Why you should give cyclists a wide berth when passing.

[WinstonWolf]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I had one this morning, the utter spunktrumpet passed me @circa 60MPH with less than 2" to spare

That's fking out of order.

Most people are absolutely fine, this one was an utter . I know when they're too close as the hairs on my legs (I'm not that committed) get dragged by their slipstream

[WinstonWolf]

spookly said:

Devil2575 said:

Indeed. For what is supposed to be a motoring forum the level of ignorance on this subject is astounding.

The idea that Cyclists cause the traffic jams is one of the biggest cases of "I'll believe any old nonsense if it supports by point of view" that I have heard on a long time.

That would be true, if that was what I was saying, but I wasn't... so it isn't.

The gripe everyone has with cyclists is that they hold up otherwise free flowing traffic, and make it difficult to overtake them, which mostly happens outside of areas of congestion given in his example.

He has tried to say that cyclists don't have an impact by ignoring the obvious example of how cyclists do exactly that. He instead offered his 40 years experience of sitting in traffic where cars have held him up as somehow being relevant to the effect cyclists have on free flowing roads... which it isn't.

Nobody is saying bikes hold up cars that are already held up by other cars, that would be nonsense. What is being said is that cars and other faster vehicles are often held up by slow moving cyclists on free flowing roads - which happens a lot. And it will have an impact on efficiency of each car behind them.

If you are too simple to understand the ridiculousness of his argument, then perhaps it is yourself who is ignorant.

Where are these free flowing roads? I've been driving for years and rarely encounter them. What normally happens is I occasionally move briskly until I encounter the next jam that we all cause with our cars...

[WinstonWolf]

spookly said:

WinstonWolf said:

spookly said:

Devil2575 said:

Indeed. For what is supposed to be a motoring forum the level of ignorance on this subject is astounding.

The idea that Cyclists cause the traffic jams is one of the biggest cases of "I'll believe any old nonsense if it supports by point of view" that I have heard on a long time.

That would be true, if that was what I was saying, but I wasn't... so it isn't.

The gripe everyone has with cyclists is that they hold up otherwise free flowing traffic, and make it difficult to overtake them, which mostly happens outside of areas of congestion given in his example.

He has tried to say that cyclists don't have an impact by ignoring the obvious example of how cyclists do exactly that. He instead offered his 40 years experience of sitting in traffic where cars have held him up as somehow being relevant to the effect cyclists have on free flowing roads... which it isn't.

Nobody is saying bikes hold up cars that are already held up by other cars, that would be nonsense. What is being said is that cars and other faster vehicles are often held up by slow moving cyclists on free flowing roads - which happens a lot. And it will have an impact on efficiency of each car behind them.

If you are too simple to understand the ridiculousness of his argument, then perhaps it is yourself who is ignorant.

Where are these free flowing roads? I've been driving for years and rarely encounter them. What normally happens is I occasionally move briskly until I encounter the next jam that we all cause with our cars...

Maybe you need to move and/or avoid busy times on the road.

I do notice when I go to the South East that the traffic is constantly absolutely terrible, tons of speed cameras and you can almost taste the traffic fumes. Do you live in the South East?

In my county we have 1 live speed camera which is near a school. There is a 'safety partnership' camera van, but they publish where they hide and are usually on Waze. Town centres might get a bit of heavier traffic with school runs/rush hour, but not South East style almost parker congestion.

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

So you could also take your motorbike if these horrible cyclists are ruining your day. I bet those tourists cause far more congestion than the odd cyclist...

Just chill, if you're in a car you're only moving between jams. Life will be far less stressful if you relax.

[WinstonWolf]

spookly said:

walm said:

spookly said:

That in no way negates that the cyclists are still holding the traffic up though does it?

It means that your average speed would be below 50mph.

So this:

spookly said:

I would have driven at 50mph all the way, as would all the other cars on that road.

Is just a massive exaggeration, like the rest of your post.

You are making the incorrect assumption that I'd bother slowing down for the 40mph limits, or be sticking rigidly to the 50mph in the first place.
I've made that journey before and averaged above 50mph, possibly far higher on my motorbike.

And still nothing you are saying negates the fact I regularly get held up by cyclists. Trying to nit pick because I'm right isn't a good look.

So your hypocrisy doesn't extend to sticking to the law? I bet you regularly complain about cyclists safely jumping red lights too...

[WinstonWolf]

spookly said:

WinstonWolf said:

So your hypocrisy doesn't extend to sticking to the law? I bet you regularly complain about cyclists safely jumping red lights too...

Cool post bro.

No hypocrisy. I'm not complaining because cyclists are breaking a law - so far as I am aware they aren't.

I am complaining because they are unnecessarily inconveniencing me by choice.

So please explain where the hypocrisy is?

I take it you ride your motorbike for pleasure seeing as you've confirmed you don't use it for work?

[WinstonWolf]

walm said:

spookly said:

I don't take a vehicle onto public road that I know cannot get up to the speed limit and will definitely inconvenience others.

So do you equally condemn:
- Caravanists.
- Anyone with a trailer.
- Classic cars.
- Leisure drivers who choose to go a little under the limit.
- The horrendous Yaris, the garage lent me as a "courtesy" car.
- Pedestrians. Particularly, those bearded rambler-types.
- People using zebra/pelican/pegasus crossings when not going to work.

Or is it just people on really narrow leisure vehicles that even a sub-par driver can overtake without much hassle?

You forgot horses, I bet he hates horses using *his* road too

[WinstonWolf]

Conscript said:

walm said:

WinstonWolf said:

You forgot horses, I bet he hates horses using *his* road too

He already mentioned them I think. It was a given. Everyone hates the jodphur-wearing brigade.
How very dare they. [/D+ Pony Club badge and proud]

Yet how many threads are there on PH complaining about horses? Arguably they are far, harder to pass because they require you slow to an absolute crawl both whilst you're stuck behind them and when passing them. Yet annoying as they are, most of us are able to accept their presence and not be too begrudging of them. Why is the same attitude not extended to someone on a bike?

"because cyclist" Spookly is more importantier when he's in his car don'tcha know.

[WinstonWolf]

Finlandia said:

Conscript said:

Finlandia said:

Conscript said:

walm said:

WinstonWolf said:

You forgot horses, I bet he hates horses using *his* road too

He already mentioned them I think. It was a given. Everyone hates the jodphur-wearing brigade.
How very dare they. [/D+ Pony Club badge and proud]

Yet how many threads are there on PH complaining about horses? Arguably they are far, harder to pass because they require you slow to an absolute crawl both whilst you're stuck behind them and when passing them. Yet annoying as they are, most of us are able to accept their presence and not be too begrudging of them. Why is the same attitude not extended to someone on a bike?

Not that many horses in city centres though

I thought the whole basis of his objection was people riding for pleasure on rural roads.

To be fair, the horses around here are very seldom seen riding on the roads.

There's one round here, wobbles all over the fking shop on his bicycle...

[WinstonWolf]

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?

[WinstonWolf]

Storer said:

As ever, you two wheeled pedal power maniacs rise to the bait!

This website is for car enthusiasts, but some on here seem to spend a good amount of time rubbishing the car. Are you on the right website?

The replies to my last post seemed to concentrate on the overtaking issue

No one seemed to want to address the dedicated cycle paths question. Why is it necessary to still cycle on the road when there is a wide, dedicated cycle path beside the road? It is much safer than the road, so why not use them. Returning to the lycra lovers, I have never seen a lycra clad cyclist on the dedicated cycleway. Is it because it reduces their credibility as a 'serious cyclist'??

And what about racing on a track. You could swerve around other cyclist or ride 4 abreast in complete safety.... No potholes either!

I am also curious if any on here have any third party insurance when out cycling?

It appears that some posters on this forum spend a great deal of their time on here. There are other things to life and you could always cycle to experience them in your lycra!

We're all petrol heads on here too, it's just that some of us also cycle so we can see both sides of the coin.

[WinstonWolf]

Mr2Mike said:

heebeegeetee said:

Would you say cyclists cause one millionth of the delays we drivers do or is our share far greater?

Who is "our" in the above sentence; cyclists or drivers? Cyclists frequently cause significant congestion in my area, especially when it's a bus that's crawling along behind them with no chance at all of getting past safely. The effects last long after the cyclist has gone.

Ergo something else is causing it

Brilliant, now we're getting blamed for congestion even when we're not there.

[WinstonWolf]

Devil2575 said:

Mr2Mike said:

WinstonWolf said:

Ergo something else is causing it

Brilliant, now we're getting blamed for congestion even when we're not there.

Read again, sounds like your brains have been mashed into the saddle a bit too much.

On narrow, busy urban roads cyclists hold up traffic and cause congestion. The problem is worse when they hold up buses since buses have no way of overtaking safely. The considerable build up traffic this causes at peaks times does not magically vanish when the cyclist decides to let traffic past, or when traffic reaches a wider section of road, so this one act of selfishness causes congestion on the road for a considerable period.

But the actual problem is the heavy traffic in the first place, which is why the congestion remains afterwards.

He won't have it, even though there isn't a cyclist in front of the bus on these busy urban roads it's still the cyclists fault.

[WinstonWolf]

Storer said:

ambuletz said:

Storer said:

No one seemed to want to address the dedicated cycle paths question. Why is it necessary to still cycle on the road when there is a wide, dedicated cycle path beside the road? It is much safer than the road, so why not use them. Returning to the lycra lovers, I have never seen a lycra clad cyclist on the dedicated cycleway. Is it because it reduces their credibility as a 'serious cyclist'??

I don't know about the country but there are many reasons.

- it can be dirty/not cleaned often (where as the roads are cleaner). = more likely to get a puncture
- it might not be as smooth as the road.
- the route might be slower.

There's a small hill on my way to the gym that has a cycle lane move off the road and onto the pavement. I used it once and I will never use it again. It's more dirty AND is full of hidden bumps. Not safe. There's also the matter of merging back into traffic at the bottom of the hill when the lane goes back into the road, no thanks too slow. I stick to the road which is smoother, quicker, cleaner. In that direction there are no overtaking lines, but almost all people overtake and i've no problem with it. 99% of people don't either. There's always that 1% that THINK I shouldn't be there, but they're always fat, old, and mostly women who are PMSing at having to use a little bit of their brain power to think about how to do a safe overtake.

There are some cycle lanes in my area that I don't use because they're on pavements. If I'm heading down the road and need to do a right turn I'd have to stop at the edge of the road and cross, no thanks!! I know how to use the roads so would rather do that.

So it is your ability to travel at speed that prevents you using the cycle path!

If the government are going to spend substantial sums of money on these safer cycle ways there must be a penalty or abdication of responsibility.
If there is a cycle path then ALL cyclist should be compelled to use them. If they choose to use the road then any accident involving a cyclist should be seen as 'caused by the cyclist' leaving him open to claims for compensation.

We have seen a massive increase in cycling for pleasure and a similar increase in the 'cycle trials' on road racing. 26 years ago when I moved to where I live we never had road races in the area. Now groups of cyclists are a daily sight. Singles and pairs are almost 10 a penny.

The situation has changed but there has not been a reduction in traffic. It has probably doubled also. If the current spending on cycle ways continues we need to 'force' all cyclists to use them. Not just the old biddies/codgers (which you will all become) to use them.

Purpose made cycle ways didn't exist here 26 years ago, even 5 years ago. Habits need to be changed and judging by the comments on here the only way is by using a 'stick'.

Sorry to break this to you sunshine, the only stick is going to be against our cars, not bicycles.

Mountain bikes and hybrids are OK on cycle paths, ROAD bikes are for use on the roads.

[WinstonWolf]

Storer said:

My comments are clearly falling on deaf ears here.

Your desire to continue to enjoy your lycra clad hobby (there must be some element of fetish involved here!) seem to over rule the element of common sense and personal risk prevention.

I am not sure of the abrasive, shock absorbing qualities of lycra as you are sliding along the tarmac, but I am sure you would wear something that offered maximum protection in the event of an accident! You would want to be as safe a possible, yes.

Look out for your own safety and use our overcrowded road network accordingly. If there is a cycle way, use it. Don't be too proud.

I think my work is done here, so this is my last post on this thread.

Why hasn't your toy got airbags and ABS?

[WinstonWolf]

Finlandia said:

WinstonWolf said:

Sorry to break this to you sunshine, the only stick is going to be against our cars, not bicycles.

Mountain bikes and hybrids are OK on cycle paths, ROAD bikes are for use on the roads.

Surely mountain bikes must then be made for mountains?

Dunno, I only get mine out when I'm pissed

[WinstonWolf]

Finlandia said:

WinstonWolf said:

Finlandia said:

WinstonWolf said:

Sorry to break this to you sunshine, the only stick is going to be against our cars, not bicycles.

Mountain bikes and hybrids are OK on cycle paths, ROAD bikes are for use on the roads.

Surely mountain bikes must then be made for mountains?

Dunno, I only get mine out when I'm pissed

It's not you being pissed up in the wobbly video, is it?

I'd love to be able to give you a witty comeback in Russian, but I can't...

[WinstonWolf]

WMP would seem to agree. A very well written article on the subject.

https://trafficwmp.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/juncti...