Really? the police told you it was a good idea to ride 2 abreast? guess you must live in a VERY quiet area then...
Cyclists two abreast on busy 'A' road, selfish?
- Thread starter newbiejim
- Start date
Really? the police told you it was a good idea to ride 2 abreast? guess you must live in a VERY quiet area then...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Not really that quiet, but yes, that is what is taught.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,285
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
HOW MANY TIMES BEFORE IT STICKS IN?
Normal tax and Council tax pay for the roads of which I pay both.
I agree, we should have insurance.
I definitely ride with a different mentality than when I drive.
It's all about self preservation when I'm cycling because I pretend every driver is out to get me and they have no idea how to treat cyclists.
Riding two abreast can be safer for cyclists, take for example..
a narrowish road - single file cycling, road not wide enough for a car to overtake safely if a car was coming the opposite direction. Some drivers will try to overtake anyways... whos going to end up in the ditch?
Same situation but two abreast, driver is now forced to wait until it is safe to pass. no one in ditch.
a narrowish road - single file cycling, road not wide enough for a car to overtake safely if a car was coming the opposite direction. Some drivers will try to overtake anyways... whos going to end up in the ditch?
Same situation but two abreast, driver is now forced to wait until it is safe to pass. no one in ditch.
When I'm out cycling the majority of other cyclists I see also stop at red lights and stick to the highway code.
you can get an on the spot £30 fine for jumping red lights , riding on the pavement etc
Whilst the law for speed only counts "motorised vehicles" cyclists who speed can be done for "pedalling furiously"
Last edited:
This is where i think peoples understanding of the highway code is not quite as great as they make out (given some of the "cyclists" responses in this thread)
never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends [section 66]
yet at least three people have said riding 2 abreast is the right thing to do.
guess everyone's an expert if it suits their opinion...
Riding 2 abreast is the right thing given a situation, although saying that even if two cycling were single file in the scenario I mentioned I'd expect them to be in the centre of the lane to not allow any traffic to attempt to pass them should traffic be coming from the opposite direction and the road deemed not wide enough for two adjacent cars + cycle
Yes it can be annoying if a driver is in a rush and you can see where frustration comes from but at the end of the day... the cyclist should move over once it is safe for them to do so, the driver has lost maybe 30 seconds max and no one is injured.
We went over this at the start of the thread.
The Highway code is clear that cycling two abreast is perfectly fine and legal. However, some people who have passed a driving test seem to be unaware of this and think the Cyclists are doing something they shouldn't, which is where the main part of this problem stems from.
The second part of the that section of the code though which refers to going single file is somewhat of a variable based on the road and situation.
If Cyclists riding two abreast were causing a tailback for miles, which as many have already pointed out is such an unlikely occurrence, and something I've never really seen. Then yes, that would be selfish and they should adhere to the code and move single file.
In other situations though where the road isn't so busy, as has been pointed out above, you need to treat overtaking a cyclist the same as a car, this is something you are taught in order to be a licensed motorist.
Take a country road for example which is quite narrow, if the Cyclists are two abreast, the motorist has to treat it like a car and wait until they can make a safe pass. Riding single file though could put them in danger because a motorist may make a dangerously close pass at high speed, which is further exaggerated coming towards a bend or if there is oncoming traffic. If however the Cyclists are on that same road with 25 cars behind them, then they certainly should allow the vehicles by if safe to do so.
I don't think that it is a huge generalisation at all though. I work in central London and see an awful lot of shocking cycling. I also go out on the roads for my job an awful lot and see an atrocious standard of road use by cyclists on pretty much every occasion. It's not a generalisation if it's an observation.
A motorist's mentality is that of somebody driving a car. You behave differently, though I don't see how comparing the mentalities is relevant - are you that naive that you do not accept motorists and cyclists are in different mindsets on their different vehicles or are you being deliberately obtuse in the guise of presenting some kind of argument? Driving standards may be poor - heck, I've already conceded that earlier in the thread, another fairly easy observation I've made during my time of being a road warrior, but that seems like all the more reason for cyclists to be better at using their vehicles.
And I'm not entirely sure what your opinion of me has to do with anything, frankly. If you don't want to debate the issue that's fine.
It's not that I disagree with you. Simple fact is motorists don't get killed by bad cyclists. Cyclists do get killed by bad motorists. Seems like an inexorably straightforward reason to be very diligent on a bicycle to me.
Now that isn't to say it is right, or that it should be like that (because it certainly shouldn't), but that is the way it is. Whilst the responsibility is placed on motorists, I'm sure that's little in the way of comfort if you're made a paraplegic.
So no, just because you're in a ****ing fruity little cycling club with your spandex buddies doesn't excuse you.
Lol, what a pathetic response, your life must be pretty empty if you're getting this worked up about something so inane.
There will always be bad cyclists this doesn't represent the majority, same goes for driving and many other things in life.
Personally, I think cyclists should be moving to single file if they are causing a consistent queue of over 5 cars, can you imaging the amount of totally unnecessary hassle this self indulgent practice is causing over say a 15-20 mile cycle?
Probably zero as its hypothetical, I've never seen such an occurrence as a driver or a cyclist.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,285
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
I've been driving 38 years and it's never happened to me.
I've been held up over a long distance by slow motorised vehicles though.
Let's face it, if you're held up by two cycles going at 20 mph you can easily get past them but a slow moving vehicle doing say 40 in a 60 zone is much harder to get past.
Works both ways how about vehicle drivers that abuse cyclists.
Irony being when you make such a narky personal remark on an Internet forum? Must be nice having such a fulfilled life.
Last edited:
That surprises me, it happens when two cyclists are two abreast whilst the opposite carriageway is busy, a queue readily builds up.
And yes tractors etc do cause more holdups, things is cyclists are making a selfish choice by cycling two abreast and could help everyone by going single file if there is a queue behind, slow moving tractors etc can only pull in to lay bys etc at regular intervals to alleviate these issues.
You keep saying the highway code says this and says that yet the only reference I can find in the highway code which mentions cycling two abreast is basically saying don't do it unless you're on a very quiet A/B road with little to no other traffic.
It's quite possible I'm blind and cannot read so if you'd like to prove me wrong I'll happily keep quiet
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,285
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Once again in 38 years I have never been held up by cyclists riding two a breast and if I have then they turned off before I got to them.