[Closed] Roadie v driver etiquette - right, or wrong?

129

Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.

You're allowed to pass bikes on a double white if it's safe to do so.

What if we transpose the term cyclists with tractor or other slow moving vehicle, ever been thanked by a tractor driver.

Driver in knowledge fail shocker. 😉

You dont drive for PICKFORDS, do you, going up hill left hand bend double white lines, and a narrow road, also 30 mph.
1 MINUTE AND 10 SECS IN

Whenever I ride with someone else we always single out when a car comes up behind us. Right or wrong it causes to much agro around here not to. If I was involved in constant confrontations I'd probably give up road riding all together 🙁

I do a fair bit on the road, so I am not car biased.
But it Pisses me off seeing two cyclists riding two abreast when it would be more polite to other road users behind them to single out.
Two abreast if in a group - then fair enough.
But simply to chat? Get a Mtb & get off the road!

Being in a car doesn't give you right of way... good that you waited till it was safe to pass but not sure why thanks should be expected... <not having a pop at you OP, you've thought about it and posted here>, but there seems to be this expectation that car drivers are the most important traffic and any other vehicle impeding their progress is somehow secondary - whether it's a slow lorry, tractor, horse, pedestrian, cyclist etc

What I don't understand is where this idea has come from that anyone slower than the a car driver is somehow 'in the way' and must give thanks if someone does the obviously safe thing and waits until the road is clear. Surely as a driver you'd rather not have a massive crash and kill yourself and the oncoming driver?

One of the most extreme examples I've seen of this recently was cars overtaking a traction engine just as the road narrowed(from double to single carriageway). The last car through very nearly got squashed between the traction engine and the railings in the central reservation 😯

I would be tempted to single out but in the conditions you say maybe not. I don't know of any road in the UK where is it is possible to pass at a considerate distance without crossing the white line. The carriageway isn't wide enough. I am working on at least a 2 metre gap (and I see that as tight) and at least 2 or 3 car lengths gap before it pulls in. A left hander makes that hard so waiting is the safe thing to do for all concerned as well as being considerate to the "weaker" party. Waiting a minute or two is irrelevant to a car driver unless there is a blue light flashing on the top.
Sadly many motorists don't have the patience or courtesy that good manners or road sense would require and thus get impatient and overtake in situations that don't match the above.
Sadly your post is on the same lines as the helmet debate. Which ever side you take you'll never win.

What I don't understand is where this idea has come from that anyone slower than the a car driver is somehow 'in the way' and must give thanks if someone does the obviously safe thing and waits until the road is clear. Surely as a driver you'd rather not have a massive crash and kill yourself and the oncoming driver?

+1

Cyclists have the RIGHT to ride two abreast, doesn't mean they should do so always. I have the right to do lots of things that I don't out of courtesy.

I'd have pulled into single file in that situation. We're always talking about how cyclists are just people, or just traffic - so take the transport mode out of the equation. If two people were walking along slowly, chatting and blocking the footpath, wouldn't you expect them to move if you were out for a jog, or walking faster? It would be discourteous wouldn't it?

If they were really going *that* slow (< 10mph) [url= https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/lines-and-lane-markings-on-the-road-127-to-132 ]you could have passed them legally by crossing the centre lines[/url], although if you could see that it was safe to get past then no-one's going to give a toss if they were doing 14mph or whatever when you went by. If you couldn't see that it was safe to get past then it almost certainly wasn't safe to pass them, whether they were single-file or two-up. So it's kind of irrelevant.

This sort of attitude is why I've pretty much given up road riding of late. I'm sick of being beeped at or abused when I've done absolutely nothing wrong. Drivers think we're using the roads on sufferance, and that we should behave how they see fit, keep our heads down and tug our forelocks every time they deign to not kill us. And that's just bullshit.

Its the two abreast thing. A tractor horse whatever can't make itself slimmer, by singuling up your showing your doing your best not to impede other road users. Acknowledging curtesy is just politness, it makes life a bit more pleasant for everyone. You either get that or you don't.

by singuling up your showing your doing your best not to impede other road users.

Depending on the specifics of oncoming traffic/blind bends/pinch points etc the cyclist(s) may also be putting themselves and the driver at risk by giving the driver the impression there's space to overtake when there isn't.

Sometimes primary/2 abreast is safer for all concerned... it's very much a matter of the specifics of the situation and discretion rather than principle IME

^^^^^ true dat

here seems to be this expectation that car drivers are the most important traffic and any other vehicle impeding their progress is somehow secondary - whether it's a slow lorry, tractor, horse, pedestrian, cyclist etc

Its not that the problem is that you do not need to drive two a breast you just chose to whether it is appropriate to do this
I could legally drive down every road [ except a MWAY] at 5 mph but i would expect it to piss of a lot of people if i did and lead to confrontation. aggro and dangerous overtakes - unless i was in a funeral car and I bet even they get grief from time to time.

