Forum menu
I know the roads there, and they are generally quiet. I would ride two abreast no bother at all. If there was cars approaching from the rear they have plenty of room to pull out and overtake, if there are no oncoming cars. If there are, they need to slow down and wait for a few seconds, hell its Oban they are going to/from so not in a hurry.
If there is sustained oncoming cars, and some from behind, go single file, but keep out 1. this avoids anyone trying to squeeze by and 2. avoids anyone shouting at you for riding 2 abreast (although you legally can do and it would not make much difference if you did)
Two abreast is inconsiderate and bloody annoying.
No its not, its a safe defensive position, you are then forced to give the cyclists the correct amount of room rather than trying to squeeze past. Being a bad driver that gets irritated by cyclist is not bloody annoying, its downright dangerous.
Two abreast is inconsiderate and bloody annoying.
lots of things annoy me in life. slowing down for a couple of minutes on the roads is not one of them.
you need to chill out a bit.
What is a road? The road we were on had 2 lanes and there isn't enough room for 2 cars and 1 bike to be side by side comfortably/safely. Is it holding up traffic therefore by riding two abreast in this instance? Riding two abreast isn't holding up the traffic since it still wouldn't have been safe to overtake if we were single file, right?
this is the case.
Once again on this cyclists forum we get people with very anti cyclists sentiments.
cyclists do not hold up traffic - they are traffic. If the road is not wide enough to allow 2 cars and a bike then its no point in riding in single file.as a safe overtake is not possible without the other side of the road being clear so two abreast or single file makes no difference
Roads will never be roadie-friendly, not in the UK. No point pretending two abreast is reasonable or practical.
Amazed again.
Sounds like the same attitude as the woman who beeped her horn at me when I overtook another cyclist. Riding 2 abreast for all of a second I was.
Maybe she was a STWer too.
Roads will never be roadie-friendly, not in the UK. No point pretending two abreast is reasonable or practical.
I have found roads to be roadie friendly. Just thank god there are plenty of decent drivers that don't share your views.
DezB did you MSM?
TJ.. Just because someone has consideration for other road users doesn't make them anti-cyclist.
and someone who will try and squeeze past a single cyclist will try and squeeze past two just as readily when the opportunity arises.
Wallace, I think you've helped me close the argument.
The way I see it, there are two kinds of roads:
Narrow roads where it is impossible for a car to get past two abreast. In these situations just ride single file when a car approaches (from rear or front) or pull into passing place if it's a single track. This is something I've always done and is basically common sense.
Normal road (like most A roads IME) where it is easily possible for a car to overtake cyclists riding two abreast and also possible for two cars and a cyclist right at the side to pass. In these situations where it is quiet, two abreast is fine because there's plenty of room for overtaking when it's safe and the car will never overtake when a car is coming the other way (due to two abrest). However, as common courtesy in busy periods as wallace pointed out, one should ride single file out from the gutter to show we're not being dicks but that we don't want them to over take then cars are coming the other way (surely this is fair).
Further to this, I believe the policeman was trying to point out that riding two abreast round corners is silly because what happens if a car is coming the other way on our side of the road, you're better prepared in single file.
I hope I've not come across as arrogant / inconsiderate because I certainly wouldn't think of myself this way.
someone who will try and squeeze past a single cyclist will try and squeeze past two just as readily when the opportunity arises.
They won't though, because of the laws of physics.
Also, what does IAM and MSM mean, cynic-al?
I recently went on a RED light awareness course. And guess what, this was one of the questions.
Although the highway code is not specific it does state that:
1. Horse riders can be two abreast - that did surprise me.
2. Cyclists can be two abreast.
Really, it's down to the width of the road and interpretation of, is it safe to be two-abreast? Are you endangering others?
Hence, imo the copper could have thought it was dangerous to be two-abreast and instructed you to be single file.
If horse riders can ride 2-abreast then cyclists certainly can!
Should have ask the copper about horse riders...
They won't though, because of the laws of physics.
They will though.. Someone who sees a foot of space adequate to safely pass a cyclist will do the same for two. Of course they'll need more space overall, but they'll still overtake just as close.
Institutes of Advanced Motorists - ironically a body idoilised by some on here who are anti-car.
Mirror Signal Maneouvre
elzorillo - MemberBack to the original post.. I'd be pretty pissed off too if you were riding two abreast on a narrow road holding all the traffic up.
Why couldn't you simply go single file if you were obviously causing an obstruction?
Bit of common courtesy wouldn't go amiss by the sound of it.
cyclists do not hold up traffic - they are traffic.
common courtesy - like cars waiting until its safe to pass? Levaing a sufficient amount of room as described the highway code?
Thats a very anti bike sentiment. treating bikes as second class road users.
riding out from the kerb prevents cars squeezing past. If you do this then there is room for a bike on the inside - of course you also do whatever is needed to facilitate the cars overtake when its safe to do so - however you as the cyclist being overtaken need to take control of the situation.
Do you actually ride on the roads elzorillo
Do you actually ride on the roads elzorillo
Cycled to work on the roads for 20+ years.. raced (world champs 89/90).. rode for pleasure my whole life.. Done the lot, but never once viewed myself above giving way to other road users once in a while.
Cycled to work on the roads for 20+ years.. raced (world champs 89/90).. rode for pleasure my whole life
That's all well and good but have you had as much experience of being right as TJ has?
I think you'll find that you haven't
Done the lot, but never once viewed myself above giving way to other road users once in a while.
TJ
of course you also do whatever is needed to facilitate the cars overtake when its safe to do so -
🙄
Done the lot, but never once viewed myself above giving way to other road users once in a while
The impression I get is that no one here views themselves as being above giving way to other road users. Everyone rides single file where they're holding cars up or it's just courteous to do so even though the car can't overtake.
The point is that roads aren't so narrow that cars can't get past when riding two abreast but are wide enough that if we were single file a car could dangerously squeeze past at bad times.
[i]cynic-al - Member
DezB did you MSM?[/i]
No, I looke.... hang on, you're trying to make it [i]my fault[/i], aren't you?
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 unless it really is so narrow that no car can pass if the bikes are two abreast.
Moving single file maight make some non-cyclists feel like you're giving way etc but if they're leaving the right amount of space in the first place it wouldn't be an issue
chamley, that is exactly correct.
However upon reconsidering my original post, it seemed that the policeman was more concerned for all cyclists to be single file because of safety, not because we hold people up. He said it is much safer to ride single file than two abreast. I think we've gone off topic a bit talking about car drivers who get mardy.
Ultimately the question should be: what is safest for the cyclist? Two abreast to stop bad overtakes and half the length of the chain or single file to keep us out of the way and ensure we can all jump into a ditch if there's a proverbial fan involved?
These posts come up at least once a week and the only answer is for everyone involve to use a bit of common sense and courtesy.
jcrompton your post is a good example of that:
jcromton - Member
Wallace, I think you've helped me close the argument.The way I see it, there are two kinds of roads:
Narrow roads where it is impossible for a car to get past two abreast. In these situations just ride single file when a car approaches (from rear or front) or pull into passing place if it's a single track. This is something I've always done and is basically common sense.
Normal road (like most A roads IME) where it is easily possible for a car to overtake cyclists riding two abreast and also possible for two cars and a cyclist right at the side to pass. In these situations where it is quiet, two abreast is fine because there's plenty of room for overtaking when it's safe and the car will never overtake when a car is coming the other way (due to two abrest). However, as common courtesy in busy periods as wallace pointed out, one should ride single file out from the gutter to show we're not being dicks but that we don't want them to over take then cars are coming the other way (surely this is fair).
Then it is settled.
Thanks all, now I need to speak to the policeman again.
Lot of roadies 2-up on the way to Inners on Sunday, and I have to say I was cringing for their own safety and at how peed off drivers were getting with them, there were some really dodgy overtaking moves and hard braking when we came upon them round a corner. Much easier to pass a single cyclist than two on those kind of roads, I think if they could have seen how close people were getting to them they would have gone single file.
cyclists do not hold up traffic - they are traffic
+1
Most of problems seem to be from drivers complete inability to slow down behind a cyclist for any length of time. Even a few seconds seems to be enough to aggrieve a lot of drivers.
I think we've gone off topic a bit
New here are you?? 😆
If it's a big group of cyclists the car would have a longer overtake if they were riding single file. How is this "safer"?
you have as much right to use the road as a car
wrong!
as a subject of her majesty you have an unalienable right to use the queens highway. motorists are merely licensed and must pay for this privilege, this is discretionary and may be revoked at any time by the authorities.
so you have a right to use the highway, the motorist doesn't
There will be prevailing road traffic conditions (carriage size, visibility, weather, amount of other road traffic etc) where cycling two abreast may amount to Dangerous, Careless or Inconsiderate Cycling as defined by Sections 28 & 29 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and in those circumstances you run the risk of being reported for summons, depending on how the officer interprets the situation. Common sense generally prevents people from rendering themselves liable to prosecution.
Regarding the Highway Code - Section 38 (sub section 7) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 states -
[i]A failure on the part of a person to observe a provision of the Highway Code shall not of itself render that person liable to criminal proceedings of any kind but any such failure may in any proceedings (whether civil or criminal, and including proceedings for an offence under the Traffic Acts, the M1Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 or sections 18 to 23 of the M2Transport Act 1985) be relied upon by any party to the proceedings as tending to establish or negative any liability which is in question in those proceedings.[/i]
... so, if the HC says don't do it, you ought not to - as it could be quoted to lend weight to a prosecution case!
Sadly, practicalities don't really enter in to it. If the road is narrow enough that cars have to cross the centre line to overtake a single cyclist, then technically, two abreast is more considerate as it halves the length of the group.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of drivers who simply can't get past the "inconsiderate idiots riding two abreast" mentality.
Interesting reading on the single file two abreast thing... I spent al the on road sections of a TCL and MBL riding two abreast in a box of 8 riders. We took up the ground footprint of a long car.
It was interesting on a couple of levels:
Uncomfortable as I usually ride in my own space single file plus the response of drivers varied between scary overakes and beeping horns...
Not good on a busy high st.
Regardless of the rights or wrongs, I think the policeman's advice was pragmatic good sense on roads with poor sightlines.
epicyclo - but riding out from the edge you can see and been seen for further can you not? - especially on left handers
I used to get pissed with cyclists riding two abreast when driving. Then I started thinking. If you give a cyclist a proper berth you pretty much have to overtake properly - like use the other carriageway as if you were passing a car. Which means that one or two abreast makes little difference. Cyclists that pull back to single file when cars are waiting behind and where it might make safe overtaking easier send a courteous message. Let them pass, give the driver a wave. Maybe he/she will be courteous back again. Give and take. We are all road users and most of us get it about right.
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
very well put
the situation is comparable to driving at 30 in a 30 zone or 50 in a 50 zone and vehicle behind weaving/tailgating and then overtaking for the car/van to stop in front of you at the next queue - big difference is no danger when sat in a car, just some people can't/won't wait and as speed difference (or sometimes perception of speed difference) increases the push to pass just ignores the danger
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 - MemberThe 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.