Why you should give cyclists a wide berth when passing.

[spookly]

Antony Moxey said:

You do know that cyclists ARE traffic, they're not holding it up.

Yes, I was making a distinction between the cyclists and traffic following. Which you knew. But you just carrying on being a pedant if you enjoy it

Antony Moxey said:

And, to be honest, so what if you have to slow down for a bike? You suggest they're holding cars up for fun - how do you know? Perhaps they're on their commute either to or from work, and who decided your journey was more important simply because you're in a car?

I specifically said I don't have a problem with travel by bike. In fact even a single bike ridden for pleasure isn't as bad a problem. Around here we get packs of lycra clad cyclists in team colours all over the place every bloody weekend.... are you actually suggesting they are not riding for fun? Have they all just left the office together dressed like that?

So, yes. it is annoying when they slow me down, particularly if I need to be somewhere.

Antony Moxey said:

As for slow drivers rarely below 40mph - come and live in the south west, 40mph's seen as suicidal by the blue rinse brigade of East Devon. I've also found, by and large, that the reason there's a long snake of cars behind isn't because I haven't pulled over, it's because Doris is convinced overtaking is somehow illegal so stays on my back wheel regardless of how wide the road is and how far into the distance she can see. Once you get that, well it's hardly the cyclist's fault no-one can overtake, same as when you get a snake behind a caravan or HGV and the first three cars are content to Bimble along for mild after mile after mile at 25mph.

Caravans and HGVs at 25mph? Really? Nearer 50mph most of the time IME. They also tend to avoid rural roads except for getting to where they are going as driving long/large vehicles on rural roads is a pain in the arse.

We have lots of old people round here that also get in the way. I would like to see old drivers who aren't up to driving off the roads, some around here are flat out dangerous. That does not excuse packs of cyclists slowing everyone down as well.

Silly argument.... old people who can barely drive slow everyone down so it's fine if cyclists do it too.... ummm no.

[heebeegeetee]

spookly said:

heebeegeetee said:

spookly said:

Yes. So long as they aren't getting in the way I really don't mind what they do with themselves.
Recreational road use by other vehicles - other than increased fuel use, wear on roads, pollution.... what is there to be bothered by?

As we've said, the levels of congestion caused by us car drivers is biblical, as is the lost time and money. Any thoughts on your contribution to that, or is it all everyone elses fault?

Biblical in some areas, not round 'ere.

My contribution is not significant, as I work from home 4 days a week and drive to the office outside rush hour. If I ever have to travel for work outside that routine it is usually by train or plane.
I have on occasion gone out for a ride/drive for the fun of it, but never when roads are busy as that would be anything but fun.

I could go all green and further curtail my travel, get a greener car, not take long haul foreign holidays etc, but where would be the fun in that.
I suspect I'm already a lot 'greener' than someone who commutes into London or through the South East. On the 1 day a week I go into the office I'll usually do 75mph all the way there and back. Green enough for me.

WinstonWolf said:

spookly said:

otolith said:

spookly said:

Don't need to be on the road & not getting in the way = no problem [cars/motorbikes for leisure etc]

Is slowing motorists down the only negative consequence of recreational road use you consider to be of any importance? Or merely the only one that personally inconveniences you?

Yes. So long as they aren't getting in the way I really don't mind what they do with themselves.

Recreational road use by other vehicles - other than increased fuel use, wear on roads, pollution.... what is there to be bothered by?

The congestion?

As said, mostly not too bad round 'ere.

Also, a self limiting argument? Nobody goes for a drive for the fun of it when roads are too busy. If the roads are too congested then people driving for the fun of it won't enjoy it and will go home.

I almost always avoid travel to the office during rush hour, let alone consider going for a fun 'ride/drive' when there is traffic.

So, my impact on congestion for travel or pleasure is very limited. I choose not to live somewhere that congestion is often bad, and choose not to join in when it does occur.

So when are you being held up by cyclists then, cos to read that it sounds like never.

[walm]

spookly said:

Perfectly rational.

None of those examples, with the exception of horses and cyclists, have any trouble maintaining the speed limit appropriate to the vehicle.

But their LEISURE journey in a vehicle that is slower than yours is by definition an inconvenience.
Appropriate for them or not, if they weren't there, you would be going faster.

spookly said:

A cyclist going up a hill is likely to drop below 10mph... in an NSL on a straight road with good visibility, but traffic coming the other way, that would impede the following traffic by 40mph+, and very likely there would not be an opportunity to overtake.

I just refuse to believe there are many roads like this.

You have repeated many many times that the roads aren't congested around you.
That means there can't be much traffic coming the other way.

Please, PLEASE post a google maps link to such a road. I am really struggling to believe you.

[spookly]

heebeegeetee said:

So when are you being held up by cyclists then, cos to read that it sounds like never.

Quite the opposite.
I still drive to see friends, visit places, buy things. But, you're right that going to the office on the motorway I'm not usually besieged by cyclists.

During the week the number of pleasure cyclists is fairly low. On the weekends you struggle to drive 10 miles between towns without running into several groups of them.


I'm done on this thread

All the pleasure cyclists think I have no right to be annoyed that they hold anyone up, or that they don't hold anyone up at all.

I think the pleasure cyclists are s a selfish, inconsiderate, bunch who would be viewed a lot more favourably by motorists if they occasionally moved aside.

I don't think we'll change each others minds.

[walm]

popeyewhite said:

walm said:

popeyewhite said:

Like me. I'm all three. But I'm still inconvenienced.

I'm still inconvenienced. For sure.
But since I recognise that that world doesn't spin around an axis with me at the centre, I don't mind waiting patiently.

You may not be, but most are. I'll bet most of them don't think the Earth revolves around them either. Not sure it's really solipsistic to be irritated at an inconvenience on the road!

OK fair enough perhaps that was a bit strong.
I am probably as irritated as the next man, but in a "that's life" type way.
Would I rather they weren't there. Probably.
It's as irritating as a Sunday driver or someone lost driving slowly or really just someone sticking to the limits.

I don't own the road, so I begrudgingly accept there will be other people using it who might slow me down a little.
It doesn't make me rant about it on PH.

[DoubleD]

Conscript said:

spookly said:

Nothing you have said negates the fact that I and many others are often held up by cyclists on NSL roads where it is near impossible to overtake safely (oncoming traffic + bends), and traffic would be going at a far more efficient speed if it weren't for the presence of the packs of lycra monkeys.

spookly said:

In summer and bank holidays the tourists can cause a bit of a jam, but its predictable so I take my motorbike instead.

On a slight diversion, why do you (and others) keep going on about Lycra in such a disparaging fashion? It's the most practical attire for road cycling.
Presumably you wear leather for motorcycling? Or at least, I bet you don't mock motorcyclists who wear leather, who arguably look just as ridiculous. To single them out based largely on their chosen clothing kind of backs up the point I was making about prejudice earlier.

Lycra is the best material for cycling, but it isnt a good look.

[walm]

DoubleD said:

Lycra is the best material for cycling, but it isnt a good look.

If you lived up to your username it would be.
Unless you are a man.

[DoubleD]

Thats true

[Antony Moxey]

spookly said:

Antony Moxey said:

You do know that cyclists ARE traffic, they're not holding it up.

Yes, I was making a distinction between the cyclists and traffic following. Which you knew. But you just carrying on being a pedant if you enjoy it

Antony Moxey said:

And, to be honest, so what if you have to slow down for a bike? You suggest they're holding cars up for fun - how do you know? Perhaps they're on their commute either to or from work, and who decided your journey was more important simply because you're in a car?

I specifically said I don't have a problem with travel by bike. In fact even a single bike ridden for pleasure isn't as bad a problem. Around here we get packs of lycra clad cyclists in team colours all over the place every bloody weekend.... are you actually suggesting they are not riding for fun? Have they all just left the office together dressed like that?

So, yes. it is annoying when they slow me down, particularly if I need to be somewhere.

Antony Moxey said:

As for slow drivers rarely below 40mph - come and live in the south west, 40mph's seen as suicidal by the blue rinse brigade of East Devon. I've also found, by and large, that the reason there's a long snake of cars behind isn't because I haven't pulled over, it's because Doris is convinced overtaking is somehow illegal so stays on my back wheel regardless of how wide the road is and how far into the distance she can see. Once you get that, well it's hardly the cyclist's fault no-one can overtake, same as when you get a snake behind a caravan or HGV and the first three cars are content to Bimble along for mild after mile after mile at 25mph.

Caravans and HGVs at 25mph? Really? Nearer 50mph most of the time IME. They also tend to avoid rural roads except for getting to where they are going as driving long/large vehicles on rural roads is a pain in the arse.

We have lots of old people round here that also get in the way. I would like to see old drivers who aren't up to driving off the roads, some around here are flat out dangerous. That does not excuse packs of cyclists slowing everyone down as well.

Silly argument.... old people who can barely drive slow everyone down so it's fine if cyclists do it too.... ummm no.

Silly argument? Caravans and HGVs avoid rural roads - so how do they get to rural locations, or is it my imagination the number of caravans, motorhomes and HGVs that I see down here in the sticks. And yes, here, on these roads 25mph is the norm rather than 50mph, and, again down here, if you're on a road where you're capable of doing 50mph in something bigger than a car then it's unlikely you're held up for more than a few seconds. That is, unless you're Doris who's afraid to overtake anything.

As for your ignorant 'Lycra clad' nonsense (why is it only cyclists who are 'clad' in their chosen attire, everyone else seems to wear their clothing), how do you know whether a cyclist wearing Lycra is making a necessary journey or not? I used to commute to and from work at least once a week on my bike, and I did it wearing Lycra because it was the most comfortable clothing to wear for that journey. So you come up behind me and are stuck - do you fume because I'm in Lycra and therefore inconveniencing you unnecessarily, or do you patiently wait for a passing opportunity because I'm cycling to work and therefore on a necessary journey? Simple answer: you don't know why I'm on my bike so you can't assume one way or the other. And besides, just because you're in your car, what makes your journey more important than mine? Is it simply because I'm slower than you?

Also, finally, when we eventually get into town and you're sat in a traffic jam, will you move over and let me pass because I'm able - legally - to ride past you at 20mph yet you're crawling along at 10mph blocking the road?

Edited by Antony Moxey on Tuesday 23 August 15:58

[heebeegeetee]

spookly said:

I don't think we'll change each others minds.

Well you're not going to change mine because I've done 40 years of extensive leisure/pleasure driving and the delays I've had from cyclists still doesn't add up to a minute - in 40 years!

I know what you mean about Hampshire, it's very nice. I enjoy picking up the A272 near Winchester, and I've had many a good run to Goodwood.

Next month's annual holiday will be in our 986 travelling to Holland, Germany and East Sussex .

And I know I whatever delays we might encounter, they'll have fk all to do with cyclists.

And btw, if you can't overtake a cyclist on a straight nsl due to never-ending oncoming traffic (and I've had no end of experience of that) it ain't the fault of the cyclist. It's 'cos there's too many effing cars on the road!

[DoubleD]

heebeegeetee said:

Well you're not going to change mine because I've done 40 years of extensive leisure/pleasure driving and the delays I've had from cyclists still doesn't add up to a minute - in 40 years!

I know what you mean about Hampshire, it's very nice. I enjoy picking up the A272 near Winchester, and I've had many a good run to Goodwood.

Next month's annual holiday will be in our 986 travelling to Holland, Germany and East Sussex .

And I know I whatever delays we might encounter, they'll have fk all to do with cyclists.

And btw, if you can't overtake a cyclist on a straight nsl due to never-ending oncoming traffic (and I've had no end of experience of that) it ain't the fault of the cyclist. It's 'cos there's too many effing cars on the road!

Make sure you leave plenty of time if you are going to take the "986"

[spookly]

walm said:

spookly said:

Perfectly rational.

None of those examples, with the exception of horses and cyclists, have any trouble maintaining the speed limit appropriate to the vehicle.

But their LEISURE journey in a vehicle that is slower than yours is by definition an inconvenience.
Appropriate for them or not, if they weren't there, you would be going faster.

An inconvenience of ~10mph isn't a big deal. Not even doing 1/2 the speed limit on flat roads is a big inconvenience.

Yes, I would be going faster, but the inconvenience is minor.
I realise this is very simplified, but: 60 miles at 50mph instead of 60mph adds 12 minutes. 60 miles at 20 mph instead of 60 mph adds 2 hours.

walm said:

spookly said:

A cyclist going up a hill is likely to drop below 10mph... in an NSL on a straight road with good visibility, but traffic coming the other way, that would impede the following traffic by 40mph+, and very likely there would not be an opportunity to overtake.

I just refuse to believe there are many roads like this.

You have repeated many many times that the roads aren't congested around you.
That means there can't be much traffic coming the other way.

Please, PLEASE post a google maps link to such a road. I am really struggling to believe you.

You can refuse to believe all you like, I'll go look outside in a minute and I'm pretty sure they'll still be there

Let me make this simple, as you seem to be struggling to comprehend: Not congested =/= empty roads.

The roads aren't congested with cars getting held up/delayed/parked. Most roads are flowing at or near the speed limit most of the time; there are still cars on the road in both directions.

It doesn't take much traffic from the opposite direction on a narrow A road to make overtaking near impossible, and that's coming from someone with a fairly laissez faire attitude to risk who is usually driving a car which would complete an overtake quite rapidly - if I could overtake I would. I find the cyclists annoying, but I am not about to endanger them, myself or other road users by making a dangerous overtaking move.

[spookly]

Antony Moxey said:

illy argument? Caravans and HGVs avoid rural roads - so how do they get to rural locations, or is it my imagination the number of caravans, motorhomes and HGVs that I see down here in the sticks. And yes, here, on these roads 25mph is the norm rather than 50mph, and, again down here, if you're on a road where you're capable of doing 50mph in something bigger than a car then it's unlikely you're held up for more than a few seconds. That is, unless you're Doris who's afraid to overtake anything.

Did you get a D- in English comprehension at school?
They avoid rural roads. That means they will try not to use them. Sometimes a rural road is the only reasonable way to get somewhere so then they have to use them. In a rural area that is just going to happen.
Most caravans and HGVs use motorways wherever possible, followed by larger A roads, and probably only go onto rural roads when necessary.

Yeah, yeah. I'm sure all those HGVs are doing 25mph in a 50mph limit all the time, they just love getting somewhere slowly. And even then the cyclists wouldn't keep up with the 25mph HGVs. Even the old people around here would be held up by cyclists.

Antony Moxey said:

As for your ignorant 'Lycra clad' nonsense (why is it only cyclists who are 'clad' in their chosen attire, everyone else seems to wear their clothing), how do you know whether a cyclist wearing Lycra is making a necessary journey or not?

It can be hard to tell, but if you're riding in a pack in team colours, then no... I really doubt you are off to work. I'm not complaining about a lone cyclist riding to work on a weekday.

And yes, lycra looks very silly. Practical, yes. Would I be seen dead in it, no.

Antony Moxey said:

So you come up behind me and are stuck - do you fume because I'm in Lycra and therefore inconveniencing you unnecessarily, or do you patiently wait for a passing opportunity because I'm cycling to work and therefore on a necessary journey? Simple answer: you don't know why I'm on my bike so you can't assume one way or the other. And besides, just because you're in your car, what makes your journey more important than mine? Is it simply because I'm slower than you?

I don't fume. I patiently wait for a safe place to pass if you are not considerate enough to move aside in a safe place.
That argument does not make packs of cyclists less annoying.

Did I say my journey was more important than you travelling to work? Nope.

Antony Moxey said:

Also, finally, when we eventually get into town and you're sat in a traffic jam, will you move over and let me pass because I'm able - legally - to ride past you at 20mph yet you're crawling along at 10mph blocking the road?

As I already said, I avoid congestion like the plague.

But, no I wouldn't have a problem with you filtering. In fact I happily filter on my motorbike. The only difference being, is that on a motorbike the traffic won't catch up with you again 20 metres after the lights.

But if you filter at 20mph through stationary traffic eventually you are going to have a bad time. I'd suggest with the lack of visibility of cycles and the small gaps they often unexpectedly go through, coupled with a lack of noise and safety wear you'd likely have on a motorbike, that filtering that fast on a cycle is not a smart move.

[walm]

spookly said:

The roads aren't congested with cars getting held up/delayed/parked.

Hoist with his own petard.

[ncjlee]

spookly said:

the lack of visibility of cycles

In my experience this is more due to people not making use of their mirrors or indeed neck muscles than any inherent feature of cyclists.

[anonymous-user]

spookly said:

Perfectly rational.

None of those examples, with the exception of horses and cyclists, have any trouble maintaining the speed limit appropriate to the vehicle. Unless they are driven particularly antisocially slowly they will not ever slow you down by more than about 10mph off the speed limit.

Steam engine, hedge cutting, mobility transport, mopeds.

spookly said:

A cyclist going up a hill is likely to drop below 10mph... in an NSL on a straight road with good visibility, but traffic coming the other way, that would impede the following traffic by 40mph+, and very likely there would not be an opportunity to overtake.
An HGV on the same hill would probably still make it up the hill doing over 40mph, as would a caravan, a car with a trailer etc.

Yes, those 1:3 hills that all the cyclists pick on the busy A roads, seriously, you're so out of touch.

spookly said:

Even on the flat parts a cyclist is probably doing... what?... maybe 25mph, still a rolling roadblock causing traffic speed to drop by 25mph+ assuming there is an HGV behind them.

See examples above.

spookly said:

So my point is perfectly rational.... cyclists will hold you up far more than any of your other examples. Even then , those causing tailbacks should get off the road and allow other to pass periodically.

If you knew anything about cycling you'd know this happens.

spookly said:

If cyclists actually did pull over to let traffic past people might not find them quite so annoying, but I've never seen it happen.

It's not 'people' it's you.

[Antony Moxey]

spookly said:

Antony Moxey said:

illy argument? Caravans and HGVs avoid rural roads - so how do they get to rural locations, or is it my imagination the number of caravans, motorhomes and HGVs that I see down here in the sticks. And yes, here, on these roads 25mph is the norm rather than 50mph, and, again down here, if you're on a road where you're capable of doing 50mph in something bigger than a car then it's unlikely you're held up for more than a few seconds. That is, unless you're Doris who's afraid to overtake anything.

Did you get a D- in English comprehension at school?
They avoid rural roads. That means they will try not to use them. Sometimes a rural road is the only reasonable way to get somewhere so then they have to use them. In a rural area that is just going to happen.
Most caravans and HGVs use motorways wherever possible, followed by larger A roads, and probably only go onto rural roads when necessary.

Yeah, yeah. I'm sure all those HGVs are doing 25mph in a 50mph limit all the time, they just love getting somewhere slowly. And even then the cyclists wouldn't keep up with the 25mph HGVs. Even the old people around here would be held up by cyclists.

Antony Moxey said:

As for your ignorant 'Lycra clad' nonsense (why is it only cyclists who are 'clad' in their chosen attire, everyone else seems to wear their clothing), how do you know whether a cyclist wearing Lycra is making a necessary journey or not?

It can be hard to tell, but if you're riding in a pack in team colours, then no... I really doubt you are off to work. I'm not complaining about a lone cyclist riding to work on a weekday.

And yes, lycra looks very silly. Practical, yes. Would I be seen dead in it, no.

Antony Moxey said:

So you come up behind me and are stuck - do you fume because I'm in Lycra and therefore inconveniencing you unnecessarily, or do you patiently wait for a passing opportunity because I'm cycling to work and therefore on a necessary journey? Simple answer: you don't know why I'm on my bike so you can't assume one way or the other. And besides, just because you're in your car, what makes your journey more important than mine? Is it simply because I'm slower than you?

I don't fume. I patiently wait for a safe place to pass if you are not considerate enough to move aside in a safe place.
That argument does not make packs of cyclists less annoying.

Did I say my journey was more important than you travelling to work? Nope.

Antony Moxey said:

Also, finally, when we eventually get into town and you're sat in a traffic jam, will you move over and let me pass because I'm able - legally - to ride past you at 20mph yet you're crawling along at 10mph blocking the road?

As I already said, I avoid congestion like the plague.

But, no I wouldn't have a problem with you filtering. In fact I happily filter on my motorbike. The only difference being, is that on a motorbike the traffic won't catch up with you again 20 metres after the lights.

But if you filter at 20mph through stationary traffic eventually you are going to have a bad time. I'd suggest with the lack of visibility of cycles and the small gaps they often unexpectedly go through, coupled with a lack of noise and safety wear you'd likely have on a motorbike, that filtering that fast on a cycle is not a smart move.

Thing is, quite a bit of the country is rural, and quite a fair proportion of holiday destinations in this country are rural. HGVs and caravans, much like most vehicles I imagine, use whichever road is appropriate for their journey.

Lycra - so what if it looks silly, if it makes your journey more comfortable then wear it. I couldn't care less what people I'm unlikely to ever see again think I look like.

Moving over - if your journey isn't more important then why worry about being held up for a few seconds? Perhaps the cyclist's journey IS important so therefore pulling over to let you bimble to the shops or to visit your mate isn't his highest priority.

And finally, if you avoid congestion like the plague then you're not being held up are you? And what's wrong with passing traffic that's doing 10mph at 20mph, or is that only allowed if you're a car passing a bike rather than a bike passing a car?

[spookly]

ncjlee said:

spookly said:

the lack of visibility of cycles

In my experience this is more due to people not making use of their mirrors or indeed neck muscles than any inherent feature of cyclists.

Or both? Cyclists are smaller and thus far less visible than a car. Motorbikes suffer from the same problem.

[spookly]

yonex said:

spookly said:

Perfectly rational.

None of those examples, with the exception of horses and cyclists, have any trouble maintaining the speed limit appropriate to the vehicle. Unless they are driven particularly antisocially slowly they will not ever slow you down by more than about 10mph off the speed limit.

Steam engine, hedge cutting, mobility transport, mopeds.

Oh yeah. Hmm how many steam engines have I seen on the road this year.... uh, none. hedge cutting and mobility need to be there. Mopeds can fk off too if they aren't in a 30mph limit.

yonex said:

spookly said:

A cyclist going up a hill is likely to drop below 10mph... in an NSL on a straight road with good visibility, but traffic coming the other way, that would impede the following traffic by 40mph+, and very likely there would not be an opportunity to overtake.
An HGV on the same hill would probably still make it up the hill doing over 40mph, as would a caravan, a car with a trailer etc.

Yes, those 1:3 hills that all the cyclists pick on the busy A roads, seriously, you're so out of touch.

Who said 1:3 hills? Cyclists don't need a particularly steep incline to go slowly, and they are getting in the way even before they reach a hill.

yonex said:

spookly said:

Even on the flat parts a cyclist is probably doing... what?... maybe 25mph, still a rolling roadblock causing traffic speed to drop by 25mph+ assuming there is an HGV behind them.

See examples above.

You mean those totally irrelevant example you gave which in no way absolve cyclists of being inconsiderate, yeah I saw those. 'tard.

yonex said:

spookly said:

So my point is perfectly rational.... cyclists will hold you up far more than any of your other examples. Even then , those causing tailbacks should get off the road and allow other to pass periodically.

If you knew anything about cycling you'd know this happens.

I know what I have seen with my own eyes. Never seen a pack of cyclists do it. I don't want to know anymore about cycling thanks, I'm not into saddle sniffing.
I have had caravans, tractors and other cars do it, but never a whole pack of cyclists.

yonex said:

spookly said:

If cyclists actually did pull over to let traffic past people might not find them quite so annoying, but I've never seen it happen.

It's not 'people' it's you.

That's the thing knob head, it isn't just me. There are plenty of people who get annoyed by it.

That's why some of them overtake you aggressively/dangerously. I don't do that, but I can see why they are also annoyed.

Ps. You know you look very camp in your lycra don't you?

[heebeegeetee]

spookly said:

Caravans and HGVs at 25mph? Really? Nearer 50mph most of the time IME. They also tend to avoid rural roads except for getting to where they are going as driving long/large vehicles on rural roads is a pain in the arse.

We have lots of old people round here that also get in the way. I would like to see old drivers who aren't up to driving off the roads, some around here are flat out dangerous. That does not excuse packs of cyclists slowing everyone down as well.

Silly argument.... old people who can barely drive slow everyone down so it's fine if cyclists do it too.... ummm no.

C'mon, get to the nub of it: Give us a figure. How much time do you reckon per annum you lose to "lots of congestion" caused by cyclists?