Primary secondary position -good or bad for cycling driving?
Discussion
About say 20 years ago you'd be able to go out on your bike or in your car, mix with traffic come home again and little drama about cycling
Today you can go out in a car with the most unassuming of drivers until they catch up with a ' cyclist ' and 'arrogant taking up all the road'. What's going on?
There've been a few threads on here where cycling position has proved contentious
If you're in a car following say a slow tractor (if they still exist) the tractor should pull over from time to time to help traffic behind make progress.
Many cyclists today keep left of the road and let the traffic behind decide when it's safe to over take, or might even pull over to let traffic past (partly if it feels uncomfortable having a queue behind)
With primary ( and secondary) positioning it's the cyclist trying to decide when the vehicle behind can over take. It's not uncommon to see a bike in centre of lane ( primary position) keeping an HGV or car behind with a long queue behind, rather than pulling over to let the queue pass.
Like everything there's a time and a place but who is to decide the place.
There's an article on wikipedia about how the concept became prevalent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling
Trouble is it's written in American and the inside of a road means the middle and the outside, nearest the verge
It talks of Primary being the default position and moving to Secondary to allow traffic behind to pass, i.e. the cyclist controls the road space
whereas in the past a bike would have been deferential kept left to middle-ish if nothing about and moved or kept left if there was anything behind
Is the taking control good or bad for cycling? Is it helping people try cycling, or does it feel confrontational
When you're out cycling or driving how does it seem to you?
Today you can go out in a car with the most unassuming of drivers until they catch up with a ' cyclist ' and 'arrogant taking up all the road'. What's going on?
There've been a few threads on here where cycling position has proved contentious
If you're in a car following say a slow tractor (if they still exist) the tractor should pull over from time to time to help traffic behind make progress.
Many cyclists today keep left of the road and let the traffic behind decide when it's safe to over take, or might even pull over to let traffic past (partly if it feels uncomfortable having a queue behind)
With primary ( and secondary) positioning it's the cyclist trying to decide when the vehicle behind can over take. It's not uncommon to see a bike in centre of lane ( primary position) keeping an HGV or car behind with a long queue behind, rather than pulling over to let the queue pass.
Like everything there's a time and a place but who is to decide the place.
There's an article on wikipedia about how the concept became prevalent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling
Trouble is it's written in American and the inside of a road means the middle and the outside, nearest the verge
It talks of Primary being the default position and moving to Secondary to allow traffic behind to pass, i.e. the cyclist controls the road space
whereas in the past a bike would have been deferential kept left to middle-ish if nothing about and moved or kept left if there was anything behind
Is the taking control good or bad for cycling? Is it helping people try cycling, or does it feel confrontational
When you're out cycling or driving how does it seem to you?
saaby93 said:
Is the taking control good or bad for cycling? Is it helping people try cycling, or does it feel confrontational
When you're out cycling or driving how does it seem to you?
I think the problem is that too many people are impatient. You probably didn't have to worry about it back in the 80s when I used to cycle on the road as people would only overtake if it was safe. Nowadays everyone is in a rush and happy to break the speed limits. If my car wasn't so wide, I'm sure everyone would overtake me. (I saw some dick in a VW 4x4 gun it past me in Richmond Park (20 zone) and disappear into the distance last year.)When you're out cycling or driving how does it seem to you?
And therefore to ensure a cyclist's safety, they have to be strategic about their positioning.
"Trouble is it's written in American and the inside of a road means the middle and the outside, nearest the verge "
Makes more sense to me. We drive on roads not pavements, so the inside of the road is in the middle and the outside is the edge.
The trouble is that the pro cycling lobby are, these days, generally a militant lot who do not accept that anything a cyclist does is wrong and put forth the general opinion that all motorised vehicle drivers are incompetent. Witness the divisive 'stop killing cyclists' protests where they all lie in the road etc. On top of that they then demand massively OTT cycling infrastructure to the cost of other road users despite the fact they make up a tiny percentage of the overall total and will only ever do so.
This engenders a similarly militant response in a lot of motorised vehicle drivers and we end up with 'us and them'. I used to be fairly neutral on the whole thing until I moved to London and see how a large proportion of them behave. These threads don't help either as the pro cycling posters are borderline insane or just a bit dumb maybe and seem utterly unable to comprehend self preservation and common sense over 'being right'.
I try to give cyclists as much room as possible when passing them, but a few deliberately act the idiot to make a point. If I was a different person I would just give them a 'close pass', but to be honest it's not worth it if something goes wrong.... others however don't think like me and that is why we end up where we do a lot of the time. I do however let them know how I feel verbally when I do eventually pass them.
It will only get worse sadly as both sides needs to compromise and agree to share the road, but it will never happen!
This engenders a similarly militant response in a lot of motorised vehicle drivers and we end up with 'us and them'. I used to be fairly neutral on the whole thing until I moved to London and see how a large proportion of them behave. These threads don't help either as the pro cycling posters are borderline insane or just a bit dumb maybe and seem utterly unable to comprehend self preservation and common sense over 'being right'.
I try to give cyclists as much room as possible when passing them, but a few deliberately act the idiot to make a point. If I was a different person I would just give them a 'close pass', but to be honest it's not worth it if something goes wrong.... others however don't think like me and that is why we end up where we do a lot of the time. I do however let them know how I feel verbally when I do eventually pass them.
It will only get worse sadly as both sides needs to compromise and agree to share the road, but it will never happen!
Magic919 said:
Yet another Saaby cycling thread. Maybe he's trying to set a record of some kind.
Here we go again There is no 100% correct answer, you adjust your position constantly depending on the conditions. Kerb hugging will get you killed far quicker than understanding the conditions and positioning yourself appropriately.
The beauty of giving cyclists plenty of space is you end up with a clear road ahead of you when you've safely passed them
Another point about kerb hugging, when you encounter a pothole you can only avoid it by moving into the stream of traffic or coming to a dead halt. In the secondary and primary positions you have more choice of how to avoid hazards. Typically it's far safer to make avoiding manoeuvres away from the traffic.
With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
WinstonWolf said:
Another point about kerb hugging, when you encounter a pothole you can only avoid it by moving into the stream of traffic or coming to a dead halt. In the secondary and primary positions you have more choice of how to avoid hazards. Typically it's far safer to make avoiding manoeuvres away from the traffic.
With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
Mind you, there seem to be just as many potholes in the wheel track lines as near the kerb. With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
Many cyclists in London seem to be unaware of the danger of potholes when hugging the kerb to squeeze up the underside of traffic
Perhaps that makes your point
cb1965 said:
The trouble is that the pro cycling lobby are, these days, generally a militant lot who do not accept that anything a cyclist does is wrong and put forth the general opinion that all motorised vehicle drivers are incompetent. Witness the divisive 'stop killing cyclists' protests where they all lie in the road etc. On top of that they then demand massively OTT cycling infrastructure to the cost of other road users despite the fact they make up a tiny percentage of the overall total and will only ever do so.
This engenders a similarly militant response in a lot of motorised vehicle drivers and we end up with 'us and them'. I used to be fairly neutral on the whole thing until I moved to London and see how a large proportion of them behave. These threads don't help either as the pro cycling posters are borderline insane or just a bit dumb maybe and seem utterly unable to comprehend self preservation and common sense over 'being right'.
I try to give cyclists as much room as possible when passing them, but a few deliberately act the idiot to make a point. If I was a different person I would just give them a 'close pass', but to be honest it's not worth it if something goes wrong.... others however don't think like me and that is why we end up where we do a lot of the time. I do however let them know how I feel verbally when I do eventually pass them.
It will only get worse sadly as both sides needs to compromise and agree to share the road, but it will never happen!
As with so much today there's a tribalism and a viewing of the other side as an enemy rather than another (in this context) road user you should deal with courteously, both aiming to cause each other the minimal hassle.This engenders a similarly militant response in a lot of motorised vehicle drivers and we end up with 'us and them'. I used to be fairly neutral on the whole thing until I moved to London and see how a large proportion of them behave. These threads don't help either as the pro cycling posters are borderline insane or just a bit dumb maybe and seem utterly unable to comprehend self preservation and common sense over 'being right'.
I try to give cyclists as much room as possible when passing them, but a few deliberately act the idiot to make a point. If I was a different person I would just give them a 'close pass', but to be honest it's not worth it if something goes wrong.... others however don't think like me and that is why we end up where we do a lot of the time. I do however let them know how I feel verbally when I do eventually pass them.
It will only get worse sadly as both sides needs to compromise and agree to share the road, but it will never happen!
Of course there's a political narrative playing into that too, certainly here in london the implementation of cycle road schemes seems to be carried out with a view to choking road traffic.
saaby93 said:
WinstonWolf said:
Another point about kerb hugging, when you encounter a pothole you can only avoid it by moving into the stream of traffic or coming to a dead halt. In the secondary and primary positions you have more choice of how to avoid hazards. Typically it's far safer to make avoiding manoeuvres away from the traffic.
With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
Mind you, there seem to be just as many potholes in the wheel track lines as near the kerb. With the roads getting worse every day the kerb is a really unsafe place to be.
Many cyclists in London seem to be unaware of the danger of potholes when hugging the kerb to squeeze up the underside of traffic
Perhaps that makes your point
wst said:
The problem with keeping "left of middle-ish" is all the crud that drops between the wheel tracks. When on a bike the options are "left track" or "right track" and the left one is often unsuitable because people don't have great spatial awareness...
Isnt left of left safer again because if a driver hasnt seen the bike theyre likely to missHas anyone found any stats if its possible or something on whether it is safer to keep to one side or to hold centre ground?
And probably in what circumstances?
In city streets where they have road narrowings and there's deliberately no room for both as a vehicle cant straddle the lane markings
saaby93 said:
wst said:
The problem with keeping "left of middle-ish" is all the crud that drops between the wheel tracks. When on a bike the options are "left track" or "right track" and the left one is often unsuitable because people don't have great spatial awareness...
Isnt left of left safer again because if a driver hasnt seen the bike theyre likely to missHas anyone found any stats if its possible or something on whether it is safer to keep to one side or to hold centre ground?
And probably in what circumstances?
In city streets where they have road narrowings and there's deliberately no room for both as a vehicle cant straddle the lane markings
There's loads of info out there if you're genuinely interested.
WinstonWolf said:
Nope, it's safer to be seen in the first place.
There's loads of info out there if you're genuinely interested.
Where is itThere's loads of info out there if you're genuinely interested.
The three terms 'gutter' 'primary position' 'secondary position' seem to have come out of a book called Cyclecraft.
Every time you try to find the source of the terms you end up back there.
Have you found anything that tests those concepts to say they're any better than normal rules - keep over to the left, where how far to the left depends on the type of road and what else is about, and we've seen in another thread keeping to the right in an offside slip.
saaby93 said:
WinstonWolf said:
Nope, it's safer to be seen in the first place.
There's loads of info out there if you're genuinely interested.
Where is itThere's loads of info out there if you're genuinely interested.
The three terms 'gutter' 'primary position' 'secondary position' seem to have come out of a book called Cyclecraft.
Every time you try to find the source of the terms you end up back there.
Have you found anything that tests those concepts to say they're any better than normal rules - keep over to the left, where how far to the left depends on the type of road and what else is about, and we've seen in another thread keeping to the right in an offside slip.
I take it you don't have any advanced driving qualifications then?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff