I think I'm done with road...
Discussion
272BHP said:
Julian Scott said:
....are they not just commuters? I can't think of anyone that would choose to ride as a leisure/exercise/sports pursuit in central London at any time, let alone at rush hour time.
Commuters would choose a sensible bike to commute with surely? Road bikes make absolutely no sense in the city in rush hour.As for sensible bike...define sensible? Especially if someone lives in say Pinner but works in the city?
272BHP said:
Donbot said:
Road bikes make perfect sense because of the narrow handlebars and the light weight helps with all the stopping and starting. Have you ever ridden a road bike?
Not as stable or manoeuvrable, aggressive riding position, lack of visibility, thinner tyres, delicate frames and usually sporting clip-in pedals.They make no sense in the city.
Do you need help out of that hole you are digging yourself?
200Plus Club said:
heebeegeetee said:
For "blocking" a country lane I'll take as using a country lane. 
Why would a dozen riders need to stop other road users legally and safely driving past though by covering the entire lane? There's no wonder some drivers react badly, it's arrogant and dangerous to yourselves. At some point it will end badly as this thread often proves really. Do you mean the road was one lane wide? Or your driving is so poor that you can't cross into the incoming lane?
Either way, riding two-abreast is the safest way to ride and the easiest to pass.
200Plus Club said:
President Merkin said:
Is this because you were hoping the men were sexy & not fat?
You got held up for a bit by people entitled to be on a road being on a road. Why not chill on it a little.
No need to chill, it's over and done with, I'm not an angry driver. Was a funny comment initially about the middle age spread road racers who are arrogant enough to deliberately block a country lane for miles and cause a number of cars to be angry and frustrated. They'll moan when someone reacts badly to their antics.You got held up for a bit by people entitled to be on a road being on a road. Why not chill on it a little.
200Plus Club said:
Castrol for a knave said:
It's usually a question of fact and degree.
If the road is wide enough for a car to pass, a decent group will call "car back", and the group will switch to single file, letting the car past.
If there isn't sufficient room even when singled out, the group will carry on until it is safe to go into singles. By staying two abreast, they are managing the car behind, because too many drivers try and pass when there is no room. This is especially dangerous on country roads when the road edges are often potholed or muddy or covered in a fancy array of detritus, forcing the riders out into the road.
So generally, a group will stay doubles until there is room to safely pass. There will be exceptions who have not switched on and don't single when there is room to pass, as there are always exceptions, but IMHO, it's a pretty general approach to switch according to traffic.
I have seen that done, unfortunately not on this occasion. Common sense needed on both sides ! If the road is wide enough for a car to pass, a decent group will call "car back", and the group will switch to single file, letting the car past.
If there isn't sufficient room even when singled out, the group will carry on until it is safe to go into singles. By staying two abreast, they are managing the car behind, because too many drivers try and pass when there is no room. This is especially dangerous on country roads when the road edges are often potholed or muddy or covered in a fancy array of detritus, forcing the riders out into the road.
So generally, a group will stay doubles until there is room to safely pass. There will be exceptions who have not switched on and don't single when there is room to pass, as there are always exceptions, but IMHO, it's a pretty general approach to switch according to traffic.
Julian Scott said:
Why?
Do you need help out of that hole you are digging yourself?
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London. Do you need help out of that hole you are digging yourself?
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
272BHP said:
Julian Scott said:
Why?
Do you need help out of that hole you are digging yourself?
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London. Do you need help out of that hole you are digging yourself?
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
t claims. Not sure 'difficult terrain' in that common in central London.And you still cannot explain why any other bike is more suitable, or more 'in it's element'.
272BHP said:
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Stop digging. You're confusing "unsuitable" with "not totally optimised", which may be the case for some riders but not even all of them as patiently explained to you.Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Actually you're just arguing for the sake of it I reckon.
272BHP said:
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
272BHP said:
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
If you don't ride road bikes why do you care? And where are you getting these opinions from?Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
272BHP said:
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a road bike is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
I don't get thisSure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Commuted for years on a road bike when in the Smoke..
Not sure the "can't handle terrain" stacks up, you only have to look at a cross bike.
I can thrash my CX bike around a trail centre and have only died twelfty times
Why feed the troll? Every word typed is tripe.
Declares road bike unsuitable for use in city centre - with no provenance, history of involvement in the sport or experience provided of doing so.
Is told completely wrong by multiple people who do this, some regularly, and have said experience.
Troll :0
Cyclists :1
Declares road bike unsuitable for use in city centre - with no provenance, history of involvement in the sport or experience provided of doing so.
Is told completely wrong by multiple people who do this, some regularly, and have said experience.
Troll :0
Cyclists :1
272BHP said:
I made the reasons clear. You must be blinkered if you cannot see that a [road bike] is fundamentally unsuitable for somewhere like central London.
Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Replace [road bike] with any of these:Sure it can do it but it is certainly out of its element in stop/start traffic and sometimes difficult terrain and conditions.
Range rover sport
BMW 7 series
Mercedes S class
Jaguar XJ
Mercedes Gwagon
Ford Ranger
BMW X6
Volvo XC90
Or just keep whining about road bikes.
Random_Person said:
Why feed the troll? Every word typed is tripe.
Declares road bike unsuitable for use in city centre - with no provenance, history of involvement in the sport or experience provided of doing so.
Is told completely wrong by multiple people who do this, some regularly, and have said experience.
Troll :0
Cyclists :1
As usual you resort to rudeness. I simply expressed an opinion which I stick to.Declares road bike unsuitable for use in city centre - with no provenance, history of involvement in the sport or experience provided of doing so.
Is told completely wrong by multiple people who do this, some regularly, and have said experience.
Troll :0
Cyclists :1
Even the cycling weekly link above expressed a similar opinion to mine but you seem to think it is just me.
I have ridden road bikes on many of occasions and I find them unsuitable for city use. A city bike, hybrid bike or even gravel bike is much more suitable.
Mont Blanc said:
I love posts like this. They are so hilariously ignorant, and they usually all feature the same utter nonsense about overtaking cyclists.
The simple fact is this:
On an ordinary single carriageway road, such as the one up Box Hill, you cannot legally or safely pass a cyclist without being in the opposing carriageway, because you have to leave a safe gap of around 1.5 metres between your car and the cyclist.
So it doesn't matter if the cyclist is single file or two-abreast, so still have to move into the opposing carriageway, whatever happens.
To be specific I’m talking about Dorking Road. Headed towards Pfizer. Limit now 40mph enforced by average speed cameras, installed recently. Groups of blokes cycling here are increasingly common. It’s not a narrow road but the bikes slow considerably on uphill stretches and drivers lacking confidence often won’t overtake. This creates tailbacks, especially on sunny Sundays. The simple fact is this:
On an ordinary single carriageway road, such as the one up Box Hill, you cannot legally or safely pass a cyclist without being in the opposing carriageway, because you have to leave a safe gap of around 1.5 metres between your car and the cyclist.
So it doesn't matter if the cyclist is single file or two-abreast, so still have to move into the opposing carriageway, whatever happens.
I wouldn’t wish anyone harm. Just think more consideration could be shown in trying not to delay other people. Falling into single file doesn’t usually means the bikes form a ‘train’ going around a bike, allowing sufficient room for a safe pass is often easier than passing six to eight bikes that make up the footprint of a LWB Transit.
I would add, when walking along the canal path on Guildford with my wife and the dog, we fall into single file when bikes come up behind us. Why wouldn’t we? Sometimes we pause and move right out of the way so riders can safely pass. We then continue. They are moving faster than we are. We don’t walk shoulder to shoulder, ignoring them. Because that would be inconsiderate.
highway said:
To be specific I’m talking about Dorking Road. Headed towards Pfizer. Limit now 40mph enforced by average speed cameras, installed recently. Groups of blokes cycling here are increasingly common. It’s not a narrow road but the bikes slow considerably on uphill stretches and drivers lacking confidence often won’t overtake. This creates tailbacks, especially on sunny Sundays.
I wouldn’t wish anyone harm. Just think more consideration could be shown in trying not to delay other people. Falling into single file doesn’t usually means the bikes form a ‘train’ going around a bike, allowing sufficient room for a safe pass is often easier than passing six to eight bikes that make up the footprint of a LWB Transit.
I would add, when walking along the canal path on Guildford with my wife and the dog, we fall into single file when bikes come up behind us. Why wouldn’t we? Sometimes we pause and move right out of the way so riders can safely pass. We then continue. They are moving faster than we are. We don’t walk shoulder to shoulder, ignoring them. Because that would be inconsiderate.
If you're talking of this road, you cannot overtake a cyclist and remain in lane here, you just can't, you MUST cross over into the opposing carriageway.I wouldn’t wish anyone harm. Just think more consideration could be shown in trying not to delay other people. Falling into single file doesn’t usually means the bikes form a ‘train’ going around a bike, allowing sufficient room for a safe pass is often easier than passing six to eight bikes that make up the footprint of a LWB Transit.
I would add, when walking along the canal path on Guildford with my wife and the dog, we fall into single file when bikes come up behind us. Why wouldn’t we? Sometimes we pause and move right out of the way so riders can safely pass. We then continue. They are moving faster than we are. We don’t walk shoulder to shoulder, ignoring them. Because that would be inconsiderate.
So what is the problem? If there are dozens of cyclists out on sunny weekends, well that's to be expected imo, plus it shows that the road is being well used.
Any issue seems to be that a minority want to travel faster than the majority, at a time and place when it wouldn't be expected to be feasible.
If the issue is drivers lacking confidence or competence, yes I agree that is an issue and one that possibly impacts millions of us and causes widespread national delay. I think it is evidence that mandatory driver restraining would be very worthwhile. See the thread 'Epidemic of Slow Drivers.'
What we don't want imo is unconfident and incompetent drivers close passing wobbly cyclists.
Dorking Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Nh2d46tRaeuTbv2r6
- An Epidemic of Insanely Slow Drivers ', now on 63 pages
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff