Jump to content
The Christmas Logo Competition is back. See thread in Sheffield Discussions for details ×

M1 Speed Limit In Sheffield

Recommended Posts

True that and slower speeds are proven to reduce accident rate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, butlers said:

Is that a little like driving faster to get to petrol station when the guage is low,logic

NO - it means you are more likely to break down on the hard shoulder (if there is one)

15 hours ago, Arnold_Lane said:

I don't know the distance between the junctions.  Let's call it 10 miles.

 

It takes 86 seconds longer to travel that distance at 60 mph than 70 mph.

 

What figures do you have for emissions per second at 60 mph and 70 mph?

Although the original post was 'M1 speed limit in Sheffield', the 

bigger picture is not the10 mile stretch of motorway that runs through Sheff.

Most motorway journeys are not 'hop on and hop off' at the next junction they are considerably more.

Increasing the motorway speed to 80 was talked about for years (and in the real world was/ is unofficially accepted even to day).

I have no figures for emissions, why should I? but if I reach my destination 20 / 30 mins earlier on my journey is the fact that whatever vehicle Im driving is no longer churning out emissions for that length of time irrelevant.

13 hours ago, dave_the_m said:

It really doesn't work like that. A simplified example: assume (on average) that cars are more fuel efficient going at 60mph rather than 70mph. Assume also (as a gross simplification) that the amount of pollutants produced by a car is directly proportional to the amount of petrol consumed. Then a car travelling between any two points A and B at 60mph will consume less petrol, and thus emit less pollutants along that stretch between A and B, than one going at 70mph - even though the faster car spends less actual time between A and B.

As above - the journey is more than A-B its A-Z. so how does spending more time in one area at a lower speed and subsequent build up of traffic help the environment?

12 hours ago, DT Ralge said:

 I'm repeating myself - a steadier queue of traffic all moving at around the same speed, 60, with little motivation for drivers to change lanes to overtake and no point in acceleration followed by braking.  Brake lights, in themselves, cause others to brake (the ripple effect) and generates a pattern of stop/start traffic and unnecessary tailbacks.

A lowered speed limit is targeted at controlling drivers' expectations and there are benefits to be had from this steadier, one speed, flowing queue, including fewer jams, lower emissions and pollution.

Yes, you are repeating yourself yet again. 

'Targeted at controlling drivers expectations'? sounds like Hog wash to me. The only expectations I have on the motorway now a days is how much longer its going to take before the next hold up due to constantly shiffting speed limits and poor driving.

'One speed flowing queue' (?) sounds like your advocating some sort of demented giant Scalextric slot track for our motorways.

I'd rather see better training  for driving on our motorways than illogical speed restrictions and fines.

 

Keep safe.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rockers rule said:

 

Although the original post was 'M1 speed limit in Sheffield', the 

bigger picture is not the10 mile stretch of motorway that runs through Sheff.

Most motorway journeys are not 'hop on and hop off' at the next junction they are considerably more.

Increasing the motorway speed to 80 was talked about for years (and in the real world was/ is unofficially accepted even to day).

I have no figures for emissions, why should I?

 

No reason at all why you would have those figures, other than you claiming something with no evidence.

 

"but if I reach my destination 20 / 30 mins earlier on my journey is the fact that whatever vehicle Im driving is no longer churning out emissions for that length of time irrelevant."

 

Yes it's irrelevant, because  you don't get the point that driving a vehicle faster (60 mph vs 70 mph) generates more emissions.

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said:

No reason at all why you would have those figures, other than you claiming something with no evidence.

 

"but if I reach my destination 20 / 30 mins earlier on my journey is the fact that whatever vehicle Im driving is no longer churning out emissions for that length of time irrelevant."

 

Yes it's irrelevant, because  you don't get the point that driving a vehicle faster (60 mph vs 70 mph) generates more emissions.

 

I have never claimed anything regarding emission because frankly I don't care.

My posts have been on poor driving and the man made congestion on our motorways due to lower speeds being implemented on the pretence its for the environment. 

I could get my Jag (proper one not the Ford pretender) down to 6 mpg if I drove it correctly LOL.

Keep safe and remember a car has to be more than A- B it has to have soul.

 

 

Edited by Rockers rule
additional info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rockers rule said:

 

I have never claimed anything regarding emission because frankly I don't care.

My posts have been on poor driving and the man made congestion on our motorways due to lower speeds being implemented on the pretence its for the environment. 

I could get my Jag (proper one not the Ford pretender) down to 6 mpg if I drove it correctly LOL.

Keep safe and remember a car has to be more than A- B it has to have soul.

 

 

You haven’t claimed anything about emissions huh?

 

Ok.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said:

You haven’t claimed anything about emissions huh?

 

Ok.  

 Correct - man made congestion on our motorways due to lower speeds being implemented on the pretence its for the environment

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rockers rule said:

 Correct - man made congestion on our motorways due to lower speeds being implemented on the pretence its for the environment

 

 

Yes but whos behind it all smart motorways no hard shoulders unecessary speed speed limits all a load of rubbish costs millions is it some idiots that dont live in the real world sat  behind a desk 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not read all Sheff City Councils transport plan but traffic pollution is behind 500 premature deaths each year in the city,and Tinsley is one of the national blackspots.

Also lung damage by asthma is multiples of other parts of the city

Be interested what difference the monitoring station picks up over the trial

So smart motorways cost millions....but the only alternative is putting more tarmac down at likely 10 fold the cost and unimaginable congestion for years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Rockers rule said:

Talking of Reliant's why didn't despite the Robin being more aerodynamic handle as good as the brick sided Regal?

 

Lot of talk about wind rather than talk about solving the problem of congestion on our motorways.

Up the speed limit, lets get to where we're going and spend less time in anyone area  =  less pollution.

 

Less hot air more forward motion. 

 

 

 

 

 

Rockers rule, you claimed the above regarding pollution.

 

You also wrote:

 

"I have no figures for emissions, why should I? but if I reach my destination 20 / 30 mins earlier on my journey is the fact that whatever vehicle Im driving is no longer churning out emissions for that length of time irrelevant."

 

I replied saying yes it is irrelevant.  You replied to that saying you hadn't said anything about emissions.  Well, history shows you are wrong. 

 

Edited by Arnold_Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, spider1 said:

Yes but whos behind it all smart motorways no hard shoulders unecessary speed speed limits all a load of rubbish costs millions is it some idiots that dont live in the real world sat  behind a desk 

I don't think that will convince anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So these "idiots behind a desk",to they teleport to a magical kingdom when they knock off or join the queues with rest of us.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Arnold_Lane said:

Rockers rule, you claimed the above regarding pollution.

 

You also wrote:

 

"I have no figures for emissions, why should I? but if I reach my destination 20 / 30 mins earlier on my journey is the fact that whatever vehicle Im driving is no longer churning out emissions for that length of time irrelevant."

 

I replied saying yes it is irrelevant.  You replied to that saying you hadn't said anything about emissions.  Well, history shows you are wrong. 

 

In #69 YOU asked ME what figures do I have for emissions per second at 60mph and 70 mph.

 

I have never proffered any figures for emissions in any of my posts so why would I offer up figures per second between your designated two figures of 60 & 70 - you might as well have asked me which was the better 2-8-4 or the 4-2-2 for railway engines running on the branch line between here and Cardiff.

I have offered up my (personal) comments on what I feel is poor management of our motorways and my belief that 80mph (MAX) would be a better way of controlling the movement of traffic rather than (IMO) the silly bunching together at 50 & 60mph.

 

Unless you want to get all Pedantic on my omission to place the word 'figures' after the word 'emission' in my statement -

                                                                                                                   

  'I have never claimed anything regarding emission  because frankly I don't care'.,  please feel free to do so.

 

 I'll even let you have the last word if it keeps you happy.

 

History is always written by the winner  (unless your still stuck in traffic on't motorway that is) LOL

 

Keep safe.

Edited by Rockers rule
additional info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.