Motorway Maximum Speed

[Roy124]

What do we think of a lower national speed limit? At 70 mph for 3 hours a car would cover 210 miles.  This is perhaps not untypical and about the max useable distance for an EV.  At 64 mph this would take just 17 minutes longer. 

Except on some less travelled motorways those sustained speeds are not possible. 

On national roads an average speed of 60 mph is simply impossible. As many 200 mile journeys involve mixed limits average mpg will be lower. 

A year back I did a very long journey and drove at 70 whenever I could with lots of dual and motorway roads.  My average was 50.  My 210 journey would have taken 4hrs 12 minutes.  A drop of 6 mph in maximum speed would have had a marginal effect on the journey time say 3 mph or 4 hrs 28 min. 

It might frustrate the boy racer in us but would be much less stressful on driver, passenger, and car. 

[Cyker]

But... why? What would be the goal of that? To make it safer? I don't think it will make any difference and will just introduce confusion. If anything I think it would make things worse.

I can see it just increasing congestion and frustration on the motorway as it will make legal overtakes that much harder and everyone will feel like they are stuck behind someone. Right now, if you feel someone is sandbagging, you can overtake them fairly easily, but the lower you make the NSL the harder that becomes.

Without that headroom, it would feel like being in a traffic jam all the time, which would increase stress?

You already see this effect in roadwork zones and with lines of lorries that are speed limited - Everybody drives at the speed limit and everyone's stuck in lock-step, but due to variances in speedos some people try to get ahead only to get stuck further up and you can see them getting more and more agitated. And I think everyone who drives on a major motorway has had the frustration of the 1mph overtake by a lorry on another lorry, causing a log-jam behind until it finally gets past enough to pull back into lane 1.

At the moment, most people tend to drive around 60mph, but when needing to e.g. overtake a 56mph lorry or other slower vehicle, will accelerate to 70, overtake, then shed that speed again. If the speed limit was 64, those overtakes would take much longer, and it would also increase incidences of road rage and encourage drivers to exceed the speed limit more.

I must admit this fallacy that slower=safer does irk me. My main experience has been with all these 20mph zones that London councils have been rabidly plopping down everywhere - Their stated reason is to increase safety and reduce emissions, but in my experience they do the opposite.

It could be argued that they'd reduce the severity of an accident, but on the flip-side they increase the chance of an accident happening in the first place - I've personally witnessed an increase in risky behaviour by bikes, pedestrians, etc. on the roads that have become 20 zones - Where they'd previously wait for a car to pass when it was a 30 zone, now they'll look at you, see how slow you're going, then cross, thinking they have time, when they actually don't. It's also created much more pollution as the 20mph zones cause bottlenecks which then causes congestion. Cars are really inefficient at 20mph, and even in my Mk4, I'm stopped in traffic so much that the engine has to run to charge the Battery, wasting significant amounts of fuel.

I think whoever implements these schemes doesn't understand that the road network is connected, and making a change in once place can and will have unintended consequences on the roads connected to that place.

But in general, I'd be opposed as a matter of principle, just because that would create the thin end of the wedge, then suddenly one day we'll find the NSL has dropped to 40mph. They never review speed limits in this country, so if it's lowered it's lowered for good, which leads to scenarios where you have a wide 2 lane road that is only 30mph, which people just start to ignore. The speed limit should be set to something appropriate for the road, not just lowered arbitrarily.

They lowered the speed limit on the A10 south of the A406 to 30mph without publicising it - I suspect they have made a pretty penny from all the fines - and it has increased traffic, congestion and aggressive driving noticeably. At rush hour it backs up onto the Great Cambridge Roundabout more than it used to because the light timings have not been adjusted to clear enough traffic due to the slower speed. It's also made it a much more dangerous road - Where before everyone'd be at around 40, now there is a mix of 30 and 40. Tailgating is much more common as drivers who ignore or don't know the limit is 30 now get frustrated and try to force the car in front to go faster, and even when it's clearer, the increased number of cars doing 40 vs 30 creates a bigger speed differential on the road than there used to be, and *that* is what creates danger - Not speed, but the difference in speed.

It's one of the reasons I dislike Smart Motorways - They can drop a speed limit at will with no warning, and it's always a butt-clenching moment when the gantrys suddenly flash up a 40-limit, and half the drivers panic-brake while the other half don't, creating that dangerous speed differential where there would have been no danger before.

Also, where cars pass under that 40-limit, but then it changes to a 60 or NSL, so the cars in front are still doing 40mph across all 4 lanes, while everyone behind is winding up their speed back to 60+. It's just all so badly thought out.

[Rhymes with Paris]

I do wonder if this proposal takes into account that at an indicated 70 mph, most cars are probably doing 64-68 mph anyway, due to the speedometer over read, which is compulsory.

Also apart from the very few who actually abide by the speed limit going on the speedometer reading, most seem to treat the 70 limit as meaning 80-90 mph in reality.

Therefore if the posted limit were 64, the abiders would be at 54-58 mph, and the majority would be at 74-84.

As Cyker says, it's the differentials in speed rather than the outright speed that causes most problems.

[Roy124]

True.  When I had a stand alone Satnav I drove at a true 70.  Now I am more concerned with economy than speed. 

We have several speed signs round here and using the on board displays I set the CC or limiter to 20/30 and invariably get thanked for doing 28.

It makes no difference for urban travel times but I think it upsets the entitled SUV driver intent on doing 30+10%+3.

[Bper]

Why are you guys worried about speed limits, the way things are going the quickest you will be going is to the loo after a bad kebab. 😂

[Rosgoe]

18 minutes ago, Cyker said:

But... why? What would be the goal of that? To make it safer? I don't think it will make any difference and will just introduce confusion. If anything I think it would make things worse.

I can see it just increasing congestion and frustration on the motorway as it will make legal overtakes that much harder and everyone will feel like they are stuck behind someone. Right now, if you feel someone is sandbagging, you can overtake them fairly easily, but the lower you make the NSL the harder that becomes.

Without that headroom, it would feel like being in a traffic jam all the time, which would increase stress?

You already see this effect in roadwork zones and with lines of lorries that are speed limited - Everybody drives at the speed limit and everyone's stuck in lock-step, but due to variances in speedos some people try to get ahead only to get stuck further up and you can see them getting more and more agitated. And I think everyone who drives on a major motorway has had the frustration of the 1mph overtake by a lorry on another lorry, causing a log-jam behind until it finally gets past enough to pull back into lane 1.

At the moment, most people tend to drive around 60mph, but when needing to e.g. overtake a 56mph lorry or other slower vehicle, will accelerate to 70, overtake, then shed that speed again. If the speed limit was 64, those overtakes would take much longer, and it would also increase incidences of road rage and encourage drivers to exceed the speed limit more.

I must admit this fallacy that slower=safer does irk me. My main experience has been with all these 20mph zones that London councils have been rabidly plopping down everywhere - Their stated reason is to increase safety and reduce emissions, but in my experience they do the opposite.

It could be argued that they'd reduce the severity of an accident, but on the flip-side they increase the chance of an accident happening in the first place - I've personally witnessed an increase in risky behaviour by bikes, pedestrians, etc. on the roads that have become 20 zones - Where they'd previously wait for a car to pass when it was a 30 zone, now they'll look at you, see how slow you're going, then cross, thinking they have time, when they actually don't. It's also created much more pollution as the 20mph zones cause bottlenecks which then causes congestion. Cars are really inefficient at 20mph, and even in my Mk4, I'm stopped in traffic so much that the engine has to run to charge the battery, wasting significant amounts of fuel.

I think whoever implements these schemes doesn't understand that the road network is connected, and making a change in once place can and will have unintended consequences on the roads connected to that place.

But in general, I'd be opposed as a matter of principle, just because that would create the thin end of the wedge, then suddenly one day we'll find the NSL has dropped to 40mph. They never review speed limits in this country, so if it's lowered it's lowered for good, which leads to scenarios where you have a wide 2 lane road that is only 30mph, which people just start to ignore. The speed limit should be set to something appropriate for the road, not just lowered arbitrarily.

They lowered the speed limit on the A10 south of the A406 to 30mph without publicising it - I suspect they have made a pretty penny from all the fines - and it has increased traffic, congestion and aggressive driving noticeably. At rush hour it backs up onto the Great Cambridge Roundabout more than it used to because the light timings have not been adjusted to clear enough traffic due to the slower speed. It's also made it a much more dangerous road - Where before everyone'd be at around 40, now there is a mix of 30 and 40. Tailgating is much more common as drivers who ignore or don't know the limit is 30 now get frustrated and try to force the car in front to go faster, and even when it's clearer, the increased number of cars doing 40 vs 30 creates a bigger speed differential on the road than there used to be, and *that* is what creates danger - Not speed, but the difference in speed.

It's one of the reasons I dislike Smart Motorways - They can drop a speed limit at will with no warning, and it's always a butt-clenching moment when the gantrys suddenly flash up a 40-limit, and half the drivers panic-brake while the other half don't, creating that dangerous speed differential where there would have been no danger before.

Also, where cars pass under that 40-limit, but then it changes to a 60 or NSL, so the cars in front are still doing 40mph across all 4 lanes, while everyone behind is winding up their speed back to 60+. It's just all so badly thought out.

I agree with most of what you have said except 20 mph needs to be more enforced in towns as we have a 20 mph limit near to where I live and I regularly see knobs doing 40 plus there has been several cats and  one or two dogs killed and it’s not going to be long before a child is knocked over in fact I have witnessed a girl on her mobile stepped of the kerb car coming up the hill had the vehicle been doing 30 she would have been knocked over without a shadow of a doubt.

[Rhymes with Paris]

9 minutes ago, Bper said:

Why are you guys worried about speed limits, the way things are going the quickest you will be going is to the loo after a bad kebab. 😂

Well Bob, the state of the average post pub kebab in the UK is or was lamentable, the last time I had one in 2005 while visiting a pal in Newark during a cold spell.

It wasn't edible even after previously consuming several pints of wetherspoons finest cut price ale , and watching the traditional Saturday pub fight.

On the other hand I can thoroughly recommend the mobile snack bar at the stone quarry entrance just outside Paphos, lovely fresh perfectly cooked lean pork, with fresh coriander and Greek mint yoghurt.

Note to self: must stop thinking about food while posting on a car forum.

 

[Bper]

6 minutes ago, Rhymes with Paris said:

Well Bob, the state of the average post pub kebab in the UK is or was lamentable, the last time I had one in 2005 while visiting a pal in Newark during a cold spell.

It wasn't edible even after previously consuming several pints of wetherspoons finest cut price ale , and watching the traditional Saturday pub fight.

On the other hand I can thoroughly recommend the mobile snack bar at the stone quarry entrance just outside Paphos, lovely fresh perfectly cooked lean pork, with fresh coriander and Greek mint yoghurt.

Note to self: must stop thinking about food while posting on a car forum. To 

 

I wasn't sure if you meant paphos in Cyprus, To be honest Paul I couldn't eat one now, I think age has dictated what the old stomach can and can't eat I am afraid. 

[Rhymes with Paris]

Yes, Cyprus,hired a Suzuki bike for 3 weeks and got around a bit.

[Bper]

Troodos mountains and the big golf ball at the top, I remember them well. Also to much mataxa brandy on an all inclusive and a boat trip the next day. Not a good idea as they cooked lunch on the boat. 

The only thing that stayed up that day was the boat.

Troodos mountains in a jeep with benches in the back and sliding all over the place with the sun beating down like a oven and again the night before to much ouzo. Half way up a bbq. That went well but I didn't. The only time I felt better on that holiday was when I got back on the plane.😂

[Cyker]

53 minutes ago, Rosgoe said:

I agree with most of what you have said except 20 mph needs to be more enforced in towns as we have a 20 mph limit near to where I live and I regularly see knobs doing 40 plus there has been several cats and  one or two dogs killed and it’s not going to be long before a child is knocked over in fact I have witnessed a girl on her mobile stepped of the kerb car coming up the hill had the vehicle been doing 30 she would have been knocked over without a shadow of a doubt.

That's another problem - A lot of these 20mph zones are actually illegal and can't be legally enforced, as the councils have put up the signs without getting authorization.

I suspect some drivers know this and know which ones are legal, and ignore the other ones.

The thing is, 20 zones are a good tool for emphasizing where drivers should be careful - In this case, there was a 20 zone around a school area, which was emphasized with islands and speed humps, and it worked well - People obeyed it, the speed bumps were right at the boundary, the road was narrowed with islands.

However, the zone was extended to the full length of the road, but the rest of the road was not modified - It is a wide long road with excellent visibility.

Previously, people would do 30, but slow down for the school part where it became 20.

Now, people are more likely to ignore the whole 20 zone, because the road has not been changed and doesn't feel like a 20mph road, and because the change/boundary to the school section is no longer there, now being part of the overall 20-zone, people are more likely to drive straight through that part at 30mph too.

I reckon if they set up the 20 zone you're talking about properly - Add speed humps and an island, maybe narrow the road to make it *feel* dangerous and 20mph-worthy, it would work a lot better.

 

This is partly my whole problem with current road planning - They keep trying to do it on the cheap and seem to think people are robots, but what they are in fact doing is *training* drivers to *ignore* signs and speed limits by using them so inappropriately.

This is most stark on the M25 Smart Motorway sections now - There have been so many false Lane Closure signs in the past, where they'd have the red X on Lane 1 (and sometimes 2), but there was no broken down car, no debris, no accident, and then it just ends, not even an all clear/NSL sign - I suspect they'd forgotten to turn the signs off after a previous incident.

What this has trained drivers to do is to *not believe the sign*, so what happens now is, as soon as the Lane Closure sign appears and people start moving into the 'non-closed' lanes, a bunch of people will pull out into the 'closed' lane and speed off, undertaking the log jam in the outer lanes.

Worse, 70% of the time they get away with it, because there is nothing there, which just reinforces this behaviour, but I've seen some near misses e.g. where one guy flew round the curve, clipped a cone and somehow slotted themselves infront of a lorry, forcing them to emergency brake. Mean while the Highways person is shouting at them and gesticulating the universal wtf are you doing hand wave, but ultimately not pulling them over or punishing them for it.

 

 

[Rhymes with Paris]

To keep on topic, the Suzuki had a very clever speed limiting device while climbing hills and mountains, it's called a slipping clutch.

When I took it back to the hire guy and explained, the language barrier meant that he swapped the spark plugs, and gave a big smile and a thumbs up.

Didn't make a scrap of difference, but he did buy me a kebab for lunch after "fixing" it.

This was a suburb of Paphos called if I can remember the spelling, gyroskipou.

[Cyker]

Hmm, sounds like the hire car my parents had when they were in spain  

No kebabs for them tho'...

 

[Rhymes with Paris]

2 minutes ago, Cyker said:

Hmm, sounds like the hire car my parents had when they were in spain  

No kebabs for them tho'...

 

What about paella 🥘?

 

[FROSTYBALLS]

It is just one of a number of international proposals to reduce pollution, which also includes a ban on driving in large cities on Sundays, working from home for three days per week, cheaper public transport, more car sharing, etc.

Why 64mph? Wouldn't 65mph be easier to judge especially for cars with analogue speedometers?

[forkingabout]

The current speed limits are hardly enforced on a lot of the main road network.

[Yugguy1970]

They already lower it on a lot of motorways, with the gantry speed cameras, not because of traffic but to supposedly lower pollution.

[Roy124]

17 minutes ago, FROSTYBALLS said:

It is just one of a number of international proposals to reduce pollution, which also includes a ban on driving in large cities on Sundays, working from home for three days per week, cheaper public transport, more car sharing, etc.

Why 64mph? Wouldn't 65mph be easier to judge especially for cars with analogue speedometers?

Especially given 65 m = 105 k

[Cyker]

14 minutes ago, forkingabout said:

The current speed limits are hardly enforced on a lot of the main road network.

They seem to be enforced more than cat theft tho'  

 

16 minutes ago, FROSTYBALLS said:

It is just one of a number of international proposals to reduce pollution, which also includes a ban on driving in large cities on Sundays, working from home for three days per week, cheaper public transport, more car sharing, etc.

Why 64mph? Wouldn't 65mph be easier to judge especially for cars with analogue speedometers?

I'm worried eventually they'll do a study and come to the conclusion that the best way to reduce pollution is to ban humans!  

 

[Yugguy1970]

On 1/6/2023 at 9:42 PM, Cyker said:

They seem to be enforced more than cat theft tho'  

 

I'm worried eventually they'll do a study and come to the conclusion that the best way to reduce pollution is to ban humans!  

 

Well Covid proved that - pollution, co2 etc., all went down during lockdown.  Let's face it, Thanos, he's not wrong.🤣

[ISL]

The motorway speed limit needs to be increased not decreased, especially late at night with minimal traffic.

[davidif]

14 hours ago, ISL said:

The motorway speed limit needs to be increased not decreased, especially late at night with minimal traffic.

I'm not sure about increasing them across the board but I'd certainly favour more variable limits based on time of day , weather conditions etc.

[Cyker]

TBH I'd just be happy with sane limits (e.g. not 20mph on a 2-lane wide road that used to be 40+!) and an understanding that drivers have been trained to drive to their ability and conditions (And also remove the drivers that aren't who are spoiling it for everyone else. The driving license is a privilege, not a right, and the DVLA need to be more careful about giving them out to people who aren't going to do 120mph on the motorway instead of treating it as a revenue stream, and be more prepared to revoke it completely when it's clear the driver is a total smeg pot)

[Roy124]

The Netherlands has a day/night differential.  I haven't driven at  night, but 100 kph by day worked well with trucks perhaps 10 kph less.  Given a 200 km journey near 2 hours but at 120 kph only 20 minutes less. In practice the higher speed could not be sustained given trucks could drop your speed. 

By night the limit is increased to 120.  As I say, I never drove at night so have no experience of the difference. 

[Cyker]

Oh that's interesting, I didn't know that was a thing!

I think a night-day differential would work on some roads here, esp. ones that have had their limits lowered due to heavy traffic during the day but were otherwise perfectly safe at their originally designed higher speed limit, but one place I'd rather it stay the same day or night are Motorways, esp. as the vast majority of motorways in the UK are now unlit and there are a lot of oblivious plonkers at the wee hours of the night.