Why not speed limits?

FInx

New Member
Someone in the UK on a de-restricted ebike hit and killed a pedestrian. They estimate the rider was going 30mph. They were on the street, in a vehicle lane. In my opinion, this is not an ebike at this point, it's a vehicle, and the driver and vehicle should be properly licensed and insured, just like any other road vehicle.

 

Captain Slow

Well-Known Member
Agreed.

They have to figure out a way to regulate ebikes more effectively. It's not an easy thing to do, but it's necessary.
 

steve mercier

Well-Known Member
Someone in the UK on a de-restricted ebike hit and killed a pedestrian. They estimate the rider was going 30mph. They were on the street, in a vehicle lane. In my opinion, this is not an ebike at this point, it's a vehicle, and the driver and vehicle should be properly licensed and insured, just like any other road vehicle.

A cyclist was killed about 5 km from here last week by a vehicle that was properly licensed and insured.
 

AHicks

Well-Known Member
A cyclist was killed about 5 km from here last week by a vehicle that was properly licensed and insured.
That happens in Florida way too frequently. Pedestrians as well. If you are riding in a bike lane protected from traffic by nothing more than a painted line, you're taking your life in your hands. I refuse. Will not ride under those conditions.
 

Over50

Well-Known Member
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.
 

Mr. Coffee

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Active Member
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

Active Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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)

 

Mr. Coffee

Well-Known Member
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Asher

Well-Known Member
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.
 

AHicks

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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?
 
Last edited: