# Dont let abuse from motorists spoil your day.



## Banjo (29 Jun 2011)

It doesnt happen often to me but when it does I used to try to analyse the situation to see if I was in anyway at fault then fret about it for a while generally losing enjoyment in the ride.

Then I had a thought. I often cycle into town and wander around in cycle gear with a helmet under my arm so very obviously a cyclist. Not once has anyone tried to barge me off the pavement noone has shouted at me or given me the finger. 

What does this say about the type of person who will only abuse a cyclist when safely inside a steel box that can accellerate away? 

Bearing that in m,ind makes it easier for me to ignore the Cowardly Twat$ and not give it a second thought.


----------



## rowan 46 (29 Jun 2011)

there does appear to be something about cars that insulates some people from the real world and the customary courtesies and you are right most often it is a form of cowardice. My partner will not cycle anymore because of the abuse from people who would never talk to her like that in real life.


----------



## Arch (29 Jun 2011)

I try to think like this:

Every time I ride, I'm making myself fitter and healthier and generally having a good time. 

Every driver who shouts abuse is probably heading for a heart attack, stroke or ulcer, because they must be so angry all the time. Plus, they probably don't have many friends, and all the men have tiny weeny penises.

Ok, maybe the last couple of bits are wrong, but anyone who gets so het up as to shout at a cyclist is probably not healthy in mind or body.

It doesn't stop me scowling at them, or muttering under my breath, but in the end, I know I win.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 Jun 2011)

I never pay the smallest bit of attention to anyone like that. I'm an experienced enough road user in all shapes and sizes of vehicles to know when I've done something dodgy, and I'm adult enough to apologise if necessary, even if only with a wave of the hand. I'm not going to waste my life arguing with morons who've got a licence to drive a pathetic little metal box about the place.


----------



## asterix (30 Jun 2011)

Good points Banjo! Where do the cowards hide when not in their cocoons?


----------



## Red Light (30 Jun 2011)

Banjo said:


> It doesnt happen often to me but when it does I used to try to analyse the situation to see if I was in anyway at fault then fret about it for a while generally losing enjoyment in the ride.
> 
> Then I had a thought. I often cycle into town and wander around in cycle gear with a helmet under my arm so very obviously a cyclist. Not once has anyone tried to barge me off the pavement noone has shouted at me or given me the finger.
> 
> ...



Yep, letting it go is the best answer. Otherwise if you spend the rest of the ride fretting or fuming they have achieved their objective of winding you up and I won't give them that satisfaction. So I just let it go and get on with enjoying my ride with maybe a cheery wave to them


----------



## pepecat (30 Jun 2011)

Unless I've done something stupid, in which case I'll apologise, I usually go 'yeah, whatever' and keep going. It's so not worth getting wound up about it. I figure the idiot who's hurling the abuse is not going to give me a second thought, so why should I get wound up and do myself no good. It's not as if my anger is going to reach whoever did it and make them feel bad (that would be nice!).


----------



## BSRU (30 Jun 2011)

I find ignoring them works best, it really gets to some people as their brains cannot understand what's not happening.


----------



## martint235 (30 Jun 2011)

There's a similar attitude with email and telephone as opposed to personal interaction. I myself find my emails are snottier when I'm complaining than I would be face to face in a shop. It was the same when I worked in IT support, I could take a quite abusive phone call knowing that when I showed up next to the person's desk they would be as meek as a little lamb.

It's probably something deep to do with the likelyhood of a situation becoming outside of your control. If you're in a car, you wind the windows up and drive away (well all the motorists I talk to do) and if you're on the phone you can always hang up.


----------



## MarcA (30 Jun 2011)

I find as many courteous drivers as the opposite, which works the same as in most other aspects of life. You can spend the whole rest of a ride fuming about an incident, or you can enjoy your ride. Your choice.


----------



## fossyant (30 Jun 2011)

A smile and a wave really confuses them.

We need a smiley that combines these three...


----------



## ColinJ (30 Jun 2011)

It's hard *not* to have your day's ride spoiled when you have to stop to scrape someone's thick green phlegm out of your eyes!


----------



## Bicycle (30 Jun 2011)

I agree wholeheartedly with everyone who agrees with me on this matter, as follows:

By far the majority of other road users are courteous, thoughtful, alert and skilled in using the road.

When someone shows particular kindness, I like to offer recognition with a vave or a flash of similar, depending on what I'm in or on at the time.

Every now and again someone is beastly. My view is that nothing I can do or say (particularly on the spur of the moment) will add in any very clever way to the flavour of the traffic soup. I ignore it.

Similarly, every now and then someone appears not to have seen me. Sometimes this is inconvenient, sometimes dangerous and sometimes it involves pain and some cost.

My view is that the trick here is to remain polite and courteous at all times, even when lying in the gutter. Sometimes I fail to do so and later I always regret that failure.

I agree with the poster who noted that the insularity of cars can desensitise the occupants to the needs of other road users. I confess to having suffered from that in my youth.

One thing of which I am convinced is that the more we all see all road users as road users, the better we will all get on.

I wonder sometimes whether words like Moton, Cager and Troll don't in some way allow a sense of insularity to develop in some cyclists - leading perhaps to a minority who look for points of difference with more enthusiasm than they seek points of common interest.

I may be very wrong here, but I ride a lot and drive a lot and the above way has done me little harm.


----------



## tyred (30 Jun 2011)

Cowardly is the word I think.

I rarely let myself get wound up by the actions of others but a few weeks ago, I was almost knocked off by a Vectra driver who decided to pass me on a blind corner and when he realised there was a car coming towards him, pulled across on top of me. It was too close for comfort. He turned into a driveway about 50 yards up the road. I decided to have a word so rode down the drive after him and he was still in the car. I went over to it, he put up his window and locked the doors and refused to get out or acknowledge my existence. So yes, definitely cowardly.

I tried to open the driver's door to speak to him face to face even though I knew it was locked and I think I might have broken the handle


----------



## BSRU (30 Jun 2011)

tyred said:


> Cowardly is the word I think.
> 
> I rarely let myself get wound up by the actions of others but a few weeks ago, I was almost knocked off by a Vectra driver who decided to pass me on a blind corner and when he realised there was a car coming towards him, pulled across on top of me. It was too close for comfort. He turned into a driveway about 50 yards up the road. I decided to have a word so rode down the drive after him and he was still in the car. I went over to it, he put up his window and locked the doors and refused to get out or acknowledge my existence. So yes, definitely cowardly.
> 
> I tried to open the driver's door to speak to him face to face even though I knew it was locked and I think I might have broken the handle


I have no sympathy for a driver willing to risk killing or seriously injuring a cyclist in order to protect their precious metal box, it was a Vauxhall only worth crushing to make washing machines.


----------



## Banjo (30 Jun 2011)

MarcA said:


> I find as many courteous drivers as the opposite, which works the same as in most other aspects of life. You can spend the whole rest of a ride fuming about an incident, or you can enjoy your ride. Your choice.



+1 definitely. The idiots are probably less than one in a thousand, the other 999 courteous drivers dont get remembered though.

On a ride with Angelfishsolo the other day it was really weird, all day people were courteous gave us plenty of room etc etc we both noticed it. Probably due to the ride being mostly in rural areas .


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

I also liked you comment about nobody approaching you in the street and shouting abuse when in cycling gear even though you are clearly a cyclist 


Banjo said:


> +1 definitely. The idiots are probably less than one in a thousand, the other 999 courteous drivers dont get remembered though.
> 
> On a ride with Angelfishsolo the other day it was really weird, all day people were courteous gave us plenty of room etc etc we both noticed it. Probably due to the ride being mostly in rural areas .


----------



## apollo179 (30 Jun 2011)

I do think the power to annoy does lie with the cyclist and that power should be used responsibly. Cyclists riding 2 abreast is unnessecary and just serves to increase the overall level of hostility towards (all) cyclists.


----------



## Mad at urage (30 Jun 2011)

apollo179 said:


> I do think the power to annoy does lie with the cyclist and that power should be used responsibly. *Cyclists riding 2 abreast is unnessecary and just serves to increase the overall level of hostility towards (all) cyclists.*


Riding two abreast is very necessary if you wish to speak to the other cyclist, or indeed to overtake another cyclist. Holding a conversation is also sometimes necessary (and occasionally can be enjoyable).


----------



## bigjim (30 Jun 2011)

There are those motorists IMO, who for some reason think certain cyclists are soft and easy targets. I find if I am on a racing bike with helmet, cycle shorts and top I experience a certain amount of abuse now and then. If I am on my MTB in my scruffs I am given a wide berth and I have never experienced any abuse at all.


----------



## Glow worm (30 Jun 2011)

Banjo said:


> It doesnt happen often to me but when it does I used to try to analyse the situation to see if I was in anyway at fault then fret about it for a while generally losing enjoyment in the ride.
> 
> Then I had a thought. I often cycle into town and wander around in cycle gear with a helmet under my arm so very obviously a cyclist. Not once has anyone tried to barge me off the pavement noone has shouted at me or given me the finger.
> 
> ...



Food for thought. I had my quick, pleasant lunchtime ride to the neighbouring village spoilt today by a fat arse in a Volvo giving me abuse for taking primary to prevent the cretin from overtaking me on a 90 degree bend. When I got off the bike and gesticulated towards the tw*t to stop and 'have a chat', he sped off like the useless sack of cowardly sh*te he and the rest of his fellow Volvo tosser chums are. After a while of blood boiling over, and quick, fruitless search of local streets to find the arse, I decided to let it go. -not easy though.


----------



## apollo179 (30 Jun 2011)

Yeh cos its the cyclists on racing bikes with helmet and cycle shorts that drive motorists crazy by riding 2 abreast. Not saying you do this bigjim but some, as Mad@urage testifies to, do. Consideration works both ways.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

Just to point out that riding two abreast is perfectly legal and encouraged at times.


apollo179 said:


> Yeh cos its the cyclists on racing bikes with helmet and cycle shorts that drive motorists crazy by riding 2 abreast. Not saying you do this bigjim but some, as Mad@urage testifies to, do. Consideration works both ways.


----------



## Hip Priest (30 Jun 2011)

In 12 years of driving I've only been annoyed by a cyclist once, and that's because he pulled a dangerous move on me which put himself at risk. I shouted 'Are you insane?' and he rode off. Nowt really.

I've never had a problem with cyclists 'holding me up' or riding two abreast, even before I became one myself. I just wait for an appropriate place and make a pass. The fact is, a lot of motorists don't seem to know how to deal with cyclists on the road, and if you can't deal with other road users, you shouldn't have a licence.

Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant didn't it?


----------



## Dan B (30 Jun 2011)

If anyone is actually "driven crazy" by the sight of two parallel cyclists ahead of them, they really weren't sane enough to hold a driving licence in the first place.

I suspect hyperbole


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

I think you have said what needed to be said perfectly 


Hip Priest said:


> In 12 years of driving I've only been annoyed by a cyclist once, and that's because he pulled a dangerous move on me which put himself at risk. I shouted 'Are you insane?' and he rode off. Nowt really.
> 
> I've never had a problem with cyclists 'holding me up' or riding two abreast, even before I became one myself. I just wait for an appropriate place and make a pass. The fact is, a lot of motorists don't seem to know how to deal with cyclists on the road, and if you can't deal with other road users, you shouldn't have a licence.
> 
> Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant didn't it?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

Amen to that!


Dan B said:


> If anyone is actually "driven crazy" by the sight of two parallel cyclists ahead of them, they really weren't sane enough to hold a driving licence in the first place.
> 
> I suspect hyperbole


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

Why, what has he done?


Dan B said:


> I suspect hyperbole


----------



## Dan B (30 Jun 2011)

apollo179 said:


> I do think the power to annoy does lie with the cyclist


Hot damn, I have The Power To Annoy! Your puny power to Knock Me Off My Bike And Maim Cripple Or Kill Me is no match for my super awesomeness!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

I have seen Green Lantern recently - I wonder what colour Annoy is? 


Dan B said:


> Hot damn, I have The Power To Annoy! Your puny power to Knock Me Off My Bike And Maim Cripple Or Kill Me is no match for my super awesomeness!


----------



## Dan B (30 Jun 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Why, what has he done?


He used his powers for evil


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

Oh no 


Dan B said:


> He used his powers for evil


----------



## ColinJ (30 Jun 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Just to point out that riding two abreast is perfectly legal and encouraged at times.


Indeed! Think about it ...

10 cyclists on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely, riding in single file. Driver decides to go for it anyway, gets half way past but sees oncoming vehicle, swerves back in and finds a long string of cyclists in the way, forces some of them off the road or hits them.
10 cyclists on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely, riding in single file. Driver decides to go for it anyway, forces a way through the tiny gap between the single file cyclists and oncoming traffic, risking tragedy should (s)he make contact with any of the cyclists when doing so.
10 cyclists on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely, riding 2 abreast. Driver wants to overtake but decides not to because the cyclists are in the way. Waits a couple of minutes and then overtakes when it is safe to do so.
10 cyclists on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely, riding 2 abreast. Driver decides to go for it, gets half way past but sees oncoming vehicle, manages to (just) overtake shorter remaining string of cyclists in time OR abandons overtake, brakes and cuts back in behind shorter string of cyclists.


----------



## apollo179 (30 Jun 2011)

Dosnt anyone else think theres a responsibility for cyclists to cycle with some consideration to motorists. 
Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good in the battle to win motorists hearts and minds and further harmonious road use by both car and bike. And ultimately it is in the cyclists interest for the relation to be harmonious cos as has been previously pointed out the cyclists power to annoy is insignificant compared to the cars power to kill.


----------



## Bman (30 Jun 2011)

You missed what really happens:

10 cyclists on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely, riding 2 abreast. Driver wants to overtake but decides not to because the cyclists are in the way. In the few minutes the driver is behind the cyclists he/she gets more and more angry until finally doing something illegal.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 Jun 2011)

If said cyclists are doing 10mph then yes, if like most roadies I see they are doing closer to 30mph then no. If a motorist gets wound up so much by a slower moving vehical (as cyclists should be treated) then he or she does not deserve the privelidge of holding a driving license.


apollo179 said:


> Dosnt anyone else think theres a responsibility for cyclists to cycle with some consideration to motorists.
> Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good in the battle to win motorists hearts and minds and further harmonious road use by both car and bike. And ultimately it is in the cyclists interest for the relation to be harmonious cos as has been previously pointed out the cyclists power to annoy is insignificant compared to the cars power to kill.


----------



## Banjo (30 Jun 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Dosnt anyone else think theres a responsibility for cyclists to cycle with some consideration to motorists.
> Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good in the battle to win motorists hearts and minds and further harmonious road use by both car and bike. And ultimately it is in the cyclists interest for the relation to be harmonious cos as has been previously pointed out the cyclists power to annoy is insignificant compared to the cars power to kill.



Absolutely agree with you but condemning 2 abreast totally is a very sweeping statement. 

There are times when it is perfectly appropriate but if it appears to be holding cars up i think you should single up ASAP.


----------



## apollo179 (30 Jun 2011)

I didnt intend to condemn 2 abreast totally. I was just suggesting that its the tendancy of some cyclists "on racing bikes with helmet and cycle shorts" to cycle 2 abreast that contributes to the unpopularity of said cyclists compared to scruffs on mountain bikes. Ive seen it myself . Not "on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely" but normal road needlessly holding traffic up. In these circumstances it is inconsiderate and likely to precipitate negative emotions towards cyclists.


----------



## Glow worm (30 Jun 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good in the battle to win motorists hearts and minds and further harmonious road use by both car and bike.



The only thing that will ever win a moton's heart and ''mind'' is petrol at £10 or £15 a gallon. That might just lure them out of their cages. Until then, we 'll always just be 'in their way', no matter how many abreast we are, wasting at least 3 precious seconds of their 500 yard drive to the chippy.


----------



## brixbrom (1 Jul 2011)

I stick to my wifes advice when she is driving, if someone says something you just keep moving and leave it behind you and before you know it you have forgotten about it. Its not worth getting stressed over, I think cycling should be a chilled experience


----------



## Stephenite (1 Jul 2011)

Something strange happens to the mindset of a lot of people when they're driving.


To wit:-

On the way to work today I came up to a junction and stopped behind a small electricians van - the lights were red. His back door was open! I tried to attract his attention to the fact he was about to lose his bits of wire n resistors n that through his rear view mirror, but to no avail. As the lights were about to change I thought "Bugger it!" And swung the door shut. I might have closed the door with a little too much gusto as he shot off - the lights went green at the same time. He was driving 70+kmh in a 50 zone - I travel this road often both on bike and in car so i think i'm fairly accurate regards the speed. I'm thinking "Shioot, maybe i scared him." When i caught him again at a RAB i came alongside and tried to tell him through his window "Your backdoor was wide open, mate. I tried to tell you..." etc. God knows what he was thinking as he just stared straight ahead. Then i left him as i was late for work.

When one is driving his car one tends to get lost in his own little bubble innit? This tends to a passive-aggressiveness with respect to other road users. A larger vehicle (eg. HGV), or a more powerful one (fancy SUV-type thingy), generally commands more respect than a smaller engined little holiday Fiat. So the dim-witted would feign subservience to the more powerful and take out their petty, pent-up grievances on the less bulky. Fortunately, most people rise above this and treat others as they would be treated themselves. It is only the truly evil, the stupid, the absent-minded, and the drunk... and now i've missed my point. Well it is Thursday!


----------



## Rhythm Thief (1 Jul 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> In 12 years of driving I've only been annoyed by a cyclist once, and that's because he pulled a dangerous move on me which put himself at risk. I shouted 'Are you insane?' and he rode off. Nowt really.
> 
> I've never had a problem with cyclists 'holding me up' or riding two abreast, even before I became one myself. I just wait for an appropriate place and make a pass. The fact is, a lot of motorists don't seem to know how to deal with cyclists on the road, and if you can't deal with other road users, you shouldn't have a licence.
> 
> Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant didn't it?



This is my experience too. Sometimes when I'm driving the lorry, cyclists annoy me. But only because I'm thinking "oh, for f**k's sake, claim your road space and stop wobbling about in the gutter. You need to be in primary here to stop me squeezing past you (not that I'm going to) ... " and so forth.


----------



## abo (1 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Not "on a narrow, twisty stretch of road, no room to be overtaken safely" but normal road needlessly holding traffic up.



Cyclists *are* traffic...


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Did anyone say they werent.
If cyclists are considerate then it seems pretty obvious that they will be more popular and get treated better accordingly - its a win win. (wait for the next cycling supremacist to say ; its legal and were not in a popularity contest)


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Apart from the lorry bit I find I do the same. Nothing annoys me more (on the roads) than cyclists riding in the gutter.


Rhythm Thief said:


> This is my experience too. Sometimes when I'm driving the lorry, cyclists annoy me. But only because I'm thinking "oh, for f**k's sake, claim your road space and stop wobbling about in the gutter. You need to be in primary here to stop me squeezing past you (not that I'm going to) ... " and so forth.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

abo said:


> Cyclists *are* traffic...


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Most cyclists are considerate in the same way that most drivers are considerate. The exceptions to the rule are the ones we see vidio clips of and posts about.


apollo179 said:


> Did anyone say they werent.
> If cyclists are considerate then it seems pretty obvious that they will be more popular and get treated better accordingly - its a win win. (wait for the next cycling supremacist to say ; its legal and were not in a popularity contest)


----------



## BilboSmeggins (1 Jul 2011)

When I am driving my car and a car appears behind that is clearly faster, or wants to go faster, I will do my best to facilitate an easy overtake for said vehicle. Firstly, I don't enjoy holding people up, and secondly, I get more enjoyment when I'm not being tailed. I carry this same sentiment with me when I'm cycling. And yes, when I am driving and come up behind the "two abreast" brigade it does annoy me. Not because I can't whizz past, but because I am being shown very little courtesy. Obviously there are times when two abreast is necessary (windy roads, blind crests etc), but, for the most part, it is a case of "sod you, I'm having a giggle with my mate(s)". And I would guess that most motorists can tell when they are a victim of the latter.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

If you were driving to the speed limit would you still facilitate and easy overtake? Am genuinely curious here.


BilboSmeggins said:


> When I am driving my car and a car appears behind that is clearly faster, or wants to go faster, I will do my best to facilitate an easy overtake for said vehicle. Firstly, I don't enjoy holding people up, and secondly, I get more enjoyment when I'm not being tailed. I carry this same sentiment with me when I'm cycling. And yes, when I am driving and come up behind the "two abreast" brigade it does annoy me. Not because I can't whizz past, but because I am being shown very litle courtesy. Obviously there are times when two abreast is necessary (windy roads, blind crests etc), but, for the most part, it is a case of "sod you, I'm having a giggle with my mate(s)". And I would guess that most motorists can tell when they are a victim of the latter.


----------



## BilboSmeggins (1 Jul 2011)

If it were clear that they were absolutely intent on getting by regardless, then yes, I would rather it happened in as safe, and controlled a manner as possible. Although I could not guarantee that a certain degree of cursing would not creep into the mix. Primarily though, I am referring to rural situations here, which is where I do 90% of my driving, and 100% of my cycling.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

OK a fair point and understood. Think I would do the same TBH.


BilboSmeggins said:


> If it were clear that they were absolutely intent on getting by regardless, then yes, I would rather it happened in as safe, and controlled a manner as possible. Although I could not guarantee that a certain degree of cursing would not creep into the mix. Primarily though, I am referring to rural situations here, which is where I do 90% of my driving, and 100% of my cycling.


----------



## BilboSmeggins (1 Jul 2011)

Glad we are in agreement. Thought I was headed for a "virtual" thick ear for a moment


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Not at all. We may differ about the riding two abreast bit but as yuo are not advocating running them down you are OK in my book 


BilboSmeggins said:


> Glad we are in agreement. Thought I was headed for a "virtual" thick ear for a moment


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

This thread has just reminded me of a Facebook status I recently read. Words to effect of - *Holding a grudge takes too much energy. Just slash the bastards tyres and be done with it *


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

This attitude that its ok to cycle 2 abreast if you are up to the speed limit is akin to someone on the motorway doing 70mph in the 3rd lane. Regardless of your speed limit point , cycling 2 abreast where it interferes with traffic flow is inconsiderate and serves to infuriate motorists.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

I disagree - cyclist are traffic, just as are cars, lorries, motorbikes, et al. They have as much more right to be on the road than a car. As for the 70mph in the third lane - remind me what the speed limit on a motorway is?


apollo179 said:


> This attitude that its ok to cycle 2 abreast if you are up to the speed limit is akin to someone on the motorway doing 70mph in the 3rd lane. Regardless of your speed limit point , cycling 2 abreast where it interferes with traffic flow is inconsiderate and serves to infuriate motorists.


----------



## lulubel (1 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If you were driving to the speed limit would you still facilitate and easy overtake? Am genuinely curious here.



I wasn't involved in this discussion, but I'll answer anyway because I would do the same.

Yes. I'm not the police. It isn't up to me to enforce the rules of the road. And if someone who's speeding is held up by someone who is (to their minds) making it difficult to overtake, they're likely to drive more aggressively once they've got past, increasing their chances of causing an accident.

I just try to keep myself safe on the roads, and stay away from the idiots as much as possible. And hope, if they're going to end up killing someone, they kill themselves rather than another innocent person.


----------



## Dan B (1 Jul 2011)

Bottom line, for me: there's nothing wrong with considerate cycling, and to that end I will single out if I'm riding two abreast and I can safely let through a following vehicle. But _I do that because I can, not because I have to_. Consideration begets consideration, and if the driver behind is being a prick (tailgating, revving, flashing headlights, beeping, etc) he is already not showing me the consideration that he apparently expects from me and he can damn well stay there until I decide to let him past. And again, anyone who gets "infuriated" by being stuck behind a slower vehicle has absolutely no claim on the moral high ground or indeed any moral ground above sea level at all.


----------



## Bicycle (1 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If you were driving to the speed limit would you still facilitate and easy overtake? Am genuinely curious here.




Yes. As would most people.

It's a courtesy. Few people keep to 70 on Motorways. I'm not sure what the option would be.... Hogging the outside lane at 70? 

Lane discipline on Motorways is one of the key elements to maintaining a safe driving environment. EVeryone should be in the inside lane unless passing a slower vehicle.

As to 'if you were driving at the speed limit'.... I meet another motorist travelling below the posted speed limit no more than once or twice a week, unless there are cameras in the area.

It's not an 'if', it's a 'when'.

The nicest rides I have are the ones when I try to be nice to everyone. It seems to encourage people to be nice to me.

I think that failing to facilitate an overtake by a driver behind me would just cause all sorts of tensions to build up in several road users and would not make the roads the happy place they ought to be.


----------



## Bicycle (1 Jul 2011)

BilboSmeggins said:


> When I am driving my car and a car appears behind that is clearly faster, or wants to go faster, I will do my best to facilitate an easy overtake for said vehicle. Firstly, I don't enjoy holding people up, and secondly, I get more enjoyment when I'm not being tailed. I carry this same sentiment with me when I'm cycling. And yes, when I am driving and come up behind the "two abreast" brigade it does annoy me. Not because I can't whizz past, but because I am being shown very litle courtesy. Obviously there are times when two abreast is necessary (windy roads, blind crests etc), but, for the most part, it is a case of "sod you, I'm having a giggle with my mate(s)". And I would guess that most motorists can tell when they are a victim of the latter.



+1


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Courtesy + consideration.
Alien concepts it appears to some.
Ultimately it is in the cyclists interest more than the motorists that there is 2 way courtesy and consideration. Cyclists being incourteous riding 2 abreast may annoy a motorist by holding him up for a short while but a cyclist could be killed by a driver showing the same lack of courtesy.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

As long as it works both ways it is great. Some cyclists some neither, some drivers so neither. When those too meet then light the touch paper and stand well clear.


apollo179 said:


> Courtesy + consideration.
> Alien concepts it appears to some.


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

I didnt really understand that.
We as cyclists can only be responsible for our own behaviour. But i suggest courtesy and consideration on our part will engendour the same in return. Win win.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

And lack of courtesy on both sides can end in lose lose


apollo179 said:


> I didnt really understand that.
> We as cyclists can only be responsible for our own behaviour. But i suggest courtesy and consideration on our part will engendour the same in return. Win win.


----------



## Dan B (1 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Ultimately it is in the cyclists interest more than the motorists that there is 2 way courtesy and consideration. Cyclists being incourteous riding 2 abreast may annoy a motorist by holding him up for a short while but a cyclist could be killed by a driver showing the same lack of courtesy.


Whoah, back up. Omitting to kill someone is not "courteous", it's the bare minimum baseline behaviour we should expect. Holding the door open for someone following you is courteous, failing to do so is uncourteous, but if you're slamming it in their face and breaking their nose then we need to find different words (like "evil", "illegal" or "dangerous") to describe that, because "courtesy" is about going above and beyond the expected minimum behaviour, not just about meeting it


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Amen to that!


Dan B said:


> Whoah, back up. Omitting to kill someone is not "courteous", it's the bare minimum baseline behaviour we should expect. Holding the door open for someone following you is courteous, failing to do so is uncourteous, but if you're slamming it in their face and breaking their nose then we need to find different words (like "evil", "illegal" or "dangerous") to describe that, because "courtesy" is about going above and beyond the expected minimum behaviour, not just about meeting it


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> And lack of courtesy on both sides can end in lose lose


Indeed the motorist loses a couple of seconds getting home - the cyclist loses his life. Im glad you finally get it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Well I know of at least one case where a motorist abused a cyclist. The cyclist spend ages searching for the car. When he found it he smashed every wind and turned it over onto its' roof. The guy had serious issues and was also built like the proverbial outhouse. Lucky he didn't find the driver.

I find find your kowtow to the car attitude a little strange and somewhat sad. We should be trying to educate drivers of cyclists rights where possible not reenforcing the belief that they are the only vehicles with a right to use the roads.


apollo179 said:


> Indeed the motorist loses a couple of seconds getting home - the cyclist loses his life. Im glad you finally get it.


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Mutual courtesy and consideration. What part dont you understand.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

The part where mutual courtesy involves kowtowing to the car all the time. If the car is an emergency vehicle of course you make as much space as possible. If it is a Sunday driver out for a blast in his sports car why shouldn't the cyclists ride safely and legally on the road. As a point of interest a cyclist holding primary should be treated in the same way as two riding abreast.


apollo179 said:


> Mutual courtesy and consideration. What part dont you understand.


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Mutual courtesy and consideration involves just that. Mutual courtesy and consideration. As i said before sadly alien concepts to some of our fellow cyclists. It is regrettable that we all pay the price for them.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Cyclist two abreast is not uncourteous it is safe and legal. This is the point the seems to not resonate with you.


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

Yes ok.


----------



## BilboSmeggins (1 Jul 2011)

But it shouldn't be about what's legal. It should be about consideration for others. Shooting a welshman with a longbow is still legal under certain circumstances. Although it would be deemed most inconsiderate to do so.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

That's why people keep shooting me.  I am not saying riding two abreast at all times is the thing to do but I am saying it is safer on many occasions than riding in single file as was pointed out in post #33.


BilboSmeggins said:


> But it shouldn't be about what's legal. It should be about consideration for others. Shooting a welshman with a longbow is still legal under certain circumstances. Although it would be deemed most inconsiderate to do so.


----------



## Bicycle (1 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Cyclist two abreast is not uncourteous it is safe and legal. This is the point the seems to not resonate with you.




Of course it's not uncourteous; I'm not sure anything is or ever has been.

It is sometimes discourteous.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Opps valid pull up on creation of a new word 


Bicycle said:


> Of course it's not uncourteous; I'm not sure anything is or ever has been.
> 
> It is sometimes discourteous.


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

I hope you appreciated that i did the cyber equivalent of politely riding away from a potentially inflamatory situation with a just friendly wave. Courtesy and consideration.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (1 Jul 2011)

Of course I did and I thank you. Hence my acceptance of fault and the blush 


apollo179 said:


> I hope you appreciated that i did the cyber equivalent of politely riding away from a potentially inflamatory situation with a just friendly wave. Courtesy and consideration.


----------



## ColinJ (1 Jul 2011)

And in the spirit of courstesy and consideration, I would like to agree that there are indeed _times_ when riding in single file is the right thing to do!

I was once riding through the small town of Ramsbottom on the Rossendale Mountain Bike Challenge and a pair of cyclists in front of me were not making any friends ...



ColinJ said:


> We headed down a short stretch of road where two riders in front of me old enough to know better rode along two-abreast chatting without a care in the world and weaving from side to side as a queue of increasingly irate motorists built behind them, before road rage ensued and they nearly got crushed in a stupid overtaking-into-oncoming-traffic-manoeuvre.


The thing is - yes, that road was narrow, but traffic was moving at a safe, slow speed so allowing motorists to creep by was the right thing to do there and then. Creating a huge tailback wasn't. Cars which had safely passed me were not able to progress further. The predictable happened ...

The most outrageous cycling I saw (which made me feel embarrassed to be in the same group of cyclists) was on a training ride near Calpe, just north of Benidorm. The coast road twists and turns, but is wide enough for traffic to flow safely in both directions even while overtaking the many cyclists who generally ride within white lines painted either side. It is often okay to ride 2 abreast. It isn't okay to ride 5 abreast! 

Many members of the group I was with decided to blatantly ignore courtesy and consideration and form a mobile road block on our side of the road. A queue of cars was forming behind us. I heard someone call out "No more than 2 abreast, cars behind" and someone else shouted out "F*** 'em, they can wait!" (Laughter.) This went of for about 10 minutes. They were well out of order!

A long-suffering motorist eventually gave a short blip on his horn to request to be let through. They gave him 'the finger'. That caused dozens of motorists behind to blast us with their horns. More jeers from the cyclists, and more use of the fingers, plus references made to WW II when they noticed that the driver in the convertible at the head of the queue was German. In the end, a driver about 4 cars back saw _'the red mist'_ and floored his throttle. He overtook us at a stupid speed and cut in so viciously that he almost hit the front riders of the group. More abuse from them ...

_Absolute f***wits! _


----------



## Glow worm (1 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Well I know of at least one case where a motorist abused a cyclist. The cyclist spend ages searching for the car. When he found it he smashed every wind and turned it over onto its' roof.




 
I really hope it was a f*****g Volvo! (albeit probably quite a small one)


----------



## apollo179 (1 Jul 2011)

I agree colin.
Riders riding as a group have that gang mentality thing where acting as part of a gang both enboldens then to do stuff they otherwise would not have the courage to do alone and gives them a sense of moral affirmation to do stuff they would otherwise not do alone. I suspect a single rider on the calpe benidorm road would not be quite so inconsiderate. Habitual gang riders are ok , it is we single riders who are vulnerable to motorists looking for payback after being given the finger driving round the beniborm coast.


ColinJ said:


> And in the spirit of courstesy and consideration, I would like to agree that there are indeed _times_ when riding in single file is the right thing to do!
> 
> I was once riding through the small town of Ramsbottom on the Rossendale Mountain Bike Challenge and a pair of cyclists in front of me were not making any friends ...
> 
> ...


----------



## explorethedales (1 Jul 2011)

We are generally a unfit nation - many drivers don't understand cyclists because they've not been near a bike since primary school. In France it's different. Drivers are polite because lots of them also cycle.

Drivers complain about cyclists all the time, yet never give cyclists enough room to cycle safely. look at the average rush hour street. How much width do they give - none. So cyclists have to either ride on the pavement or risk death. Maybe as pertol prices increase and more people go back to bikes, things will improve - here's hoping...


We get so many information vids - let's have some for cyclists and educate drivers. 



Robert


----------



## asturel131 (1 Jul 2011)

Banjo said:


> What does this say about the type of person who will only abuse a cyclist when safely inside a steel box that can accellerate away?



I refer to these individuals as "steering wheel warriors" similar to a keyboard warrior who acts tough on the internet, except these are the car driving version. I come across some right jackasses on my daily ride.


----------



## explorethedales (2 Jul 2011)

Big car - small dick. I love philosophy.


----------



## FreewheelingUK (3 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good



Cycling two abreast takes less road width than a motor car with a single occupant! If there's not enough room to overtake cyclists two abreast, there's probably not enough room to overtake a single cyclist riding in primary position. As others have mentioned, it's actually easier to safely overtake cyclists two abreast than it is to safely overtake two cyclists riding single file because you have less distance to overtake.

Another far more common scenario... two people in cars driving two abreast... blocking two lanes in a motor car in the rush hour, thus taking up the space of about 12 two abreast cyclists; that's inconsiderate!


----------



## apollo179 (3 Jul 2011)

I agree 2 cars driving 2 abreast unnessecarily is as inconsiderate as 2 cyclists doing the same. Inconsiderate to an equal degree. However i hope freewheelingUK isnt using motorist as his moral yardstick - try to aim higher .


----------



## explorethedales (3 Jul 2011)

If we start using correct terms like 'primary position', then we'll really confuse the average motorist. They see the only primary position on any road as being the driver's seat...



Maybe the driving test ought to have a greater cyclist awareness element to it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Jul 2011)

I find you assertion that riding two abreast is inconsiderate most strange. You do realise this is a cycling forum.


apollo179 said:


> I agree 2 cars driving 2 abreast unnessecarily is as inconsiderate as 2 cyclists doing the same. Inconsiderate to an equal degree. However i hope freewheelingUK isnt using motorist as his moral yardstick - try to aim higher .


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

Yes - but the fact that i like football dosnt meant that i have to defend football hooliganism or eric cantanas kungfu kick etc etc.


Angelfishsolo said:


> I find you assertion that riding two abreast is inconsiderate most strange. You do realise this is a cycling forum.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

So are you now likening riding two abreast to football hooliganism? That is an horrendous comparison. One is done for the sake of safety the other caused by a bunch of knuckle dragging a-holes who a looking for a punch up or some shops to trash. I find the comparison highly offensive indeed.



apollo179 said:


> Yes - but the fact that i like football dosnt meant that i have to defend football hooliganism or eric cantanas kungfu kick etc etc.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

It was just an analogy for illustration in principle purpose.
Sorry for any offense caused. I did not realise you were so sensitive and i reiterate my regret at any pain and distress caused .


Angelfishsolo said:


> So are you now likening riding two abreast to football hooliganism? That is an horrendous comparison. One is done for the sake of safety the other caused by a bunch of knuckle dragging a-holes who a looking for a punch up or some shops to trash. I find the comparison highly offensive indeed.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

"So sensitive" - that's taking the pi$. You likened riding two abreast to 100's or even thousands of yobs running amok destroying everything they see and kicking the cr4p out of rival "fans". Had you compared riding two abreast to a slow moving vehicle (as the highway code states) then no offence would be taken. I understand most people on here even if we have differing view points but I am sorry I can not see where your disdain for law abiding cyclists comes from.



apollo179 said:


> It was just an analogy for illustration in principle purpose.
> Sorry for any offense caused. I did not realise you were so sensitive and i reiterate my regret at any pain and distress caused .


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

It has already been pointed out by someone else that lawabiding does not equate to considerate. I suggest you use your own sense of right and wrong as guide not just blindly going by legality.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

Riding tow abreast is also safer than ridng in single file. I will continue to do so where ever safety demands it. Legal and Safe is better than legal and dead and injured in my book.



apollo179 said:


> It has already been pointed out by someone else that lawabiding does not equate to considerate. I suggest you use your own sense of right and wrong as guide not just blindly going by legality.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

I would give more credibility to the safety arguement. Why do you always opt for the "its legal" arguement. In future go with the safety arguement.


Angelfishsolo said:


> Riding tow abreast is also safer than ridng in single file. I will continue to do so where ever safety demands it. Legal and Safe is better than legal and dead and injured in my book.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

I'd be safer in my house if I rigged a shotgun to go off if anyone entered my house uninvited _*but that would not be legal.*_ Do you see why I opt for the legality over the safety issue?


apollo179 said:


> I would give more credibility to the safety arguement. Why do you always opt for the "its legal" arguement. In future go with the safety arguement.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

Err no . Because your analogy does not apply. Cycling single and or 2 abreast are both legal. Legality is not an issue. Safety could be. Thats why i propose you adopt safety as your spearhead argument. The legality is not an issue.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

Fair enough. However as I said previously I would much rather be legal and safe  Shake hands?


apollo179 said:


> Err no . Because your analogy does not apply. Cycling single and or 2 abreast are both legal. Legality is not an issue. Safety could be. Thats why i propose you adopt safety as your spearhead argument. The legality is not an issue.


----------



## Jezston (4 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> I would give more credibility to the safety arguement. Why do you always opt for the "its legal" arguement. In future go with the safety arguement.



Maybe it's because so many drivers keep saying riding two abreast is illegal?

Also could you two please keep your replies _under _the quotes? Anal I know but it makes things a lot easier to read.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

Consider them firmly shaken. Till next time. Lol.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

Re - "under the quotes"
The site default setting is above so i suggest you take it up with the site developers. 


Jezston said:


> Maybe it's because so many drivers keep saying riding two abreast is illegal?
> 
> Also could you two please keep your replies _under _the quotes? Anal I know but it makes things a lot easier to read.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

Thank you 


apollo179 said:


> Consider them firmly shaken. Till next time. Lol.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Jul 2011)

Agreed.


apollo179 said:


> Re - "under the quotes"
> The site default setting is above so i suggest you take it up with the site developers.


----------



## Bman (4 Jul 2011)

Jezston said:


> Maybe it's because so many drivers keep saying riding two abreast is illegal?
> 
> *Also could you two please keep your replies under the quotes? Anal I know but it makes things a lot easier to read.
> *




I must admit, It's been bugging me for quite a while!


----------



## Dan B (4 Jul 2011)

Jezston said:


> Also could you two please keep your replies _under _the quotes?


+1

The "site default" is a technical artefact of the system, not (as can be seen from pretty much everyone else's posts) a guide to the behaviour desired. Remember, legal is not the same as considerate!


----------



## apollo179 (4 Jul 2011)

Dan B said:


> +1
> 
> The "site default" is a technical artefact of the system, not (as can be seen from pretty much everyone else's posts) a guide to the behaviour desired. Remember, legal is not the same as considerate!


Ok i can recognise a well made point when i see one. If post below quotes is the accepted norm then im happy to comply. Personally im oblivious to if its below above or whatever , but happy to fit in.


----------



## Adasta (4 Jul 2011)

When you read a blockquote in an article, does the author analyse it before or after it has been initially referenced?


----------



## Cyclopathic (4 Jul 2011)

ColinJ said:


> It's hard *not* to have your day's ride spoiled when you have to stop to scrape someone's thick green phlegm out of your eyes!




I would say that trafic lights can be your friend at such times. If this ever happened to me I would be dammned upset and I'd just hope that I'd be able to get their number down and that there were witnesses. So often though this isn't the case. Just reading your post has been enough to get me a bit riled up.


----------



## wiggydiggy (4 Jul 2011)

Jezston said:


> ..........
> 
> Also could you two please keep your replies _under _the quotes? Anal I know but it makes things a lot easier to read.



Ditto, replies belong _under_ quotes otherwise I simply read your reply without re-reading the post, makes the quote pointless really.


----------



## Tasker (4 Jul 2011)

'Dont let abuse from motorists spoil your day.'

You've just said it. Even though it must have upset you at the time remember most drivers are decent sorts so don't let the very small minority spoil it for you.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (5 Jul 2011)

Can't see that it matters where the quote is in a reply, myself. Don't let people complaining about it being in the wrong place spoil your day ...


----------



## apollo179 (5 Jul 2011)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Can't see that it matters where the quote is in a reply, myself. Don't let people complaining about it being in the wrong place spoil your day ...


Thanks.
Normally i would give these moaning minnies short thrift but i have been flogging this courtesy and consideration idea so unfortunately had no where to turn.


----------



## Cubist (5 Jul 2011)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Can't see that it matters where the quote is in a reply, myself.I think we should all develop our own style of where we reply to quotes.  Don't let people complaining about it being in the wrong place spoil your day ...


----------



## ColinJ (5 Jul 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> I would say that trafic lights can be your friend at such times. If this ever happened to me I would be dammned upset and I'd just hope that I'd be able to get their number down and that there were witnesses. So often though this isn't the case. Just reading your post has been enough to get me a bit riled up.


No lights, no witnesses, no chance of getting a number ...

It was a beautiful summer evening about 20 years ago, when I was still newly in love with cycling and I was toiling up a tree-lined hill out of Hebden Bridge. I was just getting fit enough to enjoy the climbing and the birds were singing, all was well in the world.

Then I became aware that a large vehicle was coming up behind me. I looked over my shoulder and saw that it was a van. The driver pulled out and began a slow overtake. "Very considerate", thought I. 

His passenger was smiling down at me and wound down his window. I thought he was going to make a jokey remark and looked up at him in anticipation. He promptly gobbed a huge greeny straight into my eyes.

Was it deliberate? Oh yes! They were howling with laughter as they shot off up the hill. *BASTARDS! * 

I was so angry and upset that I turned round and went straight back home. I wasn't safe on the road feeling like that. If someone had crossed me again later in the ride, I'd have pummelled them.

There are some scumbags in the world. Fortunately, they are still fairly few and far between.


----------



## apollo179 (5 Jul 2011)

That is the quintessential "dont let abuse from motorists spoil your day" story. Very sad. Like when you hear some yobs have kicked a tramp to death for no reason. Very sad. And the reality is we are all just being in the wrong place at the wrong time away from it happening to us.


----------



## Hedgehog71 (9 Jul 2011)

I've been knocked down twice. The first time in '94 by a transit driver who pulled out of a side road and hit me broadside (he claimed his windscreen was fogged up and was very sorry indeed, to his credit he gave me and my bike a lift home and a few quid to pay for the damage, thereby avoiding a lawsuit, says my cynical side) The second time, also in '94, by a driver who decided to pull over to the side of the road and neglected to notice me cycling alongside him!

It does appear, in my experience, to depend a great deal on the area you live in. Enfield and Harlow are both areas where I have encountered a vast amount of utter a**holes: drivers taking a left without bothering to wait for me to pass their turning seems to be a favourite. Blasting by me without shifting out a foot or two to give me room and occasionally clipping me with a wing mirror. One BMW driver even slammed her brakes on just ahead of me, leaned over and threw her passenger door open to brush some rubbish out into the road, I felt like deliberately slamming my bike into the open door just to make a point!

Since moving to Wymondham, however, I find that drivers here are far more tolerant, and always acknowledge me as a road user, even giving me a wave when I pull over in a passing place to let them by. So there's hope yet it seems, a far more chilled way of life and it's reflected on the road users (still has it's share of idiot drivers though)

I don't tolerate verbal abuse, and sadly my temper gets the better of me if a motorist starts to give it large, I end up losing it completely and abusing them right back, twice now I've chased down an artic driver for narrowly missing me and got them to get out of their cabs so I could yell in their faces.


----------



## rossjevans (9 Jul 2011)

Taking advantage of the weather today after a truly miserable week, I got myself up early and got out of the house by 6am (wanted to be back in time for F1 Qualifying) for a nice 65 miles around the New Forest. Found a great route and thoroughly enjoyed the ride until I had the misfortune of meeting a rather irate van man. 

On the way home riding on this road, a blue Merc Sprinter skimmed past me leaving inches to spare - I could have easily touched it had I put my hand out. I waved my hand in the air (no swearing, yet) to express my thoughts on his shoddy piece of driving, he see's this and then decides to stop on the left of the road to wind his window down and have a go. I'm forced to pass him on his right and as I pass he shouts "Get on the f**king cycle path". This quickly brought my p*ss up to a rolling boil and so I carried on riding and pointed over to the garden center car park. 

Cue much ranting and swearing but selected (censored) quotes are as follows:

Him:

"You should have been on the cycle path, it cost the tax payer a lot of money to build it so use it...I purposely passed you close to make you realise" (it's been built since the Google streetview images were taken - it's a 2 way cycle and pedestrian pathway similar to what I posted on previously).
"You shouldn't be on the road, you don't have a bell and they are compulsory"
"I'm 63 I have a full driving license, motorbike license, HGV and PPL (!!!) also my son is in the police anti terroist squad...do you know the minimum size of a road sign, I've never met anyone who is able to answer that?"
"I'm also a cyclist, I've cycled across all of Europe"

Me:

"The highway code states you should give me as much room as if you were passing a car, everyone else including HGV's have passed me safely on this road, there is plenty of room."
"It's not compulsory to use the cycle path and I'd rather not with it being 2 way and used my pedestrians - I feel it safer to use the road except when I encounter drivers like yourself"
"The fact that I do not have a bell is completely irrelevant, you passed me from behind so you saw me before I saw you and motorists would never hear a bell anyway...on the topic of irrelevance a PPL does not make you a good driver"
Can anyone confirm the legality on bells? From what I can tell from the highway code they are recommended to warn pedestrians that you are approaching which is of course useful when you are riding on pedestrian footpaths






I was absolutely raging at the cheek and sheer bullsh*t that this guy came up with. Put a dampener on what otherwise was a lovely ride.


----------



## gaz (9 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Dosnt anyone else think theres a responsibility for cyclists to cycle with some consideration to motorists.
> Saying its legal to ride 2 abreast is all well and good but it is not considerate and is not going to do any good in the battle to win motorists hearts and minds and further harmonious road use by both car and bike. And ultimately it is in the cyclists interest for the relation to be harmonious cos as has been previously pointed out the cyclists power to annoy is insignificant compared to the cars power to kill.


Why do we need to win there hearts and minds? I'm not going to take them on a date.

As Colin pointed out above, riding two abreast is in many cases safer. And it's often taught to move back to single file when it is the safest thing to do.

Your last comment shows exactly why we should cycle in a safe manor and take control of situations. We should not allow the attitude 'I'm bigger, harder and faster than you. Get out of my way!'


----------



## apollo179 (9 Jul 2011)

gaz said:


> Why do we need to win there hearts and minds? I'm not going to take them on a date.
> 
> As Colin pointed out above, riding two abreast is in many cases safer. And it's often taught to move back to single file when it is the safest thing to do.
> 
> Your last comment shows exactly why we should cycle in a safe manor and take control of situations. We should not allow the attitude 'I'm bigger, harder and faster than you. Get out of my way!'


Hi qaz - every incident of "abuse from motorists" illustrates why we need to win their hearts and minds. Purely from a selfish perspective every motorist whos been won over (so to speak) is one motorist less likely to be abusive to cyclists on the road. Like them or loathe them , its about our self interest. Every antagonised motorist is one more motorist likely to drive without care for the safety of cyclists.
Colins point regarding where safety concerns deem it safer to ride 2 abreast is wholey valid and everyone agrees that cyclists should cycle according to there own best safety. 
However, however much you try and take control of the situation and try not to allow the atttitude 'I'm bigger, harder and faster than you. Get out of my way!' ultimately the cyclist is vulnerable , the cyclist is going to come off worse when incidents occur. This is why, unpalatable as it may be, it is in all our interests to win hearts and minds. That does not mean riding unsafely or kow towing to motorists - its means riding with courtesy and consideration , and not unnessecarily making enemies. Adopting an adversarial approach is not in the longterm best interests of cyclists at large.


----------



## Banjo (9 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Hi qaz - every incident of "abuse from motorists" illustrates why we need to win their hearts and minds. Purely from a selfish perspective every motorist whos been won over (so to speak) is one motorist less likely to be abusive to cyclists on the road. Like them or loathe them , its about our self interest. Every antagonised motorist is one more motorist likely to drive without care for the safety of cyclists.
> Colins point regarding where safety concerns deem it safer to ride 2 abreast is wholey valid and everyone agrees that cyclists should cycle according to there own best safety.
> However, however much you try and take control of the situation and try not to allow the atttitude 'I'm bigger, harder and faster than you. Get out of my way!' ultimately the cyclist is vulnerable , the cyclist is going to come off worse when incidents occur. This is why, unpalatable as it may be, it is in all our interests to win hearts and minds. That does not mean riding unsafely or kow towing to motorists - its means riding with courtesy and consideration , and not unnessecarily making enemies. Adopting an adversarial approach is not in the longterm best interests of cyclists at large.



Very well put. 

You can ride safely, take control at junctions etc and still show consideration for others.It doesnt hurt to pull right off the road on a narrow country road for example, have a breather and let any cars get past. Most wont but at least some will appreciate your consideration and hopefully think better of cyclists as a whole.

Personally i cant relax with impatient motorists behind me anyway.


----------



## gaz (9 Jul 2011)

Being a road user is about courtesy and consideration. Without it you quickly get stressed.


----------



## 400bhp (9 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If said cyclists are doing 10mph then yes, if like most roadies I see they are doing closer to 30mph then no.



They'd be lucky - most groups will be doing between 15-20mph.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (9 Jul 2011)

400bhp said:


> They'd be lucky - most groups will be doing between 15-20mph.



OK they must seem faster to me. I have certainly been behind groups riding on A roads and have had stayed behind them with the speedo indicating 30+


----------



## apollo179 (9 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> OK they must seem faster to me. I have certainly been behind groups riding on A roads and have had stayed behind them with the speedo indicating 30+



Thats some impressive speeds your getting up to afs - respekt


----------



## Angelfishsolo (9 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Thats some impressive speeds your getting up to afs - respekt


I am having a bad day. I meant in a car!


----------



## apollo179 (9 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I am having a bad day. I meant in a car!


Oh dear. 
If thats the car you recently offerred to sell me then it sounds like i had a lucky escape if your struggling to keep up with a few cyclists doing 30mph going on 15-20mph.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (9 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Oh dear.
> If thats the car you recently offerred to sell me then it sounds like i had a lucky escape if your struggling to keep up with a few cyclists doing 30mph going on 15-20mph.


So you don't believe a group of road bikers could maintain 30mph?


----------



## apollo179 (9 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> So you don't believe a group of road bikers could maintain 30mph?


Maybe if they had you behind chasing them in your car


----------



## Angelfishsolo (9 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Maybe if they had you behind chasing them in your car


----------



## gaz (9 Jul 2011)

As long as there isn't a head wind then 30mph is achievable by one cyclist. A tailwind and a group of well orgazied cyclists could easily break 30mph


----------



## Angelfishsolo (9 Jul 2011)

gaz said:


> As long as there isn't a head wind then 30mph is achievable by one cyclist. A tailwind and a group of well orgazied cyclists could easily break 30mph


Damn and I thought I had expert evidence to help me get off a speeding ticket


----------



## al78 (10 Jul 2011)

Rhythm Thief said:


> This is my experience too. Sometimes when I'm driving the lorry, cyclists annoy me. But only because I'm thinking "oh, for f**k's sake, claim your road space and stop wobbling about in the gutter. You need to be in primary here to stop me squeezing past you (not that I'm going to) ... " and so forth.



The first section of my commute takes me two miles along the main road to Guildford and involves a short uphill section, just steep enough to put a big dent in my speed. I get a little embarrassed when a HGV comes up behind at this moment as there is nowhere to pull over to let it past and thus I have just killed most of their momentum. In your experience is it really annoying for HGV drivers to have to slow right down on a hill then accelerate back up to speed?


----------



## Andy_R (10 Jul 2011)

so my view on this is that i will cycle safely, regardless of what others around me are doing. that means if i need to get out of the way of motons i will do so. if they are being arses that's their fault not mine. i won't make myself a target, defensive cycling is the way for me. i'm not going to end up as a statistic. i'm going to stay out of the gutter because that means its easier for people to see me and possibly overtake properly, but i'm not going to get arsey about it if someone doesn't. my safety is my responsibility. if some one wants to be a dickhead on the road, i can't change that.


----------



## Arch (10 Jul 2011)

rossjevans said:


> Can anyone confirm the legality on bells? From what I can tell from the highway code they are recommended to warn pedestrians that you are approaching which is of course useful when you are riding on pedestrian footpaths



Bikes must be sold with them, nowadays, but there's no legal compulsion to keep it on, or have one fitted.


----------



## gaz (10 Jul 2011)

Note they only have to be included if you buy a complete bike and it's purpose is use on the road/paths
I.e if you buy a track bike, then it doesn't need a bell.


----------



## steephill (10 Jul 2011)

Banjo said:


> It doesnt happen often to me but when it does I used to try to analyse the situation to see if I was in anyway at fault then fret about it for a while generally losing enjoyment in the ride.
> 
> Then I had a thought. I often cycle into town and wander around in cycle gear with a helmet under my arm so very obviously a cyclist. Not once has anyone tried to barge me off the pavement noone has shouted at me or given me the finger.
> 
> ...



3 words: Completely ignore them.


----------

