Cylists without lights - disproportionately annoys me!!

bosseyed

Harry_Flashman wrote:

cyclists certainly don't (and won't) get the same consideration from me as paying road users do.

Hey Harry, if you treated me like you claim to treat cyclists I'd follow you to the next set of lights much like Marleyboy would, but then I'd simply kick off your wing mirror as I cycle past. Good luck catching up with me in traffic eh?

Think of it as instant Karma.

I have as much right to be on the roads as you paying as I do car tax, council tax and all applicable VAT etc.

Mids_Costcutter

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Ah - there we diagree then. I think the cyclist should be getting as far over as possible to allow the motor past.

It all depends upon whether it's safe for the motorist to pass or whether the cyclist needs to protect their roadspace and keep in a position that makes them more visible to others. There is no hard and fast rule. As a cyclist riding right up against the kerb isn't particularly safe either: it leaves no room for manoeuvre should you encounter a pot hole or collapsed gulley cover.

dmoyes

I cycle, the only time I move into the middle of the road is when I am turning down a street as it is alot easier to keep the speed and need more space to turn that sharp.

The fact cars are meant to give a cars width when overtaking means this should have little or no effect on thier rooute.

I also drive and find other cars to be ALOT more hassle than the bikes.

adouglasmhor

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Ah - there we diagree then. I think the cyclist should be getting as far over as possible to allow the motor past.

I am only talking about if there isn't room, and only for the few seconds untill you have room to pull over. Never had a problem with a motorist over doing that, and usualy get thanked by the driver as you wave them past. Even on a bike travelling at moderates speed it is only seconds to pass a traffic island.

Azari

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Ah - there we diagree then. I think the cyclist should be getting as far over as possible to allow the motor past.

Whereas the recommendation in the relevant government publication is that cyclist should cycle around 1 metre from the kerb or parked traffic.

That's where I cycle and motorists either like it or lump it.

On occasion if I decide it is safe to do so I may move closer to the kerb to allow a car past but that is purely a matter for my discretion.

Despite hearing the witterings of a lot of very mouthy motorist/keyboard warriors I have been cycling like this for many years without problem

Harry_Flashman

bosseyed wrote: »

Hey Harry, if you treated me like you claim to treat cyclists I'd follow you to the next set of lights much like Marleyboy would, but then I'd simply kick off your wing mirror as I cycle past. Good luck catching up with me in traffic eh?

Haha - where's your adherence to 'the law' now? Doesn't it suit your purposes anymore?

Precisely why cycles should be registered, insured and taxed as motors are.

It'd be very interesting to catch you though

Harry_Flashman

Azari wrote: »

Whereas the recommendation in the relevant government publication is that cyclist should cycle around 1 metre from the kerb or parked traffic.

That's where I cycle and motorists either like it or lump it.

On occasion if I decide it is safe to do so I may move closer to the kerb to allow a car past but that is purely a matter for my discretion.

Despite hearing the witterings of a lot of very mouthy motorist/keyboard warriors I have been cycling like this for many years without problem

It'd be nice to think you were the cyclist I encoutered half an hour ago passing a small road works. He thought he should be in the middle of the road too - but the close proximity of 2.5 tonnes of hot metal persuaded him otherwise

Incidentally, neither of us had to slow down and neither of us was in any danger.

Azari

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

It'd be nice to think you were the cyclist I encoutered half an hour ago passing a small road works. He thought he should be in the middle of the road too - but the close proximity of 2.5 tonnes of hot metal persuaded him otherwise

Incidentally, neither of us had to slow down and neither of us was in any danger.

If neither of you were in any danger then there is no reason for any cyclist to change course.

You're first paragraph is clearly intended to imply that you intimidated the cyclist but you haven't got the courage of your convictions and wimp out by claiming that there was no danger so no reason for the cyclist to be intimidated.

Pretty typical behaviour for the internet bully, tbh.

It always strikes me as amusing the number of motorists who are all mouth when behind their keyboards or in a pub but accept that they have to behave when behind the wheel.

Harry_Flashman

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Aye, OK matey. We'd managed to stay above name calling up to that point

The cyclist was trying to get himself into the middle of the road, but moved over as I made my way alongside him and moved over to the left in order to avoid oncoming traffic.

He clearly thought that there wasn't room for both of us to get through (and wanted to get through in front of me), but the fact that my motor never touched him and he didn't fall off (or have to slow down) proves that he was wrong.

Azari

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

The cyclist was trying to get himself into the middle of the road, but moved over as I made my way alongside him and moved over to the left in order to avoid oncoming traffic.

Are you saying he was trying to turn right?

That is the only reason why anyone would be trying to get into the middle of the road.

He clearly thought that there wasn't room for both of us to get through (and wanted to get through in front of me), but the fact that my motor never touched him and he didn't fall off (or have to slow down) proves that he was wrong.

Quite honestly, I think you're making this up.

It seems an unbelievable coincidence that you would have had such an encounter half an hour before you wanted to try and big yourself up by boasting about carrying out a dangerous and intimidatory maneuver in an (almost certainly futile) attempt to impress people on an internet forum.

In many years of cycling and driving I have neither encountered nor seen such an irresponsible piece of driving so your claim to have perpetrated one so conveniently for posting just doesn't ring true.

Still, I'm sure you have impressed yourself.