Cycling and speed limits
Discussion
speedking31 said:
AndrewGP said:
As long as there’s no local bye law in place, then the speed limit dies not apply to pushbikes. The Highway Code specifically states that the speed limit applies to motor vehicles and they are therefore exempt.
... but interestingly Highway Code said:
Rule 69
You MUST obey all traffic signs and traffic light signals.
And lots of 'pushbikes' have motors these days You MUST obey all traffic signs and traffic light signals.
RTRA 1984 § 140
Cycling past a 30 mph speed limit sign at 50 is obeying it, in almost most cases. Just as driving an 18t bus or 64t tank past a 7.5t HGV weight limit is obeying it. Because neither busses nor tanks are HGVs.
Equally, you can drive past this sign, but cannot cycle past it, whereas the preceding sign had prohibited vehicles except authorised vehicles - but the "no vehicles" sign allows pushed cycles.
okgo said:
It should be reiterated that the reasons speed limits mostly exist (including 20 zones) is because of CARS hitting people. The whole 20 campaign is because chances of survival of being hit at 20 vs 30 are vast.
Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
stargazer30 said:
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.
The rider is also more likely to be aware of their surrounding, less likely to riding with poor observation, less likely to be on their phone/holding a moka-frapa-caramel-venti-cup-of-diabetes/reprimanding their kids in the back seat/inputting on their satnav/etc.
okgo said:
It should be reiterated that the reasons speed limits mostly exist (including 20 zones) is because of CARS hitting people. The whole 20 campaign is because chances of survival of being hit at 20 vs 30 are vast.
Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
The 20 mph limit where this overtaking and undertaking by bicycles took place is outside a School. That's a touch silly as you put it from the bicycle riders .Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
Julian Scott said:
stargazer30 said:
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.
The rider is also more likely to be aware of their surrounding, less likely to riding with poor observation, less likely to be on their phone/holding a moka-frapa-caramel-venti-cup-of-diabetes/reprimanding their kids in the back seat/inputting on their satnav/etc.gareth h said:
Julian Scott said:
stargazer30 said:
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.
The rider is also more likely to be aware of their surrounding, less likely to riding with poor observation, less likely to be on their phone/holding a moka-frapa-caramel-venti-cup-of-diabetes/reprimanding their kids in the back seat/inputting on their satnav/etc.cliffords said:
okgo said:
It should be reiterated that the reasons speed limits mostly exist (including 20 zones) is because of CARS hitting people. The whole 20 campaign is because chances of survival of being hit at 20 vs 30 are vast.
Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
The 20 mph limit where this overtaking and undertaking by bicycles took place is outside a School. That's a touch silly as you put it from the bicycle riders .Bikes obviously can hit people too, but rare and all of the research into and deaths in the roads are generally car related - “can they be done for speeding” is a touch silly if you think about why the limit exists in the first place - to save lives.
If it was weekday, then yes. More than just a touch silly, especially if the vehicular traffic was already doing 20mph.
gareth h said:
Julian Scott said:
stargazer30 said:
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.
The rider is also more likely to be aware of their surrounding, less likely to riding with poor observation, less likely to be on their phone/holding a moka-frapa-caramel-venti-cup-of-diabetes/reprimanding their kids in the back seat/inputting on their satnav/etc.And you clearly spend too much time reading the Daily Mail if you think majority of cyclists are trying to get personal bests during every minute of every ride.
Steve vRS said:
Unless there is a good tailwind on the day….
Even with a perfect tailwind, on the longest ride where I averaged over 20 mph... while admittedly I was smashing PBs for the whole ride, I'd done most of the route only once before, as part of an audax. So I'd been trucking along at nearer 10-15 mph pacing myself for 300 miles (ending up bailing at just past 190).I wasn't targeting KOMs or anything, I was trying to get to Cambridge as fast as I safely could. It would probably have been substantially faster still to have gone for the A421/A428, but far less enjoyable.
Julian Scott said:
gareth h said:
Julian Scott said:
stargazer30 said:
This. 100kg of bike doing 25mph in a 20 is carrying a lot less energy into a collision than 1500kg of car and driver at the same speed. Plus the cyclist is likely to be as injured as the person he/she hit unlike a car driver who may have minor whiplash at most at that speed.
The rider is also more likely to be aware of their surrounding, less likely to riding with poor observation, less likely to be on their phone/holding a moka-frapa-caramel-venti-cup-of-diabetes/reprimanding their kids in the back seat/inputting on their satnav/etc.And you clearly spend too much time reading the Daily Mail if you think majority of cyclists are trying to get personal bests during every minute of every ride.
Not every driver is on their phone and cappuccino and not every rider is on their Strava runs. This is my take and I do hope it is true.
Siao said:
Oh come on. Play fair, you just tarred everyone with the same brush above, you can dish it but you can't take it?
Not every driver is on their phone and cappuccino and not every rider is on their Strava runs. This is my take and I do hope it is true.
Even if they were, what do you think is going to be more dangerous of those two scenarios - the man and bike at 100-150kg combined or the car made of metal at 10x that?Not every driver is on their phone and cappuccino and not every rider is on their Strava runs. This is my take and I do hope it is true.
Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.
okgo said:
Siao said:
Oh come on. Play fair, you just tarred everyone with the same brush above, you can dish it but you can't take it?
Not every driver is on their phone and cappuccino and not every rider is on their Strava runs. This is my take and I do hope it is true.
Even if they were, what do you think is going to be more dangerous of those two scenarios - the man and bike at 100-150kg combined or the car made of metal at 10x that?Not every driver is on their phone and cappuccino and not every rider is on their Strava runs. This is my take and I do hope it is true.
Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.
okgo said:
The difference being that I’ve got a car. And usually the mouth breathers don’t cycle.
You can’t have any opinion on anything IMO unless you’ve cycled on our roads.
I got a car and I cycle and we can argue like normal human beings. That doesn't make any of us "right-er" or "wrong-er". And I disagree, anyone can have an opinion, it is just that some are more informed.You can’t have any opinion on anything IMO unless you’ve cycled on our roads.
Siao said:
I got a car and I cycle and we can argue like normal human beings. That doesn't make any of us "right-er" or "wrong-er". And I disagree, anyone can have an opinion, it is just that some are more informed.
The car is always more wrong, because the outcome of that wrong is almost always far far worse. This is why speed limits don't apply to bikes in the main. It isn't rocket science.Those opinions are worthless to me. It is why they are having people see what a close pass feels like when learning to drive buses etc in other countries. Stops people doing it pretty quick when you experience it yourself.
I did the London to Brighton a couple of weekends ago. And got flashed by a speed camera near the finish.
Fear not, it was a closed road. Strava suggests I was doing 39.7mph at the time. I guess I’d be toast if I’d have come off.
On my regular rides, I average closer to 11 mph & I do my very best to avoid the roads.
To note, I have specific cycling insurance & currently pay tax on 4 cars! I also have really good (blinding even) bike lights
Fear not, it was a closed road. Strava suggests I was doing 39.7mph at the time. I guess I’d be toast if I’d have come off.
On my regular rides, I average closer to 11 mph & I do my very best to avoid the roads.
To note, I have specific cycling insurance & currently pay tax on 4 cars! I also have really good (blinding even) bike lights
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff