Cycling UK Forum

http://www.iam.org.uk/iam_polls/ open until 17 May.

Dead link...

Actually edit that. Looks like the entire IAM site may be down. I can't even get onto http://www.iam.org.uk

Double-edit: just tried from home on different browsers and couldn't connect to either. Site issue.

Are motorway regulations of much interest to cyclists?

Yes, I think so.

Not so much the motorways themselves, but getting on and off.

A car slowing down from 80+ to 30 as opposed to 70 to 30 will have to slow down either more quickly or over a longer road space. Plus people tend to go by perception rather than actual measured speed, so they think they're doing 30 but are actually doing more like 40-45. Been there, done it. Everyone who drives a car has. So it'll take a while before people get used to the new speed differential

I remember a case here (I think last year) where an elderly cyclist got flattened somewhere in Lancashire by a car coming off either a motorway or dual carriageway because the car was travelling rather fast (and although not necessarily illegally, probably too fast for the conditions).

It's not just cyclists that need to be wary - it's all road users.

TwoPlusTen wrote:Yes, I think so.

Not so much the motorways themselves, but getting on and off.

A car slowing down from 80+ to 30 as opposed to 70 to 30 will have to slow down either more quickly or over a longer road space.

Given the length of exit slip roads on leaving a motorway (std is 70m) & their often upward inclination this isn't going to present a problem per se?
Braking distance (because we do not calculate thinking distance as we already know we're going to brake) using the old highway code 1960s Ford Anglia measurements at 80mph to a complete stop would be 98m.
So if it's your belief that huge swathes of vehicles are going to be travelling at 80mph with 70m left to a give way line if there's a change in motorway limit to 80mph, I'd have to say I completely disagree with you?
It may apply to a few loonies in sports cars with a death wish (who are going to be berks no matter what the speed limits are) however average joe isn't such an idiot & even in circumstances that might come about for some reason, braking systems in a modern day car are vastly superior to those of 50 years past..

Saying that, I'm not entirely convinced a legal limit of 80mph on the motorway itself is a good idea in this country anyway. IF it was introduced I'd want far better policing of such (unmarked overhead forward facing speed cameras on the gantries for one) and much harsher penalties handed out for those caught. (in fact harsher penalties all round for driving misdemeanors )

The problem with speed isn't so much the speed as the difference between the slowest and fastest vehicles.

We've got a group of vehicles fixed at 56mph along with expensive fuel slowing down a decent percentage of motorists, widening the gap by allowing some to go even faster (and an 80mph limit will result in a fair number doing 90-100) can't imo be a good thing.

there is nothing wrong with speed, it's the nut behind the wheel is the problem

For the last two years I've enforced my personal speed limit of 60 mph on motorways and dual carriageways. Adds about ten minutes to a two hour journey and makes the entire trip less stressful. Sitting in the left hand lane with plenty of space ahead watching as queues form in the right hand lane also gives one a sense of smug satisfaction...

yakdiver wrote:there is nothing wrong with speed, it's the nut behind the wheel is the problem

Precisely!

Tonyf33 wrote:

yakdiver wrote:there is nothing wrong with speed, it's the nut behind the wheel is the problem

Precisely!

That doesn't really offer a solution though does it?

A bad driver at 60mph is safer than a bad driver at 70mph - that's the problem with speed.

kwackers wrote:

Tonyf33 wrote:

yakdiver wrote:there is nothing wrong with speed, it's the nut behind the wheel is the problem

Precisely!

That doesn't really offer a solution though does it?

A bad driver at 60mph is safer than a bad driver at 70mph - that's the problem with speed.

Are they? On a motorway I'd hazard that isn't always the case, x driver at 60mph comes up behind a slower moving vehicle and pulls out not indicating into lane two maintaining their speed, cars behind have to brake suddenly or change lanes quickly to avoid possible collision. Same scenario but idiot driver doing 70mph and doesn't indicate, following traffic less likely to have to brake (so hard at least) or even just take foot off accelerator.
At the end of the day idiot drivers are idiot drivers, there will always be a number of them around and those on the fringes that make you roll your eyes (& we all make silly mistakes)
In some circumstances the speed IS relevant for sure but it the actions of the driver within that speed that is by far the major factor not the actual speed itself in pretty much every case.

Tonyf33 wrote:Are they? On a motorway I'd hazard that isn't always the case, x driver at 60mph comes up behind a slower moving vehicle and pulls out not indicating into lane two maintaining their speed, cars behind have to brake suddenly or change lanes quickly to avoid possible collision. Same scenario but idiot driver doing 70mph and doesn't indicate, following traffic less likely to have to brake (so hard at least) or even just take foot off accelerator.
At the end of the day idiot drivers are idiot drivers, there will always be a number of them around and those on the fringes that make you roll your eyes (& we all make silly mistakes)
In some circumstances the speed IS relevant for sure but it the actions of the driver within that speed that is by far the major factor not the actual speed itself in pretty much every case.

So what you're advocating is that we insist that crap drivers drive the fastest... That's a bizarre conclusion.

As I said above the issue is the difference in speed between the fastest and slowest traffic - as evidenced by your hypothetical situation.

Trucks do 56mph. If everyone is doing 60mph then there's less problem for the crap drivers than if some are doing 80mph.

On top of that the crap drivers are frequently the most aggressive, crap driving ime goes hand in hand with thinking that you're actually good.

The TRL reckon (PPR397, "An evaluation of options for road safety beyond 2010", Sexton and Johnson, 2009) that increasing motorway speed limits to 80 mph (and enforcing them) would increase annual fatalities by 18, serious by 64 and slight by 363.

Then we would have pressure to raise limits for HGVs. And then dual-carriageway limits. And then single carriageway non-built-up roads.

kwackers wrote:So what you're advocating is that we insist that crap drivers drive the fastest... That's a bizarre conclusion.

.

Right because that's exactly what I said!
Is there any point having a discussion when you clearly want to make up things that others haven't said or even inferred?
I'll leave you to it!.

snibgo wrote:The TRL reckon (PPR397, "An evaluation of options for road safety beyond 2010", Sexton and Johnson, 2009) that increasing motorway speed limits to 80 mph (and enforcing them) would increase annual fatalities by 18, serious by 64 and slight by 363.

Then we would have pressure to raise limits for HGVs. And then dual-carriageway limits. And then single carriageway non-built-up roads.

Why would we? I'm not advocating that we should have increased speeds on motorways I just want to know why pressure would be put upon the government to increase speeds on roads populated by vunerable road users for the most part (if the motorway limit was raised)?