In defence of cyclists

Chips Lovell

44leto wrote: »

I don't agree, its nice cycling 2 abreast but there is a time and a place, not on a main or busy road. I do see it alot on the coast road, a 2 laned busy artery and the network is great along most of that road.

So its usually club or family cyclists that go 2 to 3 abreast for the actual few miles of that road were the network stops. Its a bad cycling practice and it does force traffic into taking a dangerous manoeuvre.

Three abreast is illegal, unless you're overtaking other cyclists.

Large groups of riders cycling single file often tends to encourage motorists to perform dangerous overtaking manoeuvres, i.e. start overtaking even when they aren't sure they'll pass the group before hitting oncoming traffic. Two abreast will half the distance of an overtaking manoeuvre and also tends to encourage motorists to overtake cyclists like they would any other vehicle rather than trying to squeeze through.

As I said, the law doesn't mean that you should never single out, just that there's a time and a place for it.

danniemcq

I was thinking that, well not quite but similer in that 2 a breast would be safer, drivers would be forced to overtake "properly" and not just barrel past you leaving a hairwidth between you and them.

stovelid

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

What some motorists fail to appreciate is that cycling two abreast is often the most efficient way of taking up road space. It leads to a compact group of cyclists that, when done correctly, are easier to overtake. A good group of cyclists will single out, when appropriate, to let traffic by if it's building up behind them,.

I'm not sure I can see this.

I'd rather pass a line of single-file cyclists because a lot of the time, you can do it without crossing the line whereas anything else requires an overtake which might not always be possible hence the tailbacks. If more cyclists did "single out", we wouldn't be having this disucssion.

Chips Lovell

stovelid wrote: »

I'm not sure I can see this.

I'd rather pass a line of single-file cyclists because a lot of the time, you can do it without crossing the line whereas anything else requires an overtake which might not always be possible hence the tailbacks. If more cyclists did "single out", we wouldn't be having this disucssion.

There actually aren't that many roads where a motorist can pass a cyclist at a safe distance without straying out over the centre line. While I'm not saying you're one of them, there are many motorists who think they can squeeze through, which is all well and good until something comes around the corner going the other way.

danniemcq

stovelid wrote: »

I'm not sure I can see this.

I'd rather pass a line of single-file cyclists because a lot of the time, you can do it without crossing the line whereas anything else requires an overtake which might not always be possible hence the tailbacks. If more cyclists did "single out", we wouldn't be having this disucssion.

say a country road, or one with bushes beside the road or one of those drains or just a terrible road surface on the inside a cyclist may have to be a bit out. If you have the mind set taht its only a cyclist i can overtake witout crossing the line you will run into issues.

you see a line of cyclists think F it and go for it, half way down the line car comes round a corner towards you what do you do then?

Whereas if they were 2 a breast you could be forced to act like you were overtaking a car and look for the space and oncoming traffic

44leto

danniemcq wrote: »

say a country road, or one with bushes beside the road or one of those drains or just a terrible road surface on the inside a cyclist may have to be a bit out. If you have the mind set taht its only a cyclist i can overtake witout crossing the line you will run into issues.

you see a line of cyclists think F it and go for it, half way down the line car comes round a corner towards you what do you do then?

Whereas if they were 2 a breast you could be forced to act like you were overtaking a car and look for the space and oncoming traffic

I know the theory, as it is safer to cycle on the right of the lane, I agree, but with 2 abreast cyclists on a busy road what you get is a lot of pissed of motorist behind you giving us a reputation for road inconsideration.

We are a vehicle and a slow moving one, a tractor hugs the kerb in consideration for other road user, he doesn't have to. How do you feel about slow moving pedestrians or parked cars in the cycle lanes forcing us to make a dangerous manoeuvre. That cracks me up.

spoofilyj

Stiffler2 wrote: »

You can only cycle on roads because us drivers paid for them with our road tax. If we didn't pay road tax you would be cycling across fields so respect your car drivers.

At the end of the day if a cyclist hits my car I will probably have to get a new panel and paint job however the cyclist will more than likely die so IMO it's more up to the cyclist to watch out than the driver the same way I give wide berths to larger vehicles than me like trucks because they can cause me serious damage.

Cycle lanes are there for a reason so use them and don't be cycling on roads, it's just stupid.

What's with cyclists sometimes cycling in double tandem side by side, this really pi$$es me off, drive as close to them as possible, horn full blast, side window down "SINGLE FILE MOTHER *****ERS"

Wow your post is both well informed and not at all ignorent!

As has been said multiple times its not Road tax but motor tax and the money is now used for roads but goes into the pot to be used for what ever is decided by the country at the time.

Your rather stupid opinion on road behavious is worrying I would hope people are more evolved then to think the roads are like the Plains of the saringetty.

Cycists are entitled to cycle two abreast where appropriate to tough **** on that one.

All in all you sound like a jack ass of a road user and I hope I never encounter you.

Chips Lovell

44leto wrote: »

How do you feel about slow moving pedestrians or parked cars in the cycle lanes forcing us to make a dangerous manoeuvre. That cracks me up.

I'd overtake them like anything else.

paddyandy

Dublin pavements have become very dangerous with cyclists not seeming to care that somebody might step out of a doorway or suddenly decide to change direction .Kids playing outside their homes are in real danger too i've noticed .

44leto

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I'd overtake them like anything else.

As do I but I bet you don't like it, I bet it pisses you off, and you think the inconsiderate prikc obstructing the cycle lane. I know i do.

Chips Lovell

44leto wrote: »

As do I but I bet you don't like it, I bet it pisses you off, and you think the inconsiderate prikc obstructing the cycle lane. I know i do.

Honestly? It doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm a realist. I don't expect my way to be clear at all times.

Leaving that aside, you aren't comparing apples with apples here. One type of behaviour is legal and encouraged (cycling two abreast) the other is illegal for the most part and (parking in a cycle lane).

Fizzlesque

stovelid wrote: »

Plenty of cunts on the road whether on bikes or in cars.


If all road users just treated each other with respect, the roads would be a calmer, safer and less ignorant place.

I couldn't agree more.

facemelter

paddyandy wrote: »

Dublin pavements have become very dangerous with cyclists not seeming to care that somebody might step out of a doorway or suddenly decide to change direction .Kids playing outside their homes are in real danger too i've noticed .

Ok this statements is extremely unfair. Not all cyclists act this way and I'm sure you'll find just as many motorists with this attitude. and on this thread cyclists are being given out to for cycling on roads!!! and on footpaths !! , where do you propose we cycle ??? and before you jump in with " herr durrr in cycle lanes" often these are in a shocking state , or simply non existent.

So where do you think we should cycle ? any solutions ? or are you just placing massive assumptions over all cyclists ?

Mickey Dazzler

Of course red light don't apply to cyclists!! Why would you cycle a bike in the fist place if you had stop at red lights. Idiocy.

Badly Drunk Boy

Stiffler2 wrote: »

You can only cycle on roads because us drivers paid for them with our road tax. If we didn't pay road tax you would be cycling across fields so respect your car drivers.

So were ye motorists driving through fields until ye had paid enough motor tax (or road tax, as you call it) for the roads to be built?

44leto

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

So were ye motorists driving through fields until ye had paid enough motor tax (or road tax, as you call it) for the roads to be built?

In truth yeah we were, about the only good thing we got from the Tiger years.

But I agree it was a silly post in general.

hatrickpatrick

Same sh!te this morning by the way. Walking up Dame Street, trying to cross the road when I got to the top (I think it might be High Street) and at a green man, some asshole on a bike comes tearing through the light.

