That's it, I am no longer defending Cyclists!
Discussion
nickfrog said:
How different would that be compared to having a conversation with your passenger in a car in terms of cognitive distraction?
Generally speaking, car conversation participants tend not to be making a lot of facial contact, as the insulation of the box around you means easy to be heard.Cyclists alongside each other that I see tend to be looking at one another whilst talking rather than looking ahead.
hyphen said:
frisbee said:
Unnecessary use of the horn and cyclists quite legally riding two abreast on a quiet road.
Well done cupcake.
Horn is for warning others of danger.Well done cupcake.
To overtake the slow obstacle in front of me, I was forced to use the lane on the other side.
With vehicles, they have mirrors and so can see me and my indicator, cyclists know little of what is behind them. As with any overtake, there is always an element of risk, I could see all was clear around me, and on a straight, however there is still a chance that with me being on the other side of the road for that short space of time, another road user could do something daft.
Hence the minor and sensible use of the horn.
Cupcake.
Quiet road. You came up behind them. They'd have heard you coming from half a mile away, even in a Tesla. Car tyres make a horrendous racket compared to the other sounds present on a quiet road. I'd even go so far as to say that they have more of an idea of what's going on than your average motorist - the presence of mirrors does not equate to the use of mirrors.
Bicycles were here long before the car, and they will be here long after - if people want to wear lycra whilst using them (not personally my cup of tea), then leave them to it. It's not hurting you. If you're fed up by people getting fit, saving fuel, cutting pollution and reducing congestion, get a bike yourself; with or without an engine, the roads would be a far nicer place for all if the majority of sub-10mile journeys were completed on a bike.
hyphen said:
And here is another one- is it/should it be legal for cyclist on the road to be having in depth conversations?
As often that is why the reason that they are 2 or more abreast, as they are chatting away. This, it could be argued, will be reducing their awareness and attention on the road.
As often that is why the reason that they are 2 or more abreast, as they are chatting away. This, it could be argued, will be reducing their awareness and attention on the road.
Outskirts of Warwick yesterday morning.
Narrow winding roads.
Lots of care needed.
And then cyclists. Hundreds of the Lycra clad idiots everywhere.
Did they ride carefully & sensibly?
Did they f
k.
Three & four abreast, even on blind bends. In the middle of the road taking the fastest line.
All over the place.
s. All of them.
Wish I had a cow catcher on the front of my car....
It’s about time that they had to adhere to the same rules as the rest of us.
Cyclists. Hate them.
Narrow winding roads.
Lots of care needed.
And then cyclists. Hundreds of the Lycra clad idiots everywhere.
Did they ride carefully & sensibly?
Did they f
k.Three & four abreast, even on blind bends. In the middle of the road taking the fastest line.
All over the place.
s. All of them.Wish I had a cow catcher on the front of my car....
It’s about time that they had to adhere to the same rules as the rest of us.
Cyclists. Hate them.
Coolbanana said:
DonkeyApple said:
And yet no. It is very clearly, in the U.K. not a past time for the poor. You just need eyes to see that.
Even the loony politicians in London have woken up to the fact that their cycle super highways for the poor are in fact private lanes for the elite.
And if people don’t think they are in the higher echelons of wealth in society then just wait for Corbyn’s revolution to see which side of the wall you are placed on by the masses.
And let’s stop trying to compare London and other U.K. cities to a single, unique bit of topography and culture in another country. It’s plain stupid and ignorant.
Cycling in the U.K. is a hobby for the affluent. You won’t get the poor onto bikes without beating them with sticks and forcing them and suddenly understanding the blatantly obvious will help cyclists to understand why certain sections of British society take the opportunity to be aggressive towards them.
For want of a clearer analogy, you are walking into a flat roofers pub in top hat and tails and pushing to the front of the bar. What do you think flat roofers are going to do and think?
Even the loony politicians in London have woken up to the fact that their cycle super highways for the poor are in fact private lanes for the elite.
And if people don’t think they are in the higher echelons of wealth in society then just wait for Corbyn’s revolution to see which side of the wall you are placed on by the masses.
And let’s stop trying to compare London and other U.K. cities to a single, unique bit of topography and culture in another country. It’s plain stupid and ignorant.
Cycling in the U.K. is a hobby for the affluent. You won’t get the poor onto bikes without beating them with sticks and forcing them and suddenly understanding the blatantly obvious will help cyclists to understand why certain sections of British society take the opportunity to be aggressive towards them.
For want of a clearer analogy, you are walking into a flat roofers pub in top hat and tails and pushing to the front of the bar. What do you think flat roofers are going to do and think?
Utter garbage
You are being deliberately stupid with your inane arguments; grow up! 
I have seen kids on bikes aplenty in less affluent areas around the UK. I have seen poorer areas where cycling has been promoted to great effect that has helped locals get from A to B more cost-effectively whilst moving away from the obesity that has been creeping into UK Society.
