20mpg speed limit

Slower journey times damages the economy and makes us poorer. There’s no disputing that.

As with any safety measure, the question is whether it’s worth it given the reduction in death and serious injury. Banning smoking would be more effective if you’re that way inclined.

You might say it’s only 10mph, but that journey now takes 1.5x longer in residential areas. In dense urban areas it could take even longer. Slower journey times increase congestion as there will be more cars on the road network at any one time. Instead of many cars getting through the network at 30mph, you end up with more traffic jams and cars sitting stationary. Poor for the environment and air quality too.

 

Who knows, it may make some think more about the actual need for the journey by vehicle with a reduction in journeys made.

 

I think the issue is if Usain Bolt ran into you at 27Mph you would survive. Cars weight a lot more.
As I said higher up many pedestrians do silly things, but so do drivers. Plenty of blame to go around.

 

The chances of someone running into you at over 20mph must be astronomical due to the actual lack of how many people being able to run that fast, whereas every car driver can reach 30mph.

 

That's no argument against the speed limits, I've clocked myself at over 50mph on my bike (using a phone app).

If a person on a bike hits anything, it won't do anywhere near the damage that a motor vehicle does. Much more likely to damage the bike and person.

 

Victim blaming?

 

Nonsense. There is a huge volume of evidence that lower speed limits actually reduce journey times and congestion. The main thing which reduces vehicle efficiency and burns more fuel is air resistance which increases with speed so reducing speed to 20mph will have environmental benefits.
In the 1970s there was a fuel crisis and the government introduced a temporary 55mph limit on motorways, studies found that average journey times were shorter, fuel consumption was massively reduced and accidents (and injuries) were similarly impacted.

 

I love it when a vehicle insists on passing me (on my bike) 100 yards from a traffic light which then turns red, allowing me to get past them and into the advanced stop cycle zone and making them do it all over again.

 

Driving at a constant speed of 30mph is more fuel efficient than driving at 20mph. It’s only at higher speeds air resistance becomes a significant factor and it’s becomes more fuel efficient to drive slower. We’re not talking about a reduction in the motorway speed limit.

 

Not at all, every road user including people crossing the roads should be equally as switched on / accountable. Absolutely no need for 20 zones other than outside of key areas like schools or hospitals.

 

I don't think that's right, many cars perform better at 20 than 30. However, we are not talking about driving at a constant speed, the higher the speed you try to maintain (except on motorways maybe) the more likely you will have to slow down or stop due to traffic conditions. Also the longer you will have to wait at junctions, it's much harder to merge into traffic from a side road if the traffic is moving faster.

Read this https://www.20splenty.org/do_emission_increase

Admittedly from a group campaigning for 20mph limits but the physics is spot on - particularly the bit at the end about constantly speeding up and slowing down which is inevitable with a higher limit and less likely at a lower limit.

 

I’ve just come home after a visit to Perth. The whole city centre is now one big 20mph zone.
Tbh I never felt too much difference to how it normally was. In fact it possibly helped with traffic flow.
So if it helps to lessen accidents I’m all for it.

 

No way can you compare traffic in the 1970's to today. With the volume of traffic on the roads now, slow it down to 55mph on the motorways and we'd be in trouble.

 

Again not true, why do you think they have variable speed limits on the busiest sections of motorways? Because without them they rapidly become car parks. I used to drive through the M42 section for work before it changed and it was a complete nightmare, I spent hours sitting in traffic queues on many occasions. Since the variable speeds I've never got stuck in a jam on the road. I don't use it as much as I used to but it's our main route south from where we live and still use it often enough.

Oh and you can compare the 70s to today, back then we had fewer motorways and the ones we did have had a much lower capacity (fewer lanes) so the traffic to capacity ratio is very comparable.

 

I suppose from the perspective of the car driver it's exactly same situation.
They could say "love it when a bike overtakes me at traffic lights only for me to overtake them once again"

 

So everyone's happy

 

Again?

 

I once overtook a bloke on a bike. Ten seconds later he flew past me on the inside. I put my foot down and overtook him again, only for him to shoot past me on the inside again. This happened again and again, even though I was driving faster and faster every time. Eventually I slowed right down and wound down my nearside window..
at which point he stuck his head inside and said, "Would you mind stopping please, my braces are caught on your wing mirror."

(One of Freddie Starr's, I think)

 

Thought I’d put this here rather than made me laugh thread

 

How dare you question The Party! All cars should be banned for safety and the environment. Only travel if absolutely necessary. It's for your own good.