In defence of motorists

[cd365]

If I'd given the cyclist the usual amount of space afforded by car drivers around here, 3 feet if you lucky, then there would have been no issue!! The cyclist was not in primary, was riding in the card door zone so I was trying to be as safe to him as I possibly could.

The road is half a mile long with a few minor side roads off it.

4F, that was my point, if I was the cyclist I wouldn't have been pleased, even though he didn't have to slow down and I had given plenty of space when I pulled in.

As a fellow cyclist I had tried to do a safe overtake like I do with every cyclist but sometimes things change even though I had tried to anticipate things. It is not always the car drivers fault!

 

[John the Monkey]

As a fellow cyclist I had tried to do a safe overtake like I do with every cyclist but sometimes things change even though I had tried to anticipate things. It is not always the car drivers fault!

I still don't understand why you didn't slow down and drop in behind again.

You're speeding up in what's evidently an unpredictable environment.

 

[cd365]

I think the car behind me would have not been too impressed if I had put my brakes on and tried to pull in between him and the cyclist. the safest option was to complete my overtake.

 

[Ravenbait]

I think the car behind me would have not been too impressed if I had put my brakes on and tried to pull in between him and the cyclist. the safest option was to complete my overtake.

He shouldn't have been so close, then. And so what if he wasn't impressed? I don't think you should value another driver's opinion over safety.

I think the lesson to take away from this is that you should probably not post "n defence of motorists" on a cycling forum unless the cyclist involved in the incident was doing something bloomin' daft.

Sam

 

[cd365]

The cyclist would have been more concerned than the car driver if I had made a sudden braking and trying to squeeze in behind him move.

So all drivers are at fault unless the cyclist does something daft? Strange concept and directly leads to some of the "them and us" confrontations.

The whole point of this thread was to show that as a cyclist and a car driver things are not always straight forward and that people should look at both sides of the coin.

 

[4F]

sorry cd365 but imho I think you got caught up in "must overtake cyclist" mode

As alluded to by someone else earlier if this had been a car in front doing 22- 25 mph would you still have attempted the overtake ?

 

[cd365]

There was no "must overtake cyclist" mode, I was already overtaking the cyclist when conditions changed and felt the safest thing to do was complete the overtake. There was no reaction to my overtake from the cyclist so he couldn'thave felt in any danger.

The road is not suitable to overtake a car, but it was with a cyclist not riding in primary. If he was in primary I would not have even attempted it because this would have told me he was not comfortable with any overtake or that he was going to make a turn somewhere ahead.

 

[Moodyman]

I'm in praise of motorists. I think the overwhelming majority are very good around me.

Re the OP, I think he's trying to point out that you only have a split second to make a judgement and it's easy to get it slightly wrong. None of us is beyond making mistakes.

Heck...I make some ill-judged decisions as a cyclist. Made one yesterday - got caught out filtering on the outside but lights changed and no gap emerged for me to slide back into my lane. Had to rely on a lovely motorist to let me back in.

 

[colinr]

The whole point of this thread was to show that as a cyclist and a car driver things are not always straight forward and that people should look at both sides of the coin.

One side of the coin weighs about a tonne though, tends to amplify mistakes.

 

[sunnyjim]

There was no "must overtake cyclist" mode, I was already overtaking the cyclist when conditions changed and felt the safest thing to do was complete the overtake. There was no reaction to my overtake from the cyclist so he couldn'thave felt in any danger.

The road is not suitable to overtake a car, but it was with a cyclist not riding in primary. If he was in primary I would not have even attempted it because this would have told me he was not comfortable with any overtake or that he was going to make a turn somewhere ahead.

I'm sure there's a message in there somewhere.

 

[John the Monkey]

The cyclist would have been more concerned than the car driver if I had made a sudden braking and trying to squeeze in behind him move.

The oncoming vehicle was 200m ahead in your original description - I still think I'd slow & pull in rather than speed up - note - not suddenly brake.

By speeding up I'm closing distance with the oncoming vehicle quicker, and giving myself less reaction time for anything else unexpected (a vehicle pulling out from the row of parked cars, kid running out from between them &c).

you didn't mention a car behind initially - I think the only addition I'd make is moving in some to prevent them trying to undertake between me and the cyclist.

 

[Sh4rkyBloke]

Conditions changed after you started the overtake... so just deal with them. Seem to me that the safest option would be to brake and drop back in behind the cyclist - you've already admitted they were going faster than you anticipated. Sorry to be a bit of a damp towel but it just seems like poor driving (not reading the conditions correctly - i.e. the cyclist's speed down the gradient) followed by making it more dangerous by speeding towards a car who has entered the road to get in front of said cyclist who you've admitted was going faster than 'anticipated'..

 

[Sh4rkyBloke]

I think the car behind me would have not been too impressed if I had put my brakes on and tried to pull in between him and the cyclist. the safest option was to complete my overtake.

Nope, bugger how the driver behind feels about it... the overtake is becoming unsafe with the addition of another car in the mix heading towards you, and a cyclist whos speed you have misjudged... if you need to brake then brake you must.

 

[BSRU]

If you gave a cyclist, who was travelling at 22-25 mph, loads of room and you managed to overtake them within the speed limit then I do not understand the point of the original post.

 

[HLaB]

Taking the cyclist equation out of it; when I was younger I once stupidly overtook a truck on semi rural/ urban road, only for a car to pull out from a side road in to my path. I wouldn't use that as a defence though, it was my bad driving I should have waited patiently for a better spot to pass. Fortunately the road was wide and I wasn't going fast.