Speed limit change 120/80km (was I caught?)

sirmixalot

On the N4 dublin bound the limit changes from 120 to 80km, there's a bridge that is nearly in the middle of the two signs (just as you bypass leixlip and into lucan) The guards were there in the car with the gun facing towards the west I.e I was heading towards them, I changed down from 120 to 100 but was probably going 90 when passing the 80 sign.
Just wondering is that a ticket. How can they sit in such a contentious area?

Darc19

If they didn't stop you, then no ticket.

They are not really interested in those doing a little over the limit, more interested in the manic speeders.

un5byh7sqpd2x0

Darc19 wrote: »

If they didn't stop you, then no ticket.

They are not really interested in those doing a little over the limit, more interested in the manic speeders.

Not with the new guns, they don’t need to stop you anymore

sirmixalot

Jane Swift Railing wrote: »

Not with the new guns, they don’t need to stop you anymore

I had heard that. But the grayish area is where they were positioned, midway between a 120 and an 80 sign. That's what pisses me off. Just wondering if you slow up 40k between the two could they say you were over 80 or is it only past the sign... if you know what I mean.

Allinall

sirmixalot wrote: »

I had heard that. But the grayish area is where they were positioned, midway between a 120 and an 80 sign. That's what pisses me off. Just wondering if you slow up 40k between the two could they say you were over 80 or is it only past the sign... if you know what I mean.

If they (and you) were in between the 120 and 80 signs, then the limit was still 120.

jimmyrustle

Similarly, when joining the M50 at Blanch, and when coming off it towards Blanch/ Meath, the speed limit drops first to 50 then to 30.

Anyone who has ever attempted to drop to 30km here will know it is nigh on impossible without some eejit nearly running up your hole and blasting you out of it with the horn/

Do they ever bother enforcing limits at places where to attempt to abide by the limit will put you in danger of someone going into the back of you?

Andrewf20

Im thinking the op is refering to here which looks like 120km/h still:

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3584779,-6.4758509,3a,75y,89.42h,93.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sndVsLZCJU70sDoz6FjWqBQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Zatoichi

Haven't seen a speed van on the N4 in years. First day of the lockdown and there it is sitting at the Liffey Valley exit. Another traffic corps car sitting near the Spa Hotel tonight.

tuxy

Jane Swift Railing wrote: »

Not with the new guns, they don’t need to stop you anymore

Do you have more info about the new guns?
Does it take a photo and that's why they don't need to stop you.
I sometimes check the Garda traffic on twitter and haven't seen anything about it.

sirmixalot

Andrewf20 wrote: »

Im thinking the op is refering to here which looks like 120km/h still:

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3584779,-6.4758509,3a,75y,89.42h,93.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sndVsLZCJU70sDoz6FjWqBQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yep, that's the spot

sirmixalot

Zatoichi wrote: »

Haven't seen a speed van on the N4 in years. First day of the lockdown and there it is sitting at the Liffey Valley exit. Another traffic corps car sitting near the Spa Hotel tonight.

This was a car with a guard sitting in it pointing the gun out the passenger window.

sirmixalot

Allinall wrote: »

If they (and you) were in between the 120 and 80 signs, then the limit was still 120.

Cool, I have dashcam of it. Doesn't show my speed though. Anyway will keep an eye out for a fine if it comes and may contest it if so.

Ultimanemo

Care is needed nowadays, they are putting speed traps in very open 50 k zones

Irishphotodesk

sirmixalot wrote: »

On the N4 dublin bound the limit changes from 120 to 80km, there's a bridge that is nearly in the middle of the two signs (just as you bypass leixlip and into lucan) The guards were there in the car with the gun facing towards the west I.e I was heading towards them, I changed down from 120 to 100 but was probably going 90 when passing the 80 sign.
Just wondering is that a ticket. How can they sit in such a contentious area?

They can sit there because people will often not see the signage (driving without due care and attention) or people will ignore the signage as the road itself doesn't change .... So they continue at whatever speed they were doing.

Areas where there is a change of speed limit are often used to enforce speed restrictions, areas where road deaths occur are supposed to be monitored by gosafe vans, but I think it's essentially fair game by both sides to get numbers up.

As someone who has regularly driven this path of road, it was noticeable that enforcement was lacking, but there was a recent announcement that new zones were to be used for speed limit enforcement, the m/n4 has a number of new spots added to it.
The gardai were also catching people driving in the hard shoulder during rush hour at the start of march, before the m/n4 turn into a ghost road lol.

In recent days it's more important to monitor your speed, less traffic on the roads can lead to accidentally going over the limit, there were 2 speed checks on the n4 yesterday that I witnessed.
On the M4 one guy in a 05 with a learner plate was pulled over westbound at location linked in Google map ...Garda car with blue flashy lights behind him.

Seth Brundle

sirmixalot wrote: »

How can they sit in such a contentious area?

How is it a contentious area?
Traffic emerging from Leixlip & Celbridge on your left. Bus lane with cyclists on your left. Pedestrians on your left.
The road gets quite busy from there heading inbound and with many drivers unaware how to use multi-lane roads properly it is even more important that drivers keep to the speed limit along there.

sirmixalot

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How is it a contentious area?
Traffic emerging from Leixlip & Celbridge on your left. Bus lane with cyclists on your left. Pedestrians on your left.
The road gets quite busy from there heading inbound and with many drivers unaware how to use multi-lane roads properly it is even more important that drivers keep to the speed limit along there.

They are sitting in between the 2 zones. Why not before the 120 or after the 80? So there's no gray area...

Seth Brundle

sirmixalot wrote: »

They are sitting in between the 2 zones. Why not before the 120 or after the 80? So there's no gray area...

There is no grey area. They can police the 120.zone or the 80 zone. There is no inbetween area for them to sit.

sirmixalot

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There is no grey area. They can police the 120.zone or the 80 zone. There is no inbetween area for them to sit.

Well there is, the bridge that they are sitting on is in between the two zones.
So what's the limit in between the two zones then? To me that's somewhere between black and white...

Vic_08

What do you not understand about there being only a 120 and an 80 section? There is no such thing as an "in between zone"

Limit is 120 up to the 80 signs and is 80 from there.

kirving

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How is it a contentious area?

No issue with it being an 80km/h zone whatsoever, it's very much needed.

I travel this road all the time, usually inbound to Dublin on a Friday evening when it's relatively quiet.

Most people know the road and ease off gradually in the 120km/h zone, braking gently to get down to 80km/h before the sign. All too often though, they're tailgated by people who are determined to do 120km all the way to the sign.

Then you have idiots who drive to the letter of the law, as in they do 120km/h right up to 20m before the sign and absolutely stand on the brakes.

Finally, those who blast into the 80km/h zone still doing 140km/h need to be caught, but that's easily done by a Gard on the opposite side of the bridge.

It's already an area where there's an accordion effect with traffic, and a Gard on the bridge doesn't help that IMO. Opposite side of the bridge, or 200m up the road would be a better place to position.

Further up the road, the limit drops to 60km/h where the Liffey Valley traffic joins. This used to be another favourite for GoSafe vans, but this location was removed as it actually led to much worse driving. There was enough going on with people trying to get across three lanes quickly and safely, and doing 66 in a 60 to slot into a gap is far preferable than hitting the brakes when they see the van.

Seth Brundle

sirmixalot wrote: »

They are sitting in between the 2 zones. Why not before the 120 or after the 80? So there's no gray area...

There is no area between the two zones. There is a line (a virtual line) that exists where on one side the speed limit is 120km/h and on the other side it is 80km/h.
What is difficult to understand about this?

Ultimanemo

sirmixalot wrote: »

How can they sit in such a contentious area?

After the sign the speed is 80 km/hr so it is not contention or grey area, but it is a trap, I could be paranoid but I think after the lockdown revenue went down and they got desperate so they started putting speed cameras not in places where it is more likely to save lives but in places where it is more likely to generate revenue.

Seth Brundle

Ultimanemo wrote: »

After the sign the speed is 80 km/hr so it is not contention or grey area, but it is a trap, I could be paranoid but I think after the lockdown revenue went down and they got desperate so they started putting speed cameras not in places where it is more likely to save lives but in places where it is more likely to generate revenue.

How exactly is it a trap? It's not like the signs are hidden!
I cycle to work along the 80km stretch and it does need strong enforcement (which sadly is not frequent there!)

tuxy

Still if the speed limit is clearly marked either side drivers will have no problem adjusting their speed accordingly.

Now does anyone have info about the new speed gun that does not require them to stop you?

Seth Brundle

tuxy wrote: »

Still if the speed limit is clearly marked either side drivers will have no problem adjusting their speed accordingly.

It is clearly marked on both sides of the eastbound carriageway.
If people cannot see the signs then they should not be driving.
If drivers cannot adjust their speed accordingly then they should not be driving.
If people cannot maintain a safe speed then they should not be driving.

TheW1zard

Your speedo is 10% off. If it said 90 you were doing 81

tuxy

TheW1zard wrote: »

Your speedo is 10% off. If it said 90 you were doing 81

Not necessarily. It depends on the car you are driving and the size of wheel and many other factors. But generally it is set low enough that it never under reads even if you make a number of changes to your car.

I've measured mine using GPS and drive past Go Safe vans at 105 km/h on my speedometer but it will be different for everyone.
The kind of people who don't understand this kind of thing are not capable of paying enough attention to adhere to speed limits anyway.

tuxy

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It is clearly marked on both sides of the eastbound carriageway.
If people cannot see the signs then they should not be driving.
If drivers cannot adjust their speed accordingly then they should not be driving.
If people cannot maintain a safe speed then they should not be driving.

