http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: If the speed limit was 20mph... en Sun, 31 May 2026 14:38:02 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-35168 Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:58:01 +0000 chdot 35168@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> "I get letters every day from people saying they’re too scared to cycle. We have to remove that fear and that danger, and make the roads safer. 20mph would be one measure."</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/2011/07/i-absolutely-agree-that-where-there-is.html" rel="nofollow">http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/2011/07/i-absolutely-agree-that-where-there-is.html</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-35145 Thu, 07 Jul 2011 19:41:06 +0000 chdot 35145@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> Newspaper poll asks if you support Sustrans' call for 20mph. Find out why slower speeds work <a href="http://t.co/NWxRmFk" rel="nofollow">http://t.co/NWxRmFk</a> &amp; vote <a href="http://t.co/wRJAXBa" rel="nofollow">http://t.co/wRJAXBa</a><br /> 1 hour ago from web</p> <p>@CTC_Cyclists retweeting @sustrans</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34426 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:25:32 +0000 Smudge 34426@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Were it enacted I have to say I'd probably say I'd stick to it on a bicycle as well, I believe however to make it a legal requirement for bikes as well would be to use a sledgehammer to crack a largely imaginary nut. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34420 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:05:08 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 34420@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>p.s. 20mph limits in all urban areas? Yes, there's no <em>genuine</em> justification not to. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34419 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:04:25 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 34419@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>I must admit though, I don't understand all of the fuss I seem to have caused by suggesting that cyclists too should abide by these limits (by law, or not)?</em>"</p> <p>I think it's because it comes with the suggestion that it <em>should</em> be by law, which brings with it all sorts of practical implications as much as anything else (speedos on bikes and so on as mentioned above).</p> <p>If it <em>doesn't</em> come with that suggestion then it's really just a debate on <em>why</em> cyclists should stick to the limits, and (thankfully, it would be a boring world if we all agreed) there are differences of opinion.</p> <p>Tis all.</p> <p>:) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34418 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:00:16 +0000 Baldcyclist 34418@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm all in favour of 20mph limits in built up areas, and surprisingly, for me at least, in favour of the proposed EU legislation to introduce 20mph (or kph equiv) limits to all built up areas in Europe.</p> <p>I must admit though, I don't understand all of the fuss I seem to have caused by suggesting that cyclists too should abide by these limits (by law, or not)?</p> <p>I shall continue to hold up the traffic whether on my bike, or in my car and stick to the posted limit! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34408 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:07:51 +0000 Smudge 34408@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Of course if we *really* wanted to almost end speeding, our elected representatives could introduce a law requiring that all new vehicles have gps fitted and connected to the main ECU in such a way as to limit the top speed of the vehicle to the speed limit for the road being travelled on. Make it part of the MOT for the system to work.<br /> An average GPS already shows when posted limits are available, and if they are being exceeded, electronic speed/rev limits are easy to apply. Combine the two and 90% of speeding would end within ten years. It would save people from genuine mistakes and after a while it would be as normal as seatbelts. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34407 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:05:26 +0000 wingpig 34407@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><blockquote><em>"I often wondered why the police didn't adopt a different strategy to speed limits (say on dual carriageways) by just sending two cop cars down the dual carriageway side-by-side at 70mph."</em></blockquote></p> <p><strong>Grimbister</strong> (<a href="http://www.urticator.net/essay/1/188.html">q.v.</a>)</p> <p>Trucks should be kept away from anywhere deemed suitable for a permanent 20mph limit, really. If the 20mph limit implies narrowness (either through design or parking) or residentiality or high frequencies of incidence or volumes of vulnerable entities then you don't really want things with poor visibility and massive turning circles trundling through them.</p> <p>Likelihood-of-causing-harm-due-to-kinetic-energy-or-morphology-of-potential-impact-site aside, cycles ought not to have a problem sticking to 20mph limits on slower roads for the same reasons as they're generally implemented - nice quiet roads, nice quiet ride, not steaming along. Steam along, with the cars who want to steam along, on roads unaffected by lowered-to-20mph limits. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192&page=2#post-34406 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:04:38 +0000 steveo 34406@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I often wondered why the police didn't adopt a different strategy to speed limits (say on dual carriageways) by just sending two cop cars down the dual carriageway side-by-side at 70mph. </em></p> <p>I've noticed one doing 65 is good enough to keep several miles of traffic either side of the police car in check. Down south they seem to use the "Highway Maintenance" cars painted up to look like police cars in a similar manner. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34404 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:02:39 +0000 Smudge 34404@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Anth, A seductive theory, limits based on potential for harm, I just struggle to see why a 10 ton truck may only do 40mph on a single carriageway 60mph while a 10ton coach full of passengers is allowed to do 60mph, potential for injury loss of life? Far greater for the coach I'd have thought on the whole?</p> <p>No, I rather suspect we have arrived at the current set of restrictions through reactive, politically expedient and often ill informed/advised legislation, some of which was reasonable at the time but is now outdated and some of which was never particularly sensible. On the whole, it works, that is not to say however that it could not be improved.</p> <p>imho... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34403 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:56:56 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 34403@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I have to say I think, if we're looking at speed limits as the potential they have for harm, then some sort of correlation between the limit and that harm isn't a bad idea (it's possibly why lorries have a lower limit on dual carriageways?).</p> <p>So. In the city. 30 limit for bikes; 20 limit for cars; 15 limit for trucks; 10 limit for taxis... ;) The <em>best</em> thing about the plan is that cars and trucks can't get past the taxi doing 10mph, but bikes can. Mwuhahahaha!</p> <p>I often wondered why the police didn't adopt a different strategy to speed limits (say on dual carriageways) by just sending two cop cars down the dual carriageway side-by-side at 70mph. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34401 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:53:07 +0000 spytefear 34401@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Anth - <em>Actually, like spytefear/spitfire</em><br /> We are alike? I am finally complete ;) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34400 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:49:05 +0000 Smudge 34400@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>But without a lot more enthusiasm in the enforcement of limits it will mainly be a paper exercise anyway.</p> <p>I travelled most of the way from Craiglockart Junction down to the canal at around 30mph on the LHT yesterday evening (and my bike speedo is accurate so an average car speedo would be indicating around 32-35mph) yet had an impatient car close behind most of the way because he *had* to overtake me (sigh).</p> <p>It doesn't take much of a slope/tailwind to make 30mph relatively easy on many bikes, even for a slowcoach like me, the little Dahon does get a bit twitchy above about 35 though! :-o</p> <p>Certainly on flat roads though it's rare for me to exceed (reach!?) 20mph. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34399 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:46:03 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 34399@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Actually, like spytefear/spitfire this is a bit of a theoretical moot point for me. A few hills I hit 30 on, but all in 30 zones. 20 zones tend to be in residential, non-hilly spots (cue 73 examples in the city of hilly 20 zones) and my flat cruising speed without a tailwind isn't likely to be above 20 anyway (and closer to 17-18mph). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34398 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:44:11 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 34398@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Does 20mph also apply to cyclists? </p> <p>The speed limit applies to all road users including cyclists.</em></p> <p>Interesting. Without, once more, getting into the debate on the actual damage that can be caused... The statement <em>The speed limit applies to all road users including cyclists</em> is factually, and legally, incorrect.</p> <p>Certainly the council is 'of the opinion' that the limit applies to all road users. But. It doesn't.</p> <p>Okay, quick practical question. For speed limits to apply to bicycles then, obviously this <em>will</em> require all bikes to be fitted with speedometers. There is no way that you can apply a speed limit to a group on the road who are at the moment entirely unaware of what speed they are travelling at. So, if it's law that all bikes have to have speedos then those speedos will have to be correctly calibrated (as they are for cars) which will require a regime for regular testing (much like the MOT). I guess the question is this, in order for speed limits to apply to bikes, is any cost/benefit analysis likely to come out in favour of an expensive monitoring/testing/recording regime? I'm not saying that fast bikes can't do harm, obviously they can, but at what point does that harm become 'acceptable'?</p> <p>Put it this way, less people are harmed every year by errant cyclists (or riding bicycles) than falling down stairs.</p> <p>It's difficult to put this in a way that doesn't sound like 'I want to ride as fast as I like wherever I like'. Trust me, that's not what I think, and I slow down where I may come into conflict and thereby cause harm to others. But I just don't see there being some massive benefot to enforcing speed limits against cyclists (and if the counter to that is <em>Try telling that to the 100 people run over by bikes and seriously hurt this year</em> then I suggest if we <em>are</em> accepting that argument that we draw a line upwards from there and set out to seriously legally mitigate <em>any</em> activity that seriously hurts anyone - then see how ridiculous people think it is when it's suggested that all flights of stairs are replaced with ramps or are limited to one person walking on them at a time...).</p> <p>Where was I? Oh yes. Portsmouth Council, commonly misconceived notion, but factually/legally wrong. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34397 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:38:37 +0000 spytefear 34397@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah I probably would - only place I hit above 25 is Dundas St anyway, the rest of the way I wouldn't be slowing down too much 3-5 mph at most </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-34394 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:22:02 +0000 Baldcyclist 34394@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Portsmouth council have introduced a 20mph scheme, they are of the opinion that the limit applies 'all' road users.(http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/living/9727.html)</p> <p>Wonder if Edinburgh will take the same position? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33790 Sat, 18 Jun 2011 17:42:58 +0000 ruggtomcat 33790@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>good point, tho in my case Im not rushing, its just that after carting the trailer around an unladen bike seems to take off of its own accord!</p> <p>answer 2: you don't get a rush when you get over 20? I get a huge rush just from the acceleration, nevermind cornering at that speed. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33787 Sat, 18 Jun 2011 17:33:00 +0000 cc 33787@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What's the hurry? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33783 Sat, 18 Jun 2011 16:54:36 +0000 kaputnik 33783@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>you can have a durney bike then! Principle still applies </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33780 Sat, 18 Jun 2011 16:41:21 +0000 ruggtomcat 33780@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Unlikely, my cruising speed without luggage is between 20-25 mph these days on the bent, the man with the flag better be on a motorbike! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33743 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:09:02 +0000 kaputnik 33743@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I still say that, by law, recumbents should require a man in a top hat waving a red flag to walk in front of them </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33741 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:55:08 +0000 Smudge 33741@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>2.7 tonnes of force could result in no injury, or be fatal, there are many more factors than that alone, without even venturing down the dark alleys of chance and probability!<br /> The point is that the figure alone is meaningless, statistics which I find far more compelling are the number of people killed or seriously injured by bicycles each year (so small as to be statistically meaningless) compared against the number killed daily bu motor vehicles (hard to pin down but every figure I've seen is in the "appalling" range).</p> <p>Put bluntly, bicycles don't kill enough people to merit enforcement of speed legislation. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33739 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:41:34 +0000 Baldcyclist 33739@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Of course you're correct, 2.7 tons of force is nothing, would produce nothing more rhan a scratch. Just dust yourself, and the pedestrian you hit off and be on your way. Sigh! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33731 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 21:44:06 +0000 Smudge 33731@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>or 25 or 11 tons respectively for a small/medium (750kg) car...</p> <p>Whereas even my heaviest bike and I only weigh around 82kg which at 30mph the calculator says would provide 2.7 tons of force, funnily enough the same force as that generated by our 750kg car travelling at 10mph!</p> <p>So does this mean that I should be limited to 30mph and cars to 10mph or merely that statistics can be made to show almost anything if one tries hard enough? ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33724 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 20:09:51 +0000 Baldcyclist 33724@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nice little calculator here (<a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/carcr.html#cc3)" rel="nofollow">http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/carcr.html#cc3)</a>.<br /> A 100kg object (person + bike), travelling at 30mph would have an impact force of over 3.3 tons in a collision. At 20mph it would be less than 1.5 tons.</p> <p>Neither bikes nor cars are dangerous, the problem with both is when you introduce people who imagine that they do not pose any danger! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33722 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 20:01:26 +0000 chdot 33722@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Or unlimited speed segregated cycle lanes...!! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33721 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 19:59:42 +0000 kaputnik 33721@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Helmets for pedestrians I guess. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33719 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 19:49:44 +0000 seanspotatobusiness 33719@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hi. I notice some have raised the valid point of the energy possessed by different vehicles at different speeds. However, no-one has yet raised the point that the pressure applied to bodies during a collision is inversely proportional to the area across which it is spread. I think some cars manufacturers even go so far as to design part to crumple in the event of a collision to protect pedestrians as well as the car occupants (no idea how common this is). In any case, I'd rather bang my head on a bonnet (under my own power) than on a handlebar. That said, I don't know which would actually do more damage to a pedestrian in a collision at a given speed. Both would be quite unpleasant. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3192#post-33708 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:03:49 +0000 kaputnik 33708@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I was riding my bicycle furiously on Wednesday. Deliberately. As furiously as possible.</p> <p>I don't see speed limits as being put there to control traffic flow or journey times (or, segments of the press and motoring lobby see it as part of the "war on the motorist"). I see that they are put there for safety purposes. A bicycle at 20mph is a lot less dangerous than a car at 20mph is a lot less dangerous than an HGV at 20mph.</p> <p>I don't see that bicycles need their speed regulated or legislated as they just don't carry anywhere near the risk that cars and other motor vehicles at speed do. I'd say for a lot of riders they will rarely go over 20mph on a flat without wind assist. For me, it's about comfortable cruising speed in a light headwind on a flat. In town, even when tailwinds and gradients conspire with me, cruising speed is unlikely to get much above 25 over any distance. </p>