The Absurdity of 20 m.p.h.
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ONE of the most ridiculous anomalies of present times, as far as road transport is concerned, is the restriction to 20 m.p.h. of goods vehicles weighing, unladen, over three tons. This arbitrary dividing line causes many a headache to designers and manufacturers and is completely out of touch with modern conditions. It means that vehicles of medium weight-carrying capacity cannot, without considerable difficulty, be built to suit operative requirements and embody any reasonable "extras " that the buyer may desire.
On the other hand, those who wish to cater for the market for a vehicle which will carry something like the maximum load which could be imposed upon a chassis of under three tons are frequently forced to skimp on details and on those particular items which may add to safety and to the comfort of drivers. This position seems to be absolutely wrong and the sooner the 20 m.p.h. limit is abandoned the better. It has never been of any value, but instead has done much to present an unfair advantage to those makers of vehicles of lightand medium-load capacity, as compared with vehicles more solidly built for heavy duty.
The speed is a relatively unimportant matter. It is seldom that one finds a vehicle of over three tons travelling at less than the 30 m.p.h. permitted to lighter types and, as a matter of fact, in traffic, vehicles which do not adhere to the normal speed allowed in built-up areas are a nuisance and a prime factor in obstruction.
From the point of view also of overseas sales, it is not altogether satisfactory to have to build down to such a low net weight. Where the margin is very close, there is a natural temptation to demand weight reductions in proprietary com,ponents, and the makers of these, in an endeavour to avoid loss of important orders, may, in turn, cut weights below what would normally be considered to be the limit of efficiency combined with long life.
It may be easy to reduce weight, but this can be a danger unless it be carried out scientifically and always with an eye to safety, whilst weight cutting can even be quite expensive. Therefore, let us do away entirely with this false formula and make 30 m.p.h. the limit of speed covering every type and size of commercial vehicle designed for the carrying of goods. This would bring it into the same category as the coach or bus, which although allowed to travel at 30 m.p.h. may have an unladen weight well over double that of a goods vehicle limited to 20 m.p.h. If it be a question of safety, is it more important that the safety of goods as compared with that of passengers should receive the greater consideration?