# Maybe I’m Over reacting but…



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

But why would a cycle club decide to ride out of a very busy beach resort up a really steep and winding A road at lunchtime on a Saturday in August, and on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to undertake the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic ? Come on guys, you genuinely are putting lives at risk . Where’s the risk assessment on that cool idea? Train on the hill midweek when it’s quiet by all means but mid August Saturday lunchtime?? Why put everyone at needless risk? You should not be there but I bet you’d blame the car driver if it all went wrong. And yes, I am a runner, long distance cyclist, motorcycle rider, and car driver . Rant over? Nearly. If a teacher put a KS4 group in that situation they would be instantly dismissed but apparently it’s ok to choose that route cos you’re all adults? I know, I am a KS4 teacher. You better be certain you have no teens riding out with you


----------



## Specialeyes (20 Aug 2022)

I don't usually dive in to these sorts of threads, but on this one I'll bite, so here goes.

_...why would a cycle club decide to ride out of a very busy beach resort up a really steep and winding A road at lunchtime on a Saturday in August_
Because it's not a Motorway so they're allowed to ride there?

_...and on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to undertake the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic?_
One where filtering is permitted by the Highway Code, i.e. this one. You do imply they were trying to do it safely, after all

_Come on guys, you genuinely are putting lives at risk . Where’s the risk assessment on that cool idea? _
Was it definitely a club? Your jumping to the need for a Risk Assessment could be misconstrued as "'elf and safety gawn mad, guv"

_Train on the hill midweek when it’s quiet by all means but mid August Saturday lunchtime?? _
Maybe they didn't realise they apparently aren't allowed on that road on Saturday lunchtimes in mid-August?

_Why put everyone at needless risk? You should not be there..._
Really? On whose authority? Again, maybe they missed the sign saying they're not allowed there? 

_...but I bet you’d blame the car driver if it all went wrong. And yes, I am a runner, long distance cyclist, motorcycle rider, and car driver._
Sorry, but this smacks of "I can't be racist, I've got black friends" to me. 

_Rant over? Nearly. If a teacher put a KS4 group in that situation they would be instantly dismissed but apparently it’s ok to choose that route cos you’re all adults? I know, I am a KS4 teacher. You better be certain you have no teens riding out with you_
Slightly tangential, but most employers who don't want to end up in an Employment Tribunal don't instantly dismiss anyone these days. It's suspend and investigate, invite to disciplinary, hold hearing, communicate decision and offer right of appeal.

All of that said, if it was a club and their choice of ride was just adding to the Daily Mail-fuelled culture war against cyclists, then perhaps a reasoned email to an officer of the club would be a more productive course of action? We all see fellow cyclists doing dumb shoot at times which does none of us any favours, but personally I draw my anger threshold along the lines of the law - i.e. RLJ, pavement riding, lightless nijaing and littering etc, not just "being out for a ride on a busy Saturday in August". YMMV


----------



## markemark (20 Aug 2022)

The drivers were all off to the beach for some fun. It’s hardly essential. Do they get a monopoly on using the roads for a fun day out?


----------



## All uphill (20 Aug 2022)

You are correct, you are over reacting.

As a KS4 teacher I assume you are subject to greater provocations than other people being on your road?


----------



## markemark (20 Aug 2022)

I mabe overreacting but I was cycling to work and all the drivers were out going to the beach or the shops or to see friends. Did they have to do it when I was going to work? I think drivers should only be allowed to drive between 11am and 3pm unless they’re driving to work. 

When these drivers get out of their cars I often cycle straight at them for getting in my way. Do they not realise how much danger they’re putting themselves and their passengers in? I hope none of these reckless drivers have kids in their cars as it’ll be their fault if I cycle into them when they get out of the car.


----------



## cougie uk (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> But why would a cycle club decide to ride out of a very busy beach resort up a really steep and winding A road at lunchtime on a Saturday in August, and on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to undertake the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic ? Come on guys, you genuinely are putting lives at risk . Where’s the risk assessment on that cool idea? Train on the hill midweek when it’s quiet by all means but mid August Saturday lunchtime?? Why put everyone at needless risk? You should not be there but I bet you’d blame the car driver if it all went wrong. And yes, I am a runner, long distance cyclist, motorcycle rider, and car driver . Rant over? Nearly. If a teacher put a KS4 group in that situation they would be instantly dismissed but apparently it’s ok to choose that route cos you’re all adults? I know, I am a KS4 teacher. You better be certain you have no teens riding out with you



Is it any worse than people in cars deciding to go to the beach and causing congestion and parking issues ?


----------



## Chislenko (20 Aug 2022)

What's a KS4 teacher.

When I was a lad they were just called teachers.


----------



## markemark (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> What's a KS4 teacher.
> 
> When I was a lad they were just called teachers.



KS is key stage. They are groups of ages. KS4 are years 10 and 11 who are studying for GCSEs.


----------



## Phaeton (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> What's a KS4 teacher.
> 
> When I was a lad they were just called teachers.



They spend all year teaching 30 kids how to say & write KS4 you know these teachers & underworked & overpaid.


----------



## cougie uk (20 Aug 2022)

I wouldn't be a teacher for all the tea in China.


----------



## Sharky (20 Aug 2022)

cougie uk said:


> I wouldn't be a teacher for all the tea in China.



I'm not a teacher and now retired, but if you gave me all the tea in China, it must be worth a bit - I might consider being a teacher.


----------



## Chislenko (20 Aug 2022)

Sharky said:


> I'm not a teacher and now retired, but if you gave me all the tea in China, it must be worth a bit - I might consider being a teacher.



But where would you store it?


----------



## Sharky (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> But where would you store it?



Got me there.
An XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXL tea chest?


----------



## fossyant (20 Aug 2022)

Blah blah blah, Winnats Pass has been a challenge for over 30 years to get up on a bike at weekend.....


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Train on the hill midweek when it’s quiet



Why didn’t the car drivers do this? If a road is already congested it’s really not acceptable for them to take their car and make it worse.


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (20 Aug 2022)

They do it because they are in a club. And bike clubs are exempt from normal everyday rules. 
Club cyclists can do what they want, when they want, and anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong.


----------



## Phaeton (20 Aug 2022)

fossyant said:


> Blah blah blah, Winnats Pass has been a challenge for over 30 years to get up on a bike at weekend.....



Theres no beach near Winnats Pass?


----------



## roubaixtuesday (20 Aug 2022)

Phaeton said:


> Theres no beach near Winnats Pass?



There must be one close by, surely? Winnats pass is a coral reef!


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> There must be one close by, surely? Winnats pass is a coral reef!



The beach is inside Peak Cavern


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (20 Aug 2022)

OP comes from South Wales so he is hardly likely to have heard of Winnats, let alone tried to get up it on a Saturday in August. 
Not too long ago the National Hillclimb Championship was held there, and yes, the road was closed. 
And yes it was once a beach. I have a nice fossilised sea snail that I found up there.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (20 Aug 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> The beach is inside Peak Cavern



Blimey. Imagine being beached in the Devil's Arse!


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Clearly my underlying stress levels are still very high after an interesting teaching year and coming from an environment where all trips are highly risk assessed has made me hyper sensitive. Thing is, the Mountain near me has had 6 cycle/vehicle coming togethers that have been fatal or very near fatal in the last few years so riders cycling with complete disregard to their personal safety when there is a dedicated cycle route available is something I find irksome. Undertaking, riding in a driver blind spot while going uphill on a narrow busy road? Love to see that one being justifiable. You wanna overtake them then over take, do it properly. I worked in industry a long time and when I broke health and safety rules I was (correctly) reprimanded, the HSO always said 2 things, the health you protect is your own, and, if you’re dead, other people will have to clean up your mess.


----------



## Phaeton (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Clearly my underlying stress levels are still very high after an interesting teaching year and coming from an environment where all trips are highly risk assessed has made me hyper sensitive. Thing is, the Mountain near me has had 6 cycle/vehicle coming togethers that have been fatal or very near fatal in the last few years so riders cycling with complete disregard to their personal safety when there is a dedicated cycle route available is something I find irksome. Undertaking, riding in a driver blind spot while going uphill on a narrow busy road? Love to see that one being justifiable. You wanna overtake them then over take, do it properly. I worked in industry a long time and when I broke health and safety rules I was (correctly) reprimanded, the HSO always said 2 things, the health you protect is your own, and, if you’re dead, other people will have to clean up your mess.



You really have been brainwashed haven't you?

Did you climb trees when you were young?
Did you ever drink water from a hosepipe?
Ever ride your bike non-handed?
Start to cross the road when the yellow man is flashing?

Try living before you die, it's a one way trip.


----------



## Oldhippy (20 Aug 2022)

Cycles are valid forms of transport and have as much right to the roads as any other vehicle.


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to undertake the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic ?



I literally don't know what this means.


----------



## markemark (20 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> I literally don't know what this means.


We need a Jeremy Clarkson to English translator.


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Getting my knee down On the Cat and Fiddle pass on a CB250N 30 mph slower than the Blades and Ninjas was about as lively as I got, although racing with my mates from Storey Arms burger van to Merthyr was always a bit of light relief, so when I say the group was putting everyone in unnecessary danger, I mean I know what I’m talking about.


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Undertake means to Hope you can resist 2 ton of car when the gap between you and the pavement you started to enter isn’t there anymore


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Getting my knee down On the Cat and Fiddle pass on a CB250N 30 mph slower than the Blades and Ninjas was about as lively as I got, although racing with my mates from Storey Arms burger van to Merthyr was always a bit of light relief, so when I say the group was putting everyone in unnecessary danger, I mean I know what I’m talking about.



I think that's something about motorbikes although I stand by my earlier post.


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to Hope you can resist 2 ton of car when the gap between you and the pavement you started to enter isn’t there anymore the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic ?


I still don't understand. Honestly.


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (20 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> I still don't understand. Honestly


He's a teacher. Says it all.


----------



## dave r (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Clearly my underlying stress levels are still very high after an interesting teaching year and coming from an environment where all trips are highly risk assessed has made me hyper sensitive. Thing is, the Mountain near me has had 6 cycle/vehicle coming togethers that have been fatal or very near fatal in the last few years so riders cycling with complete disregard to their personal safety when there is a dedicated cycle route available is something I find irksome. Undertaking, riding in a driver blind spot while going uphill on a narrow busy road? Love to see that one being justifiable. You wanna overtake them then over take, do it properly. I worked in industry a long time and when I broke health and safety rules I was (correctly) reprimanded, the HSO always said 2 things, the health you protect is your own, and, if you’re dead, other people will have to clean up your mess.



You sound like a first class twat, not only that but you haven't beeen here long so it sounds like you are a Troll, perhaps you should crawl back under your rock.


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Darius, I’m off duty for a couple more weeks so no more teaching til September 😀


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Dave, I meant it, my stress levels are high so I over react to stressful situations. Working my way through an extended line of cyclists without crashing into oncoming vehicles, knocking into bikes or having the idiot in the Defender ram me up the rear when I slowed a bit quick was stressful. I am not trolling, check my post history


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Dave, I meant it, my stress levels are high so I over react to stressful situations. Working my way through an extended line of cyclists without crashing into oncoming vehicles, knocking into bikes or having the idiot in the Defender ram me up the rear when I slowed a bit quick was stressful. I am not trolling, check my post history



Cars are rubbish innit.


----------



## markemark (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Dave, I meant it, my stress levels are high so I over react to stressful situations. Working my way through an extended line of cyclists without crashing into oncoming vehicles, knocking into bikes or having the idiot in the Defender ram me up the rear when I slowed a bit quick was stressful. I am not trolling, check my post history


So basically you were held up a bit and forced to be careful around vulnerable road users. Sounds horrific. I suggest you blame everyone else.


----------



## Smokin Joe (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Dave, I meant it, my stress levels are high so I over react to stressful situations. *Working my way through an extended line of cyclists without crashing into oncoming vehicles, knocking into bikes or having the idiot in the Defender ram me up the rear when I slowed a bit quick was stressful.* I am not trolling, check my post history



Why don't you wait till a safe opportunity to pass crops up, rather than "Working your way through an extended line of cyclists without crashing into oncoming vehicles or knocking into bikes", or do you think being in charge of a faster vehicle means everyone slower should get out of your way?

And the incident with the Defender was caused because you were not paying attention and had to brake sharply, neither was the driver of the Defender that nearly hit you. Your joint incompetence was nothing to do with the cyclists.


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Which is why I asked “is it me?”


----------



## newts (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Which is why I asked “is it me?”



Most likely yes


----------



## stuckinthemud (20 Aug 2022)

Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?


----------



## Vantage (20 Aug 2022)

In fairness to the op and we've all seen them, but some cyclists are a law onto their own and ride as if they had a death wish. We're not all angels.
However @stuckinthemud no route is dangerous. The people who use them carelessly are the danger.
A cyclist has just as much right to use any road he or she wishes whenever he or she wishes and without being put at risk from other road users. 
The recent law changes were made to ensure that those with bigger, heavier, faster vehicles take the consequences of mishandling those vehicles more seriously. If you choose to travel in something weighing the better part of 2 tons and has the potential to injure or kill, do so very carefully. 
The idiots amongst us we can all agree don't make things easy, but for the sake of everyone's wellbeing, stop, let them do what they're doing and then carry on whilst they're out of the way.


----------



## newts (20 Aug 2022)

I've witnessed many incidents local to me where 'impatient cycle clubs' act like complete fs@king dickc on both road & shared use paths


----------



## classic33 (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?


I want to get to work, on a bicycle, how do I manage?
The quieter roads are actually busier, have more junctions and are the long way round.

Why should I have to go that way?


----------



## Chislenko (20 Aug 2022)

I just need to say I have no idea what year 10 and 11 is.

I assume the terminology has (needlessly) changed from 2nd form, 3rd form etc.


----------



## Chislenko (20 Aug 2022)

dave r said:


> You sound like a first class twat,



Cracking response Dave, sums it all up really.


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> I just need to say I have no idea what year 10 and 11 is.
> 
> I assume the terminology has (needlessly) changed from 2nd form, 3rd form etc.



Alright grandad, they changed it when I was in third year / year nine, some thirty years ago.


----------



## classic33 (20 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> Alright grandad, they changed it when I was in third year / year nine, some thirty years ago.


That long ago!


----------



## Ian H (20 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Undertake means to Hope you can resist 2 ton of car when the gap between you and the pavement you started to enter isn’t there anymore


Undertakers deal with the dead. Overtaking on the inside is entirely legal when done by bicycles; it's referred to as filtering (as mentioned upthread). And one of the advantages of being on a bike is that you can filter past slow-moving and stationary traffic.


----------



## Chislenko (20 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> Alright grandad, they changed it when I was in third year / year nine, some thirty years ago.



But what does it achieve? Like many things it is change for change's sake.

And who are they?


----------



## Gwylan (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> But what does it achieve? Like many things it is change for change's sake.
> 
> And who are they?



In your day job you are part of they Wreaking change on the pretence of progress 
Well it happens. Like we don't have Hussars ant more, or Tommies.
Things change, notice it, suck it up 

As for car cycle conflict maybe it needs both parties to relax a bit 

Re being stressed, maybe you need to do something about it and not standing there expecting everyone else to work with it. 
Your problem, get a grip, solve it, move on.


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> But what does it achieve? Like many things it is change for change's sake.
> 
> And who are they?



It gives continuity to pupils moving through the system and allows you to compare pupils who may be in different schools with different structures. It provides consistency.


----------



## winjim (20 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> That long ago!



We are so very old.


----------



## classic33 (21 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> We are so very old.


I'd left long before this new system came in. What does that make me?


----------



## Juan Kog (21 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> Alright grandad, they changed it when I was in third year / year nine, some thirty years ago.


So is that third year at junior/primary school or secondary school.


----------



## Vantage (21 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> I'd left long before this new system came in. What does that make me?



A dinosaur


----------



## Phaeton (21 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> But what does it achieve? Like many things it is change for change's sake.


It achieves nothing other than the justification of the salary of the person/group/committee/focus group/consultant who came up with the idea


Chislenko said:


> And who are they?


I 'think' they enter the school at 5 at Year 1, then work up from there, year 10 would be 15/16 & year 11 16/17, which in my world would equate to to 5th & 6th form, I also think you enter comprehensive or academy (again another complete waste of funding) as they like to call themselves at year 6, the old 1st year.


----------



## CXRAndy (21 Aug 2022)

I like to get in between cyclists, quietly tell them to get on the back bumper and I'll draft them back to the front.

In my EV


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (21 Aug 2022)

An for a teecher your speling an gramer is aby'smal.


----------



## alex_cycles (21 Aug 2022)

Gwylan said:


> *Re being stressed, maybe you need to do something about it *and not standing there expecting everyone else to work with it.
> Your problem, get a grip, solve it, move on.



Go for a bike ride?


----------



## All uphill (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?


In all probability for the same reason you were there - it's the most direct route from one place to another.

Maybe they could have chosen to cycle somewhere else, or at another time - but then so could you.

If you are still this stressed after four weeks out of school then I'd suggest you need to make some changes in your life;, for your sake, and for the pupils' sake.


----------



## winjim (21 Aug 2022)

Juan Kog said:


> So is that third year at junior/primary school or secondary school.



Exactly.


----------



## PaulSB (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?



I will try to answer your question. I've no idea of the area or route you are talking about or the condition of the suggested alternatives, possibly that road is closed?

Over the years I have organised hundreds, possibly thousands, of club rides and deal with at least four every weekend. I have a huge library of club routes. The simple fact is this, in order to reach quieter and more enjoyable highways and byways using busy roads is sometimes unavoidable. This is something the club have had to tackle in the last 12 months following the introduction of Saturday club rides, roads which are quiet on a Sunday are busy at 9.00 on Saturday. Our weekend routes have been altered to account for this but it's impossible to completely avoid busy roads on a Saturday and we're certainly not going to stay off the public highway because it's busy.

If you feel you have a valid point and know the club in question I suggest a well constructed email to the club secretary would be valuable. As a club sec when I receive such I contact the riders and get their perspective. If I receive a rant as per your OP it gets ignored.


----------



## PaulSB (21 Aug 2022)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> They do it because they are in a club. And bike clubs are exempt from normal everyday rules.
> Club cyclists can do what they want, when they want, and anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong.



I realise you have an intense dislike for anything to do with club cycling but this is quite simply ill-informed nonsense.


----------



## Arrowfoot (21 Aug 2022)

To me the the Club ride organiser has run out of ideas and has no clue about organising an interesting and yet a demanding ride for its members. Worse still their members are lemmings as no one seem to point it out. 

Let me cite the rides organised by likes of Ianrauk, Dellzeq, Martin235, FNRttC etc. Thru urban and less urban areas but well planned for the enjoyment of those particIpating. I can’t recall a single organised ride mentioned in CC goes pear shape because the choice of route was poorly selected. 

Would I hold a picnic in an industrial area as I have every right to do so. No. Would anyone defend my right to do so. Yep, probably some with ideological bent who could not tell the difference between a stale bun and a freshly baked croissant.


----------



## stuckinthemud (21 Aug 2022)

Paul, thank you, I clearly overreacted but if I can identify the club I will contact them (politely). Please bare in mind the number of incidents that have occurred in my home region including a number of crashes causing life changing injuries, and fatalities on a hill very similar to the one in my OP. As for my stress levels, They are stressing me out! Walking the dog isn’t cutting it any more, will have to try something else, maybe should go and ride one of my bikes?


----------



## markemark (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Paul, thank you, I clearly overreacted but if I can identify the club I will contact them (politely). Please bare in mind the number of incidents that have occurred in my home region including a number of crashes causing life changing injuries, and fatalities on a hill very similar to the one in my OP. As for my stress levels, They are stressing me out! Walking the dog isn’t cutting it any more, will have to try something else, maybe should go and ride one of my bikes?


I sympathise with the stress. Rather than discourage cyclists the aim should be to encourage cycling wherever for whatever reason and discourage driving whilst enforcing those that bring the danger to the situation to take the most care. Convenience shouldn’t come into it.


----------



## winjim (21 Aug 2022)

Where do you draw the line though? I'm all for good route planning for everybody's safety and enjoyment but the fact is that traffic is increasing and cars are everywhere. Saying that cycling clubs shouldn't use specific roads at particular times may have some merit but could also come close to bullying them off the road.

As another example, not club related, I recently went back to the street where I grew up and where I learned to ride a bike. I was about five or six and we used to ride our bikes unsupervised up and down the road and round the block of houses as the top. I would not be comfortable letting my kids do the same. There are cars parked all the way along the road and at the block of houses at the top, where there used to be neat little lawns are paved driveways with cars on. The tucked away rows of garages which had a bit of space in front are now inaccessible with a security gate at the front. As we drove in there were some kids on bikes but they were very difficult to see darting in and out of cars and from a parent's point of view I would find that worrying.

So quite apart from club cycling, where do our kids go to learn to ride? Cars have taken over.


----------



## Chislenko (21 Aug 2022)

Yes, it appears not even the horrendous price of fuel is cutting car journeys.

Every time I go out on my bike I am amazed by the amount of people still driving at circa £2.00 a litre whilst the media tell us "people are choosing to heat or eat"


----------



## stuckinthemud (21 Aug 2022)

Convenience was never part of opening this debate, we were out for a drive and in no rush. I also did not mean to imply the cycle club shouldn’t visit the resort. Coffee and ice cream. Yes please. What got me was the timing and route out of the place. Spinning up a hill at sub 10mph speeds surrounded by annoyed frustrated cagers was not wise. And yes you can filter but only when safe to do so. My brother in law nearly died when filtering along the inside of a queue of cars. He shouldn’t have and got side swiped when a driver let a car out of a driveway . Sorry mate, never saw you was no comfort after he alerted the car to his presence by hitting the windscreen with his head and shoulder. Lost a week’s work (self employed) and needed new wheel and fork. Unfortunately we all share busy roads full of fools and we need to manage the risk to our safety. Just because you’re allowed to do something doesn’t mean you should.


----------



## All uphill (21 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> Where do you draw the line though? I'm all for good route planning for everybody's safety and enjoyment but the fact is that traffic is increasing and cars are everywhere. Saying that cycling clubs shouldn't use specific roads at particular times may have some merit but could also come close to bullying them off the road.
> 
> As another example, not club related, I recently went back to the street where I grew up and where I learned to ride a bike. I was about five or six and we used to ride our bikes unsupervised up and down the road and round the block of houses as the top. I would not be comfortable letting my kids do the same. There are cars parked all the way along the road and at the block of houses at the top, where there used to be neat little lawns are paved driveways with cars on. The tucked away rows of garages which had a bit of space in front are now inaccessible with a security gate at the front. As we drove in there were some kids on bikes but they were very difficult to see darting in and out of cars and from a parent's point of view I would find that worrying.
> 
> So quite apart from club cycling, where do our kids go to learn to ride? Cars have taken over.



Absolutely!

We have sacrificed so many good things to our cars.

They have given us freedom to travel around and a means of expressing ourselves and satisfying our egos.

For me car ownership has long ceased to be a net pleasure and become a misery.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?



Your attitude comes across as victim-blaming twaddle.

What makes any road dangerous is improperly driven motor vehicles piloted by stressed and impatient idiots, not people cycling.

If you feel stressed to the degree that your driving is idiotic, don’t bloody drive!


----------



## winjim (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Convenience was never part of opening this debate, we were out for a drive and in no rush. I also did not mean to imply the cycle club shouldn’t visit the resort. Coffee and ice cream. Yes please. What got me was the timing and route out of the place. Spinning up a hill at sub 10mph speeds surrounded by annoyed frustrated cagers was not wise. And yes you can filter but only when safe to do so. My brother in law nearly died when filtering along the inside of a queue of cars. He shouldn’t have and got side swiped when a driver let a car out of a driveway . Sorry mate, never saw you was no comfort after he alerted the car to his presence by hitting the windscreen with his head and shoulder. Lost a week’s work (self employed) and needed new wheel and fork. Unfortunately we all share busy roads full of fools and we need to manage the risk to our safety. Just because you’re allowed to do something doesn’t mean you should.



It is about convenience though. You're saying that the club should not have chosen that specific route and time. I expect that would be a bit inconvenient for them. You may be right, perhaps they could have arranged things differently but convenience is absolutely a factor.


----------



## Phaeton (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> But why would a cycle club decide to ride out of a very busy beach resort up a really steep and winding A road at lunchtime on a Saturday in August, and on what planet would any cyclist think it OK to undertake the cars trying to weave safely through the gaps in the traffic ? Come on guys, you genuinely are putting lives at risk . Where’s the risk assessment on that cool idea? Train on the hill midweek when it’s quiet by all means but mid August Saturday lunchtime?? Why put everyone at needless risk? You should not be there but I bet you’d blame the car driver if it all went wrong. And yes, I am a runner, long distance cyclist, motorcycle rider, and car driver . Rant over? Nearly. If a teacher put a KS4 group in that situation they would be instantly dismissed but apparently it’s ok to choose that route cos you’re all adults? I know, I am a KS4 teacher. You better be certain you have no teens riding out with you



Can I ask you a question, if you thought what they were doing was so dangerous, why didn't you just stay behind them & give them a clear run up the hill free from traffic trying to overtake them?


----------



## stuckinthemud (21 Aug 2022)

Phaeton, I should have done exactly that but I didn’t know there was a club run, first straight section I safely overtook the tail cyclist, then there were a couple more and suddenly I’m in the middle of a cycle club riding for themselves not the other road users, we all want cars to give cycles 2m gaps but it’s not so easy when the cyclist decides to use the safety margin to filter through but the responsibility still lies with me? No pressure there then. Glasgow cyclist what makes roads dangerous is badly piloted vehicles. The pedestrian that stepped in front of my boss as he cycled up the high steeet put my boss in hospital and undergoing facial reconstruction surgery. No cars just two cyclists having a race and a pedestrian who only saw one of them


----------



## winjim (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Phaeton, I should have done exactly that but I didn’t know there was a club run, first straight section I safely overtook the tail cyclist, then there were a couple more and suddenly I’m in the middle of a cycle club riding for themselves not the other road users, we all want cars to give cycles 2m gaps but it’s not so easy when the cyclist decides to use the safety margin to filter through but the responsibility still lies with me? No pressure there then. Glasgow cyclist what makes roads dangerous is badly piloted vehicles. The pedestrian that stepped in front of my boss as he cycled up the high steeet put my boss in hospital and undergoing facial reconstruction surgery. No cars just two cyclists having a race and a pedestrian who only saw one of them



Two cyclists having a race up the high street. You do know how that sounds?


----------



## stuckinthemud (21 Aug 2022)

Yup but it’s also true


----------



## winjim (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Yup but it’s also true



Obviously I wasn't there but it sounds to me like it might not have been the pedestrian who was entirely at fault.

Or you're trolling.


----------



## Oldhippy (21 Aug 2022)

Bring on car free days in all towns and cities I say. Better still confine drivers to those zip cars where you hire them as you need. Not so many pointless three mile trips then I bet.


----------



## Sharky (21 Aug 2022)

Oldhippy said:


> car free days in all towns


I believe there was a city somewhere that announced that a certain day would be a leave your car at home day and take the bike/walk/public transport.

Alas a lot of commuters thought it would be a good day to commute by car as the roads would be free.

Result - grid lock - more than normal!


----------



## Oldhippy (21 Aug 2022)

Sharky said:


> I believe there was a city somewhere that announced that a certain day would be a leave your car at home day and take the bike/walk/public transport.
> 
> Alas a lot of commuters thought it would be a god day to commute by car as the roads would be free.
> 
> Result - grid lock - more than normal!



Doesn't surprise me at all. Local authorities should take a firmer stance and make it a thing but sadly as with so many easy fixes they don't have the political balls just in case they lose votes from the 'it's my right to pollute and clog the roads cos I can't be arsed to use my legs brigade'


----------



## ClichéGuevara (21 Aug 2022)

Sharky said:


> I believe there was a city somewhere that announced that a certain day would be a leave your car at home day and take the bike/walk/public transport.
> 
> Alas a lot of commuters thought it would be a god day to commute by car as the roads would be free.
> 
> Result - grid lock - more than normal!



A "leave your bike at home" day could be more revealing.


----------



## cougie uk (21 Aug 2022)

So Grant Shapps Wangs on about law breaking cyclists and I'm pretty sure I had the most close passes of any ride today in the last 40 years. 

I don't think these two things are unconnected.


----------



## Smokin Joe (21 Aug 2022)

cougie uk said:


> So Grant Shapps Wangs on about law breaking cyclists and I'm pretty sure I had the most close passes of any ride today in the last 40 years.
> 
> I don't think these two things are unconnected.



Obviously it's your own fault for being out on the bike and getting in the way of car drivers. Couldn't you have just wheeled it along the pavement? You'd still get excercise.


----------



## Oldhippy (21 Aug 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Obviously it's your own fault for being out on the bike and getting in the way of car drivers. Couldn't you have just wheeled it along the pavement? You'd still get excercise.



Car driving is a fundamental right isn't it. 🤣 Or that's the way it is portrayed at least. Imagine if just half of what is spent on road building went in to integrated well planned transport.


----------



## freiston (21 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?



This worries me - you are admitting that you are a stressed and impatient idiot (& that clearly equates to "dangerous" and unfit to drive) but you then go on to say that the cyclist is at fault for riding when dangerous drivers are on the road and that it is inappropriate for the cyclist to be on the road when this is the case.

It is the "stressed and impatient idiot" dangerous drivers that are the problem - and if they recognise that they are such, then they should not get behind the wheel of their car but should either find a competent driver to replace them or they should make alternative plans because it is their driving on the road that is inappropriate - just as it would be if they were unfit to drive for any other reason like drugs or drink.


----------



## Gwylan (21 Aug 2022)

Sharky said:


> I believe there was a city somewhere that announced that a certain day would be a leave your car at home day and take the bike/walk/public transport.
> 
> Alas a lot of commuters thought it would be a good day to commute by car as the roads would be free.
> 
> Result - grid lock - more than normal!



That was a regular thing in Brussels. Is it still the case?


----------



## Phaeton (21 Aug 2022)

Sharky said:


> I believe there was a city somewhere that announced that a certain day would be a leave your car at home day and take the bike/walk/public transport.


Doesn't Rome have a rule that you can only bring cars into the city on odd/even days, Mon/Wed/Fri is odd & Tues/Thurs even, one week & then swap over the next, based on the registration plate.

Only issue is those that could bought 2 cars one with an odd plate & the other with an even.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (21 Aug 2022)

A nice lively thread to enliven a grey day.


----------



## Gwylan (21 Aug 2022)

Phaeton said:


> Doesn't Rome have a rule that you can only bring cars into the city on odd/even days, Mon/Wed/Fri is odd & Tues/Thurs even, one week & then swap over the next, based on the registration plate.
> 
> Only issue is those that could bought 2 cars one with an odd plate & the other with an even.



Athens had that and it is reported that people just got 2 cars


----------



## jowwy (22 Aug 2022)

OP still doesnt say where this took place??


----------



## Gwylan (22 Aug 2022)

Gwylan said:


> That was a regular thing in Brussels. Is it still the case?



https://www.brussels.be/mobility-week-and-car-free-sunday-2022


----------



## Alex321 (22 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?



Your OP said nothing about any "safe cycle route". How close is it to the route they were taking, and is it a decent surface for road cyclists?


----------



## Alex321 (22 Aug 2022)

Juan Kog said:


> So is that third year at junior/primary school or secondary school.



That is largely why the change was made.


----------



## Mo1959 (22 Aug 2022)

Alex321 said:


> That is largely why the change was made.



Afraid I thought the old way made more sense too. Primary 3 for example you were around seven or eight and 3rd year you were in secondary school and around 14. Simple.


----------



## Sharky (22 Aug 2022)

My old school, a grammar, when under the old convention or years 1 to 5 and upper and lower sixth used roman numerals to label each year and letters for each stream within.

So for example would have classes
IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, IIID
IVA, IVB, IVC, IVD

and in the 5th form
VA, VB, VC
But if there was a need for 4 streams, they were labeled VC1 AND VC2

The old head master didn't want VD in his school!

True story!


----------



## Paulus (22 Aug 2022)

When I was at primary school, 1960-67 we started in class 6, and went up to class 1. Then in secondary school we went from 1st year, to 5th year. Those that stayed on into 6th year to do A levels were 6th formers, much like today.


----------



## matticus (22 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of* stressed and impatient idiots like me*, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily?



Presumably they didn't know you were going to be there - but YOU knew that you were STRESSED and IMPATIENT:
seems like you had a duty to remove the danger YOU were causing. Either pull over - to calm down, and give them a chance to get out of your way - or take a different route.
Or get someone calmer to drive?


----------



## freiston (22 Aug 2022)

Paulus said:


> When I was at primary school, 1960-67 we started in class 6, and went up to class 1. Then in secondary school we went from 1st year, to 5th year. Those that stayed on into 6th year to do A levels were 6th formers, much like today.



My memory is a bit vague - probably because things went a bit awry whilst I was at primary school. I remember 3rd & 4th (the final year when you took the 11+) but prior to the "3rd Year", there were three classes to advance through. I started at the 1st class but, along with about four others skipped the next one and advanced two classes - this was to bring us in line with the ages of the other pupils in the class, presumably to ensure we were in the final year at age 10/11 (afaik, I was between 5 and 6 years old when I started school). Whether 3rd and 4th years were called that when I started primary school, I cannot remember but I'm sure they were when I left.

Secondary school was 1st through to 5th form with Lower VI and Upper VI after Fifth Form. School years at both primary and secondary school were, as I remember, always expressed as ordinal numbers.


----------



## Dogtrousers (22 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Getting my knee down On the Cat and Fiddle pass on a CB250N 30 mph slower than the Blades and Ninjas was about as lively as I got, although racing with my mates from Storey Arms burger van to Merthyr was always a bit of light relief, so when I say the group was putting everyone in unnecessary danger, *I mean I know what I’m talking about.*



That's good, because the rest of us don't.


----------



## Sittingduck (22 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Convenience was never part of opening this debate, *we were out for a drive and in no rush*. I also did not mean to imply the cycle club shouldn’t visit the resort. Coffee and ice cream. Yes please. What got me was the timing and route out of the place. Spinning up a hill at sub 10mph speeds surrounded by annoyed frustrated cagers was not wise. And yes you can filter but only when safe to do so. My brother in law nearly died when filtering along the inside of a queue of cars. He shouldn’t have and got side swiped when a driver let a car out of a driveway . Sorry mate, never saw you was no comfort after he alerted the car to his presence by hitting the windscreen with his head and shoulder. Lost a week’s work (self employed) and needed new wheel and fork. Unfortunately we all share busy roads full of fools and we need to manage the risk to our safety. Just because you’re allowed to do something doesn’t mean you should.


There's a lot in this thread that I don't agree with but the bit in bold is especially irritating.

Maybe, if you have no real reason to go out in the car (other than for a leisure drive on a busy accident blackspot in the middle of the weekend) then you might have left it at home and gone for a low carbon walk instead. Big part of the (wider) problem here...


----------



## Alex321 (22 Aug 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Getting my knee down On the Cat and Fiddle pass on a CB250N 30 mph slower than the Blades and Ninjas was about as lively as I got, although racing with my mates from Storey Arms burger van to Merthyr was always a bit of light relief, so when I say the group was putting everyone in unnecessary danger, I mean I know what I’m talking about.



Why does the experience you have related here mean you know what you are talking about regarding something very different indeed?

The road from Storey Arms to Merthyr, while it can get busy, is never the nose to tail slow drive that you get on the hills to the beach area on the Gower or other South Wales resorts.

There is a massive difference between weaving in and out of traffic at 10-15 mph as on the beach road, and doing so at 60+ on the A470.


----------



## Jameshow (22 Aug 2022)

It was Saturday most people don't have the need to rush about, those that are employed are on employers time so no need to rush... 

If they were holding up an ambulance then fair enough but I'm sure they would have the decency to pull over. 

We can all enjoy the road if we have a little patience.


----------



## Phaeton (22 Aug 2022)

Jameshow said:


> We can all enjoy the road if we have a little patience.



It appears to be a very sparse commodity currently


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Sittingduck said:


> There's a lot in this thread that I don't agree with but the bit in bold is especially irritating.
> 
> Maybe, if you have no real reason to go out in the car (other than for a leisure drive on a busy accident blackspot in the middle of the weekend) then you might have left it at home and gone for a low carbon walk instead. Big part of the (wider) problem here...



But he did have a reason to be out in the car......going out for a leisurely drive is a valid reason, not everyone, especially some peoples partners may not want to walk or cycle


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere. 

It's bizarre.


----------



## Phaeton (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



He did want to go somewhere he was going to the beach


----------



## T4tomo (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.


Agree, although I may have taken this kids out for a drive when they were your to either send them to sleep or split them up if getting tetchy with each other and I will say my gran used to like an occasional Sunday drive out when she was no longer up to walking far. We'd go somewhere in the countryside though.

What is also most odd about the OP's "rant" is that he was moaning about riders filtering, so who was hold who up exactly on the rider out of the seaside if the bikes were overtaking the cars?? Maybe the cars should use the quieter "route out of the place" and leave the obvious route for the cyclists?


----------



## winjim (23 Aug 2022)

Funicular. It's the obvious solution.


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



people on motorbikes do, so whats the difference??


----------



## Chislenko (23 Aug 2022)

There are quite a few of the "older generation" who drive down to the marshes locally on a Sunday to sit and read the paper.

Personally I have never understood it, especially if it is a broadsheet as turning the pages in the car must be a right to do.


----------



## Jameshow (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



You haven't got to that age yet!! 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Julia9054 (23 Aug 2022)

cougie uk said:


> So Grant Shapps Wangs on about law breaking cyclists and I'm pretty sure I had the most close passes of any ride today in the last 40 years.
> 
> I don't think these two things are unconnected.



Have we considered that the op may actually be Grant Shapps?


----------



## freiston (23 Aug 2022)

My partner has mobility issues and we don't have a car. When she is up to it, we sometimes get a bus from Coventry to Stratford upon Avon just for the ride and the day out. When she's not even up to the walk to the bus stops or around Stratford, a trip out to a cafe/garden centre in a friend's car is a much appreciated treat.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

Jameshow said:


> You haven't got to that age yet!! 🤣🤣🤣


Actually I'm not far off "that age" but for me to drive anywhere involves trundling though through the mean streets of SE London, probably on the S Circular. It's enough to make anyone stay at home.

And anyway, I don't know where I've put my string-backed gloves.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



It's not really bizarre - some people like taking small planes, motorboats, jetskis etc out for a spin. 

Same with cars - some people like driving.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> It's not really bizarre - some people like taking small planes, motorboats, jetskis etc out for a spin.
> 
> Same with cars - *some people like driving.*



No really, it is bizarre


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> There are quite a few of the "older generation" who drive down to the marshes locally on a Sunday to sit and read the paper.
> 
> Personally I have never understood it, especially if it is a broadsheet as turning the pages in the car must be a right to do.



We often go for Carnics - we take a light lunch and our Kindles and go to a nice spot, park up and have a lovely couple of hours together enjoying the view, our reading and each others company. ❤️

There are some right killjoys in the world who seemingly want to crush all joy out of life if it doesn't fit with their view of the world etc.


----------



## Vantage (23 Aug 2022)

Some people can't understand why us lot go out in all weather's, sweating or freezing our asses off, dodging traffic and killing ourselves climbing hills all in the name of enjoyment. Much easier in a car. 
Bizarre.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> No really, it is bizarre



Not in my world it isn't - plenty of people I know have cars that they use simply for the pleasure of driving them. 

A terrible crime in some people's eyes for sure but hey-ho we are all different. 😊


----------



## classic33 (23 Aug 2022)

Phaeton said:


> He did want to go somewhere he was going to the beach


He was headed away from the beach.

Bech changed to correct spelling of beach


----------



## Alex321 (23 Aug 2022)

Vantage said:


> Some people can't understand why us lot go out in all weather's, sweating or freezing our asses off, dodging traffic and killing ourselves climbing hills all in the name of enjoyment. Much easier in a car.
> Bizarre.



Exactly.

We all find pleasure in different things. It really isn't bizarre to just enjoy going for a drive, particularly if you have somewhere scenic that you can do so.


----------



## Vantage (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> And anyway, I don't know where I've put my string-backed gloves.



Umm.......


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> He was headed away from the bech.



Maybe he was going to another beach because the first beach was busy. 😁


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



The Peak District was ram packed with people "going for a drive" on Sunday. 

Two obvious categories:
(1) Boy racers - strings of variously souped up cars en convoy. 
(2) Family outings - parked up in laybys, clearly not out of a walk or anything, but milling about their car, taking selfies etc.

One of (2) was really odd and potentially very dangerous - sat down in the road as I approached and got his mate to take a picture of him with me in the background. Proper weird.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The Peak District was ram packed with people "going for a drive" on Sunday.
> 
> Two obvious categories:
> (1) Boy racers - strings of variously souped up cars en convoy.
> ...



I can understand (2). That's not "going for a drive". That's going somewhere. Even if you don't do much when you get there. I guess I can understand (1) too. It's a social thing. Or rather it's a antisocial social thing.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I can understand (2). That's not "going for a drive". That's going somewhere. Even if you don't do much when you get there. I guess I can understand (1) too. It's a social thing. Or rather it's a antisocial social thing.



Whilst we are not agreeing with each other today I have to say that I do like your rather funky avatar. 😊


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Whilst we are not agreeing with each other today I have to say that I do like your rather funky avatar. 😊



Been playing with https://www.craiyon.com/ "Dinosaur riding a bicycle" For some reason it tends to chop the top of the dino's head off


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

There is a lot of anti-car rhetoric on this forum though......which shows in how some people think, you cant just go out for a drive in your car.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> There is a lot of anti-car rhetoric on this forum though......which shows in how some people think, you cant just go out for a drive in your car.



Going out for a drive in your car imposes costs (pollution, danger, inconvenience) to other people. Objecting to having to suffer those costs, when they are so considerable, doesn't seem unreasonable.


----------



## winjim (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The Peak District was ram packed with people "going for a drive" on Sunday.
> 
> Two obvious categories:
> (1) Boy racers - strings of variously souped up cars en convoy.
> ...



I was in the Peak District on Sunday but never out of sight of my car. I wouldn't say I was going for a drive though. There was a definite destination and activity involved, I've just got two small children who don't move very far or very fast. It was still very stimulating and engaging for them.


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Going out for a drive in your car imposes costs (pollution, *danger*, *inconvenience*) to other people. Objecting to having to suffer those costs, when they are so considerable, doesn't seem unreasonable.



but going out for a ride on your motorbike, boat, quad, etc etc is all ok??.....they subject us all to the same costs, so should people stop doing everything so those costs are stopped??

or are people allowed to have a life??

I also dont get how its a danger and inconvenience?


----------



## Jody (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The Peak District was ram packed with people "going for a drive" on Sunday.
> 
> Two obvious categories:
> (1) Boy racers - strings of variously souped up cars en convoy.



It's August. You can pretty much guarantee they are in convoy heading to a car show or meet rather than aimlessly driving around the peaks.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> but going out for a ride on your motorbike, boat, quad, etc etc is all ok??.....they subject us all to the same costs, so should people stop doing everything so those costs are stopped??
> 
> or are people allowed to have a life??



All of those activities are different, and impose different costs on others.

In my opinion, motorists impose costs on others far higher than the costs they pay for their activity. That can be quantified for things like carbon emissions, but the costs of dangerous roads, pollution, congestion and the like are arguably far higher still. We motorists should pay the full costs of our imposition on others.


----------



## Tail End Charlie (23 Aug 2022)

I don't see a problem if you want to go out for a drive, if that floats your boat. I don't any more, but have done in the past. In fact I think convoys of old cars, bikes, scooters etc all add to the pleasantries of life.


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> All of those activities are different, and impose different costs on others.
> 
> In my opinion, motorists impose costs on others far higher than the costs they pay for their activity. That can be quantified for things like carbon emissions, but the costs of dangerous roads, pollution, congestion and the like are arguably far higher still. We motorists should pay the full costs of our imposition on others.



never seen a dangerous road?? were are these things you talk of??


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

Tail End Charlie said:


> I don't see a problem if you want to go out for a drive, if that floats your boat.


I'm afraid I kicked this off. 

I don't have all that much of a problem either, it just seems a really weird thing to do. Not going anywhere, just driving around. WTF? I use buses and trains a lot but I also don't go out and get on a bus just for the hell of riding on the bus. 

But people are strange.


----------



## winjim (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'm afraid I kicked this off.
> 
> I don't have all that much of a problem either, it just seems a really weird thing to do. Not going anywhere, just driving around. WTF? I use buses and trains a lot but I also don't go out and get on a bus just for the hell of riding on the bus.
> 
> But people are strange.



I have a theory that a lot of the bad feeling towards cyclists comes from the fact that motorists are frustrated trying to get somewhere in order to do something, whereas cyclists often already _are_ doing something.


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'm afraid I kicked this off.
> 
> *I don't have all that much of a problem either,* it just seems a really weird thing to do. Not going anywhere, just driving around. WTF? I use buses and trains a lot but I also don't go out and get on a bus just for the hell of riding on the bus.
> 
> But people are strange.



but its dangerous, polluting and inconvenient....


----------



## classic33 (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> but its dangerous, polluting and inconvenient....


Dangerous only if you don't accept that other legal road users have as much right to be on the roads as you. 
However they are travelling.


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> Dangerous only if you don't accept that other legal road users have as much right to be on the roads as you.
> However they are travelling.



but is that what roubaixtuesday is saying?? because it doesnt come across that way, sighting dangerous roads??


----------



## freiston (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'm afraid I kicked this off.
> 
> I don't have all that much of a problem either, it just seems a really weird thing to do. Not going anywhere, just driving around. WTF? I use buses and trains a lot but I also don't go out and get on a bus just for the hell of riding on the bus.
> 
> But people are strange.





freiston said:


> My partner has mobility issues and we don't have a car. When she is up to it, we sometimes get a bus from Coventry to Stratford upon Avon just for the ride and the day out. When she's not even up to the walk to the bus stops or around Stratford, a trip out to a cafe/garden centre in a friend's car is a much appreciated treat.


Once I even went with a friend in his car to a train station ("A") to ride A to B (another train station) back to A on a (steam) train and then the car ride back home. We did also have a meal and a pint at "B".

And I'm someone who has a problem with the prevalence of "car culture".


----------



## Phaeton (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Going out for a drive in your car imposes costs


Opera
Theatres
Schools
Museums
Football
Cricket
Athletes
British Cycling team

All the above impose costs on me of which I have no interest in, but that's life.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

freiston said:


> Once I even went with a friend in his car to a train station ("A") to ride A to B (another train station) back to A on a (steam) train and then the car ride back home. We did also have a meal and a pint at "B".
> 
> And I'm someone who has a problem with the prevalence of "car culture".



Now I'm going to have to admit the time I went to Croydon just to have a go on the tram.


----------



## classic33 (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> but is that what roubaixtuesday is saying?? because it doesnt come across that way, sighting dangerous roads??


Ask him not me.

Do you mean _citing dangerous roads_, not "sighting dangerous roads"?


----------



## Mo1959 (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> but going out for a ride on your motorbike, boat, quad, etc etc is all ok??.....they subject us all to the same costs, so should people stop doing everything so those costs are stopped??
> 
> or are people allowed to have a life??
> 
> I also dont get how its a danger and inconvenience?





jowwy said:


> but its dangerous, polluting and inconvenient....


You do realise you are arguing with yourself now!


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> Dangerous only if you don't accept that other legal road users have as much right to be on the roads as you.
> However they are travelling.



The presence of motorists causes roads to be dangerous to others, notably cyclists and pedestrians. 

That has a huge impact on the freedom of those people to use the roads.

I don't think this is remotely a point of controversy.


----------



## Alex321 (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> The presence of motorists causes roads to be dangerous to others, notably cyclists and pedestrians.
> 
> That has a huge impact on the freedom of those people to use the roads.
> 
> *I don't think this is remotely a point of controversy.*


I do.

What causes roads to be dangerous to others is *people* using the roads incorrectly. Whether they are driving, cycling, riding a horse, or even just walking.

"Motorists" are only a cause of danger when they drive badly. Which, of course, many do, but other road users also use the road badly.


----------



## Oldhippy (23 Aug 2022)

Alex321 said:


> I do.
> 
> What causes roads to be dangerous to others is *people* using the roads incorrectly. Whether they are driving, cycling, riding a horse, or even just walking.
> 
> "Motorists" are only a cause of danger when they drive badly. Which, of course, many do, but other road users also use the road badly.



The guns aren't dangerous, people are, argument doesn't really hold up I think. The gun lobby regularly trots this out. Cars are dangerous for all for the pollution caused making them as well as running them, this is undeniable. Adding tired unthinking people to the equation just adds to the misery. Traffic jams are just considered a part of life, they don't need to be if people were more socially responsible.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

Cars are inherently hazardous.

The risk to others can be controlled, but never eliminated.

And there are costs to others beyond immediate physical injury, through congestion, pollution and the prevention of others - notably children - from the use of public spaces because of the hazards are unavoidable.


----------



## Jody (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> but its dangerous, polluting and inconvenient....



Why is driving for leisure dangerous?


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.



Are you one of the 7 males-over-30 on the planet that doesn't own a copy of Bat Out of Hell? I can lend you it. It's for your own good, I promise you...


----------



## Phaeton (23 Aug 2022)

Jody said:


> Why is driving for leisure dangerous?



I believe you have to read it in context, he is quoting not making a statement


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Jody said:


> Why is driving for leisure dangerous?



ask roubaix tuesday, he was the one that said it was not me


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Mo1959 said:


> You do realise you are arguing with yourself now!



no - im quoting roubaix tuesday....cause that was in his answer


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

I think some people are doing this quite a lot now in this thread


View: https://thumbs.gfycat.com/LegalHalfIberianchiffchaff-max-1mb.gif


----------



## Vantage (23 Aug 2022)

Oldhippy said:


> The guns aren't dangerous, people are, argument doesn't really hold up I think. The gun lobby regularly trots this out. Cars are dangerous for all for the pollution caused making them as well as running them, this is undeniable. Adding tired unthinking people to the equation just adds to the misery. Traffic jams are just considered a part of life, they don't need to be if people were more socially responsible.



The problem with guns unlike cars is that their sole reason for existing is to kill. They have no other purpose. Handled correctly, they kill even better. 
Cars were designed and built for transportation.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

Vantage said:


> The problem with guns unlike cars is that their sole reason for existing is to kill. They have no other purpose. Handled correctly, they kill even better.
> Cars were designed and built for transportation.



I think this makes cars far more difficult. We can just ban guns, we don't want to do that with cars. Or I don't, at least.

But cars are inherently hazardous, particularly to people who are not benefiting from their use.


----------



## Phaeton (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> But cars are inherently hazardous, particularly to people who are not benefiting from their use.


No they are not, why is the car that is currently sat on our drive dangerous? I understand that it has the potential to be dangerous, just like a carving knife has the potential to be dangerous, but it in itself is not dangerous.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Now I'm going to have to admit the time I went to Croydon just to have a go on the tram.



I've also just remembered that earlier this year I went all the way to Wuppertal in Germany just in order to ride on the Schwebebahn.
Not to mention riding from Whitby to Pickering and back just for the hell of being on the choo choo train.
And making a highlight of a journey to Stourbridge a trip on the Parry People Mover on the Stourbridge Town branch line

I'm a complete hypocrite!


----------



## DaveReading (23 Aug 2022)

"Going for a drive" certainly used to be a thing when I was little.

Nowadays it just doesn't sound right.


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

Phaeton said:


> No they are not, why is the car that is currently sat on our drive dangerous? I understand that it has the potential to be dangerous, just like a carving knife has the potential to be dangerous, but it in itself is not dangerous.



And yet you'd usually put a carving knife away in the presence of small people (or certain animals). But not - say - spoons.
Why is this, if the knife is not dangerous?

Perhaps it is the potential that is dangerous.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

Vantage said:


> Cars were designed and built for transportation.



They were/are and wonderfully liberating they are too. 

I'm old enough to remember when cars were rare in the street where I lived as a kid. 

We very rarely went outside of our immediate neighbourhood and all the mum's (most males did sod all domestically back then) had to trudge to the 'local' shops, or bus stop if going to town, and then back again laden with heavy bags etc. Trips to Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals were an absolute nightmare. Ditto visits to far-flung relatives too. 

Cars changed this and made life easier and opened up new horizons: and are now intrinsically interwoven into many people's social/work life. 

For sure we need to cut down on pollution and bad driving but the impression I get is that some people want to see cars disappear forever - it's never happening imo. 

For the vast majority of people bikes are an unattractive and non-viable option as a car alternative. 

In our village we have 11 people who I would call proper regular cyclists and all have and use cars regularly. Not one is anti-car that I know of. 

Ditto the other cyclists that I know who do not live in the village. 

In all honesty there is very little anti-car rhetoric in my world - most of it that is is on this forum and the Jeremy Vine show. 

The vast majority of people imo seem to appreciate the enabling nature of car ownership. 

I don't even think this is a generational thing either: I would say that every older teenager and young adult that I know either has, or desperately wants, a car. Probably second on the list after an all singing all dancing iPhone. Even the ones who rabbit on to anyone who will listen that the Old Folk are screwing up their world are in the aforementioned category. People, young, old and in between like the utility of cars. 

Banning is ludicrous, we just need to preserve the utility but do it better.


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We very rarely went outside of our immediate neighbourhood and all the mum's (most males did sod all domestically back then) had to trudge to the 'local' shops, or bus stop if going to town, and then back again laden with heavy bags etc. Trips to Doctors/Dentists/Hospitals were an absolute nightmare. Ditto visits to far-flung relatives too.
> 
> Cars changed this and made life easier and opened up new horizons: and are now intrinsically interwoven into many people's social/work life.



But doesn't this justification all go up in smoke once people are
_just going for a drive?_

[I'd love to see more sensible car use - but everyone's got an excuse, so every Spokeydokey/Phaeton blocks any progress on this; so maybe bans and restrictions are the only answer? You've backed us into a corner!!! :P ]


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

matticus said:


> But doesn't this justification all go up in smoke once people are
> just going for a drive?
> 
> [I'd love to see more sensible car use - but everyone's got an excuse, so every Spokeydokey/Phaeton blocks any progress on this; so maybe bans and restrictions are the only answer? You've backed us into a corner!!! :P ]



No, going for a drive is a valid use of a car in my opinion.

Same as any other fuel using recreational activity (motorbikes, cars, planes, going abroad on holiday). I could also include the calvacade that follows the TdF etc and the cyclists that zip of to Majorca or wherever to enjoy their cycling..

I'm not for returning to days of yor when cars were rare. As I said, we just need to do it better.

I'm not sure who 'us' is but I guess you are an 'us' and I respect your views but I think you will remain an 'us' for a long long time.


----------



## Alex321 (23 Aug 2022)

matticus said:


> And yet you'd usually put a carving knife away in the presence of small people (or certain animals). But not - say - spoons.
> Why is this, if the knife is not dangerous?
> 
> Perhaps it is the potential that is dangerous.



You do that because it has the potential to be dangerous, if misused. And the small people are likely to misuse it.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Banning is ludicrous, we just need to preserve the utility but do it better.



Literally nobody here has suggested banning cars, so suggesting that they have is ludicrous.


----------



## Poacher (23 Aug 2022)

classic33 said:


> Do you mean _citing dangerous roads_, not "sighting dangerous roads"?


FFS, don't set him off again!


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Literally nobody here has suggested banning cars, so suggesting that they have is ludicrous.



Point Of Order! I did use "ban" - after Spokey's post, in fact - but I meant in limited situations. Be that time, or geography, or both.
As you were


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

Alex321 said:


> You do that because it has the potential to be dangerous, if misused. And the small people are likely to misuse it.



How are you defining this "potential" idea - a knife has either cut someone, or it hasn't. It doesn't really matter _why _it hasn't cut you _yet _- it's still dangerous. Calling it "potentially" dangerous doesn't seem to change much! You need to always treat the thing with respect - until someone blunts it, there is always the potential for harm. You just relax when the small people are in another room, or you can see the knife is shut in a drawer.

Are you familiar with COSHH regs? (They cover dangerous chemicals). No-one that deals them with say the substancess are not dangerous when they're in the right container etc - they're just _less _dangerous.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Literally nobody here has suggested banning cars, so suggesting that they have is ludicrous.



I think you will find that the use of the word 'ban' in relation to cars has cropped up on the forum on more than the one (clarified) occasion cited above. 

I also mentioned the Jeremy Vine show and the same applies. 

***

Are you saying that cars are indeed okay? It seems that you are. 

If so, do we agree that they are very useful for many people but that we just need to do it better? 

By better I mean that cars need to be more environmentally friendly, more utility focused and more relevant to their intended use.


----------



## matticus (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Are you saying that cars are indeed okay? It seems that you are.
> 
> If so, do we agree that they are very useful for many people but that we just need to do it better?
> 
> By better I mean that cars need to be more environmentally friendly, more utility focused and more relevant to their intended use.



Using them less would be more effective. Your plans can make a contribution .. although I worry they will always be resource-hungry, as you are likely building something new, in an effort to damage the planet less!
And using them less is generally a win for the people who really need them - EVERYBODY's happy


----------



## glasgowcyclist (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Been playing with https://www.craiyon.com/ "Dinosaur riding a bicycle" For some reason it tends to chop the top of the dino's head off
> View attachment 658453



Have you tried lowering his saddle?


----------



## ClichéGuevara (23 Aug 2022)

Vantage said:


> The problem with guns unlike cars is that their sole reason for existing is to kill. They have no other purpose. Handled correctly, they kill even better.
> Cars were designed and built for transportation.



Isn't that the bullets that do that, rather than the gun, which is only really a rubbish bat.

Ban bullets, that's what I say.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

ClichéGuevara said:


> Isn't that the bullets that do that, rather than the gun, which is only really a rubbish bat.
> 
> Ban bullets, that's what I say.



Well, the bullet isn't that harmful. It's the cartridge with the bangy stuff that makes the bullet go fast that is the real danger. Without the cartridge the bullet is just going to hurt you if you tread on it in your bare feet.

Ban bangy stuff.


----------



## figbat (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Well, the bullet isn't that harmful. It's the cartridge with the bangy stuff that makes the bullet go fast that is the real danger. Without the cartridge the bullet is just going to hurt you if you tread on it in your bare feet.
> 
> Ban bangy stuff.



And the bangy stuff isn't that dangerous until is it confined in a chamber and some kind of impact ignites it - this is what the gun does. Now we're full circle - ban guns!


----------



## Jody (23 Aug 2022)

Phaeton said:


> I believe you have to read it in context, he is quoting not making a statement



The highlighted text was pointing out that RT stated they don't really have a problem with leisure driving but find it a weird thing to do.

The reply said it's dangerous. 

Not sure what I've missed?


----------



## ClichéGuevara (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Well, the bullet isn't that harmful. It's the cartridge with the bangy stuff that makes the bullet go fast that is the real danger. Without the cartridge the bullet is just going to hurt you if you tread on it in your bare feet.
> 
> Ban bangy stuff.



Ah, but that bangy stuff on it's own is just...well bangy until it's set behind the projectile, and in the right environment.

Ban environments, that's the answer.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Are you saying that cars are indeed okay? It seems that you are.



As above...



roubaixtuesday said:


> The presence of motorists causes roads to be dangerous to others, notably cyclists and pedestrians.
> 
> That has a huge impact on the freedom of those people to use the roads.



But also...



roubaixtuesday said:


> We can just ban guns, we don't want to do that with cars. Or I don't, at least.



The current prevalence of car ownership and usage massively impacts both drivers and wider society and the environment in a negative way.

Reducing the number, usage, speed and size of vehicles will likely add to the sum of human happiness and wellbeing.

I think that's consistent and hopefully clear?

Of course, we're well away from the original OP, but I'll note that the root cause of their distress was not the cyclists, but the volume of traffic.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (23 Aug 2022)

Jody said:


> RT stated they don't really have a problem with leisure driving but find it a weird thing to do.



Not me. The only thing I claimed was weird was sitting down in the road to have your photo taken, using an approaching cyclist (me!) as background. I maintain that is properly weird. I was at the time doing 100 hilly miles on a bike for pure enjoyment. Most people would think that weird, I reckon.

I've no idea what Jowwy is on about, gave up a few pages ago.


----------



## Jody (23 Aug 2022)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Not me. The only thing I claimed was weird was sitting down in the road to have your photo taken, using an approaching cyclist (me!) as background. I maintain that is properly weird. I was at the time doing 100 hilly miles on a bike for pure enjoyment. Most people would think that weird, I reckon.
> 
> I've no idea what Jowwy is on about, gave up a few pages ago.



Apologies. I meant DTs highlighted post. 

It's a bit weird taking photos as you describe. But whatever floats your boat I suppose. 

Maybe they have a lycra fetish.


----------



## Sittingduck (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> There is a lot of anti-car rhetoric on this forum though......which shows in how some people think, you cant just go out for a drive in your car.



It's not the anti car thing, I was getting at. More the fact that the OP was moaning about roads being clogged up on a weekend (the horror of it all), then contributing to the problem... and moaning a lot!


----------



## jowwy (23 Aug 2022)

Sittingduck said:


> It's not the anti car thing, I was getting at. More the fact that the OP was moaning about roads being clogged up on a weekend (the horror of it all), then contributing to the problem... and moaning a lot!



I wasnt picking on your post, i was commenting on the whole forum being anti-car……there is a lot of it in here and as you can see, within the thread too.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Aug 2022)

It's turning into one of _those _threads. "But did you not read my reply on page 76". Please mods. Save us from ourselves.



Jody said:


> The highlighted text was pointing out that *RT stated* they don't really have a problem with leisure driving but find it a weird thing to do.





roubaixtuesday said:


> *Not me. * The only thing I claimed was weird was sitting down in the road to have your photo taken, using an approaching cyclist (me!) as background.


It was me!

I was the one who made a quick post saying that "going for a drive" - just driving with no destination - was a weird thing to do. I regret it now.

I still think that. But then I hate driving and live in a congested city where driving is a pain, and where there is excellent public transport, so I very rarely actually use my car. I do accept that some other people have different perspectives. But that doesn't mean they aren't weird.


----------



## classic33 (23 Aug 2022)

jowwy said:


> I was picking on your post, i was commenting on the whole forum being anti-car……there is a lot of it in here and as you can see, within the thread too.


I've not against cars, just some of the people who sit behind the steering wheel and insist that everyone else is spoiling their enjoyment of the open roads.

And it is always the others that are at fault.


----------



## Jody (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> It was me!
> 
> I was the one who made a quick post saying that "going for a drive" - just driving with no destination - was a weird thing to do. I regret it now.



It's slightly weird but we always used to do it when I was younger. The joys of my dad having a fuel card, nice car and no mileage constraints. 

We'd go all over the place.

TBF I love driving and probably would drive for pleasure but haven't done it in some time. 

Given the option of long drive or being passenger, I'd pick driving every time. 


It's probably easier if we move on from the Jowwy quote.


----------



## Chislenko (23 Aug 2022)

Jody said:


> TBF I love driving and probably would drive for pleasure but haven't done it in some time.



Must admit I used to love driving and would often take my "sporty number" for a blast round North Wales.

Nowadays I detest driving and only use the car when I have to.


----------



## Phaeton (23 Aug 2022)

Chislenko said:


> Must admit I used to love driving and would often take my "sporty number" for a blast round North Wales.
> 
> Nowadays I detest driving and only use the car when I have to.



I'm with you on that, although I don't think I've often driven for the sake of driving, there was always a purpose to the drive, even if that purpose was trivial, 170 mile round trip to buy fish & chips, sit on the prom to eat them


----------



## Smokin Joe (23 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> It's turning into one of _those _threads. "But did you not read my reply on page 76". Please mods. Save us from ourselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is going for a bike ride - just riding with no destination - also a weird thing to do? And not everyone lives in congested cities with excellent public transport. Many of us rural dwellers enjoy quiet roads with very limited bus services.


----------



## Brandane (24 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> for me to drive anywhere involves trundling though through the mean streets of SE London, probably on the S Circular. It's enough to make anyone stay at home.



Having driven in London, you have my utmost sympathy. I would rather stick pins in my eyes than ever drive there again. However, I suggest you get yourself on the M6 and head north of Preston. The driving experience improves immeasurably, for the most part. One exception being the M8 corridor through central Scotland and anywhere within about 20 miles of it. 
There are undoubtedly areas where driving a car can still be fun, albeit very expensive fun now. Personally I enjoy having my own space where I can be alone with my thoughts; put on my choice of music and just head for somewhere scenic. If it's raining, even better! I think that comes from being a cyclist and motorcyclist too; you learn to appreciate the comfort and protection from the elements that a car gives. Too warm/cold? A quick twirl of a dial and it's sorted. Luxury!


----------



## Andy in Germany (30 Aug 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> Is going for a bike ride - just riding with no destination - also a weird thing to do? And not everyone lives in congested cities with excellent public transport. Many of us rural dwellers enjoy quiet roads with very limited bus services.



I think the point is that just driving a car with no destination entails pollution, noise and damage, and uses finite resources.

Cycling doesn't cause this damage, uses space more efficiently, and also keeps you fit.


----------



## Alex321 (30 Aug 2022)

Andy in Germany said:


> I think the point is that just driving a car with no destination entails pollution, noise and damage, and uses finite resources.
> 
> Cycling doesn't cause this damage, uses space more efficiently, and also keeps you fit.



True, but that doesn't really affect whether it is a weird thing to do.


----------



## Andy in Germany (30 Aug 2022)

Alex321 said:


> True, but that doesn't really affect whether it is a weird thing to do.



True; that rather depends on what the original poster considered "weird". In the context of an energy and environmental crisis, you could define an activity that pollutes and uses a lot of energy as "weird", although "counterproductive" may be more appropriate if we want to avoid value judgements or potentially derogatory statements.

Unfortunately I can't be absolutely sure that 's what the original poster meant, so technically I was making an assumption based on context.

Am I sounding like a social worker?


----------



## Dogtrousers (30 Aug 2022)

Andy in Germany said:


> I think the point is that just driving a car with no destination entails pollution, noise and damage, and uses finite resources.
> 
> Cycling doesn't cause this damage, uses space more efficiently, and also keeps you fit.



Actually that wasn't my point at all. My point was that driving a car is an awful stressful - and expensive - experience (especially with all these bloody cyclists on the road getting in the way). I can't see why anyone would ever do it for fun. 

Cycling my local roads is also unpleasant and stressful - not expensive though - but after about an hour's riding I finally escape.


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Do people really do that? "Go for a drive". I've never, in my entire life (except when I was learning to drive) gone out and driven a car just for the sake of driving a car. I've only ever driven a car because I want to get somewhere.
> 
> It's bizarre.



Don't cyclists do that - just 'go for a ride'?


----------



## Alex321 (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Actually that wasn't my point at all. My point was that driving a car is an awful stressful - and expensive - experience (especially with all these bloody cyclists on the road getting in the way). I can't see why anyone would ever do it for fun.
> 
> Cycling my local roads is also unpleasant and stressful - not expensive though - but after about an hour's riding I finally escape.



A lot of people don't find driving stressful once they are out of town.


----------



## tyred (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Actually that wasn't my point at all. My point was that driving a car is an awful stressful - and expensive - experience (especially with all these bloody cyclists on the road getting in the way). I can't see why anyone would ever do it for fun.
> 
> Cycling my local roads is also unpleasant and stressful - not expensive though - but after about an hour's riding I finally escape.



Roads around here are pretty quiet for the most part so driving a car isn't really stressful and speaking personally, while recovering from my injuries, I was able to drive about 6 weeks before I was allowed to cycle again and even then I needed time to build up being able to cycle a meaningful distance. In that time I drove a lot. After 4 months lying in bed and not being able to walk any distance, being able to get out and about in the car was great for my mental wellbeing and I was grateful for having access to a car. 

Driving can be enjoyed and not everyone has the fitness to cycle or walk. There are no local bus services here so if you want to escape your local area a car is the only way to do it.


----------



## tyred (30 Aug 2022)

Then there are occasions where I've put my bike in the car and went for a drive somewhere just so I could ride my bike somewhere different. I note many cars going around with bike racks. Obviously lots of people do this.


----------



## Dogtrousers (30 Aug 2022)

Alex321 said:


> A lot of people don't find driving stressful once they are out of town.



Probably because they aren't paying proper attention to what they are doing.


----------



## winjim (30 Aug 2022)

It may be my autism but I find concentrating on a technical task extremely relaxing. So going for a drive is good for me.

When I was commuting to Manchester, compared to the rigmarole of family life it was the most relaxing part of my day.


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Aug 2022)

Too many people, too little space on UK's roads and yet people persist in buying ever bigger vehicles - and manufacturers appear to encourage this. Check out the size of many EV status symbols so desired by many. Many of the B roads I ride on are no longer wide enough for cars to pass each other, the width of the SUV (!) being more than half the width of the road. Madness! Perhaps tax by area of road space occupied would be a good idea.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (30 Aug 2022)

youngoldbloke said:


> Too many people, too little space on UK's roads and yet people persist in buying ever bigger vehicles - and manufacturers appear to encourage this. Check out the size of many EV status symbols so desired by many. Many of the B roads I ride on are no longer wide enough for cars to pass each other, the width of the SUV (!) being more than half the width of the road. Madness! Perhaps tax by area of road space occupied would be a good idea.



Bigger unit size equals more profit for manufacturers and people tend to buy what they are offered.

Big SUV's are absurd conveyances imo, ditto very high performance cars.

Even "green" Tesla produce a 1020hp 200mph monster.

Insanity.


----------



## Oldhippy (30 Aug 2022)

Good job there are infinite resources and no climate emergency......ah wait there is. Lunacy utter lunacy.


----------



## shep (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> No really, it is bizarre



No really, it isn't 😉

Admittedly driving through central London for 'something to do' probably isn't much fun but if you live minutes from the country side and have a classic car or a kit car you've built or heaven forbid, something you just enjoy driving then why wouldn't you?


----------



## shep (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> But people are strange.



I might think you're strange because you can't understand the pleasure in driving something you enjoy, but I don't because you're different to me, so you need to realise it's not that difficult to get your head round.

Is riding a motorcycle the same in your eyes or can you understand that concept?


----------



## Dogtrousers (30 Aug 2022)

shep said:


> I might think you're strange because you can't understand the pleasure in driving something you enjoy, but I don't because you're different to me, so you need to realise it's not that difficult to get your head round.
> 
> Is riding a motorcycle the same in your eyes or can you understand that concept?



I've never ridden a motorcycle.


----------



## shep (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I've never ridden a motorcycle.



No, but you know they exist and that they're probably ridden mainly for pleasure so was asking whether you thought that weird?

I think wanting to live in London is weird but how many people do it?


----------



## Dogtrousers (30 Aug 2022)

shep said:


> No, but you know they exist and that they're probably ridden mainly for pleasure so was asking whether you thought that weird?



On the basis that I've never done it I'm going to tentatively class riding a motorbike for its own sake as "different". Driving a car for its own sake, with no useful destination, remains firmly in the "weird" category I'm afraid. Along with recreational hoovering.


----------



## matticus (30 Aug 2022)

winjim said:


> It may be my autism but I find concentrating on a technical task extremely relaxing. So going for a drive is good for me.
> 
> When I was commuting to Manchester, compared to the rigmarole of family life it was the most relaxing part of my day.



Given the slapdash approach most regular drivers take - and their desire to be distracted by gadgets of all varieties - I think you're in the minority there!

[but it _is _an interesting testament, thankyou.]


----------



## figbat (30 Aug 2022)

I love driving. Not just fast, but _well_. I used to relish the regular IAM driving assessments that we used to have to have at work if driving on business and I used to get good marks too. I love the challenge of driving well, of anticipating, of reading the road, of picking the best lines, of keeping stress out of it and simply passing through other people's lives with minimal impact. I love driving a favourite road when it's quiet and dry, I love towing a caravan, I love making best progress through a town or city by reading the road, reading other drivers' behaviours, anticipating traffic lights, picking the best lane to be in. I love coaxing the best out of a vehicle, be it best performance for the situation, best efficiency, best comfort. I used to go 'out for a drive' all the time as a younger person, just to be immersed in the thing I loved doing and was increasingly good at.

Now I don't drive just for fun, but I still make sure to enjoy the driving I have to do and will sometimes choose a route based on the fun and pleasure it will give me rather than the time or distance it covers. I also ride a motorbike now and almost all of my miles on that are recreational.

I know I am not alone - the whole car 'cruise' scene is this. Car meets. Car enthusiast gatherings. Not weird, just not for everyone.


----------



## Andy in Germany (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Actually that wasn't my point at all. My point was that driving a car is an awful stressful - and expensive - experience (especially with all these bloody cyclists on the road getting in the way). I can't see why anyone would ever do it for fun.
> 
> Cycling my local roads is also unpleasant and stressful - not expensive though - but after about an hour's riding I finally escape.



Thanks for the clarification @Dogtrousers. I'm with you on that aspect: thankfully I live and when necessary, drive, in a predominantly rural area but being in charge of a ton of lethal metal is never something I take lightly.

So it's (Subjectively) stressful and expensive, _and _causes unnecessary pollution, noise and damage, and uses finite resources. Oh, and it's dangerous.


----------



## Dogtrousers (30 Aug 2022)

Andy in Germany said:


> So it's (_*Subjectively*_) stressful and expensive, _and _causes unnecessary pollution, noise and damage, and uses finite resources. Oh, and it's dangerous.


I'll grudgingly accept that it is subjective, with the caveat that my subjective view is right, and other people's* aren't. 

* weirdos


----------



## shep (30 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> remains firmly in the "weird" category I'm afraid. Along with recreational hoovering.



You're clearly just being a **** now but that's OK.


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Aug 2022)

figbat said:


> I love driving. Not just fast, but _well_. I used to relish the regular IAM driving assessments that we used to have to have at work if driving on business and I used to get good marks too. I love the challenge of driving well, of anticipating, of reading the road, of picking the best lines, of keeping stress out of it and simply passing through other people's lives with minimal impact. I love driving a favourite road when it's quiet and dry, I love towing a caravan, I love making best progress through a town or city by reading the road, reading other drivers' behaviours, anticipating traffic lights, picking the best lane to be in. I love coaxing the best out of a vehicle, be it best performance for the situation, best efficiency, best comfort. I used to go 'out for a drive' all the time as a younger person, just to be immersed in the thing I loved doing and was increasingly good at.
> 
> Now I don't drive just for fun, but I still make sure to enjoy the driving I have to do and will sometimes choose a route based on the fun and pleasure it will give me rather than the time or distance it covers. I also ride a motorbike now and almost all of my miles on that are recreational.


^^This^^

And if you're worried about climate change start campaigning for people to have fewer children. If the birth rate continues to rise as it has during my time on the planet we're on course for a world population of 20 billion by the end of this century, many times more that the planet can sustain no matter how green we become.


----------



## matticus (31 Aug 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> And if you're worried about climate change start campaigning for people to have fewer children. If the birth rate continues to rise as it has during my time on the planet we're on course for a world population of 20 billion by the end of this century, many times more that the planet can sustain no matter how green we become.


If those of us already on the planet all tried to look after each-other (and the eco-sphere as a whole), we wouldn't have half the mess we are currently in.

Why not tackle that AS WELL AS population control?

(Surely you're not using future population growth as an excuse for the damage you're doing _now_. Surely ... )


----------



## Dogtrousers (31 Aug 2022)

matticus said:


> If those of us already on the planet all tried to look after each-other (and the eco-sphere as a whole), we wouldn't have half the mess we are currently in.
> 
> *Why not tackle that AS WELL AS population control?*
> 
> (Surely you're not using future population growth as an excuse for the damage you're doing _now_. Surely ... )


Quite. There was a thread on Twitter recently about the carbon footprint of Grand Tours (Helicopters, swarms of camper vans and so on). Among the responses: _"Yeah, but what about Formula One eh?"_ 

If it's not the population it's the Chinese, or the Americans, or the Welsh ...

(OK I made that up. I don't think many people are blaming the Welsh specifically for climate change)


----------



## Oldhippy (31 Aug 2022)

The reality sadly is that until most people are standing knee deep in water or some other catastrophic event standing there going 'How did this happen! I use a bag for life.' Nothing will change and it will be someone else's problem.


----------



## icowden (31 Aug 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Bigger unit size equals more profit for manufacturers and people tend to buy what they are offered.


I'm not convinced. Safety regulations have changed a lot since the 1960s. IIRC one of the key things that has made modern cars much bigger are the requirements for side impact protection, airbags etc. In the 70s there was a 55% chance of a fatality in a crash. That's now down to 26%. 

Example- a 1970s Mini in a crash at 70mph, its unlikely that anyone is getting out alive. A 2020 Mini in a crash at 70mph, you stand a good chance. The 1970s mini will look less damaged but with no crumple zones, airbags etc...


----------



## Andy in Germany (31 Aug 2022)

matticus said:


> If those of us already on the planet all tried to look after each-other (and the eco-sphere as a whole), we wouldn't have half the mess we are currently in.
> 
> Why not tackle that AS WELL AS population control?
> 
> (Surely you're not using future population growth as an excuse for the damage you're doing _now_. Surely ... )



Climate Change isn't the only reason to avoid unnecessary car journeys; if anything it's the cherry on the cake.

There's the finite nature of oil and the localised damage done by motor vehicles to infrastructure and buildings, the way roads can cut communities in half and the danger to public health; if you plot the childhood Asthma cases in Stuttgart they cluster along the main roads through the city. 

I've had to call an ambulance for my 6 month old baby because they couldn't breathe due to vehicular air pollution and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.


----------



## tyred (31 Aug 2022)

A 1970s Mini still offers more crash protection than my Raleigh. 

Is it right that drivers can consume even more of the world's resources and take up more road space than necessary as well as causing more harm to other road users by driving around in a two-ton personal safety capsule rather than take responsibility and slow down, pay attention and show consideration? 

Think how fuel efficient modern cars could be if they were still the size and weight of the original Mini.


----------



## matticus (31 Aug 2022)

icowden said:


> SpokeyDokey said:
> 
> 
> > Bigger unit size equals more profit for manufacturers and people tend to buy what they are offered.
> ...


Yes, of course crash safety has increased: but the size increase of your 2020 Mini goes nowhere near justifying the sizes of many SUVs.

As you well know, a modern Mini can often look overwhelmed by its neighbours on many high streets (especially more affluent ones)


----------



## Dogtrousers (31 Aug 2022)

The size of a modern Mini isn't _all _down to safety features. Some of it is design choice as well. That's why its far from the smallest car on the road, which the original Mini may well have been in its day (bubble car oddities aside)


----------



## Smokin Joe (31 Aug 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> The size of a modern Mini isn't _all _down to safety features. Some of it is design choice as well. That's why its far from the smallest car on the road, which the original Mini may well have been in its day (bubble car oddities aside)



A lot of it is also down to the various developments which have increased performance, fuel efficiency and emissions. Look under the bonnet of a car from the sixties or seventies and you could fit a pool table beside the engine. Now you have a job getting your hand in even far enough to change a light bulb.

And don't forget, 62% of the population are overweight with 25% classed as obese. That was far from the case fifty or sixty years ago when the average Joe could fit into a mini or an Imp and get out again without needing medical treatment.


----------



## Andy in Germany (1 Sep 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> the various developments which have increased performance, fuel efficiency and emissions.



And still we have children being rushed into hospital with breathing difficulties due to vehicular air pollution.


----------



## PaulSB (1 Sep 2022)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Bigger unit size equals more profit for manufacturers and people tend to buy what they are offered.
> 
> Big SUV's are absurd conveyances imo, ditto very high performance cars.
> 
> ...



I was astonished to be passed by someone driving a Tesla at 100+ mph on the M65. I had never imagined a Tesla could go that fast or that someone with an interest in being green would behave this way.

At least I can add Tesla to BMW, Audi and Mercedes as cars driven by dickheads.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (1 Sep 2022)

icowden said:


> I'm not convinced. Safety regulations have changed a lot since the 1960s. IIRC one of the key things that has made modern cars much bigger are the requirements for side impact protection, airbags etc. In the 70s there was a 55% chance of a fatality in a crash. That's now down to 26%.
> 
> Example- a 1970s Mini in a crash at 70mph, its unlikely that anyone is getting out alive. A 2020 Mini in a crash at 70mph, you stand a good chance. The 1970s mini will look less damaged but with no crumple zones, airbags etc...



A smart car meets modern safety standards. Let’s not say the size of modern cars is to do with safety.


----------



## tyred (1 Sep 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I was astonished to be passed by someone driving a Tesla at 100+ mph on the M65. I had never imagined a Tesla could go that fast or that someone with an interest in being green would behave this way.
> 
> At least I can add Tesla to BMW, Audi and Mercedes as cars driven by dickheads.



I have yet to see a responsibly driven Tesla.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (1 Sep 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I was astonished to be passed by someone driving a Tesla at 100+ mph on the M65. I had never imagined a Tesla could go that fast or that someone with an interest in being green would behave this way.
> 
> At least I can add Tesla to BMW, Audi and Mercedes as cars driven by dickheads.



Teslas are bought as a status symbol. Using something that large and heavy to move a single person round is hardly green.


----------



## Alex321 (1 Sep 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Teslas are bought as a status symbol.


True


Ming the Merciless said:


> Using something that large and heavy to move a single person round is hardly green.


True but still greener than buying a 2nd car (electric or otherwise) for the times you don't need one that size.


----------



## Alex321 (1 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> I have yet to see a responsibly driven Tesla.



There are plenty in South Wales. I haven't seen one being driven in a particularly dickehead way that I can recall, though I'm sure it happens.


----------



## Jody (1 Sep 2022)

PaulSB said:


> I was astonished to be passed by someone driving a Tesla at 100+ mph on the M65. I had never imagined a Tesla could go that fast or that someone with an interest in being green would behave this way.
> 
> At least I can add Tesla to BMW, Audi and Mercedes as cars driven by dickheads.



I've noticed more Tesla's being driven hard. 

It was always going to happen when you have a car that can potentially do 0-60 in under 2 seconds. Even the slow models can accelerate at the equivalent rate to an Escort Cossie with a similar top speed.


----------



## Dogtrousers (1 Sep 2022)

PaulSB said:


> At least I can add Tesla to BMW, Audi and Mercedes as cars driven by dickheads.


This is something I've never quite understood - the idea that drivers of different makes of car are different.
It might be because I'm rubbish at recognising what brand a car is so I don't make the connection. Or it might be because it's cobblers.


----------



## icowden (1 Sep 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> A smart car meets modern safety standards. Let’s not say the size of modern cars is to do with safety.



But relative to the passengers, a Smart car is still significantly bigger than a 1970s Mini. So part of the size is to do with safety. You can't have those thin, light doors, you have to have side impact protection. You have to have compartments for air bags in various places etc. 






In fact by the time you have added crumple zones, side impact protection, roll bar, and air bags, I reckon that 1970s mini would be about the size of a Smart Car...


----------



## matticus (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> This is something I've never quite understood - the idea that drivers of different makes of car are different.



There HAS to be some correlation. Not everyone can afford the top-end cars, for example. Some cars are better suited to families. etc ...
Plus certain brands/models will be more common in fleets. Then there are fashions (drug dealers in certain postcodes DO prefer certain models! )

Sure, you can always say that there are exceptions, but _statistically _certain trends will exist, whether you like them or not.
How much that leads into personality types, well that gets trickier, but people will always see patterns, no matter how tenuous ...


----------



## Dogtrousers (1 Sep 2022)

icowden said:


> But relative to the passengers, a Smart car is still significantly bigger than a 1970s Mini. So part of the size is to do with safety. You can't have those thin, light doors, you have to have side impact protection. You have to have compartments for air bags in various places etc.
> 
> View attachment 659583
> 
> In fact by the time you have added crumple zones, side impact protection, roll bar, and air bags, I reckon that 1970s mini would be about the size of a Smart Car...



But not _*all*_ of it s to do with safety.

The Mini was the smallest car on the road when released in the 60s, bar oddities like bubble cars or motorbikes and sidecars.
The new Mini is by far from the smallest car on the road now. My car (Hyundai i10) is smaller than a modern mini. Yes, it's still a lot bigger than a '60s death trap Mini but much of the size of a modern mini is down to design choices not safety regs.


----------



## icowden (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> But not _*all*_ of it s to do with safety.


True. I did do some googling. Apparently some of the size is to try and break into the US market, and the mini is seen as just being too small for them. Add to that the need to move to an electric platform, and the current vogue for cross manufacturer sharing of the actual electric platform, and again you are limited by the minimum size of the drive train.


----------



## Jody (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> This is something I've never quite understood - the idea that drivers of different makes of car are different.
> It might be because I'm rubbish at recognising what brand a car is so I don't make the connection. Or it might be because it's cobblers.



It's not cobblers. 25 years in the car trade and I'd say stereotypes generally hold true.


----------



## icowden (1 Sep 2022)

Jody said:


> It's not cobblers. 25 years in the car trade and I'd say stereotypes generally hold true.


Based on my experience of going around showrooms, I'd say that some of it comes from there.
I was going round showrooms to decide which company car to get. I made clear at the outset that I couldn't buy from the showroom but only from via the company car fleet provider. 

I found VW to be friendly, engaging and interested in showing me vehicles regardless of whether they thought they were going to make a sale.
I found Audi to be standoffish and arrogant, kept me waiting for ages, then not interested in showing me anything at all once they knew no sale was in the offing, keen to make out that they have hundreds of different models etc.
Mercedes were better than Audi but no-where near VW. Mercedes world again kept me waiting a long time without any acknowledgement and weren't very interested in showing me their cars.
Skoda were OK, but confusing - they have a version of the Enyak that you can't actually buy.

I think most of the mid range manufacturers are just keen for you to look at their cars and like them. I've found Renault to be friendly in the past. For Merc and Audi particularly, if there isn't a sniff of a sale and you don't look like the "right" sort of person, don't come in and go "i want that one", they are not interested.


----------



## Dogtrousers (1 Sep 2022)

Jody said:


> It's not cobblers. 25 years in the car trade and I'd say stereotypes generally hold true.



Must just be down to the fact that I can't tell once make of car from another then. 

IME All makes of car are driven by knobheads. But I'd add to that the fact that all pedestrians and cyclists are knobheads too.


----------



## winjim (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> This is something I've never quite understood - the idea that drivers of different makes of car are different.
> It might be because I'm rubbish at recognising what brand a car is so I don't make the connection. Or it might be because it's cobblers.



I think that if you're the type of person who buys a car as a status symbol then you're likely to be the type of person who feels a sense of entitlement when driving it and a sense of privilege which means you perceive your driving skills to be above average and therefore you can ignore the rules as you see fit.


----------



## Alex321 (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> This is something I've never quite understood - the idea that drivers of different makes of car are different.
> It might be because I'm rubbish at recognising what brand a car is so I don't make the connection. Or it might be because it's cobblers.



There is an element of truth to it.

There are certain cars which are bought (or taken as company cars) much more as status symbols than for their inherent quality, and the type pf people who are concerned about that status also have a tendency to be inconsiderate in other ways such as their driving - they feel the need to show off their fancy status symbol by acting as if they own the road.

Of course, there are plenty of exceptions to this, both in people buying those cars for other reasons, and in people buying them as a status symbol but not trying to show them off in that way. But there are enough who do so to give that reputation.


----------



## Alex321 (1 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> But not _*all*_ of it s to do with safety.
> 
> The Mini was the smallest car on the road when released in the 60s, bar oddities like bubble cars or motorbikes and sidecars.
> The new Mini is by far from the smallest car on the road now. My car (Hyundai i10) is smaller than a modern mini. Yes, it's still a lot bigger than a '60s death trap Mini but much of the size of a modern mini is down to design choices not safety regs.


Of course it is not all down to safety. But safety is one of the factors involved in average car sizes being bigger.


----------



## Joffey (2 Sep 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Still does kinda come back to my opening post, which is, when faced with roads full of stressed and impatient idiots like me, why put yourself in a position of danger unnecessarily? Why ride a dangerous route at the most inappropriate time when a safe cycle route is available?



Jumping in here, read a few pages, don't need to read anymore. You have summed it up in this one post above. 

You were annoyed with the cyclists, you are stressed and you were impatient. 

The cyclists have the right to be there, just like you. No one got hurt but if they did you are already victim blaming. You should drive in a fashion as to not run the cyclists over - so give them room, leave gaps, check your mirrors, go slowly etc etc.

If you are driving a two ton metal box you should try and relax and be patient. You of all people being a runner, cyclist and motorcyclist should appreciate this more than anyone.

So yes, it is you. 

I'm a cyclist, walker, driver and white van man. I can find time to be patient to cyclists - surely a teacher can


----------



## Toshiba Boy (3 Sep 2022)

Smokin Joe said:


> ^^This^^
> 
> And if you're worried about climate change start campaigning for people to have fewer children. If the birth rate continues to rise as it has during my time on the planet we're on course for a world population of 20 billion by the end of this century, many times more that the planet can sustain no matter how green we become.



Whilst fully understanding the stress on the planet from ever increasing human population, UN forecasts (taking large shovel of salt re lies, damned lies and statistics, let alone forecasts) shows world population at c11 billion at 2100 compared to c8 billion today, yes 3 billion more people than now, but a far lower growth rate than over the past 70 years, and a lot lower (thankfully) than 20 billion.

Fertility rates falling across large parts of the world (already happening in Europe and Japan, with falling populations happening/forecast), and even a levelling out in Asia over this forecast timeframe, with particular fall in Chinese population, with Asia currently being by far the largest continent in terms of population. The only outlier and, unfortunately, a very strong one, is an extremely large continued growth rate forecast in sub Saharan Africa. 

So yes, that's still 3 billion more people in 80 odd years time, so, IMHO, we'd all better try and do our best to lower our impact on the planet now, as I can't see how I can personally affect the sub Saharan exisiting and accelerating population growth rate.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Sep 2022)

icowden said:


> But relative to the passengers, a Smart car is still significantly bigger than a 1970s Mini. So part of the size is to do with safety. You can't have those thin, light doors, you have to have side impact protection. You have to have compartments for air bags in various places etc.
> 
> View attachment 659583
> 
> In fact by the time you have added crumple zones, side impact protection, roll bar, and air bags, I reckon that 1970s mini would be about the size of a Smart Car...



So why why why is is much much bigger?


----------



## Andy in Germany (6 Sep 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> So why why why is is much much bigger?



Possibly because it's German. German cars are primarily built for the German market, and as is well known many German Autobahns have no speed limit, so cars tend to be built big and with lots of crumple zones because there's a sort of religious belief that if you have a solid car then even if you have a high speed crash you'll be fine.

The 12 deaths per day in Germany due to motor vehicles gives the lie to this, but that seems to get ignored.

The result is that when BMW got hold of the mini they had to build it like it was on steroids because they knew people would assume they could safely drive at over 200km/h in it, and Smart makes a great deal of the "safety cage" and other things in their cars, because you can't suggest people just drive a bit more responsibly, my goodness no.

The other side effect is that when you get a German car built to race down autobahns and drive it in a British high street it's somewhat out of scale.


----------



## icowden (6 Sep 2022)

Andy in Germany said:


> Possibly because it's German. German cars are primarily built for the German market, and as is well known many German Autobahns have no speed limit, so cars tend to be built big and with lots of crumple zones because there's a sort of religious belief that if you have a solid car then even if you have a high speed crash you'll be fine.


I did find an article which suggested that they wanted to market it to the USA and felt that it needed to be large enough to appeal to Americans.


----------



## youngoldbloke (6 Sep 2022)

- don't you you mean 'large enough to FIT Americans'


----------



## jowwy (7 Sep 2022)

Theres some weird people in this thread, that think other people are weird, for doing something they enjoy.....weird


----------



## Ming the Merciless (7 Sep 2022)

youngoldbloke said:


> - don't you you mean 'large enough to FIT Americans'



Large enough to FAT Americans ?


----------



## youngoldbloke (7 Sep 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Large enough to FAT Americans ?



exactly


----------



## tyred (7 Sep 2022)

youngoldbloke said:


> - don't you you mean 'large enough to FIT Americans'



It's not very big on the inside though. 

The original Mini was a masterclass in space efficiency. The modern Mini is a masterclass in space inefficiency.


----------



## Andy in Germany (7 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> It's not very big on the inside though.
> 
> The original Mini was a masterclass in space efficiency. The modern Mini is a masterclass in space inefficiency.



And Irony.


----------



## tyred (7 Sep 2022)

A Mini is all right but personally I'm waiting for the new Morris Marina to be launched. I'm sure it would sell well.


----------



## Sharky (7 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> Morris Marina to be launched


Did you mean the Morris Minor? That would be popular.


----------



## tyred (7 Sep 2022)

Sharky said:


> Did you mean the Morris Minor? That would be popular.



Yes, I was going to say Minor originally but changed it to Marina for a joke.


----------



## kingrollo (7 Sep 2022)

Specialeyes said:


> I don't usually dive in to these sorts of threads, but on this one I'll bite, so here goes.
> 
> _...why would a cycle club decide to ride out of a very busy beach resort up a really steep and winding A road at lunchtime on a Saturday in August_
> Because it's not a Motorway so they're allowed to ride there?
> ...



People think I'm bonkers for cycling to work here in the west midlands. But actually there is so much traffic it's never going quicker than 11mph ! So if anything does hit you it's likely to be low impact.

Furthermore stats suggest the quiet rural roads are more dangerous for cyclist - as in general you have less traffic but traveling at high speeds.

What looks more dangerous - sometimes isn't.


----------



## kingrollo (7 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> It's not very big on the inside though.
> 
> The original Mini was a masterclass in space efficiency. The modern Mini is a masterclass in space inefficiency.



It's also not "mini" any more. Wonder if BMW own the naming rights to that other British Leyland stalwart..."maxi"


----------



## Dogtrousers (7 Sep 2022)

The new Austin Maxi. Rebirth of a classic.


----------



## the_mikey (7 Sep 2022)

stuckinthemud said:


> Clearly my underlying stress levels are still very high after an interesting teaching year and coming from an environment where all trips are highly risk assessed has made me hyper sensitive. Thing is, the Mountain near me has had 6 cycle/vehicle coming togethers that have been fatal or very near fatal in the last few years so riders cycling with complete disregard to their personal safety when there is a dedicated cycle route available is something I find irksome. Undertaking, riding in a driver blind spot while going uphill on a narrow busy road? Love to see that one being justifiable. You wanna overtake them then over take, do it properly. I worked in industry a long time and when I broke health and safety rules I was (correctly) reprimanded, the HSO always said 2 things, the health you protect is your own, and, if you’re dead, other people will have to clean up your mess.



Emotional reasoning, if you feel something is the truth you then believe that what you feel is the objective truth, however in the real world you can't police what other people think and feel, even if you feel it's dangerous and irresponsible to ride a bike in that location at that time of day, it won't necessarily be a feature in other peoples reasoning when they make decisions, it might be dangerous, it might not, but you cannot take those decisions away from the people making them.

Emotional reasoning often feeds anxiety, which drives more emotional reasoning, and perhaps if it's persistently preventing you from doing things you might enjoy (such as a Saturday bike ride with the club to the beach) it could be considered a problem.

*I am not a doctor


----------



## tyred (7 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> The new Austin Maxi. Rebirth of a classic.



If you increase the size of a Maxi by a similar percentage as they increased the size of the Mini it would probably end up something like an Audi Q7.

And have less interior space than the original Maxi!


----------



## Andy in Germany (8 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> If you increase the size of a Maxi by a similar percentage as they increased the size of the Mini it would probably end up something like an Audi Q7.
> 
> And have less interior space than the original Maxi!



On the other hand, it would work.


----------



## Dogtrousers (8 Sep 2022)

When I was a kid there was a lady who lived opposite us who drove a Maxi. Their house had a low wall around the garden with a small dumpy brick gatepost sort of thing which she repeatedly demolished with her Maxi. So they were pretty tough.


----------



## tyred (8 Sep 2022)

The Maxi was a great design badly executed IMO. It was years ahead of it's time. Front wheel drive with and end-on gearbox with cable gear change, hatchback design with great use of interior space. It also had independent suspension while Ford were building their cars with cart springs.


----------



## Sharky (8 Sep 2022)

I have fond memories of A40's. My dad had one and we drove one when first married. Must have been one of the first hatchbacks. We'll ahead of its time. 

And I'm sure it had more storage space than the Suzuki s-cross we have now. But nothing beats our old Peugeot 505 Family Estate with 3 rows of seats. Now sadly in car heaven.


----------



## Juan Kog (8 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> The Maxi was a great design badly executed IMO. It was years ahead of it's time. Front wheel drive with and end-on gearbox with cable gear change, hatchback design with great use of interior space. It also had independent suspension while Ford were building their cars with cart springs.


Never owned one, but for a lanky person like me the knee space in the back was great . The 1750 version had a surprising turn of speed and I think a 5 speed gearbox.


----------



## simongt (8 Sep 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> with the caveat that my subjective view is right, and other people's* aren't.


As the GLW says, I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong - !


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Sep 2022)

Sharky said:


> I have fond memories of A40's. My dad had one and we drove one when first married. Must have been one of the first hatchbacks. We'll ahead of its time.
> 
> And I'm sure it had more storage space than the Suzuki s-cross we have now. But nothing beats our old Peugeot 505 Family Estate with 3 rows of seats. Now sadly in car heaven.



My father had one.

I remember sitting on the flip down bit of the 'hatch' munching sandwiches by the side of the A2 on the way to Broadstairs back in the 60's.

That was a rare and big day out and eating on the verge of an A road was common - oh how times have changed.


----------



## Mr Celine (8 Sep 2022)

tyred said:


> The Maxi was a great design badly executed IMO. It was years ahead of it's time. Front wheel drive with and end-on gearbox with cable gear change, hatchback design with great use of interior space. It also had independent suspension while Ford were building their cars with cart springs.



The gearbox was in the sump. The Maxi Mrs Celine had used the 'improved' rod operated gearbox, with the choice of 5 speeds randomly selected using the porridge spirtle. Three of those gears still had synchromesh. The iron filings generated by the frequent grinding of gears end up in the engine oil, though it was continually being replaced as it burnt a litre of oil every 250 miles.


----------



## Slick (8 Sep 2022)

Mr Celine said:


> The gearbox was in the sump. The Maxi Mrs Celine had used the 'improved' rod operated gearbox, with the choice of 5 speeds randomly selected using the porridge spirtle. Three of those gears still had synchromesh. The iron filings generated by the frequent grinding of gears end up in the engine oil, though it was continually being replaced as it burnt a litre of oil every 250 miles.



Shouldn't have been too much of an issue as my dad emptied the sump out every other week if he went near a farm road. I think the sump put the Maxi in the same category as a formula 1 car in terms of ground clearance.


----------



## simongt (12 Sep 2022)

And let's not forget the Austin 2200, basically a super Maxi and often fondly referred to as 'the shed'; maybe something to do with it's size and internal capacity - ?


----------



## youngoldbloke (12 Sep 2022)

simongt said:


> And let's not forget the Austin 2200, basically a super Maxi and often fondly referred to as 'the shed'; maybe something to do with it's size and internal capacity - ?



We should learn from our mistakes, not repeat them.


----------



## Slick (12 Sep 2022)

simongt said:


> And let's not forget the Austin 2200, basically a super Maxi and often fondly referred to as 'the shed'; maybe something to do with it's size and internal capacity - ?


I always thought it was because it took as much knotted wood to build than an 8 X 4 shed.


----------

