Two Abreast - aggressive British drivers
Discussion
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.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.
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.
Some people go one further and even suggest that the "pull over" part of the rule applies to solo cyclists too, when it's in a sentence talking about "groups".
Random84 said:
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.
I agree but much like zipper merging getting the masses to understand that is pretty much impossible, no matter how many times it is said, both just wind people up.
There’s extremely s
t adherence to the common sense on both sides here; however, unlike motorcyclists who generally assume everyone is out to get them due to their vulnerability, cyclists generally ride as the HC permits them ‘cos my rights’, which is fair enough, but it doesn’t help much when they’re being scooped into an air ambulance.
t adherence to the common sense on both sides here; however, unlike motorcyclists who generally assume everyone is out to get them due to their vulnerability, cyclists generally ride as the HC permits them ‘cos my rights’, which is fair enough, but it doesn’t help much when they’re being scooped into an air ambulance. Drivers who insist that cyclists go single file for their ease of of overtaking never seen to acknowledge that they themselves are two or three abreast all the time. Even when in the car alone they carry around empty 2 or 3 seat sofas widthwise across the road.
If overtaking was so important why don't the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
If overtaking was so important why don't the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
Edited by i_alan_i on Monday 6th November 08:28
i_alan_i said:
Drivers who insist that cyclists go single file for their ease of of overtaking never seen to acknowledge that they themselves are two or three abreast all the time. Even when in the car alone they carry around empty 2 or 3 seat sofas widthwise across the road.
If overtaking was so important why the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
But they do pay for that space, maybe thats why they feel entitled?If overtaking was so important why the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
[/quote] Correct, cycles on the road pose no challenge for a competent driver
[/quote]
This is absolutely true. Cycling is difficult and requires real physical effort in a challenging environment. Driving is easy with just a few simple controls to master whilst largely isolated from the environment.
Kerniki said:
i_alan_i said:
Drivers who insist that cyclists go single file for their ease of of overtaking never seen to acknowledge that they themselves are two or three abreast all the time. Even when in the car alone they carry around empty 2 or 3 seat sofas widthwise across the road.
If overtaking was so important why the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
But they do pay for that space, maybe thats why they feel entitled?If overtaking was so important why the drivers go single file? Then there would be plenty of room. The entitlement is ridiculous.
But you're probably right, it likely is in part a mindset of "I pay tax, you don't, f*** off out of my way peasant".
Kerniki said:
But they do pay for that space, maybe thats why they feel entitled?
No, they do not pay for that space. We all pay tax, we all pay for new roads. What motorists VED pays for is to keep the roads that they destroy with their heavy vehicles maintained and for the pollution they emit.
Cyclists aren't destroying the roads, they aren't polluting the atmosphere.
The only roads motorists have exclusive use of are the motorways, all other roads including non-motorway A roads are for shared-use and any motorist who believes they have priority is very wrong.
Cyclists are encouraged to ride away from the kerb / two-abreast etc because it makes them noticed sooner by motorists as sharing the road ahead. Ideally, cars should be slowing down as they approach cyclists for safer overtakes and those who would cycle close to the kerb actually risk a bad driver hitting them as they try to squeeze past without slowing.
On a personal note, I cycle solo mostly and wave cars past if I see a clear road ahead for them to overtake safely. If riding two-abreast, I'll go single file to allow cars to overtake where prudent to do so.
It's not difficult for everyone to share the roads and help one another in this respect - I've lived it in Holland, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal. It's the Brits though...immediate road-rage if their very important progress is slowed by even a few seconds.
s. YorkshireStu said:
No, they do not pay for that space.
We all pay tax, we all pay for new roads. What motorists VED pays for is to keep the roads that they destroy with their heavy vehicles maintained and for the pollution they emit.
Cyclists aren't destroying the roads, they aren't polluting the atmosphere.
The only roads motorists have exclusive use of are the motorways, all other roads including non-motorway A roads are for shared-use and any motorist who believes they have priority is very wrong.
Cyclists are encouraged to ride away from the kerb / two-abreast etc because it makes them noticed sooner by motorists as sharing the road ahead. Ideally, cars should be slowing down as they approach cyclists for safer overtakes and those who would cycle close to the kerb actually risk a bad driver hitting them as they try to squeeze past without slowing.
On a personal note, I cycle solo mostly and wave cars past if I see a clear road ahead for them to overtake safely. If riding two-abreast, I'll go single file to allow cars to overtake where prudent to do so.
It's not difficult for everyone to share the roads and help one another in this respect - I've lived it in Holland, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal. It's the Brits though...immediate road-rage if their very important progress is slowed by even a few seconds.s.
Not quite all, there are some non-motorway A roads that are Special Roads, and some that have TROs prohibiting cyclists.We all pay tax, we all pay for new roads. What motorists VED pays for is to keep the roads that they destroy with their heavy vehicles maintained and for the pollution they emit.
Cyclists aren't destroying the roads, they aren't polluting the atmosphere.
The only roads motorists have exclusive use of are the motorways, all other roads including non-motorway A roads are for shared-use and any motorist who believes they have priority is very wrong.
Cyclists are encouraged to ride away from the kerb / two-abreast etc because it makes them noticed sooner by motorists as sharing the road ahead. Ideally, cars should be slowing down as they approach cyclists for safer overtakes and those who would cycle close to the kerb actually risk a bad driver hitting them as they try to squeeze past without slowing.
