Cyclists using the road safely

SpearHunt

According to the rules of the road cyclists are supposed to cycle no more than two abreast.
Why is it that so often we see groups of cyclists of up to SIX abreast on our roads?
Isn't there a need for stricter laws to stop those cyclists from endangering themselves and others?

TheChizler

Surely the law you mentioned would cover it? Enforcement is the issue.

fat bloke

SpearHunt wrote: »

Why is it that so often we see groups of cyclists of up to SIX abreast on our roads?

I've never seen that.

ThisRegard

I've never seen 6 abreast, I'd be surprised if you did, never mind seen them often.

True, I would much prefer a strictly enforced 1.5m overtaking rule.

robyntmorton

SpearHunt wrote: »

According to the rules of the road cyclists are supposed to cycle no more than two abreast.
Why is it that so often we see groups of cyclists of up to SIX abreast on our roads?
Isn't there a need for stricter laws to stop those cyclists from endangering themselves and others?

Okay, I'll bite.

Who is "we"?
How often do you see groups up to six abreast?
How many singles and pairs do you pass and ignore because they don't make good rant fodder?

Don't tar all cyclists with the same brush, just for the sake of complaining.

jon1981

hmmmm OP most of our rural roads could barely accommodate a large bus... I highly doubt that "so often" you see 6 abreast. A touch of fiction perhaps?

I couldn't help myself biting!

smacl

fat bloke wrote: »

I've never seen that.

Nope my neither, two abreast is the norm, three while overtaking. While I'm not a club member myself, most clubs I've come across or had the odd spin with are pretty good at enforcing this.

Lemming

SpearHunt wrote: »

Why is it that so often we see groups of cyclists of up to SIX abreast on our roads?

My my, that's a very dishonest play on words ...

As for having seen six abreast; would that have been a televised start of the Tour De France or some such that you were watching perhaps? .....

gaffmaster

Unless OP misunderstands the term 'abreast', taking it to mean 'in a line'?

Macy0161

smacl wrote: »

Nope my neither, two abreast is the norm, three while overtaking. While I'm not a club member myself, most clubs I've come across or had the odd spin with are pretty good at enforcing this.

As well as going out with a club, I live on one of the popular cycling routes out of Dublin. I've never seen 6 abreast, and they'd want to be a good standard/ confident to fit 6 a breast.

Haven't seen it in (the few) sportives I've done either, and I witnessed some fairly poor cycling in the ROK, but not 6 a breast on the open road sections.

gaffmaster wrote: »

Unless OP misunderstands the term 'abreast', taking it to mean 'in a line'?

This sprung to my mind too. A group of twelve isn't that big though, and any idiot could see it's easier to safely overtake a group of 12 that is 6 long, rather than it being 12....

1bryan

maybe he means the Ras? They cycle 'up-to-6-abreast' sometimes.

CramCycle

SpearHunt wrote: »

According to the rules of the road cyclists are supposed to cycle no more than two abreast.
Why is it that so often we see groups of cyclists of up to SIX abreast on our roads?
Isn't there a need for stricter laws to stop those cyclists from endangering themselves and others?

MOD VOICE: It is Friday, it is your first post on the forum, and I presume you have not read the forum rules. The law covers the ridiculous scenario that WE do not see, ever. THREAD CLOSED, PM me if you wish to discuss further.