"Far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists": 20mph speed limit analysis hailed "astonishing", with drivers' journeys just 45 seconds longer

Gimpl wrote:

Reading Wales Online every day, this has not been popular with a vast swathe of the population. I have never seen as many negative comments in response to the article as I have on this subject.

Most agree that 20 is very appropriate in certain circumstances but not a blanket reduction as has happened in Wales. The current petition against it is over 400,000 signatures so will have to be debated in the Senedd. It could well cost Labour the control over Wales that they've enjoyed for as long as I can remember. 

Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read on the web?  It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don't live in Wales.  The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.

The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.

eburtthebike wrote:

The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.

Yet the average speed only dropped 2.9mph - meaning that although a 30 limit, in reality speeding/speed was not and is not an issue

...which prompts the usual "which is it, drivers"?

Schrodingers 20 mph Speed Limit: simulataneously devastating the work of driving instructors and heating engineers, and not worth it because it only reduces averages by a titchey amount 

What a ridiculous conclusion, The average speed is in significant part determined by periods of stationary motion, such as at traffic lights and junctions, those are not significantly affected by the speed limit, so a change of overall average speed of 3mph will reflect a much greater reduction in fourth quartile speeds. It is slso very early days, I noticed that my ability to stay within the limit in 20 mph zones has considerably improved with practice as my habitual use of the accelerator and visual speed perception has adapted to a slower pace of instinctive driving. I'm sure that will not be an uncommon pattern amongst drivers.

eburtthebike wrote:

Gimpl wrote:

Reading Wales Online every day, this has not been popular with a vast swathe of the population. I have never seen as many negative comments in response to the article as I have on this subject.

Most agree that 20 is very appropriate in certain circumstances but not a blanket reduction as has happened in Wales. The current petition against it is over 400,000 signatures so will have to be debated in the Senedd. It could well cost Labour the control over Wales that they've enjoyed for as long as I can remember. 

Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read on the web?  It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don't live in Wales.  The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.

The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.

Maybe you shouldn't 

Gimpl wrote:

Reading Wales Online every day, this has not been popular with a vast swathe of the population. I have never seen as many negative comments in response to the article as I have on this subject.

Most agree that 20 is very appropriate in certain circumstances but not a blanket reduction as has happened in Wales. The current petition against it is over 400,000 signatures so will have to be debated in the Senedd. It could well cost Labour the control over Wales that they've enjoyed for as long as I can remember. 

Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read on the web?  It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don't live in Wales.  The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.
The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.

Gimpl wrote:

Reading Wales Online every day, this has not been popular with a vast swathe of the population. I have never seen as many negative comments in response to the article as I have on this subject.

Most agree that 20 is very appropriate in certain circumstances but not a blanket reduction as has happened in Wales. The current petition against it is over 400,000 signatures so will have to be debated in the Senedd. It could well cost Labour the control over Wales that they've enjoyed for as long as I can remember. 

Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read on the web?  It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don't live in Wales.  The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.

The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.

It isn't a blanket reduction - don't believe what you hear on GB News and Motohoon Youtube Channels.

It is a change of default, with provision for exceptions where Local Highway Authorities deem appropriate. It applies to around 1/3 of roads and streets by mileage only.

Plus we have very robust data that 20mph limits, reasonably enforced, do wonders for road safety. See the ROSPA Factsheet on 20mph limits and road safety.

In short - what's not to like? The only thing I don't like is that we unfortunately have a neanderthal and cycnical Govt in England.

I don't trust the petition. The moto lobby in England (55 million people vs 3 million in Wales) are all tripping over themselves to sign it. And there is no verification against fake postcodes.

The problem is that it almost is, the guidence for exceptions do not allow councils to take into account traffic speeds and engineering recomendations in the allowence for making exceptions, as if there was never a reason to do that and no one had previously concidered not to. If there's houses on the road is had to be 30 even if the houses are ribbon development.
This means some very modern wide arterial roads have to be included, including a number of roads where there was high non-compliance with the existing 30-limit and some roads that used to be 40 until a few years ago, with not changes to the design of the road.
All this seems to do is bring speed limits into contempt and undermine 20mph limits where they do make much more sense.

