Doubling Up On Road

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

adscrim

Veteran
Location
Perth
Are will still able to offer an opinion though ????
If you were cycling down a road with no oncoming traffic.
Due to cars parked partly on the opposite carriageway cars attempting to overtake can only utilise 2/3rds of the opposite lane , therefore they would have to dip into your (the cyclists) lane by 1/3rd to be able to overtake.
I am asking what would you do - ride secondary and allow the cars to overtake.
or
enforce the idea that overtaking is only permissable if cars use 100% of the opposite carriageway by riding primary to prevent overtaking.



How to cycle safely on the road


When you're cycling on busy roads you need to show drivers what you plan to do. Motorists usually travel faster than cyclists and may have less time react to hazards.

Try to anticipate what a driver will do and:

  • ride positively and decisively
  • look and signal before you start, stop or turn
  • ride well clear of the kerb - 1 metre away or in the centre of the left lane
  • make eye contact with drivers to let them know you have seen them
  • acknowledge any courtesy from drivers
  • ride a car-door width away from parked cars
That's the Governments advice
 

freecyclist

New Member
If and when it safe to do so

Yes i agree.
But mrpaul expounds the view that the answer is no .
re - page 15 of this topic and preceeding pages.
"motorists should only overtake a solo cyclist or group of single file riders cycling in secondary by moving totally into the other lane ?"
Hence the discussion.
 

MissTillyFlop

Evil communist dictator, lover of gerbils & Pope.
Yes i agree.
But mrpaul expounds the view that the answer is no .
re - page 15 of this topic and preceeding pages.
"motorists should only overtake a solo cyclist or group of single file riders cycling in secondary by moving totally into the other lane ?"
Hence the discussion.

In that case, can we just accept that he thinks one thing and you think another and end it?
 

freecyclist

New Member
circumstances alter cases. You take in to account the width of the road, forward visibility, speeds, and, critically, on a group ride, the length of the group (the longer the group, the less certain the overtake.)

Some people have pointed to training, and that's not a bad thing, but I reckon this thread has probably achieved something - you'll look at the good practice of other cyclists and appreciate the merits of it.

We all come to this from different perspectives. I'm probably as confident, assertive and patient a cyclist as you'll meet. That's down to fifty years of practice, and close on forty years of assertive riding (it's fair to say I used to crash a lot, but that was mostly about going too fast, which was foolish, and, in any case, is now beyond me).

The love of my life has been cycling for, perhaps, ten years, and has only taken to commuting in the last five or so. She is not at all assertive, and that puts her at greater risk - although that risk is diminished by the huge number of cyclists that use the same roads. When she cycles to work I usually accompany her, and act as a kind of shield - moving right when need be, signalling for two, giving car drivers the hard stare, rapping on doors when they start moving in (a commonplace on Farringdon Road) and that kind of thing. When she cycles on her own I'm like a cat on hot bricks waiting for her.....so I wish she were more like me. I wish, and I mean this sincerely, that you were more like me. You'd be better off.

And that's the thing with this thread. It isn't about us. It's about you. Right now you don't get it. You ascribe 'militancy' to people who are simply doing the sensible thing. If you put that failure of perception aside and read what's written you'll become a better, safer cyclist.
Its about me Ok then can you give me your opinion -
As far as overtaking goes ; cyclists riding solo or group , single file or 2 abreast makes no difference because motorists should always overtake 100% in the opposite lane.
However in the situation we are talking about where due to cars parked partly on the opposite carriageway cars attempting to overtake can only utilise 2/3rds of the opposite lane , therefore they would have to dip into your (the cyclists) lane by 1/3rd to be able to overtake.
So if safe do you ride secondary and allow the cars to overtake
or
enforce the idea that overtaking is only permissable if cars use 100% of the opposite carriageway by riding primary to prevent overtaking.
(just in principal and ignoring all other factors like if there are leaves on the ground , potholes etc)
 

MissTillyFlop

Evil communist dictator, lover of gerbils & Pope.
Its about me Ok then can you give me your opinion -
As far as overtaking goes ; cyclists riding solo or group , single file or 2 abreast makes no difference because motorists should always overtake 100% in the opposite lane.
However in the situation we are talking about where due to cars parked partly on the opposite carriageway cars attempting to overtake can only utilise 2/3rds of the opposite lane , therefore they would have to dip into your (the cyclists) lane by 1/3rd to be able to overtake.
So if safe do you ride secondary and allow the cars to overtake
or
enforce the idea that overtaking is only permissable if cars use 100% of the opposite carriageway by riding primary to prevent overtaking.
(just in principal and ignoring all other factors like if there are leaves on the ground , potholes etc)

Dude, that's the opinion of one person on here. You are free to completely disregard it and make up your own mind on what is safe and considerate to other road users.

But you're not going to change User's mind.

You are old enough to make this call yourself.
 

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
Its about me Ok then can you give me your opinion -
As far as overtaking goes ; cyclists riding solo or group , single file or 2 abreast makes no difference because motorists should always overtake 100% in the opposite lane.
However in the situation we are talking about where due to cars parked partly on the opposite carriageway cars attempting to overtake can only utilise 2/3rds of the opposite lane , therefore they would have to dip into your (the cyclists) lane by 1/3rd to be able to overtake.
So if safe do you ride secondary and allow the cars to overtake
or
enforce the idea that overtaking is only permissable if cars use 100% of the opposite carriageway by riding primary to prevent overtaking.
(just in principal and ignoring all other factors like if there are leaves on the ground , potholes etc)
You've completely missed the point, and given that it's been made before, I reckon you've decided to miss the point. There are no rules. It depends entirely on circumstances. And, to point out the obvious, the number of cyclists does make a difference, because the length of clear road required will increase if the group is long - and even that isn't about numbers, but whether there are breaks in the group, and how spread out they are.

And you ignore road width.

Speaking for myself, I approach this pragmatically. I don't want cars trailing me for miles on end, but I definitely don't want to be squeezed, or to see riders further up the road squeezed. I make a judgement, but (and here's the thing you're missing) I have the experience and the mental strength required to make that judgement. You clearly don't.

And now, I'm afraid, I move on. There's wisdom to be found in this thread - it's up to you to avail yourself of it or not. Good luck.
 

MissTillyFlop

Evil communist dictator, lover of gerbils & Pope.
I thought that about 10 pages earlier.

Me too, but it's like a scab that I can't stop picking at.
 

freecyclist

New Member
[QUOTE 1588685"]
Your answer lies in the Highway Code. You've ignored me when I've told you, so read the book. Or website, it's free.
[/quote]

Ok well you told me that cars should not overtake unless they are able to do so 100% in the other carriageway so presumably this is what the highway code says and presumably you are being evasive about repeating it because it highlights how out of touch the highway code is as most people acknowledge that so long as its safe theres nothing wrong in cars using part of both lanes when overtaking a cyclist riding in secondary .
I think thats about it.
 

freecyclist

New Member
[QUOTE 1588693"]
Read my subsequent post.

Your statement in bold is correct. Neither the HC nor I would disagree with it.

It might help if you read the document which you have a problem with before you start criticising it.
[/quote]

Ok before you confirmed that "motorists should treat all cyclists like cars and only overtake when they can do so 100% in the other lane (aka car overtake)."
Now you are saying its ok for cars to overtake using part both lanes.
Glad ive helped clarify your opinion .
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Hey, Freecyclist, I was wondering when you were going to get around to answering my question about a cyclist moving into primary when approaching a pinch point (whatever form that pinch point takes).

It's at least the 4th time I've asked. I'd hate to come to the conclusion that you're deliberately avoiding answering.
 

freecyclist

New Member
Hey, Freecyclist, I was wondering when you were going to get around to answering my question about a cyclist moving into primary when approaching a pinch point (whatever form that pinch point takes).

It's at least the 4th time I've asked. I'd hate to come to the conclusion that you're deliberately avoiding answering.

Hey ben remind me what a pinch point is again because last time i gave up going to answer cos of all the confusion and bickering over the agreed definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom