4 km/hr speed tolerance 2015

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › 4 km/hr speed tolerance 2015

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 24

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1439884 3-Dec-2015 13:28

MikeB4: It is a three lane road as described in the Road Code both ways can use the centre land as described in the code

No it isn't. The person doing the overtaking in the passing lane has unrestricted access to that lane.

This is actually a two-way roadway marked in 2 or more lanes (not a two-way roadway marked in 3 lanes). The difference is that this road has a centre line (the one with the yellow line).

The roadcode is just a sometimes dodgy interpretation of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. It has no legal standing whatsoever.

New Zealand's insistence of having the same markings for centre lines and same direction lanes doesn't help of course

Matthew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1439890 3-Dec-2015 13:46

mdooher:
MikeB4: It is a three lane road as described in the Road Code both ways can use the centre land as described in the code

No it isn't. The person doing the overtaking in the passing lane has unrestricted access to that lane.

This is actually a two-way roadway marked in 2 or more lanes (not a two-way roadway marked in 3 lanes). The difference is that this road has a centre line (the one with the yellow line).

The roadcode is just a sometimes dodgy interpretation of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. It has no legal standing whatsoever.

New Zealand's insistence of having the same markings for centre lines and same direction lanes doesn't help of course

Passing on a three-laned road

If there is no solid yellow line on your side of the centre line, you may use the centre lane to pass as long as:

there are no vehicles in that lane, and
you can see 100 metres of clear road in front of you for the whole time while you are passing.

Don't use the centre lane to pass if there is an oncoming vehicle in the centre lane."

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/passing/

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1439901 3-Dec-2015 13:54

MikeB4:
mdooher:
MikeB4: It is a three lane road as described in the Road Code both ways can use the centre land as described in the code

No it isn't. The person doing the overtaking in the passing lane has unrestricted access to that lane.

This is actually a two-way roadway marked in 2 or more lanes (not a two-way roadway marked in 3 lanes). The difference is that this road has a centre line (the one with the yellow line).

The roadcode is just a sometimes dodgy interpretation of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. It has no legal standing whatsoever.

New Zealand's insistence of having the same markings for centre lines and same direction lanes doesn't help of course

" Passing on a three-laned road If there is no solid yellow line on your side of the centre line, you may use the centre lane to pass as long as:

there are no vehicles in that lane, and
you can see 100 metres of clear road in front of you for the whole time while you are passing.
Don't use the centre lane to pass if there is an oncoming vehicle in the centre lane."

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/passing/

Yep, the only problem with that is that it incorrectly calls it a "3 lane road" it incorrectly interprets the 100m clear visibility rule and has the worst description of "you don't have the right-away" I have ever seen.

BUT it is correct in that it is not a shared passing lane and that you need to give way to those in the passing line on the correct side of the road.

HOWEVER it has absolutely no legal standing whatsoever.

Matthew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1439909 3-Dec-2015 14:10

mdooher:
MikeB4:
mdooher:
MikeB4: It is a three lane road as described in the Road Code both ways can use the centre land as described in the code

No it isn't. The person doing the overtaking in the passing lane has unrestricted access to that lane.

This is actually a two-way roadway marked in 2 or more lanes (not a two-way roadway marked in 3 lanes). The difference is that this road has a centre line (the one with the yellow line).

The roadcode is just a sometimes dodgy interpretation of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. It has no legal standing whatsoever.

New Zealand's insistence of having the same markings for centre lines and same direction lanes doesn't help of course

" Passing on a three-laned road If there is no solid yellow line on your side of the centre line, you may use the centre lane to pass as long as:

there are no vehicles in that lane, and
you can see 100 metres of clear road in front of you for the whole time while you are passing.
Don't use the centre lane to pass if there is an oncoming vehicle in the centre lane."

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/passing/

Yep, the only problem with that is that it incorrectly calls it a "3 lane road" it incorrectly interprets the 100m clear visibility rule and has the worst description of "you don't have the right-away" I have ever seen.

BUT it is correct in that it is not a shared passing lane and that you need to give way to those in the passing line on the correct side of the road.

HOWEVER it has absolutely no legal standing whatsoever.

Do you have a precedent to quote to show that the Road Code in this instance is incorrect.

old3eyes

9120 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1439924 3-Dec-2015 14:44

MikeB4: It is a three lane road as described in the Road Code both ways can use the centre land as described in the code

There used to be one on the Gt South Road around Manurewa, Auckland in the 1970s. It was a real death trap and just vanished one day..

Regards,

Old3eyes

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1425 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1439953 3-Dec-2015 15:17

MikeB4:
Do you have a precedent to quote to show that the Road Code in this instance is incorrect.

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
2.6 General requirements about passing other vehicles

(1) A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless—
- (d) until the passing movement is completed, the driver has a clear view of the road and any traffic on the road for at least 100 m in the direction in which the driver is travelling.
(2) Subclause (1)(c) and (d) does not apply if the passing vehicle and the vehicle being passed are in different lanes and are, throughout the passing movement, either on a one-way road or on the same side of the centre line.

So the road code is incorrect in stating "... you can see 100 metres of clear road in front of you for the whole time while you are passing"
It is also clear that if you are on the same side of a centre line you don't need to worry about 100m clear visibility, according to section 2.3 this makes the road a two-way roadway marked in 2 or more lanes rather than a 3 lane road. (big difference you can stop in the lane and use it for turning... try that in your passing lane)

The problem is, calling the road a 3 lane road changes what the centre lane can be used for. Maybe that's why I have seen someone attempt to turn right from the passing lane...

Matthew

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1440064 3-Dec-2015 18:29

JimmyH:
jeffnz:

So what is it about people that are wanting to contest everything when in reality they knew they were breaking the law. Is it just a huge sense of indignation that someone dares to question tier driving habits or just an inflated sense of entitlement.

In my case, I don't think it's either.

I accept that there needs to be a speed limit. I accept it needs to be enforced, and I even accept that given the condition of most of our roads 100km might be correct (although 110 or even 120 might be better on modern motorways in modern cars).

I agree that people who speed excessively are a menace, and that they should be caught and pinged. I also think very slow drivers, particularly on motorways and especially sitting on the inside lane below 80 in good conditions, are a significant safety hazard who should should be pulled over and fined.

I don't, however, agree with a 4km tolerance. It's too close to the maximum and, as others have pointed out, well within the boundaries of calibration errors on cars. I want people to drive sensibly at a sensible speed, but looking at the road not their speedo - in case a moment's inattention to on a downwards slope etc attracts a fine.

Someone doing 105 in a 100 zone isn't a menace and, at the most, should get a verbal ticking off. They should concentrate on those who exceed the limit by a meaningful amount.

From a safety perspective, I personally think there would be much better dividends staking out intersections and going after cars and cyclists that run red lights, and those who fail to indicate at roundabouts, than going after some poor sod who inadvertently briefly drifts up to 105 on a clear motorway because they were watching the road and not their speedo.

My objective isn't that it's necessarily a revenue grab or that I like to speed. I think that as a safety initiative it's a bit of a stunt that is poorly targeted, fairly capricious, focuses on people who by and large aren't the biggest safety risk, and is ineffective.

To clarify I wasn't meaning anyone in particular.

The point I was trying to make is that whatever speed over the limit is just that, over the limit therefore you are liable to a ticket.
Regardless of whether people think the limit is high or they can handle the speed is irrelevant its still over the limit so get it changed but unfortunately one size doesn't fit all.
Out of interest how would it be safer policing cyclists going through red lights do you have any figures to show that there are more accidents caused by cyclists going through red lights than accidents caused by/at speed. From my point of view this is just saying "not in my backyard"

by "poor sod" is he/she still not breaking the law which is my point people usually know they are over the limit if not then they aren't aware of what they are doing and you can't say they are all concentrating on the road, part of driving is being aware of not only whats happening around but what you are doing yourself.

Sorry I don't buy into it at all, break the law pay the price, if you aren't sure then slow down its not going to make you late by very much at all.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1441432 6-Dec-2015 17:21

Where do you want people's attention, on the speedo or on the moving objects on the road.
Almost every accident that occurs does so because of issues with awareness , but we call it road reading errors , fatigue, poor handling , forgot to look , dangerous roads, we blame everything we can but not education because education is and always has been the missing component.
People quite rightly assume they are safe if sober, wearing a seatbelt and travelling under or on the speedlimit. Thats pretty much all we have taught them with the hundreds of millions of dollars of TV ads.
Hence they forget the risk about the massively dangerous activity that driving is and what is actually required to do it properly.

The most important thing is awareness, of your car, the road, the moving objects and to concentrate as though your life depends upon it.

If the speed limit was set as a preventative factor in road crashes our speed limit would be about 30km/h.

Checking the speedo for 3/10ths of a second every 50m ( which is what inducing a velocity phobia does) not only adds to the misunderstanding that drivers already have about driving but it also means if I drive 100 km ive spent almost 10 minutes looking at the speedo.
If we are going to threaten our economy, people's jobs and prison time by inducing irrational fears of minor speed infringements at an already dangerous velocity then
Speedos should probably be colour coded, have audible warnings and be mounted near or incorporated into mirrors along with indicators so that eye movements away from the road are more efficient.
I'm not saying speed dosent matter but I wish police would have crackdowns on truly dangerous behaviour such as driving near the centreline , blocking the right lane of a motorway , following distances and most of all promote techniques for enhancing concentration and awareness.
Ltnz have consistently failed to educate kiwis about driving , its amazing they have never been held to account for the things they refuse to let instructors teach.
The sooner autonomous cars take over the better.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1441469 6-Dec-2015 18:16

Fully agree, though we need to keep our tone down as we are about to be shot down by the pro-tolerance group.

It's difficult, as, like it or not, the law draws a line at 100. Then it allows a tolerance. Then it moves the tolerance up and down, creating this recurring GZ thread. But I for one, find myself looking at the speedo a lot. If only my car can sound a beep at a set speed so I know when I'm there.

gzt

17160 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1441575 6-Dec-2015 21:45

The road toll is down compared to various times in the past. This is believed to be a result of a focus on speed and alcohol. It is expected to go even lower with the new alcohol and speed measures.

gzt

17160 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1441578 6-Dec-2015 21:49

Joker97: But I for one, find myself looking at the speedo a lot. If only my car can sound a beep at a set speed so I know when I'm there.

I know a couple of people do that very scary to be a passenger at motorway speed ; ).

Ergonomics of speedo is terrible in many vehicles. Interior designers...

Zippity

683 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1441593 6-Dec-2015 21:55

Excuses, excuses.

If you exceed the allowable speed limit, you deserve to receive an infringement notice and the associated fine.

I set the cruise control on my Maxima to 104 and sit back and concentrate on the road ahead :)

Batman

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1441609 6-Dec-2015 22:32

Zippity: Excuses, excuses.

If you exceed the allowable speed limit, you deserve to receive an infringement notice and the associated fine.

I set the cruise control on my Maxima to 104 and sit back and concentrate on the road ahead :)

Not possible when every other km there is a 65 bend, or when cars are ahead.

Used to be dead easy to tow at one speed when the throttle was a no 8 wire attached to a NA engine coupled to a manual box. Nowadays with electronic throttle control, CVT, turbo ... the bloody pedal is a sponge!

gzt

17160 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1441629 6-Dec-2015 23:07

I like to think I could guess from the standard white line spacing...

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1441684 7-Dec-2015 02:57

Firstly, I'm pretty sure last year there was a massive media uproar as the Christmas road toll was nearer to double that of the year before that, which brought in to question the campaigns effectiveness. I also remember the police apologising saying they "could have been more clear" about the campaign.

Secondly, it is quite obviously revenue gathering, and I'm expecting the same result as last year (or the year before, I can't remember) which is more deaths than anticipated. It will once again be blamed on their stupid campaign and nobody will do anything about it because 100 kilometers per hour is actually a magic safety number that even gods cannot tamper with.

I budget for about 250 dollars in speeding fines over Christmas as a "just in case". It's funny watching the police officers face when I ask if I can pay in cash! If you ask them about their day and crack a joke or two they usually let you off anyway. In my experience, anything 115KM/h and under you can get a warning for. You might want to hide your detector or switch your jammer off though, haha.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 24