# Getting a new 20 limit enforced



## nameinuse (22 Apr 2013)

The middle of Brighton and Hove has just gone to a blanket 20 limit. This is, on balance, a good thing, and will be even better come the invasion-of-the-lobster-people over the summer. However, the limit isn't being respected or, apparently, enforced.

Has anyone had any success getting speed limits properly enforced? What's the best group to contact? I think a few days of mobile speed-camera stuff and some stop-for-a-chat would have a significant difference. That and taking away taxi licenses for speeding...


----------



## MrHappyCyclist (22 Apr 2013)

People tend to think only of enforcement, not realizing that it is a cultural problem requiring more than just controls and enforcement. Have a look at the 20's Plenty web site for information and ideas.


----------



## sidevalve (23 Apr 2013)

It seems a little hypocrittical to to arguing for 20 mph limits while, in another post plenty of people on this forum are either bragging about or accepting cyclists exceeding a 30 limit. Speed limits, when imposed, are not simply to slow down car drivers for the benefit of cyclists but to slow down traffic [all traffic] for the safety of everyone. Acting like irresposible kids just because cyclists can "get away with it" is a bit pathetic and the argument " oh well I'm only on a bike" really isn't going to work forever. The "cultural" problem is not just with the car drivers.


----------



## Amanda P (23 Apr 2013)

Steady, Sidevalve. It would be hypocritical if one person argued for 20mph limits but routinely broke 30mph ones. Nameinuse has done no such thing (as far as we know) - he's just asking for advice.


----------



## BSRU (23 Apr 2013)

As far as I am aware the police do not enforce 20mph limits, they rely on the drivers to have self control


----------



## Amanda P (23 Apr 2013)

I was Appalled (of Bognor Regis) to read that the police in York had announced they weren't going to enforce the 20 mph limits set up there.

That's a mistaken policy in my view, but why announce it?! 

They could just not enforce them but keep quiet about it, but to announce it makes a total mockery of having them in the first place. Bizarre.


----------



## mickle (23 Apr 2013)

sidevalve said:


> It seems a little hypocrittical to to arguing for 20 mph limits while, in another post plenty of people on this forum are either bragging about or accepting cyclists exceeding a 30 limit. Speed limits, when imposed, are not simply to slow down car drivers for the benefit of cyclists but to slow down traffic [all traffic] for the safety of everyone. Acting like irresposible kids just because cyclists can "get away with it" is a bit pathetic and the argument " oh well I'm only on a bike" really isn't going to work forever. The "cultural" problem is not just with the car drivers.


 
Tripe. Why don't you compare the number of deaths caused by cars with the number of deaths caused by cyclists and try to reset your skewed veiwpoint. The danger posed to vulnerable road users by cars is not in any doubt. Slowing cars down reduces KSI rates. So it seems a little fricking stoopid to be arguing for cyclists to slow down when they pose vitually zero risk to other road users. Your attitude is symptomatic of society's hatred of cyclists, which is so pernicious that it infects our own ranks.

BTW and FYI, there are no speed limits for pedal cycles.


----------



## BSRU (23 Apr 2013)

Uncle Phil said:


> I was Appalled (of Bognor Regis) to read that the police in York had announced they weren't going to enforce the 20 mph limits set up there.
> 
> That's a mistaken policy in my view, but why announce it?!
> 
> They could just not enforce them but keep quiet about it, but to announce it makes a total mockery of having them in the first place. Bizarre.


My local police do not bother to enforce speed limits, apart from a couple of days a year when the weather is nice.
Driving around the town at the speed limit results in tailgating and abuse from people who realise they are not going to get caught.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (23 Apr 2013)

I doubt there is a single police force in E&W that say they are going to enforce 20mph limits. In the main they are not fans.

Anyway, if you live in the City of Brighton and Hove Actually, you are policed by Sussex Police. Sussex Police run Operation Crackdown enabling you to report egregious, and other, examples of anti-social driving.


----------



## Richard Mann (23 Apr 2013)

mickle said:


> BTW and FYI, there are no speed limits for pedal cycles.


 
Only an obligation not to ride in an inconsiderate, careless or dangerous manner. That covers most over-speed-limit riding, but it does make it a bit harder to prove, so you'd be far more likely to be let off with a raised eyebrow.


----------



## nameinuse (23 Apr 2013)

I do understand that enforcement is only part of the picture, but it is a vital part. Taking a quick look at the 20's plenty site seems to give lots of stuff about campaigning for having a limit introduced. This is great of course, but perhaps as this is one of the first few city-wide limits to actually happen the advice on making it stick isn't so in-depth. That's partly why I posted the question in the first place.

I think non-enforcement of limits is a very bad move by the police; it undermines the authority of all speed limits, and it runs counter to the wishes of the population who identified speeding traffic as the single biggest cause of anti-social behaviour in the recent ONS paper. I'm regularly on-record as saying that I think all traffic laws should be enforced for all road-users. That said, where resources are constrained the ones that do the most harm should be targeted first. It's clear some cyclists have a reprehensible knack for scaring little old ladies, but some drivers have a knack for killing them. Whilst it's besides the moral point, it's also true as mickle mentioned that speed limits do not apply to non-motorised vehicles in law. Of course we, as cyclists, need to be part of a more careful, respectful, road use culture, but I see no hypocrisy for asking for a 20-limit in a built-up, demonstrably dangerous area to be properly enforced.

Thanks for the info about op crackdown Greg, I know it well! I've had some moderate success myself reporting really scary driving, it's a very sensible scheme. So, anyone had luck contacting PCCs, or attending the local police liaison groups, contacting their councils, or anything like that?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (23 Apr 2013)

nameinuse said:


> Thanks for the info about op crackdown Greg, I know it well! I've had some moderate success myself reporting really scary driving, it's a very sensible scheme. So, anyone had luck contacting PCCs, or attending the local police liaison groups, contacting their councils, or anything like that?


 
outside the city, in West Sussex, we have to go through CLC (County Local Committees) to get anything on any agenda, police, local authority, safety partnerships, et cetera. CLC's are a charade and a waste of effort in the main. Get the press there, get a human interest angle ad stand up and get shouty seems to be the only tactic that works. (In "North Horsham" anyway) Behave reasonably and you'll get brushed off.

And, no excrement sherlock, the Big Society and Localism are jokes as far as cycling and road safety are concerned.


----------



## BigonaBianchi (23 Apr 2013)

Hooray!!!

similar things happening down the road here....butno blanket 20mph limit yet as far as I know.

Had a conservative election canvasser knock yesterday...snobby gobby woman she was ..anyway..

"I trust we can rely on your support on my 2nd?"

"NO"

"Ohooo..! one wonders why not?"

"One is voting lim dim because they are getting 20 mph limits set up"

"Well....the trouble with that is that nobody can get anywhere..scoff"

"Rubbish...Im a cyclist and I will get there safer and happier "

"Is it reeeaally that importantto you?"

"YEP"

" Well then we will do that as well then"

"Right"

Bye.


----------



## sidevalve (23 Apr 2013)

mickle said:


> Tripe. Why don't you compare the number of deaths caused by cars with the number of deaths caused by cyclists and try to reset your skewed veiwpoint. The danger posed to vulnerable road users by cars is not in any doubt. Slowing cars down reduces KSI rates. So it seems a little fricking stoopid to be arguing for cyclists to slow down when they pose vitually zero risk to other road users. Your attitude is symptomatic of society's hatred of cyclists, which is so pernicious that it infects our own ranks.
> 
> BTW and FYI, there are no speed limits for pedal cycles.


 Tripe x2. Seems we all love laws that apply to someone else. FYI if you read the post you will note that I didn't say that the limits [at the moment] apply to cyclists. Secondly because such accidents are rare I fail to see why, if they do happen [and sometimes they do] they can be discounted. As for a skewed viewpoint I have ridden and driven just about everything on and off the road fron a unicycle [ouch] to a HGV and although I love cycling I can't stand the attitude of "let's bring in more laws to regulate everybody else" but if any restrictions on cyclists were suggested then there would be a major outcry and loud wailing. By all means bring in the speed limits but let's stop bragging about them not applying to us.
Technology has changed from the days of "clockwork" speedometers and it would be so easy to "regulate" cycling. If you want to keep on with the "Ha Ha, look at me" attitude then fine, p--s enough people off and things will change. I just want to keep on riding free and if that means keeping the speed down a tad sometimes, so be it.
You want respect and consideration from others but don't want to show any back
PS I'd take that chip off the shoulder, youll feel a lot better.


----------



## subaqua (23 Apr 2013)

sidevalve said:


> Tripe x2. Seems we all love laws that apply to someone else. FYI if you read the post you will note that I didn't say that the limits [at the moment] apply to cyclists. Secondly because such accidents are rare I fail to see why, if they do happen [and sometimes they do] they can be discounted. As for a skewed viewpoint I have ridden and driven just about everything on and off the road fron a unicycle [ouch] to a HGV and although I love cycling I can't stand the attitude of "let's bring in more laws to regulate everybody else" but if any restrictions on cyclists were suggested then there would be a major outcry and loud wailing. By all means bring in the speed limits but let's stop bragging about them not applying to us.
> Technology has changed from the days of "clockwork" speedometers and it would be so easy to "regulate" cycling. If you want to keep on with the "Ha Ha, look at me" attitude then fine, p--s enough people off and things will change. I just want to keep on riding free and if that means keeping the speed down a tad sometimes, so be it.
> You want respect and consideration from others but don't want to show any back
> PS I'd take that chip off the shoulder, youll feel a lot better.


 

force= mass x acceleration . to misquote a fictional spacetraveller ye cannae change the laws of physics .

a 1 ton car ( and thats about the lightest general production car - caterham come in at a shade under 600kg but they are really weekend toys ) at 20mph is going to exert a lot more force and therefore do a lot more damage than a 20 Kg bike and a 100kg rider ever could at 30mph.

nobody is bragging about them not applying , its just that they don't ( some minor exceptions for royal parks etc - to keep the dangly necklaces happy) and most cyclists don't exceed the limits for motor vehicles on a regular basis.

there is a wealth of info available on the speed limitr and how and why it was introduced.


----------



## GrasB (23 Apr 2013)

How well supported was this 20 limit by the locals? I don't mean was there local support but rather how many of the locals actually supported the limit? If the majority of the locals don't support the limit then it becomes uninforceable as the pure volume of people speeding raises the minimum speed threshold until the volume of people needing to be dealt with is manageable by the authorities. If there's wide support for the speed limit then you've got half a chance of getting it enforced with a resonably low speed threshold.



subaqua said:


> most cyclists don't exceed the limits for motor vehicles on a regular basis


It's becomming more common around here. Stronger cyclists get to a 20 limit & put the hammer down. Why? Because sitting at around 13-17mph is an absolute nightmare in a 20 limit when motorists are doing 23-25mph. They hand beside you for a long time & then squeze you as the inevtible car coming the other way aproches. You either get up to car speed & sit in the off-side wheel track or slow down to about 5-8mph.


----------



## mickle (23 Apr 2013)

sidevalve said:


> Tripe x2. Seems we all love laws that apply to someone else. FYI if you read the post you will note that I didn't say that the limits [at the moment] apply to cyclists. Secondly because such accidents are rare I fail to see why, if they do happen [and sometimes they do] they can be discounted. As for a skewed viewpoint I have ridden and driven just about everything on and off the road fron a unicycle [ouch] to a HGV and although I love cycling I can't stand the attitude of "let's bring in more laws to regulate everybody else" but if any restrictions on cyclists were suggested then there would be a major outcry and loud wailing. By all means bring in the speed limits but let's stop bragging about them not applying to us.
> Technology has changed from the days of "clockwork" speedometers and it would be so easy to "regulate" cycling. If you want to keep on with the "Ha Ha, look at me" attitude then fine, p--s enough people off and things will change. I just want to keep on riding free and if that means keeping the speed down a tad sometimes, so be it.
> You want respect and consideration from others but don't want to show any back
> PS I'd take that chip off the shoulder, youll feel a lot better.


Try reading my post again - you spectacularly failed to comprehend the point that I'm making.


----------



## subaqua (23 Apr 2013)

oh and good luck in getting the police to enforce the 20 limit . We have had one in our local area for 5 years at least. doesn't stop the muppets hareing along the road at 40 plus. and thats the Met police on a routine patrol with no blu lights


----------



## jdtate101 (24 Apr 2013)

Sometimes they do enforce them. My son's school made a complaint about drivers speeding through the 20 zone outside the school and the next day 4 coppers turned up with speed guns and 2 motorbikes. They then proceeded to test all the cars and handed out speeding tickets to quite a few drivers. This went on for 3 days in a row. They also did a similar exercise recently (with the council) for cars parking outside the school, including clamping a few that parked on the yellow zigzag warning lines.
OP, Good luck with getting the limit enforced....


----------



## StuartG (8 May 2013)

Uncle Phil said:


> I was Appalled (of Bognor Regis) to read that the police in York had announced they weren't going to enforce the 20 mph limits set up there.


Asleep on the job - and that's the point. Sleeping policeman are more effective at reducing speed and casualties (at least in the landmark London study). They are 24/7 unlike the endangered radar gun toting traffic cop species.


----------



## subaqua (8 May 2013)

StuartG said:


> Asleep on the job - and that's the point. Sleeping policeman are more effective at reducing speed and casualties (at least in the landmark London study). They are 24/7 unlike the endangered radar gun toting traffic cop species.


 you should come and stand by the ones along the road i live on. they don't deter many and several nobbers try to get airborne from them


----------



## StuartG (9 May 2013)

subaqua said:


> you should come and stand by the ones along the road i live on. they don't deter many and several nobbers try to get airborne from them


So the stats are wrong then?


----------



## benb (9 May 2013)

BSRU said:


> As far as I am aware the police do not enforce 20mph limits, they rely on the drivers to have self control


 
Yeah, that's bound to work.


----------



## subaqua (9 May 2013)

StuartG said:


> So the stats are wrong then?


 
I would suggest so based on experience in East London .I did try and raise it at the community policing briefing thingy at Walthamstow , but apparently it is not a priority enforcing 20mph limits.


----------



## StuartG (9 May 2013)

subaqua said:


> I would suggest so based on experience in East London.


Aha, the Anecdotal School of Motoring. Can't argue with that


----------



## GrasB (10 May 2013)

StuartG said:


> So the stats are wrong then?


Problem is while it may slow down the majority of road users for the worst offenders it's just another challenge.

Witness one pinch point. A ~2km stretch of fairly straight road from a set of traffic lights, used by boy racers as a drag strip. A pinch point was placed 0.5km down the road. Cue the warning bollard getting hit once a month or so times. The original pinch point was removed & a double height kerb replacement placed there, but the same thing kept on happening just the cars never drove away. The problem was eventually solved by regular police patrols between 8:00 pm & 3:00 am.


----------



## Globalti (10 May 2013)

A 20 mph limit has to be "self-policing", which means there must also be traffic-calming stuff like humps, tabletops, chicanes etc. 

Lancashire Police actually encourage residents in our street to report speeders and they log reports on the PNC.


----------



## Linford (10 May 2013)

Blanket limits are rubbish...drivers ignore them, and their presence across wide areas' trivialise the requirement to have them where there really is a safety issue at given points.


----------



## subaqua (10 May 2013)

StuartG said:


> Aha, the Anecdotal School of Motoring. Can't argue with that


 

I shall borrow a radar gun from work over the wekend and also film for you if you would like. Maybe in SE london you have a local police who G A F .

as you have selectively quoted i take it you have no opinion of the community police meeting and the response there.


----------



## StuartG (10 May 2013)

subaqua said:


> I shall borrow a radar gun from work over the wekend and also film for you if you would like. Maybe in SE london you have a local police who G A F .
> as you have selectively quoted i take it you have no opinion of the community police meeting and the response there.


You appear to have missed my point and made a wrong inference. To recap - the stats show that London's 20mph zone policed by passive restraints (sleeping policemen) significantly reduce speed and serious injuries. From memory it was from 27 to 17 mph and over 40%.

Passive restraints have the advantage over police with guns of enforcing 24/7 over wide areas. Or is East London indeed different?


----------



## mickle (10 May 2013)

Linford said:


> Blanket limits are rubbish...drivers ignore them, and their presence across wide areas' trivialise the requirement to have them where there really is a safety issue at given points.


Tripe.


----------



## StuartG (10 May 2013)

GrasB said:


> Problem is while it [speed restraints] may slow down the majority of road users for the worst offenders it's just another challenge.


 
The 'worst offenders' do comprise over 80% of car drivers. That is based on the self confessions of motorists admitting they regularly exceed the speed limits. Passive restraints do, if we are to believe the statistics, have a significant effect on the majority of these. Hence a consequential big reduction in KSIs. Just because a smaller number use these as ski jumps is irrelevant. If, say 20%, do not reduce speed it has still reduced the speeding problem and casulties by a huge amount.

