Speeding cyclists

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers said:

See

eveningnews24.co.ukstory.aspOpen ↗
+11%3A28&tbrand=ENOnline&tCategory=NEWS&category=News&brand=ENOnline&itemi
d=NOED21+Feb+2004+11%3A28%3A48%3A113

or

tinyurl.com2mngtOpen ↗

"Danger warning to speeding cyclists

I've read most of this thread and frankly I've rarely been as unimpressed by the hypocrisy of some
of the views here. Somehow it's acceptable to exceed the speed limits or ride drunk, if you're on a
bike, but not so if you're in a car? How? If you run into a pedestrian at 35mph on a bike you may
indeed not be *as likely* to kill or seriously injure them as you are in a car, but you are
*likely* to. The only saving grace is that you are just as *likely* to do the same to yourself in
the process.

How can you people pretend to assume the moral high ground, as many of you do when it comes to using
the road, when you display these sorts of attitudes? Of course, there is no direct *law* that says
you can't speed on a bike, but how does that make it right? There may be relatively few KSI as a
result of being on the pedestrian end of a bike, but then there are relatively few bikes. How can
some of you argue with the next tosspot or Smith from u.r.t than comes on here arguing that there
should be less speed cameras when you lot seem to think it's a game to try to set them off, just
because you can't be prosecuted?? What you *are* doing is reinforcing that argument that speed
cameras are only there to restrict the freedom of motorists to drive at whatever speed they like -
because they don't apply to you, you feel you have the right to cycle at any speed you like.

Quite frankly, all you lot are doing is reinforcing any arguments anyone might have for legislating
on bikes. There is absolutely no reason, technical or otherwise, that bikes and bike riding can't be
subject to the same set of (speed, drink-riding) laws as motorised traffic and drivers. There is
already plenty of legislation - it would take only a small change to require all new bikes to have a
fitted, functional, properly calibrated speedo, and be required to use it.

--
Trevor Barton

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:52:24 +0000, Sue <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In message <[email hidden]>, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

tinyurl.com2mngtOpen ↗

Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool,

Oh, come on - we've all had a go, haven't we? With our club jersey on? And the phone number of our
mate who works at the police speed traps office ready on our mobile so we could ask him to grab the
picture for us?

Perhaps the location mentioned in the article isn't suitable for this activity, but there are lots
of speed cameras in places that are.

I would be interested to know the locations of speed cameras where you think is safe for cyclists to
exceed the camera's trigger speed...

Vincent Wilcox said:

David Hansen said:

On 21 Feb 2004 16:40:41 GMT someone who may be [email hidden]
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote

Quoted message said:

"All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those >speeds down Grapes Hill.

Though he presumably thinks it fine to travel at such speeds in a motorised vehicle.

Of course because we all know that motorised vehicles are inherently safer and controllable at
those speeds... Ring, ring, hello, no im driving down the hill., what, yes, no terrible hangover,
how are you feeling ...

What's the stopping distance for a bicycle at 30mph?

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 23:27:35 -0000, MSeries <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

vernon levy said:

Wheres Killhope Moor ? BTW

NW Durham near Stanhope. You'll have been pretty close to it on the C2C.

Vernon

Is it the one out of Stanhope to the moor, where the Rookhope wagonway meets the road. I missed
the turn in Rookhope, some other cyclists were stood in front of the sign, and ended up riding up
that very steep hill out of Stanhope.

The Rookhope incline (the wagonway) is as steep as the road option, Crawleyside Bank, but a damn
sight rougher. If you are on a road bike then the Bank is the better option, though the gated road
from Rookhope to Stanhope gets you off the main road.

Colin
--

vernon levy said:

Quoted message said:

Is it the one out of Stanhope to the moor, where the Rookhope wagonway

meets

Quoted message said:

the road. I missed the turn in Rookhope, some other cyclists were stood in front of the sign, and
ended up riding up that very steep hill out of Stanhope.

on the C2C climbing out of Nenthead you'd ordinarily take a left turn to Allenheads before
reaching the Killhope Summit and Killhope Moor on the
A689. The whole area; Tynedale and Weardale has some great challenging roads thar are quite
lightly used. Looking at the road maps of the area has go my yearning for a few days riding
and camping in the area.

It is a fantastic area, I'm lucky enough to live in the north Pennines. There are some very nice
quiet roads and some great hills. Take care though on the roads that directly connect places like
Stanhope and Hexham, Stanhop and Consett, etc as these can be narrow, winding and with lots of dips
yet they are fast with a lot of dangerous overtaking from car drivers.

Colin
--

Colin Blackburn said:

MSeries said:

vernon levy said:

Wheres Killhope Moor ? BTW

NW Durham near Stanhope. You'll have been pretty close to it on the C2C.

Vernon

Is it the one out of Stanhope to the moor, where the Rookhope wagonway meets the road. I missed
the turn in Rookhope, some other cyclists were stood in front of the sign, and ended up riding up
that very steep hill out of Stanhope.

The Rookhope incline (the wagonway) is as steep as the road option, Crawleyside Bank, but a damn
sight rougher. If you are on a road bike then the Bank is the better option, though the gated road
from Rookhope to Stanhope gets you off the main road.

Colin

Yes, the second time I did C2C we took the wagonway, many riders found it too much and walked.

--
The Reply & From email addresses are checked rarely. mseries.freeserve.co.ukmseries.freeserve.co.ukOpen ↗

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:09:28 -0000, MSeries <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

vernon levy wrote: The whole

Quoted message said:

area; Tynedale and Weardale has some great challenging roads thar are quite lightly used. Looking
at the road maps of the area has go my yearning for a few days riding and camping in the area.

Mmm, a possibility for Easter maybe, instead of the Dales.

If anyone is cycling in that area and they fancy stopping for a cuppa at my place (on a small road
between Blanchland and Rookhope) then just let us know by email beforehand and if I'm in you'd be
most welcome to stop by. I should also promote the White Monk tearooms down in Blanchland as a stop---
though avoid summer weekends.

Colin
--

Colin Blackburn said:

It is a fantastic area, I'm lucky enough to live in the north Pennines. There are some very nice
quiet roads and some great hills. Take care though on the roads that directly connect places like
Stanhope and Hexham, Stanhop and Consett, etc as these can be narrow, winding and with lots of
dips yet they are fast with a lot of dangerous overtaking from car drivers.

Also, when I was last up there, Northumbrian Water goons erecting temporary traffic lights & digging
big holes in inconvenient places.

Regards,

-david

Colin Blackburn said:

MSeries said:

vernon levy wrote: The whole

Quoted message said:

area; Tynedale and Weardale has some great challenging roads thar are quite lightly used.
Looking at the road maps of the area has go my yearning for a few days riding and camping in
the area.

Mmm, a possibility for Easter maybe, instead of the Dales.

If anyone is cycling in that area and they fancy stopping for a cuppa at my place (on a small road
between Blanchland and Rookhope) then just let us know by email beforehand and if I'm in you'd be
most welcome to stop by. I should also promote the White Monk tearooms down in Blanchland as a stop---
though avoid summer weekends.

Colin

Thats a kind offer. Cheeers.

--
The Reply & From email addresses are checked rarely. mseries.freeserve.co.ukmseries.freeserve.co.ukOpen ↗

Mr. Edwards is an ignorant fool. I strongly advise having nothing whatsoever to do with him...

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Gareth A. <[email hidden]> wrote: ) What's the stopping distance for a
bicycle at 30mph?

If you give the front wheel 90-degree twist by yanking on one end of the bars you can probably stop
the bicycle in significantly less than its length. What the stopping distance for the rider is in
such a stop is less certain.

Gareth A. said:

What's the stopping distance for a bicycle at 30mph?

About 30m (based on 0.4G deceleration) cf 23m for a car (according to the Highway Code)

Tony

Zog The Undeniable said:

Going up to the North Pennines in April. I reckon I should be able to join the 100km/h (62.14mph)
club coming off Killhope Moor :-)

I managed 64.5 mph there once, but that was on a part-faired recumbent. I reckon most bikes would
top out at around 50-55. Last time I was there I only hit 70 km/h coz it was raining. :-(

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Trevor Barton said:

I've read most of this thread and frankly I've rarely been as unimpressed by the hypocrisy of some
of the views here. Somehow it's acceptable to exceed the speed limits or ride drunk, if you're on
a bike, but not so if you're in a car? How?

Same way as it's ok to exceed the speed limits on foot, or walk/run when drunk. Unless you'd like to
outlaw them too?

James

Gareth A. said:

I would be interested to know the locations of speed cameras where you think is safe for cyclists
to exceed the camera's trigger speed...

There's one about here:

streetmap.co.uknewmap.srfOpen ↗
srf&searchp=newsearch.srf

Not too much of a problem to reach the speed at which it ought to go off when cruising merrily down
the bus lane. It's never gone off for me though.

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Tony Raven

BGareth A. said:

What's the stopping distance for a bicycle at 30mph?

About 30m (based on 0.4G deceleration) cf 23m for a car (according to the Highway Code)

Tony [/B]

Surely there is far too much variability in bikes to be able to give a decent value for stopping distance even when ground conditions are the same. Imagine stopping on an MTB with disk brakes and compare that to a racing bike or a fixed with front brake.

2LAP said:

Tony Raven said:

Gareth A. said:

What's the stopping distance for a bicycle at 30mph?

About 30m (based on 0.4G deceleration) cf 23m for a car (according to the Highway Code) Tony

Surely there is far too much variability in bikes to be able to give a decent value for stopping
distance even when ground conditions are the same. Imagine stopping on an MTB with disk brakes and
compare that to a racing bike or a fixed with front brake.

They should all be able to reach the sort of decelleration as the limit is usually the rear wheel
lifting, not the brakes not being good enough. See Sheldon Brown on braking for chapter and verse

Tony

Trevor Barton said:

I've read most of this thread and frankly I've rarely been as unimpressed by the hypocrisy of some
of the views here. Somehow it's acceptable to exceed the speed limits or ride drunk, if you're on
a bike, but not so if you're in a car? How? If you run into a pedestrian at 35mph on a bike you
may indeed not be *as likely* to kill or seriously injure them as you are in a car, but you are
*likely* to. The only saving grace is that you are just as *likely* to do the same to yourself in
the process.

I think you have well and truly grasped the wrong end of the stick. First, doing 30mph is for most
of us, hills aside, more a fantasy than reality but its always nice to speculate and pretend. Second
we are talking about matters of law not practice. I would always advocate riding or driving at a
speed that is safe for the circumstances and that does not mean at the speed limit. Its just that
legally there is no cap on bicycle speeds giving you freedom to go faster than the speed limit while
cars are legally required not to exceed it - provided circumstances are appropriate. Finally on your
injury point, a bicycle doing 30mph probably has the same injury potential as a car doing 10mph
(based on a 100kg to 1000kg ratio) with much greater potential of injury to the cyclist than the
motorist if there were an accident.

Tony

In article said:

On 21 Feb 2004 16:40:41 GMT someone who may be [email hidden]
(dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote

Quoted message said:

"All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those >speeds down Grapes Hill.

Though he presumably thinks it fine to travel at such speeds in a motorised vehicle.

Is it really likely that a spokesman for the Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership thinks it is
fine to speed past a camera in a motorised vehicle?

Vincent Wilcox <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Gonzalez wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The magistrate puffed himself up and said, "NO! No! no! Mr *Gonzalez*. That is quite wrong! It
wasn't Carling Black Label. It was Heineken.

Stunner. Ive oft wondered whether I would TT faster if I mounted a can of guiness on the end of
the aero bars.

Best to squeeze the can gently in a vice to give it an oval cross section.

--
Dave...