road rules

CheGuedara · 12-10-2009 11:24pm

Hermy wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken Dirk, convoys are illegal because they impede traffic. If this is so would there be an onus on large groups [say 50+] of cyclists to break up into smaller groups?

50+ cyclists would rarely be seen outside of a sportive/race/other event and would have usually notified the the local Gardai in advance of the event as part of due diligence in organising and possibly even have on the day Garda support to keep an eye on things (both cyclists and motorists) though

Hermy · 12-10-2009 11:40pm

CheGuedara wrote: »

50+ cyclists would rarely be seen outside of a sportive/race/other event and would have usually notified the the local Gardai in advance of the event as part of due diligence in organising and possibly even have on the day Garda support to keep an eye on things (both cyclists and motorists) though

True enough Che. Maybe 50+ is a bit fanciful.:o

petethedrummer · 13-10-2009 12:14am

Chiefwiggum, go out and do a bit of cycling and you might see it from a cyclist's point of view.

cdaly_ · 13-10-2009 12:46am

Even so, a group of 15 or more drafting wouldn't be that uncommon and would certainly make for some difficulty passing. Mind you, you might expect a reasonable speed from such a group.

@Chiefwiggum, the main reason for groups of cyclists is for 'drafting'. This is where the group of cyclists get into the slipstream of the leading cyclist and therefore expend less effort. The lead cyclist is putting in extra effort against the wind but spends only a short time as the lead. S/he then drops back into the group and somebody else takes the lead. In a group of 10 cyclists, each only has to lead 10% of the time so the group ends up expending less effort as a whole. Unfortunately, such a group can make overtaking a bit harder for the following motorist but I bet it's easier than trying to overtake the ubiquitous camper van...

DirkVoodoo · 13-10-2009 12:57am

Hermy wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken Dirk, convoys are illegal because they impede traffic. If this is so would there be an onus on large groups [say 50+] of cyclists to break up into smaller groups?

Sorry, I was echoing wiggums remark about large groups. The biggest group I have been in outside of a sportif is maybe 15-20 riders. Boards spins normally become quite spread out anyway, but size never seems to be an issue for reckless motorists, they will overtake regardless. I'm not saying Wiggum is reckless, I can't comment on his driving, but any group I am in normally make an effort to let cars pass by switching to single file where possible and waving them through. Indeed we got a few "hazard light thank yous" on saturday for doing so. Winding roads are not the cyclists fault and to expect them to pull in for every passing motorist would turn the saturday cycle into a joke.

tunney · 13-10-2009 9:09am

chiefwiggum wrote: »

so gabhain would you have motorist travel behind two riders cycling abreast for 4 or 5 km on a road with no overtaking oppurtunity due to oncoming vehicles or bendy road?

Tractors - what about 30kph?
Old dears - what about 30-35kph?

Pack of cyclist, halfway decent, 35+kph? Would you be as rude and aggresive to your granny? Or Farmer John?

seamus · 13-10-2009 9:32am

Having driven into various parts of wicklow on a number of sunny days this year and driven the N81 uncountable times over the last 10 years, I can safely say that it's rare (like once a year) that you'll meet more than 3 or 4 riders in a group. There are sometimes multiple groups of riders spread out, but you just leapfrog them as necessary.

Saying that you were unable to overtake for 4 or 5 kilometres, as others point out, really answers the question. If you were unable to overtake two cyclists for a number of kilometres then it would have been unsafe to overtake one cyclist for that distance.

One thing which I don't think was answered was about cycling 3 abreast. This too is legal, provided that the rider on the outside is overtaking the other two.

TinyExplosions · 13-10-2009 9:41am

uberwolf wrote: »

Given the cars capacity for acceleration, and relatively low speed of the cyclists whether they are one or two should not block given a safe opportunity. AND given that opportunity I would like to think most cyclists would revert to single file to assist.

You haven't seen some of the boardsies here motoring along -low speed it ain't.

To throw my hat into the ring, what is it with this stupid motorists creeping down roads like Stocking Lane and Edmonston Road -they never move over when I come behind them on my bike. Should I be stuck behind them for 2 or 3 km because they're to ignorant to pull over and make my life easier? I mean, they're only going about 35, and I'm going at least 50, so doesn't that make me better than them?

Idleater · 13-10-2009 9:53am

cdaly_ wrote: »

@Chiefwiggum, the main reason for groups of cyclists is for 'drafting'.

Drafting could be likened to the way that motorists tend to follow closely to the vehicle in front of them on the roads (even multi lane carriageways), while not allowing sufficient space for other road users (I'm thinking motorcyclists at least) to overtake should they wish to do so safely.

Instead us poor motorcyclists are "forced" to overtake "dangerously" into whatever gaps exist.

I am in no way inferring that the Chief drives like this, merely pointing out that what one perceives as driving them mad (pardon the pun) could just as easily be done by that segment of road users to others.

tunney · 13-10-2009 10:00am

cdaly_ wrote: »

Even so, a group of 15 or more drafting wouldn't be that uncommon and would certainly make for some difficulty passing. Mind you, you might expect a reasonable speed from such a group.

@Chiefwiggum, the main reason for groups of cyclists is for 'drafting'. This is

I would say that this is more of a side effect rather than choice. If anything the drafting is a bad thing as it means you're not working.

Primary reasons for groups are safety and being social.

TinyExplosions · 13-10-2009 10:45am

tunney wrote: »

Primary reasons for groups are safety and being social.

Which is why tunney rides alone....

niceonetom · 13-10-2009 10:52am

tunney wrote: »

Primary reasons for groups are safety and being social.

It is also a lot closer to what most riders are training for. Road racing is not about working as hard as possible - if anything it's about doing as little as possible until the time is right. Even if training for a sportive it's very sensible to get used to riding tempo at close quarters to other riders and learning how to take your turn in the wind without upsetting the pace of the group. It also provides an opportunity to attack other riders or try to reel in escapees. Responding to someone else suddenly upping the pace could be very difficult if you've been training on your own at a self determined level of effort for too long.

If you're training for solo riding (ie. TT/Tri) well other people breaking the air for you would be contrary to your goals I suppose. Plus there's the social aspect which I know most triathletes struggle with.

tunney · 13-10-2009 10:57am

niceonetom wrote: »

It is also a lot closer to what most riders are training for. Road racing is not about working as hard as possible - if anything it's about doing as little as possible until the time is right. Even if training for a sportive it's very sensible to get used to riding tempo at close quarters to other riders and learning how to take your turn in the wind without upsetting the pace of the group. It also provides an opportunity to attack other riders or try to reel in escapees. Responding to someone else suddenly upping the pace could be very difficult if you've been training on your own at a self determined level of effort for too long.

If you're training for solo riding (ie. TT/Tri) well other people breaking the air for you would be contrary to your goals I suppose. Plus there's the social aspect which I know most triathletes struggle with.

Maybe its just different attitudes but I find that once you go over 6 people in a group its always more of a recovery ride, that or a very very hard ride with everyone attacking off the front.

4-6 I think is the ideal number, enough to talk to, enough to shelter if you have had enough, but not too many to get some work if you want it.

niceonetom · 13-10-2009 11:15am

tunney wrote: »

Maybe its just different attitudes but I find that once you go over 6 people in a group its always more of a recovery ride, that or a very very hard ride with everyone attacking off the front.

4-6 I think is the ideal number, enough to talk to, enough to shelter if you have had enough, but not too many to get some work if you want it.

Yeah, i get you. Getting evenly matched riders is usually a matter of luck, and self-selection. On a good sportive I've found that the pace will incrementally rise and the group at the front get correspondingly smaller. I'm talking about the tour of Louth and the tour of Kildare here, where the last 30 ro 40 k were very, very racy. If you weren't up front when the splits happened you were very unlikely to get back on. The final group for the TOL was about 20 strong, with everyone taking their turn though some lasting longer on the front than others, and people dropping off the back as they burned out. Any fewer than that and the group would have been slower, and the pace was hot enough and the rotation fast enough that 15 riders only gave each just enough time to recover before going again. It was a workout I just don't think is really achievable solo, and an average pace that I found nearly unbelievable. I bloody loved it, in case that wasn't clear...

For me, solo riding is more likely to slip to recovery pace, but that's probably the difference between us.

Hermy · 13-10-2009 11:16am

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Sorry, I was echoing wiggums remark about large groups. The biggest group I have been in outside of a sportif is maybe 15-20 riders. Boards spins normally become quite spread out anyway, but size never seems to be an issue for reckless motorists, they will overtake regardless. I'm not saying Wiggum is reckless, I can't comment on his driving, but any group I am in normally make an effort to let cars pass by switching to single file where possible and waving them through. Indeed we got a few "hazard light thank yous" on saturday for doing so. Winding roads are not the cyclists fault and to expect them to pull in for every passing motorist would turn the saturday cycle into a joke.

Wasn't having a go at you Dirk - just been on my mind to ask what's the concensus about large groups but as Che points out these would probably be marshalled.
That's good that you get the odd acknowledgement from motorists you wave through - there's still a few good drivers out there.
Regarding size not being an issue for the reckless motorist, too fecking true. I've had a few near misses recently which bore an uncanny resemblance to incidents and accidents some of ye have described here on Boards. The only difference being that I'm driving a big blue taxi. So what hope for the cyclist against these lunatics!

petethedrummer · 13-10-2009 11:56am

niceonetom wrote: »

The final group for the TOL was about 20 strong, with everyone taking their turn

Not everyone! I didn't/couldn't.

niceonetom wrote: »

It was a workout I just don't think is really achievable solo, and an average pace that I found nearly unbelievable.

There is no way I could have inflicted that sort of pain on myself solo.

biomed32 · 13-10-2009 2:47pm

guys, i dont believe this guy is listening anymore, no replies for a while???

chiefwiggum · 13-10-2009 5:32pm

tunney wrote: »

Tractors - what about 30kph?
Old dears - what about 30-35kph?

Pack of cyclist, halfway decent, 35+kph? Would you be as rude and aggresive to your granny? Or Farmer John?

whos being rude or aggressive? not me

chiefwiggum · 13-10-2009 5:39pm

biomed32 wrote: »

guys, i dont believe this guy is listening anymore, no replies for a while???

im here reading with interest and while all points are been taken on board and some of the explanations excellent, SOME posters points are overly aggressive,the usual us against the motorist thing is coming into play and its cyclists like these that your sport could do without and b4 anyone says it yes there are more ejits driving than cycling, im actually very keen to take up the whole cycling thing,even more so after this lively debate.

petethedrummer · 13-10-2009 5:42pm

chiefwiggum wrote: »

the usual us against the motorist thing is coming into play

I would say that most people who post here are also motorists.

Anyways, you should take up cycling. Its a very fast growing sport and mode of commuting.

chiefwiggum · 13-10-2009 5:47pm

petethedrummer wrote: »

I would say that most people who post here are also motorists.

Anyways, you should take up cycling. Its a very fast growing sport and mode of commuting.

of course they are pete

Lumen · 13-10-2009 5:55pm

chiefwiggum wrote: »

SOME posters points are overly aggressive,the usual us against the motorist thing is coming into play and its cyclists like these that your sport could do without

I wouldn't presume to speak for anyone else, but when people feel consistently threatened they tend to become defensive. A motorist starting a "do you mind if I blow my horn at you?" thread in the cycling forum is likely to encounter mixed reactions regardless of the logic of his position.

Like a Progressive Democrat at a trades union meeting, it's best to tread gently.

chiefwiggum · 13-10-2009 6:31pm

ah now lads...i dont ever remember saying do you mind if i blow my horn at you my good fellow..i was askin what the best course of action was...and mary harney i aint lumen....shes in much better shape than me lol

TimAllen · 13-10-2009 6:40pm

gabhain7 wrote: »

They have no obligation, and are perfectly within their rights and indeed it is much safer for them not to budge.

Wait for a safe place to overtake, indicate and move out. Same with overtaking a car.

Completely untrue for 2 reasons:
1. Rules of the Road require cyclists to cycle in single file if inconveniencing other road users
2. Cyclists are "slow moving vehicles" and are obliged to pull in to allow traffic to progress - if in doubt on this one, just ask the farmer in Mayo who was prosecuted for being a self centred ignorant road user and allowing a traffic jam to build up behind him.

There seems to be a correlation here. A lot of cyclists on this forum think its ok (and safer:eek:) to be selfish, ignorant and flout the ROTR.
A lot of cyclists on this forum report report "aggressive" behaviour of motorists towards them.... I wonder if I'm onto something here ... yep, I think I am:rolleyes:

beans · 13-10-2009 6:59pm

TimAllen wrote: »

Completely untrue for 2 reasons:
1. Rules of the Road require cyclists to cycle in single file if inconveniencing other road users

This is the actual wording of the text

road_traffic_act_1964 wrote:

29.—(1) A pedal cyclist shall not, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists (and then only if to do so will not endanger other traffic or pedestrians) drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cycles driving abreast.

I'm not sure about your second point, perhaps you're correct on that one. Not sure what you're getting at in your final paragraph?

lescol · 13-10-2009 7:13pm

Where does it say that a cyclist is a slow moving vehicle? I can't find any reference in the rules of the road.

cyclopath2001 · 13-10-2009 7:28pm

The 'rule' about single file is actually a misinterpration of the regulations. Single file is only required when passing a parked vehicle. There is also a regulation prohibiting the parking of vehicles where it interferes with the normal flow of traffic.

TimAllen wrote: »

2. Cyclists are "slow moving vehicles" and are obliged to pull in to allow traffic to progress -
if in doubt on this one, just ask the farmer in Mayo who was prosecuted for being a self centred ignorant road user and allowing a traffic jam to build up behind him.

There is no such road traffic regulation relating to 'slow moving vehicles. All road users in slow moving or fast moving vehicles are required to show consideration for others.

He was prosecuted for failing to show consideration. That can also apply to parking a car on the roadway. If you push this one, you'll end up having all on-street parking banned.

DirkVoodoo · 13-10-2009 8:01pm

I don't think I was being aggressive, if that's what you were implying. I never brought up any "us versus them" argument either, I was referring specifically to your interpretation of cyclists and your understanding of the rules of the road. You were wrong, I pointed that out and I gave you examples of courteous driving from last weekend. I don't consider myself part of any group. I drive when I have to and I cycle because I love to.

It is not people like me that are damaging for cycling, it is drivers who do not understand the law that are bad for driving. Beeping at groups of cyclists because they are riding two abreast is just a demonstration of ignorance. I can't vouch for every cyclist out there, there are some pretty shocking ones, but like I said before (it obviously didn't register) I have never been on a spin where people tried to block traffic or inconvenience road users. Going back to last weekend, again, coming over the Sally Gap there were drivers who were able to overtake properly without endangering themselves or us, and then there were those who seemed to struggle with when confronted with a group of cyclists who have switched to single file to let them pass. Again, this is bad driving. And a bad driver is going to point to the cyclists and not themselves.

chiefwiggum · 13-10-2009 8:46pm

yep thats what i was implying

Darren_C · 13-10-2009 8:53pm

Had a look at the Rules of the Road online
http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie
and http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/8342-0.pdf

and can't find anything to back up Tim Allen's assertion that slow moving vehicles should pull in to allow other traffic to progress as he puts it.

There is a note that the general rule about slower moving vehicles keeping to the left should be strictly observed.

This situation would be fine if everyone would use their common sense. Obviously a guy driving a tractor in the middle of a wide road just to annoy motorists should be told to cop on but by the same token motorists shouldn't assume everyone they meet should clear the decks to allow them to progress.

The general rule about overtaking is that it can only be done where it is safe to do so. That applies whether you are talking about a tractor, herd of cattle, herd of roadies!

The general rule for cyclists is to stick as close to the left hand side of the road as it is safe to do so (allowing for potholes, car doors, ditches etc.)

(I'm a commuter cyclist, DH mountain biker, a moped owner and a car driver by the way).

road rules

Comments