20 mph limits

[Lootman]

Three nights ago, when driving out of an estate road towards our town, I was obeying the 20mph limit when a car came up behind, hung around for about 10 seconds before pulling out and overtaking, then roaring off ahead of me. It was dark with ineffective street lighting, icy, and the road has speed humps... Mind you, it would probably have been the same story if I'd been doing 30.

No, the problem is that if the natural speed on that road is 30 but an artificially low limit applies, say 20, then anyone obeying that limit will be slowing down everyone else, and thereby inviting risky overtaking. At 30 that might happen occasionally, but much less often.

20 is really slow for anywhere other than a crowded inner city area. Frustratingly slow in fact. People going too slow create a hazard whether legal or not. In America there are traffic laws that require you to pull over if 5 or more cars are following you, in recognition of that hazard and its potential for accidents.

[vrdiver]

No, the problem is that if the natural speed on that road is 30 but an artificially low limit applies, say 20, then anyone obeying that limit will be slowing down everyone else

An alternative viewpoint is that anybody exceeding that speed is breaking the law and by overtaking, potentially putting other road users in danger (note the conditions I described).

"M'Lud, I drive a Tesla Model 3 and was in Ludicrous mode, the car simply HAS to go faster than 20mph!" may not be the wisest defense

[Lootman]

No, the problem is that if the natural speed on that road is 30 but an artificially low limit applies, say 20, then anyone obeying that limit will be slowing down everyone else

An alternative viewpoint is that anybody exceeding that speed is breaking the law and by overtaking, potentially putting other road users in danger (note the conditions I described).

"M'Lud, I drive a Tesla Model 3 and was in Ludicrous mode, the car simply HAS to go faster than 20mph!" may not be the wisest defense

I believe it is possible to be cited for causing an obstruction even if you are driving at the limit, if you allow a buildup of traffic behind you. Which is why the US has the law I mentioned.

If you sit in the "fast lane" of a motorway on the basis that you are going at 70 mph, you are not being a considerate driver and probably not a safe driver either.

But I would agree with you that there are two ways of looking at such things. And this is only a problem if the limit is set too low.

[Arborbridge]

No, the problem is that if the natural speed on that road is 30 but an artificially low limit applies, say 20, then anyone obeying that limit will be slowing down everyone else, and thereby inviting risky overtaking. At 30 that might happen occasionally, but much less often.

There's no such thing as a "natural speed". If the imposed speed limit is 20mph that is the speed limit not some phoney concept dreamed up by drivers to rationalise their misdeeds. If I drive at the speed limit, I do not invite overtaking: the dynamics of the event come from those who are too impatient to obey the law and think they have the right to make me disobey it. If they get frustrated that is a problem within themselves - traffic does frustrate at times, but if someone cannot live with it, and temper it, they are a danger on the roads.

Arb.

[swill453]

I believe it is possible to be cited for causing an obstruction even if you are driving at the limit, if you allow a buildup of traffic behind you.

If you're in an overtaking lane with a clear lane to the left, maybe. But in the inside lane or on a single lane road - no.

Scott.

[vrdiver]

I believe it is possible to be cited for causing an obstruction even if you are driving at the limit, if you allow a buildup of traffic behind you. Which is why the US has the law I mentioned.

If you sit in the "fast lane" of a motorway on the basis that you are going at 70 mph, you are not being a considerate driver and probably not a safe driver either.

But I would agree with you that there are two ways of looking at such things. And this is only a problem if the limit is set too low.

In the UK, the Highway Code is very clear on what is allowed and what is not. I refer you to paragraphs:

124. You MUST NOT exceed the maximum speed limits for the road

125. The speed limit is the absolute maximum

152. Residential streets. You should drive slowly and carefully on streets where there are likely to be pedestrians, cyclists and parked cars. In some areas a 20 mph (32 km/h) maximum speed limit may be in force

My example was set on a residential estate, so the motorway discussion is irrelevant. Ditto the US law as per the discussion re 20mph zones.

[richlist]

My main experience with 20mph roads is that where I live they are almost always:
* Outside schools and
* Come with speed humps.
So, depending on the car I'm driving, I sometimes slow to 10mph to ride over the speed humps.
I'm never going to drive any faster over the speed humps in a low ground clearance car because my priority is not to damage the car.
It doesn't matter to me how frustrated people behind me get, that's how it is.
They can always take a different route if they want avoid the 20mph area.

[Arborbridge]

My main experience with 20mph roads is that where I live they are almost always:
* Outside schools and
* Come with speed humps.
So, depending on the car I'm driving, I sometimes slow to 10mph to ride over the speed humps.
I'm never going to drive any faster over the speed humps in a low ground clearance car because my priority is not to damage the car.
It doesn't matter to me how frustrated people behind me get, that's how it is.
They can always take a different route if they want avoid the 20mph area.

Around my old house on the very edge of London, the whole area outside main roads became 20mph zones. Motorists did not like their wings being clipped: respecting the safety and peaceful progress of children, people out with babies in pushchairs or prams and/or young children, or people walking home with shopping is not the motorist's priority.

The general problem about these various interfaces is that one group has little knowledge of the experience of the other group. If motorists had a sense of what it was like for those groups of pedestrians, they might have more empathy. Because I do most of my shopping by walking (have done for ten years) when I am driving, I am suitably cautious, particularly when I see pedetrians ahead: the thought should always be "What if they stumble or do something irrational, what if round the next bend there is someone in the road or a broken down car?".
This isn't just an advanced driver technique: it's commonsense. Don't drive in the hope that nothing will go wrong, because eventually, it will.

What suprised me over the years was the high percentage of offending drivers who weren't young boy racers, but were grey haired middle class people who really ought to know better.

Arb.

[richlist]

Let's also remember that a small, perhaps very small number of impatient drivers who may overtake and drive a little faster than you may be dealing with an emergency.

[Arborbridge]

Let's also remember that a small, perhaps very small number of impatient drivers who may overtake and drive a little faster than you may be dealing with an emergency.

Fair dos, but that can't account for the widespread law breaking I experience.

[AF62]

My main experience with 20mph roads is that where I live they are almost always:
* Outside schools and
* Come with speed humps.
So, depending on the car I'm driving, I sometimes slow to 10mph to ride over the speed humps.
I'm never going to drive any faster over the speed humps in a low ground clearance car because my priority is not to damage the car.
It doesn't matter to me how frustrated people behind me get, that's how it is.
They can always take a different route if they want avoid the 20mph area.

Roads with humps are the old 20mph zones. The new 20mph zones don't have humps and look like this - https://goo.gl/maps/kMKDe4Pkaa7vM5Fy7 hence people getting frustrated if actually do 20mph, and are being overtaken by cyclists!

[swill453]

Roads with humps are the old 20mph zones. The new 20mph zones don't have humps and look like this - https://goo.gl/maps/kMKDe4Pkaa7vM5Fy7 hence people getting frustrated if actually do 20mph, and are being overtaken by cyclists!

Our 20mph zones look like 30mph zones with the signs changed to 20mph. Because that's literally all they've done.

Scott.

[richlist]

Well we don't want frustrated drivers do we ?
I rarely get overtaken by cyclists or anyone else when driving at 20 in a 20 limit.
Even if I were overtaken.....so what ? I have far more important things in my life.

[AF62]

Well we don't want frustrated drivers do we ?
I rarely get overtaken by cyclists or anyone else when driving at 20 in a 20 limit.
Even if I were overtaken.....so what ? I have far more important things in my life.

You are missing the point.

I don't get frustrated by cyclists overtaking me when I do 20mph, which I do as I just set the speed limiter to 20mph, but it is all the other cars behind who are getting frustrated that I am doing 20mph on what was a 30mph road until the council changed the signs - and then to add salt into the wound, we are all being overtaken by cyclists.

[richlist]

Well we don't want frustrated drivers do we ?
I rarely get overtaken by cyclists or anyone else when driving at 20 in a 20 limit.
Even if I were overtaken.....so what ? I have far more important things in my life.

You are missing the point.

I don't get frustrated by cyclists overtaking me when I do 20mph, which I do as I just set the speed limiter to 20mph, but it is all the other cars behind who are getting frustrated that I am doing 20mph on what was a 30mph road until the council changed the signs - and then to add salt into the wound, we are all being overtaken by cyclists.

Yes I certainly am missing the point.
I just don't understand why you are concerned about the drivers behind you becoming 'frustrated'.
You must be a very caring person to be concerned about people in cars behind you.
My advice is stick to the limits, keep your eyes on the road and worry about something else.

[AF62]

Well we don't want frustrated drivers do we ?
I rarely get overtaken by cyclists or anyone else when driving at 20 in a 20 limit.
Even if I were overtaken.....so what ? I have far more important things in my life.

You are missing the point.

I don't get frustrated by cyclists overtaking me when I do 20mph, which I do as I just set the speed limiter to 20mph, but it is all the other cars behind who are getting frustrated that I am doing 20mph on what was a 30mph road until the council changed the signs - and then to add salt into the wound, we are all being overtaken by cyclists.

Yes I certainly am missing the point.
I just don't understand why you are concerned about the drivers behind you becoming 'frustrated'.
You must be a very caring person to be concerned about people in cars behind you.
My advice is stick to the limits, keep your eyes on the road and worry about something else.

You might drive along in a bubble ignoring everything around you, but strangely I do care about the drivers behind when they become frustrated and attempt stupid overtakes, and although I am not bothered if they kill themselves in the process, it does bother me that their stupidity might have an impact on other road users and especially me.

[richlist]

No I certainly don't drive around in a bubble ignoring everything around me but, I do try to stick to speed limits which have usually been introduced for a good reason. I have an ability to only worry about those things I can do something about. As I can't do anything about other drivers who don't want to stick to speed limits......I let them get on with their day. I have no intention of changing my driving habits in order to accommodate their inability to comply with the rules.

So, I'm still missing the point you are trying to make. Would you prefer the 20mph limits raised so that the drivers behind you are less frustrated ? Would you prefer the rest of us to drive faster ? What do you want ?

[vrdiver]

Well we don't want frustrated drivers do we ?
I rarely get overtaken by cyclists or anyone else when driving at 20 in a 20 limit.
Even if I were overtaken.....so what ? I have far more important things in my life.

You are missing the point.

I don't get frustrated by cyclists overtaking me when I do 20mph, which I do as I just set the speed limiter to 20mph, but it is all the other cars behind who are getting frustrated that I am doing 20mph on what was a 30mph road until the council changed the signs - and then to add salt into the wound, we are all being overtaken by cyclists.

So what is your solution?

#1 Pull over and let them pass you
#2 Break the law, exceed the speed limit
#3 Campaign for faster speeds through residential areas
#4 Obey the law and let them figure out their own issues.

VRD

[Arborbridge]

You might drive along in a bubble ignoring everything around you, but strangely I do care about the drivers behind when they become frustrated and attempt stupid overtakes, and although I am not bothered if they kill themselves in the process, it does bother me that their stupidity might have an impact on other road users and especially me.

I can't see the logical end to that.... effectively it means going at the speed of the fastest and most easily frustrated driver. There doesn't seem much future in that.

Do not be cowed by bullies behind you who seem to imagine that you ought to be breaking the law to please them. What right have they got to put you in that position?: ignore them. If they cause an accident it will not be on your conscience.

Arb.

[Arborbridge]

You are missing the point.

I don't get frustrated by cyclists overtaking me when I do 20mph, which I do as I just set the speed limiter to 20mph, but it is all the other cars behind who are getting frustrated that I am doing 20mph on what was a 30mph road until the council changed the signs - and then to add salt into the wound, we are all being overtaken by cyclists.

"What was a 30mph road" is a red herring. It is now a 20mph road - that's the only thing that people need to know. No one should care about the history or use it as an excuse to break the law.
I expect it was once an unlimited road back in the 30's, but so what . Irrelevant.

Arb.