Should all motorists be made to cycle regularly?
Discussion
I wasn't too sure whether to post this in here or in the Pie & Piston, but as I am actually quite serious in my belief that this would advance a lot of people's driving skills, I settled for here!
When I have to be in the office, I cycle in. This is 13 miles each way, mostly on cycle paths and quiet backroads through SW London, but also with some fairly nasty junctions to traverse, so it gives me an hour or so each way to think about what is around me. Yesterday, I got home from the office, jumped off the bike and into the car, and it set me thinking about all the various ways that my experience of cycling has improved my driving. Then I started thinking that if everyone had to go on an accompanied couple of hours of cycling instruction every 5-10 years or so as a condition of keeping their licence, it might make our roads a much safer place. I've listed just a few of these improvements below. What do people think?
Looking behind you before overtaking. When I'm in the car, it is extremely rare that I'll have someone pulling out to overtake me when I am pulling out to overtake someone else, whether they are moving or stationary. On the bike, on the other hand, it happens most of the time, as I'm generally slower than the majority of motorised traffic, which means I will always make the point of looking, and also do so in the car. Useful on the one day I happen to get a guy blasting past on a superbike as I pull out to pass granny in her Micra, and I've had people pull out on me when I'm overtaking them before now, enough to know that plenty of people just ignore what's behind them.
Calculating merge speed with other traffic With a car, not only do you fee less vulnerable than on a bike, it's also much easier to just hit the brakes and then accelerate again. If you're approaching a traffic merge on a bike, then getting there too early just means burning more energy to get there, then burning more to get started again after you've hit the brakes. Getting their too late, and again you've got to either slam the brakes on and start again or go splat!
Actually watching the road surface Hit a pothole in a car, and it's annoying, but most people won't think about it potentially damaging their car. Hit one on a bike and it tends to be rather painful! You also learn far more quickly, especially when cornering at speed, about the differences in traction you get off tarmac and a metal drain cover.
Getting your driving position right How often do you see middle-aged women driving in a position that allows them to lick the inside of the windscreen clean without undoing their seatbelt? Or young kids who've just passed their test and think it's cool to drive with their arm dead straight, forgetting that a road car has a more angled wheel than an F1 car and requires rather more lock too? People can do this in a car because whilst it may be limiting their ability, it's not doing so to the point that they really feel it. Move a saddle or handlebars just an inch in any direction on the other hand, and it instantly becomes very uncomfortable over any length of time. Demonstrate it to drivers, then put people back in their cars, agree with them that they can't feel the difference in the same way, but work with them on getting their car setup right for them.
General increase in awareness I hit something or get hit by something on a bike, and at best it's going to hurt. At worst, nothing is ever going to hurt again. I get hit or hit something in a car, and it's probably just a bit of bodywork needing fixing.... until the something I hit is a cyclist or a pushchair. This is probably the area that I most feel the benefit of cycling in improving my driving.
Increased speed awareness Anyone who has ever driven at 40mph knows that it is a nice, safe slow speed. They must do, as so many people do it through residential areas. Anyone who has ever ridden a pushbike at 40mph knows it's bloody quick and pretty scary! You might have better brakes in a car, but a bike is much narrower, so has more room to move out of danger if an obstacle presents itself. Realise how fast 40 is in a different context, and you also realise how fast it is in a car in the wrong sort of surroundings.
Making sure you've preprared yourself correctly for a manouevre. With the car, it's easy to think I can afford to be sloppy, as I can generally accelerate myself out of trouble. On a bike, I don't flatter myself about having that level of power!
When I have to be in the office, I cycle in. This is 13 miles each way, mostly on cycle paths and quiet backroads through SW London, but also with some fairly nasty junctions to traverse, so it gives me an hour or so each way to think about what is around me. Yesterday, I got home from the office, jumped off the bike and into the car, and it set me thinking about all the various ways that my experience of cycling has improved my driving. Then I started thinking that if everyone had to go on an accompanied couple of hours of cycling instruction every 5-10 years or so as a condition of keeping their licence, it might make our roads a much safer place. I've listed just a few of these improvements below. What do people think?
Looking behind you before overtaking. When I'm in the car, it is extremely rare that I'll have someone pulling out to overtake me when I am pulling out to overtake someone else, whether they are moving or stationary. On the bike, on the other hand, it happens most of the time, as I'm generally slower than the majority of motorised traffic, which means I will always make the point of looking, and also do so in the car. Useful on the one day I happen to get a guy blasting past on a superbike as I pull out to pass granny in her Micra, and I've had people pull out on me when I'm overtaking them before now, enough to know that plenty of people just ignore what's behind them.
Calculating merge speed with other traffic With a car, not only do you fee less vulnerable than on a bike, it's also much easier to just hit the brakes and then accelerate again. If you're approaching a traffic merge on a bike, then getting there too early just means burning more energy to get there, then burning more to get started again after you've hit the brakes. Getting their too late, and again you've got to either slam the brakes on and start again or go splat!
Actually watching the road surface Hit a pothole in a car, and it's annoying, but most people won't think about it potentially damaging their car. Hit one on a bike and it tends to be rather painful! You also learn far more quickly, especially when cornering at speed, about the differences in traction you get off tarmac and a metal drain cover.
Getting your driving position right How often do you see middle-aged women driving in a position that allows them to lick the inside of the windscreen clean without undoing their seatbelt? Or young kids who've just passed their test and think it's cool to drive with their arm dead straight, forgetting that a road car has a more angled wheel than an F1 car and requires rather more lock too? People can do this in a car because whilst it may be limiting their ability, it's not doing so to the point that they really feel it. Move a saddle or handlebars just an inch in any direction on the other hand, and it instantly becomes very uncomfortable over any length of time. Demonstrate it to drivers, then put people back in their cars, agree with them that they can't feel the difference in the same way, but work with them on getting their car setup right for them.
General increase in awareness I hit something or get hit by something on a bike, and at best it's going to hurt. At worst, nothing is ever going to hurt again. I get hit or hit something in a car, and it's probably just a bit of bodywork needing fixing.... until the something I hit is a cyclist or a pushchair. This is probably the area that I most feel the benefit of cycling in improving my driving.
Increased speed awareness Anyone who has ever driven at 40mph knows that it is a nice, safe slow speed. They must do, as so many people do it through residential areas. Anyone who has ever ridden a pushbike at 40mph knows it's bloody quick and pretty scary! You might have better brakes in a car, but a bike is much narrower, so has more room to move out of danger if an obstacle presents itself. Realise how fast 40 is in a different context, and you also realise how fast it is in a car in the wrong sort of surroundings.
Making sure you've preprared yourself correctly for a manouevre. With the car, it's easy to think I can afford to be sloppy, as I can generally accelerate myself out of trouble. On a bike, I don't flatter myself about having that level of power!
The fact that I had cycled a lot certainly made it significantly easier for me to learn to drive. I suspect that I do still drive differently because of it too, I certainly give cyclists and pedestrians far more space than anyone else I know.
I think I drive more smoothly because of it too, progressing under your own steam teaches you to do things like timing it so the traffic lights are green when you reach them.
I think I drive more smoothly because of it too, progressing under your own steam teaches you to do things like timing it so the traffic lights are green when you reach them.
BliarOut said:
I'm not sure about the fitness aspect of cycling, but I've long believed everyone should ride a small capacity motorbike before qualifying for a car licence. It raises your perception of grip levels and vulnerability to levels you will never fully appreciate in a car alone.
I have to agree with this too. If we all rode bikes before we drove cars, our awarness of surrounding conditions at a similar speed to other traffic would be seriously improved.
Plus, if a young lad (or lady) acts like a twunt on a bike, they will probably only hurt themselves, when they act like twunts in a car, they have a much larger cahnce of hurting other people and walking away un harmed.
It could be bring insurance down too, you've done two years on two wheels, have a cheaper policy.
The other thing that could be done is to limit the engine size to say 1.1 litres (similar to the system they have with bikes) for the first two years after passing your test (if you're not made to ride a bike).
You make some good points though Kermit, people should be made more aware of what goes on around them.
bob1179 said:
The other thing that could be done is to limit the engine size to say 1.1 litres (similar to the system they have with bikes) for the first two years after passing your test (if you're not made to ride a bike).
I've never been quite sure why this was done with bikes and not cars - it always seemed like a good idea to me. I'm not sure engine capacity would necessarily be the right thing to go for though... you'd just get 17 year-olds putting damn great turbos on their 1.1 novas and making them completely undrivable from the turbo lag; maybe limit power output to 60bhp or something?
kambites said:
bob1179 said:
The other thing that could be done is to limit the engine size to say 1.1 litres (similar to the system they have with bikes) for the first two years after passing your test (if you're not made to ride a bike).
I've never been quite sure why this was done with bikes and not cars - it always seemed like a good idea to me. I'm not sure engine capacity would necessarily be the right thing to go for though... you'd just get 17 year-olds putting damn great turbos on their 1.1 novas and making them completely undrivable from the turbo lag; maybe limit power output to 60bhp or something?
Then they would pare the weight down. Power to weight ratio would make sense though. You could always offer incentives to progress to more powerful vehicles earlier if you pass an extended test.
BliarOut said:
kambites said:
bob1179 said:
The other thing that could be done is to limit the engine size to say 1.1 litres (similar to the system they have with bikes) for the first two years after passing your test (if you're not made to ride a bike).
I've never been quite sure why this was done with bikes and not cars - it always seemed like a good idea to me. I'm not sure engine capacity would necessarily be the right thing to go for though... you'd just get 17 year-olds putting damn great turbos on their 1.1 novas and making them completely undrivable from the turbo lag; maybe limit power output to 60bhp or something?
Then they would pare the weight down. Power to weight ratio would make sense though. You could always offer incentives to progress to more powerful vehicles earlier if you pass an extended test.
Nah, there's a limit to how fast you can make a 60bhp car and having people driving light cars is a good thing in my book. I'm not sure about a second test because I personally believe that the problem with young people driving powerful cars is as much about maturity as it is about driving skill.
It is certainly a power limit on a bike, any bike you like as long as it is restricted to 33bhp. Unless of course you are over 21 and go direct access then you can pass your test and hop on a 200bhp superbike. Not sure that anomaly is a good idea perhaps there should initially be higher limit than 33bhp for DA.
But to make this relevant to the thread. Yes I agree that all driver should spend some time on a pushbike.
But to make this relevant to the thread. Yes I agree that all driver should spend some time on a pushbike.
First of all, cards on the table, I cycle alot.
I think there are definitely things in cycling, and motorcycling, which you have to pay more attention to on a bike compared to in a car.
Therefore I would say that my awareness has been enhanced and my appreciation of hazzards has been altered in my driving because of experiences and habits formed on the bike: Life saver checks, appreciation of speed , listening to your surroundings (admittedly more dificult in a car, but you can still hear clues of somethings in advance of them being seen).
Should everybody be made to cycle? I would love it if they were!
I doubt though that it would lead automatically to a better standard of driving. As 'advanced' drivers or at very least somebody who is aware that their driving can be improved, I'm sure most here are aware already of the little extra 'techniques' mentioned above (and by the OP). I wouldn't be surprised if it were just the same people who actively try to improve their driving already, who would see the potential crossovers.
The majority of people though would probably continue on cycling/ driving without much thought to what they are doing. As said already, there are a lot if lycra clad idiots out there ignoring the rules of the road asking for an accident to happen. Do they apply anything from their from their cycling to their driving? I almost hope not!
The biggest advantage that could be gained IMO is in building an appreciation that other road users exists. Cyclists, horse-riders, pedestrians etc. all have the right to use the road too (yeah yeah I've heard the 'cyclists don't pay road tax!' rubbish). Unfortunately all to often road planning seems to work against this, i.e. move all other traffic off the road and keep it for cars. This then leads to an even lower level of awareness of other road users as they are seen less and less frequently.
I think there are definitely things in cycling, and motorcycling, which you have to pay more attention to on a bike compared to in a car.
Therefore I would say that my awareness has been enhanced and my appreciation of hazzards has been altered in my driving because of experiences and habits formed on the bike: Life saver checks, appreciation of speed , listening to your surroundings (admittedly more dificult in a car, but you can still hear clues of somethings in advance of them being seen).
Should everybody be made to cycle? I would love it if they were!
I doubt though that it would lead automatically to a better standard of driving. As 'advanced' drivers or at very least somebody who is aware that their driving can be improved, I'm sure most here are aware already of the little extra 'techniques' mentioned above (and by the OP). I wouldn't be surprised if it were just the same people who actively try to improve their driving already, who would see the potential crossovers.
The majority of people though would probably continue on cycling/ driving without much thought to what they are doing. As said already, there are a lot if lycra clad idiots out there ignoring the rules of the road asking for an accident to happen. Do they apply anything from their from their cycling to their driving? I almost hope not!
The biggest advantage that could be gained IMO is in building an appreciation that other road users exists. Cyclists, horse-riders, pedestrians etc. all have the right to use the road too (yeah yeah I've heard the 'cyclists don't pay road tax!' rubbish). Unfortunately all to often road planning seems to work against this, i.e. move all other traffic off the road and keep it for cars. This then leads to an even lower level of awareness of other road users as they are seen less and less frequently.
I cycle to work in London too and agree that is does increase your perception when driving.
As others have said though there are bad cyclists out there and far too many break the rules.
A lot of the people I see on bikes I can only assume they are not drivers, some things they do are just plain stupid and surely a driver with any amount of sense would know that what they were doing on a bike is stupid? so I think it works the other way round too.
i guess when it comes down to it if you can have lots of experience at road use, motorbike, car, cycle, van, lorry etc etc. then in theory at least you should be able to have a better understanding of the road and the other users on it.
As others have said though there are bad cyclists out there and far too many break the rules.
A lot of the people I see on bikes I can only assume they are not drivers, some things they do are just plain stupid and surely a driver with any amount of sense would know that what they were doing on a bike is stupid? so I think it works the other way round too.
i guess when it comes down to it if you can have lots of experience at road use, motorbike, car, cycle, van, lorry etc etc. then in theory at least you should be able to have a better understanding of the road and the other users on it.
drgoatboy said:
A lot of the people I see on bikes I can only assume they are not drivers, some things they do are just plain stupid and surely a driver with any amount of sense would know that what they were doing on a bike is stupid? so I think it works the other way round too.
No, I know a lot of people who are very good drivers who suddenly seem to think that red lights and things don't apply to them when they're on a bike. I think the average standard of cycling is far lower than the average driving standard... difference is, cyclists tend to only kill themselves.
kambites said:
BliarOut said:
kambites said:
bob1179 said:
The other thing that could be done is to limit the engine size to say 1.1 litres (similar to the system they have with bikes) for the first two years after passing your test (if you're not made to ride a bike).
I've never been quite sure why this was done with bikes and not cars - it always seemed like a good idea to me. I'm not sure engine capacity would necessarily be the right thing to go for though... you'd just get 17 year-olds putting damn great turbos on their 1.1 novas and making them completely undrivable from the turbo lag; maybe limit power output to 60bhp or something?
Then they would pare the weight down. Power to weight ratio would make sense though. You could always offer incentives to progress to more powerful vehicles earlier if you pass an extended test.
Nah, there's a limit to how fast you can make a 60bhp car and having people driving light cars is a good thing in my book. I'm not sure about a second test because I personally believe that the problem with young people driving powerful cars is as much about maturity as it is about driving skill.
The issue here is that 33bhp on a bike and it will still move. Say someone gets a driving license, needs to drive say a van for work within that 2 years. 60bhp or 1.1l in a van doesnt get you very far!
I like the theoretical ideal that limitting the power of cars young drivers have drive, but in practise there are too many reasons why it wouldn't work from a practical and safety point of view.
Don't think its a bad idea. I've thought the same in the past - but more along the lines of making someone balance on a bike while a vehicle squeezes past between them and some oncoming traffic only an inch off their right hand. It should also be extended to cover driving a truck, a fast and slow car etc. Recent experiences in a 1.2l hire car retaught me some lessons I'd long forgotten due to having considerably more power on tap these days. It made me more sympathetic (in selected situations 
) towards other folk wringing their car's necks trying to merge into traffic etc.
Most folk only really have the experience of driving in their own European/Japenese Econobox and have no idea what so ever how their actions might seriously impede an HGV, or potentially injure cyclists/pedestrians etc.
