Roads: Increase Ontario 400-series Highway Speed Limit

When I went to the Grand Caynon last year it was bliss going 75 mph. The difference is that in the US if you go over that limit then they will pull you over.........in other words the law actually means something. It is also done in a consistent manner as opposed to Ontario where you can go by one cop at 130kph and get no ticket and 103kph past another cop and get a ticket depending on the mood they are in.
In BC it has more to do with the traffic levels.......hy#1 in 90kph in Vancouver, 100 in the Fraser Valley and 110 on the Coquihalla. In BC that's fine as most drivers drive BELOW the speed limit,,,,,,,,it's amasing how much slower people in BC drive than in Ont/Que.
I think it should be increased to 120 in non-urban areas........and kept at 100 or 110 thru built up areas like Lon/Wind Tor/GTA/KWC/Osh/Ott/ and the entire QEW which really just goes from one city to the next with no real pause. I can see the logic of having lower speed limits in core urban areas as interchanges are closer together and there is far more on/off ramp traffic due to much shorter trips on the highway or just 1 or 2 km.
I think this poll would have a better chance of getting some serious thought is they made an exception for transport trucks which, for example, would have to continue at 100kph regardless of where along the route it is.
It is a bit ridiculous.................the 402 which can get fairly busy and has huge transport traffic is still no where near the volumes of urban freeways and from Strathroy to Sarnia is as straight as an arrow so to have it as the same speed limit as the Gardiner or QEW is kind of obsurd.

Most of my highway driving is done on the 407 where I find drivers tend to drive a lot faster than the posted limit. I usually set the cruise control at 110 kmh and stick to the right lane where I hardly ever pass anyone but trucks that are regulated to 105 (most of them at least). Other traffic seems to sort it self out and stay out of each others way remarkably well, zoom-zoom guys in the left lane trot along at God knows what speed and everyone is happy.

Yesterday I drove to Cobourg on the 401 which I dislike using due to the high incidence of idiots and cowboys in large trucks that seem to be unable to use the right lane for some reason or another. I was pleasantly surprised by the decorum shown by the other drivers almost all of whom were speeding to some extent but not dangerously. No tailgating, everybody signalled their lane changes, it was wierd but proof that we can all get along at any speed.

questions is can we afford to change all the signs? it must amount to quite a significant cost.

UD2 said:

questions is can we afford to change all the signs? it must amount to quite a significant cost.

Click to expand...

Didn't seem to be a problem the last 2 times ...

I remember driving 120 on the 407 and being the second-slowest thing on the road...

I too think we should have a 120-km/h limit on the freeways, and maybe 100 on rural two-lane highways away from congested areas with lots of driveways. I'm not the only one who thinks so... was it Jim Kenzie in the Star who argues this? You can even get T-shirts about it... search CafePress some time.

Most of the so called "nanny state" laws that McGuinty has passed are common around the world, like the cell phone law. Most of Canada bans cell phone use while driving and something like 70 countries have bans in some form. Our drunk driving laws and driver training standards are hardly rigourous by world standards.

While I agree that McGuinty wouldn't likely raise speed limits, that just makes him the same as every premier before him. I think he gets his premier dad rep because that's just how he comes across - like someone's anonymous dad, and kind of a nerd.

Memph said:

I think there is a risk people will drive faster if you increase the speed limit. Maybe not on the 401 in Toronto, but outside of cities, I could see more people going at 140-160km/h. When I visited Croatia, where the speed limit in 130km/h, a good chunk of drivers were going at 150-160km/h on the new rural highways.

Click to expand...

I'd bet that the average speed is a lot lower than 150-160. Would I be right to assume by your comment that freeways are a relatively new thing in Croatia? Probably better to use France or Britain or the Netherlands as examples. In most countries I've been to people tend to drive only slightly faster than us, on freeways built to a lower standard no less, and their highways are just as safe.

Electrify said:

Some comments suggest that Ontario has some of the lowest speed limits in the world, and I think that is stretching it a bit. I believe the only place in Canada which has a limit above 100km/h is Alberta, and that is at 110km/h. In the US while some have very high limits, the vast majority of states are at 65mph, which is 104km/h.

We may be on the low end of speed limits, but it isn't fair to say we are one of the lowest. I believe Hawaii takes that prize with a maximum still at 55mph, 88km/h.

Click to expand...

There may be a few places with lower limits but we're still one of the slowest in the world. Lots of provinces have limits over 100, and 120+ is the most common internationally.

jn_12 said:

I think once you start raising the limits you will get into the issue that people just aren't comfortable with those speeds. You can argue that there's a negligible difference between 110 and 125 but to some people there is a difference even just mentally. Currently if someone only feels comfortable going around the speed limit, they can do so and have a legal reason for it. If you bump that up you're driving people out of that comfort zone, and when people are nervous that's when they make mistakes.

Click to expand...

Well for one thing, the speed limit should be the MAXIMUM speed people can travel - there's no obligation to drive that fast. But our limits are so low that we treat them as minimums, and everybody's driving well over the limit now anyway. If we don't want people to drive 130 on the freeway then maybe we shouldn't design them for 130.

Besides, if people are too uncomfortable to go faster than 80-100 on freeways then maybe they should find other roads to drive on.

If speed limits were increased I would support a different speed for each lane (100 in far right, 110 in middle, and 120 in far left) and for Express/Collectors on the 401.

However I also propose a change in how we treat speeding. I would ticket on a % of speed over the limit instead of the current x km/hr over the limit. My reason for this is, say your doing 120 on a 400 series highway, that's 20 km/hr over the limit or 20% over. I believe that 20% is more indicative of the danger level of traveling 20 km/hr over a 100 km/hr limit. Contrast that with doing 60 in a 40 zone. It's still only 20 km/hr but I think it's clear that the danger level associated with this level of speed is quite a lot higher than doing 120 in a 100 zone. There's a reason why the speed limit is 40 km/hr as there is much more 'danger' or stuff going on within these types of roads. However, under the % system you are travelling at 50% over the posted limit, and I feel that also is a better representation of the danger risk being taken. In order to assume a similar type of risk on a 400 series highway you would have to be doing over 150 km/hr which is not as common as 120 km/hr.

I'd like to see a pilot project implemented along the 401:

Implement weather/TOD-dependent speed limits (130 on a clear sunny day, 120 in the morning and late afternoon, 110 at night and on rainy days, and maybe even drop it down to 90 or 80 during severe weather that affects road conditions or visibility). There would be digital overhead signage informing drivers of the road conditions and the posted speed limit at the time.

Urban areas would have maximum speed limits of 120 at all times, except for in bad weather.

Implement automated license plate reader points (like on the 407). Space them 30km or so apart along the highway. If a vehicle passes from check point to check point in under 13.8 minutes (which is what it would be at the speed limit, maybe make it 13 mins even for a bit of leeway), then that license plate will be issued an automatic speeding ticket. If the check point time is really low, an automatic dispatch notice can be sent to the nearest OPP vehicle to have them immediately pulled over (and do the necessary roadside vehicle seizure if needed).

This would mean that drivers would be allowed to drive faster than they are now, but that speeding will be much more strictly enforced. So it becomes a give and take with drivers.

If it works well, it can be implemented on other 400 series highways.

MisterF said:

Well for one thing, the speed limit should be the MAXIMUM speed people can travel - there's no obligation to drive that fast. But our limits are so low that we treat them as minimums, and everybody's driving well over the limit now anyway. If we don't want people to drive 130 on the freeway then maybe we shouldn't design them for 130.

Besides, if people are too uncomfortable to go faster than 80-100 on freeways then maybe they should find other roads to drive on.

Click to expand...

Simply because something is designed to accommodate certain speeds doesn't mean that we should automatically assume people should go those speeds. I think that's a ludicrous argument to make.

I agree that posted speed limits should be maximums but at some point our society decided that they would act as guidelines and not thresholds. Yes, someone could go 80 on the 401, but they'd probably get pulled over for impeding traffic. And to simply say that if you don't feel comfortable going 110, 120, 130, etc, that you should find another road isn't a solution either. You have people who have been driving for decades who have never had to approach those speeds and many people (drivers and passengers, young and old) who start to white knuckle when you start inching towards 120. You have people who drive cars that aren't capable of going those speeds. You have sections of various highways/on ramps/offramps that aren't designed for those speeds. To me, I think we have a pretty good situation going as it is. People aren't being pulled over unless they stand out from the crowd and we appear to have at least created a comfort level amongst drivers with the current speeds in place.

I’m not sure what a different speed limit for different lanes would accomplish. Wouldn’t it be simpler and more effective to raise the speed limit and enforce the “stay right except to pass†rule?

