Cycling and speed limits

[Squadrone Rosso]

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

[Sticks.]

okgo said:

The car is always more wrong.......

This concept doesn't work, and seems to be a way of justifying ignoring rules. Which, as someone posted, are there for a reason.

[okgo]

Sticks. said:

This concept doesn't work, and seems to be a way of justifying ignoring rules. Which, as someone posted, are there for a reason.

It does work.

It’s why you can ride a bike pissed and probably just get a talking to by the cops if you get caught. That doesn’t happen in a car for obvious reasons.

The two, apart from sharing a road are totally different propositions. It’s so so obvious.

[Sticks.]

okgo said:

It does work.

It’s why you can ride a bike pissed and probably just get a talking to by the cops if you get caught. That doesn’t happen in a car for obvious reasons.

The two, apart from sharing a road are totally different propositions. It’s so so obvious.

So passing a car doing 20 in a 20 on a bike is wrong/a bit wrong/not wrong?

[ukbabz]

Sticks. said:

So passing a car doing 20 in a 20 on a bike is wrong/a bit wrong/not wrong?

<excluding a few specific places> it is not illegal, no more so than over taking a lorry on a dual carriageway in a car. In 20mph signed section the limit is 20mph for the car and there isn't a specific limit for the bike.

[Sticks.]

ukbabz said:

Sticks. said:

So passing a car doing 20 in a 20 on a bike is wrong/a bit wrong/not wrong?

<excluding a few specific places> it is not illegal, no more so than over taking a lorry on a dual carriageway in a car. In 20mph signed section the limit is 20mph for the car and there isn't a specific limit for the bike.

So an OK thing to do then? Or not.

[okgo]

Who cares. It means nothing and no bad outcome likely will ever come. Go outside.

[Sticks.]

okgo said:

Who cares. It means nothing and no bad outcome likely will ever come. Go outside.

Indeed, what could possibly go wrong?

[okgo]

Sticks. said:

Indeed, what could possibly go wrong?

Almost nothing. As is born out in the stats.

Head remove from behind.

[Sticks.]

okgo said:

Sticks. said:

Indeed, what could possibly go wrong?

Almost nothing. As is born out in the stats.

Head remove from behind.

Too subtle?

If you're going to be arrogant and insulting, learn to spell.

[okgo]

Sticks. said:

Too subtle?

If you're going to be arrogant and insulting, learn to spell.

I’m on a phone, autocorrect.

Anyway, I’m off to ride above 20mph in Richmond Park, bye for now.

[Julian Scott]

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?

Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.

Man and bike likely to be well under 100kg too. Car and humans likely to be approaching 20x.

[monthou]

Sticks. said:

okgo said:

It does work.

It’s why you can ride a bike pissed and probably just get a talking to by the cops if you get caught. That doesn’t happen in a car for obvious reasons.

The two, apart from sharing a road are totally different propositions. It’s so so obvious.

So passing a car doing 20 in a 20 on a bike is wrong/a bit wrong/not wrong?

Isn't the answer 'It depends'?

[okgo]

Julian Scott said:

Man and bike likely to be well under 100kg too. Car and humans likely to be approaching 20x.

Yep. Was allowing for some bigger units.

Also, having crashed a bike at speed. It really hurts, most people try to avoid that.

[Sticks.]

okgo said:

I’m on a phone, autocorrect.

Well of course

[Julian Scott]

Siao said:

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?

Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.

Sure, I did not say the opposite, cars can cause more harm. But I had the "Strava" racers almost knocking me down from my bike before, ran a red light and straight into my path. People can be dicks, from all sides is all I'm saying. Having cars doesn't make them more or less dicks, just that they should be (even) more considerate dicks.

Your ignorance is that they were 'Strava racers'. Strava is not the root of the problems with cyclists, just being a is.

I've ridden with 100s of cyclist thins year. I've not heard one of them specifically target a sector whilst we've been riding. It's a motivation issue that really doesn't exist except in the minds of the uninformed. Every single rider I know uses Strava to asses the their ride in retrospect, not to race against.

[Prisoner 24601]

Sticks. said:

okgo said:

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?

Why do it at all? In a 20 zone, pedestrians will not anticipate someone doing 20 being overtaken, and that's a risk. 100 or 100okg, it won't be good.

okgo said:

Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.

This and your other comment about drivers says more about you than them.

100% agree with Sticks here. Also, the same poster earlier in the thread boasted of overtaking a car on a dual carriageway, during a time trial - along with a laughing smiley. Which for me, is really not a good look.

[okgo]

Prisoner 24601 said:

100% agree with Sticks here. Also, the same poster earlier in the thread boasted of overtaking a car on a dual carriageway, during a time trial - along with a laughing smiley. Which for me, is really not a good look.

Wasn’t a boast, though I did win the TT I guess.

Not sure if it came across but the judgement of a few duffers on PH is VERY low down my list of worries. Alongside perhaps seeing a fat bloke in a Lime go through a red at a ped crossing. Nobody cares.

[Siao]

Julian Scott said:

Siao said:

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?

Perspective is what the anti bike mouthbreathers on PH forget.

Sure, I did not say the opposite, cars can cause more harm. But I had the "Strava" racers almost knocking me down from my bike before, ran a red light and straight into my path. People can be dicks, from all sides is all I'm saying. Having cars doesn't make them more or less dicks, just that they should be (even) more considerate dicks.

Your ignorance is that they were 'Strava racers'. Strava is not the root of the problems with cyclists, just being a is.

I've ridden with 100s of cyclist thins year. I've not heard one of them specifically target a sector whilst we've been riding. It's a motivation issue that really doesn't exist except in the minds of the uninformed. Every single rider I know uses Strava to asses the their ride in retrospect, not to race against.

Very much agree, being a c*nt is the root of all problems, both for cyclists and drivers.

Strava racers was an attempt to replicate your own snipe to the cappuccino-drinkers, without calling you ignorant though. Anyway, this is going nowhere, at least we agreed on one thing! Happy riding friend

[Julian Scott]

Sticks. said:

okgo said:

It does work.

It’s why you can ride a bike pissed and probably just get a talking to by the cops if you get caught. That doesn’t happen in a car for obvious reasons.

The two, apart from sharing a road are totally different propositions. It’s so so obvious.

So passing a car doing 20 in a 20 on a bike is wrong/a bit wrong/not wrong?

Technically, it is not wrong.

Whether it is sensible depends on the circumstances.


Doing 80mph on a deserted dry motorway is technically wrong, but it's also perfectly fine with a sensibility mindset.