New 80Km/h speed limit on Secondary Roads

MG

It seems amazing to me that there has been so little coverage or debate of the reduction in the speed limit on secondary roads to 80kmph from the current 96 or so. Over Christmas I visited some relations and drove there by secondary roads which I know well. Most of the road was of medium quality, windy in places and the remainder was excellent – better than the national road I am used to. Driving at 60mph was no problem for most of the route, though naturally it was necessary to slow down as appropriate for certain sections. At one section I got caught behind someone doing 50mph (the new limit). My God was it painful. I consider myself a careful driver so safely passing out was not possible for a good few miles. This was on a medium quality stretch of road. There were other parts of the road where driving at 50mph might be entirely appropriate and others where the roads are of excellent quality and 50mph would be crazy.

My question is whether this speed limit will increase the frustration of drivers and lead to even more deaths due to dangerous overtaking? Was this lunacy dreamt up by some jumped up nobody sitting behind a desk in Dublin who rarely drives on country roads? Will it make rurual areas even more economically uncompetitive? Wouldn’t a 90kmph/56mph limit have been far more appropriate

fletch

Coudn't agree with ya more MG! I often find ridiclously slow speed limits equally as dangerous as fast ones. You find yourself concentrating more on trying to keep to the speed limit than watching what is going on around ya. Also you "feel" like you are going so slow that it is so easy to lose concentration i.e when you are travelling that little bit faster your senses are a lot more aware.

por

MG wrote:

My question is whether this speed limit will increase the frustration of drivers and lead to even more deaths due to dangerous overtaking? Was this lunacy dreamt up by some jumped up nobody sitting behind a desk in Dublin who rarely drives on country roads? Will it make rurual areas even more economically uncompetitive? Wouldn’t a 90kmph/56mph limit have been far more appropriate

Good point MG, however what frustrates me most is drivers going substantially slower than the speed limit on a good road e.g. 45mph in a 60mph zone. I might be able to get over the fact that in the example you gave the driver was doing the new speed limit and not substantially slower than it.
I will have to wait and see

BTW, I presume the 80kph limit applies to roads that do not have an 'N' pre-fix and that all roads with an 'N' prefix (nation routes) will have a 100kph limit.
Around here (Galway) some 'N' roads are only good enough for 80kph

embraer170

Both national primary and secondary roads in a number of European countries incl. Switzerland have an 80 kmph speed limit, I wouldn't complain too much.

BrianD

This thread really underlines why so many people are killed on the road. For the vast majority of Irish roads 60 MPH is too fast (bearing in mind the majority of country roads are poorly aligned laneways). If you believe that you should be travelling faster than the speed limit and need to overtake on one of these roads then you are the prime contributor to a road crash.

I drove for a year in Australia where the speeds are in KM and the limits very similar to our own. There is rigourous enforcement and everybody obeys the limits. You would be surprised how 'normal' driving at 50 or 80 kph can become.

It's also worth noting that there is no longer a general speed limit in force. It's quite possibly that a "good country road" may have a speed limit higher than 80 depending on its condition.

MG

BrianD wrote:

This thread really underlines why so many people are killed on the road. For the vast majority of Irish roads 60 MPH is too fast (bearing in mind the majority of country roads are poorly aligned laneways). If you believe that you should be travelling faster than the speed limit and need to overtake on one of these roads then you are the prime contributor to a road crash.

I drove for a year in Australia where the speeds are in KM and the limits very similar to our own. There is rigourous enforcement and everybody obeys the limits. You would be surprised how 'normal' driving at 50 or 80 kph can become.

It's also worth noting that there is no longer a general speed limit in force. It's quite possibly that a "good country road" may have a speed limit higher than 80 depending on its condition.

This is the type of soundbyte that I am trying to get a discussion going on. This type of statement is simply taken as true without looking at the reality. I’m not arguing that country laneways should be 60MPH, I’m saying that the majority of heavily used not-national roads are fine for driving 60MPH for long stretches. There are of course stretches which require slower speeds. This is not a rant by some boy racer who hates speed limits and road rules. I hate when people drive over the speed limit and overtake dangerously. But as someone who grew up in rural Ireland and has often driven these roads, I know there is a difference between a 60 MPH non national road and a 50 MPH non national road. This law appears to have been written by someone who has no feel for rural driving. If as you say each road will be judged on its own merits then that is fine but the go metric advert is very confusing on this. This ad clearly states that non national roads are going to 50 MPH - see www.gometric.ie

Alun

The problem with putting a blanket limit like this on each and every R-road in the country is that they are so variable. Each R-road is different, and over the length of each of those roads, the safe and responsible speed to travel on them varies hugely, with some sections being capable of 60mph or more, large sections where 50mph is quite fast enough, and others where even 30mph might be considered reckless.

The problem is that it appears to be beyond some peoples' mental capabilities to drive in such a way that they adapt their speed to the prevailing road conditions, so we get the "drive at 40mph everywhere" brigade who find the whole idea of accelerating and braking just too much bother, and prefer to plod along at 40mph absolutely everywhere (including through the 30mph limits through villages) slamming on the brakes every time the road bends, or a car comes towards them, and then taking 10 minutes to get back up to 40 again in 5th gear ....

I know the idea is that under the new rules it will be possible for local authorities to put limits higher than 80km/h on R-roads, but I can't see that actually happening, can you?

MG

Alun wrote:

The problem with putting a blanket limit like this on each and every R-road in the country is that they are so variable. Each R-road is different, and over the length of each of those roads, the safe and responsible speed to travel on them varies hugely, with some sections being capable of 60mph or more, large sections where 50mph is quite fast enough, and others where even 30mph might be considered reckless.

The problem is that it appears to be beyond some peoples' mental capabilities to drive in such a way that they adapt their speed to the prevailing road conditions, so we get the "drive at 40mph everywhere" brigade who find the whole idea of accelerating and braking just too much bother, and prefer to plod along at 40mph absolutely everywhere (including through the 30mph limits through villages) slamming on the brakes every time the road bends, or a car comes towards them, and then taking 10 minutes to get back up to 40 again in 5th gear ....

I know the idea is that under the new rules it will be possible for local authorities to put limits higher than 80km/h on R-roads, but I can't see that actually happening, can you?

Very well put Alun. The 45MPH brigade are very annoying - 45 in a 60 zone, 45 in a 40 zone, 45 in a 30 zone.

Even leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the limit for a second, will it cause more dangerous overtaking and be counter productive overall? I think it will.

BrianD

MG, what I am saying that the general speed limit is abolished so every road has to have a speed limit posted on it. As a rule of thumb, the speed limit on secondary roads has been reduced to 80 kph. It is possible - and it remains to be seen - that some R roads could have variations of the speed limit.

Bottom line is that there is no such thing as "safe speeding". If the limit is 50 and you are stuck behind someone doing 50 well get used to it.

I recall reading on the NRA web site that Irish people do not vary their speed according to the road or condition. They will be found travelling at the same speed whether the road in a m-way, country lane or city street.

The reduction of speed limits on non national roads is to be welcomed and can only improve safety. However, it is not of much use if it is not enforced.

Alun

BrianD wrote:

Bottom line is that there is no such thing as "safe speeding". If the limit is 50 and you are stuck behind someone doing 50 well get used to it.

If by "safe", you mean safe from being caught, I agree, but remember that these are exactly the same roads after Jan 20th as before. Nothing has changed to make the road itself any more or less safe than it was before, so to imply that from one day to the next driving on that self same road at 60mph is unsafe is stretching it a bit, don't you?

And on motorways we'll all suddenly be able to drive at a speed that the day before we could, in theory at least, be prosecuted for for supposedly being unsafe.

MG

BrianD wrote:

The reduction of speed limits on non national roads is to be welcomed and can only improve safety.

But not if it leads to behaviour which is more dangerous than travelling 10 MPH faster. I fear that it will simply lead to more dangerous overtaking. Neither of us believe that the roads will be sufficiently policed to counter this, do we?

Whether you agree or disagree with the speed limit change, the real test is whether it makes the roads safer, and I think it is too simplistic to say that reducing the speed limit will make the roads safer.

weehamster

The problem is not the speed limit but the people who feel that the limit is too slow.
These people should think why the limit is there in the first place and it is not there to incovenicence you which most people think its there for. So of course they go over the limit because it doesnt suit them.

Ask ye-self a simple question. If your late for something like work for example, which is more important :-

A- for you to break the rules ,putting others as well as yourself in possible danger, so you wont to be late
B- Drive within the rules which is more safer to others as well as yourself but you will be late.

Im sorry to say this but I feel that Irish drivers are some of the most inconciderate people on the face of this planet when it come to driving. The most important thing when it comes to driving is the RULES and we simply do not obey them.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Alun

weehamster wrote:

Ask ye-self a simple question. If your late for something like work for example, which is more important :-

A- for you to break the rules ,putting others as well as yourself in possible danger, so you wont to be late
B- Drive within the rules which is more safer to others as well as yourself but you will be late.

To be honest, on a daily basis I see many, many more cases of other drivers putting themselves and me in danger by doing things other than speeding. For instance (and not limited to) dangerous overtaking, not indicating, tailgating, no lane discipline, not indicating (correctly) on roundabouts, breaking red lights, faulty lighting, using mobile phones ... I could go on. If all you do is obey the speed limits, and ignore everything else, you're only kidding yourself that you're driving safely.

weehamster

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I did read it thank you very much for asking and you have just givin me a classic example of people trying to change the rules so it suite your style of driving.

Jefferson Darcy

Alun wrote:

For instance (and not limited to) dangerous overtaking, not indicating, tailgating, no lane discipline, not indicating (correctly) on roundabouts, breaking red lights, faulty lighting, using mobile phones ... I could go on. If all you do is obey the speed limits, and ignore everything else, you're only kidding yourself that you're driving safely.

Fully!

Driver training is the solution to a lot of these problems but then there's no revenue generation from that. Let just keep letting incompetent, inexperienced and unlicensed people drive around. We'll nick them for speeding eventually.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

mackerski

embraer170 wrote:

Both national primary and secondary roads in a number of European countries incl. Switzerland have an 80 kmph speed limit, I wouldn't complain too much.

Only by default - higher-quality stretches are routinely given an above-default special limit.

Dermot

Capt'n Midnight

por wrote:

Good point MG, however what frustrates me most is drivers going substantially slower than the speed limit on a good road e.g. 45mph in a 60mph zone. ....

BTW, I presume the 80kph limit applies to roads that do not have an 'N' pre-fix and that all roads with an 'N' prefix (nation routes) will have a 100kph limit.
Around here (Galway) some 'N' roads are only good enough for 80kph

What really gets me is when they continue at 45mph through a 30mph zone..

From the leaflet I saw earlier, Unclassified roads will have a 50mph limit, this means that R roads can have 60mph etc.

Victor

Alun wrote:

And on motorways we'll all suddenly be able to drive at a speed that the day before we could, in theory at least, be prosecuted for for supposedly being unsafe.

The law is tyechnical afterall, how else could it be written?

Victor

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

From the leaflet I saw earlier, Unclassified roads will have a 50mph limit, this means that R roads can have 60mph etc.

Surely you mean 80km/h and 100km/h

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Depending on the rest of the circumstances, it could be construed as dangerous driving. And if you can't stop behind the car doing 10mph, then you are driving too fast for the road conditions.

BrianD

Mg wrote:

But not if it leads to behaviour which is more dangerous than travelling 10 MPH faster. I fear that it will simply lead to more dangerous overtaking. Neither of us believe that the roads will be sufficiently policed to counter this, do we?

This is all very Irish! We tend to concentrate on the behaviour of people if they break the rules/laws rather concentrate on accepting the speed and living with them. We can't introduce a safe speed limit beacuse somebody will always break it? So if we bump up the speed limit to 90 there will still be people doing 100 and so on. If this is the logic then there is no point in any road traffic legislation. And I agree with you the roads are not being sufficiently policed.

MG

BrianD wrote:

This is all very Irish! We tend to concentrate on the behaviour of people if they break the rules/laws rather concentrate on accepting the speed and living with them. We can't introduce a safe speed limit beacuse somebody will always break it? So if we bump up the speed limit to 90 there will still be people doing 100 and so on. If this is the logic then there is no point in any road traffic legislation. And I agree with you the roads are not being sufficiently policed.

The point is that on stretches of road where the limit is inappropriately low, it will encourage more people to overtake because the overtaking will still be done at a safe speed. I find overtaking on country roads far more dangerous than driving at 60mph (where appropriate, I can't emphasise enough that I am not talking about country laneways.)

At the moment when I drive 60 on a non national road, I know I will only be occasionally overtaken. After Jan 20th, when I drive 50 I know I will be overtaken far more often as more drivers will perceive it as acceptable. Overtaking someone doing 50 can be perfectly safe, I do it often, but only in the right circumstances - i.e. we are relying on driver behaviour which as we know has a very poor standard. A 90 kmph limit would have struck a better balance between slowing down and discouraging overtaking.

The balance required is a bit like setting tax rates - too high and you discourage enterprise and encourage evasion, too low and you don't get enough revenue. Or pricing goods, too high and noone will buy, too low and you won't cover your costs. This speed limit has set the wrong balance.

Imposter

Why were speed limits set to 60mph way back when? Was there some reason such as international best practice or what?

The reason I ask is that surely in the time since, that cars have gotten better and safer. Surely 60mph then would be comparable to a lot faster now. Now I know that there a lot of other things to be considered when deciding on speed limits such as safety, especially the safety of other more vulnerable road users.

I can't really understand why they are reducing the limit so much on what can be pretty decent roads. Surely a better approach would be to reduce the limit for a dangerous stretch of the road, much like what exists at present. The only reason for this reduction that I can think of, is that it is the way they are trying to make the roads safer when imo driving standards and driver education is a far bigger problem than speed limits.

Victor

Imposter wrote:

The reason I ask is that surely in the time since, that cars have gotten better and safer. Surely 60mph then would be comparable to a lot faster now. Now I know that there a lot of other things to be considered when deciding on speed limits such as safety, especially the safety of other more vulnerable road users.

There is correspondingly alot more traffic and (bad) drivers on the road. Humans have not improved perceptibly in the last 50 years.

Villain

While I was especting to see a lot of roads in my area with this new speed limit I was hopeful some of the main routes were not calsified as secondary roads.

Unfortunately they are secondary and hence from the 20th they will have a speed limit of 80km/h (50mph). I have serious concern that this will cause more accidents on busy routes like the Carlow to Tullow road I drive most days. The problem I see is the increase in overtaking maneuver's, I have driven this road for several years at 60mph and being overtaken on regular basis, this road is very windy and there is really only one stretch for overtaking.

I believe this speed limit on such busy routes will cause more accidents and not save lives. Does anybody agree?

JackieChan

If there were a higher degree of enforcement then this would not happen.
People are pretty confident that they will not be caught for speeding so dont mind doing 60-65 to overtake you and contiune at that speed.
If there were speed checks at random parts of the road often, you can be pretty sure this would happen far far less.

MG

I have a thead on this on page 2 entitled "Will the 80kmph limit kill more people than it saves?" (Sorry don't know how to link it).

I agree completely, this could seriously backfire. Having said that, I travelled a good secondary road at the weekend which I feared would be 80 but they had 100kmph signs already up.

This could be an unforeseen consequence of the limit. I have only heard one person mention this in the media, some TD from West Cork I think.

heggie

i think this has been a problem for a while in Ireland, unrealistic speed limits breed a culture of speading. How many dual carriages even sections of motorway do we have at 40mph, its rediculous.

Villain

Aplogies MG I didn't look back that far, Victor can you merge??
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=215401 is the old thread.