Safe Speed Forums

Don't know if this has been brainstormed before, but...

Should we scrap speed limits altogether?

I'm sure many here would agree that the speed limit seldom matches the safe speed to be travelling at. Sometimes conditions mean that a safe speed is considerably lower than this, but other times a safe speed may be somewhat higher than the prevailing limit. What does the speed limit then contribute since it rarely is the true safe speed to be driving at?

If, instead of speed limits, the onus could be put entirely onto the driver to select an appropriate speed. Guidance on this could be given when learners get driving lessons and possibly general guidelines developed. This would get drivers to think more about the conditions and hopefully drive more intelligently. No more 'Im doing the speed limit so I'm safe' because there isn't one.

How many people reduce their speed when it starts raining? I can't say I've noticed many. Then, how many people reduce their speed when a few flakes of snow start falling (even though temp. is above freezing and roads have been salted)? Plenty, and sometimes they overreact. Similar hazards but a considerably different response!

For experienced drivers this is great, but as Safe Speed and others will tell you the general concensus on this site is that Limits, when set correctly, do provide important guidance to less experienced drivers, and are also a benchmark against which dangerous driving can be measured (e.g. 60 in what is currently a 30 limit is probably dangerous).

My personal opinion is that "speed limits" should instead be a "maximum advised speed", and that drivers should not be prosecuted for exceeding them unless they are driving dangerously - for example, being involved in crash where you were driving faster than the advised maximum speed would leave you open to a dangerous driving charge. This is a relatively simple change that doesn't even require the signs to be changed (well they should be, but it is not urgent). This provides all of the guidance necessary for new drivers or those unfamiliar with the road, but allows other drivers to concentrate on driving safely rather than camera spotting and speedo watching.

What is more interesting is the idea of removing all controlling signage and lines from roads within urban areas; no traffic lights, no speed limits, no white lines, no stop signs, no pedestrian crossings, no double yellows, no red routes. At the same time the boundaries of roads with pavements are blurred, and all road/pavement users have equal priority. This is being tested by the Dutch, and a trial is going to start in the UK somewhere. Apparently everybody is forced into observation and considerate driving etc. In the Dutch experiment a cross town journey that used to be over an hour can now be completed in 20 minutes even in peak traffic times, congestion has all but disapeared and accident rates have fallen dramatically...

Interesting to hear about the Dutch experiment. Any more info on it?Along similar lines to what I was thinking regarding speed limits. Remove all the restrictions and suddenly drivers have to actively think about what they are doing.

Loads more about it:

Dutch started it in 1989, and it is being used in little communities of 32,000 people or so - the guy (Hans Monderman)who had the idea was originally one of those putting in speed bumps etc, but he concluded that they were not working...

I saw a feature about it on TV last year, and apparently they are trying it out in a limited form in Somerset and Avon area with other areas like Kensington (London) considering it.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12389-1225348,00.html
http://www.fastandsafe.org/site.aspx/Pages/Media/Monderman
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic_pr.html

Even Transport 2000 and other car hating groups have latched onto it, but typically can't get over their objective of getting all cars off the road so they try to twist it into just giving everybody else priority over cars and mixing it up with articles about removing parking and forcing lower speeds, etc

I'm sure that a speed limit still applies in the Dutch town in question (it's called Drachten, Google has just told me) - either the default urban limit of 50 km/h or possibly even 30 km/h.

See, for example:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0127/p01s03-woeu.html

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I am one of the very few people (some will say luckily) who is for complete de-restriction of all roads with regards speed limits. I know these thoughts do not sit well with the SS philosophy and I do not push them here because I feel the general public may discredit his work if this was picked up as been advocated by SS.

I learnt to drive and passed my test in an area of de-restriction and it made no difference to my driving at the time, other areas were heavily restricted (anyone who knows the German roads knows that whilst the Autobahns may be unrestricted, the a and b roads are certainly not) and I was taught to drive to use these limits discretionally in normal use, but absolute only during the test (this was the same on both tests – I took a BFG Test and the local German test).

There is an argument that a speed limit is good for new drivers, and others will argue, all drivers, and that they should be treated by some, or all as gospel. I would prefer to argue that if you can not tell the best limit for the road in question at the time in question without reference to a number on a sign, you should not be on the road. (As a learner in fine conditions, rain, and occasional snow I was not given a speed limit by my instructor – with only 5 hours tuition I was asked, and managed to pick the best limit for me at the time). I would be very much in favour of upping the punishment for those involved in causing RTA’s to very uncomfortable levels to encourage the sort of safe driving I see every day.

I do agree that every possible bit of useful information should be given to the driver at all times, but actual speed is so useless to the point of irrelevance compared to every thing else (the type and likelihood of obstruction, road user, etc, etc) that is just a distraction.

Remove speed limits and speedometers and I honestly believe that road deaths would be down to the number of stupid pedestrians, and people not worthy of driving licences, within days.

Cheers

Paul

Well I know for a fact that it is possible to drive safely without a speedo, because when I was at Uni, my car engine gave up the ghost. Being poor, but reasonably competant at engingeering, I got a scrap engine and replaced it myself. I made one little mistake though, and misaligned the speedo connector as it went into the gearbox, and the first time I drove it I shattered the plastic female part of the connection (in the gearbox). It took time to get a replacement part, so for a while I was driving around without a working speedo. Was it scary? No. Was it dangerous? No. All I did was drive at the speed I was comfortable with based on what was around me at the time, which in general meant keeping up with the rest of the traffic.

I remember when I at the motor show in the NEC.
We looking at an amazing Aston Martin, Le mans
While sat in the drivers seat I noticed the rev counter was massive, I think it was in the middle?(can't be too sure). the speedo was alot smaller.

I asked why this is, sales person said, it was styled to look like the dash of astons and cars in the good old days .

It is clear speed was not a prime focus of saftey. And I assume people did not wizzz though villages towns and citys, with a disraguard to the saftey of others, just because speed was not the foucs of safety.


I hope you understand what i mean?!

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Ever been in one of the new minis? Much the same idea. Rev gauge directly in front of you but the speedo is across in the centre of the dashboard. Went past a speed camera while taking one for a test drive. Not the best, as you need to look off to the left and down to check your speed.

Take a look at the Pug 807, Cit C8, Fiat Ulysse. Take your binoculars along with you though, you might need them.

The further the speedo is away, the less refocusing your eyes need to do. The new Nissan Primera and Citroën C4 are the same, as is the Toyota Yaris.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I was talking with people at work
About how it could be possible drive safley with out a speedo or limits.
- I was people looked at me is if i was a loon(probbaly ture ) and then a humm not sure about that one.

I think it could be possible For example.
When on the motorway I do not use the speedo much.
If it rains, or traffic build up I slow down, etc. I know on a dry day if my car is going to fast, I start to feel it though the steering wheel etc. Most of the time I feel uncomfortable with the speed my surrondings pass me by, so i slow down.

when I did my pass plus motor way lessons, I had to focus on the speedo, it made motorway driving harder, as there is so much esle going on.

I think we could be safe with out limits,But however as a new driver i feel guide limit would be usefull, untill you get the much needed experince.

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

A good example is when your on a twisting country road and reaching 60mph would be very unlikely. It's enjoybale to just concentrate on your driving, not to be unduely concerned with how fast your going. In that instance I don't see the need to refer to the speedo, and is an example of how a driver is capable of setting their own speed. I know what feels right approaching each corner and how far I can see to be safe, taking into account the road and a weather conditions as well. It would be impossible to set safe speed since each day, each driver and each vehicle is different.

reccomended or advisory limits would be grand and I rarely look at my speedo on the motorway.

The trouble is that enforceable limits make for 'efficient' dispensation of justice.

I'm sure I've posted this before but its easier and therefore cheaper to prosecute for exceeding a limit than to prove that in exceeding the advisory limit you were driving in a dangerous or careless manner. I'd love to see it but it'll never happen.

It flies in the face of the blair/euro control freakery.

The problem with completely dispensing with speed limits is how you prevent people from doing inappropriate speeds in urban areas.

There are plenty of urban roads with properly-set 30 limits where it is easily physically possible to do 50, and it would be well-nigh impossible to prove that under specific circumstances 50 was dangerous, unless you established a precedent that 50 was generally dangerous on that particular road, thus creating a de facto speed limit.

To some extent removing all limits would legitimise the approach of the "40-everywhere" brigade. 40 is a comfortable, ambling fourth-gear cruise in most cars, and it gives you plenty of time to deal with any physical hazards on the road - that's why people do it.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

OK Peter, just get rid of the NSL for me. I can put up with sensibly applied (advisory) limits in built up areas.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

A sensibly set NSL enforced with discretion is just a valuable as lower urban limits. Okay, there's plenty of rural NSL roads where it's really not safe to do 60 even in ideal conditions, and that waters down the argument that they serve as a guide to the inexperienced or those unfamiliar with the road. But what they do give is a definite offence for the police to use when someone is driving inappropriately, but in a way in which careless or dangerous driving will be hard to prove in court. When used this way a driver is only going to get a slap on the wrist fine wise, but the 3 points might have the desired effect.

IMO the only roads on which de-restriction could even be considered are motorways, and probably not all of them. I'd also worry that newly qualified drivers could legally go straight on the nearest motorway and max their car out, so I think there would need to be compulsory motorway training for learners (actually I think this should be done anyway). And I'm sure other measures would be needed before motorways could be de-restricted. Probably simpler to have a limit and let the police use their discretion about who to tug.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Sensibly applied (as they used to be) 30 or 40 mph limits in built up areas are OK at least in an advisory fashion, but the NSL of 60 mph on the open road is no help at all in identifying a safe and appropriate speed IMHO.

I know sections of SC road where I sometimes do 90 to 100 mph quite satisfactorily for short stretches, and yet other parts only half a mile away need a speed no higher than about 25 mph. So how can an overall 60 mph limit be any help?

Best wishes all,
Dave.

This isn't a fault of the principle but a fault in the way in which it has been applied. I have similar roads nearby with NSL limits where NSL speeds are never safe. That should be enough to show that an NSL limit isn't appropriate there. Sure as hell it isn't telling anyone anything useful about the nature of the road or the sort of speed that would be sensible. However, that doesn't mean that NSL don't work where they are sensibly applied (like any speed limit would). Also remember that without an absolute limit on all roads the police would often have nothing with which to charge some drivers who take the mick. Do away with NSLs and I believe the chavs will benefit more than the sensible majority. As things stand at least the police can charge with speeding when anything else is too difficult to prove. What we really need is better guidelines on setting limits so we don't have the situation where you leave a nice, straight, flat 50mph dual carriageway for a narrow SC back road with dips, bends and an NSL limit, and secondly police officers who feel they can just concentrate on tugging this piss-takers rather than pinging everybody over a certain threshold (like we used to).

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Whether you're minded to criticise the principle or the method of application matters not to me. The effect either way is that the NSL is useless in terms of helping people to adopt a safe speed.

The idea that no SC road in this country is suitable for more than 60 mph is sheer nonsense. I know of SC roads where 100+ mph is OK, and other SC roads, such as minor country lanes etc. near where I live where 30 mph is plenty fast enough from a safety point of view, but they are all subject to the same 60 mph limit. I'm sorry but I really can not see how that system helps us.

Best wishes all,
Dave.