Cyclists not using hand signals

SteveJW

I find the majority of motorists are very considerate if you give them adequate warning of your intentions
Usually a glance over your right shoulder and an experienced motorist anticipates you are going to make a manouvre and holds back, then you can indicate your intention to turn right. Worst offenders on bikes appear to be those that put their hand out about three inches at waist height, Worst offenders in cars are those that think a cyclist has no right to overtake on the inside when in a cycling lane

Strider590

Here's the problem, people bundle "kids weaving about the road on a BMX" in with all other cyclists........

When it comes to cars we generalise by the type of car, but when it comes to cyclists we generalise by the fact they're cyclists.

yorkie2

passatrider wrote: »

I've lost count the times I've followed some cyclists that refuse to give hand signals when turning..

Have you created a thread for each type of road user, and this happens to be the one moaning about cyclists? or where you are do car drivers actually signal? or do you have an agenda? Hmm, I wonder

I've lost count the number of times I've seen car drivers refuse to give signals when turning. In fact I could name some places where the vast majority of them do not signal.

Itismehonest

Bring back the days of the Cycling Proficiency test. Who remembers wobbling around the school playground?

passatrider

yorkie2 wrote: »

Have you created a thread for each type of road user, and this happens to be the one moaning about cyclists? or where you are do car drivers actually signal? or do you have an agenda? Hmm, I wonder

I've lost count the number of times I've seen car drivers refuse to give signals when turning. In fact I could name some places where the vast majority of them do not signal.

No agenda my friend. Just observing what I see when out on the roads.:)

thelawnet

sequence wrote: »

With the state of the roads these days, you're taking quite a risk if you remove your hands from the handle bars That said, most drivers take a turning signal to mean "overtake NOW"

Correct answer.

If turning left, it's not necessarily prudent to signal, when cycling.

Take this scenario: I'm cycling up the road, taking my daughter to school, I have to turn left to get there off the main road, and I see a 4x4 ocoming from the other way.

Do I signal here?

The 4x4 is almost certainly on the school run and if I signal it's an open inducement for them to try and beat me into the road, putting me at a risk.

There is no requirement in the Highway Code to signal, but personally I wll do so when it's safer to do so, and not when it isn't.

johncas1

freakybacon wrote: »

And they don't pay road tax either! The evil swine!

Oh the city roads like in London are maintained by council tax payers like me so cycle riders pay council tax like me which is spent by the local council to maintain and mend our roads so if a cycleist pays council tax to the council to maintain the roads they they should have the right to cycle on them your road tax goes to maintaining roads like motorways which I cant cycle on anyway and roads like the A1 which im not going to be cycleing on why pay road tax to maintain a road you cant use anyway

So cycleists are mostley paying to use the roads thats unless you don't pay any council tax

cyclonebri1

Sorry but I'm with the cyclists here, just too bloody dangerous to take your hands off the handle bars at times. Left turns, whats the issue??
Right turn? that is an issue for cyclists and other traffic, just how long should the signal be?. It's easily missed by following traffic and the loss of control if riding with one hand waving about is real. I decent pothole and it's game over.

Make 'em put indicators on any road bike?, had them on mine yonks back. :A

custardy

SteveJW wrote: »

I find the majority of motorists are very considerate if you give them adequate warning of your intentions
Usually a glance over your right shoulder and an experienced motorist anticipates you are going to make a manouvre and holds back, then you can indicate your intention to turn right. Worst offenders on bikes appear to be those that put their hand out about three inches at waist height, Worst offenders in cars are those that think a cyclist has no right to overtake on the inside when in a cycling lane

like the drivers who find it strange a bike will go around a parked car.
they seem to expect the cyclist to stop behind it?

Billy-no-Money

custardy wrote: »

like the drivers who find it strange a bike will go around a parked car.
they seem to expect the cyclist to stop behind it?

Hear, hear!

If the roads weren't full of parked cars there'd be plenty of room for cars to pass bikes - yet when we pass a parked car we're seen as the problem, not the car.

I do check behind, and I move out gradually, but I do NOT signal, nor do I have to.

Also, when I signal to turn right, well in advance of the junction, I do NOT expect to be overtaken by multiple cars, I expect to be allowed to move to the appropriate position for the right turn. Would you overtake another car that's signalling right at a junction? No! So why treat a bike any differently?

And on a mini roundabout, I can't signal right and turn at the same time. I will signal right for as long as possible, and my road position makes it obvious I'm turning right, so please don't try to kill me.

I suspect for most drivers the issue is poor observation rather than lack of signalling - much of the time I don't need to signal because I use rear glances and a mirror to work out what's around me, and slot in when it's safe. A signal is no good if you don't know who you're signalling to.