Suzuki V-Strom (VStrom) Owners Club DL250, DL650, DL1000 & DL1050
Other Stuff => The Blue Oyster bar => Humour => Topic started by: Brockett on September 18, 2023, 19:39:05
-
There seems to be some significant confusion here in Wales regarding Speed Limit change and so, I thought I would help by briefly explaining how the change works so that there can be no confusion:
Any roads that were previously 30 will now be 20 apart from the roads that aren't going to be 20, which will still remain as 30. When you see street lights you have to assume that the roads will be 20 even if the signs still say 30 because despite the signs saying 30, the roads could be 20, apart from, of course, the roads (as explained above) which will remain 30 despite them being 20. It's also important to remember that there will still be a number of roads which despite them having streetlights will not be 20, and in these cases they could be 30, 40, 50, 60 or even 70, however, always bear in mind that even if the signs on these roads still state 30 they could, of course, be 20 unless they are one of the roads that have been designated 30, in which case the 20 restriction will not apply.
I trust that clarifies. It's really not difficult.
-
Brockett. You sound like future Prime minister material. So it's 30mph everywhere then just to be safe. I know this will come to England too. When it does I will sell my DL650A and buy a 50cc scooter or maybe an electric bike and save my licence. :thumb:
The longer I live in England the more I want to leave but where in the world is better? The world has gone Mad!
-
At my age all I am fit for is President of USA
-
Undemocratically forced on us here in Wales unfortunately with no consultation. A recent poll on Wales Online showed 90% objection and a massive petition was submitted to the Wesh Assembly saying 'no' but still Mark Drakeford and his mob bulldozed it through to come into force yesterday! I went out today in Swansea and many many roads have gone 20 mph, mainly in residential areas. The signage is confusing with half being daubed in silver paint. Even a stretch of 40 had signs painted over. The advice is - 'if in doubt go 20'. When calibrated, the speed cameras will show no mercy - 20 or 3 points!!! The police say they will chat helpfully to begin with (oh yeah!) Many vehicles today were driving at 30 or more in defiance (but wait till the cosh starts coming down). There are a few exceptions to 30 around town but most places require constant rubber necking to see what the hell you should do.....not very safe driving/riding to say the least. Argument is it will save lives. Road rage and silly overtakes more likely. Still we are stuck with it unless the Conservatives put a reversal on their next manifesto! Don't know what it's like in more rural Wales but I understand each village will require you to slow down to 20. Bicycles will undertake in town (no penalty) and motorcycle filtering will be plagued by jaywalkers. The other home nations are viewing our experience with interest or maybe terror! For the moment I fancy moving back to England and what it will do for the tourist industry I don't know - holiday in Wales and lose your licence by the time you get home! :shock:
-
I drove to Carmarthen yesterday and I am not exaggerating when I say that I was in a queue of around 50 cars, all bunched up together because of this absolute lunacy. Let's save the environment huh? :crazy:
The signs are all over the place, some 20 and some 30. People are unsure so are braking hard at every village. Some drivers are clearly unsure and are hedging their bets, driving at 25mph. Others at 17 - 18mph :dl_smiley_banghead:
-
Drivers will find the non-20 routes, and because they are longer, will drive at 40 through the still-30 areas. More miles, more petrol, more risks.
-
Vote we all drive/ride at 10mph until the government come to their senses. Oh wait a minute :crazy:
-
Just drive to what the sign says... Not that hard ... Brockett has explained it eloquently :shrug:
-
To avoid the uncertainty, ride at 20mph and 30mph at the same time.
Doing 50mph will cover both bases.
-
On the way back from FatRat's on Sunday I went through one little village that had some lovely new sign posts.. nice fresh galvanised posts with new signs.
The first pair of signs as you come into the village says 20... 10 ft later the the next pair say 30. :crazy: :shrug:
All were fresh new post/signs so not a new set and an old set.
-
Edinburgh is 20 mph on virtually all streets except main bus routes. As is most of Scotland. Been like this for a few years now,. No drama. I'd rather we didn't have these limits, but we do. Looks like a lot of the hysteria is generated by desperate right wing tabloids.
-
Right wing tabloids and me.
I was pretty hysterical on that trip to Carmarthen, screaming words like 'lunatic labour fuckwits'.
-
To be fair, Welsh conservatives voted for it also when the bill was presented to the Senedd.
I expect there will be widespread exemptions to the 20 limit as local councils try to placate the pitchfork-wielding mob.
-
https://www.v-strom.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=18151.0
-
.
-
Rusty,
It's a question of do as I say ......
-
Now, now :icon_batterup:
-
If ANY government is genuinely serious about road safety they need to include pedestrians into the mix and give them specific duties under the highway code. These aimless creatures, their attention usually captivated by a smart phone or oblivious to traffic sounds due to wearing 'idiot plugs', can wander out in front of you (at whatever speed) and you as a driver will be held to blame if you hit them - unless you can prove that they did something which you could not 'reasonably' predict. Make it compulsory to use pedestrian crossings, not to cross between parked cars, be obliged to look both ways before corossing etc. A few sentences in the highway code would go a long way... A pedestrian hit a 20 mph can still die just as easily as one hit at 30 mph!
-
:text-goodpost: "Ambling without due care and attention."
-
For better or worse the people of Wales have consented to this situation as it is at this moment in time.
The practicalities of reversing decisions like this through the normal democratic process entails politicians and others who oppose potentially facing (for instance) a mother accusing them of the death of her child because it was struck by a vehicle at thirty miles an hour but would have survived if the speed had been twenty.
Given this those who have championed it believe that regardless of democratic support now or in the future it will never be reversed.
A referendum on the matter though not devoid of being influenced by emotional blackmail would maybe provide a practical democratic route.
-
90% of Welsh respondents didn't want it. Does that make Drakeford a dictator? Discuss.....or not, the rules, you know.
-
I had a go at riding through the 30mph village where I live today. Most people come through at a speed of at least 40mph and there is often a speed camera van almost hidden away at the edge of the village where drivers are usually travelling slowest but aiming at the on coming traffic entering the village from 60mph and almost always speeding. To be honest, 40mph would be completely safe in my opinion.
Riding at 20mph seemed ridiculous. I don't think I'll be going to Wales any time soon. :icon_no:
-
To be honest, 40mph would be completely safe in my opinion.
Riding at 20mph seemed ridiculous. I don't think I'll be going to Wales any time soon. :icon_no:
Come on Doc, totally wrong on 40mph! Completely safe, my a*se.
I drive in Germany occasionally where 20 mph (30 kph) in villages and towns is normal. Even France has similar limits in built up areas. Yes, at first it wasn't what I was used to but where's the fire?
Don't go to Wales then.....and maybe a lot of other places in the future.
-
" A pedestrian hit a 20 mph can still die just as easily as one hit at 30 mph!"
Especially if you reverse back over them as well. :shock:
-
I suspect a serious topic like this should not have been in the 'humour' forum...I
I'm surprised (and not surprised) by all the misinformation being bandied about.
Reminds me of the hoo -ha when drink- drive legislation was beefed up, or seat belt wearing made compulsory, or laws on mobile phone use while driving, and the rest.
You cannot alter the fact that the kinetic energy of a given vehicle is proportional to the speed squared. In plain English, double the speed, you've got 4 times the motion energy to dump into other forms. Remember those Highway Code stopping distance charts...
I suspect a lot of the wailing now is from the some of the same people who have wanted road safety measures put in near their kid's school or on their rat-run streets...
-
If velocity is the killer, why so few pedestrian deaths on motorways?
Because people don't generally wander across them.
Maybe it's not all the big bad drivers who are at fault.
Ever since 1816 the roads have been improving, allowing faster, safer and more comfortable travel over longer distances. The vehicles have evolved to use these roads.
It would be interesting to see if speed was the sole factor in the deaths attributed to it. Drink, drugs, mobile phone use, as well as pedestrian stupidity would, I suspect, all contribute.
-
Well since the reduction from 20mph to 10mph will be a 50% reduction instead of a 33% reduction, the statistics and physics will be an even stronger argument than this time around. You heard it here first ;)
Seriously though, the hypocrisy of road safety strategy annoys me more than this specific change.
