OzTennis

Thoughts on this?

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Nation...781377407.html

Industry pans 'naive' speedo limit idea
November 9, 2004 - 3:58PM

Speedometers on all new cars in Australia should show a top speed of 130kph, regardless of how fast they can actually go, the Victorian government believes.

But the road safety idea has been labelled naive by car makers and faces opposition from the federal government.

Victorian Premier Steve Bracks said today Transport Minister Peter Batchelor would submit the proposal to the Australian Transport Council, a meeting of state and federal transport ministers, in Brisbane next Friday.

Mr Bracks told radio 3AW the plan to peg speedometers was the first step in a campaign to impose a limit on the top speed of cars, with some locally-made models now capable of 200kph or more.

It would call for speedometers to be restricted to "something close to 130kph so you don't have the immediate temptation or incentive" to see how fast the car goes.

"That will be the first step, and obviously if there's further action to be taken, that can be determined in discussion at the Australian Transport Council," Mr Bracks said.

Ford's general manager of public affairs Louise Teesdale said the policy suggested speeding was the only issue of concern on the roads.

She said the idea was blind and naive and went against current laws which stipulated speedometers must reflect the speed the car was actually travelling.

"It doesn't matter what you do with legislation, you simply can't stop someone acting irresponsibly," Ms Teesdale said.

"I just think this is a huge red herring.

"It's an easy issue for everyone to get emotional about, because it does impact on all of us.

"But you simply can't stop someone from doing something that's going to get them into trouble."

Holden's national media relations manager Jason Laird said the company would be happy to implement any strategies that would improve road safety.

"However, these strategies would obviously need to based on scientific merit," he said.

"Holden is not aware of any research that indicates maximum speed marking on speedos influences driving behaviour."

Mr Laird also pointed to other issues including the fact that in parts of the Northern Territory there are no speed limits, and that some vehicles are used for racing.

There was also the question of how imported vehicles would be treated and that many locally built cars were exported.

"This does not mean that any manufacturer is encouraging people to act outside the law, nor does it mean that any of these issues are insurmountable in themselves," he said.

"However, there are circumstances where vehicles may be driven at speeds in excess of 100kph."

Deputy Prime Minister and Federal Transport Minister John Anderson said the federal government was opposed to the idea.

"We consider it could be dangerous in some circumstances," a spokesman for the minister said.

The government said the plan would also require a uniquely Australian design specification that would be difficult to implement.

But Mr Bracks said the Victorian plan would correct the anomaly where car speedos were calibrated up to 240kph despite laws preventing people driving that fast.

"That's the issue, really. Why have that incentive? Why have that inducement if you like, and why have that as part of a broader advertising campaign that you can market these as cars that can go at these extraordinary speeds," he said.

OzTennis

Stewie

This from a country that makes cars with 5.7 litre engines!!

Too late to change habits. If you've got a Monaro, you're going to put your boot down

OzTennis

Habits would be forced to change if the government had the will (and sense) to prohibit manufacturers producing cars which will do more than twice the speed limit. Where is the logic in having speed limits and cameras everywhere and breathalyser units and allowing cars that do more than twice the speed limit on the roads???

However, the General Motors (sorry Holden 'Australia's car'!), Ford's, Subaru's etc of this world have too much influence over government for this to happen though.

OzTennis

jad n rich

Yeah right, on a one hour 40 minute journey today I passed 4 speed traps going north and two going south, the top speed limit is 110 and those stretches are rare, and by the time you have been done for speeding twice you can are hanging on to the licence by a thread. No doubt ABC will fill you in on all the speed fines and points.

Been booked for as little as 3klm over the limit. Buy a diahatsu pee pee it will easily cover any speeds you can do in australia powerful cars here are a complete waste of time.

Badge

I want a powerful car - with just ENOUGH power. Modern cars have much higher speeds than they used to. Although cars are getting heavier.

I want power for
a) For overtaking
b) For cruising in comfort - see f)
c) For longer engine life and less stress on it
d) For running AC
e) For dealing with hot temps - hot air is less efficient in the intake
f) cabin noise

In Australia I can cruise economically at 60mph (100k), it would be hard to do that in stop-start in UK traffic or at the 120-140k 'normal' speeds there.

So personally, I would rather have Ford Falcon than a Pee Pee.

A well set up 2.0-2.5 4cyl, would be the best probably though.

I now have a 6cy car and I love it. I'm fed up in the past with discomfort on the motorway and not being able to overtake safely. I always said I would never own a car with less than, say, a 2000c (115bhp) engine ever again.

BM

HiddenPaw

why don't they just restrict the max speed on the car? Or reduce the power of cars available on market?

Oh, I know why - cos upsetting motorists isn't popular policy. Tax, tax, tax, petrol guzzling cars equals more tax for the govt. Speeding motorists equals more tax for the govt. Govts aren't committed to reducing speed - not now there is so much revenue to be made from it. State budget forecasts are actually dependant on a certain amount of revenue from speeding - i.e. next year's budget will have a figure detailing how much money they aim to make from speeding fines.

Road safety is a much bigger issue. Until people and govts start to realise that irresponsible driving (not just speeding but all the other idiotic driving traits) is a killer, nothing will change and there will only ever be half-hearted attempts at road safety.

Road deaths are just accepted as a way of life and it shouldn't be that way. Last year a family of 5 were killed in a light plane crash in the Cape York peninsula - it made front page of all the papers - on the same day, 2 families of 4 were killed in separate road accidents in Vic & NSW. Front page news? Absolutely not...barely 2cm in the middle somewhere.

It frightens me that 10 people are kille on the roads every day in the UK, and 5 people killed on the roads every day in Australia, countless more lives turned upside down....forgotten souls. Train Crash kills 6? Headline news now for days or weeks, questions over safety now being asked. And meanwhile the road toll still climbs.

Badge

Hidden paw is rght.

The biggest thing is idiocy - or more commonly, mixture of youth, inexperience and an element of idiocy/high spirits.

The rear wheel drive vehicles don't help of course - especially in the wet. Many of the 'fastish' cars in Australia don't have the tyres and the suspensions like the similar cars in Europe have. eg a standard off the shelf Ford Falcon will have 200bhp and Rear Wheel Drive - the same BMW, say a 328i would have much better tyres and weight distribution nearer 50/50...etc

There is a reason why it seems to be the kids that are prominent in the papers. It's their inexperience and judgement. My wife is a new driver and I worry - really I do - but at least she has maturity on her side - and no peer pressure.

BM

jad n rich

Australia needs to clean up its act by getting all the 15/20/30/35 year old cars off the road, death traps everywhere, get off a plane from overseas the first you notice is the ancient cars that would have been scraped anywhere else but Calcutta or Mumbai.

Second raise the driving age or the training required to get a licence, is there a weekend that goes by where carloads of kids are not killed.

Cops spending thier time hiding speed cameras in wheelie bins and lurking in bushes waiting for mom and pop to come past 3klm over is not really doing anything apart from revenue raising. The real issues are being ignored.

Oh yeah bald tyres, look in any carpark people drive here with totally bald tyres, now I must have been pulled over in police checks 20 times the last 2 years they breath test, licence check, ask you why you were doing 63 in a 60 zone but your tyres can be flat as a pancake. One drop of rain and accidents all over the place usually bald tyres.

HiddenPaw

I'd like to agree with you Badge, but that is only part of the problem. Yes, powerful cars and inexperienced, cock-sure drivers are a recipe for disaster, but, altho the 18-25 age group (male) represents the largest segment of road deaths in AUstralia, they are not solely to blame. People of all ages act irresponsibly on the road. Impatience, excessive speed, poor judgement, tiredness, distractions, etc etc all play their part in the road toll, and in all age groups. I'm sure you've had some big fat cat driving up your rear end on the freeway in the pouring rain, or perhaps a 40 ton tanker instead, or a motorist trying to read a newspaper whilst cruising; someone at the wheel chatting on a mobile phone whilst simultaneously having a fag.....etc etc

Badge

Agree with all you say, but I must admit to a certain fascination with the old cars. I find it a shame that I see less old cars in the UK - from a historical perspective I mean. There are 70s Holdens around - some even maintained - if not 'safe' eg airbags etc which are real beauties. Ive heard it said that the Holdens in the 70s were over engineered and that's one of the reasons why they last so long.

I love them!

BM

JAJ

The irony is that the Victorian government is hooked on revenue from speeding fines, probably more so than any government under the sun.

Jeremy

Badge

Generally, I find Australians fairly sedate. An alarmingly few will cut in and out - I'm not talking about the obvious hoons taking the piss- but this seems the norm, (in S america this is the norm) but if anything I am too cautious and over-defensive and would never do that. I had an accident when I was young, and for me, once bitten, twice shy.

But I do hear in the main its the kids. All the trees with crosses on them all appear to be kids. With a few others too for all the other reasons.

BM

HiddenPaw

Agree in some respects, but there is also a misconception amongst many motorists that newer cars are safer. Safer for whom? All very well having ABS, air bags, side-impact protection, seatbelts, etc when you're in the car....but what use are these to a cyclist or a pedestrian? I hear a lot of people say speed limits should be increased because cars these days are safer....unfortunately this doesn't take into account that people are pretty much the same as they have always been! Only 50% of people killed on the roads are the driver....the rest are passengers, pedestrians, cyclists, motor cyclists....people need to consider those outside the car as well as themsleves inside the car.

You're dead right about the vehicle road worthiness....seems to be overlooked all too frequently

Siren & Brian

So 130kmph is going to stop people being killed on the roads.... i dont think so...Some bloke on the freeway today hit a stationary truck on the side of the road just after peak hour and there is no chance he was doing over 100km and there is nothing left of him now.

If the governments really wanted to get serious about peoples driving habits there are a couple of things that I think would work.

1. P Plate drivers unable to drive with other passengers, or maybe not at night time etc

2. NO speeding fines... we all know what the limit is, if we break it once say in a year or 2 or whatever, get a warning... next time, revoke the drivers licence and made to resit the driving tests after 3, 6, 12 months.

And yes I do speed.

I would have no problems paying more in tax to cover the lost revenue, but I think insurance and hospitals and police and emergency services costs would be reduced aswell.

There is my 2 cents worth.

JAJ

Most of the debate about raising speed limits is about freeways and motorways, where on the majority of stretches, 100 or 110km/h is too low and can only be justified as a 'revenue raising' exercise.

Pedestrians and cyclists are not supposed to be on freeways.

Jeremy