The problem is that it almost is, the guidence for exceptions do not allow councils to take into account traffic speeds and engineering recomendations in the allowence for making exceptions, as if there was never a reason to do that and no one had previously concidered not to. If there's houses on the road is had to be 20 with few exceptions, even if the houses are ribbon development.
This means some very modern wide arterial roads have to be included that 20mph schemes normally exempt, including a number of roads where there was high non-compliance with the existing 30-limit and some roads that used to be 40 until a few years ago, with not changes to the design of the road.
All this seems to do is bring speed limits into contempt and undermine 20mph limits where they do make much more sense.

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

The problem is that it almost is, the guidence for exceptions do not allow councils to take into account traffic speeds and engineering recomendations in the allowence for making exceptions, as if there was never a reason to do that and no one had previously concidered not to. If there's houses on the road is had to be 30 even if the houses are ribbon development.
This means some very modern wide arterial roads have to be included, including a number of roads where there was high non-compliance with the existing 30-limit and some roads that used to be 40 until a few years ago, with not changes to the design of the road.
All this seems to do is bring speed limits into contempt and undermine 20mph limits where they do make much more sense.

Welcome to Wrexham, this in now a 20mph road????

Er... and?

If it's this one the road has some urban residential districts entirely suited for 20mph limits either end (and a school signed at the east end) - this middle bit is 0.5 mile according to Google Maps.

There appear to be some "traffic calming" meaures either end, so I would agree that spontaneous compliance may already be an issue.

Is the current designated speed 30mph?  Presumably it apply all along this section?  If so, why not 40, 50 or 60pmh?  Perhaps they decided not to say "have at it" over this relatively short distance for a reason already (see traffic calming)?

I bet people would say "no safety issue, nobody will be walking or cycling [ or riding? ] along there".  Could that be explained by the relatively narrow road with some short sight lines for half of it and lack of footway - or indeed easily traversible verge (see the chap in picture also)?

If the council think that the potential loss of 30 seconds going from one "obviously lower speed is sensible" section to the other, or the fact that the second 1/4 mile section visually signals "country road, hoon it" to drivers will prove irresistable - they can vary the limit, no?

I'm all for not startling the horses but sometimes it's donkeys you have and they just aren't going to move independently.  Is the kind of "change" we say we want / will put up with "yes to change, but just not for me" or "actually, we meant gradual change, in due course"?

Also - there appears to be a parallel A-road only a couple of hundred metres distant, if you don't trust yourself...

Yes it was before the 17 September a 30mph limit, I remember 20ish years ago it was a 60mph sandwiched between the 30 zones (where the traffic calming is now). If we are to get compliance and adherence to the new limits then let's be sensible even if it is only 0.5 mile distance should it not be upped to 30?  There are many more examples I could cite such as 40mph and even 60mph limits that have now even within 10 years come down to a 30mph limit and will now be 20s if our local council has not got exemptions.  If you are going to get people to adhere to the speed limits then you have to make some allowances and show some flexibility, at the moment it is almost brutal, black and white,  I know of a busy two lane dual carriageway that now drops from a 60 limit down to a 20 into a roundabout with 5 exits.  Yes I know the comments  (who hate Me for even daring to criticise 20 limits) will say that 20 is appropriate for a such a busy roundabout, but it's just does not work like that, as people need to get on and off the roundabout, look at where they are going (see me on my bike as I use that roundabout regularly) without being paranoid as to what speed they are doing. 

60kg lean keen climbing machine wrote:

Yes it was before the 17 September a 30mph limit, I remember 20ish years ago it was a 60mph sandwiched between the 30 zones (where the traffic calming is now).

Thanks again for the local knowledge.  I thought perhaps this was the case.

I'm familiar with the following argument, it was exactly the same as we had up here:

60kg lean keen climbing machine wrote:

If we are to get compliance and adherence to the new limits then let's be sensible even if it is only 0.5 mile distance should it not be upped to 30?

Nothing AFAIK to stop councils varying things where they feel this is appropriate?

And "sensible" is debatable.  Why wasn't 60mph there sensible?  Or 100?  All speed limits for cars and motorcycles were abolished under the Road Traffic Act 1930 - and casualties went down for a while!  Proof it worked! (They went back up again and continued to climb...)

I'm not sure just how short of a distance it is not sensible to not alter the limit over.  We're talking a maximum difference of 30 seconds on this stretch, assuming you went from 20 to 30 and at the end back again to 20 instantly...

I'm all for street design which works with humans.  (See e.g. this entire philosophy from a nearby country which covers more than just designs and rules).  I'm totally on board with "the road design should guide its users".

However this will take us lots of time to implement in the UK (the worst offenders are urban roads with residential and commercial development which are trying to be "places" / "streets" AND traffic arteries at once...)

What everyone appears to be saying is, as usual - "look at my exception - I agree in principle but not here" (0.5 miles of road here).

I disagree with "well they won't keep to the speed (or at least some of them won't) so ergo ... give up".  (I believe that was exactly the reason given for removing limits in the 1930.) There is an attraction to the approach of "find out what speed they're doing - that's the 'natural speed' of the road so make that the limit - hey presto, compliance!" Which is effectively the UK's current way.  Unfortunately that's not the whole story either because expectations come into it. There is nothing particularly "natural" about doing 30mph as opposed to 20, 25, 34, 42 etc.  30mph is pretty arbitrary.  Wales has decided just to make that default lower.

There are plenty of duel carriageways where the national limit of 70 mph is far too high, the older sections of the A1 with vehicle crossings for instance and 60mph is much too high a default limit for most single carriageway roads given modern traffic densities. A ten mile per hour reduction in the national speed limits would be very sensible with 60 and 70 mph only allowed in sign designated roads of a suitable standard, ie near motorway standards for duel carriageways.

I get that people are complaining - because change.  I don't think the change is remotely extreme (apart from the fact we're making one in this area at all - but actually we have changed some road rules over time).

60kg lean keen climbing machine wrote:

There are many more examples I could cite such as 40mph and even 60mph limits that have now even within 10 years come down to a 30mph limit and will now be 20s if our local council has not got exemptions.  If you are going to get people to adhere to the speed limits then you have to make some allowances and show some flexibility, at the moment it is almost brutal, black and white, ...

Well - yeah.  We do have abitrary limits, in units of 10, it is black and white already (apart from some legal flexibility / police leeway...)

This was the complaint in Scotland when this was mooted.  The committee complained this was replacing the concept of a perfectly sensible national default speed (30mph) whch could be varied by councils with the totally inflexible, quite frankly wacky idea of a national default speed (20mph) which could be varied by councils.

60kg lean keen climbing machine wrote:

people need to get on and off the roundabout, look at where they are going (see me on my bike as I use that roundabout regularly) without being paranoid as to what speed they are doing. 

This is frequently aired.  It's just change.  These aren't minimum speed limits.  Nothing to stop people going more cautiously.  Yes, people have an idea what 30mph (ish) feels like, but there's no reason why they can't learn what 20mph feels like.

Its lucky that cyclist are not subject to speed limits looking at strava for this bit of road😀

That's beyond my abilities! Although are you sure they weren't drafting motor vehicles?

Perhaps the local authorities reduced the speed limit to 30mph originally because of fast cyclists? Perhaps the motorists now keeping at or below 20mph can help by acting as "rolling road blocks" to check this swarm of scorchers?

If I ruled the world ... I'd be looking at more important things I hope. We can set expectations for lower speeds without getting stuck in "but these 10 places now seem odd to me / Gareth says no way is he doing that, so the whole idea must be bonkers"! However (not that anyone's asking me) what are trip patterns and volumes here? Lots of traffic? Can it go via the neighbouring A-road? To encourage that - a cheap modal filter!

Also - are there people who want to get between each end here (rather than just using this a a cut- through? Perhaps kids going to that school?
Short distance - might they walk or (more easily) cycle if we make it feel pleasant? If not by blocking through motor traffic then by adding a decent footpath / cycle path.

Of course if it turns out that only 20 or so people drive this way each day ... what's the problem 😀?

chrisonatrike wrote:

That's beyond my abilities! Although are you sure they weren't drafting motor vehicles? Perhaps the local authorities reduced the speed limit to 30mph originally because of fast cyclists? Perhaps the motorists now keeping at or below 20mph can help by acting as "rolling road blocks" to check this swarm of scorchers? If I ruled the world ... I'd be looking at more important things I hope. We can set expectations for lower speeds without getting stuck in "but these 10 places now seem odd to me / Gareth says no way is he doing that, so the whole idea must be bonkers"! However (not that anyone's asking me) what are trip patterns and volumes here? Lots of traffic? Can it go via the neighbouring A-road? To encourage that - a cheap modal filter! Also - are there people who want to get between each end here (rather than just using this a a cut- through? Perhaps kids going to that school? Short distance - might they walk or (more easily) cycle if we make it feel pleasant? If not by blocking through motor traffic then by adding a decent footpath / cycle path. Of course if it turns out that only 20 or so people drive this way each day ... what's the problem 😀?

I have cycled this road for a very long time, since I was a tenager and still use it very regularly so as to access the hills south of town.  It is quite a quiet road as most traffic goes via the A5152 Rhostyllen or goes up the Ruthin road and turns south on A483. I have never seen it as a problem road quite the opposite, yes you will always get some nutters but in my experience this is a rare event, so it is a road I use to avoid traffic, pinch points and dodgy junctions. I know people who live nearby and have walked that road for many years. They have welcomed the drop to 30mph partially on the bendy bits as you come into town, but 20 on the long strait, that just seems a step too far. As shown in the strava screen shot, that's slower than most cyclists can do and as one poster on this thread has voiced makes it more dangerous in their experience.

It sounds like it's a good resource to you - hope that continues.

Being partly fortunate (and also having made choices) to live near motor traffic-free surfaced paths I find that over time, without thinking about it, I tend to preferentially use them. Even if journeys are longer. Although they're probably less time as there aren't traffic lights to race to then stop, and even slowing for pedestrians isn't as bad as stopping. (Dog walkers though... although you even get that on roads sometimes).

I'm not a racer though.

60kg lean keen climbing machine wrote:

I know people who live nearby and have walked that road for many years. They have welcomed the drop to 30mph partially on the bendy bits as you come into town, but 20 on the long strait, that just seems a step too far.

Blimey - fair play to them if 20mph seems to slow for walking! Perhaps it wasn't cyclists on those Strava segments at all? 😂

People can get used to anything. I think many folks presented with that road might be a bit wary (or not find it pleasant prospect) to walk it what with the lack of footway or even a flat verge and the "straight country road" aspect of 1/4 mile of it. If that's your only route on foot and if you've done it a few times and rarely meet a vehicle, no drama!

Why do we think that people can't get used to driving 1/4 mile at less than 30 though?

I guess we'll see... clearly quite a few people have just refused to believe this was happening - or otherwise blocked it out - until it did. Plus we've just had a Westminster policy swing (or at least "setting a different tone") on this area.

Yes, what never ceases to amaze me is that the people behind these speed limit drops are some of the most vocal proponents of speed limits being "respected and obeyed," all the while engaging in the very behaviour that contributes to the disregard of speed limits and makes exceeding them more socially acceptable. Any attempt to explain what exacerbates speeding is consistently dismissed with appeals to the law, hasty generalizations, or appeals to motive.

A decision probably made because drivers at speed on the dominant entry road were in conflict with drivers entering the roundabout ahead of them from the junction next around the roundabout entering at much lower speeds. A common problem on roundabouts on duel carriageways.

But are people going at "speed" due to a lack of signage to tell them not to or because they're just not being sensible?

I fully understand the intuition behind removing that section of NSL road for such a short distance, but doing so isn't based on the reality of what works. It might make more sense to have it at 40. However, by having no change at either end, the issue is that including that road means traffic entering either settlement at either end will no longer encounter a drop in speed limit in line with a change in the character of the road. This is something shown to exacerbate speeding.

They removed a "buffer zone" on the approach to a village near me and moved the speed limit to where the village starts, resulting in decreased speeds through that village. Also, a school should not be a reason for a permanently lower limit, as speed limits are meant to assume ideal conditions.

It would work if people reacted to this sort of thing the way you would want them to, but you have to set rules that are compatible with real-world human behavior.

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

I fully understand the intuition behind removing that section of NSL road for such a short distance, but doing so isn't based on the reality of what works. ...

Well, you'll have some studies to share I guess...

As I've previously said, I agree that the best way to change speeds is to make the road design signal the speed. Until we get there though (lots of building) the evidence (even, already, in Wales) is that actually merely changing the signs does reduce speeds. 20s plenty has you covered I think, stuff here:
https://www.20splenty.org/20_questions_about_20_s_plenty

and

https://www.20splenty.org/faqs

Despite what's been said elsewhere the UKs 30mph roads are no more "naturally" 30mph than any other number. It's almost like 30mph is just ... a default we chose. Certainly, some probably can't be driven at motorway speed. Though some probably can, as 1/4 of a mile in the example under discussion...

In this case, will it "work"? Early evidence is there has been a change. Define "work"! I hope Wales is looking at crash stats, casualty numbers and severity as well as compliance. (As mentioned elsewhere, just "average speed on these roads" doesn't tell you all that much).

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

Also, a school should not be a reason for a permanently lower limit, as speed limits are meant to assume ideal conditions.

Where is this principle set forth?

I do note that some places have variable limits eg. lower when school sign is flashing. I'm not experienced on the law or what the data on how well this works is though.

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

It would work if people reacted to this sort of thing the way you would want them to, but you have to set rules that are compatible with real-world human behavior.

Well it's certainly convenient (for the justice system) to find out what people are doing and make that the rule. Hey presto, instant compliance, have a tea break!

It's a sensible principle but I'm not sure this case is a great example. Yes, we're changing something. There is a risk with any change that people won't accept it - especially if it seems like a loss of privilege! However going back we have actually done this universally in the UK (reintroduced speed limits where there were none) and in smaller areas.

We're just changing one of our default numbers. That's actually not an uncommon kind of change...

You could equally argue a universal change is simpler than tinkering here and there because people only have to modify one of the rules they remember, not keep adjusting to all the different places that have changed. Makes it easier for our lazy human natures.

I think this will "work" in the sense that all our existing speed limits will - more or less imperfectly. It definitely won't mean drivers suddenly get "better" (although it should give more reaction time). Nor that all will adhere or even the majority in some places. The evidence is that overall speeds will drop, which is a good thing where drivers interact with other modes (or other drivers, or even just their surroundings...). Particularly because around these speeds slower makes a great deal of difference in survival and injury in collisions. (You aren't going to care whether someone hits you at 60 or 70...).

It also can tie in with making things more pleasant - even for cycling. Although I don't think just this change will suddenly see a cycling boom...

As I said a village near me removed the buffer zone and that caused speeding in the village to decrease. I've also known speed to go up after the limit has been dropped and vice versa.
I do remember a study being mentioned in the LTN once that said they didn't work, unfortunately, I can't find it.

A driver coming across a speed limit sign in open fields is highly likely to either miss it or dismiss it as irrelevant, increasing the chance they maintain an inappropriate speed through the village.
If people are not slowing down before they reach the speed limit signs, this is a learned behaviour that comes about from councils setting the limit signs back.
People in general are more likely to obey and make an effort to obey rules they perceive as reasonable and make sense, this is called the Pygmalion Effect, you show people contempt, they will respond accordingly.
TBF no matter what speed limit you set there people will speed up naturally as it will feel safe to do so as the posted speed limit does not match the one implied by the road's design.
These limits I very much doubt are being set by advice from traffic engineers, it's merely councils responding to demands from people who want the rules set in a way that they think will make them safer. Limits set too low or too high can reduce safety, it's not a contest to see how low you can set them.

I'm pretty sure the principle of speed limits assuming ideal conditions is written into DfT guidelines, that's why we have other laws like reckless driving you can cause an accident below the speed limit, but be judged to have been going too fast. There used to be far more emphasis on driving to the conditions rather than drive-by-numbers.

I think you're making the common mistake of thinking of speed limits as a way to generally dictate the speed of traffic, rather than a tool to single out reckless drivers, then again so is the Welsh government.

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

As I said a village near me removed the buffer zone and that caused speeding in the village to decrease. I've also known speed to go up after the limit has been dropped and vice versa.

Well the first makes sense but I think that could be for a number of reasons other than just "here's a village, and here's a sign, and I agree as that makes sense to me". I don't understand e.g. changing speed signage from 30 to 20 and finding people (not just Fred, who's making a point and "prepared to go to gaol") then do 40 though. Although perhaps they were actually doing that before...?

Yet again, I think we both agree on the best measure (infra design guides behaviour). I also would not be shocked to find LAs getting it wrong in places or ignoring lots of people making reasonable requests (budget, politics, vested interests and the particular prejudices of decision makers).

I think the driving to conditions adjustment is only works downwards though. "Because it was a long straight road and a nice day I put my foot down" - I'm happy not giving that a pass (being aware that our police and judiciary are currently human and may decide to be more "empathetic" anyway). If you hoon it past the cameras more fool you!

ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:

I think you're making the common mistake of thinking of speed limits as a way to generally dictate the speed of traffic, rather than a tool to single out reckless drivers, then again so is the Welsh government.

Er... isn't the point of a signed speed limit to ... indicate the speed? Am I misunderstanding something here? Noting yet again all the imperfections of this system ... it sort of works? I'm pretty sure I remember them stressing speed limits and speed control generally when I did my driving lessons and test. (As opposed to "put your foot down until it feels about right to you". ) And because of the many years our roads were built over and their variety, that can't currently be due to some magic "feels just right" speed (yet again - I agree that it would be better to build roads this way). Also I'm not aware they make specific UK gearboxes to naturally sit at particular limits (similar but different than the foreign kilometer- specific ones)?

I'm pretty sure that speed limits are nothing to do with catching wrong 'uns though. Where does that idea come from? Also apart from automated cameras the catching is done by... the police, who are equipped (with eyes and brains) and empowered to stop reckless drivers for any number of detected issues.

Why speed limits work at all given our minimal enforcement or feedback is another question, socially conventions and the psychological "anchoring effect" and lots else probably.

If there were no studies showing this made people change that would be one thing, but there is evidence it does. Not perfectly, not for everyone everywhere, but apparently speeds come down.

To help people get the "why" I'd love to see all the other things happening like some of the road space being taken for active travel, or through traffic being limited. Sadly due to experiential learning some people may only "get it" when they're nicked, or smash into someone, or have a motorist speed by them in the new more relaxed streets environment...

Traffic speeds are mostly dictated by the disign of the road and the conditions at the time.
The idea behind speed limits is to single out the behaviour of nutters, if you have little intention of driving like a lunatic, you should find youself natually driving at or below the speed limit.
if you messure the speed that most people drive at to see what is normal driver behaviour, assume most people aren't insane and have an aversion to crashing or running people over, that's how you set speed limits. When limits are set this way, compliance is much higher, but speeds aren't.
They can influnence speeds a bit, but they're most effective at doing that when the match the road they're on.  If speed limits were something you could just set really low and it worked that would always have been the way you set them.
If you try to use them as more general traffic calming that's how you end up bringing the limits into contempt and you end up with 99% non-compliance figres like they did in Monmouthshire. I don't know who that is meant to single out or target.
you can also have other unintened consequences like satnav no longer seeing main roads as faster and pedestrians being given a faulse indication of actual traffic speeds.

You've mentioned "The idea behind speed limits is to single out the behaviour of nutters," again.

Is this your own belief, one from somewhere else or a legal principle (from which country)? I have not encountered it before?

The speed people drive is influenced by a mix of things, some more or less transient ("the media says its a war on the motorist, let's join the resistance") or nebulous. However infra AND the rules affect it. The former may be moderated by designs of vehicle and the latter by what is socially acceptable and the chance and legal penalties for disobedience.

Since signage *has* been changed (in other places than Wales) and speeds *have* then reduced, would that not suggest a correlation between these facts? I can't recall now if your examples demonstrate the opposite effect or if something else was going on.

Previous compliance with limits isn't great either, nor have you shown that "natural" limits emerge (how could they, with very different bits of road all over the UK and previous default limits?)

Rehearsing old ground again, we certainly *could* do more to make infra guide drivers more effectively. But there's even less chance of retrofitting that everywhere anytime soon than there is of installing a policeman on every street.

I just see this as an (imperfect) effort to fairly cheaply collect low hanging road safety fruit. And I guess an incidental benefit (or source of needless conflict, take your pick) is that it alerts people that current driving privileges are not set in stone and tarmac.

It seems increasingly like these objections can be summarised by "but change!"