Undercover police cyclists

Ballard

Nasqueron wrote: »

Unlike some militant cyclists, I believe in sharing the road and not holding people up while I roll up a hill at 10mph. Sitting 1m out and holding traffic up on a road that is wide enough for them to pass me safely if I am 50cm to the left is just not in my nature. I'd rather have the cars ahead of me than right on my back wheel looking for a gap and rather have traffic flowing so people can get to work than have them wound up about cyclists holding them up.

I have recently become more assertive on the road but on fast stretches I tend to move more towards the curb.

On country lanes I always take the first opportunity to let vehicles pass; partly because I don't want them to try to squeeze past me and partly because I wouldn't want to be held up by a cyclist for miles if I was driving.

About 4 or 5 years ago I was cycling along a country lane with a left hand bend and was confronted by 8 or 9 cyclists all over the road. One of them was so far over that he passed to my left. This was a blind corner so if I was a car there would have been no avoiding them. I'm not a driver but can sometimes see why they get infuriated.

Throbbe

Nasqueron wrote: »

I tend to, on commutes, sit less than that (about 30cm or so) while minding pot holes as the roads are not really that wide and I'd rather have someone impatient/aggressive able to pass me and leave a metre than get them annoyed and then they zoom past leaving 50cm or less (there are, realistically, not enough police to catch even 1 in 1,000,000 cars passing bikes)

Actually we may not be talking about different things really. I'm measuring from the centreline of the bike, rather than clearance to the kerb, which would probably leave me with around 300mm clearance from the road edge.


I think the important thing is that one size doesn't fit all, which could be undermined by the video, and that everyone will have a different view of exactly where a safe position is. There are times when I'll ride further out than 75cm, and equally times when I'll ride further to the left.


The danger is when people start attributing motives, such as people being 'militant' to people just riding in a safe manner.

EdGasket

I hope they also catch cyclists jumping traffic lights, cycling on the pavement, in fact whereever they feel like it, as well as not bothering with lights at night!

brat

EdGasket wrote: »

I hope they also catch cyclists jumping traffic lights, cycling on the pavement, in fact whereever they feel like it, as well as not bothering with lights at night!

They were quite clear that motorists were the big problem, not cyclists. Therefore that's where their energy is (rightly) directed.

WMP wrote:

“We needed to do something about driver behaviour,” he said. “In about 98% of cases [the collision] was down to driver action, it was nothing to do with the cyclist.”

jb66

Cyclists dont give me 1.5m when undertaking or filtering

boliston

jb66 wrote: »

Cyclists dont give me 1.5m when undertaking or filtering

How is this going to affect your personal safety?

prowla

esuhl wrote: »

Then you are driving dangerously close. You need to leave enough room so that the cyclist can wobble without worrying that your stupidity might lead to a collision.

You were a bit too militant there, in fact stupidly so.

To clarify, I meant that I leave enough space so that if they wobble they don't scratch my car...

prowla

I had a thought today as I was driving home and passed a cyclist.
I thought to myself, I'm sure that was less than 1.5m from them.
But I was on the road and they were on the pavement...
I wonder what these new "rules" have to say about passing cyclists who aren't on the road?

prowla

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Thats a good way of thinking about it. Add to that the possibility of blood splashes on your car and the hours you would waste dealing the ambulance and police. Then you may need to convince the police that everyone else is wrong about primary and secondary positions and the keep left rule actually means cyclists should keep left so motorists can overtake them. If you were found to be at fault you might have to go to court and after all that your insurance would cost more so its probably very wise of you to give them plenty of room for whatever reason you choose.

I'm still struggling to figure out why the normal position a cyclist should be in is called the secondary position and the one they move to because of some obstacle or hazard is called the primary position, though.

boliston

prowla wrote: »

I'm still struggling to figure out why the normal position a cyclist should be in is called the secondary position and the one they move to because of some obstacle or hazard is called the primary position, though.

Primary is "taking control" of your lane but secondary is "sharing" your lane.