) towards other folk wringing their car's necks trying to merge into traffic etc. Most folk only really have the experience of driving in their own European/Japenese Econobox and have no idea what so ever how their actions might seriously impede an HGV, or potentially injure cyclists/pedestrians etc.
hugh_ said:
The issue here is that 33bhp on a bike and it will still move. Say someone gets a driving license, needs to drive say a van for work within that 2 years. 60bhp or 1.1l in a van doesnt get you very far!
I like the theoretical ideal that limitting the power of cars young drivers have drive, but in practise there are too many reasons why it wouldn't work from a practical and safety point of view.
True, I suppose commercial vehicles are a bit different. Maybe you should need a different license to drive commercially? Given the driving standards of some "white van" drivers I don't think that'd be a bad idea.
I also cycle in Central London and with the level of congestion we all tollerate now, I find that when back on 4 wheels, It is a frustrating experience trying to exploit my cars potential on the road.Track days can be a bit monotonous.
I now have found a bit of (admittedly mild) 'extreme' street cycling (filtering, jumping the odd red light(I know-naughty, naughty!)),the bike rewards me in a way that my car always used to!!
I now have found a bit of (admittedly mild) 'extreme' street cycling (filtering, jumping the odd red light(I know-naughty, naughty!)),the bike rewards me in a way that my car always used to!!
I'll start off with the original topic first:
I used to cycle quite a lot (until recently, when some bugger nicked my bike) and I do feel that it help my understanding and awareness of roads before I drove. Obviously actually forcing everyone to cycle isn't feasible, but I assume you were just showing the advantages.
One disadvantage I'll add though: I cycled country lanes a lot before learning to drive (including some very high speed near misses from people that weren't linking speed with vision). I made a foolish mistake in that when I learn to drive, I assumed that I knew the roads I had cycled. Being young and over-confident, it resulted in me misjudging a bend on a summer evening drive and I had a VERY big accident. I remember telling the officer "It didn't tighten like that on a bike!".
I enjoy cycling, although the state of the roads and the driving around here make you question your sanity sometimes!
The other point I was going to make was on limiting the power or engine size for those who have just passed their test. I really don't think it would reduce accidents, because although there may be less that occur just due to excessive speed, most accidents seem to occur from inappropriate (or "excessive for conditions/ bend" ) speed, or driving to close.
I would also have a concern about the speed differentials this would create. I'm sure there would be an increase in accidents from drivers expecting cars to accelerate faster than they would.
I used to cycle quite a lot (until recently, when some bugger nicked my bike) and I do feel that it help my understanding and awareness of roads before I drove. Obviously actually forcing everyone to cycle isn't feasible, but I assume you were just showing the advantages.
One disadvantage I'll add though: I cycled country lanes a lot before learning to drive (including some very high speed near misses from people that weren't linking speed with vision). I made a foolish mistake in that when I learn to drive, I assumed that I knew the roads I had cycled. Being young and over-confident, it resulted in me misjudging a bend on a summer evening drive and I had a VERY big accident. I remember telling the officer "It didn't tighten like that on a bike!".
I enjoy cycling, although the state of the roads and the driving around here make you question your sanity sometimes!
The other point I was going to make was on limiting the power or engine size for those who have just passed their test. I really don't think it would reduce accidents, because although there may be less that occur just due to excessive speed, most accidents seem to occur from inappropriate (or "excessive for conditions/ bend" ) speed, or driving to close.
I would also have a concern about the speed differentials this would create. I'm sure there would be an increase in accidents from drivers expecting cars to accelerate faster than they would.
Edited by leon_t on Thursday 19th April 17:34
I think it would have benefits. Almost all the journeys made by car in central London could be made by bike, and more often than not it would be quicker.
I do think that cycling has helped me be more considerate to other road users when driving, and more appreciative of the difficulties they face. However, I despair of the standards of cycling and cyclists willingness to break traffic laws. Even funnier is how militant they get when you bring them to book for it!
I do think that cycling has helped me be more considerate to other road users when driving, and more appreciative of the difficulties they face. However, I despair of the standards of cycling and cyclists willingness to break traffic laws. Even funnier is how militant they get when you bring them to book for it!
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff