What's more dangerous 10km over or 10km under?

[Wretched]

Speed limits are there as LIMITS, go over them and it is at your own peril.
People who travel under the speed limit can annoy others but where does everyone have to be to get so angry and drive stupidly? There is no excuse.

[FPV+fteT3]

If people drive to their limits thats ok but if a person drives well below the posted limit and the driving conditions are good should they infact be driving? The road speed limits are set as advisory (for cornering) and maximum limits, most modern cars can safely travel at that limit and more (say 20k over) with no adverse reactions so why do people need to travel well below the limit and cause undue duress to other road users? The best excuse for owning my car is that overtaking can be accomplished quickly and without the need of a long straight or run up so I can make light work of passing, however people driving less powered cars as their patience waines can take more risks in overtaking and this becomes unsafe for all even for the vehicle travelling slower than posted limit. I must admit that following a car travelling at 80 in a 100 zone when the car is not fully loaded and conditions are good makes me wonder why they are on the road at all.

[Spanrz]

I've voted for 10k's under is more dangerous.

I've driven in the US, you get run over by doing the speed limit....Lol!
Don't banter to me about the US has more accidents blah blah. (they also have 17 times our population, so 17 times more chances of having an accident).

I have driven in NYC, 6pm Friday peak hour getting out of town traffic, and it rates better than Melbourne's traffic congestion. Wifes thinks the same thing.

5k's under limit is Ok, but a lot of people do 80 on a FWY, WTF!
Get with the program, it's called do 100 on the on ramp, otherwise you get killed by the truck whose doing 100 on the FWY!!
One of my pet hates. (the people who stop on an on-ramp, should be shot and not allowed a licence.!)
They cause more menace, than a fat kid wanting a chocolate cupcake.

(sorry guys, just had my dutch courage) ;)

[geehaa]

This should be deleted

[phoon]

Originally Posted by Nostalgia

I didn't vote as neither are correct.

The safest speed for human's is walking pace.

We are not designed for any G-Force beyond that.

Sorry for being off-topic but that's the fact.

Adam.

So lets assume that walking pace is 5k per hr. If we went 10k under that speed, we would in theory be walking at -5k per hr or if you like, we would be walking backwards. I would also assume that since we dont have eyes in the back of our heads that this would be dangerous and for this reason I vote for 10k over is safer. Safety first I say.

[Walkinshaw]

Multiple vehicle accidents can often be attributed to 'speed differential' not 'speed.'

10km+ over the speed limit, it may well be a safe speed for the conditions; then again it may be totally irresponsible.

What will keep people out of trouble is to drive passively WITH other traffic (within reason). This means don't sit 10kmh above the speed of other traffic, but also don't be the mobile road block sitting 10kmh slower than everyone else. minimise your speed differential with the surrounding traffic and you'll go a long way to avoiding multiple vehicle collisions.


Intresting Trivia - Speed limits use to be set at the 85th percentile of the speed traveled on a section of road. That’s right, a speed dictated by what the public feel safe and comfortable doing. This logic worked for some 80 years before the advent of revenue rais... I mean road safety tools such as LIDO etc.

[burnz]

i has to be a ford!!

[Tles]

The only thing that is dangerous, as in everything I can think of, is a blind adherence to the limits and laws regarless of any other circumstances. Speed and driving approach should be varied and adjusted to suit varying road and driving conditions. In a good well maintained modern vehicles the posted speed limits should be remarkably safe to travel at even for a poor or inexperienced driver. However, in teeming rain or even very light mist on dry dusty roads, one cannot expect to drive the same as at all other times and stay safe. Braking distances increase, traction is reduced and visibility is impinged on.

To me the best drivers are those living in the old inner city suburbs and regularly heading out on to Country back roads, as they learn the real size of their car, and how and when to get out of the way and let another car go. They also learn to be alert at all times, anticipate and double check both the blind spot before they cross, and to make sure the intersection is empty before heading off on the green light.

These people seem to drive the same way as they would walk around a busy shopping centre. Driving a car is a contract between you and every other road user, but the main person responsible for you and your passenger is the one you look at in the mirror.

Drive to be predictable, give the other cars a chance to go safely about their business too. 10km/h under the limit may be no safer or more dangerous than 10km/h over, as long as all the other traffic has an idea of what you are doing, and you have room to adjust as required. The same speed is extremely dangerous if you persist in sitting in the blind spot, or do not maintain at least as good as average stoppers and tyres.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by Tles

The only thing that is dangerous, as in everything I can think of, is a blind adherence to the limits and laws regarless of any other circumstances.

Well said, and so very true.....

Reminds me of the time there was an ambulance blaring away stuck behind a lady at the red lights. No cars coming form left or right, she was screaming back at her partner (who was probably screaming at her to let them through).. but then she pointed at the red light. Because naturally red means stop right?

Like has been already said several times. This kind of question can be debated for ever with no real correct answer. The infinite amount of variables cannot possibly be covered in a simple yes / no blanket statement.

Thanks Laminge for re-opening by the way.

[xurbanx]

It's an open question, there is no yes or no answer to this.
Numerous times I've driven on the Monash at the speed limit (80 due to roadworks) and I'll get people tailgating me. 10km under on a Fiesta, on the freeway is a major difference, heck even on suburban roads it's slow.

Point is, it depends on the situation. One a multi-lane freeway, perhaps 10km over would be better. 10km under on a small capacity car means people get backed up, angry drivers tailgating them causing anxiety, anger, nervousness for the "offending" driver.

What I don't get is impatient drivers barreling past you at speeds above the limit. Should've just left home early if they didn't want to get stuck behind someone slow.

[max_torq]

10 kays under is so much more dangerous..

Cars just don't go into other realm of physics where they fly off the road, ten kilometers over an artificial blanket limit which has obviously been set with a safety margin for the lowest common denominator ... trust me.

A slow car accumulates someone behind who can't or won't pass. Those two gen travel in close proximity where a mishap shared or caused by the other can affect them, increasing the risk. Then another joins in and a line forms, each member increasing the risk each shares. Then add some multi-lanes and a pack can form as lines come side by side, multipling the risk. This is a wolf-pack.. a cluster of cars travelling togethor at high speed. Faster car arrive from the rear with a speed differential add to their own, and all the members risk.

Then such a formation comes on a slow moving object such as a truck climbing a hill, and every car in the group already packed nice and close is going to have to change speed and or lane. The guys at the back can't see the truck, so the first people to slow are the leaders in the same way, so then the people behind them brake with a small delay and a density wave of bumper to bumper passes back through the entire wolf-pack until someones reaction times are exceeded, maybe they picked a bad time time to sip on the coffee... and wack! multi-car pile up time!

Maintain the limit!

[SumoDog68]

Doing 90 in a 70 zone sounds fast and it is if most of the others are doing 60. What i am trying to say speed is relative to conditions. The very road where speed limit is 70 can be safely driven at twice that if there were no other cars , pedestrians, cyclists..etc. So speed limit is a compromise which does not take into account how busy the road is, whether is day or night, type of car doing it, skill of the driver doing it, weather conditions... For average driver in a modern car speeds limits are set low. For above average drivers in performance cars speeds limits are very low. For bellow average drivers in old cars speed limits are too high. There are more combinations of drivers and their cars obviously. Nature of public roads is that everyone is entitled to use them, so we all have to look out for each other.
I see speed limits as being low ( but paid the price in losing lot of points and now strictly stick to speed limit ). I recently decided to conduct little experiment and drive 10 to 20 under the posted speed limit. It is very very hard and much harder to do than doing 10 or 20 over the limit. You get abused and people do crazy things to try and pass you. It does not make that much of a difference to travel time. It is probably safer for the driver doing it but less safe for others.

[shane3]

What a load of horse manure, I would know that I can stop quicker and shorter from 100KM/h then my wife can in her EL falcon doing 70km/h, 10km/h my left testicle, you have to take every car on it's own merits, Suzuki swift V FPV GT what would you rather be in ?

[Marduk]

Dependant on the conditions. Sitting 10km+ under the limit in fog is just asking for someone to rear end you. If you can't handle fog get off the road. So many people come up to the mountains for a fun weekend and when the fog rolls in every they panic and sit at 30-40km in a 60km zone. It's just asking for someone to come around a blind corner and hit you in the ***.
Sitting under the limit increases the risk to other drivers around you. You get drivers sitting behind you and then people start to get impatient and will make risky decisions overtaking in places that aren't the safest to do so. Someone overtakes on a blind corner gets collected by a car coming the other way and ends up taking out the 5 people behind him as well. If people couldn't just sit on the speed limit it's not that hard. If you can't handle a car at the speed limit you shouldn't be on the road.

[Pete from Port]

I do about 70,000 klm a year all over northern NSW and come across this problem (10-20 klm/hr under) frequently. Mix a stack of B doubles in on a highway and it is understandable that fuses blow. Caravan towers that think the towing limit is still 80klm/hr are a major cause as well. I believe that matching the existing traffic speed is the safest way to travel and I extend this to red P platers as well. Having a poor frightened kid legally limited to 80 on a 100 or 110 road only raises the tension. I mean, realistically, if they are unable to drive safely on the type of roads that are posted 100 or above should this not be detected at testing time? I live at Port Macquarie and there are a large number of incompetent elderly drivers here to share the roundabouts with so to apply a bit of humour at this Xmas day I offer the following exchange on VKG.
VKG..Any car in the Laurieton to Port area keep a look out for.........driven by.......he is travelling to Port to attempt a licence test and is unaccompanied.
Laurieton 18...I'm at Bonny Hills on Ocean Drive, I'll keep an eye out.
VKG...Thanks Laurieton 18.
Mid Coast 204....I'm on the highway just North of Kew. What sort of car is it?
Laurieton 18...(cuts in) Blue 90s Magna highway 204, you'll have no trouble identifying him. He's the worst driver you've seen in your life.....
Unknown...laughter.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by Pete from Port

I extend this to red P platers as well. Having a poor frightened kid legally limited to 80 on a 100 or 110 road only raises the tension. I mean, realistically, if they are unable to drive safely on the type of roads that are posted 100 or above should this not be detected at testing time?

Which is ridiculous because travelling so far under the speed limit just creates more problems then it solves. It shows just how damn short sited our state governments are. I'll say it again if you can't control a car at the speed limit P plater or not you should not be on the road. You are only endangering the rest off us.

[68XTFairmont]

after reading the first 1 1/2 pages I have decided that this is a no win situation so here is my take on it.

Statistically the more time that a person spends on the road the more chance they have of being involved in an accident, So saying that i reckon where it is safe to do so go the extra 10 kp/h and be home in the driveway by time the accident happens back up the road a bit .

Flame on

[05_ENFORCER]

Originally Posted by 68XTFairmont

after reading the first 1 1/2 pages I have decided that this is a no win situation so here is my take on it.

Statistically the more time that a person spends on the road the more chance they have of being involved in an accident, So saying that i reckon where it is safe to do so go the extra 10 kp/h and be home in the driveway by time the accident happens back up the road a bit .

Flame on

[b0son]

If we're talking safety, strictly speaking, speed limit doesnt actually come into it.

The safest speed is the one that most drivers around you are doing, irrespective of whether that speed is above or below the limit. 10kmh under or over that speed increases crash risk.

[Laminge]

Originally Posted by shane3

What a load of horse manure, I would know that I can stop quicker and shorter from 100KM/h then my wife can in her EL falcon doing 70km/h, 10km/h my left testicle, you have to take every car on it's own merits, Suzuki swift V FPV GT what would you rather be in ?

http://www.fordforums.com.au/vbporta...article&id=220

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by b0son

If we're talking safety, strictly speaking, speed limit doesnt actually come into it.

The safest speed is the one that most drivers around you are doing, irrespective of whether that speed is above or below the limit. 10kmh under or over that speed increases crash risk.

Disagree. I have found that after many years driving experience, also talking to experienced motorcycle riders, a most dangerous situation is when there is another driving next to me at the same speed. You are relying on them to remember to look properly before they decide to change lanes. And being 'stationary' relative to them and not a moving object, you are actually harder to be noticed, especially if you are in their blind spot.

That is why I never trust anyone driving next to me at the same speed, and when possible I purposely accelerate to get away from them if they do suddenly decide to change lanes. Or at least get into a position where I am more visible to them, to get out of that situation. All part of defensive driving.

In fact I have found it is far safer when the lanes of traffic are travelling at different speeds, which also enables vehicles to change lanes easier as they get closer to their exits. The growing traffic cluster that forms if traffic is all moving at the same speed is also avoided.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by b0son

If we're talking safety, strictly speaking, speed limit doesnt actually come into it.

The safest speed is the one that most drivers around you are doing, irrespective of whether that speed is above or below the limit. 10kmh under or over that speed increases crash risk.

Yep.

Speed-limits simply give something for people to drive at, and often; 'come what may'; - fog, etc.

This leads to 'speed-limit conditioning', and associated behaviours on the road, and opinion such as that which gives rise to this thread. An intolerance of other vehicle speeds.

Speed derestriction (//) applied to 'quality roads' in particular of course, removes any such 'guidance', it is for free thinkers who must simply drive to prevailing conditions instead.

[4Vman]

I find it frightening the amount of "Intolerance" allot have to other people's chosen speed, especially where people "choose" a speed they feel comfortable to travel at, with posted limits in mind....
Its not hard to see why we have issues and fatalities on our roads if that's peoples attitude...

[86XFFairmont]

there does need to be a 3rd selection put up (both) as its not so much speed that kills its the sudden stop, it doesnt matter what speed your doin as if ur watching ur speedo all the time ur taking ur concentration off the road, you could be doin 80 in a 60 but if ur watching what your doin u could pull up (not that i suggest you all go and try it), most of the accidents i attend are either big hits or love taps theres no in between, for instance you can get sumone doin 160 down a residential rd (toorak rd, Toorak) and clean up a car and part of a brick wall or u could get a granny in a car park behind a cop shop who takes off in what she thought was revers and goes plowing over a parking stop and a fence (very low speed impact still wrote off the old 406 peugeot) ill say again its not speed that kills its the people behind the wheel who lose their concentration and becoz there doin ten over or ten under they dont react quick enuff to the situation to lose ur concentration is like driving while under the influence not by much but enough to slow ur reaction times down and also ur motor skills ( putting foot on the brake and steering mainly)

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Disagree.

I wasnt posting an opinion - I was stating fact (based on actual crash data/stats).

I have found that after many years driving experience, also talking to experienced motorcycle riders, a most dangerous situation is when there is another driving next to me at the same speed.

I agree, though that is a separate issue. Traffic density is a major factor - most crashes involve another vehicle so it is obvious that if you reduce traffic density you reduce the likelihood of a crash.

In terms of speed-related crashes, speed differentials are a major factor. I wish penalties were tougher and enforced more often against drivers who do not give way *adequately* (eg. merging at too low a speed, pulling into traffic without adequate space or adequate speed, etc).

[Daymoe]

I do generally drive 10-20km/h under the limit at most times (Obviously not 20km/h under in a school zone, 50 zone or 70 zone etc) but my driving is mainly on 100km/h roads anyway, if people want to overtake, I go a bit to the left to let them or into those little overtaking cut outs on the road, never had someone rage at me yet or do any stupid overtaking maneuvers. I don't see what is so 'dangerous' about it? The limit is the max speed you can travel, not the ideal one

[b0son]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

I find it frightening the amount of "Intolerance" allot have to other people's chosen speed, especially where people "choose" a speed they feel comfortable to travel at

I would argue that if you are not comfortable driving at/near the speed limit in good conditions, driving is not for you.

At the very least, they should keep left. We have far too many self-appointed safety police who think they're doing the world a favour by impeding traffic.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by b0son

I would argue that if you are not comfortable driving at/near the speed limit in good conditions, driving is not for you.

At the very least, they should keep left. We have far too many self-appointed safety police who think they're doing the world a favour by impeding traffic.

No argument from me about keeping left.. that said I really doubt people travel in the right lane, well below the posted limit, just to "police" others speed though, its more ignorance than anything.
I still believe that we need to show tolerance towards people who display enough common sense to not drive faster than they feel safe doing.. if they keep left and obey the rules i can't see the problem, there is no law requiring all road users to maintain the posted limit at all times..
As i said earlier though i do understand what a PITA slow traffic is on single lane roads, but ultimately its only other peoples impatience that causes accidents....

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by b0son

I wasnt posting an opinion - I was stating fact (based on actual crash data/stats).

I suppose obviously that makes some sense then, that theres not much of a collision when travelling at the same speed in the same direction. However its when one vehicle that runs off the road due to being sideswiped or when the car in front stops unexpectedly, then the statistics may not tell the full story? Bit of a useless stat if you ask me.

Originally Posted by b0son

In terms of speed-related crashes, speed differentials are a major factor. I wish penalties were tougher and enforced more often against drivers who do not give way *adequately* (eg. merging at too low a speed, pulling into traffic without adequate space or adequate speed, etc).

I agree that excessive speed differential is a real danger, merging or changing lanes at differing speeds I believe is a different topic however. When I was saying that "it is far safer when the lanes of traffic are travelling at different speeds", I was thinking around 5 kph or so, compared to travelling at the same speed continually for some distance.

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by Laminge

http://www.fordforums.com.au/vbporta...article&id=220

so technically speaking with those stats......if i own a GTP i could theoretically do 10k over the speed limit and still be safer that most other cars out there simply because i have monster brakes and better suspension on my car..........

hmm whos going to be the first to test this one out in court.......