Should there be no speed limits on parts of the motorways?

Several thoughts and comments.

German Autobahn. There are long sections in some areas (eg Munich to Salzburg) that are the same as Irish Motorways, 2 lanes and a hard shoulder, with higher speed limits, and they work, even when one lane is seriously congested with HGV's that are not allowed in the second lane. In Germany, they obey that rule, so there's no danger of suddenly being faced with a HGV doing 70 Kph. I've driven that area a number of times, some of them in a RHD van that was limited to 110 Kph, so hard work, but even with the higher speed limits, it was still safe.

Irish cars, the vast majority of them are not capable of much more than 120 Kph because the crazy tax system that's based on engine size has resulted in massive numbers of underpowered vehicles in this country, which often ends up costing more to run them, and has significant implications when trying to overtake on a single track road when the vehicle is fully loaded. A very telling experiment if you are looking for a new car is to have a careful look at what versions of that vehicle are offered in other European countries, and if the other countries all have a larger engined version as standard, then that's a good indication that the "Irish" version is likely to be a very poor performer, and it should be looked at very carefully before making a final buying decision. Another telling test is to take the vehicle out on a test drive, and put a couple of extra people in the back, and see what the acceleration is like, you may get a nasty surprise, in the mid 90's I took a Fiat Marea saloon out for a test run, and discovered that the 1.6 petrol engine version was close to being dangerous, it was so sluggish when fully loaded, when I looked into it, the rest of Europe all had the 1.8 engine as standard.

Enforcement of lane discipline on HGV's and others. What enforcement? Doesn't happen with anything like the degree that's needed to get the attention of HGV drivers, or the huge numbers of drivers that don't have a clue how to drive on high speed roads.

I'd also be very happy to see some checks on the Motorways for L drivers, there are plenty of them that don't see any problem using Motorways, and driving unaccompanied, and the chances of being caught are about as good as my chances of a good win on the lottery.

Then, there's the issue of inaccurate speed indication systems in many vehicles. I've checked more than a few over the last few years with GPS systems, which because of the way that they work are accurate, unless you are driving around a maze, which is not often the case, if you're driving on "normal" roads at a steady speed, the GPS will give a very accurate calculation of the speed, and it's very often the case that the car speedo can be up to 15 Kph adrift, and 99% of the error is on the low side, so an "indicated" 120 Kph can be as low as 108 and the speedo is legal, and I've seen lower, the worst was a few years ago, a family member in the UK had an Escort, which was indicating 70, and they used to complain it took for ever to get to places, when I checked it, the "true" speed was 56 Mph, and that was checked in more than one way, so it was accurate. We've 2 vehicles in the family, one (Japanese 4x4) has a very accurate speedo, it's within 2 Kph at 120, the other (European small car) is way off, indicated 120 is 105 true. but getting it right would be a nightmare to do, as there's no way to adjust it, and unlike a commercial vehicle, there's no way to change the gearing of the speedo drive to get it right.

The problem with this is that there is now so much fear of the speed trap vans, people don't even travel on the indicated speed limit, just in case they are going too fast. The end result is that they then sit there, in any and all lanes, doing what they swear is 120 Kph, but in reality could be as low as 105, but "I'm doing the limit, why should I move over", and the result is blockage after blockage.

Personally, if the limit went up to 160, it would make no difference to me most of the time, the 4x4 gets expensive above 120, and won't do much more than about 140 anyway, and the other car isn't capable of getting to 160, but there have been times when being able to do a bit more (in other vehicles that were capable of faster) would have been helpful.

Realistically, what's needed are variable speed limits, which would vary depending on things like weather conditions, and possibly time of day, the M50 at 1700 in the middle of December when there's heavy rain falling, and 0200 in the middle of summer in dry conditions are not the same, so it would make a lot of sense to have different limits that recognise those sorts of differences. Won't happen in my lifetime, if ever.

If we were really serious, the "posted" limit would be a guide, rather than a target, and if an accident occurred, and in the opinion of the investigating officer, speed was a significant factor, then that should be the determining factor, regardless of what the sign might say. There are N roads in parts of the country where 80 kph let alone 100 Kph is not possible, and there are R roads with an 80 Kph limit where 120 is totally safe and can be done without risk. Being able to recognise that requires experience, so maybe one answer would be to have a system that imposes a lower limit on drivers that are either inexperienced, or have demonstrated an inability to respect the limits, or have had previous accidents due to speed.

I'd also be happier to see a massive reduction in the number of speed limit signs, there are way too many now, and they are seriously inconsistent, with limits on some roads that are totally inappropriate, and have nothing to do with road safety, one classic example being the old N2, now R135, which for most of the distance from Dublin to Ashbourne has a limit of 60 kPH on it, which is as dangerous as having a limit of 100 Kph on it, it's an old N road, so not long ago, was deemed to be "safe" at 100 Kph, but now, trying to stay below 60 is boring and dangerous, it's too slow on a road that does not justify that limit.

I've been driving now for over 40 years, and not had any accidents that would be speed related, and for a good number of years, I was driving as part of my work, so doing significant mileage, often on poor quality secondary roads, rather than motorways, and while I understand the issues of speed, in my view, it's being overdone here, there are plenty of other issues, (like mobile phone usage without handsfree, and drink) that are as big an issue as speed.

As an example, why are companies not required to have hands free units fitted as standard in things like HGV's? The number of HGV drivers I see using mobiles in hand is massive, and the potential for damage or injury from an HGV is massive compared to a car.

In danger of drifting off thread, but I suspect that there will be plenty of people that agree, and plenty that disagree at this stage.