Why do some cyclists use the entire lane, use fog horns, and flashing lights?????????

trinidadone

Norman_Castle wrote: »

trinidadone wrote: »

You're welcome to explain why you#re asking.

No long reason to provide Norman, i just wanted to know

Norman_Castle

trinidadone wrote: »

Norman_Castle wrote: »

No long reason to provide Norman, i just wanted to know

Has the information given been useful to you?.

almillar

No long reason to provide Norman, i just wanted to know

It's all in the Highway Code. I'll assume you're a driver, in which case, you should know that a bicyle is meant to be in the middle of its lane, just like any other vehicle, must have a bell or horn (look up the size of a fog horn!) fitted. Also, bikes aren't subject to the mass of regulations that motor vehicles have about lighting.
Does this answer your question?

trinidadone

Norman_Castle wrote: »

trinidadone wrote: »

Has the information given been useful to you?.

Yes, very. The thought came about after accidently coming across some you tube video clips of cyclists recording experiences on the roads, and shouting out number plates very loudly.

I had no knowledge, cyclists are expexted to cycle in the middle of the road, and never heard of the primiary or secondary positioning.

trinidadone

almillar wrote: »

It's all in the Highway Code. I'll assume you're a driver, in which case, you should know that a bicyle is meant to be in the middle of its lane, just like any other vehicle, must have a bell or horn (look up the size of a fog horn!) fitted. Also, bikes aren't subject to the mass of regulations that motor vehicles have about lighting.
Does this answer your question?

I love postings like these

mr_fishbulb

A motorist, stuck behind a cyclist in the primary position going up a hill, is still going to get to their destination quicker than this thread seems to be getting to any sort of point

redux

Norman_Castle wrote: »

OP I'm assuming you're asking as a motorist who has become irritated after following a cyclist. If you're driving on narrow city streets presumably the limit is 30 mph. The cyclist will be doing 10 mph?. For how far or for how long ...

Actually, nowadays there are 20 mph limits in many urban areas, which might be where the OP's discussion is about.

And I'd expect a slightly higher average speed than 10 mph for most cyclists.

In my experience it's much more common to be held up for a few seconds by other cars and their drivers than by cyclists.

For example, parked car, someone coming the other way, stop for a few seconds to give way. Why is that car parked there? Don't know, but it's allowed to be. We don't see many threads here asking that question.

Car in front slows down because it's about to turn left, or even stops because it's about to turn right ...

The people who rant about cyclists don't rant equally about such minor delays by other cars. That might be seen as a bit odd.

Strider590

trinidadone wrote: »

i have read all this stuff on this thread regarding fog horns, flashing lights and primary postioning, yet, there are stillo massive deaths on the road, and endless you tube clips of people using the road, so something is still wrong

Yes, the attitude of drivers.

When Sir Winston Churchill abolished "road tax" in 1936, he did so because drivers were starting to assume that by paying "road tax", they had more right to use the road. This was causing conflict with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.

Problem is that despite "road tax" not existing, drivers now see vehicle excise duty as being the same thing and once again they assume superiority over other road users.

Combine this with larger, more expensive vehicles and the fact that many people see cars as status symbols and so basically cyclists are seen as being "sub-human", no better than animals, it's that same despicable part of human mentality that started the slave trade.

trinidadone

Strider590 wrote: »

Yes, the attitude of drivers.

When Sir Winston Churchill abolished "road tax" in 1936, he did so because drivers were starting to assume that by paying "road tax", they had more right to use the road. This was causing conflict with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.

Problem is that despite "road tax" not existing, drivers now see vehicle excise duty as being the same thing and once again they assume superiority over other road users.

Combine this with larger, more expensive vehicles and the fact that many people see cars as status symbols and so basically cyclists are seen as being "sub-human", no better than animals, it's that same despicable part of human mentality that started the slave trade.

Perhaps there needs to be more education for drivers then regarding vehicle excise duty? To add to your list, drivers also pay for expensive driving lessons, the driving test (consisting of the practical and theory), high costs of fuel, high costs in insurance (especially due to no win no fee) and the yearly MOT.

Do you really think drivers see cyclists as:

"sub-human"
"no better than animals"
"part of the human mentality that started the slave trade"

If you really do, why?

ab1982

Perhaps people just need to wind their neck in and worry more about their own conduct on the road rather than others.

This goes for moaning motorists and head-cam wearing clowns on bikes.