Passing Cyclists!!

[Centurion07]

Ares said:

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.

I don't know about too often but I've certainly seen it used inappropriately (semantics).

I had one guy do it between a couple of traffic islands where I could EASILY have got round him in my car but still felt the need to ride in the middle of the lane. He didn't appreciate getting tooted. Funnily enough a week or two later, who should I see on the floor surrounded by pedestrians obviously having been knocked off his bike?

[aclivity]

TimoMak said:

I will address this point - since the HC says:



So by keeping left you should not need to 'move over', just maintain a steady course and speed. If you are in some kind of middle of the lane 'primary' position then you are simply not keeping left and should quite clearly move over.

I couldn't find that anywhere on the CURRENT highway code though?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules...

Can you find it for me?

[Centurion07]

Schmed said:

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.

Combined with the rest of your posts in this thread I think this says far more about you than anyone else...

[DoubleD]

thisisnotaspoon said:

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.

I think we are talking about a different image to the 1 that you are thinking of.

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

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.

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information on what the rest of us called basic common sense.

If you genuinely think there is, you should be giving your driving licence back as you are a too idiotic to drive a heavy metal box on the public highway.

[anonymous-user]

thisisnotaspoon said:

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).

I'm not suggesting cycling in the gutter and bumping over the drains. By keeping left you are most likely in the nearside tyre track rather than the middle of the lane, so an overtaking driver just maintaining a steady course and speed would clearly hit you.

[thisisnotaspoon]

Ares said:

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

I dunno, but I'd postulate that being in the same carriageway, in the same location, at the same time as another road user is just as bad whether it's an oncoming car or a cyclist.

Actually, I'd say one up on that the two cars should hit head-on, you'll probably both walk away from modern cars. Running the bike over is a bit more one-sided.

That's why there's a primary position (again, clues in the name) and secondary. The secondary is useful when the lane/road is wide enough for other road users to overtake safely.

[Antony Moxey]

TimoMak said:

Antony Moxey said:

If you’re in a car you don’t need to move to the middle to block an overtake, you’re already filling a lane. However, that notwithstanding, you didn’t answer my question: do you move over every time a car comes up behind you? If not, you’re a hypocrite if you’re advocating that cyclist should ‘never obstruct drivers who wish to pass’ if you do not do the same yourself when out driving.

I will address this point - since the HC says:



So by keeping left you should not need to 'move over', just maintain a steady course and speed. If you are in some kind of middle of the lane 'primary' position then you are simply not keeping left and should quite clearly move over.

Are you going to answer my question about moving over to allow cars to pass you?

[DoubleD]

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

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.

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information

Some roads are long, straight and not particularly wide.

[Centurion07]

Schmed said:

I'm not suggesting cycling in the gutter and bumping over the drains. By keeping left you are most likely in the nearside tyre track rather than the middle of the lane, so an overtaking driver just maintaining a steady course and speed would clearly hit you.

The nearside tyre track practically IS primary position!

At least, it is for me.

[TimoMak]

Antony Moxey said:

TimoMak said:

Antony Moxey said:

If you’re in a car you don’t need to move to the middle to block an overtake, you’re already filling a lane. However, that notwithstanding, you didn’t answer my question: do you move over every time a car comes up behind you? If not, you’re a hypocrite if you’re advocating that cyclist should ‘never obstruct drivers who wish to pass’ if you do not do the same yourself when out driving.

I will address this point - since the HC says:



So by keeping left you should not need to 'move over', just maintain a steady course and speed. If you are in some kind of middle of the lane 'primary' position then you are simply not keeping left and should quite clearly move over.

Are you going to answer my question about moving over to allow cars to pass you?

If you are holding up a long queue of traffic then yes I would certainly try to pull over where it is safe to let the traffic past.

[Centurion07]

TimoMak said:

If you are holding up a long queue of traffic then yes I would certainly try to pull over where it is safe to let the traffic past.

What about a single car that's just caught up with you? Would you be quite happy being forced into a ditch because he overtook where there wasn't enough space?

[anonymous-user]

Centurion07 said:

Schmed said:

I'm not suggesting cycling in the gutter and bumping over the drains. By keeping left you are most likely in the nearside tyre track rather than the middle of the lane, so an overtaking driver just maintaining a steady course and speed would clearly hit you.

The nearside tyre track practically IS primary position!

At least, it is for me.

A bit of a difference IMO. More like between the wheels.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 14th July 18:07

[Ares]

thisisnotaspoon said:

Ares said:

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

I dunno, but I'd postulate that being in the same carriageway, in the same location, at the same time as another road user is just as bad whether it's an oncoming car or a cyclist.

Actually, I'd say one up on that the two cars should hit head-on, you'll probably both walk away from modern cars. Running the bike over is a bit more one-sided.

That's why there's a primary position (again, clues in the name) and secondary. The secondary is useful when the lane/road is wide enough for other road users to overtake safely.

That doesn't say why you would want to be in the opposite carriageway for longer? Whenever you overtake, you should wish to be back into your carriageway as soon as it is safe to do so?

Nothing to do with primary/secondary positioning??

[Ares]

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

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.

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information

Some roads are long, straight and not particularly wide.

Makes no difference. If you are crossing the white line between lanes, you would not want to be on the wrong side of the road for longer?

[Salted_Peanut]

Ares said:

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information on what the rest of us called basic common sense.

Often, it can be unsafe to make your overtaking decision before you're offside. It’s frequently safer to be offside (but not yet accelerating) when you decide whether or not to pass. I didn’t fully grasp it until I did advanced training, but Reg Local from this parish has an excellent YouTube video about overtaking. (Not to mention the chapter in Roadcraft that covers '3-stage overtaking'.)

[Centurion07]

Schmed said:

A bit of a difference IMO. More like between the wheels.

Have to say if you're riding in the middle like that to prevent an overtake then there actually IS space for an overtake and if you're not confident enough to have a car that close (assuming it's not at speed) then you might want to re-think your mode of transport.

[thisisnotaspoon]

A load of car drivers adopting primary position because it's not safe to overtake (no gap infront of them to pull into)

[DoubleD]

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

Ares said:

DoubleD said:

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.

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information

Some roads are long, straight and not particularly wide.

Makes no difference. If you are crossing the white line between lanes, you would not want to be on the wrong side of the road for longer?

I can give the cyclists more space and can possibly even pass them more quickly, this would mean that I am not on the wrong side for longer.

[thisisnotaspoon]

Ares said:

It doesn't matter how often you say it....there is not a single circumstance where voluntarily being in the opposite lane for longer is better. See 'Time Exposed To Danger' for further information on what the rest of us called basic common sense.

If you genuinely think there is, you should be giving your driving licence back as you are a too idiotic to drive a heavy metal box on the public highway.

You're typing that from the perspective of someone sat in a 2ton metal box with crumple zones.

You don't want to share a lane with another 2 ton metal box traveling at a high relative speed because it's going to hurt.

A cyclist equally doesn't want to share a lane with a 2 ton metal box traveling at a high relative speed because it's going to hurt.

What the primary position does is make the driver consider the overtake before doing it. It doesn't stop them at all, just means they have to consider whether there is room to do it rather than either squeezing past the cyclists without crossing the central lines.

Secondary position is then for allowing cars past when the road is perhaps wide enough for a car to share the lane, as someone previously said that's a judgment based on speed and space, around town I'd use it 90% of the time because most of the traffic is moving at 20-30mph at most and I'm probably doing 15-20 so there's not much overtaking anyway. As the road opens out, I'd move back out to primary as the default pulling in when it's safe to overtake.