Cycling two abreast....agree or not?

[Foss62]

MB140 said:

I have no problem with 2 abreast in groups of say 6 and over. Keeps the overall overtaking distance shorter.

The one that really really pisses me off is when you wait patiently to overtake the group of cyclists. Then at the next set of traffic lights the whole group pile past you and then stop at the front of the queue (or worse still pile straight through the red light as obviously the rules of the roads don’t apply to them) rather than just waiting in the queue with everyone else. This then means the whole bunch of cars have to wait for spots to overtake them again. Bunch of c**ts of the highest order.

I saw a guy in Sudbury on Themes actually get out his transit van and go absolutely ape st at a group of cyclists that did just this. The cyclists to a man couldn’t see what his issue was, they all genuinely seemed surprised by his reaction. Inconsiderate tw*ts.

So what about all the inconsiderate tw*ts who overtake cyclists when it is clear that they will be holding those cyclists up a few yards down the road? If it is obvious that someone is travelling faster than you, then why insist on trying to get past them?

[S0updr4g0n]

It's road type / condition dependent imho. If I have to cross the line to overtake anything such as a single cyclist, I would rather there be two or even three abreast (if space allows) as it shortens the overtake and limits my vulnerability to some extent.

Other than that, I just sit back and wait for an opportunity to go past, I don't let it bother me as it may hold me up for a bit but I don't have a sore arse, am not wet or sweating/out of breath.

I do have a slight giggle at the cyclists going up hills with their legs going ten to the dozen at maybe 1mph.

[Foss62]

Wombat3 said:

If you are delaying other people by cycling 2 abreast then its just bloody rude not to fall into single file; and far too many of them do it round here & plainly don't give a st about being considerate to other road users.

It may be quicker to pass them than 2 in line but if there is any oncoming traffic then often you can't pass them safely at all (whereas you could if they were not side by side).

First rule of being a considerate road user (IMO): don't hold anyone else up if you don't have to.

As a driver for more than forty years I’m not sure I’ve ever come across a pair of cyclists causing the problems you describe. Many cyclists often ride side by side, as do horse riders and pedestrians (where there is no pavement), but if they are holding anything up they will drop into line and let it past. Unfortunately a few drivers seem to think that being required to slow down to let this happen is somehow problematic.
Your second paragraph suggests that you are trying to overtake in the face of oncoming traffic. This is a problem with your driving technique - not the activities of cyclists.

[Wombat3]

Foss62 said:

Wombat3 said:

If you are delaying other people by cycling 2 abreast then its just bloody rude not to fall into single file; and far too many of them do it round here & plainly don't give a st about being considerate to other road users.

It may be quicker to pass them than 2 in line but if there is any oncoming traffic then often you can't pass them safely at all (whereas you could if they were not side by side).

First rule of being a considerate road user (IMO): don't hold anyone else up if you don't have to.

As a driver for more than forty years I’m not sure I’ve ever come across a pair of cyclists causing the problems you describe. Many cyclists often ride side by side, as do horse riders and pedestrians (where there is no pavement), but if they are holding anything up they will drop into line and let it past. Unfortunately a few drivers seem to think that being required to slow down to let this happen is somehow problematic.
Your second paragraph suggests that you are trying to overtake in the face of oncoming traffic. This is a problem with your driving technique - not the activities of cyclists.

Lucky you..

The road between here and my local town where my business is located actually has a designated cycle lane, wide enough for one cyclist & which will also allow traffic to pass safely regardless of what is coming the other way. That's what its for.

That is unless of course one of the countless packs of "Mamils" that tend to appear on a Saturday morning occupy the whole bloody lane.

Very frigging annoying when I'm trying to get to work on a Saturday morning.

So nothing wrong with my driving technique in this instance thanks .

Assumption eh? Often doesn't end well....

[NDA]

Something the Road Captains around me will love... they're in charge of who overtakes and when.

[ChocolateFrog]

mac96 said:

Pure speculation, but how often to cyclists riding close together have accidents not involving other traffic, when those at the front whose view is unobstructed react to a hazard and those riding a couple of feet away pile into them? You see it happening to motorcyclists.

I never felt comfortable cycling in a bunch, or even two side by side, for that reason, apart from it being sometimes inconsiderate.

I've never seen it personally.

Those at the front should be passing messages back or using hand signals to indicate hazards or obstructions ahead.

[Fady]

hyphen said:

I did the motorcycle theory test recently, and the official guidance is to leave loads of room for cyclists, as they may have to suddenly swerve to avoid damaged manhole covers/potholes and so on.

So by riding two abreast, they are clearly idiots putting themselves in danger as they won't have the room to manoeuvre

One wouldn't 'suddenly swerve' if conscious of another vehicle in close proximity as that would be equally daft. However hitting a pothole or other obstacle can cause you to veer from your intended path - hence the reason for this guidance.

If you are riding two abreast or in any group you tend to spend some time constantly monitoring the terrain and you shout warnings or make hand gestures to warn the other riders.

[Slow]

My house is 10 miles of single track lane to town without wide overtaking bits other than the passing places. You might not see a car the entire time down the road, other times you see one every mile or so to give you an idea of how busy it is.

Regular people always pull in to let you past, I dont mind these people even when stuck behind for a minute or so till the next passing place (even sometimes they just stop and go on the grass).

The lycra terrorists however are a nightmare even more so when 2 abreast, think they are going the speed of light at 30 mph downhill for miles on end so refuse to let people past. They wont pull over going up hill either despite some seriously slow speeds. Makes you want to own a paintball gun to nail them or a stick in the spokes.

They act like they are on the tour de france with their heads buried into the handlebars flying around corners on whatever is the quickest way round.

You almost get hit by atleast 1-2 a week in the summer with them going round blind bends in the middle of the road and they just dont react like a car would do. You can see the panic on their faces when they look up mid corner and see a car blocking the racing line. Even the school bus that drives the road daily has been hit by a few over the years and its a slow moving big white bd.

Then you get the ones that weave into the passing place expecting you to nip past but you dont and the same again at the next one, so at the next they weave in and wave you past... Ok then just get flattened by my plant trailer you stupid bd. The shock as they see a trailer coming past with the space rapidly shrinking and they have slam on and stop is most enjoyable.

As you can tell I fking hate the s on these roads. I dont care on roads with 2 lanes as you can overtake but a 15 minute drive can become 40 minutes if you get a tt in front who purposly cycles in the middle to block overtaking in the small passing places. You fairly often see them in the grass off the road with broke bikes/tyres, much more frquently than you see cars smashed up in the ditches so kind of sums up their cycling style on this road as they think it is a empty time trial track or something as it works as part of a loop they try to do.

Road got closed for a few hours in the summer this year so can only assume a few got hit at once as there was multiple ambulances in attendance and no breakdown trucks so was probably involving a tractor.

[Mr Tidy]

I used to ride miles on my pushbike in the mid 70s, including up the Box Hill Zig-Zags to catch up with a school-mate who lived just up the road from the Hand-in-Hand. Long before the 2012 Olympics made it trendy.

On roads like that one cyclist prevents cars overtaking unless there is nothing coming the other way, so two abreast doesn't really make much difference!

But lately the A25 between Guildford and Dorking and in places like Windsor Great Park have become a bit of a nightmare with whole waves of Lycra bikers in a clump.

While they may seem oblivious (or uninterested) in the presence of other traffic, you don't usually have to wait too long to get past.

Live and let live - although a motorbike does seem like the best solution!

[Klippie]

A question for cyclists...would you walk along two abreast on a busy road and not feel scared someone would run you down.

[StuntmanMike]

I have no problem with it. We have a lot of cyclists by me ( country lanes ) and the overtaking I see is appalling.

Two abreast forces the car into the other lane to overtake which is where they should be anyway.

You only have to read this thread to see how st drivers attitudes are to other road users.

All a bit pathetic really.

[craig_m67]

Here in Australia, it’s perfectly legal to ride two abreast and take up the whole lane. I’ve no issue with it whatsoever.. to do so would be pointless, as it’s legal

What does the law/Highway Code say in the UK?

[Johnnytheboy]

DoubleD said:

kharma45 said:

Johnnytheboy said:

I always give single cyclists loads of room when passing.

When they are two abreast by definition I can't give the guy on the right as much room unless the road is unnaturally wide.

Their choice.

This sounds like you’re trying to squeeze past them without leaving your side of the road? If so, fk me that’s idiotic.

Why not overtake like you would a motorised vehicle that’s moving slowly in front of you? Wait until there’s nothing oncoming and overtake properly.

It doesnt read like that to me.

At least DoubleD can read.

If I'm driving down a two lane, but not hugely wide road and I come up behind two cyclists riding single file, I can overtake on the other side of the road (N.B. kharma45) leaving both cyclists ample room.

If I encounter two cyclists riding abreast, the right-most one near the white line, by definition I can't give the right-most cyclist cyclist as much room as I could in the first scenario.

I'm still going to overtake, so it is in the cyclists' gift to give themselves more space should they consider it important.

[slopes]

This again?
I personally think that everyone should be forced to walk, solves the issues then. Until some officious nurk decides he is walking faster and we should all have to give way to him. Then there will be the walking races, where some one will moan about people walking two abreast in their fancy yellow hi vis with their number on it.

[anonymous-user]

Delay , delay , delay...

Where are all these important motorists going that the extra minute they are allegedly delayed makes them red in the face and take to the internet ? Patience ffs.

[slopes]

Iwantafusca said:

Delay , delay , delay...

Where are all these important motorists going that the extra minute they are allegedly delayed makes them red in the face and take to the internet ? Patience ffs.

Wouldn't have this if everyone was made to walk everywhere, bloody motorists and cyclists clogging up perfectly good walkways

[Biggy Stardust]

If cyclists want courtesy from other road users then they should show some themselves. This is often not the case. The same applies to horse riders.

[kambites]

Biggy Stardust said:

If cyclists want courtesy from other road users then they should show some themselves. This is often not the case. The same applies to horse riders.

And indeed drivers, surely? Who are generally about the most self-centred, impatient, least courteous bunch on the road.

[DoubleD]

kambites said:

Biggy Stardust said:

If cyclists want courtesy from other road users then they should show some themselves. This is often not the case. The same applies to horse riders.

And indeed drivers, surely? Who are generally about the most self-centred, impatient, least courteous bunch on the road.

They are also the majority bunch on the road, so its always going to seem that way.

[NewUsername]

Speedy23 said:

See here:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/26/uk...

Well for one, I don't agree. As a driver, a motorcyclist and.....gasp....a pedal cyclist, all I can say is that I get really annoyed by clumps of cyclists stubbornly refusing to move over and restricting the flow of traffic on otherwise perfectly passable roads.

I always used to think that being considerate to others was all part of being a responsible road user, but reading this self-justifying nonsense is making me really annoyed.

This needs nipping in the bud ASAP.

Just IMHO.

havent read the thread yet but its already legal and has always been, its just being made more explicit for those too stupid or too lazy to read/understand the highway code