Cycling 2 abreast

[Mikeco]

The Dutch are good at riding side by side especially when they are coming towards you on a narrow cycle lane, they do not move over one inch, I believe that the bikes are sold in pairs already tied together.

 

[funflair]

If you ride like that you could hardly complain if you’re knocked off by a driver not expecting to be undertaken.
Sometimes even cyclists have to take some responsibility for their own safety.
There is of course Darwinism to consider I suppose.

Maybe if people stopped perpetuating the myth that it’s illegal then fewer car drivers would be surprised and the roads might be a safer place.

 

[kevenh]

I’m pretty sure undertaking is illegal. Overtaking, going on the outside is legal which is why motorcyclists go on the outside

AFAIK Undertaking on a bike is definate not illegal so long as the vehicle you are undertaking is stationery. It's called filtering.

For cyclists, as gpat wrote “Undertaking on a bike is definate not illegal so long as the vehicle you are undertaking is stationery”
For a moving vehicle, the cyclist has to overtake like a car.

 

[The Wino]

That was the Tour de France you were following....

I wouldn't have minded if they were going at that pace

 

[Monty777]

Having read this entire thread and being someone who drives, rides motorcycles and cycles some of the nonsense here worries me. The main one being the idea that cyclists shouldn’t impede other road users-errr-unless you expect cyclists to be able to ride at 40-50 mph they are always going to impede other vehicles…..so following this logic cyclists should never be on the road. Now taking this to its obvious conclusion neither should the poster be on the road in a Motorhome since he will obviously impede faster vehicles. The end of this pattern is that unless you are driving a Porsche or Ferrari, or riding a motorcycle you shouldn’t be on the road? I accept that this isn’t what was intended but it is the obvious conclusion to that form of thinking…….

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[glenn2926]

Having read this entire thread and being someone who drives, rides motorcycles and cycles some of the nonsense here worries me. The main one being the idea that cyclists shouldn’t impede other road users-errr-unless you expect cyclists to be able to ride at 40-50 mph they are always going to impede other vehicles…..so following this logic cyclists should never be on the road. Now taking this to its obvious conclusion neither should the poster be on the road in a Motorhome since he will obviously impede faster vehicles. The end of this pattern is that unless you are driving a Porsche or Ferrari, or riding a motorcycle you shouldn’t be on the road? I accept that this isn’t what was intended but it is the obvious conclusion to that form of thinking…….

I think it's more that the cyclists think they have a right to impede others and have absolutely no intention of try to lessen their impact on others. whereas the same cyclists seem to think every other road user should be the ones responsible for the cyclists safety. The cyclist themselves having no responsibility for their own safety.
I, when driving the motorhome I travel at or around the speed limit so as to try to not impede the flow of other traffic. If I am holding others up I pull over and let them pass. To me this is driving with thought for other road users. I most certainly wouldn't sound my horn when coming up behind cyclists expecting them to move out of the way. like cyclists do with their bell when cycling along the canal towpath and wanting to pass walkers.

 

[Skez]

Having contributed to cycling threads in the past on here, I can't really be bothered anymore to try and educate.

Views are so entrenched on this subject, the antis will never ever change their mind, whatever reasoning they are presented with, and likewise the pros! (I don't mean professionals there).

Bit like another recurring theme??

Tolerance both ways works best, and is safest.

 

[Guigsy]

I think it's more that the cyclists think they have a right to impede others and have absolutely no intention of try to lessen their impact on others. whereas the same cyclists seem to think every other road user should be the ones responsible for the cyclists safety. The cyclist themselves having no responsibility for their own safety.

To be fair, if one person is driving a >1500kg metal cage with >100bhp and the other is a cyclist riding a 15kg bike using their own leg power, the onus of safety really ought to be on the driver.

 

[glenn2926]

To be fair, if one person is driving a >1500kg metal cage with >100bhp and the other is a cyclist riding a 15kg bike using their own leg power, the onus of safety really ought to be on the driver.

Even if the cyclist decides to just literally ride out in front of the vehicle driver? Really? You think that? You honestly think cyclists shouldn't have any responsibility for their own safety?

 

[Guigsy]

Even if the cyclist decides to just literally ride out in front of the vehicle driver? Really? You think that? You honestly think cyclists shouldn't have any responsibility for their own safety?

Not all of it, but the majority, yes.

... Incidentally, isn't that they way many other countries set up their road laws? And the new Highway Code too?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[kevenh]

Having contributed to cycling threads in the past on here, I can't really be bothered anymore to try and educate.

Views are so entrenched on this subject, the antis will never ever change their mind, whatever reasoning they are presented with, and likewise the pros! (I don't mean professionals there).

Bit like another recurring theme??

Tolerance both ways works best, and is safest.

I think when we have motor vehicles annoyed about being stuck behind cyclists riding up hill so on the downhill section will deliberately get in front of the cyclist to block ‘em, the two sides are too far apart.

I though, continue to find cyclists do pull over to let cars by them, where the vehicles’ struggle to pass safely. It’s in their best interest to control the situation rather then have the vehicle make a rash lunge.

 

[Googlebot]

I used to ride to work, I stopped after being hit by cars three times in a week, none of them my fault.

I might sit in traffic, but at least I am alive.

A shame as I used to enjoy the exercise.

 

[Skez]

I though, continue to find cyclists do pull over to let cars by them, where the vehicles’ struggle to pass safely. It’s in their best interest to control the situation rather then have the vehicle make a rash lunge.

As a club cyclist, we ALWAYS pull over when appropriate to let traffic past. Sadly there will always be idiots both on two wheels and four.

As you said - poles apart.

What saddens me are the entrenched views, and refusal to see something from someone else's POV. But motorists who deliberately cut up a cyclist out of anger or frustration are always in the wrong - whatever they believe, and however much they think themselves inconvenienced.

 

[glenn2926]

You, as a cyclist are never going to agree that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. Whereas I’m never going to agree that cyclists safety is just down to other road users.
To me we are all responsible for our own safety. Cyclists included. I’m more than aware of this having been a cyclist and motorcyclist most of my life.
Like you say we’re poles apart.

 

[mofurt]

I don't believe any cyclist on here has said they have zero responsibility for their own safety. That is a straw man and misrepresenting what is being said.
They have every right to be on the road, and don't have to dismount and doff their caps immediately another road user approaches and may have to otherwise slow down to pass the cyclist safely. There is responsibility from that faster road user to take care during the overtake.

I cycle, I ride motorcycles, I drive fast, powerful cars (not owned any car with less than 300bhp in the last 15 years), I drive slow 4x4s and vans.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[kevenh]

You, as a cyclist are never going to agree that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. Whereas I’m never going to agree that cyclists safety is just down to other road users.

Oh! It’s all be a miss understanding
Who has said that or where is that being said? That cyclists don’t have to worry about personal safety.
There’s the Highway Code addition to “include a 'hierarchy of road users', which basically places the responsibility of safety onto those who pose the greatest risk to other road users”.

 

[glenn2926]

I don't believe any cyclist on here has said they have zero responsibility for their own safety. That is a straw man and misrepresenting what is being said.
They have every right to be on the road, and don't have to dismount and doff their caps immediately another road user approaches and may have to otherwise slow down to pass the cyclist safely. There is responsibility from that faster road user to take care during the overtake.

I cycle, I ride motorcycles, I drive fast, powerful cars (not owned any car with less than 300bhp in the last 15 years), I drive slow 4x4s and vans.

There’s not one cyclist other than me which has acknowledged any responsibility for their own safety. I always look after my safety first. I don’t expect other people to go out of their way to look after me.
If I’m cycling I get out of the way of others as fast as possible. If I’m in the motorhome I pull over to allow faster traffic to pass. I would like the same courtesy from other cyclists but I’m not holding my breath.

 

[Spriddler]

I'm quite happy to be stuck behind two-abreast cyclists.

 

[Skez]

To me we are all responsible for our own safety. Cyclists included. I’m more than aware of this having been a cyclist and motorcyclist most of my life.
Like you say we’re poles apart.

No argument there from me. I couldn't agree more in fact.

I'm a cyclist, car driver, motor home driver, motorcyclist, retired advanced police driver, IAM driver, cycling proficiency badge holder and all. I think I've got a reasonable grip on it.

 

[Skez]

There’s not one cyclist other than me which has acknowledged any responsibility for their own safety.

Rubbish. I look after my own safety first. Apart from anything else - I love my bike and don't want it damaged.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[glenn2926]

Rubbish. I look after my own safety first. Apart from anything else - I love my bike and don't want it damaged.

Strange, first time you’ve mentioned it. All your other posts have been calling for all other road users to be responsible for your safety. As I said it’s the first time you’ve acknowledged you have some responsibility for your safety.

 

[mofurt]

As far as I can tell, no-one argues against everyone being responsible for their own safety. In fact, cyclists are far more invested in that as they are more likely to suffer serious physical injury in even minor incidents.

It is still a straw man to claim that cyclists don't believe that. I've said it myself in this thread (passing cars needs extreme caution), Eurotrotter said it on page 1. I've not seen a single cyclist claim that they have no responsibility to look after themselves, though they might not have explicitly stated it.
I do, however, believe that road users also have responsibility to look after other road users, which you don't seem to think applies to motorists held up cyclists.

 

[Skez]

Strange, first time you’ve mentioned it. All your other posts have been calling for all other road users to be responsible for your safety. As I said it’s the first time you’ve acknowledged you have some responsibility for your safety.

Not trying to pick a fight with you glenn2926 but you really are talking rubbish.

Why not search back through and find any/all posts over the past few years where I've talked about cycling issues. You are totally blinkered.

Everyone has a responsibility for their own and other's safety on the road. You tar an an entire group of road users with your brush because of your views. Not all cyclists are idiots, and that's equally true of other road users. On the other hand some are. Live and let live.

 

[glenn2926]

As far as I can tell, no-one argues against everyone being responsible for their own safety. In fact, cyclists are far more invested in that as they are more likely to suffer serious physical injury in even minor incidents.

It is still a straw man to claim that cyclists don't believe that. I've said it myself in this thread (passing cars needs extreme caution), Eurotrotter said it on page 1. I've not seen a single cyclist claim that they have no responsibility to look after themselves, though they might not have explicitly stated it.
I do, however, believe that road users also have responsibility to look after other road users, which you don't seem to think applies to motorists held up cyclists.

Oh I think we have a responsibility for every road user. I just don’t think any one type (cyclists) should have any more rights than others. We all share the road, we all should respect other users. That includes allowing them past us if they’re faster instead of riding two, three, or even four abreast to try to prevent faster road users to get past just because we can.
Cyclists definitely don’t like being stuck behind pedestrians on the canal bank and will ring their bell or call out to get past. Can you just imagine the cyclists response to other road users trying this to get past cyclists?

 

[mofurt]

The very first post on here was explaining why riding two abreast is actually better for motorists who want to overtake, as was the quoted post from Surrey Police. It isn't to prevent, it's to make it safer for all concerned.

On canal banks or narrow roads I'll call out to pedestrians or horse riders ahead (normally "good morning" or equivalent) to make them aware of my presence as a courtesy rather than making them jump as I come up silently behind them. It's not "Get out of my way", just normal human interaction. Sorry you don't see it that way.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Silver-Fox]

View attachment 558791
One or two abreast 1.5m gap and make sure it's clear because there could be a hazard round the corner. Bob.
View attachment 558799View attachment 558800

View attachment 558798

With the cyclist in the first picture in that position, is there enough room on the rest of the road to overtake at 1.5m

 

[gus-lopez]

As was said earlier, you can tell who are the British drivers by the fact that they nearly knock you off!

No Brits around here just old,blind spaniards ,one who overtook me hit my elbow with the wing mirror.

Some drivers drive with wheels on the kerb to impede me.

That's where I was taught to drive ,Far left as possible if you can't hear the gdunk,gdunk of the rain water glleys you are too far out

You cannot be done for driving without due care and attention on a bicycle.

You can be done for any road traffic law. Once you take the bike on the road you are sbect to the same rules as everyone else, be it car , motobike ,van ,lorry.

Undertaking on a bike is definate not illegal so long as the vehicle you are undertaking is stationery”

parked in traffic once for nigh on an hor I aske dthe motorbike in front why he didn't 'fliter' p to the front.
" because it is stupid, inherently dangerous for both me & the stopped vehicles , & should be made totally illegal. I have no more right to maeouvre through the traffic than any other vehicle."
Couldn't argue with that.
They used to allow it in France for motorbikes around Bordeaux as long as hazards on but stopped it & made it illegal last year(?)
I don't cycle anywhere I am likely to encounter traffic or pedestrians.

 

[gus-lopez]

With the cyclist in the first picture in that position, is there enough room on the rest of the road to overtake at 1.5m

No & what I posted in post#13 You cannot legally pass especially if the cyclist moves out to the white line, which they have every right to do:

 

[gpat]

No Brits around here just old,blind spaniards ,one who overtook me hit my elbow with the wing mirror.

That's where I was taught to drive ,Far left as possible if you can't hear the gdunk,gdunk of the rain water glleys you are too far out

You can be done for any road traffic law. Once you take the bike on the road you are sbect to the same rules as everyone else, be it car , motobike ,van ,lorry.


parked in traffic once for nigh on an hor I aske dthe motorbike in front why he didn't 'fliter' p to the front.
" because it is stupid, inherently dangerous for both me & the stopped vehicles , & should be made totally illegal. I have no more right to maeouvre through the traffic than any other vehicle."
Couldn't argue with that.
They used to allow it in France for motorbikes around Bordeaux as long as hazards on but stopped it & made it illegal last year(?)
I don't cycle anywhere I am likely to encounter traffic or pedestrians.

I'm afraid you are incorrect. In the UK the road traffic act only applies to motor vehicles

 

[Silver-Fox]

No & what I posted in post#13 You cannot legally pass especially if the cyclist moves out to the white line, which they have every right to do:

So cyclists can act like total nobs then.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}