It is a brave assumption that people are only killed or injured by ski jumpers. To use it against the spread of 20mph zones and passive restraints is dangerous unless you have some compelling empirical evidence to the contrary.


----------



## benborp (10 May 2013)

'Self-enforcing' 20mph zones, with chicanes, tables, humps etc., are effective at reducing overall casualty rates. It's been widely statistically proven. However, as a cyclist I'm certainly aware of zones whose implementation is seriously flawed. Apparently a well designed zone should be self-policing with minimum enforcement. There are several near me where the infrastructure does little to control speeds, the vast majority of drivers continue to travel in excess of the previous 30mph limit, the calming measures offer little impedance to vehicles travelling in a straight line at 40mph+. In several areas the traffic calming elements can be easily by-passed, not sensibly or legally maybe, but that isn't an obstacle to many intent on 'making progress'. The trouble I have as a cyclist is that these 'calming' measures while failing to control car speeds present a hazard to two wheeled vehicles. These are easy enough to deal with, with good anticipation and road positioning, isolated from the actions of any other traffic but introduce a driver committed to maintaining their speed through the 'calming' and it's another matter. I now have several points on my regular route where I can expect motor vehicles to mount the pavement, pass to the right of bollards and mini round-a-bouts or run through cycle by-passes - all at speed. The standard issues of racing to pinch-points and close passes seem to be exacerbated by drivers' need to get through the zone as quickly as possible. On-coming traffic can be expected to swerve to the wrong side of the road at every bump.
Apparently enforcement of 20mph zones in Southwark is one of the priorities of the local safer neighbourhoods team. Well, they and the council say it is, in fact they do bugger all.

Taking newer cyclists out on local roads often reveals that, contrary to their expectations, the 'calmed' 20mph zones are far less pleasant places to be on a bike than the local trunk routes. The leafy, suburban village of Dulwich is far more cut and thrust than the churning thoroughfare of Brixton Rd. There may be more, louder, larger, faster traffic in Brixton but it feels less of a threat and behaves far more predictably.



GrasB said:


> It's becomming more common around here. Stronger cyclists get to a 20 limit & put the hammer down. Why? Because sitting at around 13-17mph is an absolute nightmare in a 20 limit when motorists are doing 23-25mph. They hand beside you for a long time & then squeze you as the inevtible car coming the other way aproches. You either get up to car speed & sit in the off-side wheel track or slow down to about 5-8mph.


 
That chimes exactly with my experiences in South London. It's a joy on those rare occasions I find myself either behind or in front of a sensibly driven car and can roll through without molestation.

20mph zones are enforceable in law, but as it is a matter of policy from Westminster down that the zones should be designed such that enforcement isn't necessary we seem to be shafted when their implementation falls short.


----------



## subaqua (10 May 2013)

StuartG said:


> You appear to have missed my point and made a wrong inference. To recap - the stats show that London's 20mph zone policed by passive restraints (sleeping policemen) significantly reduce speed and serious injuries. From memory it was from 27 to 17 mph and over 40%.
> 
> Passive restraints have the advantage over police with guns of enforcing 24/7 over wide areas. Or is East London indeed different?


 
it seems so. Cann Hall road is like a speedway , and that includes the National exp[ress coaches on the East of the country run


----------



## Linford (10 May 2013)

Speed cushions are deadly for motorcylces....along with the huge potholes everywhere


----------



## GrasB (10 May 2013)

Linford said:


> Speed cushions are deadly for motorcylces....along with the huge potholes everywhere


I hit the sump guard on my rally car more often on speed cushions that during races  I've also taken to going over several known ones down the middle of the road to avoid the body grounding between the wheels.


----------



## recumbentpanda (11 May 2013)

Re cyclists observing speed limits, I think some posters are overlooking the point that reduced limits are not only about safety. I remember having sight of truly shocking research done, I think, in Bristol, showing very graphically how the number of friendships between neighbours in a street dropped radically with increasing amount and speed of traffic. Add to this the fact that, while cyclists may not present a high risk of injury to others, pedestrians do feel highly stressed by having to share space with bikes. Reduced speed for vehicles of all kinds in cities reduces stress as well as risk, and promotes better social life. Regardless of the 'letter of the law' I believe these are strong reasons why cyclists should observe limits.


----------



## ufkacbln (11 May 2013)

The only way to make 20 mph limits work is design of the road.

Make it difficult to speed and the ratrunners will go elsewhere


----------



## ufkacbln (11 May 2013)

Here is an article from teh Sun that should have won an award for the poor level of journalism explaining how deaths increase in 20 mph zones.



> In Portsmouth, a blanket 20mph limit on built-up roads was introduced five years ago.
> _The number killed or seriously injured in the city rocketed from 79 in 2007 to 143 last year._


 

These figures came from a local Councillor and are the total deaths for Portsmouth, attributing them to 20 mph zones is completely dishonest and deceitful.


----------



## GrasB (11 May 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> The only way to make 20 mph limits work is design of the road.


Which if not done with thought makes them feel oppressive to vulnerable road users.

Admittedly this is a 30mph limit but witness a fair number of utility riders riding cycling towards Sawston from the North ride up the bypass to come into the Village via Mill Ln bypassing 2 pinch points. The situation is not helped by the fact that at this one there is often a cars parked a bit up the road past the bypass causing cyclist/motorist, or a car actually blocking the bypass completely.


----------



## Linford (11 May 2013)

[QUOTE 2447885, member: 45"]Only if you're incompetent.[/quote]

You failed your motorbike test didn't you . You aren't really in a position to judge the competency of others who regularly ride ptw's or what they consider a danger to them when you've not ridden one for the best part of 20 years....or before speed cushions were introduced.....


----------



## Linford (11 May 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Here is an article from teh Sun that should have won an award for the poor level of journalism explaining how deaths increase in 20 mph zones.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I thought the whole place was a 20 mph zone


----------



## Linford (11 May 2013)

mickle said:


> Tripe.



20's are ignored unless they have cams monitoring the average speeds. This is very much the case in Gloucester


----------



## GrasB (11 May 2013)

Linford said:


> 20's are ignored unless they have cams monitoring the average speeds. This is very much the case in Gloucester


It depends how much local support there is for the 20 limit & the % of traffic they make up. Cambridge has a lot of unmonitored 20mph limits which are ignored even if they are calmed (Grange rd being a good example. At 20mph I'm frequently overtaken by cars doing about 30-35mph between the pinch-point speed cushions). Mainly because the locals make up virtually none of the road traffic in those areas &/or there isn't much local support. In other areas where the locals make up a significant minority of the traffic & they support the limit there is much less speeding.


----------



## Linford (11 May 2013)

It may be a falacy, but when they do crackdowns on speeding in villages where there is a problem, it is usually quoted that it is actually the locals who make up the majority of them culprits.


----------



## GrasB (11 May 2013)

Hence the local support qualification.


----------



## Feastie (1 Jun 2013)

Campaign for speed bumps? The ones they put in the 20mph zone around here are so steep that you can't even comfortably cycle over them. They even put exactly the same speed bumps in the 30mph zone. Now the centre of my town is a pain to both cycle and drive through - even at a comfy 20mph you feel like your spine is being dislocated! In the 30mph zone you do 30 at your own risk, you will regret it. Basically, don't drive through town is the message.

I agree with the locals being the worst offenders on this sort of thing. When a road goes from 40mph down to 20mph and it's a through road with no pedestrians or traffic, there's a lot of people who just keep going at 40. I definitely see it every day. Speed limits are important but IMO putting them in areas where you don't have regular pedestrians/housing and so on can sometimes be a bit of overkill. They're there to protect people and I think lots of people understand that, but if there's nobody to protect it makes people feel a bit free and easy with speed limits - so when the limit is ACTUALLY important, people feel (wrongly) like it's a waste of their time. At least, that's my opinion.


----------



## Crankarm (10 Jun 2013)

20mph speed limits are a waste of time and not the way to go. Drivers should be educated to give cyclists more room and consideration at ANY speed. I don't need a speed limit to tell me to slow down around cyclists or give more space when passing. Balmy to have traffic crawling along at 20mph. Most drivers don't even stick to the 30mph limit so what hope is there that they will drive even slower. Little.

Plus most fairly fit cyclists can easily exceed 20mph. So we could potentially have the crazy situation of cars holding up cyclists or cyclists over taking cars as the cars are being driven too slowly. Bonkers. Of course if you are a fat lazy parent on the school run in your 4x4 you do slow down and drive cautiously and courteously when picking your little brat up from school. Never know you might mow down their best friend in your eagerness to pick up your little sprog or sprogette.


----------



## StuartG (10 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> 20mph speed limits are a waste of time and not the way to go. Drivers should be educated to give cyclists more room and consideration at ANY speed. I don't need a speed limit to tell me to slow down around cyclists or give more space when passing. Balmy to have traffic crawling along at 20mph. Most drivers don't even stick to the 30mph limit so what hope is there that they will drive even slower.


Why do you think your opinion and optimism deserve more credence than the research indicating 40% reductions in KSI for 20mph areas in London?


----------



## theclaud (10 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> 20mph speed limits are a waste of time and not the way to go. Drivers should be educated to give cyclists more room and consideration at ANY speed. I don't need a speed limit to tell me to slow down around cyclists or give more space when passing. Balmy to have traffic crawling along at 20mph. Most drivers don't even stick to the 30mph limit so what hope is there that they will drive even slower. Little.
> 
> Plus most fairly fit cyclists can easily exceed 20mph. So we could potentially have the crazy situation of cars holding up cyclists or cyclists over taking cars as the cars are being driven too slowly. Bonkers. Of course if you are a fat lazy parent on the school run in your 4x4 you do slow down and drive cautiously and courteously when picking your little brat up from school. Never know you might mow down their best friend in your eagerness to pick up your little sprog or sprogette.



Whatever. You could just surrender your right to the road, and stop worrying about all of this. Oh wait - you've done that already, so you can spare the rest of us your pontifications on the subject. Perhaps you should concentrate instead on the difference between 'balmy' and 'barmy'?


----------



## benb (11 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> So we could potentially have the crazy situation of cars holding up cyclists or cyclists over taking cars as the cars are being driven too slowly. Bonkers.


 
We already have that situation in almost every busy town and city in the country. I personally am frequently held up by motorised traffic.


----------



## Crankarm (11 Jun 2013)

theclaud said:


> Whatever. You could just surrender your right to the road, and stop worrying about all of this. Oh wait - you've done that already, so you can spare the rest of us your pontifications on the subject. Perhaps you should concentrate instead on the difference between 'balmy' and 'barmy'?


 
You are so predictable. What took you so long to turn up this time? You even fell for my bait.


----------



## GrasB (11 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> So we could potentially have the crazy situation of cars holding up cyclists or cyclists over taking cars as the cars are being driven too slowly.


You've not been reading the letters page of the Cambridge News have you?.. someone was complaining of a cyclist overtaking them when they were doing a bit less than 20mph down Fen Causeway... I believe that's still a 30mph.


----------



## Crankarm (11 Jun 2013)

GrasB said:


> You've not been reading the letters page of the Cambridge News have you?.. someone was complaining of a cyclist overtaking them when they were doing a bit less than 20mph down Fen Causeway... I believe that's still a 30mph.


 
Can't say I read the Cambridge News that often. Was the cyclist you refer to, you?


----------



## GrasB (11 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> Can't say I read the Cambridge News that often. Was the cyclist you refer to, you?


Possibly, but probably not. If a car is doing less than 15mph by my speedo I'll overtake it if the conditions allow. Above that then the gain is minimal & it'll require a fair kick so I can't be bothered. But I regularly see cyclists passing motorists doing less than 20mph.


----------



## Crankarm (11 Jun 2013)

GrasB said:


> Possibly, but probably not. If a car is doing less than 15mph by my speedo I'll overtake it if the conditions allow. Above that then the gain is minimal & it'll require a fair kick so I can't be bothered. But I regularly see cyclists passing motorists doing less than 20mph.


 
I guess pretty much all cyclists can ride considerably in excess of 20mph. It's young ladies on boneshakers with front whicker baskets that are the speed kings or should I say queens in Cambridge. They often scalp me and I don't hang around either.


----------



## GrasB (11 Jun 2013)

Crankarm said:


> I guess pretty much all cyclists can ride considerably in excess of 20mph. It's young ladies on boneshakers with front whicker baskets that are the speed kings or should I say queens in Cambridge. They often scalp me and I don't hang around either.


Not really, my guess about 80% are doing less than 10mph. However there seems to be a big void of riders from the sub-10mph riders to the the ones who are consistently riding near the 20mph marker.


----------

