“I Knew It!!...”

And thats one for the good guys........yup that there is Bear bait

Right...probably the same journalist that thinks all high speeders are racers too!!

Have to step back on any newspaper article and reflect what the reporter `wants`you to think.

(ie...last spring....front page last spring....owner of a business standing in front of construction equipment on a major artery in town......title was something like `Construction cost business man money``.........ok it was a 4 lane area......now it is 5 lanes (centre turn lane) all pipes replaced at same time....no follow up article that business is back to normal, increase in traffic.....I know many people that now frequent that area as there is no longer congestion)

Interesting, but Is there a link to this article???

Here's what I think:

Slower may not always be safer, while Speeding may not always kill.

The rate of deaths increase significantly in accidents that involve high speed crashes.

There are very few documented cases if any that show Slow speed accidents that caused death.

Book, r those your hands.....you should model

But I thought TV "cured" you!

Reflections wrote:Book, r those your hands.....you should model

Those really are some sexy hands

I did some CSI on the image and recovered the text of the article:

Ontario and Quebec now require electronic speed limiters on large trucks, but other provinces are rejecting the concept, saying the devices can sometimes actually make roads less safe.

Even a study commissioned by the federal government has concluded there are safety questions about speed limiters, especially in heavy traffic.

"As the (traffic) volume is set close to capacity ... more vehicle interactions take place and this leads to a reduction in safety especially for those segments with increased merging and lane-change activity, such as on- and off-ramp segments,'' reads the report prepared last year for Transport Canada by the University of Waterloo.

"In these instances, the introduction of truck speed limiters can actually reduce the level of safety when compared to the non-limiter case.''

The study was one of several commissioned by the federal department at a time when Ottawa and the provinces were talking about establishing national rules for truck speed limits.

Ontario and Quebec decided to proceed on their own and now require tractor-trailers to be equipped with engine microchips that prevent vehicles from going faster than 105 kilometres an hour.

The federal studies touted several benefits. Speed limiters would reduce fuel consumption, thereby saving diesel costs and cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Slower trucks would also make for safer roads, such as on four- or six-lane highways when traffic is light or moderate.

But most other provinces balked at the spectre of having slow trucks and fast-moving cars battling for space on crowded freeways or undivided rural highways.

"Most of the traffic already goes well above 110 ... to limit trucks to even less than that and to impede traffic more would probably be a safety problem,'' says Jerry Bellikka, spokesman for the Alberta Ministry of Transportation.

The Manitoba government considers the federal studies too narrow because they focused on multi-lane freeways and not undivided highways.

"There's a safety issue related to...the ability of one truck to pass another truck safely with speed limiters on a two-lane road,'' says John Spacek, an assistant deputy minister in Manitoba's Department of Infrastructure and Transportation.

However, supporters of speed limiters stand behind their safety claims, insisting that basic logic dictates that slower speeds save lives.

The Ontario government points out that federal studies identified only a potential safety problem and the province remains "confident that reducing maximum truck speeds will improve safety,'' Transportation ministry spokesman Bob Nichols wrote in an e-mail.

Do we have two-lane roads here with a limit of more than 90 km/h?

ticketcombat wrote:

Reflections wrote:Book, r those your hands.....you should model

Can't type, still laughing!!!

THen your post should look like this: lkdfnvwwvbsnjgnrgklsnwejtlkrnnfgnvsljknvlfkjnvdlkfvfdlkn

"As the (traffic) volume is set close to capacity ... more vehicle interactions take place and this leads to a reduction in safety especially for those segments with increased merging and lane-change activity, such as on- and off-ramp segments,'' reads the report prepared last year for Transport Canada by the University of Waterloo.

Interesting, but how was a study conducted without speed limiter law in affect, ever be accurate? I can see the before study and then do one after ....with 2 equal segments of time during the same month of the following year.

And not necessarily lane speed limiters is the the problem....it is said above with lane changes near ramps. If the hwy is near capacity....build it wider.

Reflections wrote:Book, r those your hands.....you should model

We better hope the "Price is Right" doesn't see that....Bookm might be replacing one of the models on the show at least on hand gestures

hwybear wrote:And not necessarily lane speed limiters is the the problem....it is said above with lane changes near ramps. If the hwy is near capacity....build it wider.

Or teach people how to merge properly.

I have had people honk at me after they tried to mate with the side of my car, because they're too afraid to floor it to get up to 100 km/h on the on-ramp. Loaded big rigs are another story though - I always move over or slow down to flash them in, because most of them won't even break 80 by the end of the ramp.

And it's interesting that Alberta's Ministry of Transportation will acknowledge that highway speeds are well in excess of 110 km/h, along with suggesting that vehicles doing 100 km/h are a hazard - why hasn't the speed limit been raised? Put the limit at 120 km/h, limit the trucks to 125 km/h. Everybody happy?

Squishy wrote:And it's interesting that Alberta's Ministry of Transportation will acknowledge that highway speeds are well in excess of 110 km/h, along with suggesting that vehicles doing 100 km/h are a hazard - why hasn't the speed limit been raised? Put the limit at 120 km/h, limit the trucks to 125 km/h. Everybody happy?

Limit everyone to 120km and be done with it!

Probably a good idea for the roads based on the general level of driver education, but that screws over all the street-legal cars that participate in sanctioned races. It'll be too complicated and likely too expensive to put in something like the GT-R limiter that gets turned off when the GPS hits a race track.

We can set the limit at something most of us are happy with, then bring back photo radar set to 5% tolerance for speedometer error. Then the OPP can focus on things other than speeding, like not signalling lane changes or tailgating.

Or we can study the German licensing system and truly make driving a privelege. Then we can make the 400-series into our own Autobahns.

Squishy wrote:Or we can study the German licensing system and truly make driving a privelege. Then we can make the 400-series into our own Autobahns.

That I could support. Unfortunately, I think you know how much of a chance that has of occurring in Ontario in our lifetimes...