Lycra nits:defend this...

Johno100

MacMickster wrote: »

Having just spent a few weeks working in Spain, I stayed in a villa close to this road

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@38.6797071,0.1136179,3a,75y,277.12h,69.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svan0LGVTnEe7eYRu3--fUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

On the left you will see a dedicated cycle path, separated from traffic by a high kerb. This seems like exactly the kind of layout that the cycling lobby continually call for public money to be spent on.

Almost without exception, the lycra louts ignored this cycle path, and when going up what is a deceptively steep hill would cause huge tailbacks of cars unable to safely overtake them (the road is not usually as quiet as when the camera car went up it).

Where dedicated cycle lanes are in place then cyclists should be forced by law to use them.

Many won't use them or the segregated 'super highways' being built in London because it may involve them sharing with the more leisurely commuter cyclists and thus potentially slowing them down. Plus a lot are the non-conformist types who'll rail against the idea they should be confined to one part of the road or generally being told what they should do.

You ask the activists campaigning for this improved infrastructure many will tell you it's not for them but for potential new cyclists it will encourage to take to the roads.

MacMickster

Johno100 wrote: »

Many won't use them or the segregated 'super highways' being built in London because it may involve them sharing with the more leisurely commuter cyclists and thus potentially slowing them down. Plus a lot are the non-conformist types who'll rail against the idea they should be confined to one part of the road or generally being told what they should do.

You ask the activists campaigning for this improved infrastructure many will tell you it's not for them but for potential new cyclists it will encourage to take to the roads.

And yet they claim to be in fear of their lives daily due to all of the motorists deliberately trying to wipe them off the face of the earth. Are you suggesting that they exaggerate the dangers faced by cyclists using the roads?

Norman_Castle

Lycra nits:defend this...

From the article, Cycling campaigners say the motorist did nothing wrong and the man is giving cyclists a bad name.

Richard53

I saw the article on another forum, where some of the contributors are quite trenchant in their views of motorists, and not one person defended the cyclist. General opinion was that he was a self-important prat who gave cyclists a bad name, that the overtake and turn was fine, the woman handled it well, and that her only fault was in apologising.


I could post a video of a drunk car driver ploughing through a bus shelter full of nuns with kittens, with the headline "MSE Motoring Forum: defend this". But I won't, because it would be ridiculous.

rich13348

So by the looks of it he is complaining about her turning left after overtaking. There was plenty of room for her to turn left. Also part way through he says "give me a few seconds to get past", is he really saying he is going to undertake the vehicle. That's madness and putting his own life at risk. Utter lunacy.

Strider590

MacMickster wrote: »

Having just spent a few weeks working in Spain, I stayed in a villa close to this road

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@38.6797071,0.1136179,3a,75y,277.12h,69.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svan0LGVTnEe7eYRu3--fUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

On the left you will see a dedicated cycle path, separated from traffic by a high kerb. This seems like exactly the kind of layout that the cycling lobby continually call for public money to be spent on.

Almost without exception, the lycra louts ignored this cycle path, and when going up what is a deceptively steep hill would cause huge tailbacks of cars unable to safely overtake them (the road is not usually as quiet as when the camera car went up it).

Where dedicated cycle lanes are in place then cyclists should be forced by law to use them.

I'm sorry but this statement is just plain stupid, most cycle lanes are not safe for cyclists, they're designed by car drivers and often place cyclists in greater danger.

Keep_pedalling

I often wear Lycra when going out for a spin, and no I won't defend him or any other idiot whether they are on a bike, in a car, or on a forum accusing all us keen cyclists of being nits.

Keep_pedalling

As for that Spanish cycle lane, I would not use it on a training run either, you would continually have to keep giving way at every junction you came to, alright for going to the shops perhaps but not for a proper ride.

Strider590

Also, title of this thread............... I don't think he was actually wearing any lycra at all.

MacMickster

Strider590 wrote: »

I'm sorry but this statement is just plain stupid, most cycle lanes are not safe for cyclists, they're designed by car drivers and often place cyclists in greater danger.

At least you had the good sense to acknowledge that your statement was stupid before making it.

Get yourself off to bed now. It's a school day tomorrow. Talk to your teacher about sentences and full stops.