# 2 Abreast cycling is simply not safe.



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

I've been dragged into yet ANOTHER argument about this and have just had enough. 
So I made an illustration to explain my point.

As a cyclist and a motorist I hate riders riding two abreast, and further hate it when we claim "its better for motorists because they don't have as far to overtake". It is very damaging for us cyclists and I will explain why.

We constantly (and rightly) demand that cars pass us at a safe distance. Quite right. 
Yet by riding 2 abreast we suddenly say that this is no longer important. 

I have illustrated below what I mean.
When I am driving a car behind 2 abreast cyclists I simply will not pass them. Ever. For the reasons in the graphic below. 

I don't understand how so many people claim "cars should give me 5/6 feet" etc and then also claim they should be able to ride 2 abreast and cars will be able to get past.

Illustration.







And this image from the highway code itself, How could this be possible is riding 2 abreast?






I know the haters will comes, and I will be attacked. but I am sick of the hypocrisy with us cyclists over this issue. 
By telling cars it's OK to overtake 2 abreast. You just tell them that it's ok to give the same distance to ALL riders. (which would be a squeeze past when riders are in primary).


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

Your illustrations are visible (for me at least) so I don't know what you're describing.
Even so, I'm betting you're mistaken about it!

GC


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Your illustrations are visible (for me at least) so I don't know what you're describing.
> Even so, I'm betting you're mistaken about it!
> 
> GC


https://postimg.org/image/4bxu4rygr/


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> https://postimg.org/image/4bxu4rygr/



Sorry, all I get is "This page can’t be displayed"

GC


----------



## Mugshot (9 Sep 2016)

The position for the outside rider when riding two abreast will likely be around primary, so not startlingly different to a solo rider taking the lane and getting overtaken.





The vehicle driver should be passing with as much space left as possible, if the outside rider is not comfortable with that they can single out, but in reality it makes little to no difference to overtaking vehicles.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)




----------



## nickyboy (9 Sep 2016)

We've been over this a zillion times. When it's just two cyclists (ie not a group) it always boils down to one thing; if you think a car driver should have to pass a solo cyclist in the manner of the photo, two abreast is fine. If you think a car driver can pass a bit closer than that then it's not fine

For me, I've no problem with a car passing closer than in that photo, straddling the white line in effect


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

Simple. Image 3 is not ideal but it's an awful lot better than a driver squeezing through when there's oncoming traffic.

Therefor if it stops that, and I do that by either holding primary or riding alongside, on areas of road where passing is dangerous then I do so.

Two abreast or primary forces the driver to only overtake when oncoming traffic is clear.

I too am a driver. I aslo know what it's like for a car to squeeze through with oncoming traffic. There's a Sky bus video doing the rounds here and on news sites - have a look. Then think what the coach would have done if the riders were two abreast.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> View attachment 143289



Is the car being hemmed in by a guardrail or something? What's stopping the driver moving to his right?

GC


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

Mugshot said:


> The position for the outside rider when riding two abreast will likely be around primary,


I have NEVER experienced that. The outside rider is always right of the centre line. Making a safe pass....impossible. 

This is much more realistic.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Is the car being hemmed in by a guardrail or something? What's stopping the driver moving to his right?
> 
> GC


emm, a kerb? a hedge? a farmers field? a house?


----------



## MontyVeda (9 Sep 2016)

since i don't have any friends, i never have the luxury of cycling two-abreast... so I'm with the OP.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

Markymark said:


> Simple. Image 3 is not ideal but it's an awful lot better than a driver squeezing through when there's oncoming traffic.
> 
> Therefor if it stops that, and I do that by either holding primary or riding alongside, on areas of road where passing is dangerous then I do so.
> 
> ...



By all means use 2 abreast as a means of stopping a pass. That I completely agree with and support. 
It's those who say it i safe to pass 2 abreast that irks me.


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> I have NEVER experienced that. The outside rider is always right of the centre line. Making a safe pass....impossible.
> 
> This is much more realistic.


A car passing acrosd the lines is then perfectly so for all drivers. The only cyclist in danger is one where the car is straddling the line.


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> By all means use 2 abreast as a means of stopping a pass. That I completely agree with and support.
> It's those who say it i safe to pass 2 abreast that irks me.


It is safe. It forces the car to the oncoming lane. The alternative is dangerous.

Some drivers hate it because what they;re really saying is that they can;t push through with oncoming cars. They should go farkthemselves.


----------



## Dayvo (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> This is much more realistic.



But they're on the wrong side of the road!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> It's those who say it i safe to pass 2 abreast that irks me.



It *is* safe. I've done it (the overtake) many times and can't understand why it irks you.

GC


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

Markymark said:


> A car passing acrosd the lines is then perfectly so for all drivers. The only cyclist in danger is one where the car is straddling the line.


You should give a cyclist as much room as a car. 
Say that cyclist on the left there was a car. To pass it safetly the passing car would have to be in the ditch. I would not pass that rider. Too close for comfort should he come off.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> It *is* safe. I've done it (the overtake) many times and can't understand why it irks you.
> 
> GC


Beacuse I like to pass cyclists at a safe distance. i.e. treat them as the same size as a car. I CANT do that if they are right of primary.


----------



## Mugshot (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> I have NEVER experienced that. The outside rider is always right of the centre line. Making a safe pass....impossible.


Ok, well I have, I guess it depends who you're riding with, a strong primary admittedly but not wildly different. I don't see why a safe pass couldnt be acheived in the photo you've posted either, the driver should be passing with as much space left as possible, and if they did so in a controlled manner with the space available in that photo I wouldn't have a problem.
The issue is generally impatient drivers getting wound up by what they perceive to be a hindrance to their journey, which I can understand, but if they just take a moment to think about things sensibly there really isn't vey much difference in overtaking a single cyclist or two abreast safely.


----------



## Globalti (9 Sep 2016)

I actually wish car drivers would give me a polite pip on their horn as they approached from behind to let me know they'd like to pass. So often thanks to wind noise in the ears you don't hear them until they are right behind you, by which time they are probably beginning to feel hindered and a blast on the horn comes across as aggressive. 

I can't do it with my car because the horn is the central boss of the steering wheel and the action is heavy, meaning it usually produces a longish blast. Also there's a delay between the press and the sound because there's no longer a direct link between horn button and horn; the horn is "ordered" by the car's computer when it senses the push. On my Land Rover, which had 1970s BL controls, the horn was a small button on the end of the indicator stalk with a strongish spring, wired directly to the horn so tapping it would produce the briefest of horn pips, ideal for politely alerting a cyclist to your presence.


----------



## Ian H (9 Sep 2016)

Those such as Chris Boardman, you mean?


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> Beacuse I like to pass cyclists at a safe distance. i.e. treat them as the same size as a car. I CANT do that if they are right of primary.


No. In the image a car on the other side of the road is the same distance away as an oncoming car would be which is perfectly safe.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> Say that cyclist on the left there was a car. To pass it safetly the passing car would have to be in the ditch. I would not pass that rider. Too close for comfort should he come off.



Hmm, if you were driving in the opposite direction to them, what would you do?

GC


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Hmm, if you were driving in the opposite direction to them, what would you do?
> 
> GC


This. I think the OP is using the 'pass as far away as a car' to make them ride single file. In reality a safe pass is fine if the riders are all in one lane and the car is in the other.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> Beacuse I like to pass cyclists at a safe distance. i.e. treat them as the same size as a car. I CANT do that if they are right of primary.




What measurement are you putting on a safe distance? 
I look for a minimum of 1.5m but much depends on road conditions and our respective speeds.
(I appreciate you are concerned about the riders' safety here so please don't think I'm arguing for the sake of it.)

GC


----------



## Spinney (9 Sep 2016)

I get passed much closer than that (by overtaking and oncoming cars) on some of the lanes around here, because there is no more than about 3 feet spare even when the car is as far over as they can get. Almost all cars slow right down (or I pull over to let them go, but that is not pertinent to this discussion). So a pass that would be frightening and possibly dangerous at 30 mph, feels and is probably pretty safe at 5-10 mph.

So space is not the only factor.


----------



## goody (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> When I am driving a car behind 2 abreast cyclists I simply will not pass them. Ever. For the reasons in the graphic below.
> 
> I don't understand how so many people claim "cars should give me 5/6 feet" etc and then also claim they should be able to ride 2 abreast and cars will be able to get past.



Do you stop and pull over when you see two riders abreast coming from the opposite direction?


----------



## MontyVeda (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> Beacuse I like to pass cyclists at a safe distance.* i.e. treat them as the same size as a car.* I CANT do that if they are right of primary.


Assuming a car would take up the same width of road as this group of cyclists, would you overtake a car on this road?


beany_bot said:


> ...
> 
> ...


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

MontyVeda said:


> Assuming a car would take up the same width of road as this group of cyclists, would you overtake a car on this road?


Always. However as it's quite close I'd accelerate to a tonne to do it quickly and look up from my iPad to admire my revs and speedo.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

goody said:


> Do you stop and pull over when you see two riders abreast coming from the opposite direction?


no, but i don't much like it. I do pull way over to the left. Hearts in my mouth. It only takes a wobble from the inside rider to send the outside rider into the otherside of the road. 

By telling drivers "it's fine to pass 2 abreast" we are also saying "it's fine to pass a primary rider without being fully on the otherside of the road". Because its the same distance.


----------



## beany_bot (9 Sep 2016)

MontyVeda said:


> Assuming a car would take up the same width of road as this group of cyclists, would you overtake a car on this road?


Yes of course I would.

A car isnt a vunerable road user. Its not going to topple over. A car does not need the same clearance as a cyclist (door to door - door to cyclist)


----------



## Mugshot (9 Sep 2016)

I suspect you're looking at this from the perspective of being both;

A) A motorist being hindered
B) A cyclist being a hindrance

Overtaking two abreast is perfectly safe providing the overtake is performed in a safe and controlled manner.


----------



## Markymark (9 Sep 2016)

I think you are being concerned for the cyclists which is good. But as I stated early on, it's not ideal but it does stop far more dangerous passes so on balance it;s a good idea.


----------



## Brandane (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> We constantly (and rightly) demand that cars pass us at a safe distance. Quite right.
> Yet by riding 2 abreast we suddenly say that this is no longer important.
> 
> I have illustrated below what I mean.
> ...


I think you are getting confused by the term "give vulnerable road users at least as much space as you would a car". In your diagram with the cyclists 2 abreast, let's replace the 2 cyclists with a car. The car would still be to the left of the centreline. Are you saying you wouldn't pass that car? If not, why not? Your 2 cyclists riding abreast of each other are perfectly safe for an overtake.


----------



## G3CWI (9 Sep 2016)

Didn't Team Sky give some advice on this recently?


----------



## jarlrmai (9 Sep 2016)

I think the dichotomy in some minds is this

There is a feeling that some cyclists complain when they riding solo and are overtaken by a car driver who gives them the same space a cyclist would be given by a car driver overtaking a group of cyclists riding two abreast.

So in this case it's a case of either

Two abreast is not safe as it's impossible to to give that much room and overtake and therefore all cyclists should ride single file.

or

Cyclists who are complaining about close overtakes when riding solo have double standards with regards to this matter.

My own feeling having ridden many miles in 2 up groups and solo is that when the road is in good condition groups ride close enough left that in most roads a car passing as given in the highway code is giving enough room. If the group is riding more central for whatever reason the car should wait as they would for a tractor/milk float etc if overtaking is impossible due to vision or lack of a safe distance being possible.

Groups should also and often do single out when encountering these situations, but sometimes it is just not safe to over take a group of cyclists.

Using your car as a weapon to threaten people is not acceptable even if those people are not obeying regulations (ie riding 2 abreast on a busy road)


----------



## screenman (9 Sep 2016)

How do you overtake a car if you cannot overtake 2 cyclist?


----------



## screenman (9 Sep 2016)

Dayvo said:


> But they're on the wrong side of the road!



Or reversing.


----------



## Leaway2 (9 Sep 2016)

Looks OK to me.


----------



## Apollonius (9 Sep 2016)

Might it not be that it is the overtaking that is not safe? In that case, don't do it.


----------



## Bollo (9 Sep 2016)

Has anyone asked the obvious question - where's the evidence that it's "not safe". You've stated its not safe, but how many KSIs are primarily caused by riding two abreast? The truth is it's not something you *like*, because you feel it inconveniences you as a driver. Thats a long way from "not safe".


----------



## glasgowcyclist (9 Sep 2016)

@beany_bot If you don't feel you can complete the pass safely, wait until it _is_ safe. And don't look at it as being irksome to you, look at it as there being one or more cyclists who appreciate you looking out for them.

GC


----------



## Ajax Bay (9 Sep 2016)

Ian H said:


> Those such as Chris Boardman, you mean?


Shameless Exeter Wheelers advertising. [and an excellent video]


beany_bot said:


> As a cyclist and a motorist I hate riders riding two abreast


As a cyclist, don't you enjoy (rather than hate) the opportunity to overtake a pair or more cyclists two abreast, thus demonstrating how fast a cyclist you are?


----------



## outlash (9 Sep 2016)

MontyVeda said:


> since i don't have any friends



I can't say I'm surprised by that, calling people stupid can be quite offensive to some.


----------



## summerdays (9 Sep 2016)

I was "stuck" behind a group of cyclists last weekend, they were mostly in single file with just a couple doubled up, and I waited for quite some time before I felt it was safe to pass such a long line of cyclists.... I actually wished they were two abreast. But it was fine.... I waited, as did the cars behind, for a mile or so until it was a clear long stretch and no one beeped or got stressed out. 

I'd have also waited and driven at the same speed if it was a tractor in front as well.


----------



## MichaelW2 (9 Sep 2016)

The universally observed reaction of drivers is to give cyclists the room that they give themselves. Ride in the gutter and cars won't move out for you. Ride a little way out and cars pass a little further out. Ride in a primary position and cars give you plenty of clearance.
If you are in a group and riding two abreast, cars will give you the clearance they give to other cars, driving in the opposite lane. The group they pass is half the length making for a safer overtake. To suggest that cars passing two abreast will be dangerously close is a hypothetical case, not borne out by experience


----------



## jefmcg (9 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> You should give a cyclist as much room as a car.
> .









looks like the cyclist is getting more room than a sedan would.

(your road is too narrow is the problem.)


----------



## Brandane (9 Sep 2016)

jefmcg said:


> View attachment 143326
> 
> 
> looks like the cyclist is getting more room than a sedan would.
> ...



That'll be what I was trying to explain, verbally, but being somewhat lacking in the necessary techie skills to make it clear and simple .


----------



## jefmcg (9 Sep 2016)

Brandane said:


> That'll be what I was trying to explain, verbally, but being somewhat lacking in the necessary techie skills to make it clear and simple .


Yes, i know one or two people had made the point upthread. I would have quoted you, but once I had done the picture I wanted to upload is ASAP before someone else did a better one than me


----------



## Racing roadkill (9 Sep 2016)

I've had to actually point this out from the passenger seat of a car before now. One overtake of 2 cyclists 2 abreast, closely followed by having to overtake a tractor. Guess who got more room / less horn?


----------



## Profpointy (9 Sep 2016)

on a two lane road it makes no difference. Well, striclty speaking it's easier if they're two abreast as they are ahorter as it were. If road is 1.5 cars wide then single file is easier (providong it's clear) - ditto a two lane raod with 1.5 car wide lanes


----------



## Drago (9 Sep 2016)

Going by the OPs illustration, it is impossible for a car to overtake another car and leave enough clearance for there to be a 'safe pass'. Therefore, when out in his car I expect the OP to practice what he preaches and refrain from overtaking any vehicle at all unless he can maintain 5' of clearance.


----------



## steveindenmark (10 Sep 2016)

When your riding 2 abreast along a road, as I do with Jannie. It takes no effort at all for Jannie to slow down a fraction and for me to speed up a fraction and get in front of her when we hear a car coming up from behind. We have been riding together over 10 years and so it is automatic for us now.

I think we prefer to ride in single file most of the time anyway. Its nice to concentrate on your own thoughts and not chat endlessly about nothing.


----------



## Southside Mike (10 Sep 2016)

The outside rider in a two is always going to positon him/herself such that they are comfortable with the distance they are from oncoming traffic. As long as the overtaking car pulls into the opposite lane the clearance will be at least the same.

The OP is simply wrong on this.


----------



## Dirk (10 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> .......
> A car isnt a vunerable road user. Its not going to topple over.........


Neither will a bicycle, unless it's stationary.


----------



## Apollonius (10 Sep 2016)

Dirk Thrust said:


> Neither will a bicycle, unless it's stationary.


Or you hit a hole that throws you off.


----------



## coffeejo (10 Sep 2016)

Dirk Thrust said:


> Neither will a bicycle, unless it's stationary.


Or being ridden up a steep hill. DAHIK.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (10 Sep 2016)

Globalti said:


> I actually wish car drivers would give me a polite pip on their horn as they approached from behind to let me know they'd like to pass.



Define a polite pip as opposed to I'm coming through no matter what pip. And am not referring to the prolonged blast on the horn for the latter. 

Personally I dislike being pipped however friendly friends and family thought it was. I have asked them if they see me then to give me a friendly wave when they're passed if they wish to acknowledge me.


I'm also a tad puzzled by the implication you not be aware of the vehicle behind you and; assuming you don't ride everywhere at speed limit + constantly; why you would be in any doubt that their intention is to get by you.

Even if awaiting a safe point to do so or you pulling in a tad or waving them on to indicate you are comfortable with them going by you at that point, I just don't get why you would feel the need to be beeped at.


----------



## Dirk (10 Sep 2016)

Apollonius said:


> Or you hit a hole that throws you off.


The same hole that made a car swerve into you, to avoid it?
Poor road surfaces affect all road users.



coffeejo said:


> Or being ridden up a steep hill. DAHIK.


Lack of forward motion?


----------



## coffeejo (10 Sep 2016)

Dirk Thrust said:


> Lack of forward motion?


Plenty of sideways momentum. Too much, one could say.


----------



## sheddy (10 Sep 2016)

Overtaking two abreast is only a problem for long vehicles or vehicle/trailer combos.

BTW if we are referring to 'Cyclists' then we should refer to 'Motorists'.
Let's reserve 'Drivers' for sporting events on closed roads or the dodgems.

.


----------



## Globalti (10 Sep 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Define a polite pip as opposed to I'm coming through no matter what pip.......
> 
> .....I just don't get why you would feel the need to be beeped at.



A polite pip is the briefest "pip"of the horn lasting a good deal less than a second, what you get if you tap the horn button. Any longer becomes increasingly aggressive.

I feel the need to be pipped at because I obey the rules of the road, exactly the same as I do when driving my car. I recognise that as a road user I need to be courteous to other users and that includes not needlessly hindering vehicles that move faster than me. So when I'm rding along beside my buddy and a car comes up behind, we single out to let them past unless we are on a really wide stretch of road. Sometimes you don't hear cars until they are right behind you, so a polite pip would have been useful as they approached from behind. However most cyclists and drivers would not be able to distinguish a polite pip as part of the mutual give and take of road use, from a blast of frustration.


----------



## coffeejo (10 Sep 2016)

I hate both horns and bells, even when they are used with good intentions.


----------



## summerdays (10 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> I hate both horns and bells, even when they are used with good intentions.


One of my friends always uses a bell to be polite when approaching blind corners etc, even if she is behind me, and I'm going around it first! Whereas I only use it on a few occasions when I think someone is unaware of me and could suddenly step into my path, but I'm more likely to say hello etc.


----------



## sheddy (10 Sep 2016)

or she might just be warning you of a wardrobe malfunction...


----------



## shouldbeinbed (10 Sep 2016)

Globalti said:


> A polite pip is the briefest "pip"of the horn lasting a good deal less than a second, what you get if you tap the horn button. Any longer becomes increasingly aggressive.
> 
> I feel the need to be pipped at because I obey the rules of the road, exactly the same as I do when driving my car. I recognise that as a road user I need to be courteous to other users and that includes not needlessly hindering vehicles that move faster than me. So when I'm rding along beside my buddy and a car comes up behind, we single out to let them past unless we are on a really wide stretch of road. Sometimes you don't hear cars until they are right behind you, so a polite pip would have been useful as they approached from behind. However most cyclists and drivers would not be able to distinguish a polite pip as part of the mutual give and take of road use, from a blast of frustration.



I obey the rules if the road too and feel no need whatsoever to be pipped. 

Maybe my mirrors help me be better aware of my surrounding than being taken by surprise by a stealth vehicle.


----------



## MontyVeda (10 Sep 2016)

outlash said:


> I can't say I'm surprised by that, calling people stupid can be quite offensive to some.


Still trying and failing to be a troll I see.


----------



## gavintc (10 Sep 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> I obey the rules if the road too and feel no need whatsoever to be pipped.
> 
> Maybe my mirrors help me be better aware of my surrounding than being taken by surprise by a stealth vehicle.


Bipping the horn is quite common in europe (well I have heard it in Italy, France and Switzerland). It is not aggressive and merely states, I am here and am overtaking.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (10 Sep 2016)

gavintc said:


> Bipping the horn is quite common in europe (well I have heard it in Italy, France and Switzerland). It is not aggressive and merely states, I am here and am overtaking.



I'm sure if I were in those countries and bipping the horn had those less aggressive connotations then I might feel differently about it happening to me in Greater Manchester but we don't have that supposedly friendly convention with horn use over here so it's rather a moot point. 

Also it is still from what you say used in a manner that says I'm coming through regardless, and seems to imply a lack of awareness on the part of the cyclist if they need telling a vehicle is in their immediate vicinity.


----------



## Globalti (10 Sep 2016)

I disagree completely. I bet you'll be able to find that somebody, somewhere, has done a few little trials and has discovered that the level of aggression is directly in proportion to the length of the blast. If motorists understood that cyclists are partially deafened by the wind noise in their ears, they might be more willing to pip their horns from a hundred yards back so as to give advance warning. Clearly this can only work on quiet rural roads and would fail in city traffic.


----------



## coffeejo (10 Sep 2016)

Globalti said:


> I disagree completely. I bet you'll be able to find that somebody, somewhere, has done a few little trials and has discovered that the level of aggression is directly in proportion to the length of the blast. If motorists understood that cyclists are partially deafened by the wind noise in their ears, they might be more willing to pip their horns from a hundred yards back so as to give advance warning. Clearly this can only work on quiet rural roads and would fail in city traffic.


Long may it not occur to them!


----------



## jefmcg (10 Sep 2016)

Globalti said:


> hey might be more willing to pip their horns from a hundred yards back so as to give advance warning.


warning of what? If a driver is passing me with plenty of clearance, what are they warning me about? I only need to be aware of their presence if some action is required of me. To me, even a friendly toot says "coming through, move over"


----------



## EnPassant (10 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> Long may it not occur to them!


For me and I suspect I'm not alone, the issue is that horns in this country at least are not used for "Hi I'm here and I don't want to cause you distress because you didn't notice me" they are used for either "You blithering idiot, what the ***** and ***** and ***** you!" or as already pointed out "Get the **** out of my way"

I accept that a shorter use could be considered polite, sadly this isn't what passes through most peoples minds as the first thought.

It simply isn't as easy to differentiate as with headlight flashing. (the use of which iirc as a "I've seen you please go" tool isn't supported by the highway code anyway, even though it's in everyday use)


----------



## coffeejo (10 Sep 2016)

EnPassant said:


> For me and I suspect I'm not alone, the issue is that horns in this country at least are not used for "Hi I'm here and I don't want to cause you distress because you didn't notice me" they are used for either "You blithering idiot, what the ***** and ***** and ***** you!" or as already pointed out "Get the **** out of my way"
> 
> I accept that a shorter use could be considered polite, sadly this isn't what passes through most peoples minds as the first thought.
> 
> It simply isn't as easy to differentiate as with headlight flashing. (the use of which iirc as a "I've seen you please go" tool isn't supported by the highway code anyway, even though it's in everyday use)


Round here, some people hit the horn at blind bends but that assumes that the oncoming driver (if there is one) had heard the noise - if they can hear at all. Better, IMHO, to respect the road and the conditions.


----------



## Roxy641 (10 Sep 2016)

I'm sure many drivers ment to toot a "friendly toot" on their horn, but a second too long and it turns into: "I'm gonna overtake you and I don't care if you are aware of me or not". Also, when I hear the sound of a horn behind me, I can never be sure if it's ment for me, or some other road user (not even necessary for a fellow cyclist).

Then, the other point I wanted to make (apologises if someone has already made it). On country lanes there isn't even room for a cyclist AND a car driver at the same time, or at least, not without the car driver slowing down so that she/he doesn't knock you off the bike.


----------



## EnPassant (10 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> Round here, some people hit the horn at blind bends but that assumes that the oncoming driver (if there is one) had heard the noise - if they can hear at all. Better, IMHO, to respect the road and the conditions.


Ahh, I've witnessed this here too (and elsewhere out in the sticks ), but there's the rub, because it's done blind you know they are doing it because sightlines preclude visual reference. Once you know you can be seen, the use of the horn becomes moot, sure it's supposed to mean one thing "I'm here in case you didn't notice me", but sadly it mostly doesn't.

ETA: Perhaps I lived too long in London


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (10 Sep 2016)

It's definitely not safe if you're with this chap


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkNK_VJPfBs


----------



## Katherine (10 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> I've been dragged into yet ANOTHER argument about this and have just had enough.
> So I made an illustration to explain my point.
> 
> As a cyclist and a motorist I hate riders riding two abreast, and further hate it when we claim "its better for motorists because they don't have as far to overtake". It is very damaging for us cyclists and I will explain why.
> ...



To overtake cyclists safely, move across into the other lane as soon as you can see ahead that the road is clear. However many cyclists there are is irrelevant. So, of course it is easier to overtake six cyclists riding two abreast than in single file. 

If the road is narrow, the same applies but as you will have less room, so you will also slow down accordingly. The less room that you have, the slower that you will be able to go. 

Do not think it is ok to squeeze through in the same lane as the cyclist whilst there is oncoming traffic, even if there is only one cyclist.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (10 Sep 2016)

Globalti said:


> I disagree completely. I bet you'll be able to find that somebody, somewhere, has done a few little trials and has discovered that the level of aggression is directly in proportion to the length of the blast. If motorists understood that cyclists are partially deafened by the wind noise in their ears, they might be more willing to pip their horns from a hundred yards back so as to give advance warning. Clearly this can only work on quiet rural roads and would fail in city traffic.



Would these be the same cyclists who claim headphones make no difference to their hearing of the world around them? 

Also if you are partially deafened by the wind noise and you know it, why are you not compensating for that with extra visual checks. 

Seems irresponsible cycling to blithely ride on knowingly unaware of your surroundings but hey, each to their own. 

I'll continue riding responsibly for my own welfare.


----------



## MontyVeda (10 Sep 2016)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> It's definitely not safe if you're with this chap
> 
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkNK_VJPfBs



I suspect headphones. He appears to be completely oblivious to the fact that there's a car behind him, and not a single shoulder check.


----------



## ianrauk (10 Sep 2016)

MontyVeda said:


> I suspect headphones. He appears to be completely oblivious to the fact that there's a car behind him, and not a single shoulder check.




More like Strava checking.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (10 Sep 2016)

MontyVeda said:


> I suspect headphones. He appears to be completely oblivious to the fact that there's a car behind him, and not a single shoulder check.


I couldn't see any signs of "tunes" but I'm 80% sure I saw a cam on his helmet. Would be delicious irony


----------



## Rooster1 (12 Sep 2016)

If cycling two abreast is not an issue, why did the cyclists I was behind for over a mile riding two abreast bother to thin out to single file to let me past. I was quite happy going at 18 mph behind them. They weren't bothering me but I was bothering them. Weird.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

Rooster1 said:


> If cycling two abreast is not an issue, why did the cyclists I was behind for over a mile riding two abreast bother to thin out to single file to let me past. I was quite happy going at 18 mph behind them. They weren't bothering me but I was bothering them. Weird.


They didn't know it was you and thought it was a run-of-the-mill driver with very little patience?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

TL;DR but

The statement "2 Abreast cycling is simply not safe"

is

a) really poor English
b) cobblers
c) an example of the sort of unconscious motor-centric thinking from drivers who are cyclists, which I fear we must blame on the lead they used to put in petrol.


----------



## 400bhp (12 Sep 2016)

goody said:


> Do you stop and pull over when you see two riders abreast coming from the opposite direction?



I skipped all other posts as I found THE ANSWER


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Sep 2016)

Rooster1 said:


> If cycling two abreast is not an issue, why did the cyclists I was behind for over a mile riding two abreast bother to thin out to single file to let me past. I was quite happy going at 18 mph behind them. They weren't bothering me but I was bothering them. Weird.


Not remotely 'weird'. They could not know you were in no hurry and possessed the patience of Job. They recognised that you would want to get past, identified a stretch of road where it would be safe, and singled out to make it nice and easy to pass very safely, demonstrating 'live and let live' politeness and consideration for other road users. Riding along with a car close behind doesn't make for a relaxing ride (and @GrumpyGregry has said why). The cyclists demonstrated good practice, maybe even best practice. When judging this 'weird', where's your empathy?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

Ajax Bay said:


> Not remotely 'weird'. They could not know you were in no hurry and possessed the patience of Job. They recognised that you would want to get past, identified a stretch of road where it would be safe, and singled out to make it nice and easy to pass very safely, demonstrating 'live and let live' politeness and consideration for other road users. Riding along with a car close behind doesn't make for a relaxing ride (and @GrumpyGregry has said why). The cyclists demonstrated good practice, maybe even best practice. When judging this 'weird, where's your empathy?


I am with you. Clearly the cyclists were bothered, for whatever reason, by the car tailing them at 18mph for a mile, else they wouldn't have singled out, surely?


----------



## Spinney (12 Sep 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> I am with you. Clearly the cyclists were bothered, for whatever reason, by the car tailing them at 18mph for a mile, else they wouldn't have singled out, surely?


They needn't have been bothered. They may have just thought that the car behind them had been very patient and it was no bother to them to single out at a safe place!
Love 'n' happiness all round!


----------



## classic33 (12 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> Round here, some people hit the horn at blind bends but that assumes that the oncoming driver (if there is one) had heard the noise - if they can hear at all. Better, IMHO, to respect the road and the conditions.


Which is a better indication of another vehicle approaching at night, lights or horn?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

Spinney said:


> They needn't have been bothered. They may have just thought that the car behind them had been very patient and it was no bother to them to single out at a safe place!
> Love 'n' happiness all round!


True. But only the slimmest of slim possibilities hereabouts.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> Round here, some people hit the horn at blind bends but that assumes that the oncoming driver (if there is one) had heard the noise - if they can hear at all. Better, IMHO, to respect the road and the conditions.


My sister totalled her Juke (it improved the looks) in a head on collision on a single track blind corner which goes under a railway bridge/embankment not far from her home. In daylight. 

She sounded her horn. As soon as her horn sounding ceased she heard the horn of another vehicle coming the other way. 

Since each driver, like all locals there, habitually sound their horn at this point, almost unthinkingly, without slowing down sufficiently, nor expecting an oncoming vehicle to be there, and, frankly, were tooting in the standard Mr Toad "I'm coming through! Beware! Get out of my way!" fashion, an expensive shunt occurred. The village fallout of which has still not been resolved a few years later.

I've been forced to bail twice by oncoming in the same place whilst cycling. NO horn the driver can here to respond with, and they are, of course, comin' thru! But my all time fave was the nobber who tried to overtake me as I approached the bridge.

Better, imo, for drivers to just chillax and to slow the feck down. But that will never catch on.


----------



## keithmac (12 Sep 2016)

What's the general consensus then, if a car is fully over the opposing carriageway it's an acceptable pass for the car to make?.


----------



## Profpointy (12 Sep 2016)

keithmac said:


> What's the general consensus then, if a car is fully over the opposing carriageway it's an acceptable pass for the car to make?.



well yes - assuming of course that there is sufficient clear road ahead


----------



## coffeejo (12 Sep 2016)

keithmac said:


> What's the general consensus then, if a car is fully over the opposing carriageway it's an acceptable pass for the car to make?.


Yes. Or even, IMHO, most of the way over.


----------



## Tin Pot (12 Sep 2016)

beany_bot said:


> As a cyclist and a motorist I hate riders riding two abreast



And we hate you.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

Tin Pot said:


> And we hate you.


hate is a very strong word.

but I get where you are coming from.


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Sep 2016)

keithmac said:


> What's the general consensus then, if a car is fully over the opposing carriageway it's an acceptable pass for the car to make?.


I'm interpreting this as "Is it acceptable to overtake a slower moving vehicle (going slower than the road's speed limit), a single cyclist or a group of cyclists (or indeed a group of runners) by passing on the opposite side of a 'single carriageway' road (ie a lane each way)?"
Answer (for me): Yes, assuming that there is sufficient clear road ahead to complete the overtaking manoeuvre safely without cutting in, that the road user being overtaken is not so wide that they need more than their lane to progress, and that the vehicle or cyclist ahead is not indicating that they are about to turn.


----------



## Tin Pot (12 Sep 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> hate is a very strong word.
> 
> but I get where you are coming from.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (12 Sep 2016)

keithmac said:


> What's the general consensus then, if a car is fully over the opposing carriageway it's an acceptable pass for the car to make?.


If car A were overtaking car B it would do so entirely on the other side of the centre line of the carriageway.
Why should car A overtake a cyclist in any other way? Are the driver's wrists lacking the strength to turn the wheel? Is the steering column seized?
If car A fails to move completely to the other side of the road because of oncoming traffic then overtaking is not safe at that time and the driver should suck it up and continue behind the cyclist.


----------



## jefmcg (12 Sep 2016)

Looking at this diagram 





I don't think I'd overtake a car on a road this narrow, unless they moved left and waved me through. I'd slow right down if there was a car coming towards me. Similarly I probably wouldn't overtake a cyclist either, until they pulled over and waved me through.


----------



## coffeejo (12 Sep 2016)

jefmcg said:


> Looking at this diagram
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I saw the car on the left, I'd pedal as fast as possible in the opposite direction. S/he has got cyclists' heads as hood ornaments.


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Sep 2016)

jefmcg said:


> Looking at this diagram
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How does slowing down when a car approaches from the opposite direction help? There is clearly enough room to pass, just concentrate on keeping in to the left hand side. If there isn't surely you need to *stop*. When I drive behind people who do what you say you'd do, and the brake lights keep going on for bends, cars coming the other way etc, I call them 'brakers' and just drop back a bit; and breathe. Some drivers are not as confident on narrow country roads, especially if the roads are not familiar.


----------

