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

Lusk_Doyle

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.

He may have had his tongue in his cheek when posting his views!

Dermot Illogical

Armelodie wrote: »

Just move in single, let car pass , resume chat. Too much anger created by insisting on staying two abreast

There's no need. Isn't the other side of the road, y'know - the one you're supposed to use to overtake, completely clear? Isn't it?

John_Rambo

ozzy jr wrote: »

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

I don't know ozzy... I cycle and drive in Dublin and drive all over the country. There are nine million bicycles in the city and I'm finding Dub drivers getting pretty tolerant and careful when it comes to cyclists. I'd frequently cruise along as part of a convoy of cars behind cyclists with nobody overtaking (even though they could risk a squeeze!), my folks, siblings and relatives are very observant, always checking the left wing mirror before turning, cruising behind for a few hundred metres before turning left instead of overtaking a cyclist and turning left... When I drive in the West and North West I find people very impatient when it comes to cyclists. Seen some pretty nasty buzz's.

Lusk_Doyle

John_Rambo wrote: »

I'd frequently cruise along as part of a convoy of cars behind cyclists with nobody overtaking

A convoy of cars preventing other road users from overtaking! Pitchforks!

Raam

If cars drove on stilts then we could cycle under them and they could literally overtake us. That would be handy.

John_Rambo

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

A convoy of cars preventing other road users from overtaking! Pitchforks!

THEY WERE BEHIND CYCLISTS TWO ABREAST CYCLISTS!!! :pac:

Raam

John_Rambo wrote: »

THEY WERE BEHIND CYCLISTS TWO ABREAST CYCLISTS!!! :pac:

If two ladies cycle side-by-side, is that four abreast?

John_Rambo

There's some donkeys out there though, I drove from Raheny to Howth in Dublin behind a tall fooker on a road bike, he was pumping, 35 to 40kph all the way like some sort of robot maniac in black Lycra, because of his speed (I'm guessing) he was more or less in the middle of the lane.

I was in no rush so I stayed back. There was a VIP in his (white of course) Audi behind me beeping and swerving from side to side like an F1 driver warming his tyres in an early 90's grand prix. He eventually overtook with a cloud of diesel smoke and then stopped at the traffic lights eight metres later. We all stopped and when the bulbs went green Audi took off like an exocet missile. Robot legs wasn't to far behind him. I stayed back (heavy load, stuff on the roof rack). Got to Sutton Cross... there we all were together (in electric dreams) again. Lights go green, Audi's off, manages a little wheelspin this time, Robot didn't even unclip at the lights, just stayed upright using some sort of centrifugal robotic force, he almost did a wheelspin too... Pedestrian lights before the village, we're together again, Audi man is sort of sliding down in his seat as tall robot stares him down.

I got a three kilo's of mussels, some monk fish cheeks, two sides of salmon, a kilo of Dublin bay prawns and four oysters. They gave me three free lemons.

Win.

evolving_doors

cython wrote: »

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

Notice... only one cyclist!

evolving_doors

Raam wrote: »

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.

Average speed of a bikes may be 25-30kph. But you have to accept that the average speed of a car is NOT 25-30kph.

Just pull in to single file, it'll only take you 32 seconds of your life and the important chat can go proceed. What's the big deal?

If there were 2 people on the road walking their 2 dogs having a chat (at 3-5kph) and they walked on ignoring you for a few KM not letting you pass would you still take the same view?

Doubt it..

Raam

Armelodie wrote: »

Average speed of a bikes may be 25-30kph. But you have to accept that the average speed of a car is NOT 25-30kph.

Just pull in to single file, it'll only take you 32 seconds of your life and the important chat can go proceed. What's the big deal?

If there were 2 people on the road walking their 2 dogs having a chat (at 3-5kph) and they walked on ignoring you for a few KM not letting you pass would you still take the same view?

Doubt it..

I'd overtake em when a safe opportunity presented itself. It's no biggie. Maybe I have more patience than you.

Ranchu

Brian? wrote: »

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

But yet they are.

Kavrocks

Armelodie wrote: »

Average speed of a bikes may be 25-30kph. But you have to accept that the average speed of a car is NOT 25-30kph.

Just pull in to single file, it'll only take you 32 seconds of your life and the important chat can go proceed. What's the big deal?

Seriously? So bikes should pull into single file because it will only take them 32 seconds of their life but cars shouldn't wait until it is safe to overtake them?

As far as overall aggression goes I've been witness to it for 4+ years now from motorists. Whilst I wouldn't be the best cyclist and have done some stupid things in my time (mainly through lack of concentration) there is no reason why cyclists and motorists should not be able to use the roads equally and in harmony.

I could count the times I've been thanked by motorists on one hand but the number of times I've been beeped at, shouted at and forced off the road is in the 100's.

Padkir

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

There's no need. Isn't the other side of the road, y'know - the one you're supposed to use to overtake, completely clear? Isn't it?

Not necessarily. If a lane is 13 to 15 foot wide and a car is 6 foot wide, they can overtake a single cyclist perfectly safely giving adequate space without crossing into oncoming traffic.

Too many cyclists have the entitled view that no one should be overtaking them when there is oncoming traffic, when in reality it can be done safely if some courtesy and common sense is applied. I think that is one of the biggest gripes motorists tend to have with cyclists and leads to aggression and ill feeling towards all cyclists then, leading to them perhaps being more aggressive to the next cyclist they meet, even if they're doing nothing wrong.

cython

Armelodie wrote: »

Notice... only one cyclist!

Ah, but since we drive and cycle on the left hand side of the road, it isn't really relevant as to whether there is a cyclist on the left of the pictured one or not - you should leave 1.5m from the cyclist nearest your car.

Armelodie wrote: »

Average speed of a bikes may be 25-30kph. But you have to accept that the average speed of a car is NOT 25-30kph.

Just pull in to single file, it'll only take you 32 seconds of your life and the important chat can go proceed. What's the big deal?

And in many cases it won't even take a driver 32 seconds to wait to safely overtake, so what's your point? Many drivers get irrationally antsy/impatient/dangerous after less than 10 seconds, FFS.

Armelodie wrote: »

If there were 2 people on the road walking their 2 dogs having a chat (at 3-5kph) and they walked on ignoring you for a few KM not letting you pass would you still take the same view?

Doubt it..

If those 2 peopler walking their dogs having a chat are obeying the law they will either be on a footpath (if available) or on the right hand side of the road so that even if drivers have to stop dead the obstacle will eventually clear naturally, when the walkers pass the car in the opposite direction. Now unless you're suggesting that cyclists should travel head first into traffic on the opposite side of the road (idiotic idea, FWIW), this has precisely zero relevance to the discussion.

evolving_doors

Kavrocks wrote: »

Seriously? So bikes should pull into single file because it will only take them 32 seconds of their life but cars shouldn't wait until it is safe to overtake them?

As far as overall aggression goes I've been witness to it for 4+ years now from motorists. Whilst I wouldn't be the best cyclist and have done some stupid things in my time (mainly through lack of concentration) there is no reason why cyclists and motorists should not be able to use the roads equally and in harmony.

I could count the times I've been thanked by motorists on one hand but the number of times I've been beeped at, shouted at and forced off the road is in the 100's.

As I said, what's the big deal, pull in for a few seconds and be courteous..

This whole thing about letting cars 'wait' is neither here nor there, what if there isn;t an opportune moment to overtake for a few kilometers (busy country roads)? Is your conversation that important that you can;t pick it up again after a few seconds.

Who is being impatient anyway? When I go for a drive I just want to go somewhere, i'm not out to enjoy the scenery or think about life, I'm going to a destination.

If I'm out cycling I'm not going to be doing small talk with some shmohawk, I'm cycling .. pure and simple. If I want to chat then I'll pick up the phone or do the small talk at stopping points with who ever, but if a car comes I move in and let em pass...no beeps, no frustration, no annoyance.. Just move in and move back.

Or is it a case of cycling along shouting at the other cyclist "oh I simply muuuust tell you about algernon going for the new exec job last week and what happened to his sister on the way to the bank..ohhh that driver is just soo rude with that frown on his face... sooo anyway where was I.. oh yes algernon.. blah blah blah 2 abreast blah blah blah".

Can't cyclists just get along with motorists and move in for a couple of seconds.

whiteandlight

The only issue I have with two abreast is when you are on a road where traffic is heavy interspersed with bends on the road. There is no gap for overtaking but there would be room to overtake if the cyclists would move to single file. On a number of occasions I have been stuck behind cyclists for 5+ km in this situation and a big queue of cars has formed behind. I will point out I'd be pissed with a tractor/spslow driver going 20-30km/h that didn't pull over in this situation too

John_Rambo

Armelodie wrote: »

As I said, what's the big deal, pull in for a few seconds and be courteous

If you were cruising along at a decent speed on a road with no hard shoulder and a single white line and I came up behind you at speed in a performance car would you pull in at the next possible point (someones driveway or a wider part of the road) to let me by and the fourteen cars behind me? You'd most likely have to come to a stop, and then indicate right and wait for a decent gap to take off again.

johnty56

The problem is bad roads, that are barely wide enough for a van, which out of necessity are major commuter routes. When they are used for recreational purposes by a particular type of cyclist- late middle aged, fully Lycra clad, with all the bells and whistles, and very little apparent spatial awareness who seem to have a serious sense of entitlement- that the resentment can arise.. a perfect example is the back road from Blanchardstown to Lucan via Clonsilla.

Raam

I get every so slightly irked when I am delayed by cars taking up the whole width of the road during school runs and leaving very little space for me to filter. Ah sure it's only people getting on with their everyday lives and they don't mean any harm by it.

Deub

I think there is a lack of communication to young motorists about other road users. In the last 8 years I've been in Ireland I didn't see much communications about respecting other road users.

I've lived in France for over 20 years and passed my driving licence there. You get many questions on the theory test involving cyclists at crossroads or on small roads. Of course there are issues in cities and it is far from being the best country for cyclist but overall it is pretty safe to cycle. The law protects cyclists : You can get a fine if you overtake a bicycle too close.

The instructors teaches you to let pass motorbikes by getting close to the road side so they can overtake safely without sometimes passing the white line. That is something most motorists do and bikers thank you by doing a small sign. When I do it here, the motorbike just stays behind me and only pass when it is enough space for a car to overtake.

Tenzor07

johnty56 wrote: »

a perfect example is the back road from Blanchardstown to Lucan via Clonsilla.

A "Rat-Run" for people avoiding the toll, usually taken at fairly high speed around what is a country road full of tractor entrances to fields, and the road is quite bendy also....

John_Rambo

Deub wrote: »

The instructors teaches you to let pass motorbikes by getting close to the road side so they can overtake safely without sometimes passing the white line. That is something most motorists do and bikers thank you by doing a small sign. When I do it here, the motorbike just stays behind me and only pass when it is enough space for a car to overtake.

This is common practice in Ireland too. Some bikers simply may not want to pass.

Tenzor07

Deub wrote: »

I think there is a lack of communication to young motorists about other road users. In the last 8 years I've been in Ireland I didn't see much communications about respecting other road users.

Just an observation, but on the roads now you have a generation of motorists who were driven everywhere as kids, never cycled or walked much.. now are drivers themselves with little realisation of the responsibility that comes with car ownership.....

John_Rambo

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Just an observation, but on the roads now you have a generation of motorists who were driven everywhere as kids, never cycled or walked much.. now are drivers themselves with little realisation of the responsibility that comes with car ownership.....

Bang on 100% Bad planning and total car dependence. My rural friends and family won't leave the house without getting into the car. They are fascinated with us heading to the shops/schools/work on bikes/skateboards/buses or (the horror) on foot. They drive somewhere to bring the dog for a walk. :eek:

Not judging or saying they are wrong, it's down to dreadful planning and not much forward thinking. And that goes for the large estates in cities peripherals too.

Tenzor07

John_Rambo wrote: »

Bang on 100% Bad planning and total car dependence. My rural friends and family won't leave the house without getting into the car. They are fascinated with us heading to the shops/schools/work on bikes/skateboards/buses or (the horror) on foot. They drive somewhere to bring the dog for a walk. :eek:

Not judging or saying they are wrong, it's down to dreadful planning and not much forward thinking. And that goes for the large estates in cities peripherals too.

Now cars are so cheap also, can get a 10year old Corsa for less than the price of an Ultegra carbon composite bike, pay the insurance with installments...and with more competition in the market it's a heck of a lot cheaper than the £2,100 i paid PMPA for Tpft when I started driving...!

Kashkai

OP here........

Right, since I posted my query up this morning, I've been out and about in my car to and from the Bray airshow. During my trip over, I was on a narrow country road (barely wide enough for two cars to pass) when I came up behind two cyclists, riding beside each other who were occupying the full width of the left lane on a narrow, twisting country boreen. I stayed back waiting for them to go into single file so I could overtake at some point. I was still waiting 5km later (and so were about 8 other cars queued up behind me at that stage) when we all came to the main road, which is when both cyclists continued straight out left in front of an oncoming car......cue horn beeping loudly by driver and middle fingers raised by both cyclists.

So I guess the moral of the story is that there are inconsiderate gobsh1tes out there on our roads be they aggressive car drivers or cyclists blissfully unaware of the right of car drivers to go about their business without being stuck in 3rd gear for 5km.

And before anyone asks, no it was not safe to pass anywhere on the road as there were continuous blind bends. There were also several places where the cyclists could have pulled in (as I would have if I were cycling) just to let the queue of cars past and get them "off their backs".

Have to admit that I've seen the bad side of both groups (drivers and cyclists) the past two days and there appears to be no quarter given between either side. Kind of sad and yet immature all round. Life's too fecking short for that aggro.

John_Rambo

Kashkai wrote: »

the right of car drivers to go about their business without being stuck in 3rd gear for 5km

Hell yeah!

John_Rambo

Armelodie wrote: »

Notice... only one cyclist!

Sorry, a late work out, to many sour flavoured skittles and a couple of glasses of red.

brayblue24

ozzy jr wrote: »

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.

I quoted similarly on this forum about my experiences of cycling in Tipperary recently but in Wicklow it's now got to the point that, after a few hairy moments (and being knocked off my bike last year), I have just tonight bought a helmet cam. I won't be starting up a ranting mad loon website or anything like that but just in case....

colossus-x

I'm a cyclist and I don't drive. I've never cycled with another person. Like the cinema I'd rather go on my own : ) Anyway I was wondering why do ye cycle 2 abreast? Is it to enjoy the pleasure of each others company and have a conversation? To tell you the truth it doesn't seem like a very sensible thing to do for a number of reasons.

Boskowski

I'm a motorist and I find cycling 2 abreast is bad form. Holding everyone up and endangering yourselves just so that you can have a good chat?

Darkglasses

colossus-x wrote: »

I'm a cyclist and I don't drive. I've never cycled with another person. Like the cinema I'd rather go on my own : ) Anyway I was wondering why do ye cycle 2 abreast? Is it to enjoy the pleasure of each others company and have a conversation? To tell you the truth it doesn't seem like a very sensible thing to do for a number of reasons.

Boskowski wrote: »

I'm a motorist and I find cycling 2 abreast is bad form. Holding everyone up and endangering yourselves just so that you can have a good chat?

On the contrary, it's far safer and it's not done for the purposes of conversation. It discourages or prevents overtakes that squeeze you in the same lane, as it forces drivers to wait until the other side over the road is clear. In large groups, it also shortens potentially long lines of cyclists considerably.

Searching for the word "abreast" in this forum will bring up the 100s of times it has been discussed and explained before

Red Nissan

Darkglasses wrote: »

On the contrary, it's far safer

Might have been. I won't be cycling two abreast going forward.

Lusk_Doyle

Red Nissan wrote: »

Might have been. I won't be cycling two abreast going forward.

What about backwards?

Brian?

Ranchu wrote: »

But yet they are.

I'm not going to validate other peoples bad reactions.

magicbastarder

Padkir wrote: »

Not necessarily. If a lane is 13 to 15 foot wide and a car is 6 foot wide, they can overtake a single cyclist perfectly safely giving adequate space without crossing into oncoming traffic.

what roads are you using?
the lanes on the M50 are 3m (10 foot wide), which is why it's 100km/h - you need 3.5m lanes to be able to allow 120km/h - and that's 11.5 foot wide; your 15 foot wide lanes are not the sort of lanes people generally have trouble with.

hollypink

Kashkai wrote: »

OP here........

Right, since I posted my query up this morning, I've been out and about in my car to and from the Bray airshow. During my trip over, I was on a narrow country road (barely wide enough for two cars to pass) when I came up behind two cyclists, riding beside each other who were occupying the full width of the left lane on a narrow, twisting country boreen. I stayed back waiting for them to go into single file so I could overtake at some point. I was still waiting 5km later (and so were about 8 other cars queued up behind me at that stage) when we all came to the main road, which is when both cyclists continued straight out left in front of an oncoming car......cue horn beeping loudly by driver and middle fingers raised by both cyclists.

So I guess the moral of the story is that there are inconsiderate gobsh1tes out there on our roads be they aggressive car drivers or cyclists blissfully unaware of the right of car drivers to go about their business without being stuck in 3rd gear for 5km.

And before anyone asks, no it was not safe to pass anywhere on the road as there were continuous blind bends. There were also several places where the cyclists could have pulled in (as I would have if I were cycling) just to let the queue of cars past and get them "off their backs".

Have to admit that I've seen the bad side of both groups (drivers and cyclists) the past two days and there appears to be no quarter given between either side. Kind of sad and yet immature all round. Life's too fecking short for that aggro.

I'm a bit confused though by one aspect of this post - if it was a narrow country road with blind bends and it wasn't safe to pass, how would you have overtaken the cyclists if they had moved into single file? Wouldn't you still have had to cross over the white line to overtake anyway, which you couldn't do if there were continuous blind bends? Maybe I'm missing something?

Boskowski

Darkglasses wrote: »

On the contrary, it's far safer and it's not done for the purposes of conversation. It discourages or prevents overtakes that squeeze you in the same lane, as it forces drivers to wait until the other side over the road is clear. In large groups, it also shortens potentially long lines of cyclists considerably.

Searching for the word "abreast" in this forum will bring up the 100s of times it has been discussed and explained before

I'm sure it has been discussed to death, it has to be a contentious issue.

I can follow your line of argument but I find it a hard one to chew on.

Two abreast on roads where you're effectively holding up traffic thats 3, 4 or 5 times faster than you is not going to be a very safe thing to do in any case.

Every time I bump into a group of cyclists however its seldom two abreast, its often more like 3 or more and changing and weaving and whatnot and I just can't help but feel annoyed by them.
Now I wouldn't ever dream of doing anything unsafe or threaten someone by my driving or stuff like that, but I will admit they annoy me. And I'm far from being someone with a temper and I'm very much aware of how dangerous a weapon my 2 ton propelled vehicle really is. But thats me. I imagine some of the more short fused motorists out there will be very much tempted to 'teach you'. I think cycling on such roads is basically suicidal.

I understand cyclists have to cycle somewhere if they so choose that thats their thing, but Irish country roads are probably the most unsuitable place for this.
Its the one reason why I wouldn't ever dream of cycling into work. I feel it would be a disaster waiting to happen.
Doing this for 'recreational' purposes? No way.

CramCycle

Boskowski wrote: »

Two abreast on roads where you're effectively holding up traffic thats 3, 4 or 5 times faster than you is not going to be a very safe thing to do in any case.ore short fused motorists out there will be very much tempted to 'teach you'. I think cycling on such roads is basically suicidal.

But why if you can't over take two cyclists safely, you can't overtake one, some people just think they can. If they are single file, they are over double the length to overtake, which means a longer clear line of sight.

How is this difficult to comprehend?

Boskowski

CramCycle wrote: »

But why if you can't over take two cyclists safely, you can't overtake one, some people just think they can. If they are single file, they are over double the length to overtake, which means a longer clear line of sight.

How is this difficult to comprehend?

You can ease up a little on me man, I don't find it difficult to comprehend at all and I didn't think my post suggested this.
Only saying I can't help but feel annoyed with them and I'm pretty soft tempered where others wouldn't be and I wouldn't ever dream of doing this myself.

You know what they say about golfers putting for pars and dogs chasing cars...

I'm not ever going to argue with a multi ton propelled vehicle and a potentially unhinged river. You can be in the right all day long but thats not going to be any good to you lying in bed with smashed bones.

No Pants

Padkir wrote: »

Too many cyclists have the entitled view that no one should be overtaking them when there is oncoming traffic

I think you'll find that the people most opposed to this are the oncoming traffic.

magicbastarder

Padkir wrote: »

Too many cyclists have the entitled view that no one should be overtaking them when there is oncoming traffic

POTW.

Tenzor07

Boskowski wrote: »

I understand cyclists have to cycle somewhere if they so choose that thats their thing, but Irish country roads are probably the most unsuitable place for this.
Its the one reason why I wouldn't ever dream of cycling into work. I feel it would be a disaster waiting to happen.
Doing this for 'recreational' purposes? No way.

I was with you up until this paragraph....

Yes, Irish country roads are crazy, I mean some small narrow roads have the same speed limits as the M50! But to say they are unsuitable to cycle on is quite incorrect.
In fact most are unsuitable to drive at speed on, and should have a 50kph limit on them.. I just wonder how many cars would stick to that limit... 10%?

Try cycling to work or going for a spin at the weekend, you'll save money and lose weight...

Boskowski

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I was with you up until this paragraph....

Yes, Irish country roads are crazy, I mean some small narrow roads have the same speed limits as the M50! But to say they are unsuitable to cycle on is quite incorrect.
In fact most are unsuitable to drive at speed on, and should have a 50kph limit on them.. I just wonder how many cars would stick to that limit... 10%?

Try cycling to work or going for a spin at the weekend, you'll save money and lose weight...

Agree with you speed limits on those roads are mental.
Wouldn't want to lose any weight tho :pac: the missus thinks I'm too skinny as it stands.

No Pants

johnty56 wrote: »

late middle aged, fully Lycra clad, with all the bells and whistles, and very little apparent spatial awareness who seem to have a serious sense of entitlement

So if they're younger or older, with no lycra and on less expensive bikes (I assume that's what you're referring to here) they're okay?

CramCycle

Boskowski wrote: »

You can ease up a little on me man, I don't find it difficult to comprehend at all and I didn't think my post suggested this.
Only saying I can't help but feel annoyed with them and I'm pretty soft tempered where others wouldn't be and I wouldn't ever dream of doing this myself.

But why be annoyed? The two abreast is for safety, yours and theirs. If you have over twice the distance to make the overtake then you are more likely to meet on coming traffic mid manoeuvre, leaving you with the choice of hammering it, hope for best, pull in and hope for the best or hope the oncoming traffic can slow enough. None are ideal solutions. Cycling abreast clears up any confusion some drivers may have about safe overtakes as they cannot see the potential to take a stupid risk. The overtake is over quicker, means a slightly reduced line of sight is needed.

You know what they say about golfers putting for pars and dogs chasing cars...

They both need training?

I'm not ever going to argue with a multi ton propelled vehicle and a potentially unhinged river. You can be in the right all day long but thats not going to be any good to you lying in bed with smashed bones.

I rarely have to argue with drivers, I do worry the few times I see it on our roads though, and there are some in all road user groups, who think that hitting a person or forcing them off the road is acceptable response for a perceived slight. The way society should respond to such behaviour is to accept it?

Lusk_Doyle

First world problems.

johnty56

No Pants wrote: »

So if they're younger or older, with no lycra and on less expensive bikes (I assume that's what you're referring to here) they're okay?

No, I have a problem with anybody of any age that looks as if they are not in full control of the means of transport they are using... and especially if they are on a road that would be best avoided by same. I have lost count of the number of times I have thought that a cyclist was going to fall off their bike in front of me, or have seen them wobble dangerously.

That goes for car/van/truck drivers too. I never assume that someone driving a car indicating that they intend to take the first exit at a roundabout for example, will actually do so. Driving in Ireland, it is best to assume that all other road users are complete f#ckwits, and give them all the space possible whilst getting where you need to go.


I have no problem at all with cyclists. My opinion is that it is one of these them vs us arguments that keeps people from thinking about the bigger picture.

mrcheez

colossus-x wrote: »

I'm a cyclist and I don't drive. I've never cycled with another person. Like the cinema I'd rather go on my own : ) Anyway I was wondering why do ye cycle 2 abreast? Is it to enjoy the pleasure of each others company and have a conversation? To tell you the truth it doesn't seem like a very sensible thing to do for a number of reasons.

What is particularly dangerous are cycling 2-abreast on narrow 2-way cycle lanes, for example the bike lane along the coast in Clontarf-Sutton. I don't understand why people insist on cycling 2-abreast on these routes and I can't count the number of times I've almost ended up in a collision because some guy wouldn't move.

Myself and my gf cycle this route all the time and insist on remaining in single file to allow other faster bikes pass. We are still able to communicate without the necessity to be up beside each other and ignorantly taking up 75% of the path.