Mulger bill wrote:Methinks it's time this copped another airing...
Image courtesy Rick Smith and the Kickstand.
That's Gold M B.....
Popular Bike Shops
Join the Cycling Forums on Strava
Latest Reviews and Articles
Drizt wrote:The danger levels now are all that matters to me. The cars that nearly hit me are real. Unless you are telling me they only exist in my mind.
human909 wrote:Across the world children roam the streets. In Australia they don't. We have issues in our society that go far beyond attitudes to cyclists.
koshari wrote:in some countries people drink alcohol and dont feel obliged to fight one another. strange world indeed.
Squashed wrote:In my opinion, any child under 8 should not be allowed to ride a bike in public, unless on a suitable path with adult supervision. Children see differently to adults and up to the age of 8, they have tunnel vision and only see what is directly in front of them. They do not see things on their sides. This puts young children at particular risk of being hit by things or having the child ride into something on their side.
g-boaf wrote:Around here, some of the back streets are the domain of the rat-runners and local hoon drivers.
diventare wrote:Of course it could just be that 2000's kids, having been driven everywhere since babyhood, simply harbor no interest in self propulsion when they have a family taxi to use.
il padrone wrote:g-boaf wrote:Around here, some of the back streets are the domain of the rat-runners and local hoon drivers.
With more kids riding, and as a result less 'Mum's-taxis' on the roads (notice how quiet the roads are right now - school holidays), there is less pressure on drivers to go rat-running. Roads are quieter and safer all round. Hoons demand greater enforcement, pure and simple.
BTW, I am talking about suburban roads, where the average distance to schools is still generally less than 5kms (unless you're taking the private school option, I won't comment on that). Generally a 13km ride to school means you are in a rural or semi-rural setting. Different scenario there.
Calvin27 wrote:Not the speed limit thing... When I used to ride back streets, it was all 60 zones.
Calvin27 wrote:I'd say it's safer keeping your eyes on the road than keeping glued to the speedo!
Contrary to belief, drivers dont actually want to kill kids in bikes. Not even hoons.
il padrone wrote:If you do not know your car well enough and cannot judge your speed by sound, passing objects, surrounding traffic, and accelerator pedal pressure then it begins to look like the driving competence is in question.
il padrone wrote:Calvin27 wrote:I'd say it's safer keeping your eyes on the road than keeping glued to the speedo!
Contrary to belief, drivers dont actually want to kill kids in bikes. Not even hoons.
This is the usual trotted out, no matter what the limit set is. In the NT they complain about 130 "too dangerous driving with your eyes on the speedo".
If you do not know your car well enough and cannot judge your speed by sound, passing objects, surrounding traffic, and accelerator pedal pressure then it begins to look like the driving competence is in question. I know that I can happily drive along my residential streets on 50, with minimal glances to the speedo. If your car really just tries to leap forwards maybe driving a gear lower will help to restrain it. Whatever the issue, maintaining a steady legal speed is your responsibilty. Blaming the speed limit for your speeding lacks any credence.
Calvin27 wrote:I have no issues with sensible speed limits and agree that most drivers should be able to maintain the correct speed with little glances at the speedo.
Calvin27 wrote:I'd disagree that you can 'feel' how fast a car is going even if you've been driving the same car all your life. In a manual, you will have some idea because you can judge by which gear you are in. In an auto, which is most of the school shuttles, no way.
Calvin27 wrote:If you can feel 50kph good for you, but this is not a requirement in license testing of any sort so don't expect everyone to be able to do it too.
Calvin27 wrote: My response was to the suggestion of 30kph. At that speed, I'm pretty sure most drivers will be watching their speedo more than the road.
koshari wrote:il padrone wrote: It's the 8-18 yo children, who in the past used bikes for basic transport about the suburb, mostly on residential back streets
the only rule we had as kids was to be home before the streetlighting came on, otherwise a rap over the ass with a length of Hotwheels track ensured. its abazing how quick the old hotfoot could go it i saw a streetlight in the distance begin firing up.
il padrone wrote:Calvin27 wrote:If you can feel 50kph good for you, but this is not a requirement in license testing of any sort so don't expect everyone to be able to do it too.
Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say that I could 'feel' my speed, but rather that I am capable of judging my speed*, using a range of indicators. One of these is the speedo, and once I am travelling at a certain speed it is relatively easy to maintain that speed in a stable state, without some nefarious speedo-staring.
Aussie drivers really need to get over the speed-mania and acknowledge that the idea of holding back on it is seen as an infringement to their masculinity and not much else. Then our roads may begin to get seriously safer.
Speed. Arrogance. Aggression. Distraction. All play a major part in our poor road toll. But knock the speed down and the others are all far less severe.
il padrone wrote:Calvin27 wrote:I'd disagree that you can 'feel' how fast a car is going even if you've been driving the same car all your life. In a manual, you will have some idea because you can judge by which gear you are in. In an auto, which is most of the school shuttles, no way.
Well I drive an auto Ford wagon, and somehow I manage to stick to whatever speed I need to abide by, with minimal speedo-staring.
Calvin27 wrote:Yeah nice. Point stands, you might be able to *judge* speed without looking at the speedo too much but for most trying to maintain 30kph is difficult without constantly glancing at the speedo. The margin for error is greater at lower speeds and particularly lower gears. If you have a CVT or EV then good luck to you trying to judge by vehicle response.
Calvin27 wrote:Really speed mania? Are we still talking about 40/50kph zones? No one feels masculine doing 50 in a 40 zone no matter how you frame it. Even if you put a bunch of teens in a hotted up commodore, no one will even begin to think the driver is a badass by going 50 in a 40 zone.
Calvin27 wrote:I'd argue that the speed issue is peaking and we have solved most speed associated problems now. With speeds dropping to very safe levels and vehicle technology improving the marginal benefit is no longer significant.
Calvin27 wrote:Sure people speed, but that itself is not a failure of the adequacy of the speed limit but application of it - which is an attitude problem not a speed limit one. Anyone who advocates 30kph in school zones needs to present serious evidence that this will improve accidents. Audit after audit, they all point to people not following the speed signs as the problem, not the need to lower to 30kph. It's a stupid suggestion that achieves nothing. Would a kid ride their bike on the road if the speed changed from 40 to 30kph? No, the car is still there and mum will be worried because the risk of a car is still there regardless. Knocking the speed down will do 3 things - the obedient drivers will spend more time looking at the speedo, those that speed will continue to do so and a new intermediate bunch that are not hoons but can't handle going so slow will try to overtake the first bunch. So what will be achieved?
Effect of 20 mph traffic speed zones on road injuries in London, 1986-2006
Results: The introduction of 20 mph zones was associated with a 41.9% (95% confidence interval 36.0% to 47.8%) reduction in road casualties, after adjustment for underlying time trends. The percentage reduction was greatest in younger children and greater for the category of killed or seriously injured casualties than for minor injuries. There was no evidence of casualty migration to areas adjacent to 20 mph zones, where casualties also fellslightly by an average of 8.0% (4.4% to 11.5%).
Conclusions: 20 mph zones are effective measures for reducing road injuries and deaths.
What are the benefits of lowering speed limits?
For pedestrians aged between 25 and 64, countries with an urban speed limit of 50 km/h or less have an average death rate 30% lower than countries where the urban limit is 60 km/h. Each year on Victorian roads, pedestrians comprise around 15% of deaths and 11 per cent of serious injuries.
Percrime wrote:Thats because you drive a auto ford wagon. With an engine designed in the early stone age.. lots of torque.. no revs.. a sludgy transmission and an essentially inefficient package made halfway decent with bolt on injection and engine control management. And a car subject to road and outside noise at that. I used to drive fords for a living and I know. But now repeat the experience in a modern sub 1.5 litre car with a manual transmission. A far more efficient, modern and safer car more likely than not. Especially to anyone you hit.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.