Restrictions on cyclists now being discussed at Ministerial level.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Ming the Merciless

There is no mercy
Location
Inside my skull
The bike (including rider) also weighs less than 1/10th of a car

It’s a lot less than that, how many cars weigh less than a tonne?
 

Alex321

Guru
Location
South Wales

Yes, Richmond Park was one of the few places in the country where speed limits do apply to cyclists. The limits in Richmond Park are not limits imposed by the Road Traffic Regulation Act, as it is not supposedly "public highways".

But having said that, some time after the above case, it appears that the Park authorities have stated now that speed limits do not apply to cyclists even there.
https://www.swlondoner.co.uk/news/08102021-speed-limits-dont-apply-to-cyclists-in-richmond-park
 

nickyboy

Norven Mankey
But all road users aren't the same in terms of risk.

A car is about 6 feet wide, a bike including handlebars is 3. So that much narrower an area which can hit a pedestrian. The bike (including rider) also weighs less than 1/10th of a car, so the momentum if it does hit somebody is so much less. And it is more maneuverable and so has a better chance of dodging a pedestrian who has stepped out without looking at all.

I still wouldn't be doing 20+ past a school at the start or end of the school day though.

Correct. But HGV, coach, SUV, small car, motorbike, moped all are subject to the same 20mph limit though, regardless of the kinetic energy, manoeuvrability argument. The only road users capable of doing more than 20mph that aren't subject to this are bicycles. I'm not convinced that cyclists should be a special case

There are, undoubtedly, more pressing matters regarding road safety than this. However, the tortuous arguments as regards why cyclists should never be subject to speed limits, under any circumstances, are interesting
 

Ian H

Ancient randonneur
Opposition to the idea is fairly widespread:-
Edmund King, the AA president, said: “It is in the interests of all road users, and indeed our environment, that as a society we encourage more use of active travel, such as walking and cycling, and also the transition to zero emission vehicles.

“Introducing more barriers to slow the take-up of safe cycling would be a retrograde step. What we really need is better infrastructure for cycling so that some of the present-day issues on the roads are removed.”
 

Solocle

Über Member
Location
Poole
Correct. But HGV, coach, SUV, small car, motorbike, moped all are subject to the same 20mph limit though, regardless of the kinetic energy, manoeuvrability argument. The only road users capable of doing more than 20mph that aren't subject to this are bicycles. I'm not convinced that cyclists should be a special case

There are, undoubtedly, more pressing matters regarding road safety than this. However, the tortuous arguments as regards why cyclists should never be subject to speed limits, under any circumstances, are interesting

The only road users...
1660741518354.png

Since the chap in front can run 27 mph, I suspect quite a reasonable number of people can manage 21.
 
Opposition to the idea is fairly widespread:-
Edmund King, the AA president, said: “It is in the interests of all road users, and indeed our environment, that as a society we encourage more use of active travel, such as walking and cycling, and also the transition to zero emission vehicles.

“Introducing more barriers to slow the take-up of safe cycling would be a retrograde step. What we really need is better infrastructure for cycling so that some of the present-day issues on the roads are removed.”

So cyclists are against it, the AA are too. Every government commitee to date has been against it ...

... does this mark out Shapps as a maverick free-thinker??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom