[Closed] Proposed 20mph speed limits

you already have 20MPH zones. i dont know what the fuss is about.

Regular traffic calming measures ( of the road narrowing rather than speed bump variety ) would be very effective.

speed bumps and other speed controlling designs work, as does education.

the 20mph limit is a good idea, the rural 50 limit is a joke.

what needs to change is driver attitudes to speed not the legal limits. do you think reducing the limit by 10mph will make speeding more or less thrilling for johnny boy racer?

We've got a 30 speed limit in most urban areas at the moment, and that seems to be fairly loosely adhered to- I wouldn't expect much difference in the way of enforcement- each speed camera only covers a few metres of road anyway so the vast majority of the road network is actually unpoliced (witness the slow down/speed up driving technique in action on heavily camera'd road stretches eg the A406 North Circ), and the speed limit largely tends to be enforced by self control/ traffic and road conditions.

Hopefully speed humps will be a minor part of the solution. Road narrowing, chicanes and single lane contra-flow would be preferable solutions.

What about the systems the Dutch(?) have introduced where they remove all markings and indicators to blur the boundaries between road and pedestrianised areas. Do they actually work?

Hopefully speed humps will be a minor part of the solution. Road narrowing, chicanes and single lane contra-flow would be preferable solutions.

In my experiance, people just seem to speed up in between the traffic calming measures.

The 20 mph for residential areas makes some sense, I'm a bit bemused by the 50mph rural limit though - it's already in force in most of the Peak District on the "A" roads, and the accident rate seems worse, if anything, since it came in.

Also seems odd that you can turn off the wide and smooth A515 with a 50mph limit, and then do 60mph on a rutted, potholed singletrack rural lane with stone walls 3ft either side!

Speed in itself isn't the problem, it's inappropriate speed - the ****t who nearly hit me on the roundabout this morning was only doing 20mph in a residential zone, but forgot he should slow down and look right before entering a roundabout.

Road narrowing/chicanes is not the answer. when you throw cycles into the equation they are actually quite dangerous.

There was mention on the radio this morning of increased penalities for overtaking too close to cyclists. No idea of the details or how it's going to be enforced.

Also seems odd that you can turn off the wide and smooth A515 with a 50mph limit, and then do 60mph on a rutted, potholed singletrack rural lane with stone walls 3ft either side!

I thought the limit was 50mph on single track roads...

I generally ignore all speed limits and spend my time looking where I'm going rather than at the speedo.
All the new 20mph limit means to me is that I'll be able to overtake cars on my road bike!....

😉

Decreasing limits. Greater controls. Expanding public sector employments. Folks we are heading towards a [s]socialist[/s] communist state.

Thing is, as its creeping control no one is standing back and taking notice. I was all for the smoking ban but each increment is exerting more influence and control.

Praise the lord that Hora's here to save us though.

Good luck to anyone who can make it up to the dizzy heights of 20mph on the roads around our neck of the woods. Double parked cars down every road, speed bumps every 20 yards, pot-holes big enough to swallow a Smart car. They could test tanks on em

Hora for El Presidente!!!

There's a system where residential streets are pedestrianised (no pavement, block paving, trees etc.)
Drivers tend to slow down when they do not have any perceived right of way.
20mph is plenty for residential streets
http://www.homezones.org/index.html

[i]I thought the limit was 50mph on single track roads..[/i]

Guess your name suits you.

[i]There was mention on the radio this morning of increased penalities for overtaking too close to cyclists. No idea of the details or how it's going to be enforced. [/i]

I heard that as well and thought the same thing. Will I get me own personal copper to accompany me on my commute?! I think they'll enforce this the same way they enforce not using a mobile phone whilst driving....i.e they wont!

Still amazes me how many drivers I see using a phone. That's the biggest danger to cyclists IMHO.

The best way of making someone drive at 20mph is to have the car in front driving at 20mph. No speed bumps, no cameras, no chicanes - just drivers realising the benefits of a lower speed

More information on the "20's Plenty" website - set up by cyclists
[url= http://www.20splentyforus.co.uk/ ]20s Plenty for us[/url]

Totally agree with markenduro that Road narrowing/chicanes are not the answer. Hate them both as a driver and a cyclist. Dangerous as cyclist and it becomes very difficult to over take cyclists as a driver.

When over taking a cyclist Im quite often tempted to go round them the wrong way to give cyclists plenty of room or so I dont have stupidly accelerate in between them.

Double the points system. 6 instead of 3 and 12 means AUTOMATIC ban and restest. No mitigating circumstances that some reps etc can get round. I read in our local paper about an Oldham-based rep who has accrued 26(?) points and still kept his licence.

Drac, I stand corrected: [url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070304 ]The Highway Code[/url]

That is a bit stupid then.

Automated cars, that's the solution! Take control from the humans and give it to the machines mwhahahahaha. On a serious note automated cars would be welcome from me, I hate driving. I also agree that current speed limits aren't policed well enough so fail to see how this would help and that's ignoring any other arguments about drivers not paying enough attention etc....

Also tooslow has worried me slightly (this isn't a personal attack or anything) but people do forget the proper law sometimes which sure doesn't help!

[i]Drac, I stand corrected: The Highway Code[/i]

Least you were playing it safe and not doing 70.

Is this going to be in built-up or residential areas? And will they be at certain times during the day? Not that I'm condoning speeding in any way, but it seems harsh to get knicked doing 30 at 5.30 in the morning.

Seems like it the usual spin the govt are releasing to avoid the embarrassing budget tomorrow IMO.

Decreasing limits. Greater controls. Expanding public sector employments. Folks we are heading towards a socialist communist state.

I wasn't aware that traffic restrictions was one of the tenets of communism?

don't see a problem with it.

i still think it is a massive joke you do your test at 17 and are not re-tested!!

everyone should be re-tested say every 5 years... as this would cut the nutters on the road down buy 50% 😉

trouble is you would have even more un-insured drivers out there.

dont get me started on the 'traffic calming measures' we have lots of 'narrowing/chicanes ' round our way and as a motorcyclist they are lethal, especially when you are following behind a car when you have right of way.

[i]everyone should be re-tested say every 5 years... as this would cut the nutters on the road down buy 50% [/i]

Alas - "are you a nutter?" isn't part of the test 🙂

Got to agree with waihiboy on re-testing, I have to re-take my FLT test every 5 years, why not car/bike drivers?

Not sure if truck drivers have to re-test every so often, I know they have to take a medical.

I don't have a problem with the proposed 20 limit, so long as it is not a blanket limit, but placed in specific areas.
But the 50 on rural roads seems a bit OTT.

Speed is an easy thing to police, whereas things like using a phone while driving, poor road positioning, not indicating, tailgating etc. all cause accidents too, but can't be picked up by a camera.
More measures should be put in place to stop people for these kinds of offences. It is too easy to blame speed for accidents and punish the people that do speed.
I am not condoning speeding, but other causes of accidents should be looked at as well.

Totally agree with markenduro that Road narrowing/chicanes are not the answer. Hate them both as a driver and a cyclist. Dangerous as cyclist and it becomes very difficult to over take cyclists as a driver.

When over taking a cyclist Im quite often tempted to go round them the wrong way to give cyclists plenty of room or so I dont have stupidly accelerate in between them.

I quite like the chicanes you get in the Netherlands and Belgium - even where the road is shared by cyclists and cars (over there, if there's a bike lane, you have to use it) - because they usuall have a nice gap either side for cyclists to continue through unimpeded.

Over here, the narrowing doesn't seem to work as well - instead, as a cyclist, i preserve myself by using the middle of the lane, thus preventing a car trying to squeeze through.

What about the systems the Dutch(?) have introduced where they remove all markings and indicators to blur the boundaries between road and pedestrianised areas. Do they actually work?

I believe there is some evidence that they do - for the reasons muddybum details. I listened to an article about it on the Bike Show podcast some time last year where this had been done to great effect somewhere in London.

I also have the view that, in these situaitons, cyclists tend to move more slowly (which is combined with my pet theory that Dutch bikes are the perfect urban travel tool: you travel faster than a pedestrian, but not so fast as to cause peds concern when riding near them), thus preventing frustrated interaction.

There was mention on the radio this morning of increased penalities for overtaking too close to cyclists.

Hadn't heard that. Sounds like a silly, unenforceable way of saying that people whould drive their cars with more consideration for others (as they are already obliged to do), and overtaking cyclists (and horse riders, runners, mothters with prams, etc.) is already included in this obligation.

Most of the 20 limits in place currently are not legally binding - they use black text and a green circle - these are advisory only and cant be enforced. And I find most people ignore such limits. The technology for catching people (radar/laser) works just as well at 20 as at 100 and it'll be fine in a cluttered street, but will it do any good? Speed bumps/chicanes don't help - we saw them scattered throughout our village and all they did is make the spaces between the obstacles into raceways where people would attempt to make up the lost time by flooring it. Even the people who dont speed (I always do my best not to in residential areas) found their suspension falling apart within 12 months of them arriving, there were countless cases of people almost killing me near the chicanes when I was cycling etc.

It's all about teaching people to drive for the conditions. If people drove for the conditions we wouldnt need limits, people would space themselves well and travel at a speed suitable for the area, rather than being given control of a high speed box and told to stick to limits. I find it particularly off-putting to have to monitor my speedo in residential area where I'd much rather be keeping my eyes on the gaps under and around parked cars in case of kiddie run-out.

The problem is where do we stop - cutting the limit to 15mph wouldnt completely eliminate deaths on the road because if someone steps out 1m from your car even at 10mph you're still going to knock them to the floor and a large percentage of deaths come from head impacts with the floor rather than the initial car impact.

Personally I think it is all down to driver education and the correct use of speed (or lack of) where appropriate. I cycle everyday to work (for the last 2 years) I am a common sight to the local drivers who pass me around the same time everyday, These drivers are not surprised, alarmed or feel the need to put the foot down to pass me just before a corner then brake hard in front of me, you can tell a non-local normally by the way i'm passed.
The speed limit is not the issue, traffic calming obstructs the flow of traffic (and yeah i do realise that is its purpose), speed cameras do slow some drivers down but erratically with panic braking( they were doing just fine before the camera but feel the need to slow by 10mph just in case). Driver education is the way forward, i feel our traffic system is being numbed with petty restrictions.....Jeeeesh, 1 night of snow and our roads grind to a halt, Norway, Sweden etc seem to manage just fine.
Maybe as more people take to bikes as a form of transport everyone will just chill.....Yeah right 🙂

TonyT

Oh yeah...meant to say about the whole speed hump/chicane thing.
I don't really agree with either.

Speed bumps just mean people race between them, they knacker your suspension (I have to absolutely crawl over speed bumps as the suspension in my car is quite crashy), they screw up your mpg and people in company cars who don't have the maintenance expense & 4x4 (jeep type things) drivers can go over them at pretty much whatever speed they want.

Around my area they have installed several chicane type calming methods. Some mean that cars can proceed in both directions and aren't too bad. People genuinely have to take care or they will collide. The other type are alternating give way to oncoming traffic type affairs. In my experience, what happens is that at rush hour there is a general 'flow' in one direction. So, if you want to travel against the flow it take you ages, as you are constantly giving way to a procession of cars.
Both chicane type options put cars and cyclists closer together and seem to provoke dangerous overtaking as drivers get frustrated.

I thought the limit was 50mph on single track roads..

Were you the guy in front of me on the A68 this morning? 😉

Empty single-carriageway A-road and he was pootling along at 48mph - which is fine if that was the speed he felt comfortable at - but the fact he was hitting the brakes for all the speed cameras indicates he either had no idea what speed he was doing or he had no idea what the speed limit was.

I'm not sure which is worse.

they screw up your mpg and people in company cars who don't have the maintenance expense & 4x4 (jeep type things) drivers can go over them at pretty much whatever speed they want.

Couldnt agree more actually, they really affected my MPG and the main offenders for racing over them without a care?...wagons!? Seen them stonking over them at full whack, 7am with their loads bouncing around and waking everyone up, or local buses that just hit them at full whack. They're the one group that will struggle to stop if a kid runs out.

lets get this straight...........

normaly this forums a winging pot full of "cars should slow down and give cyclist more room"

but when the government does exatly that sudddenly theyr accused of trying to create a comuinst state?

Problem is they're not doing exactly that - they're simply changing a traffic reg that wont make any damn difference.

It's always the stick isnt it, never any carrot. I wonder if theres a carrot way of getting peolpe to behave better on the road?

I spent 7 or so years campaigning for traffic calming and a lower speed in my village, to anyone with any sense the two go hand in hand.

we now have a 20mph limit but no traffic calming (lack of budget is the cited reasoning - although it would only cost 550quid labour to change priority at the junction and make a natural traffic halt. i even offered to pay for the work myself!) and the 20mph limit makes not one jot of difference.

the councillors however, with elections coming up, can pose for photos and say what a good job they did and the highways dept don't give a sh@t because they are not accountable to anyone.

I wonder if theres a carrot way of getting peolpe to behave better on the road?

Poke them in the eye with it if they misbehave?

I can't see what all the fuss is about. It'll take a few minutes more to get anywhere, in return for which you'll save money on fuel, pollute less and the consequences of any collisions (vehicle/vehicle or vehicle/human) will be less severe.

However, the whole speed limit thing needs tidied up. On one section on my old commute, it went 30/20/30/NSL/40/50/40 within the space of 2 miles. That's requiring a level of observation and control which frustrates lots of drivers.

Employ roadside flashers along the lines of the smiley face/unhappy face electronic ones. After all the country is getting older. We could employ 80yr old grannies to flash their mac's open everytime a driver exceeds a certain speed approaching them, if the driver slows down a 18yr old girl smiles, leans forward and shows her cleavage with a wink?

to anyone with any sense the two go hand in hand.

But they don't, people just assume it mades sense and don't look at real examples, I'll happily show you the traffic calming at my old village where you now see people doing 40-50 *between* speedbumps and chicanes in the 30 instead of averaging 35-40. Sure it removes the guys that used to use it at 80mph at 2am to outrun the police, but that's a whole other matter.

Roadside flashing "30" signs - dont make a jot of difference to anyone other than those too stupid to realise they're not cameras. They also de-sensitise people as they're often set at or just below the limit and so are always on.
Roadside flashing "this is your speed" cameras just interest people, some use it as a challenge.
Chicanes make traffic swerve rapidly rather than slowing, and make cycling hell.

Not sure what the answer is, but traffic calming doesnt seem to work very well.

coffeeking - Member

Roadside flashing "30" signs - dont make a jot of difference to anyone other than those too stupid to realise they're not cameras. They also de-sensitise people as they're often set at or just below the limit and so are always on.

Actually, statistics indicate that they work very well.

Sample size of 1, granted, but flashing 30 signs were put up in my village about a year ago and they seem to be working very well.

In France they have moving cut-out mannequins in some places, usually at roadworks. A human figure bobbing out from the bollards is quite effective at reminding drivers to keep it down.

Best way to enforce speed limits and not have drivers speed up between obstacles is to use average speed cameras. This could easily be done on fairly long sections of road in built up areas.

they just put in a 20 limit round our way. the road is used as a cut-through, and goes past a child's playground. as i reflected to my GF, it won't and hasn't made any difference at all to the self important 'i must get there as soon as possible', be they middle aged rep types, mums, or youngsters.
what we need is a return to proper road policing on ALL roads. unfortunately a properly crewed traffic car is deemed too expensive for it's 'return' in most cases.
oh - and those flashing signs do work quite well actually - looked on much more favourably than speed cameras by pretty much everyone, are shown to be effective at changing behaviour as they play on guilt, which most of us have in abundance...

I dont see why there is so much discussion about traffic calming here - surely a lot of this is about helping to justify fitting satalite tracking in cars?

As for the additional fines such a slow limit will incur?

This is not to say I dont recognise lives might be saved.

A lot of focus on the drivers in this thread and it's true there are a lot of bad drivers.

How about some education for pedestrians? Is the Green Cross Code still taught as thoroughly? It's certainly not advertised much on TV anymore.

Round my way, at a lot of the road junctions they put speed bumps in right at the junctions. Here's an example

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?source=ig&hl=en&q=Kilmarnock+Rd,+Glasgow,+Glasgow+City+G43,+United+Kingdom&ie=UTF8&cd=3&geocode=FaHDUwMdfZW-_w&split=0&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=6.881357,14.941406&ll=55.825741,-4.285961&spn=0,359.997168&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=55.825744,-4.285806&panoid=b9gowTdNe47syh5l3xNR8Q&cbp=12,287.00188859688484,,0,26.221590909090896

So this forces drivers to slow down as they approach the junction.

Unfortunately because it's the same height as the pavement and it's continious all the way across the junction pedestrians think of it as an extension of the pavement and they just keep on walking without bothering to check if traffic is around.

The entrance into my street is a nightmare too.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?source=ig&hl=en&q=Kilmarnock+Rd,+Glasgow,+Glasgow+City+G43,+United+Kingdom&ie=UTF8&cd=3&geocode=FaHDUwMdfZW-_w&split=0&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=6.881357,14.941406&ll=55.825069,-4.28591&spn=0,359.997168&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=55.824928,-4.286041&panoid=p8_KcqylwPWsFdOi03YzBw&cbp=12,92.10768981163424,,0,5.1704545454545485

People never, never, never bother to check if any cars are turning into or coming out of the street before they step off the pavement.

So how about reminding pedestrians that a ton of car may hurt a little bit when it hits them so they should be a bit more careful when crossing the road!

Actually, statistics indicate that they work very well

I agree the stats do show they work well, however having driven though one section of road on my commute both before and after their placement I can say they've made absolutely no difference whatsoever to the average speed through the area and the sign is constantly lit as I've yet to see anyone pass it while not speeding. Maybe it's down to the location of this particular one (and all the others I've seen) being badly chosen. The problem being this one particular road goes 60>30>60>30 and apart from afew scattered houses it would be a 60 right through so most people just stay at that speed range.

No, its about reclaiming our towns and cities from motor vehicles.
Where I live people speed at 20 to 30mph over the limit. It makes it very difficult to cross the road, causes lots of crashes and arguments and congestion.

Anyway, width restrictions in roads are the single most dangerous raod furniture installed today. Every single day I have to brake or avoid motorists diving into them, braking at the last minute or even locking up all the wheels and demolishing them. They really don't work and produce about 90% of my unpleasant conforntations with motorists. In my 5 miles journey to work I probably go past about 20 width restrictions/ central refuges and over the last 13 years I don't think a single day has gone by without me having to avoid someone attempting to squeeze me out.

Nearby there's a 20 limit (in Ham) its amazing how quickly you can get a line of about 15 cars behind in less than half a mile of travelling at the posted speed.

There is another aspect to all this.

The capabilities of the cars themselves.

I drive a 10 year old diesel Passat. I enjoy driving (for many of the same reasons I enjoy riding bikes). The Passat is in no way challenging or interesting to drive in anything less than a 60 limit, and on an average single carriageway A-road 70+ is comfortable - feels like I'm working at about 75%. I got done for speeding recently (70 in a 60 limit)for the first time after 17 years, so I'm making a real effort not to speed at all. It's absolutely killed my enthusiasm for driving, and it's also affected my concentration levels - too much time looking at the speedo rather than the road, and its far too easy to day dream because its all too easy, effortless and uninvolving.

I had the loan of a fleet Audi A4 diesel automatic over the weekend. At 70 on the motorway I could have been sat in front of the telly with the sound turned off. Absolutely no sensation of speed, no feedback. 30 was nigh on impossible to maintain without constant attention to the speedo - the car would just pick up speed if I twitched my little toe.

I can't help but feel that if we're really concerned about speed limits we need to make a) make cars which demand concentration and involvement to drive and b)feel down right hard work at anything over 70. If you couldn't hear yourself talk and were getting shaken to pieces at 60, then you'd slow down... I guess people would also find alternative methods of transport too.

However I suspect you'd have a hard job getting Mr. Sales rep to buy into the latest Ford Vibrorattle LX with extra noise maker.

So no one likes my flasher suggestion? It would mean more petrol usage for me however I think reward enough 🙂

I don't have a problem with 20 limits in residential areas. We've had them in the N/E for about 5 years and they seem pretty sensible.

The Dutch no roadsigns/roadmarkings/railings/pavements thingy is quite cool. Have seen them in Ijmuiden & they seem to work pretty well. I can't see us adopting anything that sensible.

50 limits on country roads - depends where they're deployed. Suspect it'll be all the truck-laden routes which they can't be bothered to upgrade, like the A1 North of Alnwick or the A15 through Lincolnshire. Essentially they're 40mph roads now anyway as there's no opportunity to make progress safely. If they do the 697 or 686 I'll not be happy.

Satellite tracking and/or control (from a speed point of view) of cars - I doubt we'll see it in the next ten to twenty years as the cost will be too prohibitive to bring older vehicles into line. Besides, with ANPR and RIPA, plod essentially have all the information they want at hand already.

I don't think the title "Comrade" really does him justice, it's more like Lord Protector, High Chancellor or Gruppenführer Brown.

I recently attended a speed awareness workshop (as an alternative to points) having been caught speeding in a 30 zone. All attendees were 'low speed speeders' (37 or less in a 30) and I guess thought to be worth educating/reminding about urban speed. I was genuinely suprised by how useful it was. A point made was that 30 is the limit and in many instances you should be driving a lot slower. How many people do that though? Try slowing down a bit and someone will be right up your a**

Hot_fiat - yeah, Newcastle is littered with 20mph limits. Sometimes its the extra little things on top that help.

They've just put 20mph zone into our estate. they've also tightened up the road junctions - before they were broad sweeping ones basically inviting people to keep moving and join the main road like sliproads - now it's a 90 degree 'turn' which has done wonders for people actually stopping at the junctions.

Though it's not all good news, there used to be little miniroundabouts everywhere to feed into the little roads off the main road - they acted like small speedbumps/chicanes whith the possibility someone might come out on you. They took them off, put some tiny speedbumps in (to allow the hourly bus service to smoothly plod around). Now the mummys in their X5s just plough through them doing 30 instead of 20. Sigh.

At the risk of sounding careless, I agree with JonEdwards - sometimes driving slowly really does affect the concentration. I notice this most on motorways as I tend to cruise at 55-60 in the inside lane for fuel economy while I'm not in a rush to get to places. I often find my mind wandering and have had more concentration-related "ooh" moments (drifting over lanes slightly etc) while travelling at that speed than when I used to hoon about charged with adrenalin at 80-90 on the same stretches. At lower speeds you simply perceive a lower risk and your brain starts to work on other things. This applies to 20 limits too - at 20 I'm fairly sure most people are going to be more likely to want to concentrate on other things rather than the road.

coffeeking - what we need is to all drive 1960s minis - I had one, driving at 30 was like 70mph in all other cars!

It is the volvo factor - if you feel safe and comfortable in their big heavy airbagged car then you'll take risks that you may never do in a, say, little Fiat Panda.

As someone said, the best safety device might be a large pointy stick pointing at your chest from the driving wheel......

breatheeasy - you're right in some respects. But I think its a bit more complex. My first car was a peugeot 205 - while it was a tin box and had no safety kit I would still hoon about in it at redline on the motorway, at which point it was way out of its stopping league but was fun to drive. It demanded concentration at 60-70. My celica feels nicely settled at the speeds the 205 redlined at, its pretty damned good at stopping and ultra stable - having had to do emergency 2-lane darts at high speed to avoid someone who bounced off the central res on the motorway I can attest to that happily - so what we need is a car that is ultimately safe yet feels scary as hell 🙂 The problem is we'd know it was safe and drive to its limits and if it wasnt safe it would be a danger to those around us too.

I can't help but feel that if we're really concerned about speed limits we need to make a) make cars which demand concentration and involvement to drive and b)feel down right hard work at anything over 70. If you couldn't hear yourself talk and were getting shaken to pieces at 60, then you'd slow down... I guess people would also find alternative methods of transport too.

Alec Issigonis thought of this when he designed the Mini. It was released for sale in 1959.

I recently attended a speed awareness workshop (as an alternative to points) having been caught speeding in a 30 zone. All attendees were 'low speed speeders' (37 or less in a 30) and I guess thought to be worth educating/reminding about urban speed. I was genuinely suprised by how useful it was. A point made was that 30 is the limit and in many instances you should be driving a lot slower. How many people do that though?

Er, me. Used to drive like a lunatic when younger. The more time I spent on a bike, the better driver I became. To the extent now that I'm firmly convinced that the limit is just that, "a limit, not a target".

i was overtaken at the weekend doing <25 in a 30, because the local fire station was gearing up to go out and the level-crossing style lights were firing up. The dumb fork behind me in a D-reg talbot campervan obviously took exception to having his progress impeeded and took delight in rattling by me, swearing out the window and tooting his horn.

I took more delight in smiling and tooting the horn back when i'd coasted up to the lights about 5s later. To make matters worse he tried to overtake the person in front and go through the lights! Luckily a traffic island got in his way and he looked like a prize prickle in front of a dozen cars and two fire engines. I adhered to the 10 second rule for the remainder of the time this lunatic was moving in the same direction as me.

moral of the story is regardless of speed there are idiots on the road and changing the behaviour of the minority will not work, it needs to be a wholescale change in attitudes in the same way that not wearing a setabelt is now regarded.

my 2p anyway

Education is definitely key. Did a bike [url= http://www.northumbria.police.uk/news_and_events/media_centre/news_releases/details.asp?id=11955 ]cornering clinic[/url] with plod in Morpeth a few months ago (Nothumberand had/has the highest number of biker fatalities than any other police force so they have to be seen to be doing something). It was really good! Met friendly biker-dude plods; talked about bikes all day; saw some horrific, eye-opening* incident report photos, got taken on an assessed rideout; changed bits of my riding style appropriately and went away a much happier and safer rider. Top marks!

It’s a shame they can't do similar stuff for drivers, but driving's not seen as a skill to hone, develop and ultimately enjoy. People see it as a 'right'.

A

*the most astonishing one was the bike which hit a tractor/trailer laden with 12 round bales broadside with such force that he overturned the trailer.

I find it easy to drive near the limt whit out constantly watching the speedo and can't understand why people can't other than they just have no idea of what is going on around them. I did see recently that some one has come up with a design of speed bump that when hit at speeds slower than the limt deforms and aloows the tyre to pass over where as if you hit it fast it goes rock hard and forces the tyre up and over it. They seemed a very good idea to me.

Shouldn't we feel smug that unlike frustrated drivers, we can still bike off road just as fast and hard as we like?

Cars have got very boring. Ultimately that's a good thing. RIP.

What about the '3rd for 30' thing? Anyone here do that? Very noticeable if your speed creeps up. I can't get into the habit of doing it though.

I find it easy to drive near the limt whit out constantly watching the speedo and can't understand why people can't other than they just have no idea of what is going on around them.

Because the limit seems extremely slow in a lot of cases - my speed naturally drifts upward to reduce boredom. It's not a purposeful thing, but 30/40 down this particular stretch of road:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=a803&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=18.388688,56.953125&ie=UTF8&ll=55.935465,-4.226775&spn=0.008485,0.027809&t=h&z=16
is rather slow-seeming. Certainly as there are rarely any peds crossing the road as there's no pavement on one side.

