Suicidal Cyclists !! (1 Viewer)

[Larrynwin]

Set out from home yesterday in RV with car in tow, all up around 45 ft. C classified quite narrow road , torrential rain, considerable laying water and subsequent poor visibility.
Two cycling enthusiasts in lycra ahead riding two abreast, they didnt look to see who wants to overtake and refused to give up their "right" to half of the road and just moved tighter together.
I hooted more than once and in the end overtook them with reasonable clearance but just how unnessarily dangerous.

 

[Mikey RV]

One of my pet hates Larryh, no consideration for anyone else. We have a road down this way they cycle on two a breast and just the other side of the hedge is a cycle way.

 

[jonandshell]

On the other hand, as a cyclist, if you cower in the gutter, some pratt in a lorry (or RV) will take advantage of all that space, overtake you and have you off your bike even if something is coming the other way!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Paddywack]

Two questions I always put to drivers in such circumstances:

Perhaps they didn't think that it was safe for you to overtake at that point, as jonandshell have pointed out?

Do you give the cyclist the same space you give a horse rider?

 

[Tootles]

Two questions I always put to drivers in such circumstances:

Perhaps they didn't think that it was safe for you to overtake at that point, as jonandshell have pointed out?

Do you give the cyclist the same space you give a horse rider?

And another two questions.....
Is it still illegal to ride abreast of another cyclist on the highway?
Why do cyclists on the road seem to think they are competing in the Tour De France?

 

[Judge Mental]

On the other hand, as a cyclist, if you cower in the gutter, some pratt in a lorry (or RV) will take advantage of all that space, overtake you and have you off your bike even if something is coming the other way!

Exactly....

"Never hug the kerb. That's rule one of road positioning on a bicycle. You need to be further out into the road, sometimes right in the middle of the traffic stream. Less assertive cyclists worry that being further out may put them in the way of the traffic. It won't: you are the traffic. Being in the traffic stream helps you to get treated like traffic."

every right to be there..they can wait and overtake when its safe to do so. Riding at the kerb will give them every excuse to overtake even when risky, it happens all the time.

4 times more likely to be involved in an accident on a bike

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[JeanLuc]

In general, motorists are very poor at giving cyclists sufficient consideration and room in the UK - compare with Holland for example.
There are pros and cons regarding cycling two abreast. It is perfectly legal but should not be done in certain circumstances. The following two sources offer guidance - not my words but theirs:

Here is Highway code section 66 (from www.gov.uk)
You should

• keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear
• keep both feet on the pedals
• never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
• not ride close behind another vehicle
• not carry anything which will affect your balance or may get tangled up with your wheels or chain
• be considerate of other road users, particularly blind and partially sighted pedestrians. Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted.

And here is some advice from an oft-quoted advice guide for cyclists:

Why do motorists get annoyed by cyclists two abreast?
There are many reasons why motorists tend to get annoyed so here are a few that I know of:

• They think it's harder to overtake
• They think it's illegal
• They think it's dangerous in general
• They think it means cyclists are not paying attention to the road

So why do cyclists cycle two abreast? There are many reasons why cyclists choose to cycle two abreast so I'll give you the reasons that I know of.
It's Safer!
Simply put, it's safer for cyclists to ride two abreast, it means that motorists usually have to overtake in a proper manner rather than overtaking in the same lane as the cyclists. If a group of cyclists are in single file, motorists will often assume they can overtake in places which are not safe and will not leave the cyclist enough room. Motorists should give cyclists the same amount of room they would give another car when overaking (please see the Overtaking Cyclists page for more details) which means they should be on the other side of the road and would have to wait until there are no oncoming cars. Being in two files usually forces this scenario but riding in single file can lead the motorist to think they can overtake on the same side of the road if there are oncoming cars thus not giving the cyclist the correct amount of space.

It allows motorists to overtake quicker!?!
Riding two abreast also allows the motorist to overtake the group of cyclists quicker as there is less distance between the front and rear of the group (about half!!). This means that the motorist is past the group in less time, spending less time on the other side of the road and along side the group of cyclists and therefore safer all round.

 

[Larrynwin]

On the other hand, as a cyclist, if you cower in the gutter, some pratt in a lorry (or RV) will take advantage of all that space, overtake you and have you off your bike even if something is coming the other way!

In a narrow road do cyclists have the right to ride two abreast thus preventing safe overtaking or should we all follow behind for miles at 15mph
We both ride our bikes and rarely ride two abreast , that is utterly selfish and good reason for motorists to pay little respect to their attitude.

 

[jonandshell]

I stand by my first comment!

As a cyclist, if you don't command some road space, someone in a motorised vehicle WILL take it and have you off!

Those cyclists defended their road space and in doing so contributed to prolonging their lives.
As for the disgrunted driver behind, they gained maybe a minute or two on their journey?

A cyclist doesn't know the proficiency of the driver behind. Most are in proficient verging on dangerous, so I protect my road space too when cycling.

I make no apologies for that!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Paddywack]

And another two questions.....
Is it still illegal to ride abreast of another cyclist on the highway?
Why do cyclists on the road seem to think they are competing in the Tour De France?

Please show where it says it is illegal to a ride abreast?

 

[Paddywack]

In a narrow road do cyclists have the right to ride two abreast thus preventing safe overtaking or should we all follow behind for miles at 15mph
We both ride our bikes and rarely ride two abreast , that is utterly selfish and good reason for motorists to pay little respect to their attitude.

Yes.

 

[Larrynwin]

Two questions I always put to drivers in such circumstances:

Perhaps they didn't think that it was safe for you to overtake at that point, as jonandshell have pointed out?

Do you give the cyclist the same space you give a horse rider?

At the start of the thread I stated conditions were very poor , it was a quite narrow road and moving to single file , sorry to inconvenience them, would have been far safer.
I allowed a safe margin but it could have been much safer considering the conditions and yes I did allow the same margin in the size of road that I would for a horse and rider.

It is not up to a cyclist to judge when they will allow a driver to overtake especially when they are not aware of the size of the following vehicle.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Paddywack]

It is not up to a cyclist to judge when they will allow a driver to overtake especially when they are not aware of the size of the following vehicle.

Yes it is. They are responsible for their own safety, they have probably been on the receiving end of drivers who have deemed it safe to overtake at times that it was not. It is called defensive riding and most experience cyclists (who are probably drivers as well) practice it.

Out of interest how many times when you are driving your RV do you pull over and let the traffic behind you past?

 

[Zains Pops]

Set out from home yesterday in RV with car in tow, all up around 45 ft. C classified quite narrow road , torrential rain, considerable laying water and subsequent poor visibility.
Two cycling enthusiasts in lycra ahead riding two abreast, they didnt look to see who wants to overtake and refused to give up their "right" to half of the road and just moved tighter together.
I hooted more than once and in the end overtook them with reasonable clearance but just how unnessarily dangerous.

Agreed,it drive me nuts when they use the local B road up a hill (one of the few in Essex) two abreast and preventing other road users from proceeding in a safe manner.

Don't even get me started on horse riders, usually women talking to each other as their nags plod along the highway. They seem to have no understanding of others around them.

 

[Judge Mental]

Yes it is. They are responsible for their own safety, they have probably been on the receiving end of drivers who have deemed it safe to overtake at times that it was not.

all the bloody time! "safe manner" give me a break. I live in london probably the most dangerous city in Europe for cyclists. Have at least 2 near misses a week "On sorry didn't see you" the normal retort or "f'ing cyclist". was hit in sainsburys car park the other week..

We are treated very badly in the UK, mearly looked upon as a hindrance. most car drivers opinion seems to think we have no right to be on the road.... The irony being cycling in london is twice as fast as a car...



"The Dutch cycle because strict liability made everybody drive safely and play nice"

“The Netherlands and Denmark have a law of ‘strict liability’ to protect vulnerable road users from more powerful road users. Under this law, in crashes involving vulnerable road users, unless it can be clearly proven that the vulnerable road user was at fault, the more powerful road user is found liable by default. This makes Dutch and Danish drivers more cautious around cyclists and pedestrians and is responsible for their safe roads.”

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Larrynwin]

I quote part of JeanLucs post , an extraction from the Highway Code
" and ride in single file in narrow or busy roads"
I think that answers a few questions.

Yes it is. They are responsible for their own safety, they have probably been on the receiving end of drivers who have deemed it safe to overtake at times that it was not. It is called defensive riding and most experience cyclists (who are probably drivers as well) practice it.

Out of interest how many times when you are driving your RV do you pull over and let the traffic behind you past?

Out of interest , I frequently pull in when driving RV and in my car when I am holding up others, it's called courtesy and perhaps the cyclists mentioned above could have exercised just a little of that.

 

[RowleyBirkinQC]

I have cycled since childhood, I believe cyclists have a right to use the road and that all road users need to be considerate to other road users regardless of vehicle type, motorised or non-motorised. My personal opinion is that cyclists riding 2 or more abreast is failing to show other road users the consideration they themselves believe should be afforded whilst cycling. I believe it is selfish, as is cyclists jumping red lights, and I don't buy the self preservation argument. If riding abreast frustrates a line of traffic, just because it is your right to obstruct their making progress, that traffic is more likely to overtake in a less safe place/manner. Like I said, just my opinion as a cyclist.

 

[bernardfeay]

I find tolerance to be the best solution. If the cyclist should have moved over - never mind; if the MH should have waited - never mind. Somebody is probably right and somebody is probably wrong.

Play nice kiddies!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Larrynwin]

I find tolerance to be the best solution. If the cyclist should have moved over - never mind; if the MH should have waited - never mind. Somebody is probably right and somebody is probably wrong.

Play nice kiddies!

I finally overtook when it was safe to do so, but it could have been much safer, if the inner cyclist had had a problem being near the verge there would be far less margin for error by being two abreast.
In those circumstances as a cyclist myself I would have been riding single file .

 

[Judge Mental]

there's bob hope and no hope...some seem incapable of understanding how vulnerable cyclists feel and ride defensively with good reason.

 

[chaser]

“The Netherlands and Denmark have a law of ‘strict liability’ to protect vulnerable road users from more powerful road users. Under this law, in crashes involving vulnerable road users, unless it can be clearly proven that the vulnerable road user was at fault, the more powerful road user is found liable by default. This makes Dutch and Danish drivers more cautious around cyclists and pedestrians and is responsible for their safe roads.”

Mostly the reason I never intend going back to Holland with the mh, they are crazy

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Larrynwin]

there's bob hope and no hope...some seem incapable of understanding how vulnerable cyclists feel and ride defensively with good reason.

We also are cyclists and fully understand those sentiments and also ride single file for our own safety.

 

[Hollyberry]

My OH was a keen cyclist, so I always try to give them plenty of room. Been tooted by vehicles behind when I won't overtake due to insufficient space ( in my judgement)

But cyclists don't always help themselves. I left my daughters house the other day between 5.30 and 6 so in the dark.. Within a mile passed two separate cyclists without lights. One was dressed in black, while at least the other had sense to wear hi viz. Riding along unlit country roads without lights is just asking to be hit---why do they do it?

 

[chaser]

My OH was a keen cyclist, so I always try to give them plenty of room. Been tooted by vehicles behind when I won't overtake due to insufficient space ( in my judgement)

But cyclists don't always help themselves. I left my daughters house the other day between 5.30 and 6 so in the dark.. Within a mile passed two separate cyclists without lights. One was dressed in black, while at least the other had sense to wear hi viz. Riding along unlit country roads without lights is just asking to be hit---why do they do it?

I was once fined £5 for riding a bike with no lights

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[mjltigger]

I agree bernardfeay tolerance is the answer and the only safe way to progress on our busy roads however I also find the 'im allowed to so I will' attitude all the time and it is inconsiderate and selfish.. two abreast cyclist or middle lane Lorry driver at 55.5 mph or double parked cars.. so as well as tolerance we should all be a little more polite and considerate of other road users

 

[Chockswahay]

Set out from home yesterday in RV with car in tow, all up around 45 ft. C classified quite narrow road , torrential rain, considerable laying water and subsequent poor visibility.
Two cycling enthusiasts in lycra ahead riding two abreast, they didnt look to see who wants to overtake and refused to give up their "right" to half of the road and just moved tighter together.
I hooted more than once and in the end overtook them with reasonable clearance but just how unnessarily dangerous.

I think you are probably outnumbered on this one Larry

At the size of your rig you are as threatening and as dangerous as an articulated lorry to the cyclists. By establishing their position on the road they did at least force you to consider the safety of when to overtake. They clearly caused you inconvenience but that is an unfortunate bi product of our road system (you were able to overtake them in the end 'tho).

Unfortunately too many drivers lack the spatial awareness to safely overtake cyclists so faced with that their decision was at least the safest

My wife and I cycle and generally we cycle in single file, but (BUT) there are a couple of sections of main road near us when to do so would be VERY dangerous so we ride two abreast to assert our position in the road until it is safe to do otherwise.

I have felt cars and lorries 'brush' past me sometimes on roads and if two abreast is the only way to stop this then so be it!

Normally we ride single file and I imagine the majority of cyclists do.......... but when they don't they probably have good reason.

I am not defending selfishness or stupidity (which many cyclists do exhibit) but I can not agree with the sentiment that says car and lorry drivers are right and cyclists are wrong.

The real issue here is safety

 

[Jaws]

This argument rages on and on on every forum I am a member of.
As far as I am concerned lycra luvies are nowt short of being a total pain in the bum .. Sorry if that offends but that is how I feel.. And yes, I am STILL a cyclist but consider myself, when on a bicycle, as being vulnerable and slow.. While the cyclist is happy to trundle along at 15 mph or whatever, the average powered vehicle driver / rider is not.
Riders who cannot accept that other vehicle will not only be travelling faster AND HAVE THE SAME RIGHT TO TRAVEL AT THE SPEED THEY WANT TO AS THEM SELVES are arrogant in the extreme believing only THEIR way is the right way

They may well have equal rights.. Not arguing that.. I am arguing that they make absolutely no attempt to see things from any ones perspective bar their own

All a personal view of course brought about by having to deal with 'pelotons' on small country roads on a regular basis AND having the misfortune to have to work and drive in Cambridge city for a few years

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[gus-lopez]

This argument rages on and on on every forum I am a member of.
As far as I am concerned lycra luvies are nowt short of being a total pain in the bum .. Sorry if that offends but that is how I feel.. And yes, I am STILL a cyclist but consider myself, when on a bicycle, as being vulnerable and slow.. While the cyclist is happy to trundle along at 15 mph or whatever, the average powered vehicle driver / rider is not.
Riders who cannot accept that other vehicle will not only be travelling faster AND HAVE THE SAME RIGHT TO TRAVEL AT THE SPEED THEY WANT TO AS THEM SELVES are arrogant in the extreme believing only THEIR way is the right way

They may well have equal rights.. Not arguing that.. I am arguing that they make absolutely no attempt to see things from any ones perspective bar their own

All a personal view of course brought about by having to deal with 'pelotons' on small country roads on a regular basis AND having the misfortune to have to work and drive in Cambridge city for a few years

Over here 2 , or more, cyclists are classed legally as a car. At weekend s when you come across the cycling club practising & there is 50+ of then you are expected to overtake as if you are overtaking 25+ cars. In the event of an accident you are deemed to be at fault unless you can prove otherwise. that's why you use cameras.

 

[bigfoot]

We have a number of paths which are for both cyclists and walkers. But the certain groups of cyclists have taken them over for 'unofficial' speed trials called,I think,Strava and publish their times on a website,however walkers and ramblers with dogs are an equal hazard and won't move over when asked.
One of my chums and his wife are cyclists,to the point of being obsessive and he says he has a right to be on the road,I agree,but being stubborn about it,without being aware of what's around you doesn't guarantee your survival.
My view is,in many European countries,when a new road is constructed or rebuilt,the cycle path is the first thing to be done. Live and let live but for Gods sake be sensible!

 

[sedge]

I don't quite understand the comment someone made about cyclists holding up the traffic behind then not being safe for the other traffic.

I don't understand why everyone dropping their speed would not be safe?

Just because the limit is 30 or 40 whatever, doesn't mean it's unsafe to travel slower than that, at times, does it?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}