[Closed] Riding two abreast on a two-lane road: yay or nay? (video)

We are actually not far apart as we both think

Am I about to witness an agreement on STW?

I am surprised you don't know this if you claim to be an accredited instructor.

i wondered how long it would be before you either doubted my credentials or told me how to do my job 😆

The reasons I ask if you think there is enough room for 2 cars and a bike across the width of the road is simple. if there is not then the cyclist needs to make that clear by taking the lane to force cars to overtake properly.

is just nonsense.

take the secondary position, take the lane if you need to do something.

that's all there is to it.

Right - found the quote

John Franklin, Cyclecraft, The Stationery Office (2004).

In certain situations it may be safer to use all the space that your side of the road or lane allows, i.e. [b]take a position in the centre of the lane [/b]or your side of the road. [b]This may be necessary if there is not enough room for cars to overtake you[/b] without forcing you too close to parked cars [b]or the side of the road.[/b]

Direct quote from cyclecraft

so whether there is enough room in that situation for two cars and a bike is cruicil to your road positioning. I do not believe there is enough room for two cars and a bike so I would follow the cyclecraft guidance and take the centre of the inside lane

Trail Monkey
"is just nonsense.

take the secondary position, take the lane if you need to do something.

that's all there is to it."

+1.

though I agree a lot with what TJ is saying riders need to "own the road" more even more so when the rider can keeping with the traffic speed.

But then just refuse and argue that there isn't a secondary postion and no need to be it that postion is just been silly to put it nicely.

Yes I said .5 of a meter as min, it still fair enough out to avoid the crap at the side of the road and the draining covers etc.
And to me thats not in the gutter.

right, in certain circumstances. if there are parked cars around then you should take the lane in advance of pulling out ( an open doors width ) around the parked cars. as for the cars overtaking, it says this [b]may be[/b] neccesary and even then that means on narrower roads and lanes not on wide open highways ffs. seriously, how many roads do you know that have lanes wide enough for cars to safely pass a bike in the secondary without straddling the middle ? not very many, in which case are you going to ride around all day in the middle of the road ? 🙄

bikeability training is available for adults too tj. get some. it sounds like you need it.

So you do not agree with cyclecraft then trailmonkey? And yo claim to be an acceditied instructor.

Read it again

John Franklin, Cyclecraft, The Stationery Office (2004).

In certain situations it may be safer to use all the space that your side of the road or lane allows, i.e. [b]take a position in the centre of the lane [/b]or your side of the road. This may be necessary [b]if there is not enough room for cars to overtake you without forcing you too close[/b] to parked cars[b] or the side of the road[/b].

so exactly that situation.

Yes that is true TJ

BUT as I said BEFORE
"Because the primary riding postion can result in some [b][i]inconvenience[/b][/i] to following drivers, it is reasonable to ride further to the left when this could help others, so long as your own saety is not thereby impaired. At these times you should adapt the secondary riding position

This is also from the book Cycle craft by John Franklin.

and that is when trafic is traveling faster than the rider and no oncoming pack cars juntions etc.

you need to read futher along

so long as your own safety is not thereby impaired.

riding in the witin 50 cm of the curb impairs your safety. full stop. Its too close. riding within arms length of the kerb in that situation impairs your safety as there is not enough room for a car to pass safely

Love this. 7 odd pages that boil down to debating the virtues of being technically correct but maybe squished, vs possibly a bit too submissive on the road, but getting to ride another day.

Happens on a busy dual carriageway near me regularly; cyclists exercising their legal right to ride on a fast dual carriageway. One had to get scraped of off the front of a sleepy lorry driver's Scania the other day; I bet the fact that he was technically in the right was a real comfort to his bereaved family. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valour.

v8 - the road in question is 30 mph limit.

The reasons I ask if you think there is enough room for 2 cars and a bike across the width of the road is simple. if there is not then the cyclist needs to make that clear by taking the lane to force cars to overtake properly.

So yes - the width of the road is crucial to your road positioning. I am surprised you don't know this if you claim to be an accredited instructor.

212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162-167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

so however much of the lane you take up they should be in the other one
My main concern is the reduced visibility to a car behind who may or may not have seen you and then they may be too close to you and too crap to fit in the lane [ if there is infact enough room to overtake you - there is not as per the highway code pic. In essence do you want to force the [ potentially] irate, angry, crap driver person to overtake you in another lane or do you want to allow them to squeeze past with limited space and and the car behind the van who may not even have seen you yet etc.

TandemJeremy - Member
Right - found the quote

John Franklin, Cyclecraft, The Stationery Office (2004).

Is everything in print an AUTHORITY?

Ooh he's got killfile on 🙁 Easy to win arguments when you don't have to respond to half the opposing points eh? 🙄

So you do not agree with cyclecraft then trailmonkey?

yup, it makes sense to me. it's you that's talking nonsense not john franklin.

And yo claim to be an acceditied instructor.

yeah i'd have a word with those idiots at the ctc for passing me.

stay safe out there.

TandemJeremy - Member
v8 - the road in question is 30 mph limit.

Being hit by a Scania truck with a sleepy driver at 30mph probably hurts a bit though.

Can you read the quote trailmonkey?

trailmonkey

the only reason for the cyclist not to be 1m from the curb is because he's about to turn, pass a junction, pass a parked car etc.

the width of the road, oncoming traffic or snow white and the seven dwarves have nothing to do with it.

John Franklin, Cyclecraft, The Stationery Office (2004).

In certain situations it may be safer to use all the space that your side of the road or lane allows, i.e. take a position in the centre of the lane or your side of the road. [b]This may be necessary if there is not enough room for cars to overtake you without forcing you too close[/b] to parked cars or [b]the side of the road[/b].

So actually cyclecraft quite clearly contradicts you. If the road is not wide enough to allow a car to over take you safely then you take the line - simple, clear and concise

Fair enough not a direct comparison, but I don't think I'd like to be hit up the chuff by a Scania doing 30mph either. (or 25, or 35... 😉 )

(oh and by the way, it wasn't obvious why the lorry swerved, it was certainly for no reason that was within my vision. Cup of tea/crotch interface, maybe?)

Oh please, agree to differ before this makes 300!!

Ooh he's got killfile on Easy to win arguments when you don't have to respond to half the opposing points eh?

It's the debating equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "LaLaLaLaLa"

Weak.

that is true TJ "own saftety is not thereby impaired"
will all I got to say is you have a very high level/aweness of you own safety and low regard to other road users.
"riding in the witin 50 cm"

Never said WITIN, I said Minimum
which is more like 75cm in practice.

oh and by the way, it wasn't obvious why the lorry swerved, it was certainly for no reason that was within my vision. Cup of tea/crotch interface, maybe?

aye - you said that 🙂

I've jumped from page1 to page 7, can someone let me know if the intervening pages are just the same apart from tj arguing the same point with different people?

teamhurtmore - Member
Oh please, agree to differ before this makes 300!!

If we can get a racist slant in here somewhere it might just get closed...

I'm gonna have to jump in to defend TJ here. (god forgive me) Franklin deliberately calls it 'primary' to reinforce the idea that cyclists have a right to be there. This thread shows why he needed to do that. It isn't a position I normally ride in, but it is soemthing you are entitled to do. If the road is narrow enough to encouarge a dangerous overtake if you are in secondary, then primary is the place to be. TJ's case is perfectly sound and I suspect if anyone else was making it there wouldn't be such a reaction on here.
Having said that, with respect to the vid: Bbob had it right earlier when he pointed out that two abreast really does antagonize people & I wouldn't do it even if you occupy the same amount of road space. I also agree with v8ninety. Dual carriageways just aren't bike friendly. I may have a right to be there but anyone with any sense would avoid them, and if I have to go on them I make sure I go fast and spend as little timeon them as I can. Pootling two abreast on a dual shows a shocking lack of awareness of the hazards involved.

will all I got to say is you have a very high level/aweness of you own safety and low regard to other road users.

Woody - Member
I've jumped from page1 to page 7, can someone let me know if the intervening pages are just the same apart from tj arguing the same point with different people?

The force is with you young forum member...

TJ is correct.

Cu-chicken.

nealglover - Member

Ooh he's got killfile on Easy to win arguments when you don't have to respond to half the opposing points eh?

It's the debating equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "LaLaLaLaLa"

Weak.

In certain situations it [u]may[/u] be safer to use all the space that your side of the road or lane allows, i.e. take a position in the centre of the lane or your side of the road. This [u]may[/u] be necessary if there is not enough room for cars to overtake you without forcing you too close to parked cars or the side of the road.

So it's not an absolute rule that must be adhered to at all times then, just something to consider?

Woody - Member

I've jumped from page1 to page 7, can someone let me know if the intervening pages are just the same apart from tj arguing the same point with different people?

its done to death for sure now.

I CBA with the more technical arguments, but I just want to say...

**** the motorists, they're giving us asthma, air and noise pollution, obesity, out of town shopping centres and Jeremy Clarkson.

Cyclists give nothing but joy, love and firm toned legs, and thats a beautiful thing. If they can drive sat two abreast taking up the whole lane all the **** ing time, then so can we cyclists.

It's not self-righteousness, it's just righteousness, and we are the people of the future, those mother ****ers just need to get that into their motorised skulls.

😈

Is that cynic al whining? I ignore him for good reasons

My point still stands.

TandemJeremy - Member
Is that cynic al whining? I ignore him for good reasons.

Can someone quote the following to him?

TJ - I've made various valid points that no one else on here has made, in a civil fashion. Are your "good reasons" that you have no response, like on the hub thread?

Thanks

[img] [/img]

*whimpers*

[quote=Cynic-al]TJ - I've made various valid points that no one else on here has made, in a civil fashion. Are your "good reasons" that you have no response, like on the hub thread?
Thanks

Can all the pro 2 abreasters vouch that they have never got upset with caravans or tractors when they are impeded in their cars.

As a pro 2 abreaster, I'm quite happy to admit that I have got irritated with caravans and tractors (and more significantly traction engines). The difference being that I don't feel the need to cut them up to prove some sort of point, and they have all significantly held me up - in the case of the traction engine I was stuck in a massive queue behind it for ~15 minutes, passing numerous places he could have pulled over. If the cyclists in the original video made any difference at all to other drivers' journey times (which I doubt - even those who's driving was poor enough that they didn't manage to smoothly change lanes and overtake were only delayed a little in getting to the back of the next queue), it was only a handful of seconds.

It is [s]interesting[/s] scary who I find myself aligned with on this thread (I'm gutted that TJ didn't mention me as one with the same POV). Note to the haters who think TJ is just arguing again - in this case he's far from standing alone. Though as somebody who quite often agrees with TJ, I do find it rather frustrating the way in such threads get reduced to pro or anti TJ - if only he didn't "cry wolf" quite so much to give the haters ammo (I hope you're reading and digesting this point, TJ).

Geebus. Not rocket science is it really? As a road cyclist:

1. Priority is your safety.
2. If you can reduce inconvenience to other road users without compromising your safety, do so.

If you feel safe getting squeezed by an overtake because you're close to the kerb, that's absolutely fine. Likewise if you do not, you are perfectly within your rights to take the lane if you feel safer doing so. Cyclists generally get sideswiped or cut off, not rear ended which tells its own story but it's your life, your risk, and your decision.

Why can't we all just get along?

Ta aracer - I just pulled out a few randoms who agreed.

I get annoyed with all inconsiderate people on the roads.

I get annoyed with all inconsiderate people on the roads.

Now I really am getting concerned about who I share my POV with 😉

glitchy bump

Not read the whole thread but think I agree with TJ.Never ridden two abreast but if the outer bike is in the middle of the lane then what's the problem?
I ride alone and always occupy the middle of my lane. I am a unit of traffic so why shouldn't I?
I believe I am safer , more visible and twunts in cars wont try overtaking me unless the oncoming lane is completely clear and so they leave me more room and do so safely. Would the van driver have stopped and lectured any other slow moving vehicle ie a bus,tractor, police car etc Can't believe so many posts on a cycling forum arguing against this?

I need to steer clear of this thread. I am now picturing Muddydwarf keeping arms length from the kerb yet still managing to catch the pedals on it.

oldgit - you've not been killed yet? You are incredibly lucky.

Why?
That's not in the gutter. 50cm is far enough out to clear gutters etc. And I ride in a predictable manner i.e straight and smooth so cars can pass with ease.
I'd say riding in the middle of the lane, right or wrong simply winds up drivers and giving them too much to think about seems to make matters worse.

And I've put it into practice cycling from north of Hemel Hempstead into North London in all weathers for years.
I suppose I ride like I ride with a road club.

So, to sum ip the TJ's opinion on this thread: It's legal to be a dick, either on the roads or the Internet, therefore it's ok to be a dick. That pretty much sums it up?

No - not at all. it is safer to ride defensivly in accordance with cyclecraft and other advise on defensive riding so why not do so?

Ride in the gutter and increase your danger.

Why be in more danger than yo need to be by poor road positioning.

Its sad how many supposed cyclists on here think you should get out of the way of cars and cower in an unsafe road position in the gutter

Oldgit I was joking...a lost art on here it seems...

After 8 pages, no one has said it is ok to ride in the gutter. TJ, you need to see a psychiatrist as you seem to have these voices in your head making up arguments that don't exist. Other than that you seem like a nice enough fellow.

You have and have others. You want bike riders to get out of the way of cars by riding far to close to the kerb and you have said this several times

Ok then. I never realised. Thank you.

GlitterGary
"Bikes have to get out of the way of cars do they?"

Yes, of course they do, when they are holding up traffic by driving selfishly

And gutters are mentioned where?

Did anyone see Kevin's Grand Design where he nearly took the cyclist out?
Talking to camera.
Taffic island.
Overtake cyclist.
Surely a law must have been broken there, no?

I missed that, though I had a wry smile through the bit when he was so enamoured by that 'one day' marketing bollocks and read out the 'one day I will cycle to work', followed by yet another section when he's gabbling away to a TV camera whilst driving to work.

when he was so enamoured by that 'one day' marketing bollocks and read out the 'one day I will cycle to work'

sometimes when threads like this go backwards and forwards, relentlessly it's probably best to agree to disagree, you know?

One problem with threads like this is that TJ is so vociferous that other folk who support his position can't get a word in edgeways! As a result it can often seem like an [i]"everyone against TJ"[/i] thread.

To add some "science" I've done a brief audit of the thread and tried to categorise where people stand on riding two-abreast along that stretch of road (or in general):

[u][b]FOR[/b][/u]

GrahamS
TJ
The Southern Yeti
coffeeking
psling
PeterPoddy
Rockplough
warton
stumpy01
poly
aracer
KungFuPanda
bencooper
scu98rkr
Omar Little
richmtb
teamhurtmore
stevehine
2tyred
antigee
oldgit
AdamW
Junkyard
Surrounded By Zulus
imnotverygood
nick1962

[u][b]AGAINST[/b][/u]

theflatboy
GlitterGary
5thElefant
IanMunro
martinxyz
themountaingoat
geordiemick00
theprawn
camo16
mega
rewski
kaesae
molgrips
BoardinBob
MTB Rob
user-removed
FeeFoo
Dickyboy
cynic-al
zippykona
MrSalmon
edhornby
trailmonkey
v8ninety

[u][b]UNDECIDED[/b][/u]

Cougar
wrightyson
DezB
hora
rickmeister
mansonsoul
thomthumb
project
b r
mrmo
nealglover
AlexSimon
PJM1974
redthunder
singletrackmind
grantway
HoratioHufnagel
starrman82
grahamh
Woody
thegreatape

[u][b]Totals: 26 FOR, 24 AGAINST, 21 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

Seems to be a remarkably even split so far.
No wonder the thread has rolled on so long.

(Apologies if I have misread anyone's position. It wasn't always that clear, hence "undecided" includes anyone that I wasn't sure what their position was as well as those who expressly said they weren't sure.)

The interesting point is that (almost) everyone cites "safety" as the main concern, which is good. It seems the core disagreement is about which is the safer approach.

I doubt we'll see that in [s]our[/s] TJ's lifetime, warton 😛

and GrahamS what on earth do you think you are doing with your well researched and rational approach? 😀

😆 Excellent!

tree-unnert!!

(I think the main problem is we haven't had Elfin here to tell us the correct answer)

I'm not undecided.

I'm against, the two guys in the vid were riding like ****s.
I just couldn't be bothered with it really.

Fair enough neal.
[u][b]Totals: 26 FOR, 25 AGAINST, 20 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

GrahamS, sorry, I'm clearly not making myself clear, I have self-flaggelated in repentance.

I've decided cyclists two abreast is awesome, and those dudes seem to me to be perfectly in the right.

mansonsoul: that's okay. Say ten Hail TJs and go in peace.

[u][b]Totals: 27 FOR, 25 AGAINST, 19 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

Hallelujah! 🙂

An excellent way to conclude. Now we dont need to hit 400!

Say ten Hail TJs...

😆 just picturing TJ as Mary trying to [s]arg[/s]debate away [b]that[/b] pregnancy... 😆

So only 25 out of 71 are right then 😉

Shirley [i]everyone[/i] is right 8)

If he walked up to me like that, trying to strut his stuff, I would've knocked the ****er out, no hesitation.

... But I wouldn't be riding 2 a breast on a busy road, just cos it's legal, doesn't make it right.

just cos it's legal, doesn't make it right.

I don't think anyone has tried to claim that, but new vote noted Milkie:

[u][b]Totals: 27 FOR, 26 AGAINST, 19 UNDECIDED.[/b][/u]

@oldgit - you seem to have had almost the exact opposite experience as me - I used to ride as you suggest ~50 - 70cm away from the kerb - sadly for me; a bus decided to squeeze past as we were approaching a traffic island then moved across as the road narrowed; he was still only half way past having clearly misjudged my speed. 6 months of painful dental surgery later and I now sport a nice set of implants instead of my own front teeth.

I will now take up a more prominent (I guess primary; though I've not read that book / used the terminology before) whenever I feel that to allow cars to pass / squeeze by would put myself at risk - since adopting that approach; I've had the odd confrontation with people who seem to think I've no right to take up any space - but no one has driven into me or forced me off the road.

I'm sure others have similar experiences; and I'm sure others have had bad experiences by adopting a wider road position - but I thought I would at least explain my reasoning (do I get extra marks for showing my working out ? :D)

Can all the pro 2 abreasters vouch that they have never got upset with caravans or tractors when they are impeded in their cars.

what other road users dare to use the road when I am there the Bastards. TBH I save my rage for horses or is it hearses [spelling is not my strong point] do these people not know who I am and that I have somewhere to go... i m ean uses roads when i want to but going slower than i want to its just unfair and inconsiderate - they should obviously consider mine as it would be stupid to think i should consider their needs.

It's legal to be a dick, either on the roads or the Internet, therefore it's ok to be a dick. That pretty much sums it up?

you need to see a psychiatrist as you seem to have these voices in your head making up arguments that don't exist

I'm sure others have similar experiences; and I'm sure others have had bad experiences by adopting a wider road position - but I thought I would at least explain my reasoning (do I get extra marks for showing my working out ? :D)

You do 😀
I think the simple answer is there is not a one size fits all position in the road.
If I'm reasonably confident that the vehicles behind are probably aware of my presence, then I also ride out in the manner you've suggested for the same reasons. So yes, in general I move out if I need to control a situation.
However, I can think of a couple of times when I've been on a fast straight open A roads, and cars have brushed past so close (i.e. wing mirror clipping me) with no hint of change of road position, that I'm pretty confident that the driver just wasn't looking out of the windscreen at the time.
Had I adopted the middle of the road as the default position in those occurrences, I'm pretty certain I'd have been smashed to bits.

[i]*considers moving IanMunro to Undecided*[/i]

I think you need to rename the categories Black, White and Grey.
Move me to the Grey, then start a debate on which viewpoint is Black and which is White 🙂

IanMunro - Member
Had I adopted the middle of the road as the default position in those occurrences, I'm pretty certain I'd have been smashed to bits.

Incidentally, a few people have mentioned only moving into the primary when you need to control the situation, for example when approaching a turn.

In the vid they are approaching a roundabout, so isn't that a good reason to take control?