Wishbone Ash wrote: » Any regular cyclist would have a pretty good idea of their speed within a couple of km/h and their gearing would also give an indication. If I'm spinning out on a 50x11 I know that I'm doing 60km/h+. If I have to use a 34x28, I know I'm down around 6/7km/h.
magicbastarder wrote: » ah boo. but not in the city centre though - as above, i've seen my GPS track go screwy when cycling past tall buildings.
TaurenDruid wrote: » Dude, you've posted about cycling at very precisely measuered high speeds, so you're not included in the offer. Sorry.
TaurenDruid wrote: » Any modern GPS will be very reliable on this front, unless you're driving or cycling in a heavily wooded area. More accurate than a car's speedo, in fact.
magicbastarder wrote: » cool. free GPS for all cyclists. possibly unreliable in city centre conditions, so probably not legally enforceable. this is not even a (literal) $50 solution to a $5 problem, it's a $50 solution to a 5c problem.
Podge_irl wrote: » Cyclists have no standard way of having the slightest clue what speed they are cycling at....
Podge_irl wrote: » Cyclists have no standard way of having the slightest clue what speed they are cycling at? Even GPS devices are somewhat unreliable on this front. Its fairly obvious why speed limits don't apply to pedal cycles - it is fairly rare to even be able to break them and there is no way to know if you are.
magicbastarder wrote: » on the only segment strava seems to list for o'connell street, out of a total of 2,890 people who have attempted it, 12 have averaged a (perfectly legal) 40km/h+ or, less than half of one percent; and that is the PR for each cyclist listed, the fastest they have ever gone on it. this information is being used to try to sustain a claim that 'numerous' cyclists go faster than 40. also worth mentioning that in general, i'd expect a cyclist using strava to be faster than an 'average' cyclist as strava use is skewed towards sports and leisure cyclists.https://www.strava.com/segments/5967744
SeanW wrote: » Welcome to literally every country on the planet. RIP to the cyclist. Not sure how this changes the proven fact that Irish roads are among the safest in the world.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate Nor the conclusion which must inevitably be drawn, that Irish motorists are generally safe.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » My value system is that we should treat different risks differently.
The shoplifters could try the 'I was blinded by the sun' excuse and see if it gets them off scott free, like this driver who killed a cyclist.
Charles Babbage wrote: » Here we go again, defining every anti social activity short of killing as acceptable. If that is your value system then there is no point in arguing with you.
SeanW wrote: » I wonder if shoplifters try the "but motorists are KILLING people" defense in court?
kenmm wrote: » ...Here's a thought, why is the limit on the motorway 120 for cars? Goods vehicles are 100, based on your logic we should have a blanket 100?
Stark wrote: » Says the guy who defends all bad behaviour with "but we kill fewer people than in other countries!" :rolleyes:
Spook_ie wrote: » Actually I introduced the idea that the 5 crimes listed for motorists should be extended to cyclists, funny how so many of you pick up on number 1 in the list, even though so many of you deny being able to cycle at that speed anyway. So if so many of you can't cycle that fast why do you object to a maximum speed for cyclists?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Maybe that's because cyclists aren't killing 30-40 pedestrians each year?
SeanW wrote: » Trump is not "head of the government" of the United States. The US has 3 co-equal branches, Legislature (Congress), the Executive branch and the Judiciary. DJT is only head of one branch, the Executive. As for AOC, it looks like she and "the squad" are the future of the US Democratic Party.
Spook_ie wrote: » So if it's only a minority of cyclists capable of exceeding the posted 30kph motorised vehicle speed limit then there would be no harm in introducing a 30 kph blanket limit, would there. So that when a Garda picks up one of these 30kph+ cyclists they can charge them with something other than "Cyclist driving a pedal cycle without reasonable consideration."
Spook_ie wrote: » So what speed do you cycle at then, AJR says he doesn't exceed 30kph except downhill, there's so much deflection being felt here that I assume you dont have a logical argument against a blanket speed limit.
Spook_ie wrote: » But if you insist on pushing the speed limit item to the front.
Spook_ie wrote: » Or maybe driving within the posted speed limit!
micar wrote: » Go off and ask the RSA why they aren't tackling any of these in relation to cycling.
Spook_ie wrote: » I'd far more like to get the cyclists responses so I can include them in any correspondence with the RSA and Transport Minister
Spook_ie wrote: » So if it's only a minority of cyclists capable of exceeding the posted 30kph motorised vehicle speed limit then there would be no harm in introducing a 30 kph blanket limit, would there.