New vehicle impoundment measures

[old trials guy]

My concerns are transition zones where you are entering a town and the posted speed goes from 100 to 50. Some of these zones are waaaay longer than necessary and they are a perfect spot for the local enforcement to go fishing and get their quota. Easy to overshoot the sign and be doing 100km in a 50 zone. Nice if you have your family with you on vacation as they tow the family van off to impound and leave you at the side of the hiway with a $2000 expense plus costs of getting your family safely home.

Another concern is inappropriate speed limits. Who of us hasn't driven through Manning Park at 140km on a wide, little used 4 lane hiway? The speed limit is way to low on the 4 lane sections and should at least be 110 like the Coquihalla.

Thirdly, hasn't anyone noticed that vehicles have evolved over the last 100 years and are capable of safely negotiating higher speeds due to improved handling, braking and safety devices like traction control. Not only that but every major hiway in BC has ungone improvements allowing much higher safe speeds. The ministry has to get up to date with speed limits on most BC hiways. Too slow limits actually create more accidents as people take more chances passing slow vehicles.

There are already tons of laws on the books to deal with excessive speed which seldom are enforced due to lack of resources, with this one they can set up going into Clinton and tow cars all day. This one sounds ill conceived and a money grab to me.

otg

 

[Farp]

It's my understanding that corners are assigned speeds based not so much on how fast you can safely ride/drive around them, but by how fast you can get stopped if you need to, given the limited visibility of each corner. Having said that, 20km/hr still doesn't make a lot of sense. How fast can the average car/bike stop from 20 km/hr. 1 second?

I was told that the advisory limits are set so that the corner can be safely negotiated at that speed by the least competent driver driving the worst handling vehicle in the worst mechanical condition allowable, ie worst case scenario - which makes sense. I was pulled over once while on my bike for doing 80kph in a cloverleaf entrance to a freeway where the advisory limit was 60kph. The police officer told me I could have been ticketed but he let me off with a warning, so I'm not so sure that exceeding an advisory limit is not ticketable. Perhaps someone in the know can confirm what the situation is here.

John

 

[Mollygrubber]

I like how our nice twisty roads get straightened out or decommissioned (at our expense) and replaced with boring multi-lane superhighways, and then when artificially low speed limits still aren't netting enough profit, new laws are passed to make sure we're separated from our money HARDER and FASTER...

... my tongue is firmly in my cheek here (mostly), I'm actually in favour of stricter traffic laws if they target yahoos, drunks and idiots. But is going 130 on what is virtually a racetrack (OK, no corner workers) serious enough to warrant towing your vehicle? They've figured out how to manage it in Europe, why can't we?

And to put this in perspective, I don't ride over 120 anyway, due to wind blast, bad mileage and vibration...

 

[Shuswap]

OTG;
I, for one, happen to agree with your comments. When driving quickly, I find it near impossible to think of anything else. I'm not pouring myself coffee, texting or adjusting the radio.
Food for thought.....
On being asked to lower speeds on German Autobahns, the German Chancellor of the day replied that he feared such a move would have devastating consequences for the quality and image of German engineering and technical innovation world-wide. He felt that should they reduce speeds, there would follow a reduction in the demand by drivers for improvements in German automobile engineering. This, in turn, would diminish the prestige of German engineering in other areas.

He protected the national interest..... by maintaining higher automobile speeds, where reasonably safe.

A man after my own heart!

 

[Ti welder]

A few years ago I got a 153 in a 110 and got a regular ticket in a car. Can't recall but wasn't all that much. Now they have to make something called REVINU, Ya thats probably not spelled corectly, let me try again., BULLSHIT.

 

[dirtrider]

Keep in mind they constantly have been adding new laws to create a way to collect more cash and to give the cops something more to throw at people. Remeber the bicycle helmet law, the noise law for those kids in hopped up honda cars, the " secret tool that can hear if a car has been modified" The helmet laws that still are not enforced and if you wear a turban the law does not apply to you, the noise law that isnt ever enforced since all they have to do is roll down their windows to hear an offender. And I still hear bikes every day with straight pipes. The cell phone law, I still see atleast 2-3 a day driving and talking, The HOV lanes, still see single drivers using it and using it for a passing lane. I still drive with the flow of traffic 110+ on the highway in a 80 zone and am being passed.

In my opinion the cops are in most cases are 20 something and as stupid as most of us were then, except they get to play hall moniter and while I know some real nice good cops there are some not so nice ones with "issues" like the ones who killed the guy at the airport, the ones who took the guys to the park for a beating (which I support having been a victim of theft)

Now this is a perfect example of a few guys imitating the "stunt" riders and scaring the public so a law has to be passed to quiet the old ladies who hate everything we think is fun. If we do not police ourselves with the noisy off road bikes then guess what will happen to our riding areas. So tell that idiot we all hear and see that needs to have the loudest bike so he thinks he is fast off road to put a cork in it.

Grrrrr my rant is over!

But I would not worry too much since if they cant find a loud V twin that you can hear a mile away then odds are they wont find you.

 

[cheeseburger]

Another concern is inappropriate speed limits. Who of us hasn't driven through Manning Park at 140km on a wide, little used 4 lane hiway? The speed limit is way to low on the 4 lane sections and should at least be 110 like the Coquihalla.

I think that part of the reason the Coquihalla has a higher limit than that of manning park is that it's appropriately deer/bear fenced. I know I feel comfortable going 140 in Manning Park till I imagine something jumping out onto the road from behind every bushy area. I never gave it a second thought until I actually hit a deer three years ago. And now I think I may be one of the only people who find the Coquihalla a relatively relaxing road to drive.

 

[Aquafire]

...I was pulled over once while on my bike for doing 80kph in a cloverleaf entrance to a freeway where the advisory limit was 60kph. The police officer told me I could have been ticketed but he let me off with a warning, so I'm not so sure that exceeding an advisory limit is not ticketable. Perhaps someone in the know can confirm what the situation is here. John

John,

I would consider myself as "someone in the know" on this topic. If the sign was not a regulatory sign (i.e. black lettering on a white background) but instead was an advisory sign (yellow) you cannot be charged with speeding for disobeying it. Note that I emphasize the word speeding- as just because you may not be exceeding the posted limit, you can still be charged with other offences, such as "driving without due care and attention" or "driving without reasonable consideration".

In short, the cop was wrong if he told you that you could be given a SPEEDING ticket. However, your speeding could be considered one element of the prosecution of some other offence. For example, if you were 20 over the "advisory" speed, standing on the seat and waving your arms- you could expect one of the other above mentioned tickets, just not a SPEEDING ticket. Yes, cops make mistakes and young ones who are inexperienced make more. Is this a surprise to anyone? When you started your job welding, driving truck, fixing furnaces- did you know everything? And look around you at your coworkers- are they all perfect experts in the field or are some more knowledgeable and better than others at what they do?

And as for corners- their recommended speed (or regulated, in some cases) is a factor of many things- but the biggest thing that determines the speed that gets posted is what is known as the "critical curve speed" (basically the fastest speed a car can negotiate the curve without losing control). The critical speed for a curve is determined by the curve's radius (how tight it is, determined by numerous successive chord/middle ordinate measurements), the superelevation (how much and in which direction the road is cambered) and coefficient of friction (the slipperiness of the surface).
Of course, there are factors unique to each vehicle that can affect this speed, such as commercial vehicles and the load's height/stability/centre of mass or the lean angle on a motorcycle. After determining the CCS, engineers may apply a standard safety factor to the number (for example, reducing it by 10%). That curve speed is also determined for the center of mass tracking position of the vehicle being in the centre of the lane of travel.

Of course you can drive faster than that speed in your car- but you do so at your own risk. Engineers do make mistakes and roads settle. I've measured curves and have done critical curve speed calculations in places in which the critical speed was very close to the posted limit and have even seen a CCS that was below the advisory. It happens. Obviously, in a motorcycle you can take the turn faster than a car, partly because you can change the effective radius of the curve by changing lane positions (and altering your lean angle).

Hope that helps. As for the rest of the discussion, I'm keeping my comments to myself because I know what this would turn into. Suffice to say that if you saw the difference a 150 km/h crash vs a 90km/h crash makes on your internal organs, you'd drive a lot slower.

Safe riding, my friends!

Dave

 

[cactusreid]

Aqua fire,that's a very informative post,thank you for taking the time to explain some of the reasoning's to us.

 

[250ccforme]

I was pulled over once while on my bike for doing 80kph in a cloverleaf entrance to a freeway where the advisory limit was 60kph.

John

What was the speed limit on the road from which you were entering the freeway? 60kph? Perhaps the advisory sign was intended to keep people from getting up to freeway speed too early and losing control on the cloverleaf?

 

[Farp]

Thanks, Aquafire, that's an obviously informed response. Maybe the cop didn't ticket me because he knew I hadn't broken the law, but he pulled me over because he felt that 80kph in that cloverleaf was too fast and he wanted me to slow down. Actually that cloverleaf can be negotiated safely at 100 kph on a bike. In any case, thanks for clearing up the situation with regards to the yellow/black signs; I'd always wondered about them and now I know. Thank you for that.

John

 

[Farp]

What was the speed limit on the road from which you were entering the freeway? 60kph? Perhaps the advisory sign was intended to keep people from getting up to freeway speed too early and losing control on the cloverleaf?

It was 80 kph. I drive that cloverleaf quite regularly in my car at 80kph and never have a problem as long as you apex early in the entry to the turn, go to the outside half way through and then apex again late on the exit. The advisory was probably for people who keep their vehicles tight to the inside all the way around from having problems with the decreasing radius on the exit.

John

 

[Mollygrubber]

Suffice to say that if you saw the difference a 150 km/h crash vs a 90km/h crash makes on your internal organs, you'd drive a lot slower.

Safe riding, my friends!

Dave

That's a great point, and not one most people consider. Impact force is a square of velocity, I believe. A few kms more makes a HUGE difference in how hard you hit.

And thanks for the considered reply.

 

[Shuswap]

Thanks for reminding us all about impact energy, I'm sure we all knew that somewhere in the back our minds, but a heads-up reminder is always welcome!!

 

[old trials guy]

That's a great point, and not one most people consider. Impact force is a square of velocity, I believe. A few kms more makes a HUGE difference in how hard you hit.

And thanks for the considered reply.

I think its common sense that the faster you go the more its going to hurt but that being said, modern vehicles stop better, steer better and crash better. Doesn't mean you should drive without giving due consideration to road conditions and the capabilities of driver and the vehicle but a study performed by the province on posted speeds revealed many posted speeds were too slow and detrimental to safety. I ask why is the government prepared to throw the book at you in situations where they know the posted speed is wrong. They should fix that problem first.

I also believe that using a fixed speed over the limit is stupid. Forty over in a school zone is outrageous as it is 133% of the posted limit and the consequences to others is grave. Forty over in the middle of nowhere on a hiway with no traffic and an inaccurate limit is probably not going to hurt anyone.

I still stand by my view that it is an ill conceived law and reeks of a cash grab just like photo radar.

otg

 

[JavaJude]

SPC . . . thanks for the information that you provided.


I just have a couple of things to add:

1. Not everyone has 20+ years of clean driving and perhaps stricter rules are protecting those people from doing something that they are not prepared for or trained for.
2. Most folks don't get caught breaking the rules, we've all seen them or perhaps we are one of them. I've heard some pretty fantastic stories from some of the people I ride with. They are lucky to still be with us despite their actions.
3. (tongue in cheek) perhaps lawn darts shouldn't have been out-lawed as they could have weeded out the less intelligent. Now those people are getting motorcycles and causing havoc.
4. Maybe a new rider will get pulled over due to these stricter rules and learn a lesson or two that may save their life or someone else's.
5. And lastly . . . I learned my lesson one day when a deer jumped out of no where and landed on the hood of my car. Luckily I was going the speed limit (due to the sun being in my eyes) on this deserted street or I would have been eating my dinner from a tube tonight.

Some things are beyond our control and rules are put in place to protect us from the unexpected.

For those of you who will critize what I've written, please be kind as I have the power to delete (have a sense of humour about that)

-Judy-

 

[snackdaddy]

OTG you make some great points esp. regarding the step down in speed limits around towns.

Aquafire you obviously have great insight into how speed limits are set. What I do not understand is what vehicle are they designing the speed limit for? Is it for a typical family car or the 80 000 pound tractor trailer? (I like how in Europe tractor trailers have a lower speed limit and for the most part are limited to their own lane)

I frequently travel the Hope Princeton and am always blown away by how crappy the advisor speed limits are. When I can easily and safely exceed the limit in my 83 motorhome something is wrong...On the other hand at least two corners the advisory limit is WAY to high. I aways think on those corners they should have a sign that says "we really mean it this time"
The real problem I see is the fact there appears to be no leeway in how the police enforce this law. There is also no way to defend yourself. Let’s pretend you are deemed to be going over 40 km over or another offence like standing on the pegs. Your vehicle is seized on the spot…your out the towing/storage fees (At least 400 bucks) and perhaps another 200 if you need to rent a car…You go to court and are found Not Guilty. Is the government going to cut you a check for your losses? I don’t think so.

 

[Shuswap]

And after your car has been impounded....good luck with getting any kind of court-provided remedy.
The officer has not been empowered to be judge/jury in the past. Well, that is changing, it seems.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong about this, please.

 

[Traffic Cop]

The area of legislation creating the impound rules is found here:

http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bc...ct RSBC 1996 c. 318/00_Act/96318_12.xml#part9

If you read section 251, you will see that the police officer really has no discretion:

251 (1) If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person...the peace officer or another peace officer must.....



Which means that they have to, or they have violated the law.