Cyclists riding 2 abreast on busy country roads

[Dave20046]

I'm now curious as to the general view of the org on this after a comment elsewhere about very slow cyclists two abreast was not well received. Not a place to slag off cyclists in general (apart from the minority that do this! ).

Specific example that I regularly encounter on windy narrow peak district roads:
A pair of cyclists travelling side by side discussing Bradley Wiggins latest pubic wig, they are travelling approx 22mph round a left hand bend in a NSL B Road on the incline, there are solid whites.

Please could a modgod add poll options:

- Absolutely fine. Good road practice says you should be able to stop on the road you can see... everyone including new drivers and boyracers should be abiding by this - their fault if not.
- Inconsiderate. They're going to get wiped out and/or probably hurt others, bad drivers will have to slam on the brakes or veer into oncoming traffic.
-keth d . Everyone dies.

[DarrenSV650S]

I rarely cycle these days but I tend to stick to cycle paths and pavements. Screw riding on the roads! Way too dangerous for me. Even in 30mph zones.

Double cyclists is inconsiderate IMO purely because of how slow they are. Obviously I always try to overtake in the other lane in ideal circumstances, even when on a motorcycle. But like you say, people and conditions aren't always perfect.

If double cyclists are ok, then so is a group of people walking side by side down a pavement-less country road.

[DJ123]

Originally Posted by Dave20046

I'm now curious as to the general view of the org on this after a comment elsewhere about very slow cyclists two abreast was not well received. Not a place to slag off cyclists in general (apart from the minority that do this! ).

Specific example that I regularly encounter on windy narrow peak district roads:
A pair of cyclists travelling side by side discussing Bradley Wiggins latest pubic wig, they are travelling approx 22mph round a left hand bend in a NSL B Road on the incline, there are solid whites.

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

[Chris_SVS]

Originally Posted by Dave20046

Specific example that I regularly encounter on windy narrow peak district roads:
A pair of cyclists travelling side by side discussing Bradley Wiggins latest pubic wig, they are travelling approx 22mph round a left hand bend in a NSL B Road on the incline, there are solid whites.

Non issue for the cycling portion of the example, the solid whites are there for a reason, usually signposted.

But let me reverse the example, you're approaching the bend, signage indicates a sharp deviation to the left and is backed up with solid whites in both directions. The riders** are further through the bend than your vision, have you slowed and selected an appropriate gear?

**The example is cyclists but the "conflict" you're barrelling into at 60mph could be anything from a tractor exiting a field, to horses, to a previous RTC.

[Bibio]

why do minority's think that they have all the rights. personally i dont mind them riding two abreast as it makes it easier to overtake them but its the furkin attitude of the LARGE majority of the lycra clad asswipes that gets my hackles up. read the highway code curnts, as a road user its your responsibility to look out for other road users not the other way round. YOUR NOT ALLOWED to ride on the pavements unless there is a cycle way but the furkers do it as they think the law does not apply.


if i was to ride my motorbike on public pathways i would be banned so what gives cyclists the right.



i'm sick to the back teeth of MINORITY'S having all the rights. be this gay, black, religious or please 'insert here'. while the rest of us have to suffer as it hurts your feelings... boohooo...


there is no poll for shoot the curnts.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by DJ123

... to assume vehicles travelling from behind will see them and react in time.

For the record, I generally agree with your comment, but on the flip side for this detail, isn't it considered poor driving not to be able to stop in the space you can see?

Originally Posted by DJ123

To some extent it is a safety thing, if there's 2 of you no one can squeeze past . . .

Agreed, taking primary position (usually towards the middle of the carriageway) to discourage squeezing is common with advanced cyclists (and appropriate IMHO).

Originally Posted by DJ123

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

Is it always legal? Does the "if they are travelling at 10 mph or less" apply to all the previously listed types of transport, or just "road maintenance vehicle"? On the flat, I comfortably cycle faster than that, so overtaking me by crossing a white line could be interpreted as illegal.


On the whole, tolerance amongst all users is best. If you're likely to be in the way two abreast then re-form to single (especially if that creates space for a motorcyclist to ride past safely without crossing the white line. Conversely, cycles have just as much right to be there so don't try to force past with an unsafe overtake. Wait a bit, is the 30sec or so saved by an impatient overtake really that important? How would you feel if an HGV was violating your space when on the motorbike?

[Chris_SVS]

Originally Posted by Bibio

why do minority's think that they have all the rights. personally i dont mind them riding two abreast as it makes it easier to overtake them but its the furkin attitude of the LARGE majority of the lycra clad asswipes that gets my hackles up. read the highway code curnts, as a road user its your responsibility to look out for other road users not the other way round. YOUR NOT ALLOWED to ride on the pavements unless there is a cycle way but the furkers do it as they think the law does not apply.


if i was to ride my motorbike on public pathways i would be banned so what gives cyclists the right.



i'm sick to the back teeth of MINORITY'S having all the rights. be this gay, black, religious or please 'insert here'. while the rest of us have to suffer as it hurts your feelings... boohooo...


there is no poll for shoot the curnts.

Because the minorities do have rights and have done since the 1800s, motoring and holding a licence is a privilege, one that can be revoked.

Just wondering though, why should I be shot for someone elses actions?

[shiftin_gear98]

I love a pushbike, so much so I spent 8 years of my life working with them. However some cyclists like some people are ****tards. Whether they are on a bike or not.
I don't agree with riding two abreast on twisty country roads, not something I would do or recommend. Some of the NSL roads I commute on are not the place for a chat.
But everyone is entitled to use the roads, hopefully they don't get killed doing it. Its the clueless ones that have dusted off their 10 year old steeds due to Covid that scare me the most rather than the lycra clad clan.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by Bibio

... YOUR NOT ALLOWED to ride on the pavements unless there is a cycle way but the furkers do it as they think the law does not apply.

As it happens this gets my goat too.


Sadly there's a large proportion of the motorised population that think that cyclists should be off the road and often behave as though we should be out of the way, putting our lives at risk in the process - we all know being o two wheels is vulnerable. Yet, guess what, cycles were commonplace on the roads before motor vehicles, so why shouldn't we get priority?!

Sometimes, the only way to respond is to go to the opposite extreme. Sad but true. More likely, like all sizeable groups, there's a small minority of inconsiderates that sets a tone that spoils it for the reasonably well behaved majority.

In a similar vein, I also get pee'd off with riders with ear bleedin' race cans who think the only way to ride is like you're on the TT or doing a lap of the local race circuit, even in built up areas. Ridin' like the law doesn't apply!

[Bibio]

Originally Posted by Chris_SVS

Because the minorities do have rights and have done since the 1800s, motoring and holding a licence is a privilege, one that can be revoked.

yes but so do the majority so what makes the minority think they have more.. its like voting, the majority wins.


there is no licence to ride a pushbike but due to this lycra clad asswipes think the highway code does not apply to them. ermm yes it does. and when they make mistakes they blame it on everyone else but themselves. its this attitude that really ****es me off. BTW its the same for bikers who crash their bike due to them making mistakes.. asswipes.



if a cyclist was to cut right in front of me when i'm driving my car I GET THE BLAME and possibly loosing my licence for them not paying attention. never mind the uninsured damage to my car.


the large majority of lycra clad cyclists are asswipes who think they have are gods given. this is through experience of the attitude when telling them they are in the wrong. no sorry just usually a furk off.