Two cyclists just gave me some verbal

[shauncr91]

Because when you take your five year old out onto the cul-de-sac to give them cycling lessons, you'd have to buy insurance for it. It's the floodgates argument.



That's simply not true. Horses walking and tractors are generally slower. Do you drive up to their arses beeping and overtaking 2 feet from them?

Treat cyclists on the road like you'd treat horses on the road and we'll all get along just fine.

We don't do that to tractors because they don't drive two abreast on a dual-carraigeway having a conversation, they have a ligitimate reason for going slow AND taking up space, a cyclist can do something about it and ride single file so as not to hold up other road users.

This is why cyclists have so many problems, expect to the treated like gods gift but do nothing to help themselves when given the opportunity.

 

[Dis86]

Actually I think we ALL should have some liability insurance or something.

I had a kid scrape down the side of my car with his bike about 15 yrs ago.

Had to pay for it myself

How does said child pay for that? Or, does it become the parents responsibility? Basically a tax on having children...

 

[wez130]

Two bikes side by side is far harder to pass than one single bike. You should always give way if you are doing substantially lower speed than those overtaking and certainly not make it more difficult to pass than necessary - which the pair of cyclists here have tried to do.

Just the same as if a tractor is holding traffic up, it is supposed to pull over in a safe place and let faster moving traffic pass.

 

[Participant]

We don't do that to tractors because they don't drive two abreast on a dual-carraigeway having a conversation, they have a ligitimate reason for going slow AND taking up space, a cyclist can do something about it and ride single file so as not to hold up other road users.

This is why cyclists have so many problems, expect to the treated like gods gift but do nothing to help themselves when given the opportunity.

It's actually safer for the cyclist to take up the whole lane and force a car to overtake properly. Are you arguing that cyclists shouldn't do what's safest for them and should instead consider what inconveniences a driver as their #1 priority?

Do you pass two feet away from a horse, just because there's another car in the opposite lane and you need to squeeze past as quickly as possible?

 

[dacads]

You should have done what an Audi driver would have

 

[mattyg]

How does said child pay for that? Or, does it become the parents responsibility? Basically a tax on having children...

Same way if the child knocked the TV over in house. Insurance or parents pay

 

[SDK^]

So why do cyclists cycle two abreast?

It allows motorists to overtake quicker!?!
Riding two abreast also allows the motorist to overtake the group of cyclists quicker as there is less distance between the front and rear of the group (about half!!). This means that the motorist is past the group in less time, spending less time on the other side of the road and along side the group of cyclists and therefore safer all round.


For those that cannot understand this, here is an illustration:

 

[esoteric]

Move those cyclists over to the curb and the car then only has to marginally encroach on the opposite lane. Even in illustrations cyclists are doing it wrong.

Cyclists do know what those lines are for in the middle of the road don't they? it's to divide the road and stop head on collisions, a risk which is increased if a car stupidly decides to over take when cyclists are 2 abreast. We aren't supposed to be that side of the road.

 

[Dolph]

So why do cyclists cycle two abreast?

It allows motorists to overtake quicker!?!
Riding two abreast also allows the motorist to overtake the group of cyclists quicker as there is less distance between the front and rear of the group (about half!!). This means that the motorist is past the group in less time, spending less time on the other side of the road and along side the group of cyclists and therefore safer all round.


For those that cannot understand this, here is an illustration:

But you should allow a cyclist the same space as a car according to the highway code, so that is twaddle because the distance between car and cyclist is much closer than it would be if they were riding sensibly.

The sheer ability of cyclists to try and justify being ****s on the road never ceases to amaze me, the mental gymnastics, double standards and so on involved suggests some sort of mental impairment must be involved.

 

[Dr Who]

Take that situation.

Its the driver who is causing the issue not the cyclists.

If your behind them your getting annoyed.. If I'm behind them I'm not.
So its you who's the issue NOT the cyclist.

"You" as in the angry motorist not necessarily YOU

I doubt they are angry, just frustrated at how inconsiderate it is to block the road and travel at 15mph when it was avoidable.

I am sure if you (as in YOU) were stuck for an extended period behind 2 cyclists in a narrow lane doing 10mph you would be a model of patience however long it took. But you are the exception in that scenario.

 

[eatcustard]

I work to this rule.

What is hardest a car or a cyclist in gay looking Lycra.

 

[Dis86]

Move those cyclists over to the curb and the car then only has to marginally encroach on the opposite lane. Even in illustrations cyclists are doing it wrong.

Cyclists do know what those lines are for in the middle of the road don't they? it's to divide the road and stop head on collisions, a risk which is increased if a car stupidly decides to over take when cyclists are 2 abreast. We aren't supposed to be that side of the road.

are you actually for real?

It doesn't make a difference if they're 1 or 2 abreast if you have to encroach on the other lane. You're encroaching.
The only time you should overtake is if the other lane is clear.

 

[SDK^]

But you should allow a cyclist the same space as a car according to the highway code, so that is twaddle because the distance between car and cyclist is much closer than it would be if they were riding sensibly.

What?
So if you were overtaking a car you would need to leave the same space as you would with two wide cyclists?!?
Most of the time when you need to overtake the road is only two lanes, so you"re saying that in this situation you can't overtake.

 

[mattyg]

The problem is most drivers want to overtake using the left pic. When They should be using the right picture

 

[mattyg]

I doubt they are angry, just frustrated at how inconsiderate it is to block the road and travel at 15mph when it was avoidable.

I am sure if you (as in YOU) were stuck for an extended period behind 2 cyclists in a narrow lane doing 10mph you would be a model of patience however long it took. But you are the exception in that scenario.

I used to drive for a living. And I'd lose more time filling up with fuel that bit earlier than I have ever lost behind a cyclist.

How many times have you overtaken a cyclist..Just to have to overtake them again after the next set of traffic lights.

 

[mattyg]

I'd say things would be a lot safer If cyclist were legally allowed to smack the roof/side of a car that tried to pass too close with a sock filled will snooker balls,

I'm sure you'd leave a safe gap then

 

[86JR]

They ride 4-5 abreast where I live, so annoying! You can see them turn round and see you are there and just carry on.

The other issue with cyclists is they don't have the stability of a car, they don't go straight forward but swerve around all over the place which makes judging an overtake hard.

 

[Dis86]

What?
So if you were overtaking a car you would need to leave the same space as you would with two wide cyclists?!?
Most of the time when you need to overtake the road is only two lanes, so you"re saying that in this situation you can't overtake.

Yeah. That's the law. How does there only being two lanes stop you overtaking? You just move into the other one when it's clear like you would to overtake a car.

 

[86JR]

I'd say things would be a lot safer If cyclist were legally allowed to smack the roof/side of a car that tried to pass too close with a sock filled will snooker balls,

I'm sure you'd leave a safe gap then

I think that would cause drivers to see red and run them over tbh.

 

[Fr0dders]

You don't beep your horn when you want to overtake someone.

no you use it to alert others to your presence, which is the very thing he was doing ?