You need to employ sense when you do two abreast IMHO
I am not anti two abreast [ I do it myself] but you cannot just do it anywhere thinking you have the right to do as you please ignoring whether it impedes anyone else/affects them

IMHO this attitude of only thinking of yourself is the problem with roads not the type of vehicle that does it. Of course the big heavy things kill folks not the cyclists who at worst occasionally delay you.

Not thanking you is piss poor as well ...unless they knew it was you and it was personal 😉

I guess that would be the Calver - Grindleford road

[URL= http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq47/robertedj/CalverGrindlefordrdnearCalver_zps04b498ec.jp g" target="_blank">http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq47/robertedj/CalverGrindlefordrdnearCalver_zps04b498ec.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL](from google streetview if I knew how to link it I would)

I've personally ended up in that hedge when a driver decided would rather try to kill me by pulling back in rather than hit two speeding motorbikes head on

If I was riding with someone else 2 abreast would deter squeezing past at that location and I suspect the riders were familiar with road

"could have probably got past, but maybe not given them quite as much room as they would have liked" 😥 but you chose not to so 🙂

having said that will drop to single file when wide enough to let cars go past when safe and will signal a thank you usually

[checks this is a cycling site...yep...sad that this crud is even a question here]

troll surely !

Yes you are wrong

Love this kind of debate.

On the bike I would generally drop into single file and acknowledge the drivers patience.

In the car I would give consideration to using my right to cross the central lines to overtake.

A Right is not always the polite or courteous or considerate thing to do. We have all been in a hurry, have all been frustrated, had a bad day, been sworn at or shouted at.

Just so some consideration and acknowledge other peoples and hopefully we will all live to ride another day.

If that is the road I would be a two abreast or if on my own in the middle of that road - if you want past you are going on to the other side of the road to do it

It will annoy drivers but my safety comes first on a road like that.
Every time a car beeps i know i have just prevented myself from a dangerous pass

Surely as a driver you'd rather not have a massive crash and kill yourself and the oncoming driver?

well, thats what you might think, but ive seen enough examples to conclude that a good percentage of drivers are quite prepared to risk other peoples (and their own) lives to save 2 minutes.

how do i end the bit ive quoted?

then end with [ /quote]

Note I put a gap in the last brackets or it will quote there
gap removed

It only looks like this because i have not ended the quote

 

ive seen enough examples to conclude that a good percentage of drivers are quite prepared to risk other peoples (and their own) lives to save 2 [s]minutes[/s] [i]seconds[/i]

thank you.

Do not give to receive. Disappointment will always ensue!

You did the right thing OP. But thankyou wave from the riders would have been good.

But it Pisses me off seeing two cyclists riding two abreast when it would be more polite to other road users behind them to single out.

Do you rate "politeness" over safety?

Why should cyclists feel obliged to put themselves in greater danger to be "polite"?

Do you consider it impolite of pedestrians to slow down cars by using pedestrian crossings when they could just take their chances and run across the road?

Do they not know who i am am and how important my journey is

Shortcut +1

option 1 - two abreast plus car overtaking plus car coming the other way = certain accident
option 2 - single file in same scenario = probable accident but might get away with a very close call
irrespective of who's fault it may be or who collides with who I'd rather go with option 2 personally

[b]Why are you ignoring the obvious option of the car overtaking safely?[/b]

IMHO option 1 forces a car driver to do this as they have to put their entire car on the other side of the road - ie endanger themselves rather than just you so they only do it when it is safe for them and therefore you.
Option 2 encourages them to overtake dangerously as they only endanger you by forcing their way through.
TBH there one bike or two i would take up the same amount of space - ie a bike in the middle of the road to stop them passing me on "our side".

It's not that simple though Dickyboy.

Option two [i]might[/i] possibly decrease the consequences, BUT it increases the likelihood that the driver will attempt a dodgy overtake and it increases the danger of it going wrong because the overtaking driver now has to overtake two bikes and the gap inbetween them, so spends more than twice as long in the oncoming lane.

Dickyboy - Member

option 1 - two abreast plus car overtaking plus car coming the other way = certain accident
option 2 - single file in same scenario = probable accident but might get away with a very close call
irrespective of who's fault it may be or who collides with who I'd rather go with option 2 personally

I didn't realise those were the only 2 options, I'll start overtaking dangerously forthwith.

I really don't get it. What we've learned:

1) The "problem" arose entirely because the OP doesn't actually understand the law, not because of the cyclists.
2) There is no two.

The "problem" arose entirely because the OP doesn't actually understand the law, not because of the cyclists.

To be fair to the OP, he did the right thing and waited till it was safe to overtake.

posted this before but I'll post it again - used to regularly ride the Calver-Grindleford-Hathersage road and a lot of the passing was poorly thought out same as the options listed

currently in Melbourne, Oz and a lot of the passing is aggressive - but as our local chief of police says - if isn't safe why try and pass?

and the road rules are essentially the same except helmets are mandatory for cyclists and Queensland is trialling a minimum 1m passing rule

Right

This scenario has nothing to do with whether I understand the law or not. I quite often overtake cyclists on double whites - as long as I can see a safe overtaking distance. In this situation, it was a left hand bend, I couldn't see, so I waited. I did nothing wrong in the situation.

Had the cyclists been in single file, there was enough room to get past, without encroaching oncoming traffic - I'd have done this slowly and offered enough room for any wavering. Believe it or not, being a cyclist myself, I always give other cyclists as much room as possible and as an absolute minimum, an amount of space I'd be happy with myself at an appropriate speed.

These pair, bimbled up a long stretch of hill chatting away in no rush whatsoever, either oblivious to the fact anyone was behind them, or not caring. Fair enough, if they thought their safety was at risk if they made room, but an acknowledgement of other road users patience would be a fair trade I reckon.

I'm quite capable of assessing a driving situation for my own and others safety - it was a question of etiquette, not whether I'm safe to be behind a wheel.

Oh - and I've yet to come across a horse rider that doesn't acknowledge patience and respect for their wellbeing. As for tractor drivers - some pull over when they have a big queue, some carry on for miles. Dickheads in all walks of life.

[img] [/img]

Had the cyclists been in single file, there was enough room to get past, without encroaching oncoming traffic

assuming I have the location right are you sure on this?

not personal just I did get forced off the road there about I think just where you describe

and I'm happy to acknowledge the OP held back because irrespective that the cyclists were two abreast it is not a safe place to pass

Had the cyclists been in single file, there was enough room to get past, without encroaching oncoming traffic

Hang on - in the OP you said:

if they were single file, I could have [b]probably[/b] got past, but maybe [b]not given them quite as much room as they would have liked[/b].

so, to me, that means you shouldn't attempt a pass, regardless of single or double file.

There's a difference between buzzing them at 60mph and crawling past them though.

However, I'm willing to concede that they may have been taking up the whole road for their own safety, as some idiots probably would buzz them.

Still a pair of ignorant asshats though. I'd have at least tried to look a bit lively and still given an acknowledgement.

Still a pair of ignorant asshats though. I'd have at least tried to look a bit lively and still given an acknowledgement.

Did they not know who you were?

If the photo of the road is correct, I think they were riding sensibly and considerately.
It's not a safe place to overtake, they made sure that nobody did.
What more is there to say??

Also by hanging back and waiting you are preventing other cars from overtaking .
This means that Jack the Lad wont do a suicide move and go for it as he HAS to be at McD's urgently and that simply cannot wait.
Plus , you are preventing 'The follow through' In my very limited road riding life this is the most dangerous move , car in front goes and the following 2 cars decide as its safe for car #1 it surely must be safe for them, then it isnt as Jack the Lad on his way back from MaccyD's comes round the bend at 55mph leaving car #3 stranded across the white lines and the only way to go is left - and sharpish

I sometimes acknowledge folk for giving way, then often wonder if I should really be thanking them for doing what they're obliged to.

Depends on the situation of course, as a driver in this scenario I wouldn't be expecting anything.

I sometimes acknowledge folk for giving way, then often wonder if I should really be thanking them for doing what they're obliged to.

Yeah, isn't it great that here we are on a cycling forum basically being told we should be thankful that someone didn't try to murder us on the road. It's laughable, someone getting their car-driving knickers in a twist because they weren't thanked for doing what they should have done. Mental.

I sometimes acknowledge folk for giving way, then often wonder if I should really be thanking them for doing what they're obliged to.

Depends on the situation of course, as a driver in this scenario I wouldn't be expecting anything.

Can you imagine if, on a day to day basis, we all said 'thank you' to everyone we interacted with who obeyed the law/used their commonsense so they didn't hurt us... we'd not get anything else done 😯

I'm picturing a Monty Python sketch of people endlessly thanking each other profusely 😀

the closest I ever came to dying on a bike was when I came round a bend going down a 10% hill to find a truck completely on my side of the road overtaking two cyclists riding two abreast. Yes the truck shouldn't have overtaken in a potentially dangerous place but if the riders had been in single file I would have had plenty of room, as it was I had 3ft to aim for at 45mph. Maybe in some circumstances its safer to ride two abreast but it doesn't fit with my real life experiences. Some drivers are going to try and overtake come what may, the two abreast cyclist just annoys and frustrates them. when it comes the pass is often more dangerous. That's real life not how we'd like it to be arguing on the internet, but what actually happens in the real world.

Can you imagine if, on a day to day basis, we all said 'thank you' to everyone we interacted with who obeyed the law/used their commonsense so they didn't hurt us... we'd not get anything else done

Good riders interact with other road users to humanise ourselves. The guy in a white van is less likely to try and kill you if he see's a smiling, hand waving human being. Rather than some lifeless surly lycra clad alien 🙁