The "it's only a revenue making trap" people should just not speed and prevent them from making any money from it.
Some people are incapable of this and are not dangerous because they are doing 110 in a 100 zone but dangerous because they do not have the capability to focus enough to drive safely.

Ultimanemo

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How exactly is it a trap? It's not like the signs are hidden!
I cycle to work along the 80km stretch and it does need strong enforcement (which sadly is not frequent there!)

The speed camera shouldn't be straight after the speed reduction sign, it should be a mile after the sign to give people enough time to reduce their speed.

Darc19

sirmixalot wrote: »

They are sitting in between the 2 zones. Why not before the 120 or after the 80? So there's no gray area...

What's an "in between zone"

I'm driving 34 years and have never heard of one.

Seth Brundle

Ultimanemo wrote: »

The speed camera shouldn't be straight after the speed reduction sign, it should be a mile after the sign to give people enough time to reduce their speed.

Absolute nonsense.
If you are unable to drive, then don't! As I mentioned, I cycle (and drive) along there and would prefer if incompetent drivers were not sharing the same roadspace as me!

Ultimanemo

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Absolute nonsense.
If you are unable to drive, then don't! As I mentioned, I cycle (and drive) along there and would prefer if incompetent drivers were not sharing the same roadspace as me!

It is becoming ideology, if I cycle I have the right to say any sh*t and people have to agree, if the speeding cars are imposing any danger to you and you cycle there then you are an idiot

Seth Brundle

Ultimanemo wrote: »

It is becoming ideology, if I cycle I have the right to say any sh*t and people have to agree, if the speeding cars are imposing any danger to you and you cycle there then you are an idiot

1. What sh*t have I posted?
2. Speeding cars do pose a danger to all road users.
3. I'm an idiot for travelling to work in a completely legal manner? Why is that?

Dravokivich

Ultimanemo wrote: »

It is becoming ideology, if I cycle I have the right to say any sh*t and people have to agree, if the speeding cars are imposing any danger to you and you cycle there then you are an idiot

If one cant act in consideration to other road users, theres really no place for them on the road. Be it pedestrian, cyclistist, motorist.

TheW1zard

tuxy wrote: »

Not necessarily. It depends on the car you are driving and the size of wheel and many other factors. But generally it is set low enough that it never under reads even if you make a number of changes to your car.

I've measured mine using GPS and drive past Go Safe vans at 105 km/h on my speedometer but it will be different for everyone.
The kind of people who don't understand this kind of thing are not capable of paying enough attention to adhere to speed limits anyway.

What speed does it say on your gps when you go 105kph on your speedo!?

tuxy

TheW1zard wrote: »

What speed does it say on your gps when you go 105kph on your speedo!?

About 97kmh on GPS when the speedometer shows 105 but it has been very different for other cars I've owned. One had 17" wheels when it came with 15" and that car showed exactly 100 when my GPS showed 100

TheW1zard

tuxy wrote: »

About 97kmh on GPS when the speedometer shows 105 but it has been very different for other cars I've owned. One had 17" wheels when it came with 15" and that car showed exactly 100 when my GPS showed 100

About 9.2%
Lets say 10 lol

tuxy

TheW1zard wrote: »

About 9.2%
Lets say 10 lol

Yes but 0% on another car I had.

TheW1zard

tuxy wrote: »

Yes but 0% on another car I had.

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

tuxy

TheW1zard wrote: »

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

Where are you getting the 10% figure from?
Any official sources?

I also drive a Skoda Octavia frequently where the reading shows 100 km/h and GPS shows 98km/h

Zatoichi

Posted up at Woodies on the N4 tonight with the new handheld camera. Someone overtook me doing well over 90 just as we came up to them but they didn't seem too bothered.

tuxy

Zatoichi wrote: »

Posted up at Woodies on the N4 tonight with the new handheld camera. Someone overtook me doing well over 90 just as we came up to them but they didn't seem too bothered.

Perhaps this is their way of donating to the government in these difficult financial times.

Zatoichi

tuxy wrote: »

Perhaps this is their way of donating to the government in these difficult financial times.

I guess essential workers are the only ones who can afford to pay the fines at this point.

jmreire

tuxy wrote: »

Where are you getting the 10% figure from?
Any official sources?

I also drive a Skoda Octavia frequently where the reading shows 100 km/h and GPS shows 98km/h

Same here, and with Skoda too, The SatNav always shows a lower speed ( 3/4 Klms) than the dash. All cars, in their factory built configuration, are deliberately calibrated to show a few klms over their true speed, as shown on the dash. One reason for this is that if the reading was under showing the true speed, then the manufacturer would be liable for any claims, in the case of accidents etc. Its for the same reason that truck manufacturers deliberately under state the load capacity of the vehicle....If it's plated for say 15 ton, then realistically, it will take maybe 20 ton, before it twists or warps under the load. Again, this is to cover the manufacturers liability.

tuxy

jmreire wrote: »

Same here, and with Skoda too, The SatNav always shows a lower speed ( 3/4 Klms) than the dash. All cars, in their factory built configuration, are deliberately calibrated to show a few klms over their true speed, as shown on the dash. One reason for this is that if the reading was under showing the true speed, then the manufacturer would be liable for any claims, in the case of accidents etc. Its for the same reason that truck manufacturers deliberately under state the load capacity of the vehicle....If it's plated for say 15 ton, then realistically, it will take maybe 20 ton, before it twists or warps under the load. Again, this is to cover the manufacturers liability.

Exactly and that makes perfect sense but there is no 10%, it's different for every car and like I said changing wheel size will change the reading.

FishOnABike

tuxy wrote: »

Exactly and that makes perfect sense but there is no 10%, it's different for every car and like I said changing wheel size will change the reading.

If the wheel / tyre size is changed the car's ecu should be reprogrammed to keep the indicated speed accurate, and slightly over the actual speed.

European law (ECE-R39) says speedometers cannot show speeds less than the actual speed, and they must never show more than the 110 per cent of actual speed plus 4 km/h. So, under those rules, a car could be moving at 100 km/h, but the speedometer could legally display as high as 114 km/h.

In pracice they're more accurate than that but would still indicate at least 4km/h over the actual speed.

mikeecho

Ultimanemo wrote: »

The speed camera shouldn't be straight after the speed reduction sign, it should be a mile after the sign to give people enough time to reduce their speed.

With that sort of thinking, they should put traffic lights a mile before the junction as well.

kirving

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Absolute nonsense.
If you are unable to drive, then don't! As I mentioned, I cycle (and drive) along there and would prefer if incompetent drivers were not sharing the same roadspace as me!

I agree. However, can you foresee how placing a speed van right after a sign may contribute to negative reactions from motorist approaching that zone?

As a cyclist too, and a driver, I would much rather someone let off the throttle gently and coasted into the 80km/h zone still doing 90km/h and let the car reach the limit gradually, rather than hit the brakes on a busy motorway. Smooth predicaticable driving is far safer driving.

Depending on road surface, wind, gear selection, incline, etc. it's difficult to let the car slow by itself and be at 80 on the button as you pass the sign. Slowing to 80 before the sign will just mean you have tailgaters, and rigidly sticking to the limit is not necessarily good driving.

Have the Gard sit on an onramp and nail people taking the mick out of the limit 200m up the road. Everyone would be happy to see that.

Seth Brundle

I didn't agree or disagree with the precise location of the van. I just said that it was needed around there.
Many drivers have a habit of slowing down after the sign though which means that by the time they are mixing with other road users including vulnerable road users, they are still travelling too fast. On top of this you then have the muppets joining te dual carriageway who think that they must be in lane 2 immediately (and despite lane 1 being near empty) causing further risks. Whilst most drivers are fine, there is a persistent danger along there caused by some drivers speeding, some drivers being too imaptient to wait in traffic and cutting into the bus lane and also just a poor standard of driving (poor lane positioning, tailgaiting, etc).

markpb

Kevin Irving wrote: »

I would much rather someone let off the throttle gently and coasted into the 80km/h zone still doing 90km/h and let the car reach the limit gradually, rather than hit the brakes on a busy motorway. Smooth predicaticable driving is far safer driving.

Depending on road surface, wind, gear selection, incline, etc. it's difficult to let the car slow by itself and be at 80 on the button as you pass the sign. Slowing to 80 before the sign will just mean you have tailgaters, and rigidly sticking to the limit is not necessarily good driving.

That is quite bizarre. You seem to think there's nothing between coasting and throwing out an anchor. It's perfectly possible for your average driver to use the accelerator and brakes to control the speed of the car, reducing it in a controlled way from one speed limit to another.

When you see a speed limit sign, you drive at that speed from the point of the sign. How you accomplish that safely is up to you but it's quite black and white.

jmreire

tuxy wrote: »

Exactly and that makes perfect sense but there is no 10%, it's different for every car and like I said changing wheel size will change the reading.

As I mentioned in my post, IF the vehicle is still configured to manufacturers specification's, then it will not be possible to increase the % unless these specs are changed. Used to be a tactic long ago ( not sure now though) that truckers would routinely swap the wheels on their truck, for a set ( bigger or smaller, I forget which, probably smaller ) for the DOE test. These wheels would then be swapped back for the original wheels after the test. This affected the Tacho reading's. But by now, given the existing technology, I'd say that that stunt has been eliminated, but it was one way that the original configuration was altered.