It's absolutely, mond bogglingly unbelievable. A red light is a red light. I for one would absolutely support a zero tolerance policy from the Gardai about this. I have never in my entire life seen a car break a red light as blatantly as the cyclists in Dublin do. Sure, some cars might go through a light which has just turned red, taking that chance, but these cyclists will literally go right through a light which has been red for a good while and which they could clearly see from minutes away. It's absolutely despicable.

Zero tolerance I say. If you're caught doing this once you get a yellow card, caught again and you're banned from cycling for a year. Especially if it's at a pedestrian crossing.

gubbie

Deleted User wrote: »

Try this one! :eek::rolleyes:

I envy Dublin cycle lanes. This is one of the few we have in Cork

gubbie

gubbie wrote: »

I envy Dublin cycle lanes. This is one of the few we have in Cork

That masterpiece was in the UK, lots more here.

44leto

gubbie wrote: »

I envy Dublin cycle lanes. This is one of the few we have in Cork

Just a question of legality and public liability, if you hit that post would the council be liable. I am sure if they put an obstruction on the road they would be if there was a car accident.

Chips Lovell

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I for one would absolutely support a zero tolerance policy from the Gardai about this. I have never in my entire life seen a car break a red light as blatantly as the cyclists in Dublin do. Sure, some cars might go through a light which has just turned red, taking that chance, but these cyclists will literally go right through a light which has been red for a good while and which they could clearly see from minutes away. It's absolutely despicable.

I agree with you. As it happens, the cops announced around 18 months ago they were going to crack down. Since then several people have shown up on the cycling forum saying they got summons. Average fine when they go to court was around €200 IIRC.

It's still endemic in Dublin but some people are getting a nasty shock.

Darkglasses

stovelid wrote: »

You are being deliberately wilful here.

You can usually pass out a cyclist travelling single file easily enough without crossing the line. Two-three makes it incumbent to overtake when you shouldn't have to. Saying you shouldn't be overtaking is fine but 2-3 people are forcing traffic behind them to travel at about a quarter of the speed limit just so they can have a chat.

It's not illegal but it's just bad manners and usually motivated again by usual bellicose them and us attitude between motorists and cyclists that makes using the road worse for everybody.

See, this is the problem. On most roads, this is far too close to cyclists to pass them safely. To force drivers to give them more space, they will move out or cycle two abreast.

I know it's UK and not Ireland in this video, but it's the same safety issue. See 3.34 for how the Highway Code sets out what a safe/legal pass is. Rule 163 - Give vulnerable Road Users as least as much space as you would a car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT4ZfthpfLY

CramCycle

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sure, some cars might go through a light which has just turned red, taking that chance, but these cyclists will literally go right through a light which has been red for a good while and which they could clearly see from minutes away. It's absolutely despicable.

I see several cars on my way home from work blast through red lights that have been red for at least 30 seconds to a minute, on the N11.

Much LOLing last Friday night when a little red POS done it in front of a squad car. The reason they didn't see the squad car was because they had forgotten to turn on their lights.

Dyr

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Same sh!te this morning by the way. Walking up Dame Street, trying to cross the road when I got to the top (I think it might be High Street) and at a green man, some asshole on a bike comes tearing through the light.

It's absolutely, mond bogglingly unbelievable. A red light is a red light. I for one would absolutely support a zero tolerance policy from the Gardai about this.

They should legalise the clothsline as a form of pedestrian self defence:)
A few cyclists in neck braces would sort out this carry on.

Surveyor11

mossyc123 wrote: »

People cycling around the City Centre in such large numbers has only really caught on over the last few years... !

You sure about that? http://dutchindublin.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/cyclists-on-dame-street-and-south-great-georges-street.png?w=490&h=333

Surveyor11

Surveyor11 wrote: »

You sure about that? http://dutchindublin.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/cyclists-on-dame-street-and-south-great-georges-street.png?w=490&h=333

All that proves is the fact that motoring was only for the well off for the first half of the 20th century, with rising fuel prices and stagnant wages, that trend is returning.

For an increasing number of commuters, cycling is not by choice.

Cú Giobach

stovelid wrote: »

Not in the safety sense but in the sense that road are primarily for motor vehicles.

Roads are primarily used by motor vehicles because there are more of them an another form of transport, but until the day there are different options for pedestrians (in the country), cyclists or even horses, roads are for all people to equally use to get from A to B irrespective of method of transport.
I am sure this "I am a motorist get out of my way" mindset is something future generations will look at oddly simply because there are no other options for non motorised travellers. I am coming mainly from the position of the country, where for the most part you are taking your life in your hands trying to walk down the road to visit a neighbour.

Can we all agree that some cyclists are bad and some motorists are bad and leave it at that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwESraWEpSU

Stiffler2

facemelter wrote: »

its not a road tax its a motor emission tax. Yes cyclists should watch out for other road users. but that attitude of "im bigger so get out of my way "is a bullies attitude. and behind the wheel is no place for someone who is going to use their car as a tool for bullying people. if you had to spend 20 mins cycling in a cycle lane that is in an awful state. you will understand why cyclists chose to cycle on roads. :rolleyes:

and to ask for respect while claiming to scream at cyclists who get in your way is madness. I will not respect any one , who tries to bully me. If you want respect from someone , show it to them first.

I don't ask anyone for respect on Irish roads because I wouldn't expect it.
It's just plain rude to cycle 2 - 3 a breast on the road and completely ignorant of other road users.

The cycle lane isn't good enough - boo hoo
sometimes I don't like the road, does that mean that I can drive on the footpath instead ? I think not.

What do I hope to achieve by blowing my horn at cyclists up close when they are cycling a breast. I hope they $hit themselves, fall off their bike and give me a good oul lol - that'll learn em.....

Chips Lovell

Stiffler2 wrote: »

What do I hope to achieve by blowing my horn at cyclists up close when they are cycling a breast. I hope they $hit themselves, fall off their bike and give me a good oul lol - that'll learn em.....

WTF is wrong with you?

gubbie

44leto wrote: »

Just a question of legality and public liability, if you hit that post would the council be liable. I am sure if they put an obstruction on the road they would be if there was a car accident.

I'll go cycle into it and let you know

On the point, I've never felt so scared sometimes as I do when riding a bike. It gave me great respect when I became a driver about safety. I'm not surprised that the cyclist in the video above is swearing and blinding, it's bloody scary when someone almost kills you

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

WTF is wrong with you?

I only ever see complete scumbags doing this, well who do it for the laugh. It is these exact same people who will scream blue murder if the argument "He beeped me so I kicked his car" comes up. There have been times when I have thought about chewing gum every time I get on my bike so that if this does happen, I can stick it to their car. It's childish, but no worse then "I hope they $hit themselves, fall off their bike and give me a good oul lol"

Blazer

Sacramento wrote: »

Can we all agree that some cyclists are bad and some motorists are bad and leave it at that?

I'll settle for all cyclists are bad and all women motorists are bad

Dyr

Stiffler2 wrote: »

sometimes I don't like the road, does that mean that I can drive on the footpath instead ?

According to cyclists it does

Darkglasses

Some of you really don't realise you are talking about ordinary people. You sound like psychopaths.

AwayWithFaries

A lot of people in this world are idiotic and selfish. Of these people some of them cycle and some of them drive. This whole issue isn't really about cyclists being "bad" or motorists being "bad". It just people. People are shít and in all walks of life you'll see people being idiotic and selfish, unfortunately these are the ones that will stand out, not the cyclist who pays attention to every traffic light and always use the cycle lane, not the driver who doesn't get impatient and leaves room when passing a cyclist. It's the idiots. People always remember the idiots.

Stiffler2

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

WTF is wrong with you?

cyclists cycling a breast is what's wrong, isn't that clear ?

durka durka ......



