Witnessed a Road Rage incident - argument was interesting...

[405dogvan]

I was stuck behind a car as the driver had a barney with a cyclist last night - their argument was actually interesting and I thought I'd bring-it-up here to see what you lot think.

I'd only just joined the road so I missed most of the fun-and-games - it seems the car/cyclists (there were actually 3 but only 1 was arguing) had been overtaking each other for the previous few miles at traffic lights/crossings/roundabouts etc.

The cyclist rode around and hit the guy's window - the following argument centered on the guy not giving the cyclist enough space.

The guy's response was interesting.

"You've rode up the inside of me at least 4 times in moving traffic and at least twice at lights, which you ignored and rode through at red - how come when I get too close it's bad but you can get as close as you like when it suits you??"

I thought he had a point - cyclists don't like cars getting close (for good reason) but will happily weave/undertake cars taking exactly the same risk, in most cases just making the driver have to pass them AGAIN (and in most cases, breaking the law of course)

The red light ignoring is just the usual bullst of course, but I thought the driver had a fair point, the cyclist was really just another road user DESPERATE to be ahead of everyone else??

[TooMany2cvs]

They were both being dicks.

[SlimJim16v]

Good point, calmly put.

[Fonzey]

Last weekend we went for a drive up through the Dales, through lots of villages and it was a nice day, so lots of cyclists.

Due to the quantity of farm traffic, cyclists, sheep in the road, etc - progress was slow, but everyone was nicely chilled out. Whenever we came to a stop, a handful of cyclists would weave their way through to the front of the queue wobbling around with their stupid clip on shoes - on a few occasions needing to stick a hand out for support on a stationary car.

The queue would start moving again, and all the cars would then need to pass this same handful of cyclists slowing progress even further. Repeat this scenario every 3 minutes for half an hour.

Nobody lost their temper, but I did wonder a number of times why the cyclists didn't just wait their place in line when we came to a standstill. They let the column of cars through and never have to see them again, but instead they insisted on weaving through every single time gaining absolutely nothing and instead just jamming things up at the next sticking point.

This isn't to say cyclists don't have as much right to use the road as car drivers, but I don't understand why they filter through to the front of a queue as they just become a blockage again...

[LittleSwill]

Deliberate irony?

[dvb70]

It seems in regard to the original argument that a cyclist maneuvering very closely to a stopped car does not involve the same level of risk to them as a moving car maneuvering very close to a cyclist. The second scenario is far more likely to result in serious injury to the cyclist. So they really are not quite the same thing.

[405dogvan]

Fonzey said:

This isn't to say cyclists don't have as much right to use the road as car drivers, but I don't understand why they filter through to the front of a queue as they just become a blockage again...

The argument I've heard in the past is "what's the point of using a bike if you don't take advantage of it's ability to pass other traffic" - which is fine in the city where you're likely making progress overall, fine for motorbikes who can keep ahead of me but less fine for a cyclist you're going to overtake instantly...

I get teed-off by cyclists who sit in the inside/ahead of me at lights when I have a vehicle outside me also. What am I supposed to do exactly?

[xjay1337]

I can completely see the guys (car driver) point.
Some, like our good friend uphillfreewheeler, will complain if you pass within 3 postcodes of them, others are a bit more happy with a tad less space.

That being said , without SEEING the build up you can't really say.

[esuuv]

Why does everyone expect the cycles to remain in their place in the queue when its OK for the cars to overtake when moving? Cars take their opportunity to pass the slower vehicle when they can - bikes filtering through stationary / very slow traffic are surely just doing the same thing?

[Slidingpillar]

Wearing my cycle helmet, the vast majority of drivers pass at a reasonable distance, but a few are too close, and a few sling their car way over to the other side of the road.

Bit like most things really, the idiots extracting the micheal get the notice.

[xRIEx]

405dogvan said:

I thought he had a point - cyclists don't like cars getting close (for good reason) but will happily weave/undertake cars taking exactly the same risk, in most cases just making the driver have to pass them AGAIN (and in most cases, breaking the law of course)

Two reasons, as I see it:
1. a car moving at 20mph has massive amounts more kinetic energy than a cycle and cyclist moving at 20mph and therefore has the potential to do massive amounts more damage.
2. Control: a cyclist moving through stationary traffic is in control of the separation (and as above, at massively reduced risk); a cyclist being passed by a car has much less control over the separation (and is at greater risk).

I feel that control thing in the difference between being a driver as opposed to being a passenger (or a rider as opposed to being a pillion) - for the same briskness of driving (or riding), I'm more than happy when I'm the one in control but can be quite nervous when I'm passenger or pillion.

In terms of cyclists going to the front of a queue, yeah, bugs the crap out of me. I'm fine with someone making progress, but I resent people purposefully getting in others' way - I always try to drive so I'm out of other people's way. Bikers you can almost guarantee will be off into the distance when the light goes amb-, just as it should be. Cyclists take a second or so to wobble side to side as they try to get their shoe clamped back into the peddle, then another half-second while they overcome inertia, then slowly accelerating blah blah blah. It's just a lack of consideration.

Of course, that only applies where there is insufficient space for a safe overtake.

[xRIEx]

esuuv said:

Why does everyone expect the cycles to remain in their place in the queue when its OK for the cars to overtake when moving? Cars take their opportunity to pass the slower vehicle when they can - bikes filtering through stationary / very slow traffic are surely just doing the same thing?

With that, an overtaking car you would expect (not always, granted; there are plenty of numpties about) to continue at a greater pace than the overtakee and so they do not inconvenience them in any way; a cyclist on the other hand goes to the front of the stationary traffic and proceeds to inconvenience everyone they've passed.

[Roger Irrelevant]

esuuv said:

Why does everyone expect the cycles to remain in their place in the queue when its OK for the cars to overtake when moving? Cars take their opportunity to pass the slower vehicle when they can - bikes filtering through stationary / very slow traffic are surely just doing the same thing?

I know what you mean, but sometimes you have to weigh up whether passing a few cars and saving a few seconds is worth then having those cars stuck up your jacksie for the next mile, with their drivers getting increasingly irate. On my commute there is a rail crossing on an otherwise free-flowing road, and although I could easily get to the front whenever the barriers are down I just take my place in the queue. If I went to the front all that happens is that there will be a long line of traffic stuck behind me that won't be able to get past because of the line of traffic that's built up coming the other way. For the sake of my commute taking one minute longer I'd rather not have that, thanks. Quite often though someone else on a bike will go to the front and then have numerous people do dodgy overtakes on them; it seems a bit pointless really.

[k-ink]

I used to ride bikes on the road. You do not need to give huge amounts of space at all. At low London speeds half a meter is ok. At higher speeds one meter is fine. Some cars go to extremes and do not pass unless they can cross right over to the other side of the road. Just a sensible gap is usually fine.

Clearly some car drivers don't seem to care though. I've had cars pulling closer and closer to me, where they actually hit me and I crashed into the kerb! On one occasion the car drifted into me and I hit into their mirror. They jumped out and I thought they were about to ask if I was ok. No. they just looked at their mirror and mouthed off.

So as I car driver I know how much space bikes require. It is not tricky. Just use common sense.

For the record I do find some cyclists bloody annoying. They ride two abreast, or right out in the middle of the road, which is plain daft. The ones who get all shout on youtube seem to be a real menace too. I guess either side has their fair share of total pricks. So it is not car v bike. It is normal people v pricks. Their choice of wheels is irrelevant.

[Fonzey]

esuuv said:

Why does everyone expect the cycles to remain in their place in the queue when its OK for the cars to overtake when moving? Cars take their opportunity to pass the slower vehicle when they can - bikes filtering through stationary / very slow traffic are surely just doing the same thing?

It's the net rate of progress. Yes the Cyclist is quicker whilst within a traffic jam, but the car will immediately need to overtake the bike as soon as the light goes green. Depending on the road/situation, the car may not be able to immediately overtake - especially when allowing the cyclist a "safe" amount of space - so the car traffic ends up being throttled behind the bike(s). When they finally get clear, the whole thing repeats itself.

If the Cyclists held back in the queue, the cars immediately get a romp on - and chances are, at the "next blockage" the cars and bikes will be in different phases to each other and so won't tangle again.

I don't have any issue with motorbikes filtering as they've got a greater net rate of progress when combining both traffic jams and open roads.

[Superhoop]

Fonzey said:

on a few occasions needing to stick a hand out for support on a stationary car.

Wasn't there a video doing the rounds a little while ago where the car driver reversed when a cyclist used his car a leaning post causing the cyclist to fall over - Cyclist went mental at driver, but was just being a cheeky bd in the first place...

I cycle, but would never use somebody else's car/lorry for a leaning post...

[SuperVM]

I cycle to and from the station for my commute and if I encounter a queue of cars, I generally just stay behind it as I'd like to reduce the number of cars overtaking me where possible. Something that does annoy me when on the bike is cars overtaking me shortly before turning left to go down the road to the station's side access. They have to crawl over speedbumps, which I don't and so I'm actually faster on that section of road. Also, invariably when the cars stop in the middle of the road to let out a passenger, they open doors on me. Their other favourite trick is overtaking me approaching a keep left sign and cutting across me as they do it. I'm doing about 25 mph on that section of road, so they gain at most a few seconds by not waiting until the other side of the sign.

[mgv8]

If the car is standing still then the risk is very low to both car and bike. If the car is moving then the risk is all bike. If the bike is passing a moving car very close then just bad riding. As for bikes over taking cars it depends on how many cars.

[AyBee]

The difference is the size of the vehicle passing. If a bike gets it wrong going up the inside of a car, you might end up with some scratches in the worst case; if a car gets it wrong overtaking a bike, you might end up with the death of a cyclist in the worst case - I think it's a fairly simple argument.

[WestyCarl]

Some cyclists are tts, some drivers are tts shocker

The main difference between the two groups is that the cyclist will usually come off worse if it escalates (hence I never let it escalate)