Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

Wombatman

Weepsie wrote: »

Yes and no.

But a group of say 8 cyclists in a 2 abreast formation, will be quicker, and likely safer to overtake than they would in single file.

People can overtake slow moving tractors, trucks, vans etc with due consideration. Cyclists seem to really test their ability. Even with no oncoming traffic, and a wide open lane on the other side, I get close passes.

Deffo safer a few pages ago. Now likely safer.

Progress at last.

PeadarCo

Wombatman wrote:

AndrewJRenko - Can you address this please?

Depending on the context especially coming up to road abouts, when turning right, when doing the same speed as the surrounding traffic a cyclist should take the centre of the lane. In general a cyclist should never hug the left hand of the road, there should always be room to manoeuvre on the left.

Seth Brundle

Wombatman wrote: »

Wombatman wrote: »

Those who argue that two abreast cycling is safer should logically take up the position of the outer rider when cycling alone.

Is this correct? Is this what you do?

AndrewJRenko - Can you address this please?

I am not going to try and speak for AJR but if I cycle along the N4 to work I cycle in the middle of the buslane.
Why?
The cycle path is crap so I cycle on the road. If I cycle too close to the kerb, some taxi drivers will pass by with inches to spare, generally at an inappropriate speed.
They usually honk the horn just in case I didn't notice the car and didn't feel the draft from the passby.
Rarely would they have a fare in the car and one would suspect that they had no right to be there!

To answer your question, if I cycle in the middle of the lane, they must move over into lane 1 in order to overtake - they tend to get the message. The odd one will still try and punish me for my line but they would be the ones to do that anyhow I guess.
Strangely, busses rarely have an issue with my position.

I will also acknowledge good driver behaviour with a wave or whatever, as I would when I'm driving.

Exodus 1811

Wombatman wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why are tailbacks dangerous?

People start taking chances if they are held up for an inordinate amount of time.

Changing human behavior = very difficulty.
Cyclists choosing to go single file = very easy.

Jesus, that’s some reach!

Humans are operating the vehicles who are taking the chances dangerously overtaking. Humans are also the people cycling in 2 abreast for safety. Who should change behavior?

Are you saying drivers are some sort of thickos who take years of training with treats to take a breath and pass when it’s safe? Much like a dog being taught to juggle?

Pinch Flat

Fair play OP. Not even 2 weeks into the new year and you’ve ploughed the depths of boards.ie for debate that’s never been mentioned before. These debates are important to have. All in all a good start to 2019.

07Lapierre

Wombatman wrote: »

Those who argue that two abreast cycling is safer should logically take up the position of the outer rider when cycling alone.

Is this correct? Is this what you do?

Pretty much, yes. Cycling too close to the kerb/ditch only encourages close passes. By cycling about a meter or so out from the kerb, means any cars approaching from behind must slow a bit and if they want to pass, they must check mirrors, indicate, manoeuvre... also known as a "safe overtake manoeuvre"

Fighting Tao

Wombatman wrote: »

So if with someone you would switch to single file when the 'road dedicates'. Fair play. This will stop dangerous tailbacks of faster vehicles building up.

There is nothing dangerous about tailbacks and as most here seems to acknowledge they are rarely caused by cyclists. The danger is drivers.

If I feel it so safe for a vehicle to pass I would single out. If I don’t feel the location is safe I won’t single out.

Fighting Tao

iamtony wrote: »

As another Taxi driver I would just like to say the majority of us are good with cyclists and a lot of us actually cycle for a hobby. I believe cycling 2 abreast is the way to go but if there's a build up of cars then going to single file is there's only a few out is good manners. Once the car has slowed down and is looking for the overtake.
People need to chill out your not getting anywhere any faster. People die on the roads from speed everyday.
Spookie maybe you should do a bit of cycling so you can see it from both sides.

I completely agree with the bolded bit. Of all segments of society taxi drivers know what it’s like to be tarnished with the same brush and therefore should relate to cyclists. Tbh, I don’t notice most taxi drivers when driving or cycling because they aren’t risking my life. IMO, it is the bad taxi drivers that generally are the ones spouting off about other road users and are the ones that I notice on the road.

AndrewJRenko

Wombatman wrote: »

People start taking chances if they are held up for an inordinate amount of time.

Changing human behavior = very difficulty.
Cyclists choosing to go single file = very easy.

This may come as a surprise to you, but cyclists are human. So changing behaviour for cyclists is just as much a human behaviour issue as changing behaviour of motorists.

But your response speaks volumes.

RacoonQueen

Wombatman wrote: »

People start taking chances if they are held up for an inordinate amount of time.

That is not caused by the tailback. That is caused by a dangerous, impatient driver.