On a personal note, I cycle solo mostly and wave cars past if I see a clear road ahead for them to overtake safely. If riding two-abreast, I'll go single file to allow cars to overtake where prudent to do so.
It's not difficult for everyone to share the roads and help one another in this respect - I've lived it in Holland, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal. It's the Brits though...immediate road-rage if their very important progress is slowed by even a few seconds.
s. That said, a very unsurprising example is J1A-J31 of the A282 prohibits cycling. No, what's surprising is that means you can legally cycle between J2 and J1A
. So absurd I went to see for myself, and yep, no "no cycling" signs passed to reach this point.
If you proceeded along it from this point, the first "no cycling" sign you'd see would be at the actual mouth of the Dartford Tunnels.
Royal Jelly said:
There’s extremely st adherence to the common sense on both sides here; however, unlike motorcyclists who generally assume everyone is out to get them due to their vulnerability, cyclists generally ride as the HC permits them ‘cos my rights’, which is fair enough, but it doesn’t help much when they’re being scooped into an air ambulance.
This bt adherence to the common sense on both sides here; however, unlike motorcyclists who generally assume everyone is out to get them due to their vulnerability, cyclists generally ride as the HC permits them ‘cos my rights’, which is fair enough, but it doesn’t help much when they’re being scooped into an air ambulance. ks again?Rough101 said:
frisbee said:
I just overtake them.
Cyclists have the least impact on enthusiastic driving compared to literally everything else on the road.
Correct, cycles on the road pose no challenge for a competent driver, despite what the Daily Mail style media tell you to believe.Cyclists have the least impact on enthusiastic driving compared to literally everything else on the road.
I never find myself irritated by cyclists. I simply slow down, keep my distance behind them, and overtake when safe to do so. It doesn't matter to me if there is a single cyclist or a peloton of them. If it adds a minute to my journey, or causes me to slow down to their speed for a while, then so what?
I fully accept that when driving a car, I must share the road with other users, and I must be careful around the slowest or more vulnerable users. Pedestrians, horses, cyclists, tractors, etc. Those are the rules I agree to every time I choose to drive my car.
I have absolutely no idea why anyone gets upset by any of this. If other road users upset you so much, then perhaps driving isn't for you.
Louis Balfour said:
Are you including yourself in that number?
Highway Code rule 66: "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so."
The problem is, very often, that cyclist refuse to move over, even when they should.
I am a cyclist, by the way.
Yeah but the key bit there is "when you feel it is safe to do so". If OP doesn't feel it is safe, he is under no obligation to do so.Highway Code rule 66: "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so."
The problem is, very often, that cyclist refuse to move over, even when they should.
I am a cyclist, by the way.
Usually when drivers get ticked off about this what they're really saying is "move over into the gutter so i can squeeze past without going into the opposing lane".
Meh, I get more annoyed by the local old boys club rides where it's less of a group of riders and more a steadily spread out bunch of single cyclists that you have to overtake individually, slotting in between them as you get get chance to pass. Sometimes spaced awkwardly so that you can't slot between them and have to find a gap in traffic big enough to do a double overtake.
Question for the roadies, do you ride side by side just so that you can chat or is there another reason for it?
Question for the roadies, do you ride side by side just so that you can chat or is there another reason for it?
We always go single file when out in a group if we hear a car.
However what I find is some drivers appear st scared to go past, I suspect for fear of falling foul of the new rules. There's nothing more annoying than grinding up a 20% hill hugging the verge and waving a car past who is stuck in first gear at 4k rpm right behind you and won't overtake when there's plenty of room.
Cyclists deliberately cycling two abreast, when tucking in to allow a pass would be simple and safe, do annoy me however when I'm the driver. There does seem to be a militancy/bloody mindedness that's developed in many cyclists, mainly roadies IME
However what I find is some drivers appear s
t scared to go past, I suspect for fear of falling foul of the new rules. There's nothing more annoying than grinding up a 20% hill hugging the verge and waving a car past who is stuck in first gear at 4k rpm right behind you and won't overtake when there's plenty of room.Cyclists deliberately cycling two abreast, when tucking in to allow a pass would be simple and safe, do annoy me however when I'm the driver. There does seem to be a militancy/bloody mindedness that's developed in many cyclists, mainly roadies IME
Mont Blanc said:
Rough101 said:
frisbee said:
I just overtake them.
Cyclists have the least impact on enthusiastic driving compared to literally everything else on the road.
Correct, cycles on the road pose no challenge for a competent driver, despite what the Daily Mail style media tell you to believe.Cyclists have the least impact on enthusiastic driving compared to literally everything else on the road.
I never find myself irritated by cyclists. I simply slow down, keep my distance behind them, and overtake when safe to do so. It doesn't matter to me if there is a single cyclist or a peloton of them. If it adds a minute to my journey, or causes me to slow down to their speed for a while, then so what?
I fully accept that when driving a car, I must share the road with other users, and I must be careful around the slowest or more vulnerable users. Pedestrians, horses, cyclists, tractors, etc. Those are the rules I agree to every time I choose to drive my car.
I have absolutely no idea why anyone gets upset by any of this. If other road users upset you so much, then perhaps driving isn't for you.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff