Erroneous road signs

[corco]

Here's some...Canadian signage on I-15 southbound just after Sweetgrass customs on the border, firmly in US territory

[roadman65]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/8498795416/in/photostream

Here is one assembly in Orlando on I-4 Exit 81A where US 17 is EAST and US 92 is NORTH.

[corco]

I just love my out of jurisdiction speed limit signs, I guess.

Here's a nice Oregon style speed limit reduction sign on US-2 approaching Newport, Washington

[okroads]

The "BUSINESS" banner should only be above the U.S. 40 shield on this sign:


DSC03239 by okroads, on Flickr

[Some_Person]

This sign should be PA 248, and is in front of a Wegmans just off both PA 248 and PA 33. It's a nice looking sign, they just messed up on which shield to use

[roadfro]

^ And it's an erroneous placement... Stop signs and route shields are not supposed to be placed on the same post like this.

[KEK Inc.]

I just love my out of jurisdiction speed limit signs, I guess.

Here's a nice Oregon style speed limit reduction sign on US-2 approaching Newport, Washington

Washington has a lot of those near the Oregon border as well.  SR-4 and US-101 has a few in Pacific Co.

[corco]

I actually kind of like it- those signs seem too cluttered with the full "Speed Limit" text

[1995hoo]

I don't like that "speed" usage because it's grammatically incorrect. They're saying the speed limit ahead is 45 and to confirm your vehicle's speed to that rule. The actual "speed" is dependent on the individual driver.

Perhaps putting simply "45 mph" would de-clutter it.

[J N Winkler]

I don't like that "speed" usage because it's grammatically incorrect. They're saying the speed limit ahead is 45 and to confirm your vehicle's speed to that rule. The actual "speed" is dependent on the individual driver.

Oregon speed limit signs say just "SPEED" (not "SPEED LIMIT") except on Interstates, and that sign merely indicates a "SPEED 45" condition ahead, so it would be perfectly correct if it were actually erected off-Interstate in Oregon (not in Washington state).  AIUI, the omission of "LIMIT" on off-Interstate speed limit signs in Oregon indicates that the basic speed law applies (in other words, a ticket for speeding in excess of the posted limit can be discharged without a fine if the defendant can meet an almost impossible burden of proof to show that the ticketed speed was not unsafe under the conditions then prevailing).  I believe "SPEED LIMIT" is now used on Interstates in Oregon because speeding is now a strict-liability offense on them.

[Central Avenue]

I don't like that "speed" usage because it's grammatically incorrect. They're saying the speed limit ahead is 45 and to confirm your vehicle's speed to that rule. The actual "speed" is dependent on the individual driver.

Perhaps putting simply "45 mph" would de-clutter it.

"Conform", not "confirm".

See, I can nitpick silly insignificant things too.

EDIT: Now that I've calmed down a bit, I guess I should elaborate.

Objecting to the sign on the basis that it's not 100% semantically unambiguous strikes me as somewhat silly. Part of designing clear and concise signage is knowing what superfluous elements can be left out without changing the meaning. Realistically, nobody's going to see a sign that says "SPEED 45" and think it literally means the speed of the vehicles on the road is exactly 45. I'm not sure I like that design, honestly, but it serves its intended purpose well enough.

[djsinco]

I think everyone gets the idea of the number on a sign which states speed. I enjoy the euro version (also used elsewhere,) which just shows the speed limit inside a red circle.

[Brandon]

I don't like that "speed" usage because it's grammatically incorrect. They're saying the speed limit ahead is 45 and to confirm your vehicle's speed to that rule. The actual "speed" is dependent on the individual driver.

Perhaps putting simply "45 mph" would de-clutter it.

That used to be how they were with the "SPEED ZONE AHEAD" signage.  There'd be a smaller sign underneath stating "45 M.P.H.".  These new diamond signs look cluttered by comparison.

[KEK Inc.]

I think everyone gets the idea of the number on a sign which states speed. I enjoy the euro version (also used elsewhere,) which just shows the speed limit inside a red circle.

Metric speed limit signs in the US are circumscribed with a black circle.  They still have SPEED LIMIT.

[kphoger]

I think everyone gets the idea of the number on a sign which states speed. I enjoy the euro version (also used elsewhere,) which just shows the speed limit inside a red circle.

And México's variant, which has a number in a red circle, but also includes "˜km/h'; actually, there's usually the word "˜MAXIMA' nearby, either on the sign itself or on a plaque.

[Big John]

I think everyone gets the idea of the number on a sign which states speed. I enjoy the euro version (also used elsewhere,) which just shows the speed limit inside a red circle.

Metric speed limit signs in the US are circumscribed with a black circle.  They still have SPEED LIMIT.

That was in the 2003 MUTCD.  The 2009 MUTCD removed all mentions of metric signs.

[1995hoo]

I don't like that "speed" usage because it's grammatically incorrect. They're saying the speed limit ahead is 45 and to confirm your vehicle's speed to that rule. The actual "speed" is dependent on the individual driver.

Perhaps putting simply "45 mph" would de-clutter it.

"Conform", not "confirm".

....

Yup. I was typing on my iPad and autocorrect got me, but that's no excuse for failing to proofread. I blew it there!

With that said, the other comments are correct about its intent being clear, but I view it as similar to the improperly-phrased "REDUCED SPEED AHEAD" versus North Carolina's properly-worded "REDUCE SPEED AHEAD." The first is simply incorrect, regardless of whether its meaning is clear enough.

[NE2]

Neither is quite correct. You don't have to reduce speed ahead if you're already going slower than the new limit.

[Central Avenue]

Neither is quite correct. You don't have to reduce speed ahead if you're already going slower than the new limit.

I guess the only 100% correct phrasing would be "REDUCED SPEED LIMIT AHEAD"

But then we get into the territory of adding superfluous words that don't do anything to help the driver understand the intended message. It'd be like insisting upon "DRIVERS TURNING LEFT MUST YIELD ON GREEN" instead of "LEFT TURN YIELD ON GREEN".

[djsinco]

The speed limit signs that I think must be the dumbest are the ones that say "XX Speed Limit Ends." WTF? Tell us what the current speed limit is, which in the common use of  theses signs are almost always omitted. I do not see these signs (commonly) outside of NY, NJ, and PA.

[Central Avenue]

Ohio has an annoying tendency to post "RESUME LEGAL SPEED" signs at the end of work zones, which always annoyed me. It's not like freeway speed limits vary a lot within this state, would it be too much to ask to keep a couple "SPEED LIMIT 65" signs on hand to use instead?

(On the semantic side of things, it's also nonsensical if taken literally--during the work zone, the reduced speed limit was the legal speed!)

[PurdueBill]

Ohio has an annoying tendency to post "RESUME LEGAL SPEED" signs at the end of work zones, which always annoyed me. It's not like freeway speed limits vary a lot within this state, would it be too much to ask to keep a couple "SPEED LIMIT 65" signs on hand to use instead?

(On the semantic side of things, it's also nonsensical if taken literally--during the work zone, the reduced speed limit was the legal speed!)

That probably largely is due to the split limits (which don't exist on 65mph Interstate sections but still do on non-Interstate routes and even on 60mph Interstates); they would have to place a temporary assembly of not just a 65 sign but a 55 truck limit sign.  Considering how spotty correct sign placement can be in construction zones, it isn't surprising that they may not trust contractors to place the two signs correctly.  (And only placing a 65 sign without the proper truck limit sign would have opened up issues for sure...I've actually seen a couple times where if the Truck limit sign is knocked down, the other sign is covered or removed until the whole assembly can be properly shown again--better to have no sign than an incorrect one that appears to show no truck limit.)

[Alps]

The speed limit signs that I think must be the dumbest are the ones that say "XX Speed Limit Ends." WTF? Tell us what the current speed limit is, which in the common use of  theses signs are almost always omitted. I do not see these signs (commonly) outside of NY, NJ, and PA.

Leave NJ out of it! We never use that tripe. (I've seen one or two on a county road, total, for the entire state.)

[Duke87]

This sign is on NY 114:

[Central Avenue]

Ohio has an annoying tendency to post "RESUME LEGAL SPEED" signs at the end of work zones, which always annoyed me. It's not like freeway speed limits vary a lot within this state, would it be too much to ask to keep a couple "SPEED LIMIT 65" signs on hand to use instead?

(On the semantic side of things, it's also nonsensical if taken literally--during the work zone, the reduced speed limit was the legal speed!)

That probably largely is due to the split limits (which don't exist on 65mph Interstate sections but still do on non-Interstate routes and even on 60mph Interstates); they would have to place a temporary assembly of not just a 65 sign but a 55 truck limit sign.  Considering how spotty correct sign placement can be in construction zones, it isn't surprising that they may not trust contractors to place the two signs correctly.  (And only placing a 65 sign without the proper truck limit sign would have opened up issues for sure...I've actually seen a couple times where if the Truck limit sign is knocked down, the other sign is covered or removed until the whole assembly can be properly shown again--better to have no sign than an incorrect one that appears to show no truck limit.)

I hadn't considered that before, but it does make sense.

It still seems like the sensible solution would be "then don't have split speed limits, dumbasses", but that would mean less revenue from ticketing people who are driving safely, and we can't have that now can we?