Cyclists causing traffic problems

[roverbarmy]

Folks are now "over cautious" so as not to incur the wrath of cyclists with head cams! Time to tax and insure them?

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by roverbarmy

Folks are now "over cautious" so as not to incur the wrath of cyclists with head cams! Time to tax and insure them?

Does that apply to children on bicycles?

[Phil th Barrow]

I like cyclist's. Im one of them.

[Lancpudn]

Looks like private ICE car drivers will fall further down the pecking order around towns & cities as the decarbonisation of UK transport to net zero begins to hasten. Cycling lobbyist have recently got the rules of the road changed from highway laws being made by people who sit behind the windscreen of a car to people who sit behind the handlebars of a bicycle. https://greenfleet.net/news/06042022...te-cars?page=1


Edit: New laws coming in on the 28th August for careless inconsiderate driving etc. https://www.transport-network.co.uk/...alendars/17743

[wraymond]

Some cyclists on the road are claiming their holy space with what seems like a challengingly militant attitude. Doubling up is now a determined act of entitlement. It’s also inviting a) serious injury or death or b) a rather large road burn. Still, every cloud...

It might remove some of those awful leg tatts.

Also it seems the old fashioned method of pavements being for pedestrians and wheelchairs only has gone the way of so many other things. Wasn’t it illegal to ride on them?

The practice of bikes and electric scooters using pavements as dodgem tracks is suddenly the ‘done’ thing. Tempted to adopt an elbows-out self defence mode.

[MSS]

Recommended attire for when out for a leisurely walk on pavement in town or public footpath in the countryside.

[mileshawk56]

As a cyclist for a number of years(70ish) and still fortunately able to get my leg over I rage against the principle of making cyclists special cases, we are all "the traffic" and should view each others problems and be tolerant and look out for ourselves and others. The present situation is stupid and most likely to result in more deaths and injuries not less. I gave up years ago with peoples crass remark?question "I would cycle but its the traffic/danger" etc. Dont get me on cycle helmets I will bore everyone witless. Chris S. Both my daughters cycled 15years, drove at 17years,one also motorcyclist, and better for it.

[edwardmk]

I completely agree that cyclists should be given more space. I was impressed last week when cycling in Spain how traffic was always respectful and gave space to me on a bike. However, is it really practical on narrow roads in the UK with large volumes of traffic to specify a 1.5 metre clearance when passing a cyclist? If the cyclist is going at an ant's pace up a hill, it's reasonable surely for vehicles to edge past carefully at a lesser distance? We do have a problem here. As a motorist I don't like being held up by cyclists (and tractors ). As a cyclist I do like vehicles to give me a wide berth if they are travelling over 10mph. Tractors are supposed to pull over if a long queue has formed, maybe cyclists should do the same?

[Torqueofthedevil]

Originally Posted by Kaloz

I had a similar experience yesterday. Came round a bend that has restricted visibility to find a large van coming towards me, on the correct side of the road, and a runner directly opposite the van, coming towards me on my side of the road. The runner made no attempt to move off the road, didn’t even slow down, it he did provide me with an ideal opportunity to test the new brakes I fitted the day before ( callipers, discs, pads on front).
The idiot just smirked- I like what has been written above ‘ it’s you fault if you kill me’. That’s just how it felt.
Brakes worked well, fortunately for both of us.

Whether we like it or not, the runner is in the right - he shouldn't have to move off the road or slow down. The new rules make the hierarchy of users clear, with the intent of keeping the more vulnerable road users alive (I agree that the 1.5m rule is perhaps excessive). A court would ask why you were taking a bend with restricted visibility at a speed which required the use of brakes when the runner came into sight.

[Avulon]

Originally Posted by SCP440

I had to go into Oxford this morning and at the time I usually go the traffic is not to bad. Today it was a complete crawl, not extra traffic just cyclists, as soon as the mass of cars got past the first one there was another and then again and then another. With traffic coming the other direction and the width of the road was the problem,



I know the rules with the 1.5m is there to protect them and I agree something had to be done but as most people cant judge 1.5m most give at least double that and because of the width of the road this causes traffic problems.


Has anybody else noticed this since the campaign on cycle safety.

3m is over 9feet most single carriageway roads are only just 10-11ft wide at best, if the cyclist is 1m from the kerb (a nice safe distance from the detritus in the gutter) then to be 3m clear you'd have the wheels on the opposite pavement. If you're overtaking someone while both are in motion regardless of their mode of transport they own the full width of the lane.

Originally Posted by Borg Warner

Followed one into the next town recently. Gave him plenty of room when I passed him. Little further on there was a set of temporary traffic lights on red. I stopped behind a works van and watched as said cyclist passes me with somewhat less than 1.5m and did the same the the van, not slowing down. Carried on over the lights on red too. Would have loved to stop him and ask why he thought the rules of the road didn't apply to him.

Also saw one exit a one way street incorrectly recently, how the Bini in front of me missed him I don't know.

Passing a static vehicle that happens to have steel cage around it while on a bicycle isn't the issue. Passing a bicycle in a big vehicle surrounded by a steel cage is. As is running a red light - those apply to everyone.

Originally Posted by Kaloz

I had a similar experience yesterday. Came round a bend that has restricted visibility to find a large van coming towards me, on the correct side of the road, and a runner directly opposite the van, coming towards me on my side of the road. The runner made no attempt to move off the road, didn’t even slow down, it he did provide me with an ideal opportunity to test the new brakes I fitted the day before ( callipers, discs, pads on front).
The idiot just smirked- I like what has been written above ‘ it’s you fault if you kill me’. That’s just how it felt.
Brakes worked well, fortunately for both of us.

You were obviously driving no faster than you could see was clear which is good. You should always be able to stop in the space that you can see to be clear in your lane of the road. What if there was an accident around the bend taking up the full width of the road? You're still supposed to be able to stop in time.
You may have heard 'only a fool breaks the 2 second rule' this doesn't just apply to following other vehicles but to blind bends and hill brows.