Some highway speed limits to increase - ClubTread Community

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of (permalink) Old 07-02-2014, 10:35 PM Thread Starter
Summit Master
 
Ryan.in.yaletown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Van, BC, Canada.
Posts: 3,231
Default Some highway speed limits to increase


Of interest to lower mainland-ites heading North (sea to sky) and East (coquihalla) out of town to the trailheads:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...km-h-1.2694277

-Ryan
Ryan.in.yaletown is offline  
Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of (permalink) Old 07-02-2014, 10:53 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , , .
Interest: I hike it cause I like it.
Posts: 334
Default

I wonder how much extra revenue they'll get from increased gas sales.
Hemlock is offline  
post #3 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 12:23 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 719
Default

They were changing the signs on Highway 1 almost as soon as the announcement was made.

As a committed speeder, I welcome the change. But the part of me that is the mom to a 15-year-old who will start to learn to drive in a few weeks thinks WTF?!
Eryne is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 01:52 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: , , .
Posts: 462
Default

It all works out if people just stay in the right lane except to pass. It's actually the law but doesn't seem to be followed or enforced.


From the motor vehicle act.


http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/..._05#section150
Quote:
quote:
Driver on right

150 (1) The driver of a vehicle must confine the course of the vehicle to the right hand half of the roadway if the roadway is of sufficient width and it is practicable to do so, except

(a) when overtaking and passing a vehicle proceeding in the same direction,

(b) when the right hand half of the roadway is closed to traffic while under construction or repair,

(c) on a highway designated and marked by signs for one way traffic,

(d) if necessary when operating snow removing equipment, or

etc...
cutthroat22 is offline  
post #5 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 03:05 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , , .
Interest: I hike it cause I like it.
Posts: 334
Default

Quite often I can move along nicely in the far right lane of hwy 1 through Burnaby while there's slower traffic in the middle lane of the three non-HOV lanes. I can understand why truckers like to stay there as they don't have to deal with on and off ramp traffic, but more nimble vehicles just aren't using the hwy space wisely.

According to the section you posted, and specifically: "a vehicle must confine the course of the vehicle to the right hand half of the roadway", if we're including the HOV lane in that statement, people are OK to stay in the middle lane of the non-HOV lanes (ie. the second lane from the right) because the 'right hand half of the roadway' would include either of the two right lanes.

Do we have a law against passing on the right? I have a hard time with all that open space on the right that slower vehicles aren't using.
Hemlock is offline  
post #6 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 08:24 PM
Summit Master
 
BillyGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chilliwack, BC, Canada.
Interest: Hiking, UL Backpacking, canoeing, snowshoeing
Posts: 7,376
Default

Quote:
quote:I can understand why truckers like to stay there as they don't have to deal with on and off ramp traffic, but more nimble vehicles just aren't using the hwy space wisely.
Yes that's exactly why we stay in the middle lane.
Funny about this announcement and how soon it was implemented as Eryne had mentioned. On my way to Vernon that morning the speed limit on the Coq/ Connector was 110. The announcement was made while I was in the Okanagan and by the time I was heading back around noon all the signage along the Connector and the Coq had been changed. Almost tollbooth tear-down speed fast how that all changed.
Personally I think this move particularly for the Coq/ Connector is a bad idea as it will lead to more accidents and likely more fatalities, which has been the RCMP's concern all along with this move.
As a truck driver, there is now an even wider gap of speed between commercial vehicles and passenger vehicles which can also lead to more accidents. Ironically, that morning on my way to Vernon a Delica did a major rear-ender on a fully loaded Super B truck as it was climbing the Loon Lake hill. Super B was probably doing 30km/h going uphill and the Delica, well by the looks of it's front end was probably going around the speed limit. It's not a pretty sight when 4000 lbs crashes into 130,000 lbs.
Today the police had a speed trap out just past the Coquihalla Lakes rest area and had people pulled over. Some people can never seem to go fast enough.
BillyGoat is offline  
post #7 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 09:10 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnemucca, NV
Interest: Outward bound author of the Seinfeld thread who builds his own snowshoes
Posts: 3,332
Default

Staying right except to pass depends on where you are driving. In busy freeway traffic, through traffic should stay left, allowing on-ramp and off-ramp traffic to freely enter and exit. This assumes that you are capable of keeping up with the flow of traffic. If you drive the US interstate system there are many "Thru traffic keep left" signs in major cities.

120km should be the norm on highways, not the exception. That's how it is here in the Great State of Montana. It's just too bad that "Reasonable and Prudent" went the way of the dodo bird.
Farmer is offline  
post #8 of (permalink) Old 07-03-2014, 09:12 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnemucca, NV
Interest: Outward bound author of the Seinfeld thread who builds his own snowshoes
Posts: 3,332
Default

[quote]quote:Originally posted by BillyGoat

Quote:
It's not a pretty sight when 4000 lbs crashes into 130,000 lbs.
Newtons Laws should be more central in drivers ed. M1V1 + M2V2 = the smaller vehicle loses.
Same goes for bikes that think having the same rights as cars somehow protects them.
Farmer is offline  
post #9 of (permalink) Old 07-04-2014, 10:55 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: , , .
Posts: 453
Default

Quote:
quote:Same goes for bikes that think having the same rights as cars somehow protects them.
You're assuming bikes follow the same rules of cars
WildernessMan is offline  
post #10 of (permalink) Old 07-04-2014, 11:32 PM
Summit Master
 
Flowing-Brook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Popkum, BC, Canada.
Interest: Hiking, biking, kayaking, swimming, tai chi, meditation.
Posts: 6,099
Default

I took Mom to MEC in Langley and noticed that the speed limit was 110 all the way. Memories of Europe flood my mind!
Flowing-Brook is offline  
post #11 of (permalink) Old 07-04-2014, 11:51 PM
Summit Master
 
Flowing-Brook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Popkum, BC, Canada.
Interest: Hiking, biking, kayaking, swimming, tai chi, meditation.
Posts: 6,099
Default

I'll have to agree with BG on this, setting a higher speed limit only makes the speeders speed faster, and that's just crazy! I was happy with 100 kmh and people doing 120 but now with the 110 limit people will do 130 or more. We just get to die faster. Maybe that's the government's plan?
Flowing-Brook is offline  
post #12 of (permalink) Old 07-05-2014, 02:50 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: , , .
Posts: 326
Default

About time. Most traffic travels at these speeds as it is. Nice to know we're no longer speeding.

I don't think this will make people drive faster, there is a speed that all vehicles and people are comfortable with given the conditions.

It's peoples lack of attention that causes accidents. If you rear end someone, that's your fault.
shinsplints is offline  
post #13 of (permalink) Old 07-05-2014, 04:07 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC, .
Posts: 5,612
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by shinsplints
It's peoples lack of attention that causes accidents.
That is true, but a higher speed gives your "attention" less time to react and direr consequences if there is a collision.

I'm all for going with the flow of traffic, and frequently 110-120 IS the speed of the flow, but many people want to go faster than "the flow" and this is dangerous. My personal non-favourite is when I'm in the left lane passing something, and someone zooms up two feet behind me, and just as I'm signalling to move back into the right lane, this idiot suddenly jerks around me on the right. Like, give me a sec. I was taught that it's safe to move back into the right lane only when you can see the passed vehicle in its entirety in your rear view mirror.

Or the ones that think "keep right except to pass" means, "the left lane must be kept completely clear for ME to go as fast as I want." So you have a line of slow-moving trucks on the right, and a line of people in the left passing them at 110-120, and one idiot behind flashing his lights because he wants all those people to get in behind the slow-moving trucks to let him get by at 140.

I can't believe the number of people who think it's OK to drive two feet behind someone at 110 km/hr. I think raising the speed limit will only encourage these people to drive at 150.
wilderness_seeker is offline  
post #14 of (permalink) Old 07-05-2014, 06:59 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnemucca, NV
Interest: Outward bound author of the Seinfeld thread who builds his own snowshoes
Posts: 3,332
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Flowing-BrookYou should shut the fuck up asshole.
You're awfully angry Lynn. Off your meds?
Farmer is offline  
post #15 of (permalink) Old 07-05-2014, 07:08 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Qualicum Beach, BC, Canada.
Interest: general mountaineering/ hiking/ backpacking/ skiing/ kayaking
Posts: 1,704
Default

On CBC radio they were talking about studies showing that traveling at 90 k was best for fuel efficiency for most vehicles and that transport trucks favored this speed for that reason. To me it would make more sense to lower the speed limits. Who's stupid idea was it to raise them? Those fools should be fired. Probably the same idiots that got rid of photo radar, which was shown to slow down traffic in general and saved lives, with fewer major accidents. If we are wanting to lessen our footprint, raising speedlimits is going in the oposite direction. Fracking Liberals!
prother is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1