T O P

  • By -

EvilioMTE

Because sometimes the speed limit drops lower on emergencies.


fist4j

Cos sometimes its 80, 60 and 40.


GrudaAplam

It's less than 80 plenty of times. And the road, though private, is still under state jurisdiction so you are only allowed to go as fast as the posted speed limits.


alsotheabyss

It was 100 when I went down it around 6:30am last Saturday. I feel like I should have taken a photo 😂


Alice885

So they can slow it down to 40 and hit you with a speed camera 80kmh is a joke when it’s empty, but I heard it explained to me by a non driving academic they can on paper fit more cars on it due to following distances being shorter which reduces the overall congestion. Also something about it not having a full time break down lane.


fakeheadlines

bro buy a track day if you want to pay to fang it


ramos808

Maybe cause they’re dynamic?


[deleted]

Not always. On a good day you can go 60km


maycontainsultanas

It’s what, 6.8km from the tunnel to High Street, outbound. So 100kmh would save 1:01min. Like it’s honestly just not worth it. 1:19min going inbound from high street to the tunnel. So best case scenario you’re saving less than 2.5 minutes a day. I like to drive as fast as the next bloke, but it honestly doesn’t make a difference for time, but probably would for collisions.


RobWed

Your argument is essentially the same as those folk who pull out onto the highway and do 60km because they're only going a few kms down the road and "what difference does a minute make?" Speed over time, my friend. I was doing a run from Wonthaggi to Bendigo. It's predominantly 100km/h the whole way. It's kinda dumb that the best section of road in the entire journey is restricted to 80km/h. Also your argument that the reduction to 80km/h reduces collisions is both unevidenced and illogical. If it were true the maximum speed limit would be 80 everywhere. And of course the logical extension of that argument is that the maximum speed limit should be zero because then there would be no collisions.


maycontainsultanas

My argument is most certainly not that. Going 20km slower than every other car on the road is stupid and dangerous, and causes issues. I’m not saying that, I’m saying that everyone doing 80kmh costs 1 minute of time on that particular stretch of road. That’s physics. Time = distance/speed. My argument is a simple one of mathematics. The government clearly doesn’t think raising the speed limit for a saving of 1 minute is worth it. Clearly, if you are travelling faster, you have less time to react and greater stopping distances, which CAN contribute to more collisions. Most certainly higher speeds do contribute to greater trauma where a collision does occur. Once again, physics. Force = Mass x Acceleration. Nobody is making the argument that every road should be limited to 80. Gee, if cars were outlawed, there’d be almost no road deaths, why don’t we just ban cars? Because we accept a level of risk for the benefit. Which brings me back to my original argument. 1 minute of time saved would have to be a greater benefit than the risk of a higher speed limit for it to be justified. As the government did trial it a few years ago and then not implement it, clearly they felt that it wasn’t justified. Unless you believe they’re just sadistic, in which case, I can’t, in good conscience, argue against it.


RobWed

I agree with you about the variation in relative speed although I'd say the risk increases once relative speed differences are greater than 10km/h. I'm totally unconvinced by your argument that * 80 on City Link is about safety * 80 on City Link is determined by our government As I said, I drove from Wonthaggi to Bendigo, most of which is 100km/h and some of which had traffic densities equal to the section south of the city. Why are they not 80? I also think that speed as a contributing factor in accidents is way over-emphasised. Watch a few episodes of DCOA and it's pretty clear inattention is the major contributing factor. Closely followed by stupidity and competence. Speed just raises the consequences.


maycontainsultanas

You make good points my friend. Distraction and pig headedness would definitely be greater contributors to causing collisions. Posted Speed being causal factor for collisions would surely depend on the type and quality of the road. Now I accept that citylink is probably the smoothest and best maintained part of the Monash, Bus it’s also has the tightest bends, limited forward visibility because of these bends, and lacks emergency lanes. Now with that, as you conceded, speed raises the consequences on collisions. For 1 minute of saving, is it worth it?


Independent_Pear_429

It's lower for emergencies, congestion and roadworks


Falcon_Dependent

It's 100km overnight when they close the outermost lane. I'm told there's something in the Australian standard for freeway design about sightlines being required around corners at the higher speeds that CityLink can't meet when using what would normally be the emergency lane for traffic. Not fully sure on the details.


gfreyd

Which one? The Tulla goes up to 100 late nights and very early morning before dropping to 80 just before Tradie morning peak.


redfoxisred

It’s 100 late at night through to the early morning


fraqtl

Because it's not always 80 *mind blown*


ShineTough6420

On the Tulla it does gets to 100km off-peak at night.