Is this aggression "normal"? MOD WARNING: read post #219

Kashkai

Hi all,

Just getting back into some serious cycling after a ten year lay off. During that time as a motorist, I saw some pretty stupid things done by cyclists running through red lights especially but I was never the type to go all "road rage" on them, not even beeping the car horn. "It's your ass" was usually my reaction.

However during my recent reconversion to cycling, I've been pretty shocked by the behaviour of a lot (and I mean a lot) of drivers. My mate and I cycle two abreast but keep into the left of the road allowing plenty of room for cars to overtake. However I've lost count of the number of cars that drive up your ass, beep their horns and then finally overtake, while beeping again. A few morons have even cut in close and hit their brakes after they get in front forcing us to do likewise. Have to say that my mate has gotten pretty aggrieved himself at this and I thought there was going to be a confrontation the other night when some eejit in a corolla overtook us, cut in and slammed on his brakes bringing us all to a halt (with me nearly hitting the back of his car). My mate was off his bike in a flash but the car drove off.

When did this car v cyclist thing kick off? Like I said, I've been on 4 wheels for years but never got aggressive with any cyclist, gave them plenty of room when overtaking etc. And I sure as hell never tried to cut them off or force them off the road. It'd make me think twice before encouraging my kids to come out cycling with me.

I don't want to start a car v cyclist thing here but I'm just curious if the behaviour I've seen from motorists the past month or so when I'm Cycling is "normal" behaviour, or should I just cycle elsewhere

Lumen

It's not unusual on 100 kph limit roads where drivers see that speed as a target and most have poor overtaking skills.

Raam

Kashkai wrote: »

When did this car v cyclist thing kick off?

Probably right after the car was invented.

diomed

Formula One on the telly this week.

Baron Kurtz

I'm a regular cyclist and for me personally I haven't experienced much ire from motorists, primarily because I stick to the rules, don't chance hairy manoeuvres, and never engage when a motorist/pedestrian does something silly. I probably sound the embodiment of Zen but to be honest I couldn't be arsed getting in a heated argument with other road users - just try to get from A to B quietly and safely as possible.

SCOOP 64

I like the cyclist who ride 2 abreast but when a car comes go to single file to let car through and then go back to 2 abreast.,wish all would do this.

Lusk_Doyle

Baron Kurtz wrote: »

I'm a regular cyclist and for me personally I haven't experienced much ire from motorists, primarily because I stick to the rules, don't chance hairy manoeuvres, and never engage when a motorist/pedestrian does something silly. I probably sound the embodiment of Zen but to be honest I couldn't be arsed getting in a heated argument with other road users - just try to get from A to B quietly and safely as possible.

What influence exactly does you sticking to the rules have on the stupidity of others? I would not consider one inversely proportional to the other.

Mongfinder General

If you're cycling in Dublin it's an absolute free for all. There is very little law enforcement so it's law of the jungle out there. I've seen it time after time. The law abiding guy in the lycra, helmet and luminous clothing ends on a car bonnet. The light breaking, foot path racing loon gets to where he's going without a scratch in super quick time.

So, how to react in the predicament you outlined above? You can let it go or if the car stops at the next set of lights you can have yourself a confrontation.<snip>

ozzy jr

I'm from Dublin, but have been cycling in Kerry the last week. What I've noticed is that foreign registered cars and most Irish cars give plenty of clearance when over taking and don't take stupid risks.


The worst offenders are D and C registered cars. I'm not sure what this tells me. Maybe people that drive in cities all the time, going from one red light to another are just highly stressed people and it doesn't take much for their anger to come out when driving a car.


The locals seem to have an attitude of "I'll be held up for maybe 5 seconds while the oncoming traffic passes, then I'll be able to tear down the road again at 100km/h".

No Pants

Take the registration of any cars that behave in the manner you describe OP and let the Gardai handle it.

Arthur Beesley

diomed wrote: »

Formula One on the telly this week.

And you think there is a link?

Wonder what affect the Tour de France will have on Irish cyclists ignoring traffic lights then.

mikeyjames9

SCOOP 64 wrote: »

I like the cyclist who ride 2 abreast but when a car comes go to single file to let car through and then go back to 2 abreast.,wish all would do this.

I thought the point of cycling 2 abreast was to force cars to overtake properly and not squeeze by

Pawn

mikeyjames9 wrote: »

I thought the point of cycling 2 abreast was to force cars to overtake properly and not squeeze by

...therefore causing more risk and inconvenience. Wise indeed.

punisher5112

I am a cyclist and motorist myself and believe it is not good practice to cycle 2 a breast as you are putting yourself out and at risk.

OP in your situation maybe the road is wide and possibly you do it say along the n11 in the hard shoulder or whatever road you would be on and I see this as been safe and out of the road.

But there are plenty I come across that cycle 2 or 3 side by side and on small roads and some do be in full conversation and don't seem to hear or care what is behind them.

We all have to share the road but a bit of common sense and respect could go a long way from all users.

Baron Kurtz

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

What influence exactly does you sticking to the rules have on the stupidity of others? I would not consider one inversely proportional to the other.

Not a lot really. I see what you're getting at, but I don't perceive those things to be related either. Just stating that keeping within the rules lessens the chance of someone getting upset with me. And if someone causes me unnecessary trouble due to their silliness I choose not to get aggressive/take the high ground.

I wasn't saying either were connected, inversely or otherwise. Just letting the OP know of my personal experience.

SCOOP 64

mikeyjames9 wrote: »

I thought the point of cycling 2 abreast was to force cars to overtake properly and not squeeze by

As long as your not the cyclist on the outside,is he safer?

UDP

I generally cycle two abreast and go into single file if a car approaches from behind in the small group of 2-3 I cycle with. If a car is coming against us the person at the back will put their hand out to let the car behind know it is not safe to pass. When the road clears ahead the car is waved on. The car is never waved on if it is unsure whether it is safe to pass. Every car that has passed us have always thanked us by a wave or a hazards light flick on.

Timmyctc

mikeyjames9 wrote: »

I thought the point of cycling 2 abreast was to force cars to overtake properly and not squeeze by

Pawn wrote: »

...therefore causing more risk and inconvenience. Wise indeed.

fundamental misunderstanding of the world 'Properly' buddy

Brian?

Pawn wrote: »

...therefore causing more risk and inconvenience. Wise indeed.

Risk and inconvenience to whom? When I cycle alone on narrow roads I cycle wide enough out that cars have to over take me in a correct way and I have room for correction. This minimises the risk of me being pushed into the ditch as a car squeezes by.

Drivers, in my experience, do their level best to avoid other cars even if it puts cyclists in very serious danger.

07Lapierre

In my experience, aggression towards cyclists is not "Normal". It does happen, but the majority of motorists do respect cyclists.

monument

Baron Kurtz wrote: »

I'm a regular cyclist and for me personally I haven't experienced much ire from motorists, primarily because I stick to the rules, don't chance hairy manoeuvres, and never engage when a motorist/pedestrian does something silly. I probably sound the embodiment of Zen but to be honest I couldn't be arsed getting in a heated argument with other road users - just try to get from A to B quietly and safely as possible.

Do you cycle on rural roads a lot? If not, what has your experance got to do with the OP's?

mal1

07Lapierre wrote: »

In my experience, aggression towards cyclists is not "the Normal". It does happen, but the majority of motorists do respect cyclists.

In fairness, the OP said a lot of drivers. He didn't say the majority. I think we all know most are respective but more are becoming erratic.

I blame George Hook.

Kashkai

Guys, I usually cycle on what would be classed as "good wide roads" that should allow a car to overtake safely (in my opinion as a motorist who does 25,000km a year round the country for work) e.g. the Kilcock to Summerhill road, the old N3 between Dunshaughlin and Navan, Navan to Trim road etc. However it's on these good roads that I've experienced ALL the aggression from motorists. While cycling two abreast, I do cycle in the hard shoulder (if there is one) while my mate would be on the road proper. Therefore you could say we are in "single file" and not taking up a car's width on the road itself. If there is no hard shoulder, we do go into single file to allow cars to overtake on the narrower stretches. This hasn't stopped the beeping, the aggressive overtaking or the cutting in barely a few feet in front of us. Funny how I've never experienced this behaviour when cycling alone on narrower roads. Maybe one of the posters who suggested that it might be the 100kph or 80kph speed limits (ie targets) might have something there, or is it that more than one cyclist seems to irritate some motorists??

Maybe I'm just a bit more chilled out as a motorist but I just can't see why the sight of a couple of guys out for an evening cycle appears to annoy the fcuk out of some car drivers.

Ranchu

Cycling two abreast means you're more likely to be in the way. No amount of theorising as to wether its a good thing or not changes that. That's going to piss motorists off all day long.

punisher5112

It's just one of those things some are just mad and will not change as in bad drivers.

But I have come across plenty of cyclists putting themselves at huge risk by taking chances and on occasion starting on motorists for no good reason so I suppose can be both ways.

mikeyjames9

Ranchu wrote: »

Cycling two abreast means you're more likely to be in the way. No amount of theorising as to wether its a good thing or not changes that. That's going to piss angry motorists off all day long.

FYP

Brian?

Ranchu wrote: »

Cycling two abreast means you're more likely to be in the way. No amount of theorising as to wether its a good thing or not changes that. That's going to piss motorists off all day long.

Quite frankly, I don't care if it pisses some motorists off. They have nothing to actually be pissed off about.

Chiparus

Got myself a rear light with a camera built in, Already has been useful in reporting one hooligan.

Tigerandahalf

The amount of threads popping up about this is ever increasing.
I will not be surprised if someone is assaulted or killed out of a road rage incident any day now.
You see this with tractors too. I cycle sometimes and for my own safety I generally try to keep to the middle of the lane. Why? Because on several occasions when I kept close to the ditch cars whizzed by, pushing me into the ditch and one car nearly clipped my handlebar. Some car drivers are great. Others will beep at you and overtake on your side of the road, pushing you off the road.
I car drive much more than I cycle and I get frustrated too especially when people don't pull in at ample places when there is a stream of traffic after them.
I would much prefer to drive. It just takes one incident to put you in serious trouble. Just not worth the danger.

mikeyjames9

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

The amount of threads popping up about this is ever increasing.
I will not be surprised if someone is assaulted or killed out of a road rage incident any day now.
You see this with tractors too. I cycle sometimes and for my own safety I generally try to keep to the middle of the lane. Why? Because on several occasions when I kept close to the ditch cars whizzed by, pushing me into the ditch and one car nearly clipped my handlebar. Some car drivers are great. Others will beep at you and overtake on your side of the road, pushing you off the road.
I car drive much more than I cycle and I get frustrated too especially when people don't pull in at ample places when there is a stream of traffic after them.
I would much prefer to drive. It just takes one incident to put you in serious trouble. Just not worth the danger.

you have to keep out on smaller roads

cars will nose out of side roads or driveways and hit you if you keep in to the side

mamax

I had been tempted to start a thread like this

Some motorists overtake cyclists way to close and way way too fast.
Several times I've been passed too close by a car without an indicator on while there is oncoming traffic and then you see him slow down and indicate to pass a person walking !
Are cyclists less important than pedestrians on the road ?

Also for your next few spins take note of the makes of cars that....
1. Don't indicate when passing you
2. Pass you too close

My answers
1. Big cars like BMW, Audi and vans
2. Same as above

The government and/or the AA need to educate motorists more about cyclists and vise versa considering the amount of new cyclists on the road every year.

Ole Rodrigo

We need these:

cython

ror_74 wrote: »

We need these:

Please, it needs to be metric to be Euro :pac:

Ole Rodrigo

cython wrote: »

Please, it needs to be metric to be Euro :pac:

Spot on, can't believe I missed that. For shame

fixie fox

Pawn wrote: »

...therefore causing more risk and inconvenience. Wise indeed.

Cars shouldn't overtake at all unless the right-hand carriageway / lane is fully free to move into when overtaking. In that case, cycling two abreast is no problem. The only reason to ride single file as far as I can see is to make room for them to squeeze past against oncoming traffic. No?

Raam

fixie fox wrote: »

Cars shouldn't overtake at all unless the right-hand carriageway / lane is fully free to move into when overtaking. In that case, cycling two abreast is no problem. The only reason to ride single file as far as I can see is to make room for them to squeeze past against oncoming traffic. No?

Dude, it is a motorist's right to overtake cyclists as and when they choose. Cyclists' rights have nothing to do with it

Red Nissan

Kashkai wrote: »

When did this car v cyclist thing kick off? or so when I'm Cycling is "normal" behaviour, or should I just cycle elsewhere

Currently there is a major drive to get motorists to cycle, they except a 60% reduction in motor traffic within inner cities.

To facilitate that, massive disruption has taken place and one will find threads on Did Cyclists ruin, Cork/Dublin/Limerick/Galway? and so on.

If you have another road to use, give it a try.

rollingscone

Anyone who is unable to safely overtake a car sized space on the road should go to their local Garda station and hand in their driver's license.

Lusk_Doyle

cython wrote: »

Please, it needs to be metric to be Euro :pac:

Maths fail.

mamax

Some legal stuff

http://www.dublincycling.ie/cycling/key-issues-concern-cyclists-irish-road-traffic-law-rtl

Raam

Cars take up too much space on the road anyway. "OUT OF MY WAY SKINNY CYCLISTS ON YOUR SKINNY BIKES AND SKINNY TYRES! I HAVE NO ONE IN MY PASSENGER SEAT OR THE REAR SEATS SO I DEMAND THAT YOU MOVE OVER SO THAT I CAN FERRY ALL THIS EXTRA SPACE AROUND ABOUT 20 SECONDS FASTER THAN I MIGHT HAVE WERE YOU NOT IN MY WAY".

mamax

Raam wrote: »

Dude, it is a motorist's right to overtake cyclists as and when they choose.

Not when they choose, but when it's safe to do so.

Raam wrote: »

Cyclists' rights have nothing to do with it

Of course cyclists have rights, the right to be safe on the road while cycling.

Raam

mamax wrote: »

Not when they choose, but when it's safe to do so.





Of course cyclists have rights, the right to be safe on the road while cycling.

Cyclists have the right to get the hell out of the way of important Sunday drives.

Tenzor07

In my opinion the number of posts about cyclists behavior is not proportionate to what happens out on the roads...

Though have a look at this current thread.. we have a guy trying to say cycling is worse for the environment than motoring!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057250274

No Pants

mamax wrote: »

Some legal stuff

http://www.dublincycling.ie/cycling/key-issues-concern-cyclists-irish-road-traffic-law-rtl

Please turn your sarcasm filter off and then back on again.

cython

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Maths fail.

Never claimed it was a direct equivalent in distance

Besides, 1.5m is the recommended space to leave in overtaking cyclists around these parts.

evolving_doors

SCOOP 64 wrote: »

I like the cyclist who ride 2 abreast but when a car comes go to single file to let car through and then go back to 2 abreast.,wish all would do this.

Ya , two abreast is akin to long ago when farmers tractor stopped in the middle of the road to have a little chat for ten minutes.
Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

Two abreast is a limit not a target.

Raam

Armelodie wrote: »

Ya , two abreast is akin to long ago when farmers tractor stopped in the middle of the road to have a little chat for ten minutes.
Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

Two abreast is a limit not a target.

Yep, it's the exact same. Sure you can't make any progress at all when sitting behind a pair of cyclists doing 25-30kph. In fact, you are actually going backwards.

No Pants

Armelodie wrote: »

Ya , two abreast is akin to long ago when farmers tractor stopped in the middle of the road to have a little chat for ten minutes.
Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

Two abreast is a limit not a target.

If two cyclists are cycling side by side, it's not just for a chat. There are real benefits to it.

I normally cycle sole, but I've sometimes paired up by accident. We'd take turns at the front and sometimes end up side by side. Can't recall ever speaking a word, expect maybe "Safe home" or something similar when our paths diverge.

mal1

Armelodie wrote: »

Ya , two abreast is akin to long ago when farmers tractor stopped in the middle of the road to have a little chat for ten minutes.
Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

Two abreast is a limit not a target.

Haha, come on, that's not really true. Two abreast when there's a solid white line for example. Makes sure nobody feels pressurised or tempted to overtake when it's not safe to do so. It's not some rule linked to allowing cyclists have a chat back in the good auld days.

Lusk_Doyle

Armelodie wrote: »

Ya , two abreast is akin to long ago when farmers tractor stopped in the middle of the road to have a little chat for ten minutes.
Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

Two abreast is a limit not a target.

Two a-breasts is a target I aim at getting all the time.