The fact is, cars are relatively cheap to obtain in Great Britain compared to many other Nations and this has encouraged car commuting even amongst your 'flat roofer' types' rather than the far cheaper alternative, cycling!
Only a moron would suggest cycling costs more than running a car and anyone who can afford a car, can afford a bike.
The UK is NOT a deprived country and its GDP is far higher than most, the average salary in the UK easily affords a bicycle as a health and recreation tool, let alone a commuting one.
Btw - had an idiot cyclist to put up with yesterday, so don't think for a minute that getting into cycling makes you defend the behaviour of every other cyclist. Same goes for motorists of course.
Matthen said:
If you're fed up by people getting fit, saving fuel, cutting pollution and reducing congestion, get a bike yourself; with or without an engine, the roads would be a far nicer place for all if the majority of sub-10mile journeys were completed on a bike.
Have a 1x11 speed mb and also a hybrid. In the household have everything down to balance bikes...Without massive investment, which is not on the horizon, your dream of majority of journeys will never come true. The country can't afford to move to cycling neither, tfl are already worried about drop in passenger and resulting hole in budget.
Fact is that cycling if it became the majority would need to be taxed to a level that would make mamils cry.
And keep dreaming the dream, I will just look at how much money is being invested in electric cars, that is the future of short journeys...
Edited by hyphen on Sunday 22 July 15:11
hyphen said:
nickfrog said:
How different would that be compared to having a conversation with your passenger in a car in terms of cognitive distraction?
Generally speaking, car conversation participants tend not to be making a lot of facial contact, as the insulation of the box around you means easy to be heard.Cyclists alongside each other that I see tend to be looking at one another whilst talking rather than looking ahead.
They're being even more courteous! You're welcome!
As ever this thread is full of self confessed driving gods, who for some unknown reason, are happy to admit they are completely flummoxed by slower moving traffic and have to become snarling monsters
Surely it cant be that hard to slow, then if appropriate overtake giving a reasonable amount of space? I have far more time for cyclists going slowly than cars going dramatically below the speed limit. The former clearly can't go any faster, the latter just need to extend their foot a bit. In other news. Despite seeing hundreds of cyclists out there this morning. Only accident I saw today was a Pick up and transit that had t boned. Then someone else nearly rear ended another prick in a Transit who slowed to 5mph to rubber neck the incident!
f
king cyclists! mybrainhurts said:
Rich_W said:
Ironically, looking at each other will give them a better view to the rear.
You're on to something there...Even better...one rides backwards, then they have a 360deg view.
Magic solution...
They could even serenade you with a Violin recital!
OR
Even faster!
That's IT! We've cracked it! :
saaby93 said:
n the contary you can expect a caravan owner to pull over if they're causing a hold up and you'll see it happen from time to time.
It is the concept of 'owning the road' that seems to be leading to some of the issues and we've seen it in photos in previous posts
Yes it is often ok to ride two abreast but if it's causing a hold up, it's no great sweat to revert to single file and help someone pass by keeping left where it's not full of potholes.
There are only a few cyclists that despite all that try to 'own the road' as if it's their's and nobody elses, and leads to threads like this one.
There are numpty motorists too.
Most of the time people get on fine
Ask the advanced driving forum if owning your space is a good road technique or not.It is the concept of 'owning the road' that seems to be leading to some of the issues and we've seen it in photos in previous posts
Yes it is often ok to ride two abreast but if it's causing a hold up, it's no great sweat to revert to single file and help someone pass by keeping left where it's not full of potholes.
There are only a few cyclists that despite all that try to 'own the road' as if it's their's and nobody elses, and leads to threads like this one.
There are numpty motorists too.
Most of the time people get on fine
People who've only passed the basic test don't seem to be able to understand...
Coolbanana said:
Johnnytheboy said:
My take on it is that some people (on a Johnny-amateur-psychologist level), due in part to whatever else is going on their lives, seek freedom from control by other people, while some people seek to exercise control over other people. Stick these fundamentally different types of people in a city, where no one has as much personal space as they'd like and the result is road rage.
Being one of the former type of people I find cyclists very irritating down in Dorset on the occasions when I feel like they are being deliberately obstructive. Then I get past them and remember that I live in a nice house in a lovely part of the world. If I lived in a stty flat in London I expect I'd be wound tighter than a Swiss watch!
Are they being 'deliberately obstructive' to offend you somehow or are they just exercising their equal right to enjoy using the road? Reading these threads that are predominately anti-cyclist one gets the distinct impression that non-cyclists cannot accept that motorists do not 'own' the road or have greater rights to it. Being one of the former type of people I find cyclists very irritating down in Dorset on the occasions when I feel like they are being deliberately obstructive. Then I get past them and remember that I live in a nice house in a lovely part of the world. If I lived in a s
tty flat in London I expect I'd be wound tighter than a Swiss watch! For example: cyclists can legally ride two-abreast and not have to hug the kerb. They are not being obstructive, they are exercising their equal right to use the road. Just because you might be able to, or want to travel faster does not mean you get priority. It is no different to the hordes of caravans slowing cars down in the Summer - you cannot expect the caravan owners to pull off from the road just to let you speed past. You have to pass when it is safe to do so without affecting the journey made by the cyclists or caravanners.
See also people who straddle two lanes at merge points.
It's a shame the rest of my post passed you by.
Coolbanana said:
Utter garbage
You are being deliberately stupid with your inane arguments; grow up! I have seen kids on bikes aplenty in less affluent areas around the UK. I have seen poorer areas where cycling has been promoted to great effect that has helped locals get from A to B more cost-effectively whilst moving away from the obesity that has been creeping into UK Society.
The fact is, cars are relatively cheap to obtain in Great Britain compared to many other Nations and this has encouraged car commuting even amongst your 'flat roofer' types' rather than the far cheaper alternative, cycling!
Only a moron would suggest cycling costs more than running a car and anyone who can afford a car, can afford a bike.
The UK is NOT a deprived country and its GDP is far higher than most, the average salary in the UK easily affords a bicycle as a health and recreation tool, let alone a commuting one.
The hobby of cycling in the U.K. is for the affluent. It is a hobby that requires quite high expenditure. Bike, kit, transport, storage. It is exactly why you have such a narrow economic demographic perusing it as a pastime.
The ‘built it they will come’ political movement has failed and most sane people understood that it would.
DonkeyApple said:
The ‘built it they will come’ political movement has failed and most sane people understood that it would.
More accurately, they haven't built 'it', they have built 'a bit here, and a bit there' hence why it was never going to work. Unless it's door to door with no gaps, it won't convert the masses who have the brainpower to assess risk of injury, just the willing Lycra early adopters willing to die for the cause.WinstonWolf said:
saaby93 said:
n the contary you can expect a caravan owner to pull over if they're causing a hold up and you'll see it happen from time to time.
It is the concept of 'owning the road' that seems to be leading to some of the issues and we've seen it in photos in previous posts
Yes it is often ok to ride two abreast but if it's causing a hold up, it's no great sweat to revert to single file and help someone pass by keeping left where it's not full of potholes.
There are only a few cyclists that despite all that try to 'own the road' as if it's their's and nobody elses, and leads to threads like this one.
There are numpty motorists too.
Most of the time people get on fine
Ask the advanced driving forum if owning your space is a good road technique or not.It is the concept of 'owning the road' that seems to be leading to some of the issues and we've seen it in photos in previous posts
Yes it is often ok to ride two abreast but if it's causing a hold up, it's no great sweat to revert to single file and help someone pass by keeping left where it's not full of potholes.
There are only a few cyclists that despite all that try to 'own the road' as if it's their's and nobody elses, and leads to threads like this one.
There are numpty motorists too.
Most of the time people get on fine
People who've only passed the basic test don't seem to be able to understand...
Owning your space is a good technique when learned how to use it.
Owning everyone elses space just because you can, doesnt go down so well
hyphen said:
More accurately, they haven't built 'it', they have built 'a bit here, and a bit there' hence why it was never going to work. Unless it's door to door with no gaps, it won't convert the masses who have the brainpower to assess risk of injury, just the willing Lycra early adopters willing to die for the cause.
The masses won’t ever be converted unless they are taxed out of their cars and banned from using buses and Uber’s. Very few people want to cycle unless they have no choice. That’s why it is nothing but a hobby like golf or tennis in the U.K. where affluent people can throw a chunk of money and have some fun. There is a reason why the same people continuously vent at cyclists, horse riders or women in SUVs. And it has nowt to do with being held back for thirty seconds on a single journey but everything to do with them holding themselves back at life and needing to blame others.
Andbon the other side of the loser coin are the blokes on bikes who go out of their way to find confrontation. It’s all about angry little people trying to take their issues out on others.
DonkeyApple said:
The hobby of cycling in the U.K. is for the affluent. It is a hobby that requires quite high expenditure. Bike, kit, transport, storage. It is exactly why you have such a narrow economic demographic perusing it as a pastime.
Not sure if you have much industry or competitive cycling knowledge but I have both and it's definitely not a sport for the particularly affluent. It's very democratic and traditionnaly has a very working class demographic for some reason. Of late, it is true that a few golfers have adopted it (some of them not particularly affluent either incidentally) but it's fundamentally a very cheap sport if you need it to be partially thanks to many who start the sport and stop it within weeks and sell their bikes for very little. If you visit the Surrey Hills on a Sunday morning, the typical cross section of riders will confirm that.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff