[Closed] Im still fuming..Is it just me or are rodies a breed apart...arrogant??

Seems there's a signal for 'slow down' - perfectly applicable for pulling into an area to allow drivers to pass, perhaps?

not at all! The signal means slow down (for traffic lights, t-junction, stationary traffic, zebra crossing etc)

It does not mean 'pull in'

You can't have one signal meaning two different things. Clear communication of risks is the whole point of them!

Strikes me that those who say cyclists shouldn't ride two abreast have never actually ridden on a club ride and don't actually understand the basic reasons for it and reality of group road riding...

as pointed out on page 1 or 2, to safely pass 10 single file riders in one hit you do need alot of space, to pass 5 pairs you need alot less space.

Ten of me would have formed several single file groups with gaps for a four mile stretch of very tight windy road.

I'm not entering into a perpetual circular argument with each new person that logs in and joins the debate..

Er yeah, sorry, forgot to declare I struggle with long sentences.

Strikes me that those who say cyclists shouldn't ride two abreast have never actually ridden on a club ride and don't actually understand the basic reasons for it and reality of group road riding...

just the selfishness of it

It's all just another reason for riding off road
this times a gazillion

and you never ride on the road when riding off road?

serious question, when i can be arsed i have ridden off road with a club, rides tend to be about 15 but have been known to get to almost 30 riders, so quite a big group by any standards.

I live in Cheltenham so am, i guess, in the fortunate position to be able to ride a good selection of trails with no need for a car. However it is not possible to do a ride without using tarmac to link sections together. It is inevitable that once in a while you will have to deal with a car. no one tries to hold a car up but sometimes it is not possible to not hold a car up, small cotswold lanes tend not to be the ideal place for cars overtaking groups of cyclists.

From experience there are very few places in the UK where you can do a ride, and i mean a few hours at least, and never cross a road, unless all the riding you do is in trail centres.

Whether i ride a road bike or an mtb i will on occasion be in the position where i have a car trying to get past.

You freddies get very uppity about roadcraft-- or lack of--- bring in testing i say -- cycling proficiency, would create some employment and help with issues such as this.....

Ten of me would have formed several single file groups with gaps for a four mile stretch of very tight windy road.

which to repeat earlier statements, you do not want a car in the middle of a group of cyclists, it tends to end badly, been there done that earned the scar tissue.

You need the car to get past the group in one clean move, that is the ideal, anything less is dangerous for the cyclists.

10 pages - great effort

Having read it all I would like to share some conclusions

1 you can find cocks anywhere
2 everyone has a right to use the road safely
3 everyone has the right to use the road to go about their lawful business
4 our laws don't give all the answers, so you have to apply your brains
5 being nice to each other is a good idea, and also usually safest for all concerned

And finally - some of us (especially those of us who have read the whole thread) have too much time on our hands

Just seems a bit rude and selfish of the riders really, they will always be going slower on average than a vehicle so not actively letting a car through is is just arrogant and selfish.

many of the roads are the same layout as they were 100 years ago when people were on horseback, so of course there are issues.

you do not want a car in the middle of a group of cyclists, it tends to end badly, been there done that earned the scar tissue

Even with adequate gaps?

I would not put myself in the position of being a mobile road block in the first place. So it's moot.

And I'd not pull over to remonstrate with cyclists either.

@rudebwoy,

or maybe drivers need to be educated in how to behave around vulnerable road users such as horses and cyclists?

After all drivers are only allowed to drive by virtue of a licence?

and you never ride on the road when riding off road?

I do I do.. and with the kids in a trailer to playgroup and everyfing.. all around the winding lanes of Devon..
but I am very courteous towards faster moving traffic.. I don't want to be in anyone's way for a moment longer than I have to

I totally understand it but I imagine that the majority of motorists really [i]really[/i] don't

I live in Cheltenham so am, i guess, in the fortunate position to be able to ride a good selection of trails with no need for a car

I live on Dartmoor so ner ner ne ner ner 😆

So how many more centuries must pass and road fatalities must occur before the powers that be realize that the roads are not used by horseback any more.

you might be surprised how many quiet lanes are still used by walkers, horses and cyclists. and that some of these features might help slow the cars down?

These problems are not just restricted to remote country low traffic lanes, even major arteries are not up to standard IMO. This is a small country with a large population of taxpayers and the state of the roads never ceases to amaze me.

Welcome to NIMBY land. Can't build a bypass, or a housing estate, or a railway line, infact sod it build nothing!!!!

This is a small country with a large population of taxpayers

Where are you from? And how long have you been here?

1) Traffic volumes are extremely high in many places, so roads need repairing a lot.

2) Do you know what happens when they try to improve or replace roads? It usually involves destroying something beautiful and upsetting a lot of people.

3) Road death stats are actually very low in the UK. Very low compared to the rest of Europe and the US.

4) The road network is very dense. There are lots of high volume roads close to each other. So although the country is small there is still a hell of a lot of roads.

I live in Cheltenham so am, i guess, in the fortunate position to be able to ride a good selection of trails with no need for a car
I live on Dartmoor so ner ner ne ner ner

Prefer the cotwolds to dartmoor anyway 🙂

all around the winding lanes of Devon..

having spent the last week in north devon, the more impatient drivers seem to have london plates on their cars? mind you i have noticed this in the Cotswolds as well....

I wonder where the OP lives..... maybe there is a theme here.

could be on to something..

the drivers round here are generally very nice.. (except my mother in law)

where'd you stay in North Devon..? Anywhere nice..?

or maybe drivers need to be educated in how to behave around vulnerable road users such as horses and cyclists?

[img] ?[/img]

The vast majority are educated and do behave otherwise there would be carnage.

To be blunt drivers aren't.

At no point in your test are you expected to overtake a horse, to understand what to do if you see a cyclist riding in the middle of a lane. There is an expectation that a driver will know what to do, but most people can't empathise because they have never been in the position of the person being passed.

This is one of the fundamental problems, think about it a driver can drive on motorway never having been taught what to expect. There are test centres where it is not possible to experience a dual carriageway!

The stupid situation where you could tow trailers with no training has been partially solved, but there are plenty of drivers who legally can tow a caravan but have no idea how to do it.

where'd you stay in North Devon..? Anywhere nice..?

Barnstaple, well i suppose someone has to....and whilst i bought the road bike and have ridden it a few times, no point bringing a mtb as there appears no where short of going off to exmoor for a ride. I really can't be doing with sticking a bike in car just to go for a ride.

We don't know the road, but even the OP said "its wide enough for two cars to pass but not two cars and a bike" so exactly where is he going to go if he starts passing a long single file of bikes and an oncoming car appears from around the bend?? (which is likely given the road is "just a bit too winding for me to pass safely")

From the OPs own statement there was no option to pass safely - so I can't understand people getting worked up about the roadies not letting him attempt an unsafe pass. The only realistic option was for them to pull in somewhere safe and let him past, which they eventually did.

Your arguments I fear are too well reasoned for this forum, Graham. They fall on deaf ears.

This really pi$$es me off so I'm afraid I will be antagonistic on that one.

Firstly there is minimum speed limits on roads, just because you can drive at the speed limit, or faster than 20 mph doesn't mean you are automatically entitled to.

Secondly, you sir at the wheel 2 ton weapon have a duty of care towards vulnerable road users. Be they walkers, joggers, professional cyclists or kids or elderly people on their bikes. Denying that makes you a c0ck in anyone's book. Shame our penal system refuses to send killers down for proper sentences. Don't get me started on the whole "I didn't see you mate".

Thirdly, you obviously shouldn't be on the road since you do not know your highway code, and simple common sense is beyond your grasp when behind the wheel, as it happens far too often unfortunately.

Fourthly, people like you make me want to sell my mountain bike. I won't get into that one because to be fair there is more to it than just the original post.

Finally, by travelling for 4 miles at 20 mph you have lost the whole of 8.5 minutes compare to dring at 50 mph (windy road, so generous).

8.5 minutes worth putting 8 people lives at risk? Seriously? Them behaving in a safe manner arrogant because they lost you the whole of 8.5 minutes????????

FFS

8.5 minutes worth putting 8 people lives at risk? Seriously?

You've missed the point.

No-one is saying that the driver should have the right to barge through.

My point is that in choosing that bit of road and maintaining their group formation the group as a whole seem to have taken action that they knew would cause hold ups for motorists. I don't think that was particularly good.

My point is that in choosing that bit of road and maintaining their group formation the group as a whole seem to have taken action that they knew would cause hold ups for motorists. I don't think that was particularly good.

Okay. So we shouldn't cycle on the roads.

Thanks for clearing that up. How selfish of us.

I haven't missed the point at all.

The only reason to ever take is because you want to get there faster. In this case by 8.5 minutes. So just a shade over 2 minutes per mile. The riders did stop.

The only, single reason the driver becomes irate is because of the perceived time lost.

8.5 minutes IS the point. and it's arrogant to think that a group of people should make way so you can get where you want to go 8.5 minutes quicker.

The only, single reason the driver becomes irate is because of the perceived time lost.

it's about worrying about the safety of the overtake.. nothing more

unless you're an utter nutjob..

are you..?

Finally, by travelling for 4 miles at 20 mph you have lost the whole of 8.5 minutes compare to dring at 50 mph (windy road, so generous).

8.5 minutes worth putting 8 people lives at risk? Seriously? Them behaving in a safe manner arrogant because they lost you the whole of 8.5 minutes????????

Okay. So we shouldn't cycle on the roads.

That's not at all what I've said now is it?

I've said you shouldn't cycle on some roads in large groups UNLESS you are prepared to mitigate the inconvenience to others. See the critical mass thread, for instance.

There are a few roads by me I won't go on.

I haven't missed the point at all.

The only reason to ever take is because you want to get there faster. In this case by 8.5 minutes. So just a shade over 2 minutes per mile. The riders did stop.

Well you were saying that cyclist safety was not important. Of course I wasn't. My point is that everyone has a duty to minimise the disruption they cause to everyone else. And to me as a cyclist, that means not delaying motorists more than is reasonable.

If you think 8.5 minutes is nothing, next time you are in a queue at the supermarket I'll stand at the checkout in front of you chatting on my phone for 8.5 minutes. Let's see how that goes down, shall we?

Strikes me that those who say cyclists shouldn't ride two abreast have never actually ridden on a club ride and don't actually understand the basic reasons for it and reality of group road riding...
just the selfishness of it

Argh! How many times does this need saying? Cyclists were doing it before cars were about! Where's the logic which says it's now selfish just because there are more cars?

And how many times do we have to point out that on a narrow road it's also safer for cyclists, the driver behind and also the driver coming the other way?

Really, there's a lot of opinion on this thread based on zero experience of actually riding in a group. Go and ride in a group a few times, experience it and then come back and give your views...

And in the meantime, remember that the 'cars first, cyclists second' attitude is killing an maiming people...

Oh, and without club riding there'd be no Armistead, Cooke, Wiggins, Cav, Froome, Hoy, Pendleton. The whole lot, they'd never have got into riding bikes and competing...

absolute utter bollocks..
it's about worrying about the safety of the overtake.. nothing more

unless you're an utter nutjob..

are you..?

fight or Flight

[url= http://www.****/news/article-1390203/Why-male-motorists-stressed-traffic-jams.html ]I wish to apologise for linking to the.. daily mail…. but it was the first link i could find. [/url]

It is a known problem with men and being held up.

absolute utter bollocks..

it's about worrying about the safety of the overtake.. nothing more

unless you're an utter nutjob..

are you..?

and also just the fact that thay could of pulled in and let him thur. thay dident have to but would of been jolly nice of them.

but when riding tight twisty roads it is amazing how many plp nearly have head on's just then thay dont have to slow down for even one second

or maybe drivers need to be educated in how to behave around vulnerable road users such as horses and cyclists?

The vast majority are educated and do behave otherwise there would be carnage.

To be blunt drivers aren't.

I think you need to get a grip on reality and realise that a bit of give and take can go a long way.

If you're worrying about the safety of the overtake and aren't bothered about being slightly slower than you would with a clear road, you wouldn't become irate.

Therefore the annoyance/anger felt whilst driver slower is direct result of the perception of being made late.

And in the meantime, remember that the 'cars first, cyclists second' attitude is killing an maiming people..

That's not my attitude though.

My attitude is people first, regardless of transport. Don't needlessly piss other people off.

I get just as annoyed when ignorant motorists cause me long delays too. Nothing to do with cyclists being second.

The debate isn't about road cyclist against car drivers. It's good road users vs bad road users and there are both on each side.

Each time you take the road, be it on a bike or in a car, we need to choose which one it's going to be. Of course it starts with having the right information to start with.

cyclists doing things every day that make my hair stand on end and listening to you it would appear they are all model road users fighting off big bad people in cars attempting to mow them down!

not going to argue, it pisses me off to see cyclists riding at speed on the pavement, the wrong way down one way streets, off pavements into moving traffic.

But by the same token i am the one in the car, i am the one who is going to be ok if i hit a pedestrian or a cyclist, so i do have to accept i have a duty of care to those around me. I might think some speed limits are a bit arbitrary, but they are what they are. I might like to park on double yellow lines to make my life easier but i know they are there for a reason so i don't. I applied for a driving licence i knew the rules when i made that application and i accept that they are what they are.

I also feel that more should be made to ensure that EVERYONE is trained to ride a bike in traffic. For a start it might make kids think a bit more, give them freedom to do things rather than sit in front of the TV all day etc and also make them better drivers because they understand both sides a little better.

a bit of give and take can go a long way.

very true, but drivers need to understand that they will be ok and it is the cyclist who will get hurt if they make a mistake overtaking. Hence cyclists riding defensively.

I hate cyclists. They boil my piss. Every time I'm inconvenienced by some I come on a cycling forum to whine about it. People may think I'm unnaturally aggressive, going bald or that I've belatedly realised my wife is cheating on me, but I don't care. These people have to understand how much I hate them.

That's not at all what I've said now is it?

I've said you shouldn't cycle on some roads in large groups UNLESS you are prepared to mitigate the inconvenience to others. See the critical mass thread, for instance.

But this group HAS mitigated the inconvenience by cycling in a tightly knit group, which can be passed quickly. (See Graham's post on the previous page).

I can understand why some people don't agree with that. We can debate it all day and fire valid comments at each other continuously from both sides of the coin. But that's not really the point. It's about individual beliefs. And everyone will have their own, and their own reasons. But in this case, it is the cyclist at risk. It's nothing more than an inconvenience for the driver. Whatever you believe SHOULD or SHOULDN'T be there, just take a minute to take a deep breath and think, [i]you know what, it's not that big a deal. Those guys are just hoping they're still alive by the time I've passed them. I can sit it out a bit[/i]

The fact is, in this instance, you believe they shouldn't be there. Despite them riding (to their mind, and quite reasonably) considerately.

There are a few roads by me I won't go on.

To be honest, I refuse to cycle on the vast majority of roads. I'm lucky enough to have a good network of country lanes where I can ride all day and see very few cars. But when I get on the proper roads (and sometimes it can't be avoided) it makes me very uncomfortable.

That is the ONLY reason I don't cycle on the vast majority of busy roads. In 15 years of daily driving I have NEVER once been held up long enough by cyclists to believe that I would be in any way acting selfishly, or truly inconveniencing anyone. I've never once seen it.

My attitude is people first, regardless of transport. Don't needlessly piss other people off.

My attitude is safety first. I will piss other people off if it makes me (and them) safer.

I'd rather not obviously. But as a general rule I'd much rather be "selfish" and alive than "considerate" and dead.

[b]Whatever you believe SHOULD or SHOULDN'T be there, just take a minute to take a deep breath and think, you know what, it's not that big a deal. Those guys are just hoping they're still alive by the time I've passed them. I can sit it out a bit[/b]

It needed saying twice

butcher - Member - Block User - Quote
In 15 years of daily driving I have NEVER once been held up long enough by cyclists to believe that I would be in any way acting selfishly, or truly inconveniencing anyone. I've never once seen it.

As I said in another thread, the one about reducing speed limits on country roads, where the hell is everybody going in such a hurry anyway?

WORK you ****er [ none of the emoticons says envy}

To the OP;
You shouldn't have stopped to have a word.. a step too far!

But you are right that they should have pulled over way before 4 miles if there was space for them to do so. Basic road manners for any vehicle whether it be my Nan plodding along in her Porsche or a group of cyclists.

A side note.. Some (dare I say most?? not you peeps of course :lol:) Car drivers are bleeding terrible at overtaking cyclists.. the amount of times I have had to take defensive positions on blind bends to make sure the vehicle behind hasn't decided on a 'I'm sure it will be fine' overtake.
I really think drivers need to be made much more aware of how difficult it is to overtake someone doing 20mph on a pushy around twisty roads.. Horses get loads of patience from nearly all drivers but in my experience cycles are squeezed past by otherwise perfectly sensible drivers. Time for a campaign??

Horses get loads of patience from nearly all drivers but in my experience cycles are squeezed past by otherwise perfectly sensible drivers. Time for a campaign??

I know I should read the whole thread but I want to retain the will to live. However can I just confirm that the OP has a problem because:
1: the road was wide enough for two cars to pass each other
2: the road wasn't wide enough for 2 cars & a bike
I may be missing something here but doesn't that mean that it is irrelevant whether they are 1,2 or 3 abreast. He still won't be able to overtake if the is something coming he other way.

Apologies if the point has already been made..

and also just the fact that thay could of pulled in and let him thur. thay dident have to but would of been jolly nice of them.

...its wide enough for two cars to pass but not two cars and a bike....
... All they had to do was form a single file and let me pass...

basic decency as far as Im concerned.

not one of them came up with a reason as to why they never let me pass.

imnotverygood
I know I should read the whole thread but I want to retain the will to live. However can I just confirm that the OP has a problem because:
1: the road was wide enough for two cars to pass each other
2: the road wasn't wide enough for 2 cars & a bike
I may be missing something here but doesn't that mean that it is irrelevant whether they are 1,2 or 3 abreast. He still won't be able to overtake if the is something coming he other way.

Apologies if the point has already been made..

Has STW ever created a campaign of any note (plenty of talk on these pages surely there has been some action over the years)
Turn this overly long thread about a patient and reasonable car driver trying to get past slow moving cyclists into a STW campaign for better education of Drivers when overtaking cyclists.. Ironic but justified I think.
Rally the Troops.. We are going to Number 10 8)

Does everyone here realise that Emily Batty is going to be at the Olympic XC race, tearing it up? Just thought that might be relevant.

I fail to see what's so dangerous about a group of cyclists splitting into 2 and a car moving into the middle of them? (provided the gap is big enough to safely get into of course). Car moves into the middle and drives along behind the first group, exactly as they would be doing if they were stuck behind the full group.

As for the cyclists behind, as far as I can see it the danger has already passed them. Just keep their eyes open and what can possibly happen?

When riding on road with friends on country roads, even in a group of 4, we often apply the principle of splitting in 2 to allow a hole in the middle for passing.

Oh not another weekly road incident thread where the scenario gets analysed in more detail and from more angles than the 'trial of the century' with O.J freekin Simpson!

Get back to work,get out on yer bikes or hit another website before this turns into another 10 pager!

POSTED 13 HOURS AGO #

Switch.the.computer.off.

Appreciated that with a large group of 10 it can be difficult for all to stop at once, but I can't believe that in 4 miles there were no options at all to aid somebody to pass.

It's not about being in a rush, or owning the road, it's just common courtesy. How many of you ride the singletrack at a trail centre with a faster rider behind, and don't make any effort to pull over and let them pass?

allyharp
May I respectfully refer you to [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/attention-motorcyclists ]THIS[/url]

Good idea martinxzz goodnight 😉

One thing has occured to me as I've dipped in and out of this thread today - it's very hard to communicate an idea to a group of people at the best of times, let alone whilst pedalling at 20mph on a narrow road with a car behind you.

There's a good chance that several of the riders each thought seperately, and at different times, that it would be a good idea to stop and let that poor bugger behind them past. A peleton though, is not a hive mind (unless it has been assimilated by the Borg). Perhaps regular club riders have set ways of doing things? Signals passed back through the bunch? I don't know - not in a club.

Some of them may even have felt embarrassed but unable to act - it's not going to make any difference if just one rider pulls over.

I fail to see what's so dangerous about a group of cyclists splitting into 2 and a car moving into the middle of them? (provided the gap is big enough to safely get into of course). Car moves into the middle and drives along behind the first group, exactly as they would be doing if they were stuck behind the full group.

As for the cyclists behind, as far as I can see it the danger has already passed them. Just keep their eyes open and what can possibly happen?

When riding on road with friends on country roads, even in a group of 4, we often apply the principle of splitting in 2 to allow a hole in the middle for passing.

It really isn't a good idea, it hurts when it goes wrong which is usually does.

Appreciated that with a large group of 10 it can be difficult for all to stop at once, but I can't believe that in 4 miles there were no options at all to aid somebody to pass.

and i very much doubt it was 4miles.... but as the OP has had sense and disappeared it seems we may never knwo where this happened

Good morning.

I was asked to produce an etiquette guide for my club just recently, as all this stuff is such an issue.
Firstly newcomers have really over egged the whole thing. It's very simple based on the fact that every rider in the bunch is responsible for himself. So just a few points to the left or right, and perhaps a little wave behind the back for obstacles are all that's needed. No need for words.

The biggy is when to go single file or two abreast. In nearly fifty years of club riding this has just been a fluid action it's never been an issue, but in the last year....Jeebus.
So as we needed a guide I suggested that the group ride leader makes the call, or a senior member perhaps with good local knowledge.

Finally as club chairman I go out on the three club rides and the level of riding on the beginer groups can be shocking (though not exclusive to the beginers)
I recognized the problem as half wheeling. Riders up front two abreast, the next two are half wheeling so in theory now three abreast and it goes on until you get an echelon right across the road.

Under my 'science of rockets' guide it's single file or two abreast. It's wheel to wheel, no half wheeling. Move smoothly and efficiently and keep signals to a minimum

Has STW ever created a campaign of any note

you mean come together with one unified voice and said proudly and clearly said 'we hold this to be true'?

Doubt it. 😉

But 11 pages... Can I throw a cat into the works, a spanner amongst the pigeons? Where do we fall on waving people past on such occasions?

Myself I avoid it. But there is an argument that it would allow people to pass when the cyclist can see more than the driver. Think I made exception once for someone in a kit car who was very low down and couldn't see a thing, and it was very very very safe.

Personally I think the more people are behind you for longer the more 'appropriate it becomes to find a straight bit to tuck in. On a narrow windy lane a long line of traffic can begin to pose a hazard for oncoming traffic (if they drive like the ****wit tourists we get in summer). But the biggest group I've ever really been in is 7 or 8. And of course you have to take the safety of the riders bunched up by the side of the road into account as well.

One last thing I try to remember in situations like this. You don't know what's happened to these guys before you got there. Entirely possible they got two people behind them in big threatening four by fours, who performed a silly overtake, nearly clipped someone, pulled in too soon, barged past. And they just decided for one ride they'd had enough. I'm sure any one who rides/drives on the road has had those days when you can't help but begin to believe there is some kind of conspiracy to terrify you out of your wits or try to kill you. On such a day even a politely worded criticism at a petrol station isn't going to go down well.

The last time I got held up by cyclists was about 10-15 of them on a group ride, strung out in 1s and 2s over about a mile. The road was winding, some downhill, some uphill, some flat. I overtook a couple in safe places quite quickly and sat behind some of the others for a few mins before moving on. I had a moment of "I wish these buggers would get out of my way" before realising that I was actually driving through quite a nice area and I could just take the opportunity to enjoy the day a bit more like I would on the bike.

[i]Where do we fall on waving people past on such occasions?

Myself I avoid it.[/i]

I do it. For several reasons;

1) If I can see further up the road than them and they get a longer 'window' to overtake.

2) It tells them you know that they're there.

3) It sends a 'I'm being polite, let's all be nice to each other and share the road' type message.

People often put a hand up to acknowledge that I've done it/say thankyou.

I think it just makes what can be a bit of a frustrating experience for both parties (them trying to overtake, you trying not to get knowcked over) more of a social interaction.

I was always told not to wave people through at any time when I learned to drive because it's their job to work out when to pass and you can't take responsibility for how well they drive, how fast their car is etc.

That said, I HAVE done it once or twice to indicate I'm comfortable with them passing when I'm on the bike or to indicate I know they're there, in the same way that I've told people to slow down when they're lining up to have a go at passing me on a blind corner or somewhere equally dangerous.

I always want riders to go to single file as well but now appreciaite better the longer group to overtake arguement.

However, overtaking a group riding 2 and 3 up means I end up being only 24-36 inches from the outside rider of 3 as he will invariably be on, or near, the white line (just like overtaking a car or being on a dual carriageway). If single file I would be able to give a much wider berth which feels much safer when I am in the car.

Perhaps this feeling is why so many drivers want bikes to single file.

Perhaps this feeling is why so many drivers want bikes to single file.

I could give the benefit of doubt, but no point, whilst some drivers do want to give the room, most just want to get past. The cyclists are in the way.

Regardless of whether it is safe to overtake it is easier to squeeze past single file riders than to properly overtake a group.

As for room, groups tend to be able to move a little if the car is a bit close.

The last time I got held up by cyclists was about 10-15 of them on a group ride, strung out in 1s and 2s over about a mile

That's the problem with molgrips' suggestion of splitting the group up: instead of one big overtake on a windy road, you end up with 5 smaller overtakes.

On most roads I'd say there is a better chance of finding a safe bit to make one big overtake.

when this happens to you;

As it did to me recently then you change your attitude to riding on the road and every car is a threat so you ride in a manner that means the car cant try squeeze past and I dont give a frick if they have to sit behind me for ten miles, that's their tough luck.

No more debtate until we get a link to streetview of the road in question!

when this happens to you;
As it did to me recently then you change your attitude to riding on the road and every car is a threat so you ride in a manner that means the car cant try squeeze past and I dont give a frick if they have to sit behind me for ten miles, that's their tough luck.

I thought these incidents were rarer than pheasants falling from the sky or being shot by a stray bullet on a bridlepath.(page 8.)
Clearly there's nothing to worry about.

near misses with cars occur on ever ride, and it just takes a clip from a car to send you tumbling, so no they are not rare incidents, they are happening a lot.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-19059003

It happens again and again

A tragic news story, but the fact that it makes the news tells you how relatively rare it is.

I agree with you completely. I have had a few even on the very short trips I do on these country roads to link up trails.
Why do you choose to subject yourself to this in your leisure time?
I would certainly ride road if it wasn't for this but like your comment and links above I find it extremely dangerous.
I couldn't count the amount of times I've come around a blind hedged bend and a car coming the other way has had to make an evasive manouvre to avoid me, cause they're in the middle of a single carriage road without enough room for a bike to get past either side.

more people are dying on bikes than British soldiers dying in Afghanistan, more people are being injured than anything.
Its news because its a kid.
Its not on the news because its happening so often.
If they were putting up on the news every death of a cyclist then it would be on every night.
107 died last year
19,000 injured.
the news would be boring if they were all reported.
Half of cycling fatalities occur on rural roads.

A little update a twist.

Firstly i drove home from work the same way yesterday and there are three places the bikes could have pulled-in to let me pass. one is a filter lane sized left turn at least 50yards long.

I was speaking to a fellow cyclist on an unrelated issue yesterday and mentioned the incident. He initially defended their actions until I told him what road it was. I then mentioned several of the riders had a sort of team or club kit on. He immediatly discribed the kit and knew them, explaining they have a bit of previous regarding this type of thing, he has riden with them and still does from time to time. He then told me I may know some of them as they frequent a pub we go to post Thursday ride.
If they are there on Thursday I will introduce myself, it may get interesting but Im not the confrontational type so we will see how it goes.

I will update you all as and when.

specialknees - Member
A little update a twist.

Firstly i drove home from work the same way yesterday and there are three places the bikes could have pulled-in to let me pass. one is a filter lane sized left turn at least 50yards long.

What road is it?

hmm. so you're not confrontational but you're going to find them on a ride a few days later to ask them to account for themselves? I hope they aren't confrontational either otherwise this could get messy.

one is a filter lane sized left turn at least 50yards long.

I NEVER let cars pass me in a filter lane like that (i.e. I don't go into them to let cars past on the road I'm driving on). Did it a couple of times and had near misses as cars thought I was turning off the road and put their foot down.

got a google maps link for this road ?

just leave it FFS
they arent required to let you past and who gives a shit if there was a passing place, you sat behind some cyclists for a while, wow, what a travesty, if you are so hell bent on getting some kind of justice, why not call the police, this whole argument you have is frankly pathetic.
get a grip and walk away from it.

If they were putting up on the news every death of a cyclist then it would be on every night.
107 died last year
19,000 injured.
the news would be boring if they were all reported.
Half of cycling fatalities occur on rural roads.

and so, it won't be too long before campaigning starts to legislate against road riding, especially with all the money that's being spent on cycle networks..

stubborn roadie groups (grown men obstinately playing with their toys in the road) riding inconsiderately, are not doing anything to help promote a positive image of road riding ..

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Meet up, have a few pints, chat, find common ground. Then lamp the ****ers (just kidding baout the last part) 😉

more people are dying on bikes than in Afghanistan, more people are being injured than anything.

The danger of figures like this is that it gives the impression that cycling is hugely dangerous and should never be attempted. Indeed several people on this thread have said as much.

Please remember that mile-for-mile the fatality rate is actually very similar to walking.

107 died last year
19,000 injured.

But in the context of the total: 1,901 killed and 202,049 injured.

Yes Yunk, grown men shouldn't ride bikes, they should drive their car to the boot sale (or asda or whatever) on a Sunday like normal people. I mean the best way to keep out of the way of all these people rushing about in their cars on their crucially important missions is not to ride a bike at all.