Passing Cyclists!!

[anonymous-user]

Centurion07 said:

And we're back to giving those drivers with no spatial awareness the signal that there IS enough space to overtake when there actually isn't...

You're not giving anybody any signals. There will always be good and bad drivers, some with poor spatial awareness and others who are inattentive and distracted by what's on their phones. Cycling is dangerous full stop, but would you rather put yourself in the hands of someone who is relatively calm and rational or make them angry and more likely to take risks. Fact is drivers massively outnumber cyclists and it only takes one muppet to put you in intensive care or worse. Would you manage the risk downwards by defusing the tension and letting people by, as stated in the Highway Code or do you continue the war by taking the primary just because you think you know better? Your call.

[Centurion07]

Schmed said:

Centurion07 said:

And we're back to giving those drivers with no spatial awareness the signal that there IS enough space to overtake when there actually isn't...

You're not giving anybody any signals. There will always be good and bad drivers, some with poor spatial awareness and others who are inattentive and distracted by what's on their phones. Cycling is dangerous full stop, but would you rather put yourself in the hands of someone who is relatively calm and rational or make them angry and more likely to take risks. Fact is drivers massively outnumber cyclists and it only takes one muppet to put you in intensive care or worse. Would you manage the risk downwards by defusing the tension and letting people by, as stated in the Highway Code or do you continue the war by taking the primary just because you think you know better? Your call.

The likelihood of coming across a driver that will deliberately endanger you is pretty small.

The likelihood of coming across a driver with bad spatial awareness that will try a risky overtake is pretty large.

Nothing a cyclist can do will eliminate the first. Taking primary position, if done properly, WILL eliminate the second.

[DoubleD]

Centurion07 said:

Schmed said:

Centurion07 said:

And we're back to giving those drivers with no spatial awareness the signal that there IS enough space to overtake when there actually isn't...

You're not giving anybody any signals. There will always be good and bad drivers, some with poor spatial awareness and others who are inattentive and distracted by what's on their phones. Cycling is dangerous full stop, but would you rather put yourself in the hands of someone who is relatively calm and rational or make them angry and more likely to take risks. Fact is drivers massively outnumber cyclists and it only takes one muppet to put you in intensive care or worse. Would you manage the risk downwards by defusing the tension and letting people by, as stated in the Highway Code or do you continue the war by taking the primary just because you think you know better? Your call.

The likelihood of coming across a driver that will deliberately endanger you is pretty small.

The likelihood of coming across a driver with bad spatial awareness that will try a risky overtake is pretty large.

Nothing a cyclist can do will eliminate the first. Taking primary position, if done properly, WILL eliminate the second.

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

[Ares]

zygalski said:

To me, cyclists riding two abreast is just a big fat **** you to other road users, especially when on busy, fairly narrow B roads. I've never understood the rationale other than it could make for more dangerous overtakes by bad drivers.

It isn't. It is only the inability to be aware of what is around you that is the '**** you' element. Only the biggest wker of a driver will be bothered if after a couple of seconds behind a group of cyclists, one turns around, and either wave them past, or shouts for the others to get into single file, if it is needed.

[thisisnotaspoon]

DoubleD said:

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

The whole point of primary position is they can't "push" past you unless it's safe. Pull into the other lane, overtake, pull in. Rather than try and squeeze 2 cars and a bike into a space that only fits 2 cars (clue, the person on the bike comes off worse every time however expensive the paintwork was).

[anonymous-user]

DoubleD said:

Centurion07 said:

Schmed said:

Centurion07 said:

And we're back to giving those drivers with no spatial awareness the signal that there IS enough space to overtake when there actually isn't...

You're not giving anybody any signals. There will always be good and bad drivers, some with poor spatial awareness and others who are inattentive and distracted by what's on their phones. Cycling is dangerous full stop, but would you rather put yourself in the hands of someone who is relatively calm and rational or make them angry and more likely to take risks. Fact is drivers massively outnumber cyclists and it only takes one muppet to put you in intensive care or worse. Would you manage the risk downwards by defusing the tension and letting people by, as stated in the Highway Code or do you continue the war by taking the primary just because you think you know better? Your call.

The likelihood of coming across a driver that will deliberately endanger you is pretty small.

The likelihood of coming across a driver with bad spatial awareness that will try a risky overtake is pretty large.

Nothing a cyclist can do will eliminate the first. Taking primary position, if done properly, WILL eliminate the second.

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

Exactly, people may be even more likely to make a close pass after you've just pissed them off, and it's easy enough to make an even closer pass of someone in any position when the road opens up just to underline the point. A lot of safe driving and cycling is about attitude, if you go out looking for a fight I daresay you'll find one.

[Centurion07]

DoubleD said:

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

Primary position done properly will prevent it unless they are willing to literally smash you out the way; that's the point.

That screenshot a few posts earlier, with the Range Rover squeezing a little kid? Had the owner of the waving hand been in primary position it would've been quite clear the overtake isn't on, and even if Mr RR-dhead decides to try it anyway, the cyclist now has an extra metre of so of "escape route".

If you're already in the gutter and get squeezed you have nowhere to go.

Anyone claiming primary position shouldn't be used is directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users.

This shows how useful primary position is; van driver pass too close meaning he did it deliberately or has bad spatial awareness. The cyclist already being away from the kerb means he has a little bit more room to distance himself from the crap overtake. Note how the van driver had a massive chevron area to use but CHOSE not to do so.

This one left himself nowhere to go as he was already in the gutter and was lucky not to get knocked off.

[DoubleD]

thisisnotaspoon said:

DoubleD said:

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

The whole point of primary position is they can't "push" past you unless it's safe. Pull into the other lane, overtake, pull in. Rather than try and squeeze 2 cars and a bike into a space that only fits 2 cars (clue, the person on the bike comes off worse every time however expensive the paintwork was).

They can still push past if they are annoyed at you riding in the middle of the road, they just take more risks to get past you.

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Lets keep things civil shall we.

Yes, you are on the wrong side of the road for a little longer, but you have a greater gap between yourself and the bike/car so more wobble room. Its only worse if you pick the wrong time to overtake.

Which is why you leave the 1.5m gap.

You can leave more than 1.5m gap when in single file.

You can leave 100s of metres if you take a different road, but neither are really relevant.

2x2 is safer all round than 4x1.

Depends on a variety of factors, things like this are never black and white.

<faceplam> On a road like in the image, they are. Unless you are argumentative/obtuse/dim.

[TimoMak]

Centurion07 said:

Anyone claiming primary position shouldn't be used is directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users.

That is simply nonsense. Even the Highway Code itself does not endorse the primary position, it simply says to keep left.

[Centurion07]

Schmed said:

it's easy enough to make an even closer pass of someone in any position when the road opens up just to underline the point.

Chances are then that they're the kind of dhead that would pass close anyway but as I said, at least by being further out you now have a small amount of escape room if that happens. If you're already in the gutter and they pass too close you're fked.

[Ares]

Centurion07 said:

Anyone claiming primary position shouldn't be used is directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users.

It should be used very very sparingly, it is used far far too often.

Funnily, the cyclists I see who do maintain that' right of passage' positioning regardless and then manage talk to about it will regale stories of how they got scars/injuries from drivers pushing past....

.....and I'll then highlight that in 120,000km of cycling over the last 6/7yrs, I've never been knocked off, never been injured due to a car, never really had a near miss caused by my positioning.

I'll pose them the question, who has got it right?

[DoubleD]

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Lets keep things civil shall we.

Yes, you are on the wrong side of the road for a little longer, but you have a greater gap between yourself and the bike/car so more wobble room. Its only worse if you pick the wrong time to overtake.

Which is why you leave the 1.5m gap.

You can leave more than 1.5m gap when in single file.

You can leave 100s of metres if you take a different road, but neither are really relevant.

2x2 is safer all round than 4x1.

Depends on a variety of factors, things like this are never black and white.

On a road like in the image, they are. .

The road in the image was only 3 car lengths long, the image needs to be longer and show oncoming vehicles before you can say that 1 is safer than the other.

[thisisnotaspoon]

Schmed said:

Exactly, people may be even more likely to make a close pass after you've just pissed them off, and it's easy enough to make an even closer pass of someone in any position when the road opens up just to underline the point. A lot of safe driving and cycling is about attitude, if you go out looking for a fight I daresay you'll find one.

Schmed said:

If you are already keeping left you should never need to move over, just maintain a steady course and speed.

The problem with your idea is those car drivers (the 50% that are below average anyway) will do exactly what you just said; just maintain a steady course and speed! When that is 60mph a foot from your right elbow it's **** terrifying.

Primary vs secondary also makes no difference at all with regards to your safety relating to those drivers on their phones, radios, satnavs, or truckers watching porn. It just changes whether you go under the nearside or offside wheels, the outcome will be just as unfavorable.

People who perhaps ride bikes only occasionally and conclude that primary is bad are I think doing so because they ride too far into the gutter and get overtaken badly. As a result, they conclude that if they had been 6" to the right they'd be dead. When in reality if they'd been 3ft more to the right the driver would have crossed the line into the other lane and given them the whole lane of space. In neither scenario does the driver get held up unless the overtake was unsafe in the first place due to some other hazard (oncoming traffic, blind bends etc).

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Lets keep things civil shall we.

Yes, you are on the wrong side of the road for a little longer, but you have a greater gap between yourself and the bike/car so more wobble room. Its only worse if you pick the wrong time to overtake.

Which is why you leave the 1.5m gap.

You can leave more than 1.5m gap when in single file.

You can leave 100s of metres if you take a different road, but neither are really relevant.

2x2 is safer all round than 4x1.

Depends on a variety of factors, things like this are never black and white.

On a road like in the image, they are. .

The road in the image was only 3 car lengths long, the image needs to be longer and show oncoming vehicles before you can say that 1 is safer than the other.

Irrespective, the less time you are in the opposite carriageway the better, especially if there is oncoming traffic.

In what world is being in the oncoming carriageway for longer a better situation???

[DoubleD]

Centurion07 said:

DoubleD said:

I think you just end up winding people up so that they are even more likely to want to push past you.

Primary position done properly will prevent it unless they are willing to literally smash you out the way; that's the point.

That screenshot a few posts earlier, with the Range Rover squeezing a little kid? Had the owner of the waving hand been in primary position it would've been quite clear the overtake isn't on, and even if Mr RR-dhead decides to try it anyway, the cyclist now has an extra metre of so of "escape route".

If you're already in the gutter and get squeezed you have nowhere to go.

Anyone claiming primary position shouldn't be used is directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users.

This shows how useful primary position is; van driver pass too close meaning he did it deliberately or has bad spatial awareness. The cyclist already being away from the kerb means he has a little bit more room to distance himself from the crap overtake. Note how the van driver had a massive chevron area to use but CHOSE not to do so.

This one left himself nowhere to go as he was already in the gutter and was lucky not to get knocked off.

To me winding up others by riding down the middle of the road is a very bad idea.

My opinion is in no way directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users either.

[Centurion07]

TimoMak said:

Centurion07 said:

Anyone claiming primary position shouldn't be used is directly endorsing endangering vulnerable road users.

That is simply nonsense. Even the Highway Code itself does not endorse the primary position, it simply says to keep left.

And yet here you have a police force actively encouraging it...

https://www.northants.police.uk/police-forces/nort...


Can you point out any rules from the Highway Code SPECIFIC to cyclists, that mention keeping left to enable vehicles to overtake because all I could find was a link to the general rules (from the cyclist section) which includes this gem:

Rule 163
Overtake only when it is SAFE and legal to do so

[DoubleD]

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Lets keep things civil shall we.

Yes, you are on the wrong side of the road for a little longer, but you have a greater gap between yourself and the bike/car so more wobble room. Its only worse if you pick the wrong time to overtake.

Which is why you leave the 1.5m gap.

You can leave more than 1.5m gap when in single file.

You can leave 100s of metres if you take a different road, but neither are really relevant.

2x2 is safer all round than 4x1.

Depends on a variety of factors, things like this are never black and white.

On a road like in the image, they are. .

The road in the image was only 3 car lengths long, the image needs to be longer and show oncoming vehicles before you can say that 1 is safer than the other.

Irrespective, the less time you are in the opposite carriageway the better, especially if there is oncoming traffic.

In what world is being in the oncoming carriageway for longer a better situation???

Like I say, it depends on the road layout, they are all different. It doesnt take long to over take a few cyclists so hardly an issue.

[thisisnotaspoon]

DoubleD said:

The road in the image was only 3 car lengths long, the image needs to be longer and show oncoming vehicles before you can say that 1 is safer than the other.

If your idea of a safe overtake is that marginal that you're measuring the space to pull in safely is a few bike lengths then the cyclist isn't the problem. For reference, my racing bike's wheelbase is ~105cm, so about 170cm overall, say 2m allowing a 1ft gap to the next guys wheel when drafting.

[anonymous-user]

Centurion07 said:

Schmed said:

it's easy enough to make an even closer pass of someone in any position when the road opens up just to underline the point.

Chances are then that they're the kind of dhead that would pass close anyway but as I said, at least by being further out you now have a small amount of escape room if that happens. If you're already in the gutter and they pass too close you're fked.

Or chances are they would've left you well alone if you hadn't pissed them off.