Deluded cyclists!!!

[will_]

KrazyIvan said:

will_ said:

Because drivers drive in them. They are, afterall, only painted tarmac.

We'll some one may as well use them, as I have yet to see a fecking cyclist in one.....*

• this comment should be taken with a large pinch of salt, and a full glass of "Calm the fk Down"

I don't use segregated cyle lanes or shared paths because they are usually unsuitable, tokenistic and badly thought out.

[Johnnytheboy]

will_ said:

Depends what type of cyclists you are and the design of the road/cycle lane.

Segregated cycle lanes shouldn't be needed if drivers gave appropriate space and consideration.

But in the context of this thread it would greatly mitigate pothole creation.

[okgo]

I do agree claiming for salt damage is silly, but the rest is fair enough.

And obviously the council agree's I've known quite a few people claim money back for a pothole wrecking some expensive wheels at night or something.

I personally don't use cycle lanes much at all, I prefer bus lanes and jumping red lights.

[KrazyIvan]

will_ said:

I don't use segregated cyle lanes or shared paths because they are usually unsuitable, tokenistic and badly thought out.

Do you not think that it might piss of a motorist who is stuck behind you, when in their view at least, there is a perfectly useble bit of road just for you?

[okgo]

I don't use them. They are often covered in glass and st, and I'm still legally entitled to use the main road.

[ewenm]

KrazyIvan said:

will_ said:

I don't use segregated cyle lanes or shared paths because they are usually unsuitable, tokenistic and badly thought out.

Do you not think that it might piss of a motorist who is stuck behind you, when in their view at least, there is a perfectly useble bit of road just for you?

It's the bit I've highlighted that is often just not true.

Anyway, cycle lanes as part of the main carriageway can be used by cars if the separating white line is broken (but not if it is solid), so many cycle lanes around the country aren't actually taking any road from drivers.

[KrazyIvan]

okgo said:

I don't use them. They are often covered in glass and st, and I'm still legally entitled to use the main road.

Not really an answer thou is it. I agree we all have a right to use the road, and should do with consideration for others.

As a side note I have been shouted at by a cyclist for not leaving enough room between my car and pavement, and dont really get where this comes from, as a rule I always tend to stick close the curb in stationarey traffic to allow motorbikes to filter.

[ewenm]

KrazyIvan said:

As a side note I have been shouted at by a cyclist for not leaving enough room between my car and pavement, and dont really get where this comes from, as a rule I always tend to stick close the curb in stationarey traffic to allow motorbikes to filter.

The cyclist was an idiot - they should have been filtering on the outside with the motorbikes. Cyclists who filter on the inside (if there's no cycle lane) are taking a fairly large risk, so need to accept some responsibility for that.

[HundredthIdiot]

ewenm said:

The cyclist was an idiot - they should have been filtering on the outside with the motorbikes. Cyclists who filter on the inside (if there's no cycle lane) are taking a fairly large risk, so need to accept some responsibility for that.

I filter on the inside or outside depending on what's safer, but shouting at motorists in such a situation is just stupid.

[okgo]

HundredthIdiot said:

I filter on the inside or outside depending on what's safer, but shouting at motorists in such a situation is just stupid.

Yep, I'll go whatever way I can make progress, I don't shout at people unless they are doing it on purpose.

[ewenm]

HundredthIdiot said:

I filter on the inside or outside depending on what's safer, but shouting at motorists in such a situation is just stupid.

As long as you understand the risks, that's fine (and sensible). It's our fellow cyclists who assume that passing on the inside is always safest and should be facilitated by drivers who put themselves and others at risk.

Edit: The classic to watch for is a passenger jumping out while the traffic is stationary - they rarely check the mirror. This happened to me even though I was in the designated cycle lane on the inside of the traffic (heading north from Blackfriars bridge for those that know it). A lorry driver's mate nearly took my head off with the corner of the passenger door!

Edited by ewenm on Monday 7th February 15:33

[mph1977]

Johnnytheboy said:

It would be better from that perspective if they were an adjunct to the road rather than just a white lined strip at the side.

as they are in Denmark for instance , where out of town the footpath and the cycle path share a wide path seperated from the carriageway by a bit of verge ...

or even as i saw somewhere ( can't remember where road/ cyclepath / footpath all at different heights but together ( the cycle path was a bit lower than normal kerb height and the foot path was rasied again by a little less than norma kerb height.

[johnxjsc1985]

Personally I would never undertake even when racing I would always over take a car that was moving slower than I was.too many people have been hurt that way.

[okgo]

Many in London are not on the road, they're the ones I don't use. They're usually covered in all sorts of things.

[will_]

KrazyIvan said:

will_ said:

I don't use segregated cyle lanes or shared paths because they are usually unsuitable, tokenistic and badly thought out.

Do you not think that it might piss of a motorist who is stuck behind you, when in their view at least, there is a perfectly useble bit of road just for you?

Which is why I don't favour them - because in the vast majority of cases they are not perfectly usable, but if they are there anyone with no idea what they're talking about will abuse a cyclist for not using them.

Edited by will_ on Monday 7th February 16:00

[will_]

okgo said:

HundredthIdiot said:

I filter on the inside or outside depending on what's safer, but shouting at motorists in such a situation is just stupid.

Yep, I'll go whatever way I can make progress, I don't shout at people unless they are doing it on purpose.

I'd rather dive onto the kerb than into oncoming traffic. I've also been side-swiped by a taxi doing a u-turn - that doesn't happen if you're on the left. It's also where the council tend to paint the tarmac for cyclists so in London at least drivers are increasingly aware that cyclists may be passing on the left.

[will_]

Johnnytheboy said:

will_ said:

Depends what type of cyclists you are and the design of the road/cycle lane.

Segregated cycle lanes shouldn't be needed if drivers gave appropriate space and consideration.

But in the context of this thread it would greatly mitigate pothole creation.

So would getting rid of all the cars!

[Johnnytheboy]

okgo said:

I don't use them. They are often covered in glass and st, and I'm still legally entitled to use the main road.

I've heard this said before - the irony is that the 'glass and st' probably accumulates because heavier vehicles don't drive on them and kick it out of the way.
But if they do drive on them then you get more potholes.

[Saddle bum]

okgo said:

............ I've known quite a few people claim money back for a pothole wrecking some expensive wheels at night or something.

Done that. With our present third world roads, using your best kit is very marginal.

I can see a great deal of money going into the Olympic road race course in SE London, or else it won't happen.

[Saddle bum]

RYH64E said:

I've never known the roads to be free of potholes and am not expecting an improvement any time soon, thicker tyres and some suspension would be the pragmatic response - that or punctures, buckled wheels and whinging.

Just goes to prove you know SFA about road cycling.