Dublin Go Slow from Midnight

TallGlass

07Lapierre wrote: »

"It will not affect the main arterial routes into the city"

https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2017/0530/879059-speed-limits/

It's been considered.

Leroy42

givyjoe wrote: »

Why dont we just reduce the speed limit to 20kh.. or 10 even? Then there will next to no accidents and those that happen will be cause minor damage/injury.. if even that.

Or.. and this nuts I know.. how about we start to place emphasize some greater personal responsibility on pedestrians and cyclists. Crazy things like, paying attention when they stop out onto a road, kids not using the road in front of their house as a playground. Why isn't J-walking an offence that is enforced in this country? A drive down the quays even at 30 and you will see almost non stop moronic behaviour from pedestrians and cyclists.

Also, while we have these stupidly low limits being expanded, we still have ridiculously high limits on all sorts of back water country roads, where lethal accidents are happening.

LordSutch wrote: »

Taxi's @ 5:30am crawling along empty roads @ 30km/h (18 mph), possibly on a dash to the airport?

The whole 24h 30km/h thing is I'll conceived and seriously flawed.

Hyperbole much. Why not reduce to 20 or 10? Look at the problem people are having over 30kph.

You are right of course, that any accident prevention scheme should not just focus on the motorist. Pedestrians need to be more aware, cyclists, everyone. But we all know that takes time, time when people will be hurt or killed. So why not tackle the cause first (in this instance I don't mean cause in terms of blame but rather the cause of injuries in the vehicle hitting the pedestrian etc).

THe idea behind this will be in part to change attitudes. Roads are not just for motorists. They are an integral part of an urban environment and need to be seen as part of it not separate from. Kids should play outside their homes? How about when the ball gets kicked over the wall. Hitting the kid at 30 rather than 50 may save their live?

Having the wrong speed limits in other areas is neither here nor there. Having problems somewhere else does not exclude one from solving the problem in front of us.

LordSutch wrote: »

Taxi's @ 5:30am crawling along empty roads @ 30km/h (18 mph), possibly on a dash to the airport?

The whole 24h 30km/h thing is I'll conceived and seriously flawed.

I'll conceived I would probably agree given DCC usual track record. Seriously flawed? Well you may want to back that up? What part of it do you think it wrong?

ScumLord

gctest50 wrote: »

If someone gets hit at 30, they'll probably walk away

(watch the speed in the bottom corner of the screen )

If you watch the rest of the screen you'll see the driver doesn't brake until he hits the kid. He never saw him. Maybe if he'd been paying more attention to what's in front of him he wouldn't have hit him at all. Drivers should always be expecting someone to run out in front of them if their view is obstructed by the likes of a truck. Parked trucks have a loophole you can exploit to know if someones going to pop out from behind them. Just look under the rear for feet. Most the time you have a clear view of what's around you and can see someone coming towards the road. When your view is obstructed take it for granted someones there.

ThisRegard

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Well it's official.
The traffic is sh1t. Nobody knows what speed you can go where. No signs to tell you.
What a mess.

What, traffic at rush hour on a wet Thursday evening is bad? Well that's something anyone who commutes in and out of the city would never have expected.

gctest50

ScumLord wrote: »

If you watch the rest of the screen you'll see the driver doesn't brake until he hits the kid. He never saw him..........

Makes it an even better example - kid just runs away after getting hit.

Wibbs

ScumLord wrote: »

I can't believe I have to go to this length to prove the obvious that faster spinning engine means more wear and tear. I thought everyone would understand that.

Earlier.

Leroy42 wrote: »

I will admit I am no mechanic

Leroy42 wrote: »

I readily admit that I know little of the inner workings of the engine.

You have your answer SL. May as well be tilting at windmills.

Speed limits have nothing to do with real world practicalities anymore. What I'm saying is this is going to cause all kinds of issues with peoples cars and traffic, I think it could cause more accidents, a jumpy car in second gear or a car that wants to run on in third gear. I also don't see any reason for it. If you can't see a potential danger at 50kph you're probably the kind of driver that will see it at 30kph either. The slower people go the less attention they pay to driving because they think they've more time to deal with what's happening in front of them.

No point being sensible SL. The Speed Kills! Mantra has wormed its way so deeply into the cultural psyche as a simplistic answer to a complex problem that it would be the very devil to shift. Never mind that Dublin City centre streets are the safest roads in the country when we take into account volume of traffic and proximity and volume of pedestrians.

The other problem are motorists themselves. There should be better lobby groups than existing yahoos like the AA and others, who usually just parrot the government press releases like good little boys and girls. Motorists are already paying through the bloody nose in various taxes and insurance and should have better voices in the discussions.

Leroy42 wrote:

THe idea behind this will be in part to change attitudes. Roads are not just for motorists. They are an integral part of an urban environment and need to be seen as part of it not separate from.

When objects that weigh at least a tonne and a half are moving at any speed in the environment, that environment should be as separate as possible from human beings. This is common sense 101.

Kids should play outside their homes?

Not on the roads.

jamesthepeach

ThisRegard wrote: »

What, traffic at rush hour on a wet Thursday evening is bad? Well that's something anyone who commutes in and out of the city would never have expected.

At 6:10 am driving in and 3:00pm driving out.
Hardly rush hour. And way slower than it always is every other day of the year.

ThisRegard

Wibbs wrote: »

Not on the roads.

Kids have played on their road in the suburbs long before cars, self entitled motorists won't change that.

Wibbs

gctest50 wrote: »

Makes it an even better example - kid just runs away after getting hit.

Just an aside GC. It doesn't mean he was uninjured. Personal story and all, but many moons ago I saw a child of about that age being hit by a van(sickening to see, almost saw it happening in slow mo), traveling at a slow speed, at a guess under 30MPh in old money anyway. The lad jumped up and ran over to his house. A few people stopped, myself included and he had collapsed in his driveway, unconscious. 999 and all that. I found out later that thankfully he survived but was pretty badly injured internally*.

ThisRegard wrote:

Kids have played on their road in the suburbs long before cars,

*Internal logic fail*

Even the dogs, cats and urban foxes in the street are sensible enough not to loiter in the middle of a road, no matter how suburban. Not so much hedgehogs...



*Aside No 2, I also found out later that apparently being hit by a van had "helped", because he was hit square on, rather than buckled over the bonnet. Car front design has come on in leaps and bounds that way. A fair few cars even have that doodah that pops the bonnet upwards in the event of a person being hit to minimise the upper body injuries.

LordSutch

30 mph (50 km/h) would be much more sensible and attainable as a maximum speed limit that drivers would adhere to IMO.

This new 30km/h limit (too slow) will be ignored.

Wibbs

jamesthepeach wrote: »

At 6:10 am driving in and 3:00pm driving out.
Hardly rush hour. And way slower than it always is every other day of the year.

Traffic has been heavy all over the place today. More like the long weekend coming and some getting the Friday off.

Leroy42

Wibbs wrote: »

Earlier.





You have your answer SL. May as well be tilting at windmills.

No point being sensible SL. The Speed Kills! Mantra has wormed its way so deeply into the cultural psyche as a simplistic answer to a complex problem that it would be the very devil to shift. Never mind that Dublin City centre streets are the safest roads in the country when we take into account volume of traffic and proximity and volume of pedestrians.

The other problem are motorists themselves. There should be better lobby groups than existing yahoos like the AA and others, who usually just parrot the government press releases like good little boys and girls. Motorists are already paying through the bloody nose in various taxes and insurance and should have better voices in the discussions.

When objects that weigh at least a tonne and a half are moving at any speed in the environment, that environment should be as separate as possible from human beings. This is common sense 101.

Not on the roads.

And yet still not even one piece of evidence to back it up.

I asked earlier, but you seemed to have missed it (funny since you seem to be able to see all my other posts) what is the added wear and tear that will result from the drop from 50kph to 30kph.

I even tried to make it easy. 100km lifespan of engine (although many would last much longer) so lets say 7 years. What will the new norm be.

Should be easy enough since you guys are experts and everything.

TallGlass

LordSutch wrote: »

30 mph (50 km/h) would be much more sensible and attainable as a maximum speed limit that drivers would adhere to IMO.

This new 30km/h limit (too slow) will be ignored.

Well it will be ignored, most of the studies posted on the last page mention this.

According to the studies it will work, once it's backed up with, driver education, willingness from drivers, residence of these areas and also alongside traffic calming measures that work, enforcement, traffic signal synchronization if speeds are kept at 30 (lights turning green on approach rather than red if over), variable speed limits along with signs, information signs (the ones you see on motorways, example 'Eden Quay to Docklands 10 mins').

All we have had so far is a few signs posted up. I think in particular, the information signs would help, if drivers knew they would be at a certain point in 10 mins for example, they'll know there either on time or not and even doing 120KM/H to point b won't get you there on time.

jamesthepeach

Wibbs wrote: »

Traffic has been heavy all over the place today. More like the long weekend coming and some getting the Friday off.

It was the same yesterday. No signs or anything to show where the 30 zones begin and end. So everyone just crawling along everywhere. One person drives 30 and then everyone behind them is snaked up.

jamesthepeach

TallGlass wrote: »

Well it will be ignored, most of the studies posted on the last page mention this.

According to the studies it will work, once it's backed up with, driver education, willingness from drivers, residence of these areas and also alongside traffic calming measures that work, enforcement, traffic signal synchronization if speeds are kept at 30 (lights turning green on approach rather than red if over), variable speed limits along with signs, information signs (the ones you see on motorways, example 'Eden Quay to Docklands 10 mins').

All we have had so far is a few signs posted up. I think in particular, the information signs would help, if drivers knew they would be at a certain point in 10 mins for example, they'll know there either on time or not and even doing 120KM/H to point b won't get you there on time.

Do the studies give you tickets and points when you get caught doing over 30? That's what will make people stick to the limits. And the speed van opposite McGowan's the last two days too.is having an effect.

Leroy42

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Do the studies give you tickets and points when you get caught doing over 30? That's what will make people stick to the limits. And the speed van opposite McGowan's the last two days too.is having an effect.

But thats hardly fair. If they intend to bring in this, then as was stated it should be done properly. Proper signage, education, a PR campaign. Not some speed trap stuck behind a billboard (or wherever it is). Speeding vans are not really there to catch speeding drivers (although of course that is what they do) but rather to set out the impression that speeding is not worth the risk and thus lower speed across the board.

This will only lead to people seeing this as nothing more than a racket and it will not be accepted and will eventually either fail or become so widely unpopular as to have the opposite effect on driver attitudes as was hoped for.

Obviously you will always get those that will try to break the speed, but in the main people are willing to work with this if it is explained and well rolled out.

TallGlass

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Do the studies give you tickets and points when you get caught doing over 30? That's what will make people stick to the limits. And the speed van opposite McGowan's the last two days too.is having an effect.

Yes they talk about enforcement and speed camera. It also mentions, drivers must be aware of the disadvantages and advantages of complying with the speed.

Interestingly enoght, the documents themselves are not entirely fixated on '30KM' as the speed, they mention 101 other things which DCC and the RSA have decided are of no importance to road users. Things such as, 'Variable Speed Limit Signs' are heavily mentioned in the last document along side others, such as information signs (mentioning it again) displaying times to destination, weather conditions, road traffic, accidents etc..

The main thing I am getting from reading these reports, is that simply just fixing the speed at 30KM and doing absolutely nothing else, then it won't work.

These documents talk about building infrastructure, getting people to use other means of transport, walking, cycling, public transport. IE, seriously investing in the transport network, all of which DCC are not doing along side this project, there just putting up signs and nothing else, not reviewing the traffic management plans in place to see if they are even suitable. What's worse is this is potentially damaging as drivers choose to ignore the speed and pick there own suitable speed, which in some reviews is higher than the average speed and in turn increases the risk of an accident which is fatal.

The documents mention, it should save fuel, be good for your car and better for the environment. Althought for me personally that's is seriously up for debate.

Maybe I missed it but it doesn't go to much into how it affects the driver, other than the speed coming down reduces accidents.

One mentions, the UK are doing a 4 year study which should be out this year 2017, based around the 20 speed limit and its effects.

ThisRegard

Wibbs wrote: »

*Internal logic fail*

Even the dogs, cats and urban foxes in the street are sensible enough not to loiter in the middle of a road, no matter how suburban. Not so much hedgehogs...

I'm starting to think that your claims of being the most experienced driver on boards is somewhat exaggerated by yourself. You struggle to drive at 30, you aren't aware of hazzards within housing estates.

Kids in a suburban setting, in their estate, see a road as an extended playground, bikes, football, paths, everything

sunny2004

For the trekkies

3.0619e-12 in light years

beauf

LordSutch wrote: »

30 mph (50 km/h) would be much more sensible and attainable as a maximum speed limit that drivers would adhere to IMO.

This new 30km/h limit (too slow) will be ignored.

Do you just make this stuff up? 50 limit is ignored.

http://irishcycle.com/2016/09/26/high-level-of-motorists-speeding-in-50kmh-zones-top-speed-of-132kmh/

“There was an extremely low level of compliance with the 50 km/h speed limit. Of the total of five hundred vehicles included in the systematic surveys, only ten (2%) were observed to be travelling at or under the 50km/h speed limit. If ‘speeding’ is defined as driving at 60 km/h or more in a 50 km/h zone, then a total of 436 motorists were observed to be speeding, comprising 87% of the entire 500 vehicles surveyed. Overall 70-80% of drivers were travelling at 65 km/h or above, which Cosain categorises as ‘high risk’ speeding.”

beauf

TallGlass wrote: »

...The main thing I am getting from reading these reports, is that simply just fixing the speed at 30KM and doing absolutely nothing else, then it won't work. ....

You didn't have to read a report to know that...

There is no enforcement. End of.

Syphonax

Hopefully the law breakers are starting to be caught, whats are the stats up to now? Them there potholes needa fixing what with all the rain!

LordSutch

beauf wrote: »

Do you just make this stuff up? 50 limit is ignored.

http://irishcycle.com/2016/09/26/high-level-of-motorists-speeding-in-50kmh-zones-top-speed-of-132kmh/

You refer to drivers doing over 130 km/h in a 50 km/h zone, fair enough, throw the book at them, but as a very experienced driver of several decades I can safely say that keeping to 18 MPH for any length of time is nigh on impossible, or at least very difficult (to maintain).

Breaking the speed limit in a 50 km/h zone is a different thing altogether, as you shift up through the gears to top gear .... and then accelerate over the limit. The thing with the 30 km/h limit is that its annoyingly slow, toooo so slooooow ..............

beauf

The point is it doesn't matter what the speed limit it. No one sticks to it, be it 20, 50 100. So its complete BS saying its the speed. Its ANY speed.

beauf

Data from the 2006 Census reveals that, for journeys within the Dublin Canal Ring, cyclists reached an average speed of 12 km/h compared to just 15km/h for cars.
For trips within the M50, the 2006 Census reveals average speed for cyclists of 14km/h compared to 18km/h for cars.

Don't worry about it. You're doing the speed already.

Autosport

So they don't want anyone to drive into the city so what happens when shops/stores notice a decline in business ? Do they raise the speed limit or just tell businesses to deal with it.

It will be great for the likes of Blanch/Liffey/Dundrum etc

cython

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you sure? I am pretty sure it's a speed limit and not a car limit?

Theoretically, a pedestrian could be done for exceeding it, too, no?

ThisRegard wrote: »

No, they theoretically can't

This. Speed limits apply to mechanically propelled vehicles, a category that neither cyclists, nor most certainly pedestrians fall into.

markpb

Autosport wrote: »

So they don't want anyone to drive into the city so what happens when shops/stores notice a decline in business ? Do they raise the speed limit or just tell businesses to deal with it.

Over half (56%) of all retail spend in City Centre comes from people arriving on public transport, a further 24% from walkers/cyclists. Car-based shoppers account for only €1 in every €5 spent in town

Over a third (36%) of retailers’ revenues, in the Grafton Street and Henry Street areas of Dublin’s City Centre, comes from shoppers who arrive into the City Centre by bus. Over a fifth (21%) comes from people who walk into town and 16% comes from people taking the Luas in. Just under 20% comes from shoppers who arrive by car.

While people coming in by car will always be important – they do spend the most money per head when they are in town (€137) – it is the public transport, walking and cycling communities that deliver the strongest cash injection to the city’s economy as a whole. After all, they account for over 80% of all visitors, and we will continue to put these people at the centre of our transport planning – for the long-term economic benefit of the city.”

NTA

TallGlass

So stuck to it in one of the estate's, tried to turn on cruise control, wouldn't turn on, just wanted to see if it would.

Stuck to the speed, must have looked like I was gonna do a drive by shooting/on phone or drunk, hard to find the sweet spot, it feels like it should be second but it's like the car wants third, once in third it's hard to keep it at 30 it wants to do 35/40. Feels unusual guess it will take sometime to adjust.

goz83

ThisRegard wrote: »

Sirens and big flashing lights will allow them get by easily enough, just like they do now.

Except it will still cause delays.

Syphonax wrote: »

That has really nothing to do with the topic, its an inane point put out there as you probably, like most of us, have had a bad experience with a public representative at some point. If anything our political representatives here ie the DCC chief executive ARE actually taking an approach to traffic calming and following through and I agree with what they are doing. Bash them all you like though as thats always the easy thing to do!

Is not the DCC chief exec anti-cars and wants us all out on pedal power? I'm sure some unbiased analysis went into this brain fart plan.

Leroy42 wrote: »

An article from 2011, and even then it comes in at number 9 on the list!

I have not disputed that it may cause damage, but may is a long way from it does. Different brands of fuel are better/worse for the engine. Different tyres have different rolling resistance. People driving with AC on uses more fuel. Peoples driving style can have a negative effect on the car. That article even mention people who hold onto the gear stick.

The point is not that it can't happen, but what is the change of use from 50kph down to 30kph. Does a car that is forced to drive at no more than 30kph have significantly more wear and tear. Is that enough to warrant giving up on a potential safety, but definitely a re-attitude campaign to make cities more amienable to the public at large.

Lets say a normal car engine will last 100k, so maybe 7 years with normal servicing. What do you think the reduction in life span will be with the introduction of the new limits.

Here's a suggestion. Next time you're in the car, only use 1st, 4th or reverse gear. You'll quickly have an answer you can understand.



I drive an EV. I set the speed limiter to 30kph earlier on my way back from the cinema. Holy bejaysus that was a few seconds of horror. It was so slow and I felt frustration build immediately as other cars quickly became congested behing me. I attempted it twice and both times it felt dangerous doing it. If driving a manual car, it would be horrendous to stay at or below 30

morritty

Ah lads, the limits are a joke...... me takeaway took twice the usual time to get to the house and it was bloody freezing...

Wibbs

TallGlass wrote: »

hard to find the sweet spot, it feels like it should be second but it's like the car wants third, once in third it's hard to keep it at 30 it wants to do 35/40.

Exactly TG. Many, if not most cars are simply not currently designed to drive consistently at this speed.

goz83 wrote: »

Here's a suggestion. Next time you're in the car, only use 1st, 4th or reverse gear. You'll quickly have an answer you can understand.

Hope springs eternal G, but I doubt it.

Leroy42

goz83 wrote: »

I drive an EV. I set the speed limiter to 30kph earlier on my way back from the cinema. Holy bejaysus that was a few seconds of horror. It was so slow and I felt frustration build immediately as other cars quickly became congested behing me. I attempted it twice and both times it felt dangerous doing it. If driving a manual car, it would be horrendous to stay at or below 30

I asked for evidence and you have consistently refused to provide any and now the latest you have is a personal anecdote! You do know that one anecdote does not evidence make?

But, ok, lets go with your anecdote as the evidence on which to base our reaction to this. Based on what you said, there was no damage to your car, no accidents during that time. In fact, apart from you getting frustrated nothing negative seems to have happened at all.

It seems to me that the entire problem is how you personally react to this. You felt horror, frustration, and you think it is dangerous. I really think you need to review your ability to drive and control yourself whilst driving if you struggled so much which such a simple exercise.

You have just debunked your own theory.

beauf

Have the same problem on my bicycle...the gears don't let me cycle slowly in urban areas....

http://www.speedingeurope.com/netherlands/

4.2. Experiences with '30 kmlh zones'
It was generally acknowledged that with regard to traffic safety in residential areas two
features were essential: reducing speed of motorised traffic and reducing through traffic.
From accident studies it turned out that the collision speed should remain below 30 km/h,
because then the probability of a serious injury will be minimal. From this finding it was
deduced to set in residential areas the legal limit at 30 km/h.
Since 1983, Dutch municipal authorities can institute a maximum speed of 30 km/h on
roads or in zones within built-up areas.
So, in fact, the concept of the '30 km/h zone' has been deduced from the 'woonerf-concept. It attempts to improve traffic safety and living quality in areas which predominantly
serve as a residential function. However, it seeks to offer safety to a wider residential area
at far less cost, thus avoiding the major drawbacks of the 'woonerf'-approach.
Over the years many municipalities have decided to implement '30 km/h zones'. Based on
a recent survey we expect that 300 out of almost 700 municipalities have realised one or
more '30 km/h zone'.
The concept has been developed over these years. Design elements have been conceptualised, undergone further refmement and have been applied to various locations . Speedrestricting engineering measures represent an essential element in the reorganisation of
residential areas, where a speed limit of approx '30 km/h' is intended. The following
objectives were aimed for:
- to lower the speed of motorised traffic;
- to discourage through traffic;
- to improve traffic safety, both in terms of accident reduction and diminishing the threat
posed by traffic;
- to reduce traffic nuisance, such as parking congestion, noise and other pollution;
- to promote the mobility of cyclists and pedestrians

To guide Dutch municipalities to select effective speed restricting measures a 'Handbook
for 30 km/h measures' was developed. Nowadays these measures can be found in a publication called the ASVV-Recommendations for urban traffic engineering.
In an evaluation of the effects of '30 km/h zones', changes in traffic flows, opinions of
residents, conflicts, and accidents were extensively studied in 15 cases (Vis & Dijkstra,
1992).
Recently, the effect on the number of injury accidents was studied in 151 of such '30
km/h zones' (Vis & Kaal, 1994). In order to enable correction of effects which were not
associated with the realised measure, all injury accidents inside the built-up area were
collected for the same municipalities over similar periods (control areas).
Following correction based on the trend shown in the control areas, it was determined that
the number of injury accidents had dropped by 22% (± 13%).
It has been shown as well, that these areas tend to carry a lower volume of motorised
(through) traffic, while the number of cars taking shortcuts through these zones has also
diminished to a significant degree.
It is obvious that the safety effect demonstrates a large variation. Probably this has to do
with the magnitude of the traffic safety problems in the before period and the quality of
the measures taken. Taking into consideration the (average) results, however, the measure
can certainly be considered as very successful. Comparisons of the effect on accidents of
'woonerfs' and '30 km/h zones' learned that their effectiveness is about the same. Intensive stimulation to foster implementation of '30 km/h zones' on a broader scale, particularly for existing residential areas, is therefore recommended. At the same time, it is advisable to check if the quality of the different applied countermeasures are functioning as
planned and if this is not the case to find out why, in order to avoid this in the future

beauf

Leroy42 wrote: »

I asked for evidence and you have consistently refused to provide any and now the latest you have is a personal anecdote! You do know that one anecdote does not evidence make?....

All the anecdotes point to a normalization of speed. We've got used to it because we've had so little enforcement.

Atoms for Peace

There is way too many interest groups and egotist such as Shane Ross involved in motoring legislation.

