PDA

View Full Version : Article: Canada's Need For Speed



sexualbanana
06-20-2013, 11:46 AM
Stumbled across this article today about Canada's speed limits. What are your thoughts?

Source: Canada's Need For Speed (http://autos.ca.msn.com/columnist/mark-richardson/canadas-need-for-speed)



Mark Richardson — On the Road

Speed – gotta love speed, right? So how about speed limits?

The Net’s full of arguments about speed limits. It’s a polarizing issue: nobody’s happy with them.

Half of us believe they should be raised because they’re making criminals out of regular people, driving safely but swiftly. “Cars are designed to be way more capable than ever before,” they say. “Why haven’t the speed limits changed with the technology?”

The other half thinks they’re too generous, especially the speed limit on their street. “People fly along here all the time. I’ve got kids, you know!”

The one thing that seems constant here in Canada is that speed limits on our controlled-access highways will not change either way without massive public outcry. See the contradiction there? Canada? Massive public outcry? Not going to happen, and that’s too bad.

Related link: Driver's car suspended after 221 km/h speeding ticket

The 85th percentile





Photo: Mark Richardson

One hundred sixty five kilometres per hour in a Sprinter. Gives the FedEx slogan "The World On Time" a whole new meaning.

I’ve been thinking about speed limits recently because I’ve just returned from Germany, where I drove a Sprinter delivery van on the Autobahn and wound it right up to its maximum speed. I did this only because it was legal there and not here.

I could justify it by saying I was testing the various electronic safety systems that protect the van from high gusts of side wind, and which keep it on the straight and narrow no matter how bad the conditions, but the truth is it was fun. On a downhill straight, we reached 165 km/h and my co-driver snapped a souvenir photo, and then we relaxed and let the van come back down to a more comfortable speed. For the diesel-powered Sprinter, that was around 120 km/h.

This just happens to be about the maximum speed the police will let you drive in Canada where the legal limit is 100 or 110 km/h. You’ll probably get away with 125 km/h, but much north of that and you’re relying on the cop’s good mood.

The police will let you drive this speed because it’s within the 85th percentile of all vehicles on the road. This means that 85 per cent of cars and bikes and trucks will not exceed 120 km/h, though the actual speed will vary depending on conditions: it’ll come down if it’s raining, and it’ll go up on a Friday afternoon leaving the city.

Related link: What are the most common excuses people make for speeding?

The science of speed limits
Theoretically, this is how road designers determine speed limits. If it’s safe for 85 per cent of vehicles, then that’s the speed everyone should drive. There’s a lot of science at work here with a bunch of variables to consider:
Controlled access highways are the safest roads of all. Higher speeds are possible because traffic travels in one direction. Filtering ramps on and off the highway are designed to increase and decrease speed, up to and down from the traffic flow.

The higher the speed, the greater the severity of any collision.

The lower the speed limit, the greater the number of people who will exceed it, and hence the greater the difference in speeds on the road.

The greater the difference in speed between two vehicles, the greater the likelihood of a collision.

Designers weigh all these factors, make recommendations as to the best speed limit, and then politicians and police choose the status quo. I’ve asked four different ministers of transport in Ontario if they would consider raising the speed limits on the 400-series controlled-access highways and each one has refused to even consider it. “If it saves just one life…” they said, and “the faster the traffic, the more gas is wasted. We owe it to our planet to slow down.”

This is why speed limits won’t change here – because there’s too sanctimonious a response available without having to actually think about it. But elsewhere in the world, speed limits are being considered with much more careful thought.

Related link: Canada's worst speed traps

Change around the world
In Germany, home of that fabled Autobahn, every election brings a new proposal to place speed limits on the country’s entire road system. Nowhere else in the world allows such high speeds on public roads. On Britain’s Isle of Man (home of the annual motorcycle TT races), there are no limits on rural roads, nor in a couple of Indian states, but none of those highways are as fast and well designed as the Autobahn.

In fact, there are already blanket limits in Germany, even on the half of the 12,845 km system that allows unlimited speed. The entire network has an “advisory maximum speed” of 130 km/h, in line with most of Europe, though this is not mandatory and the average speed tends to be about 140 km/h. However, many German insurance companies make it very clear that if you should crash at a speed above that “advised” 130 km/h, you will not be covered. That’s a powerful deterrent.

It’s going to happen – it’s inevitable,” a German driver told me while I was there recently, when I asked about potential speed legislation. “Not in this election, but maybe in five years. We’re alone in the world on this, and it’s really divisive for drivers. You talk about speed limits in Germany and it’s like talking about gun control in the United States.”

In the U.S., it was Richard Nixon’s administration that imposed the infamous “double nickel” speed limit of 55 mph (88 km/h) on the entire country, to reduce fuel consumption during the 1973 energy crisis. Whether it reduced it by more than a negligible amount is debatable, but many states bucked the law and imposed their own rules. The national speed limit was repealed in 1995, and now individual states determine their own limits.

Balance the cost





Photo: Mark Richardson

It's a bit hard to see, but the needle is lingering on the far side of 160 km/h.

They balance the potential to save gas against the time wasted travelling in your car, not to mention the political popularity of quicker and more practical speeds. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that faster traffic uses seven to 14 per cent more fuel, which it translates to paying an extra quarter per gallon of gas for each 5 mph you drive over 55 mph. But time is also money, especially in North America.

The result is that only Hawaii has a state speed limit lower than most of Canada, at 60 mph (95 km/h) compared to the general Canadian limit of 100 km/h (62 mph). All the New England states except Maine, and several others, have 65 mph limits, which is around the 110 km/h permitted on the fastest highways in Canada, but most of the rest of the U.S. is 70 or 75 mph. A few places allow 80 mph, and in Texas, the wide and straight toll road between Austin and San Antonio was designated last year with an 85 mph limit (138 km/h).

Have these higher limits meant an increase in average speeds, with drivers routinely exceeding the posted limit by the same margin as before? No – they drive at the natural speed of their vehicles, as they’ve always done. They just travel more comfortably, without worrying that they’re about to get a ticket despite their safe driving.

Americans and Europeans know the value of getting somewhere quickly while making sure it’s safe to do so. Why don’t Canadians?

About the author: Mark has been a journalist on the road for 25 years with both car and motorcycle. He's the author of a couple of books — Zen and Now: On the trail of Robert Pirsig and the art of motorcycle maintenance (2008) and Canada's Road: A journey on the Trans-Canada Highway from St. John's to Victoria (2013) — with more on the way.



My thoughts. When I drove to Vegas a couple years ago, then went from Vegas through Calgary to Edmonton, getting into Alberta was the worst part of my trip because going from 75mph (120kmh), in some cases 80mph (130mph) to 110 kmh felt like such a big difference. It was a little frustrating.

a social dsease
06-20-2013, 02:29 PM
Agree. It's weird coming over the border from Montana (speed limit 120) to Canada (speed limit 110). The highway looks the exact same, built to the same standards, same width, same shoulder, everything identical, except you have to drive 10km/hr slower in Canada, for no apparent reason.

94boosted
06-21-2013, 01:33 PM
What is super annoying is that in the US they do something that our designers & politicians are either too stupid and ignorant or too greedy to adopt: trucks (semi's) take longer to stop and are less maneuverable than normal passenger cars and as such most US interstates (that I've seen) have two speed limits, one for trucks (and night time driving) and one for passenger cars, holy f**k what a concept.

Make it 110km/h for trucks and 125km/h (or any other similar combination) and voila.

artieg30
06-21-2013, 04:12 PM
it's an interesting point but I think there has to be some driver education invested into the general public before we raise the speed limits...

I too have spent time in Germany and had the opportunity of driving a nice sports sedan on the autobahn... reaching speeds of 160-180km/h were the average norm and traffic was moving along great!

BUT

of all things, Germany's average driver is much more attentive and confident than your average Calgarian driver... Not to mention they know the rules of the road... for example, the left lane is virtually empty at most times and you'll have the occasional encounter of a 911 or m5 blowing by... that or the left lane is solely used for the purpose of overtaking. If you approach a car in front of you in the left lane they actually know to move over to the right to allow faster cars to go through... what a concept right??

Now if we were to introduce the same type of speed limit (or lack of) here in Calgary i'd be scared shitless... don't know about the rest of you guys but the majority of ass hats I deal with on deerfoot in my daily commutes is just horrendous. Imagine if these ass hats were allowed to do 180km + on these roads? Major accidents would happen and it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine numerous fatalities. Or maybe it's just Darwin?

haggis88
06-21-2013, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by 94boosted
What is super annoying is that in the US they do something that our designers & politicians are either too stupid and ignorant or too greedy to adopt: trucks (semi's) take longer to stop and are less maneuverable than normal passenger cars and as such most US interstates (that I've seen) have two speed limits, one for trucks (and night time driving) and one for passenger cars, holy f**k what a concept.

Make it 110km/h for trucks and 125km/h (or any other similar combination) and voila.

in the UK, the semis (Heavy Goods Vehicles) are electronically limited to 56mph (90kmh) and are not allowed in the outside lane of a highway to overtake (unless its only a 2 lane highway). This also applies to anyone towing any sort of trailer, although they aren't electronically limited, they are limited based on their weight.

i've personally never driven in continental Europe, but comparing Alberta to the UK, i doubt AB drivers could handle higher speed limits...they can't even handle using their signals to change lanes!

hellraiser456
06-22-2013, 11:09 PM
There is simply too many things that general drivers do wrong to raise speed limits. Things like tail gating, not using turn signals, and improper use of the "passing" lane commonly lead to accidents. Hell, imagine some one merging onto deerfoot at 60-70 km/h and the flow of traffic is going 160. i would sit in my car with pop corn and watch the catastrophic accidents. it would be a show of flying cars and body parts, prime for the movies.

revelations
06-22-2013, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by hellraiser456
There is simply too many things that general drivers do wrong to raise speed limits. Things like tail gating, not using turn signals, and improper use of the "passing" lane commonly lead to accidents. Hell, imagine some one merging onto deerfoot at 60-70 km/h and the flow of traffic is going 160. i would sit in my car with pop corn and watch the catastrophic accidents. it would be a show of flying cars and body parts, prime for the movies.

LOL ... epic

But truer words have not been spoken, we live in a nanny state where people have been taught that they have to be protected from themselves and each other.

Heres something along the lines of what will happen:

d3gYzmGAJWM

Benny
06-23-2013, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by hellraiser456
There is simply too many things that general drivers do wrong to raise speed limits. Things like tail gating, not using turn signals, and improper use of the "passing" lane commonly lead to accidents. Hell, imagine some one merging onto deerfoot at 60-70 km/h and the flow of traffic is going 160. i would sit in my car with pop corn and watch the catastrophic accidents. it would be a show of flying cars and body parts, prime for the movies.

It's almost as if we'd have to have a profession that deals with people driving improperly. And with the lack of enforcement time being dedicated to ticketing those who drive 125km/h, this profession would have ample opportunity to patrol the roads for those driving badly. And furthermore, we could preemptively make it more difficult to become certified to use the public roadways, thus hopefully making the general populace more competent drivers.

I apologize for the overly sarcastic tone. I just feel like, "The average driver sucks too much to raise speed limits!" is giving up. People are already driving at the speeds being discussed. Raising the limit doesn't change anything, it just takes the emphasis off speed enforcement and onto safe driving and better training/licensing, which are far more complex and generate far less revenue. Not to be too cynical, but we might have just found the problem there...

hellraiser456
06-23-2013, 02:09 PM
So how do you fix someone merging onto a high way at well below the posted speed limit? This is fear and lack of skill, not because person doesn't know the rules of the road. they are simply too scared to line their car up with their "spot" on the road. granted it can be hard to merge sometimes because of tail gating...but like the video above of the guy doing 300 km/h and someone just decides they need to make a lane change into his lane.

Lets face it. "the average driver sucks too much to raise speed limits" may be giving up, but is entirely too true. Granted, law enforcement would need to change their ways, but then so would the equipment police use to judge bad drivers. What is a bad driver? how do you prove that bad driver in court?

I entirely agree on far stricter licencing programs, but that would only lead to more corruption in the system. you would always be able to find a guy willing to give your licence for the right amount of money. So though this would help greatly...there would still be bad drivers.

And that brings us back to the video above and people merging onto deerfoot at well below the posted speed limit. Laws are generally in place for safety reasons, not to impact the flow of your day. just because you are comfortable driving 160 km/h doesn't mean the person on deerfoot, merging at 60-70, and reaching a top speed of 90 km/h, while holding on to the steering wheel for dear life is. But because you want to drive faster, does that mean that the slower drivers are now no longer allowed on main road ways because they are in fear of their safety too? The reality is that there are simply too many variables to consider raising the speed limits. hell what about all the older vehicles on the road that aren't as safe at those speeds as new ones. yea a guy may survive an accident in a brand new car...but what about a 25 year old beater. i like the deerfoot example because everyone has seen it ( in Calgary atlesat) and we can all relate to it.

how many of you think you can stop your car with out using abs, as you just get cut off and are in a situation where your urge is to simply slam the brakes, and if you don't stop, you end up in the back of someones trunk. Now apply this to the white knuckled driver.

I wonder what a small car would look like after slamming into a deer at 160 km/h

Even in a perfect world, where we all followed the rules and did everything by the book, speeding up highways reduces their capacity. higher speeds means greater distance between cars. this means less car per unit of space.

Its really not about saving 2 mins on your trip ya know.

schocker
06-23-2013, 05:23 PM
^^^ If people aren't comfortable driving the speed limit, they shouldn't be driving at all if they are going to drive poorly, timid, slow and spastically.

Hallowed_point
06-23-2013, 06:11 PM
If you're to scared to press down the go pedal to merge onto deerfoot - hop on the bus and spare the rest of us!

MustangSVT
06-23-2013, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by hellraiser456
There is simply too many things that general drivers do wrong to raise speed limits. Things like tail gating, not using turn signals, and improper use of the "passing" lane commonly lead to accidents. Hell, imagine some one merging onto deerfoot at 60-70 km/h and the flow of traffic is going 160. i would sit in my car with pop corn and watch the catastrophic accidents. it would be a show of flying cars and body parts, prime for the movies.
I believe your viewpoint misses the current situation. People already speed on Deerfoot for example (120-130) and people already merge onto Deerfoot going 60-70 if they don't know what they're doing. The current speed limit of 100 doesn't "stop" this situation from happening.

What raising the speed limit would do (i.e. 130 on Highway 1 for example, or more on the highway to Edmonton perhaps) would be less revenue from tickets. Everyone already does 120-125 on the highway. Once you start creeping up more above 130 your average gas consumption goes down quite a bit, so most people wouldn't be driving at those speeds anyway.

When I visited Texas and drove on the highways with 80mph limit, I remember most folks doing 80-85mph, and the select one or two guys doing 100mph in some sport car. Roads didn't seem any less safe.

max_boost
06-23-2013, 07:37 PM
It's a combination of my car's capabilities, the roads and my comfort/skill.

I drive a lot different in my Golf vs Tribeca vs BMW vs 911 Turbo. :eek:

94boosted
06-24-2013, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by hellraiser456
Granted, law enforcement would need to change their ways, but then so would the equipment police use to judge bad drivers. What is a bad driver? how do you prove that bad driver in court?


:werd: I would love it if the police started cracking down on bad driving i.e. tailgating, excessive speeding, not being able to merge, driving slowly in the left lane, driving without due care & attention..... instead of the very profitable "enforcement" they do now, but as hellraiser said it would be hard to make some of these things stick in court.

Making it much tougher to get a drivers license would be a great first step though.

jibber
06-24-2013, 11:27 AM
The problem isn't the speed. Make the speed limits whatever you want and you're still going to run into the same problems. If everyone would simply keep pace with the vehicle in front of them we'd have a lot less accidents. I apply this equally to people driving too fast and too slow.

People driving faster than the flow of traffic usually tailgate, change lanes more frequently and/or cause other people to change lanes to get out of the way. People driving too slow create the same problems reciprocally making people change lanes around them just to keep up with the flow of traffic as well as making people use the brakes on freeways because they didn't get up to speed before they merged (the accordian effect).

People should really be paying more attention to what's going on out of the windshield and less to their speedometer if they want to drive safely. The problem is that increased speed enforcement makes people pay more attention to their speedometers and less to the traffic in front of them. If they were serious about safety, they should have banned in-car radios, navigation and other entertainment systems a long time ago so that people could focus more on the task at hand. (don't get me wrong, I'm kinda glad they didn't!)

jwslam
06-24-2013, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by max_boost
I drive a lot different in my Golf vs Tribeca vs BMW vs 911 Turbo. :eek:
Seems like all champagne colored corollas in Calgary are built with a speed limiter set at 20km under the speed limit, and a 0-100kph of 20 seconds.

jwslam
06-24-2013, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by jibber
People should really be paying more attention to what's going on out of the windshield and mirrors and less to their speedometer if they want to drive safely. The problem is that increased speed enforcement makes people pay more attention to their speedometers and less to the traffic in front of them. If they were serious about safety, they should have banned in-car radios, navigation and other entertainment systems a long time ago so that people could focus more on the task at hand. (don't get me wrong, I'm kinda glad they didn't!)
Fixed.

revelations
06-24-2013, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by jibber
The problem isn't the speed. Make the speed limits whatever you want and you're still going to run into the same problems. If everyone would simply keep pace with the vehicle in front of them we'd have a lot less accidents. I apply this equally to people driving too fast and too slow.

People driving faster than the flow of traffic usually tailgate, change lanes more frequently and/or cause other people to change lanes to get out of the way. People driving too slow create the same problems reciprocally making people change lanes around them just to keep up with the flow of traffic as well as making people use the brakes on freeways because they didn't get up to speed before they merged (the accordian effect).

People should really be paying more attention to what's going on out of the windshield and less to their speedometer if they want to drive safely. The problem is that increased speed enforcement makes people pay more attention to their speedometers and less to the traffic in front of them. If they were serious about safety, they should have banned in-car radios, navigation and other entertainment systems a long time ago so that people could focus more on the task at hand. (don't get me wrong, I'm kinda glad they didn't!)

Dont worry, in 10-20 years most of the complete morons wont be operating their own vehicle as their vehicle will drive them around.