noisebeam

I have many times and in two cases they went right over the edge of the road, actually the trailer started swaying madly and took them over the edge.

I generally stay in the outside late at 75mph down those hills and am passed by lots of towing vehicles. Freaks me out every time they start to wobble as they usually do.

Anyway, enough of I-17, you seem to realize it is not a road that one can just mindlessly drive at 11mph over the SL and be OK like on the more flatter interstates.

Oh, a bit on topic as I-17 is open to cyclists.

Al

syn0n

Indeed. There are some twisty bits of interstate here that I can't possibly slow down for unless there is traffic. And these are followed by a long, straight stretch. Perfect for a healthy 90mph charge.

The thing I've noticed on the bends is that some people clearly do not understand what oversteer and understeer are, and/or they don't know how the powertrain of their vehicle is going to influence which is exhibited. I saw a guy in a sport compact understeer right into a wall a few months back. Too fast, and bad technique.

LittleBigMan

so fast...



That's perimeter speeds 'round here.

Kachunk

Some people type so fast that they type whatever comes out of their head, regardless of the fact that "irregardless" isn't a word. Not to pick on you. It's a pet peeve.

You have your choice of very nice words: irrespective or regardless. Pick one. Use it. Don't combine them.

maddyfish

I'd agree sppeds are too fast. I'm all for 15 and 25 mph speed limits everywhere except on the interstates.

John Wilke

Interestingly, while the city is 'improving' the road in front of my house, folks driving the big 4WD SUVs go by at a snail's pace, I presume so that they don't damage their car/truck/whatever. Folks in their rusty Ford ******* continue on like before, "Rocks? What rocks?"

I think we need more gravel roads.

Mr. Underbridge

You're living in fantasyland. There's absolutely no scientific basis for that other than a desire to make the 99% of traffic that's motorized bow to us. That won't happen, hell that *shouldn't* happen, and if you make the case that speed limits need to be at or under 25mph for safe operation of bike on road, you'll get us banned from roads.

John Wilke

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the point of "driving significantly faster than 85-90" ?

Feldman

I agree, and believe it's because tickets aren't expensive enough and cops are candyasses about writing them. A speeding ticket should be a significant financial and social hardship--you are after all endangering multiple other lives in a public space.

sggoodri

The retailers have two objectives when locating on major thoroughfares:

(1) To make themselves seen to people driving by, so people know the retailers are there.
(2) To alter people's shopping habits so they routinely shop at places that are on their commute rather than out of their way.

Of course this pattern increases congestion on important roads for commuting, making commuting less convenient, probably more so than it increases the convenience of shopping.

genec

15 and 25MPH speed limits on most arterial roads are a probably too slow (fine for residential and high intersection areas such as downtowns), but the flip side is "what is too high?"

Should there an upper limit on roads shared with pedestrians and with businesses, with driveways; even in front of multiunit apartment structures, and with traffic lights? I am speaking of roads with limited sightlines that may or may not have bike lanes.

What should be the practical speed limit on these roads? Here there are such roads which have limits as high as 50 and 60MPH. Of course, they are often driven at higher speeds.

Roads with few intersections and few disruptions, good sight lines and with above grade or below crossing facilities, work well at higher speeds. But what about roads that don't fit this description?

sggoodri

I think that improving driver behavior requires more than just increased competence among drivers. I think it also requires lowering their "target risk."

According to the theory of "risk homeostasis" people adjust their behavior according to environmental conditions in order to achieve a target level of risk that they are comfortable with in exchange for whatever advantages this risk level may provide them. Make the road safer and they drive carelessly; make the road more dangerous and they drive more carefully - but the crash rate stays stubbornly similar.

Therefore, in order to drop the crash rate, it is valuable to reduce drivers' target risk. Possible ways to accomplish this include increasing their empathy toward vulnerable road users and/or crash victims or making risky behavior in public less socially acceptable (rather than celebrated as it sometimes is in our motoring culture). I think much of the reduction in DUI crashes among non-alcoholics has resulted from stigmatizing people who drink and drive as baby killers. I think we should apply similar stigma to overdriving one's sight distance, distracted driving, and drowsy driving.

It is also possible to increase the monetary risk of dangerous driving, such as increasing enforcement and fines, but I think this will be politically difficult without first building increased public support for reduced crash rates and socially responsible motor vehicle operation. Lower the target risk of those with political power so that they see themselves as more careful, law abiding drivers, and it will become easier to increase the financial risk to less responsible parties.

Note that I don't fully endorse the concept of risk homeostasis, but I believe it partially explains some safety phenomena as a contributing factor in human behavior.

bmike

we have a posted 30mph 2 lane road in my neighborhood. (it switches to 4 lane in front of the shopping center) it is fed by a slip ramp from a 55 mph 'parkway' (we're working to get the slip ramp closed, as its impossible for kids and seniors to cross without a light).

speeds here are always high. residential along its length, with a large commercial shopping center, post office, 2 schools, several churches, and a park. most folks go 35-45 on this stretch. some targeted enforcement might help... for awhile.

in general i think speed limits on suburban and urban roads are too high. knowing that most folks drive over the speed limit anyway, and the limits are rarely enforced, it seems lowering the posted limits might lower overall speeds just a bit.

I-Like-To-Bike

Getting somewhere sooner rather than later.

nova

In some maybe even most cases i say yes. There are of course exceptions like old 21 aka great lakes blvd. It is a 55 to 65 mph road where bikes are allowed. But do to the fact that years ago it was a 4 lane highway and is now only 2 lanes on this road bikes can safely share the road with 65mph+ traffic. The lanes are close to a extra 50% the normal width with wide shoulders nearly 1/2 the width of a normal traffic lane making up the rest. So if you simply split the lane in half and in half again and ride in that strip you have lots of room to your left and a ton to your right. Then you have roads like johnson where even 35mph is a tad fast and places like vanburen where theres a 25 mph speed limit but drivers can hit 40+ after dropping their kids off for school.

Mr. Underbridge

I think even the most ardent pro-car motorist would agree that speed limits in areas with lots of businesses, no merge areas, no turn lanes, pedestrians, and bus stops would be best limited to 35mph or so.

Commuter8

I will always remember my driving instructor telling me that I was responsible for my vehicle at all times. If you cannot stop/ avoid / prevent a crash, you are not in control of your vehicle. The word accident makes it sound like most crashes are unavoidable. A 70 year old man on the freeway doing 80 mpg does not have the reaction time needed for a decision that could take the lives of many people. Never mind the 30 year old mother with an infant son crying in the backseat.

Road safety is about people safety. Members of your community are traveling beside you as well as visitors, friends and relatives.

I suggest the number one cause of preventative deaths is from car crashes and lifestyle choices created by the car industry and our participation in car culture.

AlmostTrick

Yes, traffic flow speeds are too high in most area's today. I say this not only as a cyclist but as a motorist also. Reducing speeds would make cycling and driving more pleasant and crashes less frequent. To believe otherwise defies the laws of physics, as increased speeds leave less reaction time. The problem is not just the high speeds, but the inadequate buffer zones most drivers leave for themselves. High speeds combined with these short buffer zones leaves little margin for error. (or anything unexpected like a cyclist moving slower than other traffic)


+1 If everyone thought like this there would be very few crashes.

rando

"in general" is too broad...it depends on the location. I will say this; that speeds on my local arterials (aka urban freeways) are too fast for me to feel safe riding a bike on them.

John Wilke

Where? The hospital? Jail?

Forgive me for not being polite ... but driving that fast is unresponsible, even if you are driving a Ferarri.

If person wants to wrap their car around an oak tree, great ... thats fun to look at. But unfortunately someone else would probably get taken out as well.

genec

"In General" is "too broad" but that was how Helmet Head chose to frame my rant on the speeds of surface street arterials that may also support bike lanes, parked cars, pedestrian crossing and stop lights.

To be quite specific, I believe interstate freeway speeds generally should not be considered too high, and residential and downtown grid speeds are probably not too high, but arterials with lots of intersections and driveways, parked cars and other potential "hazards" should not be 50MPH or higher.... Especially if upon these roads a cyclist may be expected to "take a lane."

MrCjolsen

When I become King, Grand Poobah, Maximum Potentate, or Top Dog, here are the speed limits:

Residential: 15 mph
Urban - 20 or 25
Rural roads without a shoulder - 35
With a shoulder - 40
Freeway - no limit - Charles Darwin will regulate the speed.

AEO

I know for a fact that many people who drive on Ontario's 400 series highway drive a good 20km over the speed limit of 100km/h (60mph) some parts of our highways people go 140km/h~160km/h (87~100mph) and that's going with the flow.
Hwy 401 in particular has a section where people don't go slower than 130km/h (80mph).
Our 400 series is designed for 130km/h (80mph) maximum speeds in mind, but all posted with 100km/h maximums.


That being said, we had a lot of accidents and deaths on our highway this year alone because of inattentive drivers, distracted drivers, drunk drivers, drivers cutting off 18 wheelers, racing drivers who think the road is their own personal playground and in general poorly skilled drivers.

You just have to drive for the conditions and pay attention.

I-Like-To-Bike

You are forgiven for not being polite, just as your self admitted ignorance of the subject is forgiven. I don't expect anything else from know nothing nannies. I managed to drive the Autobahns of Germany for 10 years and never ended up in jail or the hospital; just like millions of other drivers who are not so ignorant about safety and appropriate speed for the conditions

John Wilke

I realize that this is a global forum, but I really didn't know that there were roads in Iowa that were like the Autobahn. Huh, that's news to me.

I must be horribly mistaken ... I guess roads built like the Autobahn with their expert high speed drivers are perfectly safe.

[link]

Again, sorry for my ignorance.