Why you shouldn't give cyclist a wide berth when passing

[julian64]

So I found the other thread interesting but infuriating. Always try to be courteous to cyclists and motorcyclist as I do both myself

However going down a country lane (with passing places) for cars for nearly eight miles on Saturday in my car. In front of me were two lycra clad cyclists drinking from water bottles, eating what looked like mars bars and generally chatting with each other while enjoying the countryside air.

They were completely aware I was behind them and spent the entire eight miles at about ten miles an hour, one of them demonstrating their hands off handlebar technique for about a mile. At no time did either of them think to pull into a passing place to let me through.

There were two occasions early on when the road started to widen when I could've made an overtake manoeuvre but I would have come very close to the cyclist to do so.

If I had known there would be eight miles involved I would've gone for it early on. Gawd only knows what people with that cycling attitude must create in a busy part of London.

After that little meeting I'm now of the opinion that cyclists should not have equal access to the road as cars.

[julian64]

I suppose the point of the post was that it was a demonstration to me that there is a 'section' of cyclist behaviour which is unlike anything else you find on the road.

I've lived in my neck of the wood for nearly twenty years and due to its location ash, kent there are large quantities of times you will be going down small country roads behind caravans, tractors, hay bailers, horses. Its all expected and part of living in a small country roads area.

I've never met a pack of horse riders who didn't pull into the next layby, and thank you for creeping past so as not to alarm the horses.

I've never met a tractor driver or someone herding sheep who didn't put an arm up to thank you for waiting. Tractors often hold up cars but you can see them trying to get to the next field so no problem

These guys didn't have to travel at 10mph, they could've pulled over at any time and I would've been passed in a flash. I've done this countless times on a bike its simple just to pull into a driveway for a few secs, you don't even have to take your feet off the pedals.

The 'I can hold you up and bugger you' attitude is particularly peculiar to some types of cyclists usually the lycra clad ones. Its an aggressive attitude which is contrary to MOST road users.

perhaps I should say that I kinda like sorts cars so am unlikely to be the sort who just stays behind for no reason. I do draw the line however at roaring past with a few inches to spare even if they are annoying me.

[julian64]

WinstonWolf said:

Should a Micra driving at 40MPH everywhere be forced to pull into a driveway when they hold me up in the TVR?

Well we wouldn't be having this conversation if it was 40mph, or if the cyclists in question had no choice.

The fact that you defend them is what's worrying me.

Just as an aside I have pulled over for a number of cars in my TVR, and my TVR's pretty fast. On a dry day I am overtaking cars on my way home. If its raining and/or ice, pretty much anyone is waived past cos my visibility is poor and my traction is worse compared to any German car trying to make progress. I don't make it difficult for them as I love my car

[julian64]

yonex said:

8 miles, I just don't believe you. This is re-enforced by one of the cyclists riding with his hands off of the bars for 'about a mile'.

Also, cycling is one of the fastest ways to get around London.

HTH

Honestly this is the most dire type of post on PH. I feel slightly disinclined to even answer. It you think the whole post is a lie then just don't reply. If you call custard on everyone on the internet then why have the conversation.

I didn't measure eight miles, or take the time behind them. It felt like an age it was an estimate, but I fail to see what's going on with your brain. If I tell you where and you measure it to 3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10, does it make the comment any less valid. The only certainty was me looking at my speedo and seeing 10mph for most of the way with the cyclist making little attempt to go faster although they undoubtedly could, or pull over. I didn't actually measure the time or distance but gave an estimate and for that I whole heatedly apologise, but really does that make any difference

The route was from my house in ash kent through pease hill toward stanstead and then onto trottiscliffe, but I could simply have scoured the map for any section of road for your nonsensical request.

It matters not whether you believe me or not. What matters is that I posted that is was unreasonable for a cyclist to hold up a car at 10mph for eight miles and there have been a significant number of posters on here defend their right to do so.

Those particular cyclist need their moral responsibility not to hold up faster traffic put into law in the same way a middle lane moron can now be bought to book.

And I say that with a heavy heart cos I hate the ever increasing legislation in this country.

[julian64]

CS Garth said:

julian64 said:

I didn't measure eight miles, or take the time behind them. It felt like an age it was an estimate, but I fail to see what's going on with your brain. If I tell you where and you measure it to 3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10, does it make the comment any less valid. The only certainty was me looking at my speedo and seeing 10mph for most of the way with the cyclist making little attempt to go faster although they undoubtedly could, or pull over. I didn't actually measure the time or distance but gave an estimate and for that I whole heatedly apologise, but really does that make any difference

Indeed it does. As the shorter the distance the more you look like an impatient moaning Minnie. . I'd suggest your wild exaggeration was to garner greater sympathy. If the post was "i sat behind some sub-optimally courteous cyclists for a little over 1800 yards" you'd have been less well treated even on a motoring forum imho

So, in short: impatient man meets cyclists who doesn't pull over when man would like. Man has to wait for a few minutes to pass. We as car owners don't own the road and the sooner we stop acting like we do the better

Live and let live

Edited by CS Garth on Wednesday 24th August 10:59

The only thing I'm impatient with now is your laziness. I gave you the route, so where did the 1800 yds come from or the few minutes inconvenienced? Did you just pick figures out of the air. I've already admitted I didn't measure it, but you are welcome to with the rough directions I gave. You can easily see it wouldn't be a few minutes. Why don't you google down the route and spot the overtaking places if you are really that anal about it.

I am however having my suspicions about lycra warriors confirmed by the comments on this thread. Any excuse, even simple denial of everything rather than agree the cyclist were unreasonable. Unbelievable!

It is becoming my suspicion that legislation will come to cycling whether it be tax or laws, not because cycling really needs them, or because the vast majority of cyclist cause any problem on the road. but because a few of you cycling warriors leave the rest of sensible road goers no other choice.

The sort of cyclist I met on that day will one day cause an accident by causing that frustration, and when they do they should be accountable.

the eye opener for me and possibly my last comment on this thread is that they obviously weren't two in a million when people on here are backing them up.

[julian64]

je777 said:

Regarding your last line, I agree: that is how all rules should be made. Whatever happens to you in an isolated incident should be the basis for all laws that are applied to everyone.

Sarcasm aside, I quite agree and as I have posted before no one would change the law for me. But up until that point I'd never really met bloody minded cyclists before. If you read my posts though the reason I suggest a change in the law is two fold

1) If their behaviour was duplicated in a busy area like London it would cause untold frustration to all other road users.

2) The number of posters on here who seem to be backing them up suggesting that behaviour on the road is acceptable. Demonstrating that those two cyclist are not alone in their anti car/car frustrating thinking.

I have to say I don't commute in London so have no idea. I do see loads of posts on PH about road warrior cyclists in london and consider them almost always to be 6 of one and half a dozen of the other when angry driver meets annoyed cyclist. I considered myself to be rather on the fence and swayed by the fact we are over legislated already.

Having met said road warriors in their country form I consider them to be the unacceptable face of cycling if they were to appear in a busy area would be dangerous but in my country lane obviously just very frustrating.

because of 1) and 2) I have therefore come off the fence.

Is that clearer? Apologies for other readers where this is simply a reiteration of the posts so far.

[julian64]

you knit picking bunch of tosspots



5.6 miles time 15 mins suggested by the AA

Actual time 10mile per hour on the straights, so lets say a bit less round the corners. 8mile per hour average being generous

5.6miles/8mph*60 minutes

= 42 minutes for what should have been a fifteen minute journey.

AND I LIVE OPPOSITE PEASE HILL for anyone else who would've overtaken them as I pulled out my drive.

I do bloody apologise for wrongly estimating 8 miles when it was 5.6 miles and only 42 minutes of my time. I realise that this level of estimation has completely voided my argument, and you cyclists when typing are accurate to a couple of feet!!!

Now how about one of you warriors going through the google street map and telling me where you think it would be safe to over the two cyclist abreast down those roads

Standard of proof on pistonheads seems to be rising daily
Its like having a conversation with the flat earth society

[julian64]

tigger1 said:

julian64 said:

you knit picking bunch of tosspots



5.6 miles time 15 mins suggested by the AA

Linky no worky.

And it's "nitpicking".

I'd also call BS on 8-10mph if I'm being really picky. There's a few on here who run that quickly for 5.6 miles, nevermind cycle.

The only way this whole story can be true (IMHO) is if you're known by these cyclists, and they've deliberately done it because of you. Otherwise so little of it makes sense.

Someone better than me will have to sort out the link as I just used their own upload system.

I think I'll keep it as knitpicking

And you are seeming to say I'm lying that the cyclists were doing 10mph because cyclists can go faster than that. Not even sure where to start with that so I'll just leave it.

Obviously the cyclist know me by the jaunty way I travel country lanes and were trying to teach me a lesson. I just think its a shame you didn't post that at the start of the thread to save us all wasting our time this afternoon.

PH nothing if not entertaining

[julian64]

its been two hours since I posted the roads and yet no one has posted back to show a likely overtake place, or called me a liar.

Do I win a prize?

To the person not satisfied with knowing where I live and the road I drive down but now wants to interrogate my phone, I'm afraid I will have to decline. I feel I just don't want to make the point of this argument strongly enough to show the whole world my phone, even if it did store all my journeys on it (which I think is a bit sinister).

Night all

[julian64]

Finlandia said:

Not looking for problems, it just seems like many cyclists here are out to cause problems for other road users, I would like to know/understand why.

An important question. Why do a minority group of cyclist behave In this way. I think the answer might be a combo of the following.

1) These cyclist see themselves as having an equal rights as cars. They consider that if you pass them in any way differently to the way you would pass an HGV then you are at fault. Read any online cyclist forum and they will talk to you about 'commanding the roadspace', and not cycling near the curb, but cycling in the middle of the road and allowing other cars to overtake when they are happy rather than leaving it up to the car to decide. This is completely at odds with highway codes suggestions of facilitating overtakes.

2) These cyclists see themselves as vigilantes at the top of the cycling food chain, and see it as their right to play policeman, such as the need to wear go-pros, and generally tell other road users off.

3) And lastly. There is no effective legislation against cyclists. You can't report them because they can't be identified. They are the vulnerable one rather than the car so prosecution would be difficult, and the same legislation applied to the lycra warriors would have to be applied to small children on tricycles which would be absurd.

Its a tricky one to sort, and you can see how tricky when people immediately pour scorn on anyone who highlights it as a problem, and immediately jump to defend even quite ridiculously unacceptable cycling behaviour.

[julian64]

TwistingMyMelon said:

julian64 said:

Finlandia said:

Not looking for problems, it just seems like many cyclists here are out to cause problems for other road users, I would like to know/understand why.

An important question. Why do a minority group of cyclist behave In this way. I think the answer might be a combo of the following.

1) These cyclist see themselves as having an equal rights as cars. They consider that if you pass them in any way differently to the way you would pass an HGV then you are at fault. Read any online cyclist forum and they will talk to you about 'commanding the roadspace', and not cycling near the curb, but cycling in the middle of the road and allowing other cars to overtake when they are happy rather than leaving it up to the car to decide. This is completely at odds with highway codes suggestions of facilitating overtakes.

2) These cyclists see themselves as vigilantes at the top of the cycling food chain, and see it as their right to play policeman, such as the need to wear go-pros, and generally tell other road users off.

3) And lastly. There is no effective legislation against cyclists. You can't report them because they can't be identified. They are the vulnerable one rather than the car so prosecution would be difficult, and the same legislation applied to the lycra warriors would have to be applied to small children on tricycles which would be absurd.

Its a tricky one to sort, and you can see how tricky when people immediately pour scorn on anyone who highlights it as a problem, and immediately jump to defend even quite ridiculously unacceptable cycling behaviour.

Not sure which is worst, your dullness or small mindedness..

Stop chastising all cyclists ..sorry "these cyclists" as one, don't judge a minority with confirmation bias

There are a few knobs around that ride bikes, get over it and get on with life

'why do a minority' - Just thought I'd highlight that for you. Plus the fact if you read any of my posts I don't tarnish all cyclists with this behaviour. Its the few who are eventually going to cause legislation for the many, just like in so many walks of life.

Otherwise your post was bang on and incisive.

[julian64]

mph1977 said:

as opposed to the be-goatteed and poewerfully built who repeatedly demonstrate their ignorance of the law and their apparent willingness to use their vehicles to enofrce their fictional 'rights' ...

So the famous mph1977 arrives. The poster most likely to end any thread by either pomposity, sarcasm, or a completely failing to grasp anything anyone says if it does not conform to his expert view on every subject.

As the op of the thread, and as is so often the case on this site, I realise that resistance is futile when certain posters appear.

Make sure you let everyone how it should be done before you go.

Bye.

[julian64]

nickfrog said:

Btw, and that's incidental, the OP made it all up, albeit 8 miles, 4 miles or half a mile.

And you base that on ??.......

Not only did I not make it all up. But I provided you with a detailed AA map showing the distance and challenging you to show an overtaking place on google roadmap. Just to add authenticity for those of you who were still suspicious I told you it started from my house so I couldn't pull the road out the air as my home address could probably fairly easily be found by someone persistent enough.

I am actually a cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver and have said so on this thread so I have no particular axe to grind. Starting to get one now though. Mainly to idiots like yourself who think their comments are important enough to post despite not bothering to read the thread.

[julian64]

There's no two way street here.

To summarise this thread.

I posted one thread in about five years of being on PH about cycling. The thread was how I was kept behind two uncourteous slow cycling cyclists for forty odd minutes because I wouldn't cut/push past with the chance of hitting them on narrow country lanes. They had seemingly decided not to share the road with other road users but to dominate it. I acknowledged they were uncharacteristic of normal cyclists until I met the bunch of internet warrior cyclists on here.

The thread was descended on by a bunch of posters who I later found out post on every cycling thread the same rubbish about it always being the drivers fault. I was called a liar and anti cycling, and same posters jumped to defend the cyclists right to do whatever they want on the road.

I even had to post the exact route to prove I couldn't have overtaken and the time it would have taken. After that the posters went quite for a while then just posted I was lying about it all because they had nothing else to say.

Well if nothing else its been an eye opener. Sharing the road with other road users is simple. Anyone coming up behind you making better progress should be let through whether they are in a car, or on a motorcycle or bicycle, and the transport you are in when overtaken is immaterial.

bicycles should always attempt to move toward the curb to let cars through. Cars should always move to the curb to facilitate easier overtakes by motorcycles, and cars in slow moving traffic should always move away from the curb to let bicycles an easy route.

How bloody difficult is that for you lycra warriors to understand?

[julian64]

DonkeyApple said:

Although, the cyclists are generally tax payers exercising their rights to use the public road network, whereas the combine harvester is an element of an industry that can't exist without tax payers bank rolling it and which isn't actually needed as cheaper produce can be imported and if it were a free market, wouldn't exist. . Technically, farmers are just benefit scroungers who haven't worked out that there is an easier option.

Just keep going. You're posts are the only fun I'm having on this thread any more. I'm fed up of reiterating to a bunch of mindless morons that I wasn't lying over and over again. I just started another post and thought ......why?

You placed an order for a new TVR yet. Or are you happy you own the best TVR ever likely to be produced?

[julian64]

DonkeyApple said:

julian64 said:

Just keep going. You're posts are the only fun I'm having on this thread any more. I'm fed up of reiterating to a bunch of mindless morons that I wasn't lying over and over again. I just started another post and thought ......why?

You placed an order for a new TVR yet. Or are you happy you own the best TVR ever likely to be produced?

Hi Julian, with two small children of never be able to use a two seater but having seen the setup recently (big secret btw) then frankly, I'd swap mine for a 2+2 if they built one. The project looks amazing and the cars could be genuinely monumental. Just more expensive than many are hoping, sadly.

One son going off to uni this september and one at fifteen. Nearly back in a two seater after eighteen years of +2.

Just finished a restoration on the XKSS so that'll keep me on my toes.

[julian64]

4U2P said:

I'm not so sure....Cycling does tend to have a high proportion of bellends despite its relatively small user base. Then again, I'm probably judging cyclists by the cyclists that use twitter like cyclingmikey and not actual cyclists on the road...

I thought as you do. Then I started a thread about it on PH.

[julian64]

Pablo said:

Well you lied about an incident to gain some kudos from the anti-cycling fraternity, made a ridiculous comment about entitlement then realised your thread actually has a human element behind the hyperbole, that people are actually dying as a result of other people's ignorance and prejudice, all for the sake of a few minutes delay.....Are you avoiding the question I asked on Wednesday?

No lie on my part, and I find it quite bizarre you persist in suggesting it with all the evidence I've provided you with in this thread.

[julian64]

walm said:

Where you had to drop their speed from your initial estimate of 10mph to 8mph (running pace) - another blatant lie.

Lycra warriors do 15mph absolute minimum so it was 22 minutes rather than the google map estimate of 15 mins.

So in summary, your 50 minute lie was really a 7 minute inconvenience.

No idea why people persist with thinking you bear a striking resemblance to Walter Mitty.

One of us is being a bit 'thick' The 10mph was on the speedo of the car. It was obviously on the straights as I don't look at my speedo round the bends. If they were making 10mph on the straights their average is going to be considerably less. I was being generous to say 8mph as a total average. Why not simply follow the link I have given you and look at the turns and stops to see where they couldn't have maintained a constant speed and would have to stop. I can tell you what they did on the straights but don't have a detailed plot of the stops and turns, sorry.

Secondly your continued insistence that its was all a lie because lycra warriors do a minimum of 15mpg is just ludicrous. I'm pretty sure the lycra warriors in question could have done substantially more than 10mph and if they had you wouldn't be commenting on this thread because there would be no thread. I don't get frustrated behind country vehicles doing what they can no matter how slow unless they are being bloody minded.

They were intentionally holding me up. I thought I'd made that pretty bloody obvious. Your attempts to say what they did were reasonable just makes you look like an apologist for poor behaviour on the road.

On the other hand I stayed behind because I didn't want to do a death or glory move past them. I maintained a sensible distance and didn't touch the horn because they already knew I was there and if they chose to impede me there was very little I could do other than accept it. My road behaviour while following them was at a standard much higher than most car drivers would have achieved in that situation.

I'm not In the habit of posting threads every time I am travelling behind cyclists as there would be a gazillion threads by me on cyclists. I've been on PH over ten years and I think this is possibly the first thread I've started on cyclists so I'm not your average cyclist hater.

Its unfortunate you come across as completely blinkered to the point where I wonder why I bothered writing any explanations or descriptions. I have no idea why I bothered to post about the route or anything. Nothing I could say this whole thread would have satisfied you. You simply dismiss everything I've said as a lie with absolutely no justification.

I spent 40 odd minutes at 10mph behind two of the most inconsiderate road users I'd met in a long time on the road. Its not the end of the world. I wasn't rushing to anywhere. Was worthy of a post I thought.

I've been on PH a long time and seen most types of threads. I have to say however, your continued attempts to just rubbish anything said and generally be obnoxious is below the standard of conversation I'd expect even on PH.

[julian64]

pablo said:

Which doesn't make sense to me. You tolerate a forty minute delay to your journey without losing your temper but want to limit cyclists access to the road and you're still refusing to offer up any suggestion of how it could possibly be enacted...

My issue has always been that comment because I believe it's inflammatory and for some people, justifies a dangerous, bigoted opinion of self entitlement above other road users.

I'm not limiting cyclists access to the roads. Cyclists can go wherever they want.

I'm taking issue with the fact that 'some' cyclists and especially the ones in my example above believe themselves to have all the 'rights' of a car to dominate the road. They obviously felt no need to use the advantages of a small nimble bike to pop into a driveway and let me pass in the time it took them to cross the driveway. They could do things a car couldn't to get out of the way but chose not to.

My comment about bikes not having the same rights to the road as a car is that I would expect a bike to move toward the curb to allow an easier overtake by a car/motorcycle. I wouldn't expect them to stay near the middle of the road an expect to be overtaken like a car, making it nigh on impossible on a country road, and probably quite difficult on some London streets.

I think this should be made clearer in the highway code. Obviously not In the country (as you pretty much never see the plod there) but if a cyclist was acting this way in London they should be addressed by the police in the same way that bullying behaviour by cars should be.

Its only common sense. I'm not trying to clear cyclists off the road