Should cyclists have the same speed restrictions as motor vehicles?

[first mate]

But you do not have to consistently maintain a speed over 20mph for it to be a risk factor, do you? Being hit by a fast moving vehicle may cause significant damage. Presumably speed limits are applied to try to reduce risk.

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

But you do not have to consistently maintain a speed over 20mph for it to be a risk factor, do you? Being hit by a fast moving vehicle may cause significant damage. Presumably speed limits are applied to try to reduce risk.

The point is that there are far fewer people travelling by bicycle than motor vehicle. And even fewer of those who are travelling by bicycle over the speed limit (as it applies to cars).

And at the same time, a far greater proportion, of the far greater number of people travelling by car, regularly speed. And they speed not just at 20mph, but up to and beyond 70mph. And of course they seriously injure and kill many many more people.

[tedfudge]

 

[Penguin68]

4 hours ago, malumbu said:

it is difficult to maintain a speed over 20mph.  Why are you more of an expert that an experienced cyclist?

It is actually, Mal, very difficult, particularly in hilly Dulwich, for cyclists to maintain any speed - which makes driving behind them that much more tricky, as compared to powered road users. As a long-term driver (passed my test in 1967) I look for consistency in road users to allow me to predict their actions - cyclists can neither maintain constant speeds in anything other than flat conditions - nor frequently, where road or weather (wind) conditions are poor, a constant line (and inexperienced cyclists particularly so). This is not to blame cyclists - they rely on person, not mechanical, power - but it does make their progress that much more risky for them, and sharing roads with them that much more tricky. Which is why, where there are significant volumes of cyclists, I don't resent giving up road space to them, although I do resent some cyclists then insisting on using the shared road space 'because they can'.

And of course no one has suggested that cyclists should maintain a speed over 20 (in a 20 mile zone). We actually don't want them going over that speed, as (particularly for pedestrians) prediction of road user behaviour is again compromised when some believe that speed restrictions don't apply to them. And especially when these move from road to pavement users - where in general a 4mph usage speed is anticipated.

I'm intrigued that you should be inventing here a refutation of an argument hitherto un-made. Why? Or is it simply (another) diversionary tactic?

[snowy]

Please look at rule 213 of the highway code which reminds drivers that cyclists may need to move unpredictably.

And Rule 61 on cycle lanes.

[malumbu]

Penguin:  "which makes driving behind them that much more tricky"

If you are not able to do this then you are not meeting minimum driving standards.  You would fail your driving test,

The Highway Code is generally not road user specific, a bike in front of you has priority whatever the speed, noting that slower road users may choose to move into a safe space to allow you to overtake, but are not compelled to.  Like in the Scottish Highlands when those towing caravans would let you overtake, not so common nowadays and no doubt many of us have been on a single carriage A road with a massive queue behind a tractor, nervous car driver or car towing a caravan.

You should only overtake the bike if there is enough room, which includes giving the bike around a couple of metres.  Significantly less than this you could be stopped by a police officer and given a ticket.

 

[first mate]

No comment, I see, on the video posted above, showing cyclists breaking the law and cycling recklessly.

[ab29]

On 18/02/2025 at 15:11, tedfudge said:

How can this be ok - and in front of the hospital?

Edited Thursday at 16:53 by ab29

[Penguin68]

On 18/02/2025 at 16:11, malumbu said:

Penguin:  "which makes driving behind them that much more tricky"

If you are not able to do this then you are not meeting minimum driving standards.  You would fail your driving test,

The Highway Code is generally not road user specific, a bike in front of you has priority whatever the speed, noting that slower road users may choose to move into a safe space to allow you to overtake, but are not compelled to.  Like in the Scottish Highlands when those towing caravans would let you overtake, not so common nowadays and no doubt many of us have been on a single carriage A road with a massive queue behind a tractor, nervous car driver or car towing a caravan.

You should only overtake the bike if there is enough room, which includes giving the bike around a couple of metres.  Significantly less than this you could be stopped by a police officer and given a ticket.

Mal

The fact that it is more difficult to drive where other road users actions are less predictable is, well, a fact. Of course that means that other road users have to take that into consideration when they drive, but being themselves 'good' and predictable drivers doesn't mean that cyclists aren't less unpredictable.  I was making the point that of course cyclists, particularly in hilly conditions, as we have, find it more difficult to 'maintain' a constant speed - I'm not blaming them for that, just stating it as a fact (as you had yourself mentioned that difficulty). Cyclists, by the very fact that they are unpowered, pose more technical problems to those sharing roads with them - of course we cope with those, but it doesn't stop it being a fact. All driving is about attention and anticipation - when you have fellow road users who don't obey (sometimes) rules others are obliged to obey (traffic lights, zebra crossings, signalling etc. etc.) - and at times vary their speed because of topology in a way that powered users can more readily overcome,  then sharing roads with them is more tricky than sharing roads with users who do 'follow the rules' and do drive more predictably. That should be a self evident fact. That you challenge that and imply that I don't meet minimum driving standards... well!

Oh, and if cyclists had tests that they could fail ... but of course they don't, and you argue against that as a requirement.

[malumbu]

What is difficult about being aware of other road users?  It should be second nature. You've just argued for more cycling infrastructure if you think it is better segregating cyclists and motor vehicles.

I could say that it is difficult cycling when you don't know what a driver is likely to do.  Fortunately I can usually anticipate when they don't check their mirror, blind spot, signal and or are on their phone

I could say that it is difficult cycling when you don't know what a driver is likely to do.  Fortunately I can usually anticipate when they don't check their mirror, blind spot, signal and or are on their phone

[Dulwich dweller]

On 18/02/2025 at 10:24, malumbu said:

am a highly experienced cyclist.  I know many cyclists.  I know the local roads.  Why do you find it so difficult to comprehend that due to human physiology, the mechanics of bicycles and simple physics, the condition of the roads, traffic lights and junctions, and the number of other road users, it is difficult to maintain a speed over 20mph. 

Not with an ebike it isn't. Still condescending I see. 

 

[march46]

With a legal e-bike it is.

[malumbu]

8 hours ago, Dulwich dweller said:

Not with an ebike it isn't. Still condescending I see. 

 

Please avoid personal attacks.  As March says with legal electrical assisted pedal bikes, the power cuts out before the bike hits 20 mph.  There are numerous posts about illegal e bikes, a separate subject.  You shouldn't confuse legal with illegal.

https://www.bikeradar.com/advice/buyers-guides/electric-bike-laws

Useful reading, road legal e bikes electric assistance cuts out at 25 mph

[first mate]

The problem is, you never offer solutions, but simply get picky on legal terms or other deflections, rather than admitting an issue.

It is a fact, that pedalled and powered two wheeled vehicles are between them, daily exceeding 20 mph speed limits, jumping red lights,  cycling on pavements and pedestrianised areas, not stopping at pedestrian crossing.

In the eyes of the public, anything on two wheels that looks like a bicycle is a bicycle. For the vehicle users, many also view themselves as outside the law and that confusion is down to an unhelpfully grey area where bicycles that look very similar to the eye are treated differently in law. This is why a blanket speed limit would be helpful and we might get a bit more enforcement on the other areas.

Edited 5 hours ago by first mate

[Penguin68]

19 minutes ago, malumbu said:

You shouldn't confuse legal with illegal.

As a pedestrian, or indeed any other road user, that's quite difficult. Which means judging what might, or might not, be safe is also quite difficult. Of course the ones that are clearly badged as being e.g. Lime bikes are theoretically identifiable, although when they are heading towards you I'm guessing less so. 

Also I note that you write "the power cuts out before the bike hits 20 mph." and then "road legal e bikes electric assistance cuts out at 25 mph" in adjacent paragraphs. 

[malumbu]

If they are going fast without pedaling it's illegal.  Most of the delivery bikes are illegal.  Usually it's a hub drive on the rear wheel.  Most legal e bikes have the drive in the crank.  Illegal bikes are not difficult to spot, enforcement bodies could do more but making the delivery companies have greater responsibility would be a better way, but would put the cost of your takeaway up.

Stopping the illegal kits and modifications is difficult as bikes that are not road legal can be used off road with the land owners permission.  Not sure how this affects bridal ways, pathways where bikes are allowed and the like.

[first mate]

39 minutes ago, malumbu said:

Illegal bikes are not difficult to spot,

I beg to differ. To those in the know, they may be easy to spot, but to the general public, as well as types of enforcement personnel, I do not think they are easy to spot. The whole area is a muddle and In think, in part, we are not seeing much enforcement, because it is not clear.