Motorway speed limits in Ireland

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I just noticed in the post that dr.fuzz quoted.... Ginger83 is a MAN???? Not an ould wan?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I mistook you for an ould wan from your posting style that's all. Although you could be a Gaybo or Ray D'Arcy wannabe. :eek:

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Nope. You will damage the engine if you rev it at the limit or over for prolonged periods of time, but not a chance at 120. And most cars will rev between 2k and max 4k rev at 120. No chance of damage. I've done 160 km/h in a Smart with no issue. That's a 600 cc engine

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Absolutely, as long as you don't crash it, but that goes for any car at that speed. I wasn't any safer in the Fiat at 220...

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Nope. You will damage the engine if you rev it at the limit or over for prolonged periods of time, but not a chance at 120. And most cars will rev between 2k and max 4k rev at 120. No chance of damage. I've done 160 km/h in a Smart with no issue. That's a 600 cc engine

ScumLord wrote: »

This is more of people being stuck on stats and engineering from the 1950s. A modern engine isn't going to bat an eyelid at just about any speed it can mange. They limit them so they can't damage themselves. My car has a 1.6HDi engine and there's videos of people getting 200bhp+ (stock is 90bhp)out of them with some tuning and not changing any parts. Now that probably would damage the engine but it goes to show how under stressed modern engines are.

The slow = safe mentality in this country infuriates me. I encounter slow pokes on rural roads every day and their just not safe, they assume because they're going slow they can now pay more attention to what's happening in the fields they're passing and wobble all over the road, jam on brakes when a car comes towards them, won't over take tractors, wait at junctions for a car to come along then pull out in front of them and then stop in the middle of the road when they actually notice the car coming.

If anything untowards happens their clueless and end up in a ditch. They're incompetent and shouldn't be allowed near a car.

dfeo wrote: »

After reading the thread about the lad who pretended to be driving 151 km/h without insurance and seeing the outrage from people about how "fast" he was going, I thought we could have a reasoned debate on increasing Ireland's Motorway speed limit. This doesn't seem to have been done in a while.

Ireland's motorways are among the newest in Europe. We really only began to get a proper motorway network in the noughties (I began driving in 2009). Our motorways are new, well-surfaced, have excellent drainage and are in excellent condition.

I've been on motorways in Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the UK, Hungary, Slovakia and Austria. Ireland's motorways are even better than some of the aforementioned countries, believe it or not!

It is my opinion that you can be "speeding" without breaking the speed limit and you can break the speed limit without "speeding".

Allow me to elaborate. In the former situation, imagine a small country road which passes by a rural school, the speed limit on the road is 80 km/h. If I drive at that speed past the school at 2.30 in the afternoon, I'm not breaking the speed limit, but it may be considered "speeding".

In the latter situation, there could be a stretch of a perfectly-good N-Road, where the speed limit drops arbitrarily from 100 km/h to 60 km/h. If I continue on at 100 km/h and go with the flow of everyone else, I'm not "speeding" but I am breaking the speed limit.

By the logic of the government, if you don't follow the posted speed limit, you are speeding. You can drive 100 km/h on the M50 and weave in and out of traffic in 5 inches of snow with driving sleet and visibility of only a few metres, but, hey .... you're under the limit, so you're grand ..... but if you dare do 121 km/h on a dry, open motorway, you'd better hand over your license.

It is my opinion as well, that a mismatch in speed also causes disturbances. Unless you are limited to a certain speed or there is a good reason not to, there is no reason why you shouldn't be travelling at 120 km/h.

It is my opinion, that if certain transgressions were eliminated from our roads, such as poor merging and bad lane discipline, our speed limits could be subject to a modest increase.

dfeo wrote: »

If any of those concern you, then get off the motorway.

dfeo wrote: »

It'd still be the same bumper-to-bumper mess we have now with idiots lane hogging left, right and centre.

The M50 is an example of a road that needs variable limits. A limit of 60 km/h in the morning would probably achieve great average speeds overall and thus shorter journey times by virtue.

However, the M50 could have its limit removed at night.

kbannon wrote: »

Medical degrees can take as little as 5 years and you wouldn't question a graduate doctor's abilities, would you?
You have no idea what experience the poster has so get off your high horse!

What has made you such a qualified expert in driving?

Jayop wrote: »

Not half as rude as someone driving in the overtaking lane well below the limit or forcing busses and lorrys to pass them because they are going far too slow and thus holding the whole show up for someone.

That guys 7 years could be more miles in more conditions than someone with 70 years, you don't know.

Jayop wrote: »

If someone is slowing up a bus or lorry, both of whom drive to a schedule then they are of course forcing them to pass, thus holding up everyone else.