07Lapierre

goz83 wrote: »

I drive an EV. I set the speed limiter to 30kph earlier on my way back from the cinema. Holy bejaysus that was a few seconds of horror. It was so slow and I felt frustration build immediately as other cars quickly became congested behing me. I attempted it twice and both times it felt dangerous doing it. If driving a manual car, it would be horrendous to stay at or below 30

It wasn't dangerous...you just felt it was frustrating, because everyone else was also frustrated, because they felt you were slowing them down.

morritty

Leroy42 wrote: »

I asked for evidence and you have consistently refused to provide any

When all the mechanics are rolling in cash with all the burnt out clutches they're changing, will that be enough proof to shut you up?

Leroy42

morritty wrote: »

When all the mechanics are rolling in cash with all the burnt out clutches they're changing, will that be enough proof to shut you up?

Yes of course it will. It will easy enough to get that sort of data from the other countries (like Holland) that have had these type of speed zones for years. I would have thought that if it was such a problem as you seem to suggest, that the motorists in those areas would have demanded the rules be changed back or at the very least demanded better suited vehicles for the task. It would appear odd that they have simply accepted the constant failure of clutches without any feedback.

You do also realise that there is no more material use of a clutch driving at a constant 50k than there is at 30k? The revs might be different so we are not talking about continuous gear changing here are we?

I have at point said that I am right, only that those that are putting forth hypothesis should at least try to back it up.

If, however, they don't have any backup and the truth is that the simply don't like it then that's fine as well, just don't come on here making stuff up based on nothing more than a bias.

Cantona's Collars

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

There is way too many interest groups and egotist such as Shane Ross involved in motoring legislation.

He reminds me of that character Tim-nice but dim.
Posh accent but not much between the ears.
Driving in 2nd gear and causing more pollution, people riding the clutch causing damage to it.
Imagine buying a second hand car out of the city,gearbox fecked,never been out of 2nd,clutch knackered,engine crying out to be reddened.Yep,they really thought this out before implementation.

morritty

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes of course it will. It will easy enough to get that sort of data from the other countries (like Holland) that have had these type of speed zones for years. I would have thought that if it was such a problem as you seem to suggest, that the motorists in those areas would have demanded the rules be changed back or at the very least demanded better suited vehicles for the task. It would appear odd that they have simply accepted the constant failure of clutches without any feedback.

The only issue I have was that me takeaway took longer and it was cold. Do you need proof of that? read back through the thread any find any other "problems" I have.

Wibbs

morritty wrote: »

When all the mechanics are rolling in cash with all the burnt out clutches they're changing, will that be enough proof to shut you up?

Unlikely, it seems the high horsers are of the bicyclist variety - a well known collection point for zealotry - with it seems near zero understanding of the basic mechanics of cars and how they work. QV a daft comparison like this; Have the same problem on my bicycle...the gears don't let me cycle slowly in urban areas.... Or this display of mechanical ignorance; You do also realise that there is no more use of a clutch driving at a constant 50k than there is at 30k? The revs might be different so we are not talking about continuous gear changing here are we? Clueless. No amount of evidence would ever dissuade them from their entrenched position.

Leroy42

zerks wrote: »

He reminds me of that character Tim-nice but dim.
Posh accent but not much between the ears.
Driving in 2nd gear and causing more pollution, people riding the clutch causing damage to it.
Imagine buying a second hand car out of the city,gearbox fecked,never been out of 2nd,clutch knackered,engine crying out to be reddened.Yep,they really thought this out before implementation.

1st off, why are you assuming that people would only ever drive in the 30kph zones? If your driving is so restricted to such a small area that in reality you don't need a car?

What extra level of pollution so you think this will generate?

And why would you buy such a wrecked car, Surely you would carry out a check and the seller would fix an issues before sale (or reflect the damage in the sales price). At worst it would mean increased maintenance costs (although there has not been one iota of evidence to back up the assertion that it does result in more damage)

Leroy42

Wibbs wrote: »

Unlikely, it seems the high horsers are of the bicyclist variety - a well known collection point for zealotry - with it seems near zero understanding of the basic mechanics of cars and how they work. QV a daft comparison like this; Have the same problem on my bicycle...the gears don't let me cycle slowly in urban areas.... Or this display of mechanical ignorance; You do also realise that there is no more use of a clutch driving at a constant 50k than there is at 30k? The revs might be different so we are not talking about continuous gear changing here are we? Clueless. No amount of evidence would ever dissuade them from their entrenched position.

