Cyclists not using hand signals

interstellaflyer

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

I pretty much agree, a quick glance over the shoulder is certainly enough to warn me that the cyclist is going to perform some sort of manouvre, from this I don't really need a hand signal, that is enough for me to drop back as thsi normally indicates that they intend to move out in the carriageway, no real need for a hand signal, I'd rather they had both hands on the handlebars, unfortunately there are a lot of Play Station type drivers out there that are conditioned to react to situations after they happen as oppossed to anticipating what could happen.

As for undertaking in cycle lanes, this is perfectly acceptable, I don't understand why motorists get wound up about it, the only time I have a problem is when trying to turn left, in Oxford there are cycle lanes on some routes where the cyclist has signs and road markings telling them to giveway to left turning vehicles, most cycleists don't take any notice what so ever, which is utter stupidity, I heard somewhere that the most common accidents involving cyclists and motor vehicles involved cyclists trying to go inside a lorry or bus that was turning left, of course lorrys and busses have blind spots so it's not always the drivers fault.

I don't have a problem with cyclists filtering either, if the cyclist can safely move between lanes in near statioary traffic, then why not, where I do have a problem is when they fly down gaps that are only just wide enough, take out your passenger side mirror and not even acknowedge what they've done, just cycle off leaving you with a rather large bill for a new mirror, this happened to me.

Norman_Castle

I give cyclists extra space because they can be unpredictable and it's the car driver who inevitably loses out (damage to vehicle/increased insurance premiums for five years).

Really?. Dead cyclists would disagree.

custardy

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Really?. Dead cyclists would disagree.

yeah,the poor taxi driver who couldnt wait a couple of seconds
so chose to force me off the road


he really suffered on those few seconds
I have 4 months(ongoing) of healing
bike/bike gear repairs/replacement
paying for extra treatment
possible permanent nerve damage

aye,he really lost out on that one.

Johnmcl7

I see both cyclists and car drivers on a regular basis who don't give any indication where they're going so I don't think it's fair to brand all cyclists and car drivers the same way.

I actually find most car drivers are considerate up here and give me space when I'm on the bike so I always give clear hand signals so they know where I'm going. My bike is light at the front and heavy at the back so it can be a little unstable cycling one handed but if needed I bring my hand back to the handlebars briefly and back out again for the signal. Similarly I always indicate with the car as I do find it irritating when I'm waiting for a car to go by only for them to drive up a junction with no indication whatsoever.

John

Shimrod

Billy-no-Money wrote: »

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.

I suspect this is the same attitude used by motorists who don't indicate as well. Just because you know what you're going to do, it doesn't mean everyone else does. The purpose of signalling is to let other people know what your intentions are.

custardy

Shimrod wrote: »

I suspect this is the same attitude used by motorists who don't indicate as well. Just because you know what you're going to do, it doesn't mean everyone else does. The purpose of signalling is to let other people know what your intentions are.

I think its a stretch to compare what a cyclist has to do while signalling/preparing/making a maneuver
versus flick a lever and move your head slightly to look in a mirror

cyclonebri1

It's pretty simple really, some folks just don't give a toss, wether they are on foot, cyclists car drivers even bus drivers doesn't seem to come into it. Once an xrse hole always an xrse hole :A

Billy-no-Money

Shimrod wrote: »

I suspect this is the same attitude used by motorists who don't indicate as well. Just because you know what you're going to do, it doesn't mean everyone else does. The purpose of signalling is to let other people know what your intentions are.

Read the last sentence of my post again. I didn't say I don't signal and I certainly don't have an 'attitude'. I work with the traffic, and THINK and PLAN. I also ANTICIPATE, a skill which sadly seems to be lacking from many road users of all kinds.

interstellaflyer

custardy wrote: »

I think its a stretch to compare what a cyclist has to do while signalling/preparing/making a maneuver
versus flick a lever and move your head slightly to look in a mirror

I don't know, I've seen some cyclists that are pretty good at multi tasking, it's not only motorists that do naughty things with mobile phones, iPods etc, I've seen plenty of cyclists that are more concerned with speeking on the phone, texting, @rsing about with their iPod etc that they are with where they are going or what dangers are arround them, I would prefer they paid more attention to their cycling, likewise I would prefer motorists paid more attention as well, like I said earlier, I am not bothered about cyclists using hand signals, a glane over the shoulder is enough for me to realise that they intend to make some sort of manuever, i'd prefer they kept both hands an the handlebars as much as possible.

custardy

interstellaflyer wrote: »

I don't know, I've seen some cyclists that are pretty good at multi tasking, it's not only motorists that do naughty things with mobile phones, iPods etc, I've seen plenty of cyclists that are more concerned with speeking on the phone, texting, @rsing about with their iPod etc that they are with where they are going or what dangers are arround them, I would prefer they paid more attention to their cycling, likewise I would prefer motorists paid more attention as well, like I said earlier, I am not bothered about cyclists using hand signals, a glane over the shoulder is enough for me to realise that they intend to make some sort of manuever, i'd prefer they kept both hands an the handlebars as much as possible.

my point is that a 'simple' hand signal isnt always so simple
on the 26" wheeled MTB its no issue
slack angles,suspension and stable tyres
however on the 700c wheeled bikes,its a different matter
especially with panniers fitted
you have multiple factors to deal with,so comparing it to a driver not bothering to indicate is a stretch.
Im pushing for my whole journey( i use the bike as a fitness tool as well as transport)
so phones or whatever others do is no interest to me. I'll be the cyclist with the head down,making good speed.
however a driver may not be aware that its windy,the road is in terrible condition,the road is extra greasy after a small rain shower etc
I'm out there every day and dealing with anything from inconsiderate to downright life threatening actions from other road users.
I see it in the car too,however the potential consequences on the bike are massivly different.