[Closed] Attention Motorcyclists...

Unfortunately when on a bike I will jump into these spaces and overtake quickly, but I wouldn't dream of having a pop at you because you consider me inconsiderate. I would apologise, go on my merry way and change nothing because I'm a __________ .

And I'd respect you for at least admitting it! 😆

It has been questioned earlier but are you really saying that no-one is allowed to overtake you unless you have had the foresight, immediately prior to being overtaken, to double the gap between you and the vehicle in front?

I'm not saying anyone isn't allowed to do anything. I'm just saying it's inconsiderate and dangerous to overtake where there isn't sufficient space to pull in without forcing people to brake. It's baffling me that people are arguing the contrary.

Surely that would cause you more angst than simply dropping back a bit once a bike or car has gone safely past. After all, especially with a motorbike, it is likely to be past the car in front quite quickly anyway.

Don't mistake my consistent defense of my point as angst or obsessive argument. I just don't change my opinion without reasonable evidence to the contrary, none of which has been presented. So far all that I see having been presented (apart from the mis-understanding folk who jumped in part way without reading fully) is bikers saying "you might as well drop back when I've forced you to, it's easy enough" and "Bikes and bikers are far superior, therefore my cutting in in front of you doesn't matter because we're safe". Paraphrased, of course.

If I can't (or don't want to) overtake the vehicle in front I'll often leave a large space for the faster/more motivated drivers.

What I have noticed recently is that motorcyclists are less likely to acknowledge when I pull over to the left to let them squeeze past, easing their overtake. When I was riding motorbikes, that sort of behaviour was both welcomed and thanked.

I'd get miffed at having to drive to accomodate other people's miff-inducing driving! Why can't people just drive sensibly, instead of forcing me to either drive with huge gaps or make gaps for them?

Interesting that you're arguing for consideration. Consider, who's most inconvenienced by other road users' inconsiderate driving?

1) The car driver who has to momentarily slow down slightly to allow a bike to pass safely before returning to his original position.

2) The bike stuck behind traffic that he could otherwise easily pass and be on his way but for the car in front being too close to the next one.

I'm not arguing in favour of driving / riding like a hooligan, I'm just struggling to understand why this is such an issue for you. It seems remarkably petty.

If I can't (or don't want to) overtake the vehicle in front I'll often leave a large space for the faster/more motivated drivers.

Snap, as said about two pages ago 🙂

What I have noticed recently is that motorcyclists are less likely to acknowledge when I pull over to the left to let them squeeze past, easing their overtake. When I was riding motorbikes, that sort of behaviour was both welcomed and thanked.

And I'd respect you for at least admitting it!

I'm just saying it's inconsiderate and dangerous to overtake where there isn't sufficient space to pull in without forcing people to brake. It's baffling me that people are arguing the contrary.

I'm not saying anyone isn't allowed to do anything. I'm just saying it's inconsiderate and dangerous to overtake where there isn't sufficient space to pull in without forcing people to brake

I think you are being a bit over-zealous on this one and don't appear to know the difference between braking and lifting your foot off the accelerator for a few moments in order to safely restore the gap in which you feel safe. I would also question that by braking immediately to restore the gap you are probably far more likely to cause an accident by forcing cars behind you to also brake.

Interesting that you're arguing for consideration. Consider, who's most inconvenienced by other road users' inconsiderate driving?

1) The car driver who has to momentarily slow down slightly to allow a bike to pass safely before returning to his original position.

2) The bike stuck behind traffic that he could otherwise easily pass and be on his way but for the car in front being too close to the next one.

I'm not arguing in favour of driving / riding like a hooligan, I'm just struggling to understand why this is such an issue for you. It seems remarkably petty.

I'm not arguing about being slowed, I'm arguing about having my safety compromised for someone elses progress. I don't feel that's petty, do you?

I do quite a lot of driving and riding in a 'making progress' mode and if I followed your 'advice' it would be quite a challenge to overtake anyone on certain roads.

We all find it a bit of a challenge to make progress on some roads, be it a car or a bike. Again, what you're saying is you'll compromise basic safety to make progress faster.

I think you are being a bit over-zealous on this one and don't appear to know the difference between braking and lifting your foot off the accelerator for a few moments in order to safely restore the gap which you feel safe.

That's your opinion, next time I'll let off the throttle rather than dabbing the brake lightly and hope that in the 15 seconds or so it takes for me to drop back to a safe distance you don't come acropper and end up as paste under my wheels. Should I make that assumption of all bikers? Someone inform the lawmakers that all bikers are willing to turn the laws around and not blame cars who run into the back of them. If you want to pull in on the bumper of the car in front of me, knock yourself out - I won't complain.

I would also question that by braking immediately to restore the gap you are probably far more likely to cause an accident by forcing cars behind you to also brake.

Only if it actually was in any significant degree - it isn't.

I think you are being a bit over-zealous on this one

no, I think it is you that is wrong here - it is fine to overtake and then pull it as long as it is your braking distance that is compromised, not the guy you have just overtaken.

If you overtook me and pulled in, cutting my braking distance short, and then something happened and I had to brake and ended up hitting you then it would be seen as my fault for not leaving enough gap - which is clearly not the case.

I doubt that you would 'fess up to the insurance either to accept liability. If you would then I would have thought that you would be in the minority.

Only if it actually was in any significant degree - it isn't.

how do you know it isn't - pray?

If he had to brake to keep safe distance then it was significant.

Forcing me to brake to get my stopping distance back isn't cutting me up?

Well, yes, it is, but is that what we're talking about? You're pootling along minding your own business, with plenty of braking distance between yourself and the car in front, a bike overtakes and slots in front of you, and you have to hit the middle pedal? Really?

Either you're changing what you're describing, I'm totally misunderstanding you, or you need to work on your observation.

Riddle me this. You're cruising down the motorway at 70, inside lane, someone comes past you and pulls in a couple of car lengths ahead of you waiting for the next exit. Assuming you sensibly brake to increase your stoppign distance do you a) congratulate him on his making progress despite forcing you to brake or b)raise an eyebrow at his leaving overtaking and pulling in to the last minute? I think I'm b).

I'd think b) of course, but this seems to be an entirely different example all of a sudden.

If you overtook me and pulled in, cutting my braking distance short, and then something happened and I had to brake and ended up hitting you then it would be seen as my fault for not leaving enough gap - which is clearly not the case.

How about anticipating the manoeuvre and start dropping back as you are being overtaken by a faster vehicle? That is common road sense.

Ah, but that's inconvenient remember.

How about anticipating the manoeuvre and start dropping back as you are being overtaken by a faster vehicle?

Ah, but that's inconvenient remember.

How about chilling out and waiting until you can overtake, all the vehicles that are slowing you down, in one go?

How about anticipating the manoeuvre and start dropping back as you are being overtaken by a faster vehicle? That is common road sense. There are things on cars called mirrors and if you use them it is fairly easy to anticipate and take appropriate action to ensure both your own and other road users safety.

you must be taking the p1ss now...

Much safer DS, I shall try that next time I'm on the A68 stuck behind 2 camper vans, a truck and Doris and Fred out for a Sunday drive and attached to each others bumpers by an elastic band

How about anticipating the manoeuvre and start dropping back as you are being overtaken by a faster vehicle? That is common road sense.

If something wants to overtake me, it's fine, I can live with it, and my ego normally recovers after a good sing-song to the radio. I do tend to maintain my road speed though, as the manoeuvre is the overtaker's - it's up to him to get past. If he's overtaking, then changes his mind and goes to pull back in, and in the meantime I'm displaying "common sense" by slowing down too, then we're a both a ****ayed aren't we?

Having said that, if a donorbike comes up behind me, I'll normally wander to the left so he can get past - if he gives me a little wave of his nicely power-rangered up little bootie, then I give him a smile, a cheery wave and a wink if I think he might fancy me. Everyone's happy, and someone else can live with the consequences of scraping him up - I'd rather not thanks.

We all have to share the tarmac, we just need to chill out a bit. 🙂

there are countless dozens of idiots on crotch rockets who are not.

If you want to be taken seriously in a debate with motorcyclists, using the term 'crotch rocket' will win you no points. It just makes you sound like a Daily Mail reader.

Unless you've ridden bikes, you simply don't understand the contemptuous ease with which you can get past [i]anything[/i] with four wheels, unless you happen across a Veyron on a regular basis. So the question is, why on earth would any sane person sit there in a queue of badly-driven econoboxes all doing 48mph in a 60 zone, when you can do one or two overtakes and get past all ten of the trundling diesel Golfs.

OK, they're not all diesel Golfs (quite often it's a Hyundai, driver comatose at the wheel). But just because [i]they[/i] don't want to go any faster, why should everyone else wait? If you're in a car you may well not have the acceleration or visibility to get past, but just 'cos someone with a faster vehicle does have that power, why get all grumpy over it? I leave additional space if I look in my mirrors and see bikers, precisely because I drive a 3 tonne truck and can overtake very few people - so I assume that others will want to get past me and the mobile chicane blocking my way.

The idiots who flash past at 120mph leaving no margin for error are fools, obviously, but all of us, regardless of the number of wheels used, can agree with that.

you must be taking the p1ss now...

nickf, you start with this little preach:

[i]If you want to be taken seriously in a debate with motorcyclists, using the term 'crotch rocket' will win you no points. It just makes you sound like a Daily Mail reader.[/i]

Then your next paragraph mentions "contemptuous ease"; then there's "badly driven econoboxes", whatever TF, "econobox" is supposed to mean. Then there's the implied insult of drivers of various models, etc. etc. A bit "Top Gear" I'd say.

Which part?

that I have to keep an eye out in case you are going to overtake me - I don't remember this being taught in the highway code.

Please show me the section.

I rather think that if you passed me and caused me to brake because of your driving, it would be you that failed your driving test, not me.

I remember trying my best not to overtake when doing my driving test. 🙂

that I have to keep an eye out in case you are going to overtake me - I don't remember this being taught in the highway code.

Are you really arguing that all-round observation is bad practice?

that I have to keep an eye out in case you are going to overtake me - I don't remember this being taught in the highway code.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/travelandtransport/highwaycode/dg_070309

151

In slow-moving traffic. You should

reduce the distance between you and the vehicle ahead to maintain traffic flow
never get so close to the vehicle in front that you cannot stop safely
leave enough space to be able to manoeuvre if the vehicle in front breaks down or an emergency vehicle needs to get past
not change lanes to the left to overtake
allow access into and from side roads, as blocking these will add to congestion
[b] be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side[/b]

HTH. Next?

<applauds Cougar and awaits response with baited breath>

Are you really arguing that all-round observation is bad practice?

I may have alround observation, but that doesn't give you the right to take away my safe braking distance - it is the responsibility of the person overtaking me to ensure that they don't inconvenience me, which includes making me brake.

Maybe it is time for you to retake your test:

OVERTAKING, MEETING ONCOMING TRAFFIC, TURNING ACROSS TRAFFIC:-

Overtaking unsafely, wrong time or place, causing other road users inconvenience or danger, too close or cutting in afterwards causing another vehicle to swerve brake or stop. Inadequate clearance when meeting oncoming traffic, causing vehicles to swerve or brake. Turning right across oncoming traffic unsafely causing other vehicle to swerve, brake or stop

[url= http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BeDa0s3Dgj8C&pg=PA357&lpg=PA357&dq=too+close+or+cutting+in+afterwards+causing+another+vehicle+to+swerve+brake+or+stop&source=bl&ots=fWlIYRBQ_k&sig=X5vHr0dMzecBxAdYNkk4aWx4QG0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wukOUOLHB6OZ0QXDv4C4Bw&ved=0CGQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=too%20close%20or%20cutting%20in%20afterwards%20causing%20another%20vehicle%20to%20swerve%20brake%20or%20stop&f=false ]see page 256 - Summary of 'L' driver faults[/url]

be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side

they may pass, and I need to be aware that they are passing so I don't swerve into them but if they cut in and take my braking distance and cause me to break, they would fail their test.

Next?

They are not taking away your safe braking distance as has been explained - they will be setting up to use the centre of the road as an escape route in emergancy leaving you with the same amount of space between you and the car in front.

I can see that it can be frustrating that bikes do this when you cannot get past. However it is not having any significant adverse effect on you in the real world

and who relies on their mirrors anyway ?

heard of blind spots ?

Excuse me for not having read all of the thread. Are we saying that it's OK for a motorcyclist to cut into my "safe braking distance" but not a car, van or lorry?

TandemJeremy - Member
They are not taking away your safe braking distance as has been explained - they will be setting up to use the centre of the road as an escape route in emergancy leaving you with the same amount of space between you and the car in front.

Then your next paragraph mentions "contemptuous ease"; then there's "badly driven econoboxes",

As to the first, I mean that it's so easy to get past you'd scarcely believe it, not that any contempt is meant.

For the second, OK, bang to rights. It's hard not to look at some of the astonishing inept drivers and wonder how they ever passed a test. The sort of people who drive at a steady 40 in a 50 zone, then carry on at exactly the same pace in a 30 zone. The ones who think that you shouldn't overtake because if that speed's good enough for them, it should be good enough for you. These are the people who like to flash you if, gosh, you have the temerity to wake them from their snooze as you go past.

They are not taking away your safe braking distance as has been explained

if they pull in and the resulting distance between me and them is now closer than the recommended braking distance, or 2 seconds if you watched Police Stop! , then they have taken away my safe braking distance and they fail their test.

For the second, OK, bang to rights. It's hard not to look at some of the astonishing inept drivers and wonder how they ever passed a test. The sort of people who drive at a steady 40 in a 50 zone, then carry on at exactly the same pace in a 30 zone. The ones who think that you shouldn't overtake because if that speed's good enough for them, it should be good enough for you. These are the people who like to flash you if, gosh, you have the temerity to wake them from their snooze as you go past.

Are we saying that it's OK for a motorcyclist to cut into my "safe braking distance" but not a car, van or lorry?

And what if it a Honda Goldwing?

I may have alround observation

that I have to keep an eye out in case you are going to overtake me - I don't remember this being taught in the highway code.

When driving, do you rotate your head 360deg on a very regular basis?

The sort of people who drive at a steady 40 in a 50 zone, then carry on at exactly the same pace in a 30 zone

I am not young but this ^^ is something that should force a retest.

driving too slow (40 in a 50 wouldn't count though) is also a test failure.

Sorry, uncalled-for pisstaking on my part. Apologies.

And what if it a Honda Goldwing?

Then it [b]is[/b] a lorry. Just a very large one.

When driving, do you rotate your head 360deg on a very regular basis?

I have never done this, even when not driving...

120-130deg commonly though if wanting to change lanes.

I am not young but this ^^ is something that should force a retest.

And what if it a Honda Goldwing?

You're quite young, aren't you?

Ooh, that man's trying to chat me up. Calling me young and everything.

Ooh, that man's trying to chat me up. Calling me young and everything.