[FatBoy]

It's not the speed that kills, it's the inability to handle speed that does (or drive to the conditions). Nobody has ever died from speeding, deceleration sickness kills them all!!

[Hati]

Germany has as many accidents involving speed as other countries.  Two lane autobahns without a hard shoulder are not conducive to the safest driving at  high speeds as the introduction of limits indicates.  The recommended limit on "unrestricted" autobahns is 130 kph and those stretches are becoming less and less.

Missing the point... Germany is one of the few countries left with ANY unrestricted roads. If the "speed kills" rubbish would be true, they would have much higher rates of accidents involving speed, proportionate to the number of cars on the roads. While they had small numbers of "blow ins" their rates were lower despite the speeds. Statistics were ruined by migrants who did not receive the same training as well as not being able to afford newer and therefore safer (to travel at high speeds) cars.


The other point that you are missing is reducing speeds proves one thing: the lowest common denominator they set the rules to is getting lower. That's why they decrease speed limits. The roads didn't get any less safe, people using it are dumber/not trained as well/using older cars etc etc, take your pick.

Does a Lambo defy the laws of physics?  But the second bit is true

No, it does not but it has VASTLY SUPERIOR brakes compared to a Corolla. Because of that it stops quicker from the same speed. Which is exactly my point. Not all cars are equal as far as brakes are concerned, hence generalising the way they do in our "deterrent" ads is idiotic.

[Doggie 1]

I agree (with Phil) which brings me back to my point - the harder you hit more it hurts.

[rustynutz]

C'mon Phil, you know speed doesn't kill, it's only the sudden stop that does the damage! 

Which brings me to the question of, why do our idiot road authorities go out of their way to place obstacles alongside our roads for drivers to crash in to?
Obviously there's not much that can be done with some but why plant trees in the median section of divided roads and alongside our highways and then erect "dangerous" wire rope barriers to supposedly stop us from crashing in to them?

[Doggie 1]

I agree - I think there are a lot of environmental changes that could be made to reduce the risk of injury and death.

[Phil №❶]

C'mon Phil, you know speed doesn't kill, it's only the sudden stop that does the damage! 

Which brings me to the question of, why do our idiot road authorities go out of their way to place obstacles alongside our roads for drivers to crash in to?
Obviously there's not much that can be done with some but why plant trees in the median section of divided roads and alongside our highways and then erect "dangerous" wire rope barriers to supposedly stop us from crashing in to them?

I lost a schoolmate to a median strip tree he will always be in his 20's now.

There has been some comment above about higher speeds not being dangerous, slightly opposing my view.

If I can have a foot in both camps I would like to acknowledge that the vehicle development that companies like Mercedes Benz it their E class is very encouraging. A lot of devices we have today, although still optional on some other brands, stem from initial development at MB. Anti lock brakes and ESP just to name a couple. There is no doubt in my mind that European car makers have contributed enormously to the ability of cars to travel safely at high speed. Coupled with better roads and skilled drivers it is possible to move a lot of people efficiently on the roads and I don't necessarily disagree with the statements above.
The point I was making was that WHEN you're in any accident, you wish you weren't going so fast. The laws of physics are rigid and unemotional, they don't care who they hurt. 

[FatBoy]

Phil,

I couldn't agree with you more.  I think we are saying the same thing, except in a slightly different way.  You can never change the laws of physics.  When you crash at speed, the energy has to go somewhere, the faster you go, the more energy there is to disperse.  That is one of the reasons that modern race cars (from F1, NASCAR, V8 Supercars, etc) are designed to break apart during an accident, it takes the energy away from the meat (person) in the car.  The race cars have things on the sides of the track to catch these parts (fences, crash barriers, etc) which are not practical for the normal road.  In normal cars (although modern cars are much better at absorbing SOME of the energy) a fair proportion of the energy is take up by the human inside.

Everybody should drive at a speed that takes into considerations things such as braking distance, obstacles, etc.  In reality we are all assessing and analysing the risk of driving, every time we get in a car.  We subconsciously consider our actions, the possible outcomes, the likelihood of those outcomes, and therefore the level of risk we are willing to take.  We also consider the exposure time to those risks as well.  We then place mitigators on those risks (eg. it is raining, so I will drive slower) to ensure that the benefits outweigh the costs.  If we didn't take any risks, then in reality, we wouldn't even get in a car.

Travelling at a higher speed than we previously did is becoming safer (not totally safe) due to improvements in car and road technology.  Driver training still has a long way to go IMO.  Therefore, I will still travel at a speed that reduces the risk to myself and other road users.

As for fixed speed cameras, I thought that only idiots got pinged at them, until I got caught by them, twice, at the same bloody one!!  Was I speeding?  Yes (57 in a 50 zone, both times).  Both times I realised as I went through it.  People told me that it was in a bad place (the speed limit is 60 just after the speed camera), but still the speed limit at that place was 50, and I broke the posted speed limit.

I also remember years ago in an Open Road magazine that people were taking their speeding fines to court.  For example, they were booked at 72 in a 60 zone.  They told the magistrate that they weren't going that fast, they were only going 66.  I think the words from the prosecuting officer and the magistrate were, "Well then, that is an admission of guilt.  Please pay the fine and the court costs."

FatBoy

[Surferdude]

Great post fatboy.

I should clarify my stance in favour of speed cameras. As long as there are speed limits they should be enforced as much as necessary.

Whether the existing speed limits are correct or should be raised is a moot point IMO UNTIL the majority of drivers are capable of driving at higher speeds.

And therein lies the crux of my problem.

I have a deeply ingrained belief that there is a significant proportion of drivers on our roads who will NEVER be able to handle higher speeds, just simply because of their irresponsible attitude to life in general and driving in particular.
For instance there is an estimated 3% to 5% of cars/drivers on our roads who are unlicensed/ unregistered. Then there are those who continue to drive after drinking (you can bet THEY don't care too much about speed limits either).
And a very visible group who love to weave in and out of lanes, talk on mobiles, tailgate etc etc.

Unfortunately, whilst I am a strong advocate of more indepth driver training, the listed examples above will never benefit from, or put into practice what they might learn.

So, to combine higher speed limits with compulsory defensive driver training would be desirable but I fear would have no effect on the majority of those in the danger groups.

[Doggie 1]

I agree pretty much with all of the above posts.
With education and driver training, it needs to start in upper primary school because that is the only way that core attitudinal beliefs will be changed over the coming years and it will take a long time to do it.
Most kids these days think that smoking is a bad thing because it has been drummed into them over a long period of time.
Kids will always rebel, you won't stop that, but we're talking here of the macro view in relation to changing societal beliefs.

And re your comment Jamie about people taking fines to court, you are absolutely correct. What happens is that all the prosecution has to do is prove prima facie that speeding occurred. The actual speed only determines penalty.
So offenders may or not have received a lower monetary penalty as a result but would then have to pay court costs on top.
Two things that it affects - one is demerits points (if the prosecution & defence agree on a lower speed it will reduce the number of demerit points allocated if it then falls within a lower bracket) and secondly, the offender now has a court record whereas if they had paid the infringement notice they do not have a court record.
Records are kept for the purpose of allocating points and the possible later service of a demerit points suspension, but an infringement notice does not give them a traffic record. A court appearance does.

[Just Rick]

Love this thread, although I disagree with some comments and also agree with some, I like some of the older memebers here, grew up in a great time of driver training was given free in schools form about the age of eight to ten years of age till we left high school,I still remember the driver eductaion course at Elizabeth in SA,with the little pedal cars and bush bikes.

I also had the added advantage of having a Ol man who was a proffessional driver and took having a license was a privaledge and not a right attitude, when he taught all us older kids to drive, it ws with the drive to arrive alive message,not dead on time attitude a lot of people have today.
I also joined the army and was lucky enough to go into my chosen feild of transport and heavy vehicle driving and later in my career staff car driving, so I got paid to do continual driver training courses,defensive driver training course and the best ones were the anti terrorist course,they were a lot of fun but dangerous at the same time.

I am the first one to admit,I am still far from the perfect driver,years ago most cars were fitted with speed warning devices,haven't seen one of those for ages,as I can tend to get a little heavy footed sometimes on the open road,I have a Alert GPS, which is set at the three most common speed limit's for WA, wish I could somehow hook this to my computer so it automatically slows the car if I was or am to go over the posted limit,but the warning alarm it gives off is sufficiant at the moment to get me to slow down.

Some thing I do agree with, is licenses here in WA at least are far to easy to obtain, I work with three overseas people who have all said the same thing,they were allowed to drive here on their own coutries licence for the period of three years and then had to doa written and driven test of which none of them have done, we have a fourth overseas person working with us now,he is from the states,he has a heavy vehicle ticket and is at the moment driving a semi here,IMHO he shouldn't even be driving a car let alone a heavy vehicle, but because of the way our laws are he is within his right to do so.

some here don't beleive in the big stick method of policing is working or should be pursuded, but as far as I'm concerned many things should be ZERO tolerance,such as driving with any sort of alcohol or drugs in your system, it also amazes me howthese days, ask any new driver or even some of the older drivers,how to change a flat tyre,most can't even find where the spare or jack is,yet ask them how the stereo works and they can tell you everything about how the stereo,bluetooth and where the CD  changer is,I have driven around Australia and I used to say a lot of the other states used to have the worse drivers, but after our trip late last year,this all changed WA would have to have the worse drivers in Australia and a recent survey also showed that WA had the worse drivers in the world,now thats a sad case of affairs but I can believe it.

Oher than driving to and from work the past five weeks I have enjoyed not being in the semi and on the road with most other road users,but sadly this will change in the next few weeks,as I have been cleared from my shoulder injury and will soon be put back in the truck,sad day when someone who loves driving, is not afraid but doesn't want to go back on the road.

[Dazzler]

Enjoying your posts Rick 

[FatBoy]

Great post, Rick (I wouldn't even think of adding a P).   

[baroudeur]

Missing the point... Germany is one of the few countries left with ANY unrestricted roads. If the "speed kills" rubbish would be true, they would have much higher rates of accidents involving speed, proportionate to the number of cars on the roads. While they had small numbers of "blow ins" their rates were lower despite the speeds. Statistics were ruined by migrants who did not receive the same training as well as not being able to afford newer and therefore safer (to travel at high speeds) cars.

Have a read of this report
http://www.etsc.eu/documents/copy_of_Speed%20Fact%20Sheet%201.pdf

The other point that you are missing is reducing speeds proves one thing: the lowest common denominator they set the rules to is getting lower. That's why they decrease speed limits. The roads didn't get any less safe, people using it are dumber/not trained as well/using older cars etc etc, take your pick.

I would agree with your view in general but I would add aggressive driving to the top of list.  The wide spread anti social and/or aggressive behaviour in general extends to driving where its effects are, arguably more serious

No, it does not but it has VASTLY SUPERIOR brakes compared to a Corolla. Because of that it stops quicker from the same speed. Which is exactly my point. Not all cars are equal as far as brakes are concerned, hence generalising the way they do in our "deterrent" ads is idiotic.

Perhaps VASTLY SUPERIOR is more than  exaggerating the difference? Do you have any figures with which I can compare the two?  But even so how many Lambos or other exotica exist  compared with mainstream cars?  Tyres play a much bigger part in stopping a car  and budget brands, the choice of most motorists for replacement purposes, are known to have poorer stopping performance.

[Just Rick]

No speed doesn't kill as someone said, it is the sudden stop at the end when you hit something that actually kills you.

Love db08's theory, the harder you hit the more it hurts, beleive me I can varify this, 23rd December, 2250, 1976, I unfortunately had a head on with a drunken driver on my Motorbike,it was reported to me some months later when I could comprehend the english langauge again, the impact was similar to me hitting a four foot concrete wall at 240kph, to say it caused many painful memories is to say the least,eight months in hospital and two years to learn to walk properly again,even though I used to do the same years ago,I just cringe at what I see on the roads these days,especially from bike riders and P platers,mind you not all are bad drivers or riders,plus a lot of the oldies,we see them especially up here where we are, police don't have the heart to take their licences of them,their simply restricted to drive within our town limits,hello this still causes accidents.

[Phil №❶]

No wonder you're Rick not with a P after an accident like that 

Lucky to be still alive.

I had both hips replaced recently and that was bad enough, but your effort takes the cake. I understand how you must feel remembering the pain and seeing stupid drivers / riders. 

[Doggie 1]

 

That's a hell of a prang, Rick.

[Dazzler]

Wow Rick.. I will make allowances for you now  (not that we have to) 

[Just Rick]

no need to make allowances for me, sadly I have been on both sides of the fence,I have been the drunken hoon on the streets(many many moons ago)I've been through all the "I'm Invincible stages" that particular accident still didn't bash any brains into me,yes I was and am lucky to survive that one, as even this still didn't stop me getting back on a bike, or having a tipple and thinking I was OK to drive,wasn't till 82, when something happened which changed me to become who I am today,why I get so passionate about a lot of what happens our the roads today.

[Doggie 1]

Now you've got us inrtrigued, Rick.......
Was it when the Ford Laser was introduced?   

[Hati]

Round 2   

Have a read of this report
http://www.etsc.eu/documents/copy_of_Speed%20Fact%20Sheet%201.pdf

Yep, supports what I was saying that the "blow ins" aka tourists with lesser training (including no experience in high speed driving) ruin it for all. So, with the borders now pretty much  gone, they need to start thinking of the lowest common denominator. Look at Hungary's abysmal performance for one. No unrestricted roads there last time I checked...

The other point that you are missing is reducing speeds proves one thing: the lowest common denominator they set the rules to is getting lower. That's why they decrease speed limits. The roads didn't get any less safe, people using it are dumber/not trained as well/using older cars etc etc, take your pick.

I would agree with your view in general but I would add aggressive driving to the top of list.  The wide spread anti social and/or aggressive behaviour in general extends to driving where its effects are, arguably more serious

No arguments from me here. The cultural behaviour changes you pointed out are certainly a large factor.

Perhaps VASTLY SUPERIOR is more than  exaggerating the difference? Do you have any figures with which I can compare the two?  But even so how many Lambos or other exotica exist  compared with mainstream cars?  Tyres play a much bigger part in stopping a car  and budget brands, the choice of most motorists for replacement purposes, are known to have poorer stopping performance.

Can look up the exact specs, but roughly speaking the Lambo's brake disc is the size of the Corolla's entire wheel. Ceramic too in some cases, enormous stopping power.


Yes, a Lambo is not a common example, but the point it served was to show that different makes and models do have different stopping power, depending on brakes, tyres, vehicle weight, load on board etc, so again, generalising by suggesting that ALL cars will take equally long to stop from a given speed is rubbish. I never argued which factor is more important, not without looking it up.



I recall in one of the Top Gear episodes they conducted some brake performance comparison that demonstrated well that not all cars are equal when it comes to braking.


This exact rubbish was  a "deterrent" advertisement here in West Oz, which was the main reason for me bringing this part of the debate up in the first place.

[baroudeur]

Yes, a Lambo is not a common example, but the point it served was to show that different makes and models do have different stopping power, depending on brakes, tyres, vehicle weight, load on board etc, so again, generalising by suggesting that ALL cars will take equally long to stop from a given speed is rubbish. I never argued which factor is more important, not without looking it up.

If I may quote  from a specialist

..........While almost every current passenger car is capable of a single stop from maximum speed at or near the limit of tire adhesion,.............

........."In order to brake effectively, the tyres must comply with and grip on the road. The braking system is no better than the  tires and suspension. The best money that  can be spent is on really good tires and really good shocks"...........

And a single stop from maximum speed will be achieved only very occasionally by the  average motorist.

[Surferdude]

Yes, a Lambo is not a common example, but the point it served was to show that different makes and models do have different stopping power, depending on brakes, tyres, vehicle weight, load on board etc, so again, generalising by suggesting that ALL cars will take equally long to stop from a given speed is rubbish. I never argued which factor is more important, not without looking it up.

If I may quote  from a specialist

..........While almost every current passenger car is capable of a single stop from maximum speed at or near the limit of tire adhesion,.............

........."In order to brake effectively, the tyres must comply with and grip on the road. The braking system is no better than the  tires and suspension. The best money that  can be spent is on really good tires and really good shocks"...........

And a single stop from maximum speed will be achieved only very occasionally by the  average motorist.

Quite right. And if it's a pre-ABS car it will almost certainly lock up at some stage during that braking.