Yet Another Dull Cylists v Motorist Riding/Driving Thread Rant

ventureuk

This new Forum had so much potential to help people who wish to ride more for pleasure, fitness or to save money but has been contaminated by users uninterested in the subject and who instead would rather vent their spleen against other road users.

As I said elsewhere.

There are good cyclists and bad cyclists, experienced cyclists and inexperienced cyclists.

The same goes for pedestrians, motorcyclists, car, PSV, L/M/H goods vehicle drivers, rant and opinion threads are an utter waste of time for users who actually want MSE advice.

Go shout at a tree about that man/woman/child/cyclists/white van man/BMW driver etc that cut you up/undertook/went through a red light and don't come back until you've got something useful to say.

Mids_Costcutter

Would it perhaps be more helpful if different road users be they cyclists, lorry drivers, motorcyclists etc. explain why they behave in a certain way in certain situations instead of launching into a tirade at someone else's "outrageous actions"?

For example how many who don't cycle understand why cyclists need at times to take a position in the centre of the traffic lane: to prevent overtaking when it's not safe to do so and make themselves more visible?

Or that long vehicles have to swing out wide to take corners from a wider angle, so don't try and 'squeeze' past them?

Could we all get more from the forum then?

Stooby2

For example how many who don't cycle understand why cyclists need at times to take a position in the centre of the traffic lane: to prevent overtaking when it's not safe to do so and make themselves more visible?

I appreciate that at times this is good advice - passing parked cars, road obstructions etc, however the problem is some take this too far and will sit in the middle of a lane for far too long as they feel the lane is too narrow for vehicles to pass. If you don't feel its safe to cycle down that part of a road then your option is to get off and walk that bit, not inconvenience everyone else - and almost certainly come into conflict with other road users as a result.

Marco_Panettone

Stooby2 wrote: »

I appreciate that at times this is good advice - passing parked cars, road obstructions etc, however the problem is some take this too far and will sit in the middle of a lane for far too long as they feel the lane is too narrow for vehicles to pass. If you don't feel its safe to cycle down that part of a road then your option is to get off and walk that bit, not inconvenience everyone else - and almost certainly come into conflict with other road users as a result.

There's a huge difference between 'feeling the lane is too narrow to pass' and 'feeling it's not safe to cycle down that part of the road' though.

Should cyclists walk through ALL pinch-points? Or anywhere there are cars parked? You seem to be suggesting that cycling safely is less important than driving faster. Why?

Mids_Costcutter

Stooby2 wrote: »

I appreciate that at times this is good advice - passing parked cars, road obstructions etc, however the problem is some take this too far and will sit in the middle of a lane for far too long as they feel the lane is too narrow for vehicles to pass. If you don't feel its safe to cycle down that part of a road then your option is to get off and walk that bit, not inconvenience everyone else - and almost certainly come into conflict with other road users as a result.

If some motorists feel that they're being 'inconvenienced' then perhaps they shouldn't be driving down that part of the road and should get out and walk instead? Sorry to be blunt, but the point is that the highway is for all road users. When cycling I wouldn't hold up traffic for any longer than is necessary (for my safety) and am sure that most cyclists are the same. Is that not reasonable?

Stooby2

You missed my point - I agree that at pinch points, passing parked cars etc, its a good idea. But I have seen cyclists take the primary position along a road that has no parked cars, one lane in either direction, for over half a mile, simply because it would have meant cars passing them too close for their comfort. You can't hold traffic up for that distance as you feel its not safe for cars to overtake.

ventureuk

Aaaaaaaaand the thread becomes its own prophecy !

verybigchris

Stooby2 wrote: »

You missed my point - I agree that at pinch points, passing parked cars etc, its a good idea. But I have seen cyclists take the primary position along a road that has no parked cars, one lane in either direction, for over half a mile, simply because it would have meant cars passing them too close for their comfort. You can't hold traffic up for that distance as you feel its not safe for cars to overtake.

In the scenario you're talking about, is the other lane free of oncoming traffic?

If it is, you can use the other lane to overtake and therefore you're not being held up at all.

If it's not, then the only way to overtake the cyclist is to squeeze past within the same lane, which is never a safe thing to do.

verybigchris

ventureuk wrote: »

The same goes for pedestrians, motorcyclists, car, PSV, L/M/H goods vehicle drivers

Typical of a horse rider to think they're perfect

Marco_Panettone

ventureuk wrote: »

Aaaaaaaaand the thread becomes its own prophecy !

At least it's vaguely stayed on-topic...

Norman_Castle

You missed my point - I agree that at pinch points, passing parked cars etc, its a good idea. But I have seen cyclists take the primary position along a road that has no parked cars, one lane in either direction, for over half a mile, simply because it would have meant cars passing them too close for their comfort. You can't hold traffic up for that distance as you feel its not safe for cars to overtake.

If you read the Highway Code it explains how to overtake cyclists. It even has a picture. The oncoming traffic is preventing you overtaking, not the cyclist.