Why do people think 25km/h speed limitation is safe?

I'm sorry but I completely disagree with the 25km/h speed limitation on bike.

I'm for now riding a non electric bike (sent back my slow one) and have an average speed of 15-20km/h. And I feel it's really dangerous on the road because I'm way too slow compared to the cars surrounding me.

Today I was riding and I've seen so many cars irritated by my speed. I do my best to stay "safe" on the road and ride on the bus lane.. But even THE BUS IS WAY FASTER THAN ME and try to pass over me...

Some cars act like I'm 'non-existant' and just run like I wasn't allowed to ride on the lane. Many times I could have an accident if wasn't so cautious. Sometime I just want to run on the walking road but it's forbidden.

The truth is that bikes are too fast on the walking road and too slow on the "car road". Why limit our speed at 25km/h when no cars around me run at this speed? That transform me into a "burden" or "road blocker" for others cars. I just don't understand why nobody say anything about this speed difference on the road.

This low speed seriously handicap me. Unless I'm on bike lane (which is rare), running at 15-20km/h is dangerous because I'm too slow. I avoided a tunnel because cars were way too fast.

I do believe that for my own safety, bike speed on the road should be at least at 30km/h. And weather I'm at 20km/h or 40km/h, being crushed by a car would have the same terrible consequence...

Any though?

Edited August 21, 201114 yr by cwah

I use my bike on the roads, but only on quiet roads like bus route lanes and small roads mainly. I don't feel too confident on roundabouts, dual carriage ways and motorways because at the end of the day it's a bicycle I'm riding amongst fast moving traffic and I have no indicators etc.

I see what you're saying but I think there is a some wisdom in the 25km/h speed restriction. It's a reasonable speed to travel without pedalling still I think and keeps the pedelec still firmly in the bicycle category so it can retain the flexibility to travel on pavements etc. If you pedal under power you can easily go faster and get a reasonable travelling speed of around 20mph without much effort. Would you be able to pedal if you had a motor delivering speeds of around 20mph and above?

From a safety point of view, if you had pedelecs going faster than that without pedalling, it could present a danger to pedestrians on pavements and built-up areas, plus a danger to pedelec owners themselves on the road. Would you be able to stop safely at high speeds, and some motorists might not be expecting something looking like a bicycle to travel that fast which could cause problems.

Also how would you classify bikes then? Would they still be bicycles or something that sits between bicycle and moped and requires licensing etc?

Also, bicycles are not generally designed or suitable to travel at moped-style speeds, and that introduces a whole host of problems regarding build safety and handling on and off roads, and how to ensure the bikes are built and operated safely.

If you want or need to go faster than 15mph without pedalling on the road, I think really you should be considering an entry level electric moped.

Edited August 21, 201114 yr by morphix

My point is that it is dangerous to cycle slowly. And 25km/h restriction would be fine if I wouldn't always have cars/bus trying to pass over me everytime..

I think the speed is a little bit too restrictive and made it dangerous. A speed limitation of 32km/h like in Canada/US wouldn't hurt and I would feel less threatened on the road.

And for the moped, I'm considering this. But I've no place to park it in my place and it's really difficult to park anything in London. Bike still seems more practical.

If you want or need to go faster than 15mph without pedalling on the road, I think really you should be considering an entry level electric moped.

Rubbish. I happily tootle along at 25mph (indicated) on the flat and that's enough for me. The throttle works both ways, you know.

What we have to remember is that our electric bikes are classed as bicycles and because of this we enjoy many privilages and easments over a motorcycle or moped. No helmet, no MoT, no insurance, no VEL, and ability to ride on cycle paths to name but a few.

I view the electrical assist element of an electric bike as something to help with hill climbing, for pushing into a headwind, or for just maintaining a utility cycling speed on the flat if I'm not feeling overly energetic. I don't think the electrical assist should be viewed as something for adding additional speed to a bicycle, but more as something which helps you maintain a reasonable and normal rate of progress through changeable terrain / weather conditions.

I can see how higher assist speeds may help you keep up with the general flow of traffic and as a consequence reduce the number of times that you are overtaken, which may reduce risk. But the downside would almost certainly be the loss of some of the freedoms we enjoy through more regulation.

I would say that you are at no more risk using an electric bike than you are using a normal unassisted bike. If you feel the need to go faster on two wheels for the sake of perceived, "safety" you need to switch modes of transport to a moped and incur the additional regulation.

I can't see the law changing to allow for faster ebikes to be used anytime soon.

If you want or need to go faster than 15mph without pedalling on the road, I think really you should be considering an entry level electric moped.

I am inclined to agree with Morphix in general, but specifically this last point! The line needs to be somewhere.

As I suggest to my Institute of Advanced Motorist pupils, "can you stop safely in the distance you can see to be clear, on your side of the road"???

if the answer is Yes, then speed is not an issue, but the Yes must be based on the fullest Observation.

this answer is a also govern by another Question, which is are you Obstructing other vehicles, and on a cycle especially in London with bollarded central islands, the answer is probably Yes, but maintaining a sAFE POSITION always takes precedence

being e powered helps these situation, but having an excess of 25k/hr available will bring with it the risk of inappropriate speed, which as the Motoring Section of the Saturday Telegraph described this week is one of the main causes of accidents

First of I'm sorry you feel unsafe on the road with your bike. Nothing worse.

I ride on very busy roads in birmingham and sometimes cares do get a bit close. However the majority do give you plenty of space and to be honest I've probaboly got used to it.

Sometimes being a bit slow is actually safer because people can over take easier than if I was travelling say 20mph in which to do a decent over take they would need to at least be doing 30mph+

Which is usually to quick for those roads. Yes you may get over taken less but the cars / vans and lorries wil lneed to be doing some speed to get past safely.

The majority of cyclist I see around Cambridge are already a danger to themselves and everyone else without giving them quick e-bikes.

As someone who has a quick e-bike I would like it to either (a) stay as it is, where the few motivated to build a quicker bike are likely much more experienced riders or (b) introduce a two tier system where one requires a competency test, even insurance I'd be happy to pay.

The fact is my e-bike doesn't go much quicker than me just peddling. The difference is I can't maintain that speed over a distance or into head wind, so the speed of my powered bike is not really anything from what I've already been used to for a number of years.

Most people are only used to pootling around town at 10-15 mph so to put them on a quick e-bike that's suddenly doing 25ish would be a disaster waiting to happen.

There is no limit to the speed allowed on an e-bike.

It's just that if you wish to take advantage of the concession which defines our particular type of e-bikes as pedal cycles, then you have to accept the restrictions.

To go faster would require better handling, better brakes, better suspension. I can easily get up to 40mph on my Tonaro because I live on top of a big steep hill. But frankly, it is terrifying.

See my response here as well on this subject in an adjacent thread.

.

 

What makes you think that your disc brakes hydraulic or otherwise are better than quality rim brakes?

What makes you think that your disc brakes hydraulic or otherwise are better than quality rim brakes?

Experience of both.

You don't see any half serious cross country or downhill mountain bikers without decent hydraulic discs, the reason for that is that they have greater stopping power and are suffer less performance loss in adverse weather conditions.

Edited August 24, 201114 yr by peasjam

Experience of both.

 

You don't see any half serious cross country or downhill mountain bikers without decent hydraulic discs, the reason for that is that they have greater stopping power and are suffer less performance loss in adverse weather conditions.

While the second is certainly true, the first isn't. A disc brake's performance is primarily set by the disc diameter, faster vehicles have larger discs. A rim wall is the largest disc brake possible on a bike, and if the brake is of equal design quality and type, the rim brake will easily outperform the much smaller discs.

But as said, rim brakes are much less help in wet and muddy conditions and can even be useless then, hence the cross country and downhiller's preferences.

Indeed, a rim brake is effectivly a disc brake. But the weather difference is spot on.

Thats why most road bikes do not require disc's. They are heavier and offer no real improvement in dry conditions.

Some Motorbikes like Buells use a rim brake setup which look quite cool. I've never used one but i'm sure they are effective. Since alot of stunt teams use them.

And then there's super discs like these on the Matra MS1 e-bike!

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/09/9-28-07-ms1_3.jpg

While the second is certainly true, the first isn't. A disc brake's performance is primarily set by the disc diameter, faster vehicles have larger discs. A rim wall is the largest disc brake possible on a bike, and if the brake is of equal design quality and type, the rim brake will easily outperform the much smaller discs..

Except you're forgetting contact area, pad compound and the greater amount of force a hydraulic calliper can exert against the disc. It's not all about diameters; my old car had drum brakes on the rear which were larger diameter than the front discs. Guess which ones had more braking force.

Road bikes use rim brakes not because they are better but because the application doesn't require immediate and large braking forces to the same degree a downhill or cross country mountain biker does, thereby making the weight penalty an overall disadvantage and the rim brakes a better overall choice.

Edited August 24, 201114 yr by peasjam

Except you're forgetting contact area, pad compound and the greater amount of force a hydraulic calliper can exert against the disc.

No, I said subject to equality of design and type, i.e. equal on the factors you mention.

Your comparison of drum and disc brakes is invalid for a whole host of reasons, in the same way that apples and oranges cannot be compared for superiority.

Hydro Calipers I believe are a bit overkill for a bicycle application. There more complicated and require more painful care than a cable operated system.

However in applications like Cross Country and downhill they have there need.

The Car brake one was a bit or a worrying comparison. Cars generally have a set Front / rear brake bias.

The rear drum may only have one piston lever plus there on the rear. If the same force was sent to the rear the wheel would lock.

Front brakes are usually 2 or more pistons in a floating caliper, while the disk itself ranges from solid, to pitted and groved, to vented. Heat is dispersed even quicker in the front wheels due to the air rushing in from moving forwards. Even more so if you have alloy wheels.

Anyway its a bit off topic. I just find that the feel of brakes and pads outweights how powerful they are from the inital bite.

The way bikes are setup with the center of gravity chances are you'll end up over the bars with most braking systems...

No, I said subject to equality of design and type, i.e. equal on the factors you mention.

 

Your comparison of drum and disc brakes is invalid for a whole host of reasons, in the same way that apples and oranges cannot be compared for superiority.

Except it's not is it; both are mechanical systems designed to exert a braking force on a rotating axle. It seems odd that you feel it's not reasonable to directly compare them, parrticularly as you seemed perfectly happy to compare rim brakes with discs which, again, are different mechanical solutions to the same problem.

My disc brakes have less than 0.5mm of piston travel in the calliper for around a quarter distance pull of the lever. This compares to around 3mm for the brand new Avid V brakes on my wife's bike. The disc system has a much greater mechanical advantage than the V brake which more than compensates for the smaller diameter of the rotor compared to the rim. There is no way you could set up a rim brake with such small tolerances unless you stopped to true your wheel every few miles, they can never have anything like the braking force of a good disc system.

 

Except it's not is it; both are mechanical systems designed to exert a braking force on a rotating axle. It seems odd that you feel it's not reasonable to directly compare them, parrticularly as you seemed perfectly happy to compare rim brakes with discs which, again, are different mechanical solutions to the same problem.

Completely untrue. One's shoe pressed on the front tyre exerts a braking force on a rotating axle. Would you really compare that with other braking systems.

There are a large number of physical differences between a drum and disc brake which crucially affect their materials and relative performances.

Conversely, a rim brake is physically just a larger diameter disc brake, very directly comparable and calculated for in identical ways.