Read things properly, there's a good fellow. What I said I'd had enough of was not other road users but deliberate intimidation by those who regarded me as an inconvenience that should get out of the way. And their online equivalents.
Doubling Up On Road
- Thread starter DonnyDarko
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Read things properly, there's a good fellow. What I said I'd had enough of was not other road users but deliberate intimidation by those who regarded me as an inconvenience that should get out of the way. And their online equivalents.
MissTillyFlop
Evil communist dictator, lover of gerbils & Pope.
Thats good, where are the concessions of the motorist when considering the right of cyclists to be on the road two abreast? It's not a real problem. It's a perceived inconvenience on the part of the motorist. Given that cyclists should be given a safe amount of distance when passed, it makes little or no difference whether a group is 1 or 2 deep.
freecyclist
New Member
I suspect that the intimidation that you say you experience might reflet your riding style.
My experience is that motorists are pretty sensible and can generally tell when cyclists are legitimately cycling 2 abreast or in primary and are happy with that but likewise can tell when cyclists are being inconsiderate and selfish.
You might like to reappraise your riding style if you are getting intimidated alot , for your own safety if nothing else.
freecyclist
New Member
Are you saying that motorists should treat all cyclists like cars and only overtake when they can do so 100% in the other lane (aka car overtake).
I can see the theoretical validity but really ? in real life ?
And if that were to be the case cyclists would be even more unpopular - i know - we dont care how poular we are - its not a popularity contest. I know.
400bhp
Guru
grrrr
freecyclist
New Member
[QUOTE 1588397"]
I've explained it clearly.
Whether there are 6 or 12 bikes in a group makes very little physical difference on a road.
Whether you are passing 2 bikes abreast or a lone cyclist you should give them the same width as you pass. It's easier to pass 2 abreast as you should than two in line as you should.
Those facts considered, it can only be the attitude of the riled road user that is the problem. I would suggest some internal analysis of why you are annoyed at only one of two almost identical sets of circumstances.
How does it need to change? Get over it and let it go. You'll be a lot happier.
[/quote]
So are you saying that motorists should only overtake a solo cyclist or group of single file riders cycling in secondary by moving totally into the other lane ? Like they would if overtaking a car.
SAorry just seen your reply above !!!!
I've explained it clearly.
Whether there are 6 or 12 bikes in a group makes very little physical difference on a road.
Whether you are passing 2 bikes abreast or a lone cyclist you should give them the same width as you pass. It's easier to pass 2 abreast as you should than two in line as you should.
Those facts considered, it can only be the attitude of the riled road user that is the problem. I would suggest some internal analysis of why you are annoyed at only one of two almost identical sets of circumstances.
How does it need to change? Get over it and let it go. You'll be a lot happier.
[/quote]
So are you saying that motorists should only overtake a solo cyclist or group of single file riders cycling in secondary by moving totally into the other lane ? Like they would if overtaking a car.
SAorry just seen your reply above !!!!
MissTillyFlop
Evil communist dictator, lover of gerbils & Pope.
Well that's what the highway code asks drivers to do.
Mad at urage
New Member
- Location
- Just N of Cardiff
[QUOTE 1588403"]
Yes. It's only safe enough to poke 12" of your car into the offside/opposing lane if it's safe enough to move lanes completely.
If you can't pass a bike in the same lane without giving them at least the "width of a car" space then you shouldn't be overtaking. Unless you're in a country lane and travelling at an appropriate speed.
According to the book that you should have read when you learned to drive.
[/quote]
Ahh, but that's not "real life" is it
Yes. It's only safe enough to poke 12" of your car into the offside/opposing lane if it's safe enough to move lanes completely.
If you can't pass a bike in the same lane without giving them at least the "width of a car" space then you shouldn't be overtaking. Unless you're in a country lane and travelling at an appropriate speed.
According to the book that you should have read when you learned to drive.
[/quote]
Ahh, but that's not "real life" is it
Have you actually ridden?
You can ride in the approved (CycleCraft) manner and be treated with complete courtesy and care by some motorists and be treated with disdain, abused and dangerously by others who think they are (wrongly) right.
99% of motorists are unaware of why experienced cyclists are taking a particular line in the interests of his/her safety and the driver's paintwork. Some will trust the cyclist, others will abuse the cyclist. Abuse is just something you have to live with. Explaining things to them/you is just a waste of time.
IMHO abuse is never justified no matter what your perceived view of the other road user - but that's another discussion.
those of us who have admired TC's riding style, which is practiced, purposeful and a vivid testament to virtues of nature's economy, will make our own minds up on that one........
freecyclist
New Member
[QUOTE 1588402"]
IRONY ALERT
Bloke admitting to getting wound up by a group of 12 cyclists, but not wound up by 6, accuses other road user of having wrong attitude.
[/quote]
Wrong.
I have not admitted getting wound up by any groups of cyclists - i have just questioned the wisdom of cycling in large groups and that seems to have ruffled a few feathers.
Im not sure who you mean when you say "accuses other road user of having wrong attitude."
Do you mean clauds attitude might be in some way causing the intimidation ? or what ?
IRONY ALERT
Bloke admitting to getting wound up by a group of 12 cyclists, but not wound up by 6, accuses other road user of having wrong attitude.
[/quote]
Wrong.
I have not admitted getting wound up by any groups of cyclists - i have just questioned the wisdom of cycling in large groups and that seems to have ruffled a few feathers.
Im not sure who you mean when you say "accuses other road user of having wrong attitude."
Do you mean clauds attitude might be in some way causing the intimidation ? or what ?
freecyclist
New Member
[QUOTE 1588403"]
Yes. It's only safe enough to poke 12" of your car into the offside/opposing lane if it's safe enough to move lanes completely.
If you can't pass a bike in the same lane without giving them at least the "width of a car" space then you shouldn't be overtaking. Unless you're in a country lane and travelling at an appropriate speed.
According to the book that you should have read when you learned to drive.
[/quote]
What about when part of the opposite lane is taken up with parked cars or other obstacles ?
Yes. It's only safe enough to poke 12" of your car into the offside/opposing lane if it's safe enough to move lanes completely.
If you can't pass a bike in the same lane without giving them at least the "width of a car" space then you shouldn't be overtaking. Unless you're in a country lane and travelling at an appropriate speed.
According to the book that you should have read when you learned to drive.
[/quote]
What about when part of the opposite lane is taken up with parked cars or other obstacles ?
If the other lane is blocked then it's unsafe to pass. This is where it become the cyclists decision to slow and allow other road users through if they deem is safe enough to do so.
- Status