Cars haven't got boring, the fun of driving (for myself) is cornering and acceleration - this can be achieved in plenty with most modern cars. Being stuck at 30 on a road that can easily be taken at 60 is boring. Unfortunately because we cant be trusted to only do 60 when it's safe and not when the schools are kicking out we have to be forced into boredom 🙂

What about the '3rd for 30' thing? Anyone here do that? Very noticeable if your speed creeps up. I can't get into the habit of doing it though.

Great way to waste fuel I'll give you that if your car revs more at 30, and with a stereo above 1/8th I can't hear my engine anyway on the diesel. On my loud obnoxious car I'd struggle to get into rd at 30 as I'd be bouncing off idle, but I would hear it 🙂 This is it works differently on different cars.

I find that its 3rd for 20, 4th for 30 and 5th for 40.
...and judging by the onboard, it'll return about 5mpg, can get 60mpg at 40

What about the '3rd for 30' thing?

Worked very well on our old car (2.0l Focus), which sat happily at 30 in third and let you know about it if your speed crept up.

Not so good on our new car (also a 2.0l Focus) which has higher/longer/taller/whatever-the-technical-term-is gears so it will happily do up to 50 in 3rd without screeching.

When I learnt to drive the instructor encouraged the use of 2nd for residential streets and pretty much all corners, roundabouts etc.

my clio has a speed limiter, which is the opposite of cruise control. basically you ping in the max speed you want to do and the engine wont go above it in any gear. its a very strange feeling driving through at exactly 29 mph with your foot on the floor. very useful though, but a faff to use on 20/30/20 style journeys

I have just been done in a rural 30. 👿

Surely if they were serious about reducing speed/accidents, all cars would be governed to 75mph and/or power output. To keep imposing limits and speed cameras is a money raising venture rather than an effort to actually address the problem?

[i]Surely if they were serious about reducing speed/accidents, all cars would be governed to 75mph and/or power output. To keep imposing limits and speed cameras is a money raising venture rather than an effort to actually address the problem? [/i]

Not really.
You can quite happily drive a car pissed whilst reading your paper shaving your face and phoning your mates with a speed governer fitted.

20mph in a urban zone is a good idea.

50mph on a rural A road is utter stupidity. In case anyone hasn't noticed people don't drive 60mph on rural A road. So why is changing it down to 50mph going to make any difference? I reckon it will cause more accidents and deaths, people who want to go 70-80mph will still do so and just overtake the people driving at slow speeds. Probably in dangerous areas too.

People are generally good at judging speed. We have a lot of cars on the road and a very low accident rate compared to most other countries.

It’s just another way for the government to waste our money. Governing cars is very silly, most of the time you need to accelerate out of accidents hence why mopeds are so dangerous.

Another thing they need to do is regulate insurance companies, this will cut the amount of uninsured drivers. When you are quoted £1200 at 18 a lot of people will just drive uninsured.

..most of the time you need to accelerate out of accidents..

Come on, that is blatantly not true.

[i]Sometimes[/i] you may be able to avoid an accident by accelerating out of danger, but I'd say almost all accidents could be avoided by stopping before you get to them.

Graham S - clearly you have never ridden a motorbike. The amount of times I've had to accelerate when cars decide to turn out of the road or roundabout in front of me is ureal.

True, I haven't and I'm not sure how that relates to governing the speed on [u]cars[/u], which is what your original comment related to.

I have been in similar situations on a bike though, where accelerating out of trouble was not an option (especially the way I ride!).

Edit: to be clear, I accept the argument that [i]sometimes[/i] being able to briefly exceed the speed limit may help avoid an accident so I'm not in favour of putting automatic governors on cars.
At least not at anything close to the speed limit. Something like 100mph may be a reasonable limit, but I can't see that saving many lives.

Think the future will probably end up with a little black box in all cars by law. You crash or get pulled over then plod plugs into your box and gets your speed out. Either that or they connect it to GPS and automatically send you the fine....

I seem to remember some company (maybe Post Office) considering that for their vans now.