[Closed] STW cyclist disagrees with police shocker. Two abreast not allowed.

TandemJeremy - Member
epicyclo - but riding out from the edge you can see and been seen for further can you not? - especially on left handers

Yes, but if there's something coming fast your mate on the inside means you don't have the option to dive to the inside.

Would continue to ride in mid road position when no traffic visible.

fairy snuff

would like to think that if in the position of the OP i would be asking the officer if he/she ever actually rode a bike

chamley - Member
I think there's a psychological thing going on here i.e to non-cyclists - single file equals considerate, 2 abreast equals inconsiderate, despite what the conditions suggest.

However if i'm driving and I come up behind a cyclist, I have to cross the white line to overtake. So it doesn't matter how many bikes are riding abreast in front of me, I can't pass if a vehicle is coming in the other direction so it shouldn't matter

sections of main road near where i live are too narrow for cars to pass a cyclist safely with cars coming other way (hilly,bends double whites with limited visibility, cars coming other way exceed 60 limit) - this means at peak periods tailbacks behind commuting cyclists - i find if i'm riding with someone else and i sit outside their wheel (not actually 2 abreast but slightly wider but in a good position to react) we will regularly get passed by cars with horns blasting - usually going too fast to deal with oncoming traffic if it did appear - ride single file and people driving in the same style will pass close and pull in early just in case something is or is actually coming the other way
a friend got badly hurt on an A road on narrow double white bends - was front rider in single file and drivers first words were "didn't realise there was two of you"

on single track roads i'll pull into let cars pass

Should have ask the copper about horse riders...

-10 points to gryffindor for non-sequitur

This is an interesting read.... [url= http://michaelbarry.ca/2011/11/the-group-ride-2/ ]Group riding[/url]

Does a group riding 2 abreast take up any more room, or go any slower than a tractor? That said a lot of tractor drivers do pull over and let vehicles pass when safe.

Lovely reading that group riding link.

Also, how about this:

A road wide enough for a car to safely pass single file riders with a vehicle coming the other way, but not if the riders are two abreast. Is it rude and a hindrance to the car to be riding two abreast here?

Good point jcromton, if it's a busy enough road, I'd say "yes" (tho many riders might not want to be on such a road), though if you have a chaingang of 50 riders, try telling them that!

hammerite - Member
Does a group riding 2 abreast take up any more room, or go any slower than a tractor?

The difference is that a group of riders doesn't [i]have[/i] to take up that much room.

cynic-al - Member

The difference is that a group of riders doesn't have to take up that much room.

Is it better/safer for a vehicle to travel wider round a group but have less a distance to do so? Or is it better for a vehicle to not have to go so wide, but have a longer obstacle to overtake, which takes more time?

One of the worst things to happen is when a car starts to overtake, sees something on coming and has to pull in. Cyclists have to take evasive action to let the car in.

I can see the arguments both sides, but I don't there should be a blanket single out rule. Take every scenario on it's merits, sometimes singling out would be common sense, other times staying two abreast makes sense.

I wasn't expressing an opinion there, just pointing out the difference between groups of bikes and tractors.

Totally agree whterh 2-abreast is good or not is dependent on the various factors: visibility, amount of traffic, width of road, no. of riders etc

The difference is that a group of riders doesn't have to take up that much room.

No - it could take up more room by riding single file.

Sorry, what was the problem?

[img] [/img]

How fast would one cycle though? on a roadie, maybe 20 mph? Now many roads it would take an awful long time to come to a spot to safely overtake a car doing 20mph, whereas overtaking a single file bike can be done safely in a lot more spaces. Fair point yes?

So riding two abreast is going to hold up traffic, quite simply, and not going to make you any safer as the drivers will get irate and try to make dangerous overtakes. Another fair point?

whereas overtaking a single file bike can be done safely in a lot more spaces. Fair point yes?

Nope - 'cos if you obey the highway code you should give a bike as much room as a car.

[img] [/img]

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070314

Can I suggest a simple rule of thumb? If a road is quiet enough for coppers to pull over and lecture a couple of blokes out for a ride on their bikes, it's in all likelihood quiet enough for two abreast to be fine.

Interesting, TJ: last time I cited the Highway Code, because it condoned my view on certain riding in traffic, you told me my position was BS.

[i]Nope - 'cos if you obey the highway code you should give a bike as much room as a car.[/i]

this. end of thread, etc.

Classic big hitter thread

cynic-al - Member
Institutes of Advanced Motorists - ironically a body idoilised by some on here who are anti-car.

Yawn.. Shall I bother?

The IAM is not 'anti car', it's pro responsible use and road safety.

The IAM is an independent charity, funded by it's members who have all shown their own commitment by taking and passing the advanced test.

Most of it's work is delivered by local groups run entirely by volunteers (like myself).

The 'Skill for Life' defensive driving course gives you membership of a local group, a copy of the manual, as many hours out on the road as you need to get you up to test standard as well as the test itself - 2hrs over a mix of roads with a qualified police instructor.

All for £139.

And yes, if you are currently not able to competently overtake one, two or more cyclists then I can guarantee that by the end of the course you will be 😉

IAM are the lot that recommend (or used too) sitting at a red light waiting to turn left with your indicator off. an invitation for (usually women) cyclists to ride up your inside them get cut up when you turn left.

Just saying.

nick3216 - Member
IAM are the lot that recommend (or used too) sitting at a red light waiting to turn left with your indicator off. an invitation for (usually women) cyclists to ride up your inside them get cut up when you turn left.

Just saying.

Show me where?

Quite the opposite, the IAM teach that you should indicate when it would be of benefit, not indiscriminantly or when it could be misconstrued. In the situation you describe I'd teach you indicate, and keep paying attention to your mirrors looking for bikes moving up the inside and outside.

In the same situation we [u]do[/u] teach people not to sit there with their foot on the footbrake blinding people behind them - maybe that was what you were thinking of?

Ahh splendid this again. For reference here is the thread (with video) from last time the two-abreast issue raised its head:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/riding-two-abreast-on-a-two-lane-road-yay-or-nay-video

In that instance it was a two-lane carriageway, so cars had a whole other lane to overtake safely in, and a driver still went mental at the cyclists.

(And several people on here appeared to agree with him 😯 ).

I agree with the policeman and single file riding is safer than riding side by side, just my 2 cents.

Just for reference, the highway code also states this;

The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn

while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am

except when another road user poses a danger.

And

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

That.

So you all obey the highway code now? never flicked your beams to let someone out of a junction?

I'm sorry but I rarely give a cyclist as much room as a car and, as a cyclist, I wouldn't like that. As I said earlier, there would be queues for miles until a safe overtaking spot, and drivers would get so angry. Be realistic.

here here.

I'm sorry but I rarely give a cyclist as much room as a car and, as a cyclist, I wouldn't like that. As I said earlier, there would be queues for miles until a safe overtaking spot, and drivers would get so angry. Be realistic.

In that case yo are a part of the problem not a part of the solution. As a cyclist I get very angry with drivers who risk my life by squeezing past too close. Yo think its acceptable to put peoples life in danger to save you a few seconds. Nice

It amazing how anti bike people are even on a bike forum.

not giving a cyclist as much room as a car is not automatically putting their life in danger.

It may well be dangerous but that's entirely different.

So it's dangerous, but it's not putting their life in danger.

Right......

I'm sorry but I rarely give a cyclist as much room as a car

Then you are one of the motorists I shout at for driving like an idiot (from my car or bike).

Personally I make point of giving cyclists plenty of room.
As fellow cyclists I think we have duty to set an example to other motorists. If we don't then who will?

GavinB - Member
So it's dangerous

No, try again.

cynic-al - Member
not giving a cyclist as much room as a car is not [u]automatically[/u] putting their life in danger.

It [u]may well be[/u] dangerous but that's entirely different.

I agree grahamS - but it seems some of us disagree on how much room a cyclist needs.

I don't understand why you'd want to overtake a cyclist with less room than you would a car. A car goes in a fairly straight line. A 2-wheeled bicycle is naturally more wobbly, plus you have to avoid potholes, glass etc more on a bike than in a car.

So if anything you need to give more room for a bicycle.

This is the usual photo from the HC I have a difference of opinion about with TJ regarding what it portrays.

My interpetation of what the HC means by "as least as much space" is that the gap between your vehicle and the cyclist you are overtaking should be "at least" as big as the gap you would leave between you and another car. i.e. if you leave a 3ft gap between wing mirrors when overtaking that is the same gap you should leave between wing mirror and elbow. I think TJ thinks that photo and accompanying words indicates something slightly different.

The crucial difference is that in my interpretation of the code if the rider takes a sensible position (i.e. not in the gutter but not right in the middle of the road)on nice wide roads it can be possible for a car to overtake a cyclist safely without crossing the central line therefore not holding up other road users to the same levels and everyone can be safe and happy.

I think the words and picture are absolutely clear.

If I was driving the car in that photo and overtaking a car roughly where the cyclist is, I'd have my car all the way over the into the other carriageway, not straddling the white line.

convert - Member
The crucial difference is that in my interpretation of the code if the rider takes a sensible position (i.e. not in the gutter but not right in the middle of the road)on nice wide roads it can be possible for a car to overtake a cyclist safely without crossing the central line.

Druidh - I'm with you on this. The "same space" guidance as TJ sees it fails on that photo exactly as you say - that is not the road positioning one would take to overtake a car. That is the road position one would take with a generous helping of [b]at least[/b] in your "at least as much space". i.e. this is a photo of a driving being more than generous and setting an excellent example for the good book. This was not a photo intended to show the bare minimums.

convert - so you want the bike ride to ride towards the edge of the road and are happy for a car to squeeze past without safe room. Unbelievable

Its not safe to do this. unless the road is very wide. Bike 3-4 ft from the kerb at a minimum. 2ft wide, car leaves 4 ft gap - a very bare minimum and car is 6 ft wide - that means unless the car crosses the white line the carriageway would have to be 16 ft wide at a very bare minimum

Don't tell me what I think - I agree with druidh. However that picture is not being generous - its the minimum space you should leave.

"...in my opinion".

I'm not going to get into an argument with you regarding this because you are incapable of debate as has been shown on too numerous occasions and we are in entrenched positions. There is very little point. I've put my view and said you don't agree. I'll just leave it at that.

You cannot argue with the numbers above. how may 16 ft wide single lanes do you know of?

do you actually ever ride a bike on the roads?

So according to convert the highway code is wrong, the IAM are wrong and its acceptable to squeeze past bikes leaving inadequate room. NIce

Convert [b]and[/b] TJ both agree with me but not with each other 🙄

You cannot argue with the numbers above.

I could (they are wrong imo), but I'm not going to bother.

do you actually ever ride a bike on the roads?

Check back over our discussions on this in the past, you'll see I have more that a little bit of experience 😉

TJ - look at the photo.

Imagine a car where the cyclist is.

Imagine how far out the offside of that car would be.

Now add on the gap shown in the photo, plus the width of the overtaking car.

What do you reckon?

druidh - you and I ( beleive) see the space the car is leaving he bike as the required amount - convert thinks it

That is the road position one would take with a generous helping of at least in your "at least as much space". i.e. this is a photo of a driving being more than generous and setting an excellent example for the good book.

Be right on the other side of the road

TandemJeremy - Member
druidh - you and I ( beleive) see the space the car is leaving he bike as the required amount - convert thinks it

I think the photo shows way more than the minimum safe overtaking distance.

TandemJeremy - Member
Be right on the other side of the road

convert - Member

"You cannot argue with the numbers above".

I could (they are wrong imo), but I'm not going to bother.

ah - so that's the yo know better than the highway code, bikability, IAm and all other road experts then

Sorry druidh - I misunderstood you.

give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders [b]at least [/b]as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211-215)

At least means "no less than", not "some more than".

How many roads do you know that have enough room for a car to overtake a bike safely leaving enough room without crossing the white line? Maybe you could shave a foot or two off the 16 ft I post above but not much more.

I was actually thinking of an example I use frequently which you might know...

When I leave Balerno heading into town, I turn right at the traffic lights into Lanark Road West (just near the WoL path exit). There's a bend and then a straight section of road.
[url= http://g.co/maps/rav75 ]Wide[/url]
Here, I cycle close enough to the kerb (you know I don't to the gutter thing) to let cars past. After a couple of hundred meters, the road narrows down on the nearside.
[url= http://g.co/maps/udmgh ]Narrow[/url]
Before I get there, I move out to stop any cars from squeezing me out and to prevent them passing unless the oncoming lane is clear.

'tis wide there and there are some around but not many. I do cooperate with cars and buses to let them past when safe but I control it and decide it

Hmmm - following your links where you have it as wide enough for a car to pass without going over the white line to me it is nowhere near enough IMO - you can see a car in he pic and even if its right on the white line you would only have about 5 ft of space thats 18 inchs clearance each side.

Or do yo mean its wide enough for two cars and a bike if the overtaking car crosses the white line? still a bit narrow IMO