I saw one idiot argue that a pedestrian hit at 30mph would have a better chance of survival than one hit at 20mph as they'd be more likely to bounce off the car and would likely go under it at 20mph, some of the arguments against are just ludicrous.
all the way thru this you have been making totally spurious objections to the 20 mph limit trying to use research that disproves your point.
whilst talking about emissions, not not being able to keep to 20mph.
but complained you petrol engine can’t hold a steady 20mph up a hill.
that's more BS, I just said the research on emissions at 20mph relied on driving calmly, which isn't the case when hills are involved as you use the accelerator more.
I've got bags of power and torque in my engine to ensure I can get up that hill easily. My second car was a diesel, and did you not read my comment about the DPF making a diesel impractical.
whilst talking about emissions, not not being able to keep to 20mph.
Which point was disproved by your link
Which point was disproved by your link
the one about changing gear early - it is not my fault that your comprehension skills are so lacking that you couldn't understand the effects that changing gear early have
T^hats the one. Yes changing gear early is good. However it did not show what you claimed at all as you can still change up early and accelerate less aggressively at 20 mph. so it proved the opposite of what you claimed
the one about changing gear early – it is not my fault that your comprehension skills are so lacking that you couldn’t understand the effects that changing gear early have
And you do know that the paper you quoted is completely irrelevant in the use case you are trying to apply it to?
Let’s be honest, most people speed a little bit and the default 20mph is really about getting drivers from doing somewhere around 35-40ish, which realistically seems the norm, to me anyway, down to around 25mph ish or hopefully lower,
In the Borders yesterday, where the 20mph limit has been there for 3 years now, I’d say 20% were doing the 20mph limit, and most others staying around 30mph. Like in some areas in Wales, the limit is applied where there are no houses around, with wide roads, so it is hard to see the point in the limit in those areas, and most ignore it, and carry on using 30mph.
ill bet those now doing 30 would be doing 40 if it were a 30 mph limit
T^hats the one. Yes changing gear early is good. However it did not show what you claimed at all as you can still change up early and accelerate less aggressively at 20 mph. so it proved the opposite of what you claimed
Not if you are driving up a steep hill - at 30mph you might have been able to change to 4th whereas at 20mph you wouldn't - unless maybe you were driving a large BMW diesel but round here there are lots of Ford Ecosports, Vauxhall Adams and 'normal' cars that won't be able to make that gear change and will therefore have a lower mpg and higher emissions.
The reports stating that fuel efficiency at 20mph is often as good or better as driving at 30mph are based on being able to drive calmly (and make those gear changes early), whereas in areas like here with lots of hills calm driving (and early gear changes) is not so easy.
Isn't that why you would have 3rd gear?
If you go at 50 is your mpg even lower. Surely you should have heard the phrase when you're in a hole, stop digging
Like in some areas in Wales, the limit is applied where there are no houses around, with wide roads, so it is hard to see the point in the limit in those areas
Living in Wales, I have never seen or heard of this?
stop digging
Username checks out.
Like in some areas in Wales, the limit is applied where there are no houses around, with wide roads, so it is hard to see the point in the limit in those areas
Living in Wales, I have never seen or heard of this?
So there are areas in Wales with Wide roads, street lighting every x metres, yet no housing and a council that hasn't chosen to apply the opt-out?
That was always the plan was it not? Blanket 20mph then apply exemptions to 30mph on selected roads
Swansea council leader Rob Stewart welcomed the change, but said the government must help foot the bill to swap signage.
Well if that was the plan all along, they don't seem to have told the people implementing it. Looks to me like its gone from being a default 20mph with 30mph exceptions to just 20 mph in specific locations.
Looks to me like its gone from being a default 20mph with 30mph exceptions to just 20 mph in specific locations.
Not really. It'll still be default 20 with a few exceptions for higher limits. That's what happens in Bristol and from that article that sounds like the plan in Wales:
Mr Stewart added that he anticipated the changes to the policy could affect up to 10 roads in his own local authority.
Huw Thomas, leader of Cardiff council, said.... he "certainly can't see many roads changing".
Let’s me get this right.
The 20mph blanket in residential areas that local authorities could make exemptions for from the start is now allowing local authorities to make exemptions?
The town I live in is introducing 20mph through out the town, the signs have been gradually going up. The few seconds it’ll add to a person’s trip through the town will make little odds to their journey. Of course there’s been the usual moans on Facebook such as “It’s pointless you’re lucky to get over 10 mph through centre” and “This will only make the traffic worse”.
"blanket". Someone's sucked up the Tory propaganda!
This is a new minister trying to make it look like he's changing something and thinking we're too stupid to realise that it's being changed into what it already is. If 20mph is ruining you and your neighbour's lives (and it isn't, is it?) you can make representations to your local authority and if you have a case it can be changed. Like you have always been able to do, under the same law, since the 1930s.
Apparently they are changing the guidance so something is changing from the original roll out. Was down in South Wales at Easter, 20 did seem a bit slow on some rural roads through villages. In Cardiff it generally felt OK although I think average speeds were closer to 25 on open stretches of road in town. Many places though 20 was fine and you'd struggle to get above it with all the parked cars, traffic lights, junctions and intermittent bus lanes.
This might actually work quite well, it needed the blanket approach initially, hopefully now the minority of roads that need increasing will occur but the majority will be left at 20.
It's not "blanket". That makes it sound like it's more than it is, which is why the Tories are so fond of the term.
Hmmm, government introduces policy that is widely successful, identifies ways to improve it in certain places, gets roundly criticised and lampooned by headbangers for doing the right thing.
We're ****ed as a nation, aren't we.....
20 did seem a bit slow on some rural roads through villages
It's all about perspective. We were down in Devon at Easter and 30mph felt reckless in a lot of places! And yes, I did slow down.
We were down in Devon at Easter and 30mph felt reckless in a lot of places!
Yeah, well, in Devon, especially South Hams, the quickest way to get anywhere, like from Dartmouth to Kingsbridge, is to get behind a bus and follow it, ‘cos everyone coming the other way has to give way to it. Same thing going from Stokenham down to Beesands - get behind another vehicle like a bus or delivery van and follow it, trying to reverse back up a 1:4 hill with blind corners isn’t a lot of fun.
I speak from experience.
Just to add, in Wiltshire, once you get south of Warminster, 40 is about the maximum top speed, especially if you get stuck behind a farm vehicle with a trailer; I got behind one once, I think I spent nearly nine miles before there was a stretch of road long and empty enough to overtake, and it was about six miles before I had anything else in front of me, everyone else was still stuck behind the tractor! South of the A30/303, Wiltshire, Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall are all the same - I spent enough hours driving around down there to find out the hard way.
Hmmm, government introduces policy that is widely successful, identifies ways to improve it in certain places, gets roundly criticised and lampooned by headbangers for doing the right thing.
when I watched it on the news, I thought they were going to real off a load of stats that showed that reducing speed limits hasn’t saved any more lives, reduced road accidents, or reduced pollution. But no it appears the reason is because it’s an election year and people don’t like it
Very sad really
We've had it for years and I think it's great. Next town down the road is in a different region and has 30 in towns, which now feels ridiculously fast.
I'd say I've seen 4or5 kids saved from injury (caused by phone zombie mode) because the car was easily able to stop short of contact.
@FunkyDunc It feels very much like the usual ‘progressive party bowing to a small noisy minority of people who won’t vote for them anyway’. As with LTNs/ULEZ etc I suspect that, if they hold their nerve, it will prove popular (or at worst most people won’t care) and it will do no electoral harm.
“Yeah, well, in Devon, especially South Hams, the quickest way to get anywhere, like from Dartmouth to Kingsbridge, is to get behind a bus and follow it, ‘cos everyone coming the other way has to give way to it. Same thing going from Stokenham down to Beesands – get behind another vehicle like a bus or delivery van and follow it, trying to reverse back up a 1:4 hill with blind corners isn’t a lot of fun.
I speak from experience.”
I came off Dartmoor yesterday on a route I had never been down before and the roads got pretty narrow in places. I tucked myself in behind a tractor and trailer and took advantage of the free run he created 😁
He pulled over to let me through and I just gestured to him to carry on 😂
Was down in South Wales at Easter, 20 did seem a bit slow on some rural roads through villages. In Cardiff it generally felt OK
Always seems the other way round to me - lots of wide roads in Cardiff. and the surrounding areas with little chance of an unseen person emerging from behind a parked car or kids playing on the street - 20 just seems like a speed trap - whereas up in the valleys with narrow roads going through towns and villages and lots of cars parked on the road side, the 20mph limit seems much more appropriate. And there are some places still at 40mph through narrow street villages that should be 20mph but aren't because they weren't 30mph in the first place so escaped the change.
What it needs is someone sensible from the institute of andvanced motorists or similar, to drive round the Welsh roads noting which sections have inapproproate limits, and then getting exceptions raised for them.
Just to add, in Wiltshire, once you get south of Warminster, 40 is about the maximum top speed
Yesterday we went on a day trip and I drove along loads of brilliant winding country roads, most of which was 60mph. Where was I? Wales of course.
lots of wide roads in Cardiff. and the surrounding areas with little chance of an unseen person emerging from behind a parked car or kids playing on the street – 20 just seems like a speed trap
It's not only about safety. If you can get your head round it, lower speed limits means traffic flows better. I'm guessing you're thinking of Caerphilly road - this is very busy with some crap junctions that require lane changing, so I think 20 is going to help there.
people massively over complicate this issue. 20mph is safer, helps traffic flow, doesn’t materially impact on journey times and encourages active travel. All this time and effort debating and implementing exclusions is stupid.
@franksinatra I would love to see the polling about how people opposing 20mph zones/LTNs/CAZ/whatever then go on to vote. As above I bet they’re all Tory/Reform.
There is very little evidence that opposing this stuff is enough of a wedge issue to get elected; suggestion from Paris is that if they hold their nerve, there is little electoral fallout.
If you can get your head round it, lower speed limits means traffic flows better.
which wasn't the reason for implementing the speed change, safety was. All the studies justifying it were based on safety, not traffic flow, for which it is debateable, as are the suppossed savings from the increase in safety (according to my GP friend).
My late 70's dad called by today as I was car tinkering, once again he was frothing at the mouth about it despite not having been to Wales since the 20mph limits came in (they haven't avoided it but Covid then an operation).
The reason he gets so het up about it is the daily ****ing mail arse wipe rag that my folks belove.
They are going to Porthmadog next week so I'm awaiting the fall out about it.
which wasn’t the reason for implementing the speed change, safety was
I don't think there was just one reason.
All the studies justifying it were based on safety, not traffic flow, for which it is debateable, as are the suppossed savings from the increase in safety (according to my GP friend).
How can it be debatable that slower cars mean less severe injuries? As for traffic flow - this is well proven and also very obvious. If you're from Cardiff you'll be familiar with the Gabalfa roundabout. When it was a traditional setup, it was almost impossible to get out of Whitchurch road because of the number of people swinging round it at higher speeds. You'd get a nice big gap but due to the speed of the oncoming driver it wasn't safe. Their impatience pinned you down and you'd be waiting for 5 minutes sometimes. They they made it a 20 limit on the roundabout (which was of course ignored) but they also made it one lane which slowed people down, and guess what - more people could pull out, leading to better traffic flow. It's not just this roundabout - more people can pull out if everyone's going slower.
thought they were going to real off a load of stats that showed that reducing speed limits hasn’t saved any more lives, reduced road accidents, or reduced pollution
There are no stats yet to prove it works or doesn’t yet. It will need years to achieve that to remove the impact of other factors and random natural variation
There are no stats yet to prove it works or doesn’t yet
I think there are in other areas.
The thing that gets me is that the MS all live in Wales themselves. They also have to stick to 20mph limits. And yet, having done the research most of them agree it's worth it.
I assume there are some stats from Scotland where there have been 20mph limits in urban areas for a while, IIRC, and from lots of European countries where they’ve dropped the urban speed limit from 50kph to 30?
And physics, of course.
(Before anyone says ‘but no-one sticks to it’, no-one sticks to 30 either and if that means people slow from doing 35 to doing 25 there’s still a beneficial effect).
TBH gettign hit at 30 is definitely worse than getting hit at 20. But people don't actually get hit by cars that much and when you do it tends to be in slower areas anyway. And car vs car at 30 is pretty safe, these days.
I genuinely don't care about the safety side, I mean I hope it helps but I'm pretty confident that the actual numbers will be really low. I don't really care much about the emission side either. But I live in a 20, and it makes it a better place to live. It's quieter, nicer to walk or cycle, way better for kids, it's also nicer to drive yourself, less stressful. That alone's worth it.
Towns are supposed to be places to live not places for people who live somewhere else to drive through as fast as possible, for so long we've had that completely backwards. People can have different opinions about 20 limits in general but when you get specific and speak to someone who lives in a street that's gone from 30 to 20, how many people ever say they'd turn it back?
But people don’t actually get hit by cars that much and when you do it tends to be in slower areas anyway.
You what? Govt stats:
"In 2022, 385 pedestrians were killed in Great Britain, whilst 5,901 were reported to be seriously injured (adjusted) and 13,041 slightly injured"
So, one person a day is worth sacrificing for a few minutes saved? If you care so little maybe it should be someone you love tomorrow?
There's 67 million of us, 385 is not very many. And of course cutting 30 to 20 won't save all of them so it's far from "one person a day". The welsh government's estimate is 6-10 lives saved a year. Of course you don't want that to be someone you love but that's just an appeal to emotion, the reality is the speed limit change will have a trivial real world benefit when you make it just about that, 6 is too few to be impactful. So that's a bad idea, if you actually want it to stick.
When you look at the full basket of benefits, the arguments for speed limit reduction are far better, and benefit far more people. The anti brigade are all about saving minutes, and wailing about the "nanny state", nobody who's bothered by that will ever be swayed by an argument about saving 6 lives. And god forbid the stats come in and it's only 5! Because of course, most people aren't great at statistics so it's very easy to make bad arguments out of them- 385 was the 3rd lowest in the last decade, it's totally possible that the next couple of years will be higher not lower and just wait for the noise people make if that happens.
But 85% of people live in urban areas and can experience the real world, day to day benefits of it. It's just it's less persuasive because we don't talk about it enough, in fact it's barely mentioned. What I'm saying is, let's not make it all about weak numerical arguments that people will easily dismiss because nobody believes they'll be one of the 385. Even if it saves 0 lives and 0 injuries and 0g of co2 it's still totally worthwhile
I'm with Northwind - on our trip to Wales last year towns and villages were so much nicer with traffic at 20-25 rather than 30-40.
Looking forward to going back in July
Key stat to note, the Thinking Distance for someone driving at 30 is further than the Thinking AND Stopping Distance for someone driving at 20.
