Speed limit

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:40d9be6f.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

Nathaniel Porter said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading
somewhere that

there

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

I believe a rev counter has been proved good enough,
because it (sort of) indicates speed.

Yebbut, there is certainly no requirement for a tachometer
on cars :-)

In article <40d9be27.0@entanet>,

Zog The Undeniable said:

So if you don't fit a computer, how are you expected to
know the difference between 19mph and 22mph (OK,
experienced cyclists will know from their gear and
cadence, but it would be an interesting court case)?

It wouldn't be interesting in the slightest, and wouldn't
last very long. Do you believe that cars which do not have,
and are not obliged to fit, a speedometer are exempt from
speed limits? Imagine it lasted more than ten minutes:

Prosecution: Were you aware that the speed limit in the park
was 20mph? You: Yes. Prosecution: I put it to you that a
cycle computer, correctly installed, or some experience with
your gear and cadence would tell you your speed. You: That's
true. Prosecution: And yet, although you knew the law, you
took no measures to ensure you obeyed it, and now are using
that failure as your defence. You: Er, yes.

court.

ian

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:20:23 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less): ...

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading
somewhere that there is no obligation for cars to have
speedometers.

Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations require a
functional speedometer to be fitted for a car to get
certified as roadworthy.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Nathaniel Porter wrote: [snip]

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading
somewhere that there is no obligation for cars to have
speedometers.

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a
speedometer. Another driver in the same car received a
speeding ticket for doing 36mph in a 30 limit, an event
commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

[snip]

Peter

Tony Raven said:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed
no more exempts you if you break the speed limit than your
inability to measure you blood alcohol exempts you if you
exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a
reasonable expectation that you'd know if you were over the
limit or not? If you have half a pint you can reasonably
assume you're below the limit. If you have four then it
would be difficult for you to argue that you would be under
the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones
speed with any sort of accuracy.

--
Jose Marques

Zog The Undeniable said:

I believe a rev counter has been proved good enough,
because it (sort of) indicates speed.

I've seen a photo of the interior of Nick Mason's Ferrari
250 GTO, which has a second tachometer fitted, with Dymo
numbers to indicate approximate speeds in 4th and 5th. Which
apparently pleaseth Plod.

Not sure about the km speedo business, though. AIUI
legalising grey imports includes changing the speedo to one
which reads in miles as well.

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Peter Amey said:

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a
speedometer. Another driver in the same car received a
speeding ticket for doing 36mph in a 30 limit, an event
commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

"Gawnsoft" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:20:23 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less): ...

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading
somewhere that

there

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations require a
functional speedometer to be fitted for a car to get
certified as roadworthy.

OK, its probably just that cars which predate this
requirement are aren't required to be modified to meet the
requirement.

Dave Larrington said:

Peter Amey wrote:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

None other!

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:32:22 +0100, Jose Marques
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed
no more exempts you if you break the speed limit than
your inability to measure you blood alcohol exempts you
if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a
reasonable expectation that you'd know if you were over the
limit or not?

If you know what you're metabolisation rate for alcohol is.

Most folk haven't had themselves measured.

Quoted message said:

If you have half a pint you can reasonably assume you're
below the limit. If you have four then it would be
difficult for you to argue that you would be under the
limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones
speed with any sort of accuracy.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jose Marques said:

have four then it would be difficult for you to argue that
you would be under the limit. I don't see how one can be
expected to know ones speed with any sort of accuracy.

I can't believe that anyone who rides a bike cannot ride in
such a manner as to be certain they are riding at under
20mph. They may do that by riding at 10mph, of course.

ian

"Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I've seen a photo of the interior of Nick Mason's Ferrari
250 GTO, which has a second tachometer fitted, with Dymo
numbers to indicate approximate speeds in 4th and 5th.
Which apparently pleaseth Plod.

I wonder if that's the same one that Plod advised my uncle
to, ahem, "borrow" and told him exactly where it was parked.
This was under the strict understanding that the length of
the borrowing was only as long as PF's debt to his company
existed (he used to do rather a lot of work for them back in
the 70s). I do know it was a Ferrari, but NM does have
rather a few of those.

Graeme

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:13:34 +0100, "Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Peter Amey said:

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a
speedometer. Another driver in the same car received a
speeding ticket for doing 36mph in a 30 limit, an event
commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

Small world, eh? 🙂 Mr Larrington, how the devil are you?
--
David Shepherd Wymondham, Norfolk

Dave Larrington said:

Not sure about the km speedo business, though. AIUI
legalising grey imports includes changing the speedo to
one which reads in miles as well.

My grey motorbike had 3 stickers on the speedo, marking
(IIRC) 30mph, 70mph and either 40 or 50 mph. Apparently
that's legal.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my
reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/> "He who
dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Ian G Batten said:

I can't believe that anyone who rides a bike cannot ride
in such a manner as to be certain they are riding at under
20mph. They may do that by riding at 10mph, of course.

You forget they belong to the Church of Cager which beleives
that speed limits are the speed you must go at and not the
maximum speed you are allowed to go.

Tony

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven ('junk@raven-

family.com') said:

Gawnsoft said:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:31:34 +0100, Jeremy Collins <jd.collins@ntlworld-
not.com> wrote (more or less):

> dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
>
>> Does it state anywhere that a pedal cycle is a
>> *vehicle*???
>
> I couldn't find a UK legal definition of "vehicle",

That's becuase it varies from part to part of the UK.

Legally, IIRC, under Scottish law bicycles can be viewed
as a pedestrian with additional equipment, although I've
no idea what the specific phrasing is.

Hansford vs London Express Newspapers (1928):

"I cannot see any reason for putting a limitation on the
meaning of the word "vehicle" and I hold that the word
included a bicycle."

In what jurisdiction was that decision made and what
relevance has it to Scotland?

Its in the English Courts which have no relevance to
Scotland other than precedents from other legal systems can
be used in the Scottish Courts. I have had an Australian
court decision used in helping an English Court
interpretation. However since the definition of vehicle was
in respect of the RPOOSR 1984 which only applies to the
Royal Parks etc in London, English Law is the relevant one
for interpreting the Regulations.

Tony

Jose Marques said:

Tony Raven said:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed
no more exempts you if you break the speed limit than
your inability to measure you blood alcohol exempts you
if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a
reasonable expectation that you'd know if you were over
the limit or not? If you have half a pint you can
reasonably assume you're below the limit. If you have four
then it would be difficult for you to argue that you would
be under the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to
know ones speed with any sort of accuracy.

Well if you pedal very slowly you can probably reasonably
assume you are below the limit and if you pedal furiously in
top gear you can probably assume you are over the limit. So
where's the difference.

Tony

PS Blood alcohol depends on many more factors than how much
including body size, metabolism, how quickly you drank
it, what the drink was, how long ago so not at all easy
to estimate with any accuracy at all. In fact I bet you
can judge your speed more accurately than your blood
alcohol level.

In message <[email hidden]>

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

Ningi said:

I was going to ask about this. The 20mph speed limit in
Richmond Park has bee introduced.........

We're lucky cycling is allowed at all there. Shame about
Windsor Great Park: "No cycles -- ridden or otherwise".

~PB

The situation in Windsor Great Park is complicated by poor
signing. You can legally cycle on most park roads south of
the Copper Horse - Sustrans route 4 goes through the park.

Paul Luton

--
CTC Right to Ride Representative for Richmond upon Thames

Paul Luton said:

Quoted message said:

We're lucky cycling is allowed at all there. Shame about
Windsor Great Park: "No cycles -- ridden or otherwise".

The situation in Windsor Great Park is complicated by poor
signing. You can legally cycle on most park roads south of
the Copper Horse - Sustrans route 4 goes through the park.

Oh right. I don't know the area well at all.

I was thinking of one particular glorious bit: The Long
Walk, I think, south of the A308. Why no cycles there?
Keeping the off-roading riff raff out, or just because Her
Maj doesn't like bikes?

~PB

"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I was thinking of one particular glorious bit: The Long
Walk, I think, south of the A308. Why no cycles there?
Keeping the off-roading riff raff out, or just because Her
Maj doesn't like bikes?

There's been no cycling there since way before off-roading
was popular.

--
Dave...