Simply because something is designed to accommodate certain speeds doesn't mean that we should automatically assume people should go those speeds. I think that's a ludicrous argument to make.

Click to expand...

People drive based on what feels right, and that’s impacted by the design of the road. That’s just human nature. What’s ludicrous is designing a road for a certain speed and then expecting people to drive 30 km/h slower.

And to simply say that if you don't feel comfortable going 110, 120, 130, etc, that you should find another road isn't a solution either. You have people who have been driving for decades who have never had to approach those speeds and many people (drivers and passengers, young and old) who start to white knuckle when you start inching towards 120. You have people who drive cars that aren't capable of going those speeds. You have sections of various highways/on ramps/offramps that aren't designed for those speeds.

Click to expand...

How many cars sold in Canada in the last 20 years aren’t capable of going 130? Even Smart Cars can go 120. I drive a decade old Hyundai Accent that can go as fast as I’d ever want it to, up into the 180s apparently (not that I’ve ever gone that fast of course). But really it’s a moot point. Traffic would largely go the same speed it does now since just about everybody already speeds. If the speed limit goes up the people who are currently driving 100 or less would still be free to (you don’t get pulled over for going 80 on the 401 BTW). You see trucks doing that all the time in other countries. Sections of highway that aren’t designed for the higher speed would simply have a lower limit. We already do that.

I’m not sure what your point is about off ramps…the speed change lane is just what its name implies – to slow down before you get to the off ramp. There’s plenty of room to slow down, the length of those lanes is determined by the design speed.

To me, I think we have a pretty good situation going as it is. People aren't being pulled over unless they stand out from the crowd and we appear to have at least created a comfort level amongst drivers with the current speeds in place.

Click to expand...

Driving on a freeway shouldn’t be comfortable, and people who can’t handle the speed should stay off them, period. We don’t want our driving laws based on the lowest common denominator. Driving, especially on freeways, isn’t a right, it’s a privilege reserved for those who know how to do it. Most of our highways are designed for 120-130 and that’s what people drive and what the police enforce. The speed limit doesn’t reflect that so it’s ignored to the point of being meaningless.

denfromoakvillemilton said:

It should be 175km/h

Click to expand...

I'd agree but I was going to cap my endorsement of an increase at 160.
I used to drive Toronto to Ottawa at 160 when I went to school there before the stupid "racing law". No problems. These roads and these cars are built for much higher speeds than are currently legislated. That was in a Subaru wagon. Now I regularly cruise at 145 in a pickup truck....it just feels most comfortable at that speed.
Now, I know....most of the drivers are not built for higher speeds, but that shouldn't prevent the rest of us from going places in a timely fashion.

In fact, a lot of the drivers on our roads are much too scared to be driving if you ask me. If you're afraid of hitting the roads, stay off them. I would try my best to avoid driving if I was scared of speeding up to merge, for example.

gweed123 said:

Implement automated license plate reader points (like on the 407). Space them 30km or so apart along the highway. If a vehicle passes from check point to check point in under 13.8 minutes (which is what it would be at the speed limit, maybe make it 13 mins even for a bit of leeway), then that license plate will be issued an automatic speeding ticket. If the check point time is really low, an automatic dispatch notice can be sent to the nearest OPP vehicle to have them immediately pulled over (and do the necessary roadside vehicle seizure if needed).

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, it's a pretty well-thought out idea, but I have to ask: what fascism is this? I chuckled, but I'd be afraid of living in a country where they have something like this going on.

UD2 said:

questions is can we afford to change all the signs? it must amount to quite a significant cost.

Click to expand...

I can't afford for them NOT to change the signs.

My personal choice would be to raise the criteria for giving licenses and increase it... Honestly, I drive a 1.8 and I feel sorry for the people who are driving at 100 with v8 and v6

Much of the 400 wasn't designed well enough to allow safe travel beyond 80km/h let alone 120km/h. Signs are terrible. By the time you get to the sign you realize you have 1 or 2 seconds to switch lanes. Some curves are far too severe, and Ontario is the only place I've ever been where you need to change lanes to stay on the same highway. Exiting to stay on the same highway? Really?

I understand New Brunswick having 110km/h speed limits; I'd even support 130km/h on some of their highways. Many of Ontario's 400 highways have serious design flaws and are dangerous enough at the limits we have now.