Two Abreast - aggressive British drivers

[Random84]

Cyclist can and should ride two abreast on an appropriate road, it makes over taking them much easier, especially if its a big group of cyclists.

If I'm on my own and ride too close to the left (even if it's just a brief drift to the left) I can guarantee at least one car will skim past me, the minute I ride further out it stops but I still get the idots shouting out the window.

I've had mother's with their kids in the car shouting as I'm in their way, funnily enough they never take up my offer to put the son/daughter on the bike and I'll drive like they do!

I've ridden in Majorca where the attitude towards cyclists is so much better and there is mutual respect in return. As soon as I return to the UK its shocking how bad the driving is over here.

As a cyclist I'm defensive and will stop, catch up or shout in return as it's my safety they're gambling with. I wish a lot of the close calls I've had were good judgment by the car driver but I'm almost 100% sure its lick and matter of time before I'm knocked off.

[monthou]

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

This is nonsense.
The HC says allow an overtake if safe to do so, and gives examples of how you might do that.
It doesn't say never ride 2 abreast if there's a car behind.

Read the thread.

2 lane road, 2 cyclists (1 presumably a child) 2-abreast, dhead driver behind.
What have I missed?

[Louis Balfour]

monthou said:

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

This is nonsense.
The HC says allow an overtake if safe to do so, and gives examples of how you might do that.
It doesn't say never ride 2 abreast if there's a car behind.

Read the thread.

2 lane road, 2 cyclists (1 presumably a child) 2-abreast, dhead driver behind.
What have I missed?

The point, apparently.

[monthou]

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

This is nonsense.
The HC says allow an overtake if safe to do so, and gives examples of how you might do that.
It doesn't say never ride 2 abreast if there's a car behind.

Read the thread.

2 lane road, 2 cyclists (1 presumably a child) 2-abreast, dhead driver behind.
What have I missed?

The point, apparently.

Please feel free to explain.

So far I have
- that you don't understand the Highway Code.
- but as "I am a cyclist, by the way." we should all take note.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Panamax said:

Wonder how a cyclist would feel coming up behind two cars driving side-by-side at 5mph?

Consideration is a two way street.

But many drivers think the cyclist should cycle within the double yellow lines. If I cycled a metre out from the kerb I receive a close punishment pass.

The upshot is unless we are riding in the gutter a driver isn't happy.

[caiss4]

Had to chuckle that this subject has come up.

Out on the group ride this morning I was accosted by some old guy at our coffee stop who just randomly came up to me and said ' you cyclists need to ride in single file and not two abreast'. I retorted 'you need to read the Highway Code' to which he replied with the standard response 'I don't need to read the HC, I pay road tax, you don't' whilst stabbing the air with his finger.

Now as far as I know none of us had been riding two abreast in the last few miles as it was principally 50/NSL and we tend to stick to single file. The only time we might opt for two abreast is on quieter roads with lower speed limits which have a centre line.

[Louis Balfour]

monthou said:

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

Louis Balfour said:

monthou said:

This is nonsense.
The HC says allow an overtake if safe to do so, and gives examples of how you might do that.
It doesn't say never ride 2 abreast if there's a car behind.

Read the thread.

2 lane road, 2 cyclists (1 presumably a child) 2-abreast, dhead driver behind.
What have I missed?

The point, apparently.

Please feel free to explain.

So far I have
- that you don't understand the Highway Code.
- but as "I am a cyclist, by the way." we should all take note.

Here's the link. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules...

It's rule 66.

It says, amongst other things, "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) "

So, if cyclists are riding two abreast and it is safe for them to pull over and allow a car past that is exactly what they should do.

[monthou]

Louis Balfour said:

Here's the link. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules...

It's rule 66.

It says, amongst other things, "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) "

So, if cyclists are riding two abreast and it is safe for them to pull over and allow a car past that is exactly what they should do.

I get that you don't understand the highway code.

1. It might not be safe to overtake cyclists in single file.
2. There might be plenty of room to overtake 2-abreast.

In the OP it sounds like both could have been the case. Plenty of room (a lane and a half?) if nothing's coming. Not enough room to overtake a single cyclist if someone's coming the other way - you would cross the centre line to leave room, wouldn't you?

But yeah, I've missed the point.

[Master Bean]

caiss4 said:

Had to chuckle that this subject has come up.

Out on the group ride this morning I was accosted by some old guy at our coffee stop who just randomly came up to me and said ' you cyclists need to ride in single file and not two abreast'. I retorted 'you need to read the Highway Code' to which he replied with the standard response 'I don't need to read the HC, I pay road tax, you don't' whilst stabbing the air with his finger.

Now as far as I know none of us had been riding two abreast in the last few miles as it was principally 50/NSL and we tend to stick to single file. The only time we might opt for two abreast is on quieter roads with lower speed limits which have a centre line.

I think you encountered what is known as a knobber. These people are just stupid. Nothing can change they're mindset. You just have to smile and nod.

[James6112]

Billy_Whizzzz said:

Again… this morning, cycling with my daughter up a hill, two abreast, close together, 2 lane country road unclassified, and some person behind starts intimidating us by sounding horn then aggressively overtakes with passengers shouting at us to get out of the way. Almost every time we ride in this country something like this happens and has never happened in another country in 35 years riding. Why are UK drivers so clueless about the Highway Code?

I cycle regularly & rarely have any issues.
In 50+ years of occasional cycling.

If it’s almost every time, perhaps you are the problem?

[Louis Balfour]

monthou said:

Louis Balfour said:

Here's the link. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules...

It's rule 66.

It says, amongst other things, "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) "

So, if cyclists are riding two abreast and it is safe for them to pull over and allow a car past that is exactly what they should do.

I get that you don't understand the highway code.

1. It might not be safe to overtake cyclists in single file.
2. There might be plenty of room to overtake 2-abreast.

But yeah, I've missed the point.

I think I understand it perfectly well.

[monthou]

Louis Balfour said:

I think I understand it perfectly well.

Of course, you would think that.
How could you possibly be mistaken?

Nice edit of my post btw.

[OutInTheShed]

Weekend wobblers 2 abreast take up a lot of road.
You don't want the nearside one to be in the gutter with the leaves and potholes.
More so when they're struggling up a hill in the wrong gear.
You expect car drivers to give you 5ft of clearance?
Around here, we have A roads where there isn't space for all this.

Personally, when I'm on my bike, I don't like having people close behind me, so I let them pass as best I can.
I especially don't like having a fitter cyclist behind me.

At least the OP was aware of someone behind, a lot of cyclists seem to take no rear observation at all.

[Gerradi]

monthou said:

Of course, you would think that.
How could you possibly be mistaken?

Nice edit of my post btw.

Dear dear...foaming on the internet...

[Gweeds]

cerb4.5lee said:

They consistently hold me up though, and I can guarantee that if I come up behind them, there will always be a car coming the other way(so I have to slow right down and wait). I just can't recall cyclists always being in my way 30 years ago when I was out driving though in comparison.

Poor baby.

[Jasey_]

monthou said:

This is nonsense.
The HC says allow an overtake if safe to do so, and gives examples of how you might do that.
It doesn't say never ride 2 abreast if there's a car behind.

It says don't be a .

Something some cyclists appear to struggle with.

[cerb4.5lee]

Gweeds said:

cerb4.5lee said:

They consistently hold me up though, and I can guarantee that if I come up behind them, there will always be a car coming the other way(so I have to slow right down and wait). I just can't recall cyclists always being in my way 30 years ago when I was out driving though in comparison.

Poor baby.

I'm just getting more grumpy in my older age in fairness. Although if I had my way I would ban all cyclists from riding on the road though for sure. There are plenty of woodland areas for folk to go and ride their bikes off road I reckon.

[Gweeds]

I’d ban all cars so it’s nice and clear for me to ride.

[Solocle]

Panamax said:

Wonder how a cyclist would feel coming up behind two cars driving side-by-side at 5mph?

Consideration is a two way street.

Shoot through the middle of the dual carriageway. It's not a hypothetical... well, they were mostly doing more than 5 I guess.

[monthou]

Gerradi said:

monthou said:

Of course, you would think that.
How could you possibly be mistaken?

Nice edit of my post btw.

Dear dear...foaming on the internet...

You've lost me. Oh well, never mind.