daviee

and cycling single file touché

jaygsi

iTrader: (46)

Did you not see on Gov website, it says ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends

davyboy

If you are so worried about the danger, just slow down a little.

If you struggle to read the road..slow down until you are a little more experienced driver.

If you can't see around the corner, there could be so many things there....horse, tractor, walkers.....but no, the focus is on the cyclist as they might be legally riding 2 a breast.

davyboy

I think you need to learn how to read.

daviee

So I have to slow to less than 60mph that is legal to avoid a hazard but you can cycle two abreast to create a hazard that is legal. Arise King davyboy

jaygsi

iTrader: (46)

I did miss read the first bit oooops sorry


ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends

nurburgking

Thats hilarious

jaygsi

iTrader: (46)

When i ever see a horse i always cut the engine as i drive past, oh yes considerate

nurburgking

As someone who lets the car cool down before turning off... I do not ! although I do know most of the riders in my village so they stop so I can coast by

jaygsi

iTrader: (46)

I do to, but i hardly think 4 seconds is going to make any difference, Subaru manual states after driving hard let the car cool down before shutting engine off.

I don't drive hard down back lanes anyway

nurburgking

I dont drive too hard on back roads sensible round bends flat out from bend to bend I love B roads its were these cars are most fun single lanes bushes n trees either side. Really gets ya blood pumping lol

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

To be fair, it's a 60mph limit, that doesn't mean that you have to do 60mph at all times, no matter what.

And who decides whose legal 'right' should take precedence?

I rarely agree with Davyboy (well, past encounters anyway, which I'm sure he'd back up) but he does make a valid point about not knowing what might be around a corner. Regardless of what your view is regarding who has more right to use the road, people other than drivers are permitted to, and they should not feel they can't use them due to fear of being mown down by someone in such a hurry that they won't slow down for a bend/blind crest etc. just because they are legally allowed to drive at a particular speed. Law aside, common sense should prevail.

That said, I'm not blindly defending non-motorists. The same can be said for them. Just because something is legal, doesn't always mean you should stick two fingers up to make a point. I wouldn't want to be hurt or killed trying to assert my authority so to speak.

Really, as I've said on threads like this in the past, if everybody had a bit more respect for one another, and didn't always think what they are doing/where they are going is oh so much more important than the next person, people could co exist on the roads a lot more happily.

Not sure if it's worth noting, before anyone jumps in saying I'm taking sides, I'm neither a motorist or cyclist.

daviee

Lisa with all due respect, I don't go flying round blind corners at 60 mph as I understand the risks but why are you condoning two abreast cycling when they are creating a unnecessary risk ?

Originally Posted by Lisawrx View Post

To be fair, it's a 60mph limit, that doesn't mean that you have to do 60mph at all times, no matter what.(and don't ride two abreast no matter what) EFA

birchy2010

iTrader: (12)

I have no problem with cyclists sharing the road. Although they should have a licence or insurance for doing so. Much like everyone on a motorised vehicle. Riding two abreast in a dangerous position could then be classed as dangerous riding and fine points to follow such as in line with middle lane hoggers on the motorway now.

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

It sure as hell doesn't. It's a limit, not a target!

nik52wrx

In addition, a new craze of staring at ones thighs seems to have taken off, occasionally glancing ahead, I wonder what's going on.......twitter, Facebook, texting.....

nik52wrx

Will the same apply to horse riders and joggers?

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

Noticing three different types of people posting in this thread, the aggressive cycles and aggressive drivers are the problem.

I'm a cyclist and I don't believe I have a right to get in the way and I'm a driver who makes sure I don't kill anyone on a bike.

In other words, I'm perfect.

andy97

iTrader: (1)

I am not agreessive whilst cycling I am cycling within prescribed laws. I challange you to find a cyclist who is willing to go full on attack with a 1.5 ton vehicle. The highway code is littered in virtually all sections that drivers must be careful and considerate to all vulnerable road users. However most who are disagreeing with riding two abreast are advocating driving safely round horses and runners/walkers. I fail to see any difference. If you have to slow down for a horse and rider and pass over to the other side of the road, why can't you do that for a cyclist? Would you try and stay on same side of the carriageway when passing another car, no you wouldn't!.

Many comments about drivers, god forbid being forced to scrub off their 60 mph for a few seconds, all because it interrupts their pace. The crass hypocrisy of some is breathtaking that they would willingly risk the life of a cyclist, due to an irrational dislike and ignorant disrespect for all slower road users

Maz

iTrader: (34)

It's the old knowledge vs common sense scenario. Knowledge dictates I can ride a push iron two abreast on a road, common sense dictates I shouldn't.
It's alright quoting the Highway Code but on today's crowded roads where everyone is late for something, it would be a folly for a cyclist to expect parity.

andy97

iTrader: (1)

There is no requirement for a license or insurance as cyclist don't cause any damage or pollute the environment. Driver a motorized vehicle is a dangerous pass time for other road users, that is why there is licensing and insurance requirements.

Riding 2 abreast in a dangerous position. Sorry explain?


Note. The below example isn't complicated with added issues of what type of road or location.

So cycling(abreast) along at steady pace, a vehicle comes up from behind, harasses the riders so they can get by quickly. Who is dangerous in the simple scenario?

andy97

iTrader: (1)

You are correct, but you still constantly get drivers blaming the slower road users for their impatience. If the continued popularity of cycling continues then drivers are going to have to be more diligent and cautious around vulnerable cyclists

Butkus

Reading this, watching videos on Youtube, and hearing of all the deaths of cyclists just reminds me why I would rather ride my mountain bike offroad than ride my road bike on the road. Drivers and cyclists are NEVER going to agree, and they are ALWAYS going to come to blows. You can see how quickly both get angry and that is just going to end in tears.

It's not a case of who's right and who's wrong, it's a case of who's left....

andy97

iTrader: (1)

It can change. , The Netherlands did it, they prioritised cyclist safety and segregated riders where ever possible

davyboy

I'm not aggressive, nor do I ride 2 a breast often. This takes planning. I tend to ride when I can...morning or evenings, rarely during busy times when the oh so important car driver is in such a hurry and reducing his speed cannot be tolerated.

I just fail to understand why cyclist get drivers backs up so much. The drivers bang on about safety...but the only reason it upsets you is that you have to slow down.

hodgy0_2

my 14 year old son has just started to cycle around the local villages (further afield than just our village)

to meet friends after school and go to his squash lesson etc

to think that he shares the road with some of the

"fvck the cyclist i'm a b road blasting god"

that inhabit this forum is both frightening and potentially heart-breaking

davyboy

....what, he's not got insurance and a license?

Rusti

iTrader: (4)

Get a mountain bike and use it off road problem solved

EddScott

Funniest thing I've read for ages

davyboy

You should read more