Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

the_pen_turner

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I’m not afraid of the good drivers. They wait patiently until it is safe to over take. I fear the bad ones that don’t and they make up a significant portion of all drivers. When with others, two abreast protects me from them.

i dont believe it does protect you. i have seen some close calls both ways. the bad driver didnt care

AndrewJRenko

Sam Hain wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Roads aren't dangerous. Idiot drivers are dangerous.

And idiot cyclists.

There's idiot cyclists for sure, but they don't kill 2 or 3 people each week on the roads.

AndrewJRenko

the_pen_turner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You've pretty much proved my point beautifully there, given your lack of understanding of how two abreast deters dangerous overtakes.

you havnt explained even one way it makes it safer.

the lunaic will still squeeze past. the good driver will still wait.
all you are doing is putting yourself closer to the danger

It's been explained to you several times by others, but if you really need it again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJiixtKuVq8

meeeeh

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Saying it for ages. Spend 6 months on a bike before you graduate to a car. The roads would be a different place. It's people who can't see the more vulnerable users that tare hard to reason with. Cars create a little isolated bubble of selfishness.

I did, more than six months but not in Ireland. I always cycle in single file with my kids (unless the cycle lane allows different). I also always overtake with a good distance away from a cyclist when in the car.

Fighting Tao

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i dont believe it does protect you. i have seen some close calls both ways. the bad driver didnt care

It’s hard to believe that you are simply wrong, isn’t it? It does protect from the vast majority of bad drivers. But that doesn’t sit well with you because all you see is people on bikes holding you up.

facehugger99

I don't cycle very often - mostly at the weekends with the kids.

In my experience, despite the fact I spend far more time in my car, I am far less likely to encounter an ignorant cyclist when driving than an ignorant driver when cycling.

flatface

the_pen_turner wrote: »

a good driver will still overtake safely. a bad one wont

My experience shows me that 2 abreast makes more overtakes safer. This is backed up by the images shown, and most importantly the rules of the road. Do you think its the other way around?

xckjoo

the_pen_turner wrote: »

you havnt explained even one way it makes it safer.

the lunaic will still squeeze past. the good driver will still wait.
all you are doing is putting yourself closer to the danger

It's about having space to maneuver. If you're being overtaken and the driver cuts in to avoid oncoming traffic, the cyclists need room on the inside to try and avoid the car and save themselves. Bikes are also more susceptible to wind, potholes etc. that may require the cyclist move laterally.

the_pen_turner

xckjoo wrote: »

It's about having space to maneuver. If you're being overtaken and the driver cuts in to avoid oncoming traffic, the cyclists need room on the inside to try and avoid the car and save themselves. Bikes are also more susceptible to wind, potholes etc. that may require the cyclist move laterally.

I would agree with that but surely having 1.5M beside you is better than another cyclist

the_pen_turner

flatface wrote: »

My experience shows me that 2 abreast makes more overtakes safer. This is backed up by the images shown, and most importantly the rules of the road. Do you think its the other way around?

I hadn't seen either way treated differently.

xckjoo

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I would agree with that but surely having 1.5M beside you is better than another cyclist

But then you increase the number of drivers who are sure they can "squeeze through" and the driver loses the benefit of the shorter overtaking distance.

Wombatman

xckjoo wrote: »

It's about having space to maneuver. If you're being overtaken and the driver cuts in to avoid oncoming traffic, the cyclists need room on the inside to try and avoid the car and save themselves. Bikes are also more susceptible to wind, potholes etc. that may require the cyclist move laterally.

Probably safer then not to have another cyclist right beside you.

Macy0161

facehugger99 wrote: »

I don't cycle very often - mostly at the weekends with the kids.

In my experience, despite the fact I spend far more time in my car, I am far less likely to encounter an ignorant cyclist when driving than an ignorant driver when cycling.

And I'd find motorists much more patient when I'm out with the children rather than solo or with an adult group*, so you probably aren't seeing the worst...

*motorists wont risk a child, but will their mam or dad, as they are just "a cyclist" when on their own or in a group of other adults.

the_pen_turner

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It’s hard to believe that you are simply wrong, isn’t it? It does protect from the vast majority of bad drivers. But that doesn’t sit well with you because all you see is people on bikes holding you up.

I am very open minded and open to being wrong.
I'm often wrong and admit it.

I'm very respectful to cyclists . Yes they hold people up but so do pedestrian s , tractors, horses, trucks, . That doesn't mean I dislike them for that.

xckjoo

Wombatman wrote: »

Probably safer then not to have another cyclist right beside you.

If these were the only factors to consider then sure, but it's just one of many.

AndrewJRenko

the_pen_turner wrote: »

flatface wrote: »

My experience shows me that 2 abreast makes more overtakes safer. This is backed up by the images shown, and most importantly the rules of the road. Do you think its the other way around?

I hadn't seen either way treated differently.

Those who have actual experience from a cyclist point of view have seen how drivers have to treat a larger group differently.

Spook_ie

When you say you are only holding up a motorist, bus whatever for a 30 seconds, you're not, you're holding up the next person in the queue by 30 seconds if there's a queue of 10 vehicles then you actually hold up the last to arrive in the queue by maybe 5 or more minutes before they get to overtake you, again a bit of cop on from cycling clubs and groups and a bit less propaganda.

Also if you want to cycle two abreast please stop waving at me to back off when I'm prepping to hoof it past you at the next safe overtaking opportunity. I'm not likely to double the overtake I'll be in any danger zone for as short a time as possible.

the_pen_turner

xckjoo wrote: »

But then you increase the number of drivers who are sure they can "squeeze through" and the driver loses the benefit of the shorter overtaking distance.

The driver that squeezes through will still do it.

It's easier to overtake 2 in a row than beside each other.

flatface

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I'm very respectful to cyclists . Yes they hold people up but so do pedestrian s , tractors, horses, trucks.

Cyclists are people too. Law abiding traffic with the right of way. No body is holding any one up. No one is entitled to get to their destination sitting on the speed limit with no delays.

The real evil out there on the road is traffic lights. I lose endless time to these inconsiderate idiots with their red light on for no reason at all.

AndrewJRenko

Spook_ie wrote: »

When you say you are only holding up a motorist, bus whatever for a 30 seconds, you're not, you're holding up the next person in the queue by 30 seconds if there's a queue of 10 vehicles then you actually hold up the last to arrive in the queue by maybe 5 or more minutes before they get to overtake you, again a bit of cop on from cycling clubs and groups and a bit less propaganda.

Also if you want to cycle two abreast please stop waving at me to back off when I'm prepping to hoof it past you at the next safe overtaking opportunity. I'm not likely to double the overtake I'll be in any danger zone for as short a time as possible.

How often does it happen that there is a queue of ten vehicles behind a cyclist?

Don't Chute!

Spook_ie wrote: »

When you say you are only holding up a motorist, bus whatever for a 30 seconds, you're not, you're holding up the next person in the queue by 30 seconds if there's a queue of 10 vehicles then you actually hold up the last to arrive in the queue by maybe 5 or more minutes before they get to overtake you, again a bit of cop on from cycling clubs and groups and a bit less propaganda.

Also if you want to cycle two abreast please stop waving at me to back off when I'm prepping to hoof it past you at the next safe overtaking opportunity. I'm not likely to double the overtake I'll be in any danger zone for as short a time as possible.

Whats this "propaganda" bull**** you're talking about?
Also, "when i'm prepping to hoof it...." Says it all really.

Boom_Bap

I've been that frustrated driver caught behind cyclists 2 abrest, groups of cyclists, single cyclist way out in the road....then I realise that I'm the idiot for thinking I'm special and have the right to be ahead of them just because I'm in a car.

the_pen_turner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often does it happen that there is a queue of ten vehicles behind a cyclist?

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

greenspurs

Branson Angry Circus wrote: »

Absolutely no way should it be allowed, causing needless hold ups for cars and other vehicles where you could get past one easily but two abreast makes it too tight to get past with oncoming traffic.

Why would you try to over take with oncoming traffic ?

Safer all round for all to wait until theres no oncoming traffic !?!?!?!?!?!?

amcalester

greenspurs wrote: »

Why would you try to over take with oncoming traffic ?

Safer all round for all to wait until theres no oncoming traffic !?!?!?!?!?!?

Nox drives a fast car so thinks the rules don't apply to him.

the_pen_turner

flatface wrote: »

Cyclists are people too. Law abiding traffic with the right of way. No body is holding any one up. No one is entitled to get to their destination sitting on the speed limit with no delays.

The real evil out there on the road is traffic lights. I lose endless time to these inconsiderate idiots with their red light on for no reason at all.

I can legally drive my van down the road at 10 kph . If there are people behind me of course I'm holding them up.

RobbieTheRobber

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

Sounds like it wasn't safe to overtake so!

xckjoo

the_pen_turner wrote: »

The driver that squeezes through will still do it.

It's easier to overtake 2 in a row than beside each other.

Nah. That's not what happens in reality. See my previous post about giving people space to pass and the third car nearly going through you. People make judgement calls on the fly so when you're cycling you need to maximise the chance that they'll make the choice that won't kill you.



The logic of the 2 beside vs in a row has been explained at length. You don't seem to agree with it but that's a personal choice. Would you find it easier to overtake a truck or a mini?

Spook_ie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often does it happen that there is a queue of ten vehicles behind a cyclist?

Often enough, unfortunate that cyclists don't tend to look beyond the vehicle immediately behind them

RobbieTheRobber

Spook_ie wrote: »

Often enough, unfortunate that cyclists don't tend to look beyond the vehicle immediately behind them

How do you look beyond an object that occupies your field of vision?

Macy0161

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

Traffic coming against, stuck behind another vehicle... But that's the whole point - single out there and, if not you, some other idiot behind will try and squeeze past.

fwiw my current daily driver is a van, and up to last year, we also had a 6m motorhome (for the previous 10 plus years, holidays spend around Ireland). I live in what is a tourist area and cycling hotspot. I've never experienced these massive, and particularly, long delays behind cyclists. Even in the motorhome, which certainly wasn't nippy, I spent many many more minutes stuck behind slower moving cars. My experience has been because I'm respectful of cyclists - don't drive up their arse, try and squeeze by or otherwise intimidate them out of my way - I've been waved through when safe to do so.

flatface

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

Twice in your lifetime on the road you have seen a cyclist hold up several cars for several minutes??

How does this fit into the overall tapestry of road delays and inconveniences? Roadworks, car crashes, traffic jams, red lights, broken lights.. seriously how big is this a problem?

My annoyance scale goes kinda like this:

legal things that inconvenience me < illegal things that inconvenience me < illegal things that endanger my life

Those that bang on about being held up by legal traffic must have very sheltered road experiences to even hit their top 10 list.

AndrewJRenko

Spook_ie wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often does it happen that there is a queue of ten vehicles behind a cyclist?

Often enough, unfortunate that cyclists don't tend to look beyond the vehicle immediately behind them

How often? And where - given that we're talking about weekends, generally earlyish, on quieter roads - where have you seen these queues of 10 building up?

Spook_ie

Don't Chute! wrote: »

Whats this "propaganda" bull**** you're talking about?
Also, "when i'm prepping to hoof it...." Says it all really.

Hoofing it, do you think I should be overtaking a group of cyclists travelling at 15Kph at 20Kph or hoof it at 40-50Kph, says it all really cyclist not knowing anything about driving safely.

As to the propaganda bull**** the internets are full of it perpetuated by the likes of Dr Mike McKillen, Cian Ginty etc.

AndrewJRenko

the_pen_turner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How often does it happen that there is a queue of ten vehicles behind a cyclist?

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

Twice in your lifetime? What roads was this on?

Exodus 1811

Spook_ie wrote: »

When you say you are only holding up a motorist, bus whatever for a 30 seconds, you're not, you're holding up the next person in the queue by 30 seconds if there's a queue of 10 vehicles then you actually hold up the last to arrive in the queue by maybe 5 or more minutes before they get to overtake you, again a bit of cop on from cycling clubs and
Also if you want to cycle two abreast please stop waving at me to back off when I'm prepping to hoof it past you at the next safe overtaking opportunity. I'm not likely to double the overtake I'll be in any danger zone for as short a time as possible.

So, what is your solution? If I am traveling in a group of 4 riders, where do you want us to go? Outline it so that there’s minimal risk of you hurting myself or the occupants of your vehicle. Being delayed in traffic is something we deal with all the time, but it’s only when a cyclist is involved it gets people all up in the air?

Spook_ie

Exodus 1811 wrote: »

So, what is your solution? If I am traveling in a group of 4 riders, where do you want us to go? Outline it so that there’s minimal risk of you hurting myself or the occupants of your vehicle. Being delayed in traffic is something we deal with all the time, but it’s only when a cyclist is involved it gets people all up in the air?

I want you to cycle with due consideration for other road users, unhappily it would seem the only people groups of cyclists are concerned with is themselves.

A bit of cop on would go a long way, much the same as I expect a bit of cop on from tractor drivers etc.

Seth Brundle

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I have seen it twice. Both times because the cyclist wouldn't pull in and traffic coming againt

aah would you stop with your nonsense!

AndrewJRenko

Spook_ie wrote: »

Exodus 1811 wrote: »

So, what is your solution? If I am traveling in a group of 4 riders, where do you want us to go? Outline it so that there’s minimal risk of you hurting myself or the occupants of your vehicle. Being delayed in traffic is something we deal with all the time, but it’s only when a cyclist is involved it gets people all up in the air?

I want you to cycle with due consideration for other road users, unhappily it would seem the only people groups of cyclists are concerned with is themselves.

A bit of cop on would go a long way, much the same as I expect a bit of cop on from tractor drivers etc.

Do you pull over in heavy urban traffic to let faster cyclists through? Due consideration, bit of cop on etc.

Macy0161

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you pull over in heavy urban traffic to let faster cyclists through? Due consideration, bit of cop on etc.

Pulls in OK I'd say - to stop any filtering on the left! :pac:

Hurrache

Spook_ie wrote: »

When you say you are only holding up a motorist, bus whatever for a 30 seconds, you're not, you're holding up the next person in the queue by 30 seconds if there's a queue of 10 vehicles then you actually hold up the last to arrive in the queue by maybe 5 or more minutes before they get to overtake you, again a bit of cop on from cycling clubs and groups and a bit less propaganda.

Says the taxi driver's Goebbels.

The situation you describe doesn't happen.

f@steddie

Spook_ie wrote: »

I want you to cycle with due consideration for other road users, unhappily it would seem the only people groups of cyclists are concerned with is themselves.

A bit of cop on would go a long way, much the same as I expect a bit of cop on from tractor drivers etc.

Cyclists cycle 2 abreast because it's safer. It has been said many times in this thread.


You're right... a bit of cop on would go a long way. Unless you have a woman in labour or a dying man in your car you can probably wait a minute or two.

Spook_ie

f@steddie wrote: »

Cyclists cycle 2 abreast because it's safer. It has been said many times in this thread.


You're right... a bit of cop on would go a long way. Unless you have a woman in labour or a dying man in your car you can probably wait a minute or two.

Unhappily though I have cop on it, would seem there is a majority of cyclists who don't have enough room in their tight lycra shorts to actually bring their cop on out on group rides with them and instead leave it on the hall stand or in the wardrobe.

Spook_ie

Hurrache wrote: »

Says the taxi driver's Goebbels.

The situation you describe doesn't happen.

Does Goebbels qualify for Godwin's?

Hurrache

There's some amount of posters on this thread fascinated with men who wear tight clothing. You can get your desires satisfied on other internet pages without fantasising over posters here.

Hurrache

Spook_ie wrote: »

Does Goebbels qualify for Godwin's?

As much as a taxi driver complaining about other road users.

Spook_ie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you pull over in heavy urban traffic to let faster cyclists through? Due consideration, bit of cop on etc.

On the basis that a cyclist has enough room to filter on the left why would I? Or are you suggesting that when the local CC are out and about we let them past until on the open road, please clarify your train of thought.

Spook_ie

Macy0161 wrote: »

Pulls in OK I'd say - to stop any filtering on the left! :pac:

If I pull into the left you are still able to overtake on the right, the only time I actually do pull in close to the left is

A When a passenger is alighting

B When I'm turning left

Both reasons to prevent a cyclist who's not paying attention from overtaking on the left when circumstances make it dangerous to do so, however, if you want to bring something into the topic about taxi drivers or other motorists routinely driving 2 abreast please feel free.

Spook_ie

Hurrache wrote: »

As much as a taxi driver complaining about other road users.

I'd happily take you as a fare to prove my quality of driving, until such time though I feel your assertions on my abilities rate as nothing more than unwarranted insults

AndrewJRenko

Spook_ie wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you pull over in heavy urban traffic to let faster cyclists through? Due consideration, bit of cop on etc.

On the basis that a cyclist has enough room to filter on the left why would I? Or are you suggesting that when the local CC are out and about we let them past until on the open road, please clarify your train of thought.

Why? Due consideration of course. Do you make sure that they have enough room to filter through?