"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Martin Underwood wrote:

Whenver I come across a speed limit that seems to be absurdly low (eg
30 on a road that I'd judge to be safe up to 50 or 60) I always do
two things: firstly I keep repeating to myself "this is a 30 limit,
this is a 30 limit" to help me avoid gradually drifting back up to
60; secondly I look all around me to see if I can spot the hazard
that I might initially have missed which justifies such a low limit.
Sadly there are some 30 limits which have me baffled and can only
have been "justified" by residents' dislike of fast traffic rather
than for any road-safety reasons.

You don't consider the safety of residents and their wish for a quiet(ish)
life along a stretch of road to be worthy of consideration in reducing
your headlong flight then?

Well in the case I'm thinking of, the road has fields along one side and
occasional houses that are set back about 100 yards from the road, behind
high (noise absorbing) hedges and with ample see-and-be-seen visibility when
a car emerges from its drive. 30 seems a bit low in the circumstances. Maybe
40 or 50 would be more appropriate, given that there are plenty of roads
with far greater hazards (parked cars, houses with front doors directly on
the pavement, children playing on bikes, bends) that are also graded as 30.
I'm not advocating driving at the speed limit come-what-may, but that you
should be given the option of tailoring your speed to the sconditions as
they present themselves at that instant.

As an aside, why is the perceived difference between 30 and 40 much greater
than between 40 and 50? Keeping to 30 when you'd rather do 40 is much harder
than keeping to 40 when you'd rather do 50.