Look I've been driving nearly 17+ years, never crashed into anyone, never been involved in an accident and haven't run any cyclists off the road....yet.

Your insults to my attitdue towards cyclists is fair enough but cyclists are total muppets my good man.

They break red lights, swerve all over the road to avoid potholes ( get in the cycle lane FFS ) cycle 2 / 3 a-breast.

But there's bad cyclists and I'm sure there's good cyclists. I personally have never seen the good kind.

Same can be said for drivers, good & bad.

Anyway I've never run over a cyclist but a guy can dream

SleepDoc

Stiffler2 wrote: »

cyclists cycling a breast is what's wrong, isn't that clear ?

durka durka ......



Look I've been driving nearly 17+ years, never crashed into anyone, never been involved in an accident and haven't run any cyclists off the road....yet.

Your insults to my attitdue towards cyclists is fair enough but cyclists are total muppets my good man.

They break red lights, swerve all over the road to avoid potholes ( get in the cycle lane FFS ) cycle 2 / 3 a-breast.

But there's bad cyclists and I'm sure there's good cyclists. I personally have never seen the good kind.

Same can be said for drivers, good & bad.

Anyway I've never run over a cyclist but a guy can dream

Cyclists 2 abreast is legal and safe. 3 abreast is not.

Cyclists do indeed swerve to avoid potholes. Responsible and safe car drivers give enough room to vulnerable road users to avoid just such scenarios.

So you've never run over a cyclist. Brilliant. Keep it up.

Stiffler2

Stiffler2 wrote: »

cyclists cycling a breast is what's wrong, isn't that clear ?

durka durka ......



Look I've been driving nearly 17+ years, never crashed into anyone, never been involved in an accident and haven't run any cyclists off the road....yet.

Your insults to my attitdue towards cyclists is fair enough but cyclists are total muppets my good man.

They break red lights, swerve all over the road to avoid potholes ( get in the cycle lane FFS ) cycle 2 / 3 a-breast.

But there's bad cyclists and I'm sure there's good cyclists. I personally have never seen the good kind.

Same can be said for drivers, good & bad.

Anyway I've never run over a cyclist but a guy can dream

A damning indictment on the way licences are handed out and managed in this country.

17 years driving and still not a fcucking clue about the rules of the road.

desertcircus

Stiffler2 wrote: »

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

WTF is wrong with you?

cyclists cycling a breast is what's wrong, isn't that clear ?

durka durka ......



Look I've been driving nearly 17+ years, never crashed into anyone, never been involved in an accident and haven't run any cyclists off the road....yet.

Your insults to my attitdue towards cyclists is fair enough but cyclists are total muppets my good man.

They break red lights, swerve all over the road to avoid potholes ( get in the cycle lane FFS ) cycle 2 / 3 a-breast.

But there's bad cyclists and I'm sure there's good cyclists. I personally have never seen the good kind.

Same can be said for drivers, good & bad.

Anyway I've never run over a cyclist but a guy can dream

Words fail me. No, actually they don't. But I'd get banned for using the ones I have in mind, even in AH.

Mycroft H

stovelid wrote: »

I'm not sure I can see this.

I'd rather pass a line of single-file cyclists because a lot of the time, you can do it without crossing the line whereas anything else requires an overtake which might not always be possible hence the tailbacks. If more cyclists did "single out", we wouldn't be having this disucssion.

Well thats a pretty damn dangerous practice.

Average width of a lane in the city center = 3.8m
Average width of a car (MK2 Ford Focus) = 2m
Average cyclist cycling 1m from the kerb = 1.7m

So your overtaking cyclists with 10cm to spare? How is that justifiably safe to a vulnerable road user? Its not in any way safe, its rather poor judgment even think it's safe.

Chips Lovell

Deleted User wrote: »

A damning indictment on the way licences are handed out and managed in this country.

17 years driving and still not a fcucking clue about the rules of the road.

Not having a clue about road traffic law is one thing. There's plenty of motorists and cyclists who're guilty of that. It's deliberately wanting to injure people that's pretty creepy.

0066ad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM_PNlaTzLg

Ray Palmer

I cycle and it amazes me the blindness of drivers to their own action but how they love to tell cyclists how to obey rules. Obviously being inside a metal box makes them braver.

The ones I like are the clearly marked cycle boxes that they like to stop in at lights and then complain when you go in front of them at the lights.

Using bus lanes and trying to get you out of the way by driving close. I liked a comment earlier about North Strand road how the cyclist don't use the terrible unuseable cycle lane and how it slows them down. That section of the road is a bus lane.

Cars creeping out onto the road blocking cycle lane and/or making me cycle around them.

Driver pulled straight into me on my bike as they were parking in the cycle lane. Siad I should be wearing a high vis jacket:eek: Appolgised for hitting me and then proceeded to park in the cycle lane and didn't see the problem. So you know if you can't see things unless they are bright yellow you shouldn't be driving

There are good and bad on the roads but most of the laws are broken by drivers way before cyclists actions.

Nobody driving a car sticks to the speed limit and this is the most dangerous thing to do. If every cyclist choose when to break the lights when they felt like it there would still be less fatalities from cycling than there are due to speeding. The dangers of cyclists breaking lights is proably quite low and more of an irritation to people than anything else. I don't do it mostly due to violent reaction by others not the actual danger of the traffic.

I have been hit by cars and not once was it due to my actions. Pedestrians breaking lights are a bigger risk than cyclists. I have seen many accidents caused by them and maybe two by cyclists breaking lights.

The King of Moo

0066ad wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM_PNlaTzLg

Why the hell did the woman pull the dog towards the bike? Why didn't they move onto the grass?

RobFowl

The King of Moo wrote: »

Why the hell did the woman pull the dog towards the bike? Why didn't they move onto the grass?

Dogs are attracted to bikes, like magnets..
It's a scientific fact

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZ0P6w2-K80

sebastianlieken

I've been following this thread in and out and i've discovered one thing:

I feel alot less safe on my bicycle now that I know how ignorant and damn right psychotic a few people on this thread are.

Dyr

In the space of ten minutes today I counted three ignorant twats on bikes using a busy (and wet) footpath right in the city centre as their own private road.

Amount of cars spotted driving on footpath this week? Zero. Cyclists deffo have the highest ration of c**ts out there

GaryIrv93

If a cyclist is right in the middle of the road, going much slower than a motorist is used to, and holding up a massive convoy of cars including yourself, of course you're going to get annoyed, regardless of the cyclist's equal right to use the road. I've no problem with cyclists as long as they allow enough room for a car to pass safely, but it can be extremely frustrating when there's nothing you can do to make them go faster when they're holding up everyone behind them.

SleepDoc

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

If a cyclist is right in the middle of the road, going much slower than a motorist is used to, and holding up a massive convoy of cars including yourself, of course you're going to get annoyed, regardless of the cyclist's equal right to use the road. I've no problem with cyclists as long as they allow enough room for a car to pass safely, but it can be extremely frustrating when there's nothing you can do to make them go faster when they're holding up everyone behind them.

Take a deep breath and overtake when safe to do so.

Do you climb over old people walking more slowly than you on a crowded street?

desertcircus

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

If a cyclist is right in the middle of the road, going much slower than a motorist is used to, and holding up a massive convoy of cars including yourself, of course you're going to get annoyed, regardless of the cyclist's equal right to use the road. I've no problem with cyclists as long as they allow enough room for a car to pass safely, but it can be extremely frustrating when there's nothing you can do to make them go faster when they're holding up everyone behind them.

Your idea of what constitutes enough room to pass safely will probably differ from a cyclist's. And a cyclist stands to suffer a great deal more than you if there's not enough room.