Forum menu
Cyclists in the right or wrong here?
My take is that there is a perfectly good overtaking lane so what is the issue?
Even if they were riding single file then motorists obeying the Highway Code would be obliged to use the overtaking lane anyway to give them sufficient clearance.
they're technically in the right, then, but personally i wouldn't be taking the risk on what's clearly a faurly busy dual carriageway with fast-moving traffic.
Cyclist perfectly in the right - that road is not wide enough for two cars and a bike so a single bike should be in the middle of the lane anyway. Tosser in van, bikes in the right.
Edit - where would you be then flatboy? Itsa 30 mph road
The cyclists are being uncourteous to other road users.
They are guests on the road and shouldn't act like knobs.
I drive defensively (from years of riding a motorbike). Annoys the hell out of my wife. She works on the basis of 'if you have the right of way it's the other persons fault if they crash into you'.
Personally I wouldn't drive two abreast any more than I'd pay attention to an indicator.
But I don't care how other people chose to die. Being right must be a huge comfort.
so 5th - were would you be riding on that road?
They are guests on the road and shouldn't act like knobs.
🙄
They are guests on the road and shouldn't act like knobs.
[url= http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4083/5055032357_69d1d1be72.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/54644045@N08/5055032357/ ]OBVIOUS TROLL IS OBVIOUS[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/54644045@N08/ ]JasonStarcraft[/url], on Flickr
Perfectly within their rights.
Is that a 40 limit?
I'd guess that fat boy is jsut unhappy as he couldn't ride a bike for any distance at all.
so 5th - were would you be riding on that road?
In a car.
trickydisco - They are guests on the road, just like every other road user.
And they were acting like knobs. No question about it.
I'd happily ride 2 abreast there - it's plenty wide enough and not particularly busy, well within the guidance of the highway code. I swear I'm going to carry a highway code with me when riding in future, there's too many morons out there with a false belief that they're in the right.
Nay for me.
Though my view is slightly clouded by harbouring the prejudice that anyone with a camera on their bike is probably antagonistic bell-end 😀
Really GG?
Bikes have to get out of the way of cars do they?
According to standard defensive riding techniques one should adopt the primary position - occupy your lane. there is not enough room there for two cars and a bike so you adpopt ther oad positioning that forces cars to overtake properly so as not to get squeezed into the edge and also to give you an escape route if required
Its a busy looking road but they are in their rights.Obviously expecting confrontation with the camera filming it all.Is it really worth it if you run the risk of ending up in a coffin? No time for silly arguements once that happens and the white van man will have the final say.
Either that or they die young of high blood pressure from all the grief they have given themselves!
anyone with a camera on their bike is probably antagonistic bell-end
This.
GlitterGary - Member
trickydisco - They are guests on the road, just like every other road user.And they were acting like knobs. No question about it.
Loathed as I am to feed the troll.
Cyclists have a right to use the road and a right to ride two abreast. It is motorists who are there by license.
Even though its allowed in the highway code, I personally wouldnt of ridded two abreast on that road . Judging by his moobs and gut the van driver could do with getting on a bike now and then!
Cyclist perfectly in the right - that road is not wide enough for two cars and a bike so a single bike should be in the middle of the lane anyway. Tosser in van, bikes in the right.
I'm sure being 'technically right' will be a great excuse when a Policeman knocks on the door to deliver the bas news to loved ones........
When will some of the cycling fraternity just wake up and admit it, we are at the bottom of the transport food chain and we can mumble under our breaths all we want, most motorists would be pissed off by riding like that because all it appears to most is two blokes taking up far too much room than they need.
If you want to ride two abreast and talk about the highway code go and find a nice country back lane, not a dual carriageway, which is hardly the most enlightening place to ride in the first place...
There;s a meteoric rise in cyclist filming themselves as they feel it offers some 'protection', whilst it may help apportion blame in certain cases it doesn't stop a ****in big truck running you over...
This wouldn't happen if they'd been taxed and were displaying their cycling proficiency certificates.
why do they need to cycle two abreast? the bloke in the van has clearly got too much time on his hands though hasn't he. they've done nothing legally wrong but why not just ride single file to help keep the traffic flowing?
as my motorbike instructor used to say, there's no point in being dead right.
They were in the right. Whether or not it's their best course of action or not is a different argument.
Are they safer two-abreast in the middle of the lane asserting their position, or in the gutter where people are going to try force their way past potentially dangerously close? Difficult call.
Laws/whose in the right doesnt matter when you have already contributed to getting into a coffin earlier than expected.
They didn't seem to be impeding the flow of traffic, there was no alternative cycle path, perfectly within their rights IMO. As TJ suggests, whether single file or 2 abreast in that location makes no difference.
I do wonder what was going on in the van driver's head to make him stew about it for a few metres, pull over and get out to remonstrate. With that sort of anger he probably shouldn't be in control of a vehicle.
anyone with a camera on their bike is probably antagonistic bell-end
Obviously expecting confrontation with the camera filming it all.
Apparently lots of road riders have a camera running all the time when they are on a bike. It's a growing trend as people are subject to dangerous driving and road rage incidents.
Some taxis, buses and commercial vehicles do the same thing.
Thats an urban 30 mph limit road
You are safer riding it the middle of the lane than in the gutter.
Once again stw petrol heads show how little they actually understand cycling. I am getting used to it now but I find the anti cyclist nonsense on here rather sad.
https://www.iam.org.uk/news/latest-news/491-cyclists-take-prime-position-says-iam-book
Cyclists technically have the right to ride two abreast. However this does not automatically make it a good idea.
Practically, we all need to get along as well as we can, not follow the letter of the law to the annoyance of others.
This kind of attitude is what annoys the living crap out of other people TJ 🙂
why not just ride single file to help keep the traffic flowing?
Because that would only keep the traffic flowing if they also rode in the gutter and the motorists ignored the Highway Code by squeezing past in the same lane.
as my motorbike instructor used to say, there's no point in being dead right.
I agree with others (including TJ 😯 ) that riding single file in the gutter is a lot more likely to get you killed in that situation.
They didn't seem to be impeding the flow of traffic
really??
You didn't hear the car hit the horn at the other car for "swerving into the fast lane"
I wonder why?
A ball roll out into it's path?
A flock of Geese started to cross the road
Maybe Robocop was breakdancing in lane one?
None of the above, simply two dickheads deliberately antagonising motorists so they can upload it to youtube is of course the correct answer.
Really GG?Bikes have to get out of the way of cars do they?
Yes, of course they do, when they are holding up traffic by driving selfishly. I know it's acceptable to be selfish these days, by holding up trains because you couldn't be arsed to buy a ticket, but some people so still have some shred of decency and self awareness.
If they moved over to and rode single breast then none of this would have happened and everyone would be happy.
Oh, and for the sanctimonious ones, the only troll on here is the OP for posting that video. 😉
Judgement call according to HCode (66):
never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
WVM was being an idiot and drove dangerously. Cyclists probably would have been better off single file on such a busy road. So no-one covered themselves in glory there
[TJ - following on from your comments yesterday about following the rules, the HC also states that cyclists should wear a helmet :wink:]
TandemJeremy - Member
Thats an urban 30 mph limit roadYou are safer riding it the middle of the lane than in the gutter.
Though i tend to make decisions on personal safety myself rather than assuming something i read in a book is the best option, the link you've posted contradicts your point:
How to be a better cyclist advises cyclists to stay nearer but not close to the kerb on long, even stretches, but where safe and appropriate to do so, to assert themselves (such as when approaching a side road), pushing out into the road and making themselves visible to drivers.
GlitterGaryYes, of course they do, when they are holding up traffic by driving selfishly. I
Bikes do not hold up traffic they are traffic. are you saying the bikes should get off the road then? riding in the gutter is dangerous and there is not enough room for two cars and a bike there so the bike should be in the centre of the lane.
do yo ever actually ride a bike?
Can anyone explain why they think riding single file in the gutter is safer in that situation?
(Contrary to advice in Cyclecraft, Bikability and even the Institute for Advanced Motoring)
The van driver is clearly a tool for haranguing other road users on a busy carriageway and for throwing his weight around.
Having said that, I wouldn't ride two abreast on a road, even if the HC said it was cool to do so.
I'd be waiting for this sort of thing to happen, or something worse.
Riding in the gutter is clearly a bad move. Contrary to suggestions above, though, there's plenty of space on that road for a cyclist to be a safe distance from the kerb with cars passing in both lanes.
How to be a better cyclist advises cyclists to stay nearer but not close to the kerb on long, even stretches, but where safe and appropriate to do so, to assert themselves (such as when approaching a side road), pushing out into the road and making themselves visible to drivers.
theflatboy: but that's exactly what they are doing!?
They are approaching a hazard (roundabout) so they are asserting control over their lane, in line with that advice.
The reality is that single file still wouldn't work here as a car would still have to overtake by crossing into the outside lane - which it should do anyway BTW. Bottom line, bl@@dy dangerous riding on busy dual carriage ways. There is no need to cycle in the gutter, but even in the middle of the lane, you are in trouble if two cars approach at speed.
You didn't hear the car hit the horn at the other car for "swerving into the fast lane"
That would be poor driving then.
If they moved over to and rode single breast then none of this would have happened and everyone would be happy.
The thing a lot of posters seem to be missing here is that an overtaking car (or van!)would still have had to move partly or fully into the outside lane to pass a single bike. Are you guys saying cycling should not be allowed in that location?
Once again stw petrol heads show how little they actually understand cycling.
See TJ, jumping to conclusions with your blinkers on here. I've never even started a car, let alone driven one and have no intention of ever doing so. I believe you have, so you are more of a petrol head than myself. In my eyes you might as well be Jeremy Clarkson.
I have however spent years riding motorcycles, and bicycles on the road, so am fully aware of how to conduct myself on the road.
Like others have said, it's no good being in the right if you are flattened by a truck (or a big man in a van!).
Those cyclists were being selfish, that's the top and bottom of it. There was no need to be, there are enough idiots on the road without self righteous cyclists adding to the numbers.
[b]Bikes do not hold up traffic they are traffic[/b]
THIS! ^^
It's the responsibility of the passing vehicle to make a safe overtake. If they can't do that, they should stay where they are.
This is what people forget. Will 10,20,30 seconds really make a difference to your journey. No. If you're a tawt you may think it does though.
did I say ride in the gutter? no, no i didn't. you assumed that's what i meant and you know what assume did, don't you.
if they rode single file, away from the gutter there would be plenty of room for cars to pass safely, it's a nice wide road (just look at it).
the difference is that the car and van drivers wouldn't be getting pissed off with them, swerving in front of them as the van did, another car sounds it's horn. why needlessly upset people in big metal objects?
The only possible problem I can see here is the cyclists are pootling. I think if you want to use the road you have an obligation to at least try and match traffic speed.
Re single file vs 2 abreast, as has already been pointed out it's a non-issue. Correct overtaking makes no distinction.
[i]Once again stw petrol heads show how little they actually understand cycling. I am getting used to it now but I find the anti cyclist nonsense on here rather sad.[/i]
Having never driven to work, and clocked up 100,000+ miles just cycling to and from work, could you show all the anti-cycling nonsense please? (and not the stuff that is plainly written tongue in cheek), because I can't see anything particularly outrageous being said.