Best position to overtake cyclists on a dual carriageway.

[Cycleops]

This is another one from Ashley Neal who posts on YouTube as an advocate of road safety. You might recall I posted another of his on getting ‘left hooked’ a few days ago. He makes some good points.

View: https://youtu.be/9HckuL116g4

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I haven’t watched the video but my answer is use the next lane, do not straddle. This does two things, gives the cyclist plenty of space and gives following drivers a clear view of the cyclist so they too can pass safe and wide.

The lane is occupied, so use the next one.

(Edit to add: I have now watched the video and it hasn’t changed my mind.)

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

The speed difference on a DC would warrant a complete lane change imo.

 

[mjr]

Nope. Disagree. It doesn't "encourage" people to overtake on the left. Daffodil drivers like that shouldn't be on the road anyway and good drivers still shouldn't close-pass cyclists in-lane to enable them.

 

[winjim]

Interesting that he seems to be advocating the straddle position for similar reasons that we as cyclists would take a primary position. That is, essentially blocking both lanes and preventing dangerous overtakes from impatient drivers behind.

He does keep using the word 'undertake' though which makes my brain itch.

 

[mickle]

If you have a black BMW SUV on your arse it might be better to straddle the lane to prevent him from undertaking at great speed and taking out the cyclist. (Ask me how I know)

 

[BoldonLad]

Haven’t watched the video yet, but, will do.
Initial thought is that driver should “move over” to give cyclist AT LEAST 1.5m clearance. The greater the speed differential, the greater the clearance which should be given.

interesting that many (including me), commenting are most likely cyclists AND drivers.

Edit: ok, have watched video, hasn’t changed my view on the subject. One point, on next clip which comes up, of learner driver, overtake on zig-zags!

 

[Arrowfoot]

The straddle does protect the cyclist in case the vehicle behind has not seen the cyclist. It also stops an impatient motorist attempting to squeeze between the cyclist and the vehicle that might have moved to lane 2.

As long as the clearance is 1.5m, that should be fine.

 

[Milkfloat]

He mentions it briefly but maybe could have laboured the point a bit better, if the road is pretty empty then as the driver, use the whole of lane 2. I think he could have gone into more detail, a decent driver would use their mirrors a lot and would be able to look at the speed differential between themselves and the car behind, if the difference is small then lane 2 might also be the better option as there is no chance of an undertake.
However, having said that, if the cyclist had taken a strong primary all the cars would be forced into lane 2 fully.

 

[MichaelW2]

I am always more worried about the 2nd car behind. 2nd trailing cars dont always assess the situation for themselves, they get triggered to overtake by the 1st car overtaking.
If I am approaching a constriction such as bollards, I am always looking to stop 2nd car overtaking in the constriction.
I havent experienced this particular flavour of dick head driving. For those who havent watched, the 2nd trailing car is triggered to overtake cyclist in lane 1 as truck driver moved way out into lane 2.

 

[Sea of vapours]

As long as the clearance is 1.5m, that should be fine.

What he doesn't mention, unless I missed it, is the absolute speed on the dual carriageway (or other road with more than one lane in each direction. 1.5m is fine for a cyclist at moderate speed and a car up to 30mph in an urban situation, arguably, but it certainly isn't on a national speed limit dual carriageway. i.e. 70mph. At least, as the cyclist, I'd not be happy at all !

As to the main point about straddling, it really is highly context sensitive, a key part of that context being the behaviour, and thus likely behaviour, of cars behind you (as the car driver). I nearly always pass cyclists fully in the second lane on multi-lane roads, but if there are other vehicles behind me then I do actively consider the straddle option, or other options, including slowing right down to properly alert following vehicles to a person on a bike, depending on how alert the following drivers seem to be.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I have had drivers use the straddle option (not as a conscious decision, more like laziness) to pass me on a DC. The problem is that with a stream of following vehicles, each driver is less aware of the reason that the lead car has deviated and the subsequent levels of deviation decrease until some twat almost rear-ends you.

I will pull out to pass such a cyclist, not too early and not too late, and just before I pass him I’ll stick my left indicator on again to pull back in. If it’s a particularly busy road where I know drivers go way too fast, I’ll happily delay my overtake, matching the rider’s speed until everyone in lane 1 has slowed right down and then I’ll pass in lane two.

 

[Arrowfoot]

What he doesn't mention, unless I missed it, is the absolute speed on the dual carriageway (or other road with more than one lane in each direction. 1.5m is fine for a cyclist at moderate speed and a car up to 30mph in an urban situation, arguably, but it certainly isn't on a national speed limit dual carriageway. i.e. 70mph. At least, as the cyclist, I'd not be happy at all !

As to the main point about straddling, it really is highly context sensitive, a key part of that context being the behaviour, and thus likely behaviour, of cars behind you (as the car driver). I nearly always pass cyclists fully in the second lane on multi-lane roads, but if there are other vehicles behind me then I do actively consider the straddle option, or other options, including slowing right down to properly alert following vehicles to a person on a bike, depending on how alert the following drivers seem to be.

Agree, speed is an important factor. At higher speed, 1.5m would not be sufficient. Probably scare the daylight out of me.

 

[Drago]

Haven’t watched the video yet, but, will do.
Initial thought is that driver should “move over” to give cyclist AT LEAST 1.5m clearance. The greater the speed differential, the greater the clearance which should be given.

interesting that many (including me), commenting are most likely cyclists AND drivers.

Edit: ok, have watched video, hasn’t changed my view on the subject. One point, on next clip which comes up, of learner driver, overtake on zig-zags!

1.5 metre in 30mph or less. Dual carriageways are at least 40mph, and the guidance is 2 metres in higher speed limit zones.

Not that I drive vrry much at all now, but Id go compleyely into lane 2, exaclty as I would were i overtaking anything else. Other advantages then include you being more visible and having a better field of view and arcs of vision.

Dont wait until youre about to go oast before pulling out. It feels very unnatural, but pull across well ahead - this opens up your visibility, gives room to reach an appropriate speed and offers the space and opportunity to safely abort and move back to the left if required. And don't attempt to overtake u tul you are in a position to complete the maneuver in one hit.

Ill stick to my Class 1 training, and not some nodule from Pooptube land.

 

[mickle]

1.5 metre in 30mph or less. Dual carriageways are at least 40mph, and the guidance is 2 metres in higher speed limit zones.

Not that I drive vrry much at all now, but Id go compleyely into lane 2, exaclty as I would were i overtaking anything else. Other advantages then include you being more visible and having a better field of view and arcs of vision.

Dont wait until youre about to go oast before pulling out. It feels very unnatural, but pull across well ahead - this opens up your visibility, gives room to reach an appropriate speed and offers the space and opportunity to safely abort and move back to the left if required. And don't attempt to overtake u tul you are in a position to complete the maneuver in one hit.

Your meds Drago. Take your meds.