Why not speed limits?

[Mr. Coffee]

I was hit by turning vehicles (right turns because I am in the States) twice in the 90's in basically the same scenario.

Even with a grade-separated bike lane turning traffic can be deadly.

 

[Browneye]

IMO the bike class regulations are an effort to protect the consumer. A max speed limit is too logical, if a trail needs one you put one on it, otherwise ride whatever you want up to beyond Class3 where you license them as motor vehicles. Otherwise, if you want to kill yourself, go for it. Just don't hit anybody else. Cars and motorcycles don't have a governor, they have a speed limit on the roads they drive on. Bikes should be the same way.

There will always be a dingaling that will mod his bike and wreck himself - deal with the exceptions instead of boxing everyone else in.

 

[Nutella]

What I don't get about the video in the prior post: is that the driver passes the cyclist and therefore must be aware of his presence? No? I can see this happening if the cyclist was catching and passing vehicles. But I fail to understand how it happens when the vehicles are passing the cyclists and therefore must be aware of their presence.

This happens to me often in our bike lanes but I haven't been hit yet. The city buses are the absolute worst offenders. They will pass me - a couple of times the driver has given me a double horn honk as a warning - and then pull right into my path and block the bike lane. Whereas, were they to wait for me, they might be delayed a few seconds at most. I once went to the bus administration office and made a complaint. It got nowhere of course. But I didn't have video evidence.

Drivers underestimate the speed at which you are riding, they think that since you are on a bike, you must be slow and ridin like a kid with training wheels. I've had that happen countless times, they speed up, pass you and think they've left you far behind, when in reality you are still sitting just off their back bumper. If I hear anyone speed up to pass me in an urban area I keep my eyes open for them to cut me off.

 

[Rick53]

No Offense but this is mind Boggling : Why would anyone what More Regulations ?? They never accomplish what they are claimed to take care of . It's confusing to me Why someone would wish for more Govt Intervention : SPEED LIMITS?? Who honestly always Obeys them??? Everyone Speeds and those who don't are because they don't drive very well and are usually going to slow : I don't get why Someone would want to pay the state to ride a Bicycle : Then next they require Insurance etc.

IMO Foolishness

 

[Asher]

IMO the bike class regulations are an effort to protect the consumer. A max speed limit is too logical, if a trail needs one you put one on it, otherwise ride whatever you want up to beyond Class3 where you license them as motor vehicles. Otherwise, if you want to kill yourself, go for it. Just don't hit anybody else. Cars and motorcycles don't have a governor, they have a speed limit on the roads they drive on. Bikes should be the same way.

There will always be a dingaling that will mod his bike and wreck himself - deal with the exceptions instead of boxing everyone else in.

The analogy to cars and motorcycles doesn't hold. Mopeds have a speed limit of 30-35 mph depending on locale, and usually have lower licensing/insurance requirements. And may be able to use bike Lanes.

So between the licensing burden and access to bike Lanes, there's a very different reason to limit bike speeds.

One concern of mine is desensitization. If you're used to going say 45 mph, you're going to want to do that everywhere regardless of circumstance. Moderation to you will be say, 35 mph. Especially if you have a full suspension and all. Whereas with an e-bike that tops out at 28 mph, a moderate speed will be considerably lower.

 

[Asher]

No Offense but this is mind Boggling : Why would anyone what More Regulations ?? They never accomplish what they are claimed to take care of . It's confusing to me Why someone would wish for more Govt Intervention : SPEED LIMITS?? Who honestly always Obeys them??? Everyone Speeds and those who don't are because they don't drive very well and are usually going to slow : I don't get why Someone would want to pay the state to ride a Bicycle : Then next they require Insurance etc.

IMO Foolishness

Yes what's needed is speed limiters which actually work. The EU is implementing them. (lol I know this will enrage you)

Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA)

For years, speed has been recognised as one of the three main contributing factors to deaths on our roads. And for more than a decade, ETSC has been advocating the benefits of Intelligent Speed…

etsc.eu

 

[6zfshdb]

Yes what's needed is speed limiters which actually work. The EU is implementing them. (lol I know this will enrage you)

Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA)

For years, speed has been recognised as one of the three main contributing factors to deaths on our roads. And for more than a decade, ETSC has been advocating the benefits of Intelligent Speed…

etsc.eu

An interesting approach but how long will it take for someone to come up with a hack? Just look at all the posts here on EBR about delimiting motor controller speed limits.

 

[Mr. Coffee]

No Offense but this is mind Boggling : Why would anyone what More Regulations ?? They never accomplish what they are claimed to take care of . It's confusing to me Why someone would wish for more Govt Intervention : SPEED LIMITS?? Who honestly always Obeys them??? Everyone Speeds and those who don't are because they don't drive very well and are usually going to slow : I don't get why Someone would want to pay the state to ride a Bicycle : Then next they require Insurance etc.

IMO Foolishness

I think it reasonable to argue that some regulations go too far and do more harm than good. To say that regulations "never accomplish what they are claimed to take care of" makes absolutely no sense and can only be described as deranged.

 

[Asher]

An interesting approach but how long will it take for someone to come up with a hack? Just look at all the posts here on EBR about delimiting motor controller speed limits.

It's like locksmiths say, locks are for the 98%. 1% will always get through the lock, 1% will never steal, and the rest of us are lazy opportunists.

Also with cars, these are established brands with huge liabilities to worry about, so they have much more incentive to make a hard to hack limiter. Provided they can be sued by people/governments if it fails and enables crashes/deaths.

Also, it provides herd immunity. If everyone else is speed limited and the roads aren't empty, you're held back too.

 

[Browneye]

The analogy to cars and motorcycles doesn't hold.
>snip

Sure it does. They have speed laws too.

 

[AHicks]

Sure it does. They have speed laws too.

In today's world, I don't think car and motorcycles rules are relevant when it comes to bikes either.
Speed limits for cars and motorcycles have been around long enough to have the enforcement of those laws budgeted to the point where they are being enforced. Enforced well enough where compliance becomes a matter of common sense. You CANNOT say either of those points are true regarding bikes (budgeted enforcement and mostly voluntary compliance).

They're still working on what common sense bike speed limits would even look like! What we have now is so stupid it's mostly not enforced!

 

[Asher]

In today's world, I don't think car and motorcycles rules are relevant when it comes to bikes either.
Speed limits for cars and motorcycles have been around long enough to have the enforcement of those laws budgeted to the point where they are being enforced. Enforced well enough where compliance becomes a matter of common sense. You CANNOT say either of those points are true regarding bikes (budgeted enforcement and mostly voluntary compliance).

They're still working on what common sense bike speed limits would even look like! What we have now is so stupid it's mostly not enforced!

speed limits on cars are not adequately enforced. that's why the eu is passing a law to patch that, and says may thereby reduce crash deaths up to 30%.

Arguments around speed come down to what George Orwell identified 80 years ago - people are okay trading human lives for a little speed, everything else is just sleight of hand.

 

[Browneye]

Exactly...cuz its just not a problem yet. If it becomes so, then people will have something to say. Speed limits work, all that flim-flam nanny-state BS does not.

We have 22million people in so-CAL and it's just a non-issue. Pretty much everyone gets along, peds, horses, bikes. The only time there are restrictions is where there's a lot of pedestrians, then speeds are limited.
The class system is fine, but it's fuzzy at best. You couldn't ride 28mph on the strand if you wanted to, just wouldn't happen.

Everybody thinks you can legislate morality - that ain't happening either.

 

[AHicks]

Exactly...cuz its just not a problem yet. If it becomes so, then people will have something to say. Speed limits work, all that flim-flam nanny-state BS does not.

We have 22million people in so-CAL and it's just a non-issue. Pretty much everyone gets along, peds, horses, bikes. The only time there are restrictions is where there's a lot of pedestrians, then speeds are limited.
The class system is fine, but it's fuzzy at best. You couldn't ride 28mph on the strand if you wanted to, just wouldn't happen.

Everybody thinks you can legislate morality - that ain't happening either.

Agree with your thoughts here, but struggling on the relevance of car and motorcycle speed limits.

For instance, if you assign a 5mph speed limit to a section of popular multi use trail, and there's nobody around to enforce it, what kind of compliance would you expect? Do you think that because a speed limit has been established that authorities will just start enforcing?

Assign a section of residential street, where kids are often found playing, with a 20mph limit, and consider which of the posted speeds you are most likely to exceed. The bike trail speed limit, or the residential street? Why?

 

[Browneye]

Agree with your thoughts here, but struggling on the relevance of car and motorcycle speed limits.

For instance, if you assign a 5mph speed limit to a section of popular multi use trail, and there's nobody around to enforce it, what kind of compliance would you expect? Do you think that because a speed limit has been established that authorities will just start enforcing?

Assign a section of residential street, where kids are often found playing, with a 20mph limit, and consider which of the posted speeds you are most likely to exceed. The bike trail speed limit, or the residential street? Why?

I think you're splitting hairs. If you're setting a safe speed to ride, just like any other conveyance, you either adhere or you don't, but putting additional regulations in to somehow curb the equipment just seems draconian, illogical. At least to a point. And yeah, at some level of motorization the bike ceases to be a bike, whether to be allow at all or not.

If no one is patrolling the freeway I can go 100mph in my car. [shrug] If they are I'm likely to get cited.
You're talking about a limit and enforcement like they are inextricably connected, and they're not. If limits are set and not followed then enforcement becomes necessary. Otherwise people self-police. Wherever there are rules and limits there may or many not be an enforcement element present. Does that mean you shouldn't set them anyway?

I don't know why this seems complicated to some. Must be a different mindset. I'm just not getting it.

Waterways are a another example. For inland ways they're set for safety, but even more importantly to keep wakes down so as not to upset moored watercraft. This goes right along with your paved bike path example - the limit is set for the safety of others present - which my example again was, you couldn't make 28mph on that strand if you wanted to. The speed limit is set for 10mph. If you're exceeding that, regardless of the conveyance, it's a violation.

Oh well, I'm out. Have fun with it!

 

[AHicks]

I think you're splitting hairs. If you're setting a safe speed to ride, just like any other conveyance, you either adhere or you don't, but putting additional regulations in to somehow curb the equipment just seems draconian, illogical. At least to a point. And yeah, at some level of motorization the bike ceases to be a bike, whether to be allow at all or not.

If no one is patrolling the freeway I can go 100mph in my car. [shrug] If they are I'm likely to get cited.
You're talking about a limit and enforcement like they are inextricably connected, and they're not. If limits are set and not followed then enforcement becomes necessary. Otherwise people self-police. Wherever there are rules and limits there may or many not be an enforcement element present. Does that mean you shouldn't set them anyway?

I don't know why this seems complicated to some. Must be a different mindset. I'm just not getting it.

Waterways are a another example. For inland ways they're set for safety, but even more importantly to keep wakes down so as not to upset moored watercraft. This goes right along with your paved bike path example - the limit is set for the safety of others present - which my example again was, you couldn't make 28mph on that strand if you wanted to. The speed limit is set for 10mph. If you're exceeding that, regardless of the conveyance, it's a violation.

Oh well, I'm out. Have fun with it!

Simple version of my thought. You can make all the rules you like, including speed limits. but with no enforcement/teeth to back them, they are a waste of ink/bandwidth.

Regarding water, I've lived on the water for the last 40 years and feel very safe saying no wake zones and speed limits are an absolute joke with no cops on the lake to enforce them. Add in the (clueless) weekend warriors to that idea, and you have what I see every holiday weekend. A real zoo.

 

[Alaskan]

When you are a big dog, dog eat dog works for you....not so much when you turn into an old big dog or come up lame.

 

[steve mercier]

One concern of mine is desensitization. If you're used to going say 45 mph, you're going to want to do that everywhere regardless of circumstance. Moderation to you will be say, 35 mph. Especially if you have a full suspension and all. Whereas with an e-bike that tops out at 28 mph, a moderate speed will be considerably lower.

I disagree. Some local trails are marked 10 kmph. They may be congested with dog walkers. I know how to slow down and use Eco until I am clear and then resume my 35 kmph. I do not know what kind of mindless juvenile E bike riders you fear are roaming the streets.

 

[Asher]

I disagree. Some local trails are marked 10 kmph. They may be congested with dog walkers. I know how to slow down and use Eco until I am clear and then resume my 35 kmph. I do not know what kind of mindless juvenile E bike riders you fear are roaming the streets.

Onyx RCR goes up to 60 mph. Sur Ron to 47 mph. Bunch of others go up to 35. Plenty of bike paths that aren't congested but still dangerous to do >25 mph.

 

[steve mercier]

Onyx RCR goes up to 60 mph. Sur Ron to 47 mph. Bunch of others go up to 35. Plenty of bike paths that aren't congested but still dangerous to do >25 mph.

if it goes 60 mph it is not an E bike it is an E moto