Cyclists riding 2 abreast on busy country roads

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by Chris_SVS

and suggested they should be shot.

Ooops, might retract my vouching on that particular one

...did he say what with?

[Bibio]

i would like to say absolutely fine but dont hold traffic up... where is the option... lol


ooohhh and shoot lycra clads..

[Chris_SVS]

Originally Posted by Dave20046

Oooh poll is 50/50

I think you think my grievance with this scenario is that I am travelling in the same direction as the cyclists and am upset that I have to apply my brakes, it is not - i'm concerned about the number of times I've had to deviate my path sharply because cars (and lorries!) avoiding cyclists doing this have swerved dangerously into my lane.
And before you say, adjust your road positioning from the crest when rounding blind bends - I do. But couple the above bad driving arising from a needless (imo) situation with a new rider and you get something like this. Or a car that has no where to move in fact.

No I don't.

It is not the fault of the cyclists/horse riders/tractor driver if another driver or rider chooses to overtake when it isn't safe. Much like the R1 rider I commented on yesterday in the Gripe thread, I did not blame the driver that was being overtaken.

Number abreast doesn't change this.

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by DJ123

I am in 2 camps on this, if it was a straight road with lots of visibility, it's not great but equally there is the space and visibility to overtake - but on a corner/incline it is unsafe (mainly for the cyclist) to assume vehicles travelling from behind will see them and react in time. To some extent it is a safety thing, if there's 2 of you no one can squeeze past . . .

It's legal to over take non-powered vehicles on a solid white line.


Highway code extract:

129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26

Yeah it's not the straights that get me, you clock the cyclist ahead and if you see a car coming up behind the flock you know what they're going to do (because the motorcyclist is smaller!)... iit's when it's out of the blue several times an hour and in my head completely needless. Clocked the doublewhites , but they're going marginally faster than the permitted overtake on my example - it's more just to demonstrate the nature of the bend (toight and blind)

[Bibio]

as with other asswipes i have no time for Rossi wanabeezzz either. i hate to say this on a bike forum but a large majority of bikers have a serious attitude. not the folk on this forum though who are solid minded individuals.


i like to ride fast i have no qualms admitting that but only when i know it safe to do so. unlike the power rangers.

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by Chris_SVS

No I don't.

It is not the fault of the cyclists/horse riders/tractor driver if another driver or rider chooses to overtake when it isn't safe. Much like the R1 rider I commented on yesterday in the Gripe thread, I did not blame the driver that was being overtaken.

Number abreast doesn't change this.

hmm

But is it the fault of the cyclist? The one who chooses to make themselves that difficult to pass knowing how slow they are going? The tractors on the road out of necessity, none are doing that for fun I bet if you ask any they'd say they'd prefer to be able to move faster safely or halve their footprint.

I remember having a similar debate with a forum member on a ride out , I was adamant a car shouldn't do something and was uoting the highway code- in the end he said yeah technically you're right but there's no point being right and dead. That always stuck with me, you're actually more right if you see the bigger picture and do what's safer for everyone.

Although in this scenario the cyclists are wrong and dead....

[Dave20046]

I'd also argue number abreast does change it. If it's one people can (if needed) pass pretty safely while still giving the cyclist 1.5m. 2 a breast means the only option is brake or compromise the other lane. What do you think to 3 a breast?

[Bibio]

they should all bunch together.. domino effect applies more.


i actually prefer them to bunch up when i'm on the bike as i can overtake quicker. its the mongs in cars who are shizzing themselves who are the problem.


lycra clad group + old folks = queue. i see it all the time.


whats wrong with cyclist groups pulling over when they know there is a large queue forming behind them... jezz even caravan towers have this courtesy.

[Chris_SVS]

Originally Posted by Dave20046

hmm

But is it the fault of the cyclist? The one who chooses to make themselves that difficult to pass knowing how slow they are going? The tractors on the road out of necessity, none are doing that for fun I bet if you ask any they'd say they'd prefer to be able to move faster safely or halve their footprint.

I remember having a similar debate with a forum member on a ride out , I was adamant a car shouldn't do something and was uoting the highway code- in the end he said yeah technically you're right but there's no point being right and dead. That always stuck with me, you're actually more right if you see the bigger picture and do what's safer for everyone.

Although in this scenario the cyclists are wrong and dead....

No. Defensive riding (solo or abreast) is done for a reason, to discourage overtakes when unsafe, and to make actual overtakes shorter - thus easier for the overtaking vehicle. Good example of this is approaching pinch points like pedestrian islands, I will move purposely to centre of the lane to prevent being squeezed. Rewatch my video from yesterday, had there been oncoming traffic I would have been positioned differently.

The secondary reason for abreast riding is sharing of the work, a group is constantly rotating anticlockwise around itself. Doing so 3 abreast is not illegal, but simply isn't practical.


The fact that some drivers (and riders - referring back to R1 rider) respond to this with aggressive and poorly thought overtakes is really the fault of the training and licencing system, perhaps just total lack of giving a sheite.

[Bibio]

Originally Posted by Chris_SVS

No. Defensive riding (solo or abreast) is done for a reason, to discourage overtakes when unsafe, and to make actual overtakes shorter - thus easier for the overtaking vehicle. Good example of this is approaching pinch points like pedestrian islands, I will move purposely to centre of the lane to prevent being squeezed.

now that just pizzes of car drivers. i ride Defensibly on the bike but more to show my visibility. if you done that to me i give you a mouthful. who the fuk taught you to do that..


most drivers give cyclists a wide berth and we are not to bothered by cyclists until said cyclist starts pulling stunts like that.