Roadhawk wrote: » Im driving a modern EV (EQC) at the moment...UK import. It has a speed limiter the stops at 20mph (33kph)
Roadhawk wrote: » What on earth is happening here??? 30km "special limit" being rolled out as if it were the solution to all transport problems. Its clearly another tactic to drive motorists nuts and encourage them to walk, cycle and/or get public transport. I see loads posted on boards.ie about people in petrol or diesel vehicles having issues driving at low speeds but Im driving a modern EV (EQC) at the moment...UK import. It has a speed limiter the stops at 20mph (33kph)...thats 10% above the special limit? Cars are not built to crawl. 30kph is farce. Im glad to see that AGS are not enforcing it and i dont think anyone should be driving that slow. The 30 limit was initially rolled out to increase safety for pedestrians, cyclists and locals to the area but this year alone has shown an increase (double in April YTD) in pedestrian deaths on the road despite a huge decrease in vehicle activity due to the COVID situation.
magicbastarder wrote: » you have a UK car that is primary designed around imperial units rather than metric, that's the problem there. if it had been built for a metric market, the limiter would work to 30km/h. the reason for the increase in pedestrian deaths was, according to the gardai among other groups, that less traffic meant people were driving faster due to no congestion.
07Lapierre wrote: » If a car can’t drive at 30kph or less, the problem is the driver, not the car.
kenmm wrote: » I honestly don't get it - I really do estimate I have driven 100s of different vehicles over the years - I don't recall any of them refusing to drive at 20/30, spontaneously combust, randomly blow up or any other such nonsense. For those that say they cannot sufficiently control a car at low speeds - it's a real worry, that you are allowed to use a car on public roads without a basic grasp of how cars work or understanding on how to drive.
Duckjob wrote: » The whole "cars can't do 30kph" thing is just a smokescreen. The real msg is : "I don't have the patience to drive at 30kph because I'm used to going around the place at pretty much whatever speed I want."
Manion wrote: » The gear thing is a real thing just badly described here. There are certain speeds at which a car is comfortable holding and other speeds where a car is looking to change down or up. These points change based petrol versus diesel, engine size, 5 gear versus 6 and even car make. In my own car I've found that 30 kmh is the lowest speed I can drive at in 3rd and is that bit too high for 2nd. This means any slow down at all requires a gear change and the engine naturally wants to speed up. So anyway, agree or disagree with it as an excuse, there are definitely speeds that are easier to maintain and drive at.https://rightwaydriving.com.au/Gear-Changing-Techniques
magicbastarder wrote: » you have a UK car that is primary designed around imperial units rather than metric, that's the problem there. if it had been built for a metric market, the limiter would work to 30km/h.
magicbastarder wrote: » the reason for the increase in pedestrian deaths was, according to the gardai among other groups, that less traffic meant people were driving faster due to no congestion.
kenmm wrote: » I honestly don't get it - I really do estimate I have driven 100s of different vehicles over the years - I don't recall any of them refusing to drive at 20/30, spontaneously combust, randomly blow up or any other such nonsense.
kenmm wrote: » For those that say they cannot sufficiently control a car at low speeds - it's a real worry, that you are allowed to use a car on public roads without a basic grasp of how cars work or understanding on how to drive.
kenmm wrote: » No one's saying it's not a bit if a pain, but some make out it's impossible. It's not like everyone will be doing bang on 30 anyway. 30 is a touch too high for second then go 28, or more likely go at 35 and hold 3rd more comfortably..
Roadhawk wrote: » Yeah I suppose...should have bought local. The deals are just too attractive. I can see the logic... I still don't see the sense in 30kph. As a large portion of the roads being revised for the special speed limit are 60kph... trips will take twice the time to complete if traveling at 30kph. I spend roughly 45 mins going to work and another 45 returning home...1.5 hours total per day travelling...if i was travelling at the suggested 30kph my travel time would at least double because the roads i take are currently comprised of 50, 60 and 80 zones. Adding another 1.5 hours on to my travel time takes away from time i need for my family. Adding to 7.5 hours per week sure thats nearly an extra work day (all because of a speed limit). Keep adding, 30 hours a month or 390 hours (16.25 days) per year... To put it into perspective...in 1.5 hours you could get from Dublin to galway...Dublin to Wexford... or Dublin to the NI boarder. Its pointless other then to annoy and deter motorists.
Roadhawk wrote: » As a large portion of the roads being revised for the special speed limit are 60kph... trips will take twice the time to complete if traveling at 30kph. I spend roughly 45 mins going to work and another 45 returning home...1.5 hours total per day travelling...if i was travelling at the suggested 30kph my travel time would at least double because the roads i take are currently comprised of 50, 60 and 80 zones. Adding another 1.5 hours on to my travel time takes away from time i need for my family. Adding to 7.5 hours per week sure thats nearly an extra work day (all because of a speed limit). Keep adding, 30 hours a month or 390 hours (16.25 days) per year...
Manion wrote: » 35kmh is above the speed limit. I think thats kinda the point.
Roadhawk wrote: » spontaneously combust...? randomly blow up...? Thats quite an imagination. I should have mentioned my car does 30kph quite comfortably. I can understand it might require more work from a driver if driving a manual and again might have a random shift up or down in an automatic but EVs don't have any of those complications...smooth at every point. (im not in car sales BTW:))
Roadhawk wrote: » I can see the logic... I still don't see the sense in 30kph. As a large portion of the roads being revised for the special speed limit are 60kph... trips will take twice the time to complete if traveling at 30kph.
Roadhawk wrote: » I spend roughly 45 mins going to work and another 45 returning home...1.5 hours total per day travelling...if i was travelling at the suggested 30kph my travel time would at least double because the roads i take are currently comprised of 50, 60 and 80 zones.
Roadhawk wrote: » Adding another 1.5 hours on to my travel time takes away from time i need for my family. Adding to 7.5 hours per week sure thats nearly an extra work day (all because of a speed limit). Keep adding, 30 hours a month or 390 hours (16.25 days) per year... To put it into perspective...in 1.5 hours you could get from Dublin to galway...Dublin to Wexford... or Dublin to the NI boarder.
Roadhawk wrote: » Y I kind of agree with you here...i dont really have the patience to drive at 30kph because i dont have the time to travel that slow
kenmm wrote: » Be practical. No one will stick to 30. That's not kinda the point the point is to reduce average. But even then just do 30. That comment is for the ones that moan. (I still don't buy that cars cannot be driven at 30 for a few kms. I have yet to sit in one, it's one of the silliest arguments I've heard).
Manion wrote: » I think the point of a speed limit is to establish the upper limit of speed on a road. Its a bit mental to introduce a speed limit with the express idea that people exceed it.
VonLuck wrote: » If the general population find it difficult to stay below a speed limit then the speed limit is wrong.
VonLuck wrote: » Those of you saying it's madness having a 50km/h speed limit on Gardiner Street, can you tell me what relevance does the proximity of O'Connell Street have on it? If the general population find it difficult to stay below a speed limit then the speed limit is wrong. I've been on plenty of streets where 30km/h felt appropriate, but somewhere like Gardiner Street is just not suitable in its current form. I believe it's due to the fact that there are multiple lanes in some sections, very wide lanes in the remainder, it is a long stretch of straight road and downhill on the way to the city centre. Despite that, I also feel that going 50km/h at the junction with Talbot Street is asking for trouble. Traffic calming measures are the way to go if they feel it's necessary to reduce the speed limit.
magicbastarder wrote: » does not compute.
kenmm wrote: » It's easy, it's the roads fault. Just asking to be driven fast on.
Duckjob wrote: » the sign tells them they need to stick under 30kph but everything about the road screams otherwise.
magicbastarder wrote: » depends on how you look at it. maybe it's that people are conditioned to expect that 'there's lots of space so i can drive fast'. the conditioning is to blame rather than the road. i don't get to a wide open space on foot and think 'i have to run across this landscape'.
07Lapierre wrote: » Then DCC need to put a big,wide cycle lane on Gardiner St.! Reduce the width of the road, maybe add a few traffic calming islands, a few trees etc. Roads can be engineered in such a way that high speed is not possible.
