More and more modern cars have speed limiters, mine has a limiter and a cruise control. I very occasionally use the limiter in areas where I stop start a lot but to be honest the chances of getting over thirty are remote. I use the cruise in areas of decent runs. As an example, last night I drove from Purley Cross to Croydon flyover non stop at 30 on the cruise control. Not one adverse traffic light. Concentration was entirely on junctions, zebra crossings and other road users.
Interesting, as I never feel comfortable using cruise control on a road where I am likely to interact closely with other vehicles. My foot is just that little bit further from the brake than driving normally. (Probably OK with adaptive cruise control, though, if you had that). I only ever use it on a quiet motorway.
Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Going outside into the big wide world will always carry risk. Unless we want the world to grind to a halt, we must accept that. The government were, supposedly, considering an increase in the motorway speed limit, to quicken journey times and boost the economy. Everybody crawling around at 20 at either end of their journey would appear to be singing from a different hymn sheet entirely.
I was very disappointed that didn't go ahead. In most places, managed motorways aside, 80 is the de-facto limit (ish) - but there is very little enforcement and those doing 100 etc are getting away with putting others at a far higher risk[1] than those doing 70-80. So I would have been happy with a change to 80 as the limit, but a significant increase in enforcement and reduction in tolerance to stop people going *excessively* fast.
The difference with motorways is of course that there is (in normal cases) nobody walking on them - same as the railway - so the safety decision relates almost[2] solely to the safety of those in vehicles and on motorcycles. Which is different to 20mph residential areas, which I largely agree with - where I disagree is that 20mph is slowly working its way out of simple residential areas[3] and onto thoroughfares (the kind with pedestrian crossings provided, which people should be using, and the kind which are far too busy to have young children playing along them) and entire city centres, which I consider unnecessary. And I am not a fan of unnecessary safety measures.
[1] Modern cars can do 100mph safely in and of themselves - most are designed to work on the Autobahnen. However, most people don't have the reactions to deal with other vehicles doing 100mph or thereabouts, and it does create huge speed differentials which are what adds most risk on motorways.
[2] Though people on the hard shoulder are a consideration, they aren't supposed to be walking on the road, and if they are, serious accidents aside, they are putting themselves at a much higher risk than even walking along/across railways, which is seen as very much unacceptable.
[3] If, assuming you are not "rat running", the limit you are driving in goes 30-20-30, it is not a "simple residential area" but a "thoroughfare". The kind of residential areas I envisage would always be found at the start and end of journeys, not in the middle. The one exception is outside school during arrival/departure times, which can be dealt with by way of temporary limits.
Neil