But even a bit of evidence would be nice. You have failed to even provide the simplest form of evidence, you have provided nothing at all. You are now resorting to conspiracies and ad hominem attacks.

So again, what is the effect on the life span of an average engine due to this imposition?
What will be average number of gear changes be required in order to maintain 30kph rather than 50kph?

Wibbs

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

There is way too many interest groups and egotist such as Shane Ross involved in motoring legislation.

Indeed and motorists are being constantly targeted as easy pickings. There's the "green" argument(do not get me started on those muppets*) and the safety argument with "won't somebody think of the children" piled high on top. Motorists are more likely to grumble and go along with all this for the public good, because they don't want to be seen as naysayers. I mean "speed kills", right? Never mind that it's the motorists that are footing the biggest bills for the privilege of driving the bloody roads that they're being increasingly made to feel somehow guilty for. When one is trying to debate the topic with people who clearly have zero clue how cars and gearing actually works, you know you're on a hiding to nothing.

DCC policy maker earlier.







*even when we're all driving google pods powered by animal product free organic pixie dust those morons will find a whinge somewhere.

ThisRegard

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

There is way too many interest groups and egotist such as Shane Ross involved in motoring legislation.

zerks wrote: »

He reminds me of that character Tim-nice but dim.
Posh accent but not much between the ears.
Driving in 2nd gear and causing more pollution, people riding the clutch causing damage to it.
Imagine buying a second hand car out of the city,gearbox fecked,never been out of 2nd,clutch knackered,engine crying out to be reddened.Yep,they really thought this out before implementation.

What had Shane Ross go to do with this?

ThisRegard

Wibbs wrote: »

I am "attacking" the post, not the poster.

You are?

Wibbs wrote: »

Unlikely, it seems the high horsers are of the bicyclist variety - a well known collection point for zealotry - with it seems near zero understanding of the basic mechanics of cars and how they work.

Wibbs wrote: »

When one is trying to debate the topic with people who clearly have zero clue how cars and gearing actually works, you know you're on a hiding to nothing.
[/IMG]



*even when we're all driving google pods powered by animal product free organic pixie dust those morons will find a whinge somewhere.

Oh look, there you go again, smarmy attacks on posters from the self declared bestest and most experienced driver on the forum.

Your time might be better suited to doing a few driving lessons.

Wibbs

Leroy42 wrote: »

But even a bit of evidence would be nice.

You and others have had the issue explained to you repeatedly, by a number of people, to the point of ad nauseam.

You are now resorting to conspiracies and ad hominem attacks.

What "conspiracies"? Ad hominem attacks? Nope, sorry, you can't pull that all too usual one as a get out when your "argument" has run out of puff and you don't like being disagreed with. I have attacked your position on the matter, I have not attacked you, the person holding said opinion. I am "attacking" the post, not the poster. I can link a few that skirt that line against me if you like? See post directly above.

What will be average number of gear changes be required in order to maintain 30kph rather than 50kph?

Repeating the reasons why for the umpteenth time will serve no good, given you have continued to ignore them all along. At this point it's smelling more like being wilfully obtuse.

Syphonax

lol theres a smell of the "I cannot control myself and stay in third gear phenomena on here" I dont know the inner workings of a car engine but using this as some form of an argument against driving at the correct speed limit is quite laughable haha good luck with that one haha people who run should really only jog u know haha

Wibbs

ThisRegard wrote: »

You are?

Oh look, there you go again, smarmy attacks on posters from the self declared bestest and most experienced driver on the forum.

Your time might be better suited to doing a few driving lessons.

The level of irony in that post is off the scale.

Syphonax wrote:

lol theres a smell of the "I cannot control myself and stay in third gear phenomena on here" I dont know the inner workings of a car engine but using this as some form of an argument against driving at the correct speed limit is quite laughable haha good luck with that one haha people who run should really only jog u know haha

#facepalm