Do You Agree With Cyclists Exceeding the Road Speed Limit?

[simonhill]

I know it's not illegal to break the designated road speed limit on a bicycle.

I just wondered what is the general feeling of the forum members.

[cycle tramp]

Without wishing to curtail the range of this discussion, please remember that as such this is a public forum and may be viewed by journalists and pro-car lobbies. As such any argument in support of cyclists breaching speed limits may be equally used to defend why cars and other motor vehicles should also breech the same limits....

[cycle tramp]

My view as a road user (motorist and cyclist, ex-tractor driver and ex-motorcyclist) is that speed limits exist in an attempt to make road use less hazardous.
Due to the possible lack of any speed odometer, I can understand that a cyclist may temporarily breach the speed limit, but I would not support any cyclist who goes out of their way to do so, or who seeks to maintain their speed in the knowledge that they were breaching the speed limit, or the safe stopping distance for the conditions in which they were riding...
..any behaviour to the contrary, will mean at the very least the legal freedoms which we enjoy will be scrutinised with a deepening vigour. We are an easy social target. Let us not make things any harder for ourselves.

[roubaixtuesday]

Moderator note - post removed for breach of the Forum Guidelines.

[Cugel]

No one who cycles or drives should need a speedometer, as how safe a speed is varies enormously with circumstances, location, vehicle and the pilot of the vehicle. Part of the necessary skill of piloting vehicles on the road is to be able to make good judgements, not to rely on some arbitrary limit that's generally far too high for most.

Since cars are made to exceed speed limits by huge margins, speedometers might be a good idea - as an excuse-preventer when car loons go tearing about in a murderous & maiming fashion. You can't claim to not-know your speed.

With a bicycle it would, one might think, be far more obvious as to what's a safe speed and what isn't. After all, the cyclist is far more exposed to the possible outcomes of a risky velocity than a car loon in their modern person-protector metal cage. Any cyclist who needs a speedometer to know that they're going too fast really shouldn't be cycling. Data screens are no substitute for a well-refined and considerate human judgement facility. (Of course, many have the opposite sort of judgement facilities - about everything).

Yet there are bike loons too. With the faux-racing culture in British cycling, there are rather too many of them, coursing madly through both roads and shared byways imagining themselves in Le Tour or whatever. How to control them? Speedos on a bike aren't going to help as the speeder already has 6 other screens to gawp at as they chase their StupidStriver-segment goals. They're already in a state of not-looking-where-I'm-going despite going as fast as they can no matter the conditions.

*************
Personally I have no objection to traffic rozzers hadding-up daft cyclists going too fast for the conditions - although I'd prefer if they also had-up all the car loons, who outnumber the daft cyclists thousands to one and are vastly more dangerous.

And what dangers to others, in addition to those to themselves, do loon cyclists speeding madly present? Well, a 12 stone cyclist going at 30 mph or even 20mph can do a lot of damage to the sort of frail peds unable to jump out of their way ....... .

But I offer no solution other than to make vast changes to our so-called society that makes it less likely that even some cyclists will go about being self-centred little skinbags with no regard for others. Speedometers and number plates will make zero difference, as with car loons, who have both.

[Psamathe]

My understanding is that there are other laws covering dangerous cycling. So if it's dangerous for a car to drive over 20 mph on a given stretch of road, likely to be dangerous for a cyclist but the driver will maybe be sent on a speed awareness course and the cyclist taken to court under eg the
Road Traffic Act 1988.

Ian

[Jdsk]

My understanding is that there are other laws covering dangerous cycling. So if it's dangerous for a car to drive over 20 mph on a given stretch of road, likely to be dangerous for a cyclist but the driver will maybe be sent on a speed awareness course and the cyclist taken to court under eg the
Road Traffic Act 1988.

The problems with the current legislation are described in the 2018 Thomas review:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... report.PDF
(It doesn't mention speed limits.)

Jonathan

[Nearholmer]

Two thoughts:

- how often does it actually happen?

- how is a cyclist supposed to know their exact speed anyway?

My instinct is that, even with the growth of 20mph limits, it must be a pretty rare event, so while a cyclist travelling at, say, 24mph represents a greater risk to pedestrians than one travelling at, say, 18mph (lesser sighting time increasing probability; greater kinetic energy increasing consequences), the overall risk from this cause in most places must still be very low.

There are doubtless “hot spots” in urban areas, but I can’t see how changing the speed limit laws without simultaneously requiring speedometers could work, whereas some targeted policing, flagging down and ticking-off the small minority of scorchers who endanger others might. Even in London, my observation is that most cyclists “plod along”, and that it’s only delivery riders on EAPC, and a few fit young whippets commuting who get up to the sorts of speeds that might matter in this context.

Personally, I find that those electronic feedback signs that give a smiley or grumpy face simply laugh at me as I flog up hill at 9mph to enter a village with a 20mph limit. I think I’ve only got a frown from one once, 22mph in a very flat part of Bedfordshire.

[Bmblbzzz]

Cycling very fast is a minor safety concern compared to driving at the same speed (or even at lower speeds, due to lower mass) but crucially presents none of the other societal costs of driving fast: no noise, no pollution, and unless cycle traffic grows to at least the volumes of say 1970s motor traffic, no segregation of one side of the street from the other.

[Psamathe]

Two thoughts:

- how often does it actually happen?

- how is a cyclist supposed to know their exact speed anyway?

My instinct is that, even with the growth of 20mph limits, it must be a pretty rare event, so while a cyclist travelling at, say, 24mph represents a greater risk to pedestrians than one travelling at, say, 18mph (lesser sighting time increasing probability; greater kinetic energy increasing consequences), the overall risk from this cause in most places must still be very low.
...

Added to which cyclists tend to feel more vulnerable than those car drivers safely enclosed in their metal box that has been repeatedly tested to protect them from anything and everything. Cyclists without all that protection.

Ian

[Psamathe]

...
Personally, I find that those electronic feedback signs that give a smiley or grumpy face simply laugh at me as I flog up hill at 9mph to enter a village with a 20mph limit. I think I’ve only got a frown from one once, 22mph in a very flat part of Bedfordshire.

I regard those flashy signs mostly as toys.My village got one and it recorded me doing 35 mph at the end of a long ride into headwind. I rarely get to 25 mph and that's with loads of energy at the start of a ride going downhill with a following wind.

They do have a place in some villages where eg fast straight road with national speed limit runs straight through village where speed limit reduces to 30. If houses are back from the road they do serve as a reminder to drivers. But equal reminder is the large "30" in a circle painted on the road.

In my own village there is no problem with people exceeding 30 (the limit) because lots of sharp blind bends. Anybody that does exceed 30 is suicidal or beyond mad and they wont pay any attention to the flashy signs (might even challenge such idiots to see how big a number they can get.

Ian

[axel_knutt]

I can’t see how changing the speed limit laws without simultaneously requiring speedometers could work

Cyclists aren't often going to break the speed limit accidentally without noticing, it generally takes too much effort, and it's markedly different from 'normal' cruising speed, so if anyone's worried about it happening they can go and buy a cheap readily available speedometer. People are expected to remain within the drink driving limit whether they have a meter or not.

[Carlton green]

My view as a road user (motorist and cyclist, ex-tractor driver and ex-motorcyclist) is that speed limits exist in an attempt to make road use less hazardous.

Yes, as a car driver I always try to obey the speed limit(s) and regard it(them) as a cap rather than a target. As a cyclist I expect to ride sensibly and safely and wouldn’t knowingly break a speed limit … they are there for a purpose, etc., and I’d certainly moderate my speed in a 20 mph area. Cyclists naturally tend to be accident averse, we get hurt when there is one.

Due to the possible lack of any speed odometer, I can understand that a cyclist may temporarily breach the speed limit, but I would not support any cyclist who goes out of their way to do so, or who seeks to maintain their speed in the knowledge that they were breaching the speed limit, or the safe stopping distance for the conditions in which they were riding...
..any behaviour to the contrary, will mean at the very least the legal freedoms which we enjoy will be scrutinised with a deepening vigour.

The likelihood of me being able to cycle faster than 20 mph is limited and whilst I’m not the fastest cyclist in the world I can still push along. The chances of cyclists being able to go fast enough to break limits are limited - so possible (for some) but not common. If my maths is correct then I’d need to be pulling well over a 100” gear at a cadence of 60 rpm to exceed 20 mph; even if they wanted to only a small percentage of people could actually do that.

We are an easy social target. Let us not make things any harder for ourselves.

Quite, and I would echo your warning too. This forum is open for all to see.

[Audax67]

One should always proceed in a reasonable and proper manner. That wording is lifted from the California Highway Code as quoted to me by a colleague in Santa Clara, who then pointed out that if everyone else on the freeway was exceeding the speed limit then you could actually get a ticket for not exceeding it too, since by doing so you would perturb the flow of traffic.

I did enjoy California.

[pwa]

My own feeling is, and long has been, that sticking more or less to the speed limit tends to be a good idea, even though it isn't mandatory for cyclists. For two main reasons. Firstly, pedestrians and other road users in, say, a 20mph area are likely to feel more inclined to move out into your path if they feel the area to be free of fast moving traffic. You don't get time to explain to them that actually, the rule doesn't apply to you, on a bike, and you can in fact do 40mph if you are able. So their potential behavioural change, having seen the limit go down on their street, makes a potential hazard for you as a cyclist. Running over a pedestrian badly affects steering... It could also badly affect the pedestrian. Car drivers are also not expecting anything fast coming along, so are probably even more likely to emerge in your path. Reasons to be cautious.

And secondly, it doesn't look good, to people who live alongside a road with a new 20mph speed limit, if cyclists still go by at 40mph on a downhill. I know they are less dangerous than a car driver doing the same, but even so, it looks bad. It looks like you don't care about them, their kids, their community.

I no longer use any sort of speed readout on bikes, so it is all down to my impression of speed, which I think is close enough. Especially as I'm not as worried about being precise when on a bike.