It seems that in NZ until about the 1980s they tried to improve the road toll by improving driver behavior, however it didn't work at all. They then reduced speed limits and improved roads and that in combination with better cars has reduced the road toll, so telling people to just drive better isn't going to work.
tegretol,
Apr 28, 10:25am
And that will make those who have never held a license go rushing in and getting legal will it? My local cop told me recently that 15-20% of all drivers that he stops have never held a license. Yet the penalty is less than the cost of a driving test. Something is wrong.
philltauranga,
Apr 28, 10:32pm
This cut and paste from NZTA website should tell you everything you need to know about the "greasy little selfish assholes" who are making these so called safety decisions.
NZTA- "Rangitaiki Straights. In the future we may propose new speed limits here too."
If they determine the flat, wide, straight, low traffic, virtually no public use intersections-just farms and forestry, the very gentle corners- there is one 75 advisory corner just North of Rangitaiki, needs to have a speed reduction then what will that mean for every other country roads? If that section is a bench mark for a road they consider needs a speed reduction then the rest of the country will be royallyfuked, we will be doing 80kmh as soon as you leave a motorway/expressway.
tweake,
Apr 28, 11:26pm
sounds about right. the catch22 of the situation is if you make it hard to get a license then they don't bother at all, but they still drive. they have a need to make it easy enough for them to get started with training. then use a bit of carrot and stick to move them through the rest of the training.
tweake,
Apr 28, 11:28pm
that would not surprise me one bit. 80kmh everywhere except motorways.
jesus2000,
Apr 28, 11:34pm
Except people will be doing 75 tops, too worried about going over the speed limit.
alowishes,
Apr 29, 12:13am
Back to what it was from ‘73 to ‘85? ( and at times earlier)
nice_lady,
Apr 29, 1:32am
That s what they want. They say that any road which doesn't have a central divider, (solid barrier, wire cheese cutter etc), is safer to travel at lower speeds because IF there is a head on crash the damage/injuries/deaths are less/fewer. Yeah we know that but. it's insanity to slow the entire country down to stupidily slow speeds like 80 & 60 Kmh for these reasons. Waka-KoWhatever go paddle away somewhere else !
gunna-1,
Apr 29, 1:40am
The advisory speed on corners people need to follow, if they dont and they screw up its tough cookies, defensive driving courses are what people need, so you can drive properly if you need to take evasive action in the face of another car out of control, about the only time you get to drive like james bond and not have your car towed.
bumfacingdown,
Apr 29, 2:33am
And they know what a good driver you are but they also are making allowances for the other 95% of drivers who could cause a head on with you
cjohnw,
Apr 29, 2:44am
We know no amount of ranting and raving on here will have any effect whatsoever and just to underline our fears, the Government are now refusing to commit to confirming all the new promised road upgrades will actually proceed. In my view the lowering of speed limits throughout the country is their only other way of looking to be addressing the road toll. The speeds they are a changing - nothing surer.
gunna-1,
Apr 29, 10:49am
Then tell them not to address the road toll, it isnt that bad and wont get much better, someone has to sell news thats all.
grantm,
Apr 29, 9:43pm
tamarillo wrote:
I use this road lots, it has reduced travelling times ? dont you mean its INCREASED travelling times
xs1100,
May 1, 6:14am
shes a hundy no prob most of that road, done it today no prob and i actually do it every 5 weeks and is one i enjoy but not at 80kph
framtech,
May 10, 3:44am
I see the LSTA (correct name) has stated that their calculations on time difference was wrong and they have extended the time for the public to tell what idiots they are by 4 weeks, so get you submissions in on hw crazy their cheap idea is.
reb53,
May 10, 4:37am
When they ignore everyone, and just go ahead, they'll say how reasonable they were, and how much they listened because " we did give everyone another 4 weeks to make submissions". Giving people the right to make submissions is just a petty bureaucrat's way of ticking boxes before doing what they'd always planned to do.
philltauranga,
May 10, 5:02am
I have now come up with a counter for what I am rubbishing.
reb53,
May 10, 5:42am
?
You, presumably, mean someone who agrees with you? As I do.
marte,
May 10, 6:15am
I thought they increased the open road speed limit from 80 to 100km/h in 1985,. I'm not sure if they had dropped it from something down to 80km/h before that though. The public education: 'Roadshow' tour & subsequent school road education classes around 1984 made a huge difference in public perceptions, and drink driving, and drinking practises from then on.
When i got my first car in 1989 I become one of the new dedicated ' sober drivers' who didnt drink at all. From memory before that, people didn't drink alcohol because they had had a slcohol problem, or were considered sober because they had drunk ' under 1 jug in the first hour & 1 standard drink every hour after' or sum such ambiguous standard.
Even on a 100kmh road, the average will be way under 100 as there's simply no way to bring the average back up by driving over 100km/h. Like for every Km @ 90, would require a Km @ 110, and 80-120.
Lowering to top speed limit won't make that much of a change because it only effects the small amount of time spent actually at or near 100 km/h, like its just knocking to top curved bit off the graph, flat at 80 ( or 90 depending )
It should get rid of studders where one person slows down quickly, the person behind them having to slow down even more, and so on untill theres cars nearly stopping still for no reason But, at the same time, driving slow is a opportunity to daydream, use cellphones, do chores as well as drive, which is detrimental to safe driving.
framtech,
May 11, 3:05am
They lowered it for the oil shock during the period of carless days, they quickly increased it back soon after because it caused all sorts of road issues, and that was back when most drove crappy old english cars. Yep I know we need to deal with the modern stupid, those high on P and grass and the increasing number of left foot greenies, but for heaven sake how about stopping the bullshit spin and let the public know the real truths Things like, money spent on road works on highway 5, age of those killed, what they were driving, race, visitor etc, if the white lines were worn off, bumpy corner, day or night, truck involved and target the real issues
philltauranga,
May 11, 3:15am
"JUNK MATHS". hahaha. I love it, especially this bit: If NZTA can’t do such a simple calculation but instead relies on junk maths, that is a huge worry. D.F-KB
tygertung,
May 11, 3:22am
Except the higher speeds doesn't really translate to a significantly higher speed, as illustrated above.
marte,
May 11, 4:20am
Better roads would translate to suitable speeds for all traffic & more economical, much safer transport system.
Putting 4+ different sort of vehicles limited to 3+ different speeds on the same single lane of road at the same time is just plain stupid i think.
spead,
May 12, 4:30am
true. we are amongst the worst in the world.
absolute_detail,
May 12, 4:42am
Drove it again on the weekend, from taupo to bay view in 70 mins, didnt die,
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.