'Seatbelts are compulsory and anyone even thinking of not using one is a certifiable moron', also 'you should take the bus which is essentially a shipping container full of scaffold poles with no seatbelts being driven by a complete stranger at the end of a long shift'.
'Driving is killing people and the planet and should be stamped out at all costs', also 'we'd like people back in their offices more because the landlords are all losing rent and Pret aren't selling enough sandwiches'.
We have a fair few 20 limits in Sheffield now but they're all on streets which are either parked up solid on both sides or have schools on them. I can totally get on board with that, I find it scary driving those roads at any speed as I'm constantly on the look out for that errant football from the hazard perception test. However, Penistone road is also 30mph and it's 4 lanes wide with a central reservation, no parking allowed and no residential buildings along it's entire length. Making that 20mph simply because you want a nice easy blanket change that doesn't involve any thought or planning would be almost as dumb as including the ring road in your clean air zone so all the vans shortcut through the suburbs past all the schools. Oh hang, no, Sheffield did do that didn't we :)
-
It is difficult to argue against lowering the speed limits if you then agree with drink drive and SRS legislation. All these laws will reduce KSI figures, it's science and you can't argue with science. Whether we want to ride at 20 or not is immaterial. It's the law. Science driven law.
If you don't like it then don't ride on the roads, simples.
Scotland did this years ago and the sun still came up, there's an awful lot of derestricted roads to ride on. OK, I lied about the sun coming up in Scotland.
I used to like the French system but politicians buggered it up, if you saw the town sign, slow down, when you see the exit sign it was game on.
We are a little spoiled in North Northumberland, we don't have a roundabout, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings and not many 30 limits for about 20 miles or more in any direction. But it's horrible, you wouldn't enjoy it, go to Llandudno instead........please.
Upt.
:icon_batterup:
-
Informed consent.
No absolute for the overwhelming majority of people.
All a judgement on what the compromise should be between safety and the environment against economic benefit and convenience.
Turn every road that's currently a thirty into a twenty gets more of the former against a loss of the latter etc. :shrug:
When every big construction project is started it's known that it'll probably cause lost lives and severe life changing injurys :shrug:
Kinetic energy.
Einsteins first law of thermodynamics.
Energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another.
Solar energy millions of years ago turned into crude oil turned into a RTC in Wales this morning...
-
Oh absolutely you can't argue with the science, but then you wouldn't be able to argue with the science of 10mph or banning driving completely.
* Or to go full tin foil hat, strictly for comedic effect, banning smoking, drinking, cycling, skiing, crisps, biscuits or overly energetic sex.
To be clear, these changes won't effect me obviously since I work from home (and don't live in Wales) but I do think it's a bit simplistic to tell people who commute or take kids to school or run a transport business that they could simply not travel on these roads. I would just like to see a little more targeting and balance rather than blanket changes that seem more about ease/grand gestures for the rule makers than an attempt to assess specific scenarios.
-
"can't argue with science" no, but people can and do manipulate scientific data and statistics to suit their own particular agenda.
-
I'm sure the people of Wales will make their views known at the next elections.
In the meantime, if the limit is 20mph, do 20mph where it's safe to do so.
As well as making it safe for pedestrians involved in RTCs, part of the aim of this is to encourage alternative transport so I suppose some folks who can may make the switch, which may ease congestion for others who can't/choose not to.
Incidentally, I was knocked off my bicycle last year by an AA van turning left across me with no warning at around 20mph and it bloody hurt and took months to recover from. If they'd hit me at 30 or 40mph I'm sure I'd have been injured much worse. Same would apply if I'd been on the motorbike at the time and knocked off.
I do advocate lower speed limits in built-up areas but see the point about blanket approach rather than it been given due thought/justification for the change.
-
The first speed awareness course since the introduction of the new limit was busy....
-
Of course politicians manipulate data, don't we all?
Upt.
-
@ Robostar5 that was lol lol lol
-
I lived in a village called Poltimore. It has become a rat run for commuters who travel through at 30mph. 30mph is too fast, the road is single track with no pavements, there are pedestrians, dog walkers, cyclists and horses to say nothing of tractors towing heavy machinery. A milk tanker drives to the local farm every day and when hay is ready large lorries with just as large trailers use the narrow roads too.
The local councillor asked for the speed limit to be lowered to 20mph and to be honest that is to fast during busy rat run times. The answer was no, it must remain 30mph. There were and still are accidents in the village all the time, it's crazy.
The village I now live in is Whiddon Down. The speed limit is 30mph and as I said before, is in my opinion too slow. I don't mind it being 30mph and I don't brake the speed limit in the village but it is slow.
Speed limits are for people who don't understand what speed is safe and what is not. The same road can be safe or dangerous at different times and a good driver/rider knows that and maintains a safe speed. When I did my advance riding course years ago I was told the course probably wouldn't slow me down but make me safer but faster.
If you you ask the internet what speed do most motorcycle accidents happen at, the answer is 30mph. Does that mean that 60mph is twice as safe? :roll: :thumb:
-
I agree with a 20mph limit in specific streets and agree that 20 is too fast for some, such as the street that leads to my place. Narrow street with cars parked nose to tail both sides and just enough room for a trasit van down the middle.
-
Maximum here is 35mph with many roads 25 and even some at 15, you’ll get use to it, but there again I haven’t, that’s why I can’t wait to get to France for a week at the weekend 😝
-
Speed limits are for people who don't understand what speed is safe and what is not. The same road can be safe or dangerous at different times and a good driver/rider knows that and maintains a safe speed. When I did my advance riding course years ago I was told the course probably wouldn't slow me down but make me safer but faster.
If you you ask the internet what speed do most motorcycle accidents happen at, the answer is 30mph. Does that mean that 60mph is twice as safe? :roll: :thumb:
Wow, how wrong is that! There is no such thing as a safe speed. The 'limit' is a maximum speed, even for you. It takes into cosideration general expectations of ability, conditions and anticipated traffic flow etc. of everypne. Things change, reduce speed. I too have passed my IAM but at no time was I given any green light to exceed speed limits. On the contrary I learnt to use speed, behaviour and position to highlight my prescence on the road to increase my safety. That made me more confident any maybe quicker in my travels, not faster.....I leave that to the Police. The attitude of "I know how to drive/ride better than you" doesn't change everyone else and above all they don't know you.
Personally I consider your last sentence totally inappropriate "asking the Internet" for a non qualified question to which you don't agree with the answer either.
You have all my respect Doc but I can't agree with you here.
-
Ditto my experience doing the IAM bike test. They were very keen for you to 'make progress' where conditions allowed but breaking traffic rules such as speed limits was a big no-no.
Used to live near Hendon and would see loads of police bikers with learner plod bikers. They were amazing at how they'd go miles without ever touching the brakes, always being in the right position on the road at the right speed at the right time. Must have helped having more well-behaved drivers around once they'd clocked that you were the police though!
-
Joe. Ref: Personally I consider your last sentence totally inappropriate "asking the Internet" for a non qualified question to which you don't agree with the answer either.
You have all my respect Doc but I can't agree with you here.
Can't you see a sarcastic joke when you see it. When I ride my main goal is to stay alive and not hurt anyone. Second goal is to ride with a smile on my face. I also don't take life too serious, it's too short. If I have upset you then one day, if we meet, I'll respectfully buy you a pint and apologise but until then, sorry. :thumb:
-
Right, we have established that there are some sensible bikers on this forum - well done chaps :icon_wink:. OK just for the record are there any more on here who like to be a bit naughty sometimes ?......just checking :grin:
-
I have no problem with 20s but.
Speeding 7th.
-
It'd be interesting to know how they determined that % of drivers/riders were exceeding the speed limit at the time of a RTC? I'm guessing they're guessing.
-
Number 3 includes driver/rider in a hurry...
-
Number 9 'too fast for conditions'...
-
Number 2 'driver failed to judge other persons path or speed'?
Maybe one of the vehicles was within 'the speed limit' but was the other?
Add all the above together & speed becomes number 1 in one form or another?
-
That list perfectly highlights the difference between 2 very similar phrases;
"Accidents in which speed is a factor" (That's all of them as presumably they would all be avoided if everyone was stationary :icon_wink:)
"Accidents in which SpeedING is a factor".
Assuming those stats are in any way accurate, lowering speed limits will do less to reduce the total number of accidents than to reduce the severity of those accidents which already occur as a result of all the non-speeding related factors.
It's back to the question of what level of risk is deemed acceptable when talking about humans whizzing around in 2 ton hunks of metal. Assuming we all accept that 'zero risk' is not an attainable target.
I'm not suggesting I have an answer btw, other than perhaps targeting these reductions would be a more popular and more easily explained approach than the current, rather poorly communicated, sledgehammers and nuts scenario.
-
Hello Doc! Yes, I know you saw it as silly. However, asking the Internet is not going to get truth.
As for that beer, then yes. .....and no apology, I'm not upset. Healthy debate heh? :)
-
It's nice to see no 'busting for a dump' accidents on the list, talk about adding insult to injury...
-
Has anyone read "The Flying King" by Terry Jones?
-
I find I am very much more awake and 'in the moment' when I'm hooning (on private land) than when I'm bored to tears in slow moving traffic.
-
Over the years I think I've crashed in all 10 of those most common accidents, sometimes more than once!
-
I don't see stopped and dropped on that list :shrug:
-
For those who don't live in Wales and think 20 might be a good idea - come to Swansea and ride the route I did today with top box containing frozen fish.....my normal 15 minute trip from Morrisons to home took me 1/2 an hour cos of the new jams and some 15mph drivers. Mind, the cyclists thought it was great! Would have taken 45 in the car but thanks to my trusty DL1050 and some pretty careful filtering as usual I managed to slip between the crawlers and get my not too soggy load home! It is definitely not good news for buses, taxis, car commuters, emergency vehicles, commercial vehicles etc and on the bike you tend to wing it when you can - not the idea but you know how it is fellow :auto-dirtbike:
No, you can quote statistics all day long about causes of accidents etc but take it from me '20 is not plenty in Wales.' :dl_soapbox:
The safety statistics are open to debate but for most road users it's a retrograde step. To me it's a sledgehammer to crack a walnut which is why for the majority of the UK - 30 is plenty! Schools and busy streets I'm OK with if we have to have 20. My advice to pedestrians is stay on the pavement and cross when the green man tells you.
-
And they want to reach net zero, good luck. Slower traffic, more traffic jams, more idling, more pollution. Also, lower speed limit will encourage people crossing the roads in front of cars, therefore more accidents instead of less. Seriously stupid idea. I don't mind 20 in front of schools but the rest I silly....
-
'Seatbelts are compulsory and anyone even thinking of not using one is a certifiable moron', also 'you should take the bus which is essentially a shipping container full of scaffold poles with no seatbelts being driven by a complete stranger at the end of a long shift'.
A highly trained professional "complete stranger" who drives all his shift not just the end bit.
-
Sorry, I didn't mean to disparage bus drivers, that was unfair.
I guess I meant that they're asked to drive long shifts by the very people who want you to use the bus. I communicated that very badly, point taken.
-
:thumb:
-
.
-
One of my pet theories is that a significant number of Give Way signs at T junctions should be replaced by Stop signs.
It would (IMHO) only cause a marginal reduction to overall traffic flow for a significant improvement in safety [#1].
Particularly motorcyclists.
-
I agree with the above 100%. If people approached a Give Way with the intention of stopping unless they can see it's clear to go instead of the intention of going unless they manage to see a bike (or car) with the slightest glance whilst not slowing enough. :roll:
-
+ for 2x above. I stop on give a way signs anyway, when aproaching a junctions with give away signs for other drivers than me I also slow down, to many morons not looking.
-
I agree too but I'd reinforce Doc's point. A STOP is no movement but most people roll anyway irrespective of their observations. :roll:
-
I'm sure I read Spain has introduced cameras at Stop signs to fine folks who don't stop. Am sure if that proves to
improve safety generate money, it'll be introduced everywhere
-
Fast bikes can be safer than slower ones - T junctions, overtakes, whatever. You don't have to use the power but when needed...... gets you out of trouble. Generally, smaller engine machines require a more cautious approach. We are talking experience here - not newbies and certainly not clowns! Fast, defensive riding on 1000cc and up is where a lot of bikers spend their latter years. It's probably why police riders are supplied with 'big' bikes. Things like the 20 limit might help some but interfering with road dynamics to overcautious levels can actually cause more issues.
I've no problem with careful road users but unhelpful changes by politicians ###.
20 is plenty..... :icon_exclaim:
On another front, I see the petition objecting to the new 20 mph restrictions is approaching 400k votes! That's a huge section of affected Welsh licence holders who think it's wrong.
-
I'd read something saying that a lot of the signatures on the petition were from people outside of Wales, and even outside the UK... Even 400k won't change the outcome even if they were all from Wales.
-
A ride around Chelmsford today shows that most drivers can't obey the 30 mph limit. In the event that 20 limits are imposed there, some folks heads will explode with anger. Lets be honest, deep down, we are all a little bit like Mr Toad ( of Toad Hall - if you're familiar with the story).
-
I suspect far more people worry about points on their licence than public safety. Slow down for a speed camera for instance then speed up after it is out of sight maybe?
:smirk:
-
I think it was Mark Williams (Bike mag) in the 80s who made a good case for dangerous driving being the only driving penalty,getting rid of speed limits.
My take on the lowering of speed limits is that it is a tacit admission by "the man" that driving/riding standards have dropped to the point they had to be seen to do something and changing limits was easiest.
This next bit will NOT be popular but .............a 10 year licence and retest would sort a lot of problems.
-
I would fully support a ten year re-test, standards have dipped so much it's a joke. This would help to weed out the blind, incabable, out-of-date and plain simple dangerous.
And while you're at it change marriage licences to 10 years too...
-
What? walk your wife around a series of traffic cones and then stop suddenly ( and not outside a shop)
-
".a 10 year licence and retest would sort a lot of problems."
Yes, but some of us might struggle with that :shock:
-
Retest won't happen. Waste of time and money! Why? Because those who passed their test and then drive/ride like idiots will do the same. Behave for an hour, get your new licence and then back to old ways. As for skills deteriorating over time - mid life crisis 40 something undertook me this morning within a hair's breadth doing 50 in a 20 zone - hopefully he will have calmed down by the time he retires and start riding sensibly! Not a lot you can do to stop dickheads - they box clever and care about nobody but themselves. The over 70's need to reapply every 3 years. You go to the optician, get new glasses and that is it. As for the marriage licence - we celebrate our golden wedding next year and I've no complaints :icon_wink:
-
We've got three years to go. Do we get a telegram from the king if we make it?
-
Well this thread grew since I last looked at it.......
A couple of things that I think are worthy of note.
1. How can it be undemocratic if the Welsh voted these politicians in? You got what you voted for, it's democratic. You might not like it but the Welsh put these esteemed politicians in power. No?
Obviously you'll be able to vote for someone else next time around, or not.
2. The speed limit of 20 mph is dangerous? Of course it isn't dangerous, how can a limit be dangerous, it's folks driving that may or may not be dangerous. Is it a good idea to have 20 mph limits, only time will tell? But dangerous, no.
3. The poll, of course there's a gazillion signatures, it's social media driven frenzy and nonsense, but it'll fizzle out next week when their attention is distracted by Strictly. Cha cha cha. I would think the strong objectors have found ways to vote numerous times. Poll? Meh.
Upt.
-
Sea Strom.
Couldn't disagree more.
"Fast" bikes are not safer. They don't get you out of trouble.
If you've got into trouble in the first place, you need to ask yourself why. I presume you were riding the "faster" bike before the trouble started.
Just my view and ride what suits you, but faster ain't safer. It's just faster.
Upt.
-
Just my view and ride what suits you, but faster ain't safer. It's just faster.
Upt.
Plod talk,
So faster is a safe as slow?
-
Nigel,
Not sure I follow your response, but speed is as safe as the conditions dictate.
Is it dangerous to ride at 3 figures on an isolated motorway with no traffic to worry about on a well maintained motorcycle, probably not if the rider is alert and able to react at high speed.
Is it dangerous to ride at 30 mph in a 20 mph area which was previously a 30, probably not if conditions allow.
Although I still can't see how riding a fast motorcycle makes any of this safer or not.
I don't know what plod has got to do with it, but Police drivers/rides are trained to ride as fast as is safe when attending emergency incidents. I wouldn't describe all Police vehicles as fast, in fact far from it, but being in a faster vehicle would not make that response safer. Would it?
Upt.
-
Fast bikes are faster than slow bikes. The difference is, a slow bike is always slow but a fast bike can be fast or slow! On my 3 V-Strom 650's (what great bikes they were) over 10 years riding on the same stretch of road, I would hang back from overtaking sometimes not wanting to put my self in danger. On the 1050 I have more options. Like many bikers (not all) we ride because we have a bit of a daring streak - we like the small rushes of adrenaline. Bikers who find that concept uncomfortable fit more into the cautious/defensive mould. I have a few friends like that and respect them fully. I have other friends who still like to put a smile on their face. Now a faster bike gives them more options. If you can't agree with that then you are probably riding a machine with the correct power capabilities for your style of riding. I've been riding over 50 years and still like to move it from time to time. Police riders sometimes have to do the same - I have the choice. If I really feel like blowing away the cobwebs I probably would not take the Suzuki but prefer the Kawasaki with it's 2.5 secs 0-60 mph and 1400cc. I can and often do ride that motorcycle around town at 20 or 30 mph. However on a very fast road when my lane is clogged, I find it much safer to overtake knowing I will get round in time. There are loony riders who do this to silly extremes - that's up to them but not me. So for me, as I often prefer not to stay behind queues of traffic, it is safer if I am going to pull out anyway to have more power than less. This forum which possibly has a more sober riding dynamic due to the type of more practical bike, may be the wrong place for me to find like minded riders. I think I have and anyone else has to be mindful of being too 'holier than thou'. A young buck came up beside me a while back on his Gixxer thou and nodded indicating he wanted to race me away from the lights. I let him go partly because we were in a thirty limit, partly because of my clean licence and anyway, I knew my bike can reach 100 in 1st gear very quickly and did not have anything to prove! My Harley is slower than both my other 2 bikes but I ride that for the joy of an open faced helmet and kicked out feet. I love my motorcycling and always will. I ride bikes for different reasons - the DL is mainly for nipping/filtering through traffic to the supermarket.
Back to the topic. Just like some votes on the petition are coming from those not even living with 20 limits everywhere nearby, so are some opinions on how safe it is are coming from there too! Come and see the tailgating, frustrated barmy overtakes, painted out signposts, cocked up timetables and delayed journeys causing mayhem in Wales at the moment before you judge fully. I have never voted in my entire life but may put a cross down to oust the loonies in power at the moment, for the first time, in my mid seventies, at the next election!
-
I was planning to stay out of this debate until I had experienced the problem myself, however, I saw this & thought it worth a share.
If Chris Rea was living in Wales, would he have to start driving home for Christmas this week?
-
I have driven on blue lights many times. It is not all about speed, though it is nice to be able to drive to the limit of the conditions without worrying about an across the board speed limit which may not relate to the conditions at the time and may not actually be the safest limit on that road.
It's really all about making progress. If you read the traffic correctly and pass when safe, including filtering. Timing and choosing the correct position at traffic lights helps too, blue lights or not, if the lights up ahead have just changed, slow down and watch the traffic then move into the best position to ride off when green. If the lights are on red for some time as you approach then a little more caution may be required as the lights are more likely to go green as you filter.
Riding is a skill it is not a race, if you master the skill then you will be able to travel fast (or slow) and make good safe progress without endangering yourself or others in the prosses. Just so you know, I do like to ride fast and sometimes break the national speed limit but not often in 30 zones though I did flash a camera a few months ago. Speed is not dangerous (it's fun and exiting) but bad riding/driving is. Speed is only relevant when you hit the ground, tree or third party but it's not always the reason for the accident or should I say collision.
My views only and I respect different views. Ramble over. :thumb:
-
.https://www.rd.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/01-Short-Jokes-Anyone-Can-Remember-nicole-fornabaio-rd.com_.jpg?fit=700%2C467?fit=700,700
https://www.rd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/this-sentence-clever-joke.jpg?fit=700%2C700?fit=700,700
Just trying to get back online with the threads mane heading. :whistle: :thumb:
-
Mane??????? :crazy:
-
That almost made a horse's a s s out of you Doc.
Upt.
No you can't type that either.
-
.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_e5szITRCg