140km/h Off-peak Speed Limit

[Equinox]

Who said they'd make the limit 140 everywhere?

Re-read what Skaife said. He said on specifc roads which are designed by European engineers for 200kph+. (eg. Eastlink)

[mad082]

i'm against the 140km/h speed limit for a few reasons.

1: it will cause more crashes because more people will lose control of their cars because a lot of people won't be able to handle those speeds

2: a lot of the roads aren't good enough. the effect of hitting a pot hole at 140 will be a lot greater than at 100 or 110, and you don't want a tyre blowing out at 140kmh. also you have to take into account things like the sharpness of corners. at 140kmh some corners may be too sharp to be safely taken at 140kmh in all cars (remember that the roads have to be suitable for all cars at that speed)

3: a lot of cars aren't capable of safely driving at 140kmh. they might be able to do 140kmh, but that doesn't mean that they would safely be able to do it for extended periods of time, or be able to adequately brake or corner well enough at that speed, as well as the fact that you can expect a lot more cars to break down due to the much more heat generated in the engine from sustained running at 140kmh.

4: it isn't really needed.

now number 4 is the key thing (and a lot of people will disagree), a lot of people on here simply want it because they want to be able to drive as fast as possible on the roads, and if it is signed at 140kmh they will do it and think that it is good, but i'd like people to tell me why it should be done with an intelligent response, not just some stupid hoon's repsonse that it will save time, etc. even the time issue isn't that much of a reason. if you drive 25kms at 140kmh and someone else follows you at 110kmh, you will only get there 2 minutes and 54 seconds earlier, but it would've cost you more on fuel. and that is the big key. if it was a long trip (such as a few hundred km), sure it may have taken you 20 or 30 mins less time to get there, but you will lose some of that time back on having to fill up on fuel, and the fact that it's cost you more money to do the same trip. i don't think people realise just how much extra fuel they would use driving at 140kmh, plus the stress it would put on the vehicle. think about all the extra heat being generated and then heating up the exhaust wheel on the stock turbos. would certainly increase the fail rate of stock turbos.

and also if the speed limit is 140, then you will get the people who do 150. there are always going to be people who sit 10kmh over the limit no matter what the limit is. and these people will still do stupid things while trying to get around slower cars.

personally i think maybe raise them up to 120kmh, but 140kmh is too much.

[jjskyline79]

as much as i like victorias "get a RWC when u puchase a car" idea... there is far 2 many cars down here that are not safe to drive. im from nsw originally, 25yrs up there and 2 yrs down here. As much as i hate to say it i think victoria needs to bring in yearly safety inspections like nsw. Basically before you can re-register your car you need to have it inspected by an authorised inspector and passed as safe. i live out in gippsland and i can tell u now theres atleast 30% of the vehicles ive seen shouldnt be on the street, that would compensate for removing bad vehicles off the street.

I also 100% agree with more driver training, nsw and vic alike sound like they are the same with the very minimal driving lessons and experience to obtain a license.

i think a big issue with some people is that they dont respect thier vehicle as a weapon, nor do they respect speed. I feel that speed is not the killer, its the people who have minimal experience in driving, and want to "test out the car" or push it to its limits, unfortunatly they are to unexperienced and push it beyond its capabilities, before they know it, they are dead along with their mates. In the midst of all of this, the rest of the sensible drivers who are passionate about thier car and thier mods, have it stuck is a damn garage at home in fear of getting singled out as a hoon, and picked on by the police.

so i agree with what has been said, bad cars should be taken off the road, more driver training should be put in place, and the speeds should be raised. instead of punishing everyone and creating a massive group of rebellious car hoons, who get a kick out of disobeying the law and endup costing someone thier life.

cheers.

Hate to say it but I agree

They did that in Northern Ireland.

Worked well and boosted the economy.

I think you have been fed slightly false information there, It was more a grant. If you had owned your car/van over 12 months and it was road worthy and over 10 years old. You were given 1000 pound by the government and a further 1000 min by the dealer against the purchase of a new car. But guess what the price of the car was not 2 or 3k cheaper they just added the extra on top to start with. It was such a piss take yet thousands of people thought for some reason they were getting a good deal. Shows you how stupid Britain is tbh

I'm going to have to disagree with you there 'FrangaR33'. Uping the fines and penalties wont stop people from speeding and killing themselves. We all know it's illegal to speed yet people do it anyway. 5x the points, 5x the fine, people will still continue to break the law. Look at all these kids killing themselves; they know they can only have one passenger, they know they can only drive at 60km/h on hypothetical road, yet they still pack their car with five of their good mates and go flying down the road at 160km/h into their neighbors tree. So worse fines wont stop them doing it. Restricting what they can drive will help immensely.

Going off what 'saff_cossie' was saying, restricting P-Platers to four cylinder vehicles, I think, will reduce our road toll. It takes much more time for a four cylinder to get to that tree hitting 160km/h than a Commodore/Falcon. Being forced to drive a lower powered vehicle for four years will give new drivers a chance to develop driving skills. I bought my first car at 16. It was a 1982 Toyota Celica. Now this car is quite capable of driving at 200km/h, however, it will take about fifteen minutes to get to that speed. Head to head, my car was able to keep up with my mates brand new magnate ute until 60km/h, after that though it was a different story. During my time as a P-Plater I learned many driving skills such as, heel and tow, clutch kicking, threshold breaking and weight transfer. All skills you don't need a high powered car to learn.

Now sorry to all you P-Platerd that are shouting at me saying,"But I need my V6 Commodore/4Letre Falcon Ute for work". Well did you guys know that they have 4 cylinder utes that have more than enough torque for your working purposes? Toyota have their Hilux's, Mazda have their Bravo's, and I'm sure there are many other vehicles out there that can do the job.

Having developed my new driving skills I now feel more experienced and ready to handle high power cars, as would most drivers if they took this course of action.

Sorry for the long read guys lol

Daniel

Sorry i disagree. For example insurance is a killer in the UK compared to here. So many people run around without insurance its un real. But they think like this.

So it costs them say 2k gbp to insure there car its only worth 200 quid if that. But IF AND ONLY IF they get caught its going to cost them 3 points on ther licence that half of them dont have any way and a fine of maybe 500 quid hummmmmmmmmmmmm oh hang im better off not buying/having insurance coz im better off not being law abiding. Now if the it was say a 10k fine and 5 years in prison. that would make you stand up and think even if you are slightly thicker then 95% of the already stupid British population f**k plus as an added bonus gets them off the damn road.

On a side note i dont no what the law states here but you get the fundamentals

Wasn't limited to just NI and was a disgrace IMO.

Had some good points especially in a time of recession for dealers with high stock levels. Caused a lot more pain for independant workshops who number highly who used to maintain the older vehicles and rely on their servicing/MOT revenue. To compound it when a new vehicle doesn't need an MOT (RWC) for the first 3 years means there is no end in sight, knock on effect with motor factors etc. I know a number of people on the negative end of that scheme, more than the positive end. Guys with families having to cut down to 3 days a week rather than being made redundant to name one, car detailers at those places. Once that car is moved off the forecourt, they need not see it again for 12 months or more. An older car has multiple expenditure items in that period, tyres, batteries, servicing etc.

I agree and dis agree

The car still has to be serviced as per manufacture guide lines to maintain the warranty you dont have to take it to main dealer but you still have to have it serviced and stamped by an authorized garage. Plus there is a lot of money to be made in warranty work

Edited June 18, 2010 by jjskyline79

[Harey]

Guys please dont take the 140km/h thing out of context.

Marks point is lets put more emphasis into driver training, road quality and newer cars.

Then once these have taken effect, lets look at increasing the speed limit on certain roads.

Please dont fall into the "140km/h" headlines the media are trying to feed you.

[R TUNE]

Up in the NT it's 130km/h (and fun), altho we have only about 120,000 people our death told is low, considering we face the following.

rouge wild life (esperly out of darwin area, people crossing the road with out warning in pitch black, 4 full lenth trailer road trains that sway every wear.

I believe it should be brought in for all rual roads were it's two lanes per side.

[Crackfox]

I pretty much agree with everything Skaife has said, though I would be hesitant to up the speed limit to 140kph for a few years atleast. As peter brocks wife said, there are still so many people who are incapable of safely driving at 100kph and better driver education is a far bigger issue than getting to your destination quicker, though I'm sure Skaife means the new limits would only be introduced when/if people improve their driving skills. Theres also the issue of fuel efficiency, do we really need to be burning more fuel to get there a bit quicker in this day and age as oil becomes scarcer? Maybe a compromise between the 2, such as a 120kph limit.

[Taso84]

Will never happen.

The diff b/w us and Germany, is that the German Govt does not rely on revenue from speed cameras. Why would they ever increase the speed limit when that would mean less revenue? I hope you pple are still not buying into the whole 'road safety' marketing ploy.

[teK--]

...

now number 4 is the key thing (and a lot of people will disagree), a lot of people on here simply want it because they want to be able to drive as fast as possible on the roads, and if it is signed at 140kmh they will do it and think that it is good, but i'd like people to tell me why it should be done with an intelligent response, not just some stupid hoon's repsonse that it will save time, etc. even the time issue isn't that much of a reason. if you drive 25kms at 140kmh and someone else follows you at 110kmh, you will only get there 2 minutes and 54 seconds earlier, but it would've cost you more on fuel. and that is the big key. if it was a long trip (such as a few hundred km), sure it may have taken you 20 or 30 mins less time to get there, but you will lose some of that time back on having to fill up on fuel, and the fact that it's cost you more money to do the same trip. i don't think people realise just how much extra fuel they would use driving at 140kmh, plus the stress it would put on the vehicle. think about all the extra heat being generated and then heating up the exhaust wheel on the stock turbos. would certainly increase the fail rate of stock turbos.

and also if the speed limit is 140, then you will get the people who do 150. there are always going to be people who sit 10kmh over the limit no matter what the limit is. and these people will still do stupid things while trying to get around slower cars.

personally i think maybe raise them up to 120kmh, but 140kmh is too much.

I don't care about the extra fuel used or time saved. I know my car and brakes can handle 140+, however I just get bored out of my mind driving at 100 or even 110 for any decent period of time. I just drove back from Bright today, over 300kms and I was often daydreaming because it is such a slow pace.

I have paid more attention on the track at 140+ then I ever have on an open road at 110.

[Peter89]

i'm against the 140km/h speed limit for a few reasons.

1: it will cause more crashes because more people will lose control of their cars because a lot of people won't be able to handle those speeds

2: a lot of the roads aren't good enough. the effect of hitting a pot hole at 140 will be a lot greater than at 100 or 110, and you don't want a tyre blowing out at 140kmh. also you have to take into account things like the sharpness of corners. at 140kmh some corners may be too sharp to be safely taken at 140kmh in all cars (remember that the roads have to be suitable for all cars at that speed)

3: a lot of cars aren't capable of safely driving at 140kmh. they might be able to do 140kmh, but that doesn't mean that they would safely be able to do it for extended periods of time, or be able to adequately brake or corner well enough at that speed, as well as the fact that you can expect a lot more cars to break down due to the much more heat generated in the engine from sustained running at 140kmh.

4: it isn't really needed.

now number 4 is the key thing (and a lot of people will disagree), a lot of people on here simply want it because they want to be able to drive as fast as possible on the roads, and if it is signed at 140kmh they will do it and think that it is good, but i'd like people to tell me why it should be done with an intelligent response, not just some stupid hoon's repsonse that it will save time, etc. even the time issue isn't that much of a reason. if you drive 25kms at 140kmh and someone else follows you at 110kmh, you will only get there 2 minutes and 54 seconds earlier, but it would've cost you more on fuel. and that is the big key. if it was a long trip (such as a few hundred km), sure it may have taken you 20 or 30 mins less time to get there, but you will lose some of that time back on having to fill up on fuel, and the fact that it's cost you more money to do the same trip. i don't think people realise just how much extra fuel they would use driving at 140kmh, plus the stress it would put on the vehicle. think about all the extra heat being generated and then heating up the exhaust wheel on the stock turbos. would certainly increase the fail rate of stock turbos.

and also if the speed limit is 140, then you will get the people who do 150. there are always going to be people who sit 10kmh over the limit no matter what the limit is. and these people will still do stupid things while trying to get around slower cars.

personally i think maybe raise them up to 120kmh, but 140kmh is too much.

1: if you cant drive at 140kph, you shouldn't have a license. it's basic car control.

2: it was talking about fwys during off peak times. the eastern + east link fwys are awesome. i would feel safe at 200kph. other fwys are safe enough for 140kph in a car with road worthy suspension, brakes and tyres.

3: maybe 30 year old vans but even newish commodores can drive over 200kph without trouble. euro cars even since the 90s would be safe at speeds up to 200kph. the same point again, if your car isn't safe enough to drive at 140kph, then it shouldn't be on the road.

4: i don't care about fuel usage, didn't buy a turbo sports car to worry about petrol costs. if you don't want to "waste" the fuel, then sit in the left lane. this line of thought can be applied to 110kph zone, "it's too fast, it's wasting fuel". such statements are slippy slopes, every car is different and every car has a different maximum efficiency range though it would be between 75-120kph. it's not like 140kph zone force you to sit at 140kph all the time, the left lane is designed to be the slow lane but i highly doubt people would care about the extra fuel costs.

[180Roman]

it sounds like a few people on here never driven on a long trip on the Hume to Winton or even Sydney

You are completely bored out of your mind driving at 110 for more then 1hr,

such interstate roads like the Hume need to be upgraded and definitely raised to at least 140

[lukebaldan]

1: if you cant drive at 140kph, you shouldn't have a license. it's basic car control.

Highly disagree, victorian licensing system: "Jump in the car, drive around, do a reverse parallel park" Yay you got your license. High speed driving is not tested, thus this assumption is invalid.

I know plenty of people who have a license and have trouble/get worried doing 100km/h let alone 140km/h.

Things happen much faster at this speed, you need to be more alert of your surroundings. The risk definately increases.

[teK--]

Highly disagree, victorian licensing system: "Jump in the car, drive around, do a reverse parallel park" Yay you got your license. High speed driving is not tested, thus this assumption is invalid.

I know plenty of people who have a license and have trouble/get worried doing 100km/h let alone 140km/h.

Things happen much faster at this speed, you need to be more alert of your surroundings. The risk definately increases.

I think you took his comments out of context. He was saying that if someone can't handle 140 then they shouldn't have their license, not that they couldn't get their license.

[UW8NCY]

i agree with mad082 120km would be a better option ive done plenty of nsw to qld drives but do you really want elderly /truck/the general inexperienced driver at 140km i wouldnt .dont get me wrong id love to do 140km but our skylines can sit on these speeds safely and comfortably but alot cant and most people dont follow the limit anyway they would sit on 150-160 . our roads are crap to be doing these speeds in an average car which is the majority

so 120km would be better and safer option which is what alot people do on our 100km posted motorways already.

[PENGUYEN]

Why do people keep saying our roads can't handle it... I doubt (if they do enforce the 140) that they would allow it on every freeway we have. It would make sense for the road minister to consult with engineers to see which roads can handle it (ie. EASTLINK) and enforce it on those that can handle it.

[llama_au]

Wait until you've been driving for a while and you'll change your view on that.

[scotty014]

some people are turning into the media (some of my friends included). dont just listen to the headlines of a topic and think you can make an opinion, how about you watch and listen to the whole story that Skaife was saying which was that SOME of our roads are as good as the autobahn and can handle higher speeds, also if we had good driver training and safer cars just like Germany are doing than it is safer to increase the speed limits on those few good pieces of road.

[Matt350Z]

Totally agree with 140km/h and need to adjust princess hwy speed limit as well. 70km/h during off peak hr is way too slow

[_Ryan_]

1: if you cant drive at 140kph, you shouldn't have a license. it's basic car control.

and if you do, you loose your licence.

[bluejeans]

human error will never be taken into account by vicpol/gov/vicroads u name it..

i believe human error isnt taken into account at all...

[blind_elk]

...but do you really want elderly /truck/the general inexperienced driver at 140km i wouldnt .

No one is suggesting that you MUST drive at 140 (if that is the limit on the particular road). But we have to get driver to respect the "keep left" road rules if a higher limit than is current is to ever happen.