Cyclists who cause road rage
- Thread starter ForssAwakens
- Start date
Centralscrutinizer
Well-known member
That should make my short road ride on the way to the mountain bike trails more entertaining 
Muttley
Well-known member
When did/does this come into force?
The giving way to pedestrians thing is something that I already do if I can do it safely, I would rather not stop if I have twenty tons of badly driven HGV two foot from my bumper. From a pedestrians point of view some drivers approach left turns at speeds which would not allow them to stop even if they wished to.
The giving way to pedestrians thing is something that I already do if I can do it safely, I would rather not stop if I have twenty tons of badly driven HGV two foot from my bumper. From a pedestrians point of view some drivers approach left turns at speeds which would not allow them to stop even if they wished to.
BoroBosco
Well-known member
This is only a slight change to the rule as pedestrians already have priority if they have started to cross
Duffman
Well-known member
I find cyclists on occasions a little bit irritating. In Ingleby we have a lot of cycle paths across the vast majority of the estate but the proper Lycra lads refuse to use them. What is most irritating is when on fairly busy roads - the main road up to the roundabout to the Industrial Estate they choose to ride two abreast causing traffic to back up and when the perfectly good cycle lane a few feet away is empty. Why do they do that? If people toot or comment to move over to single file they get a right mouthful off them about their right to cycle two abreast
Last edited:
RedAsABeetroot
Well-known member
In many areas where there are pedestrians there are islands in the middle of the road to allow pedestrians to break their crossing. You can't fit a bike and a car through the gap at the same time and quite a few car drivers only see the cyclist that they need to overtake and not the obstruction beyond them. This results in the worst drivers trying to overtake and then either stopping dead in the centre of the road or swerveing back into the cyclist's path. This is why people ride two abreast which is perfectly legal.
RedAsABeetroot
Well-known member
Ps try using the cycle paths on a bike. They are generally poor and overrun with dog walkers. This is why people use the road.
Last edited:
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Its legally required to ride 2 abreast so prevent accidents happening. The bike has as much right to the road as a car
Duffman
Well-known member
Thank you for the replies. If you are cycling with another person are you saying you are legally required to cycle side by side? I never knew that and does that mean people who ride in single file are breaking the law? On the other response, what is the point of creating thousands of miles of safe cycling infrastructure if as you say they are not fit for purpose or suitable to be used by cyclists. What a complete waste of money?
Fattyfoggon
Well-known member
think every motorist should try riding a bike on a road, loss count of the number of times I have nearly written off by car which overtakes me then realises at the last minute that he does not have enough room because of oncoming traffic and swerves back in, worse are cars or vans with trailers and they forget how long the trailer is, and that's just me by myself so you can see why they would cycle double breast reduces the chances of motorists trying to squeeze by
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Sorry when I said legally I meant it was in the Highway Code. Not sure if the Highway Code can be enforced by law.
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
Because a lot of times they're not safe, and not fit for purpose.
Many are a waste of money, because they're largely an afterthought and designed by people who are ticking a box rather than trying to encourage safe cycling.
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
I think what you're saying is that we're allowed to cycle side by side (two abreast) not legally required to do so.
RedAsABeetroot
Well-known member
There isn't much safe cycling infrastructure at all. There is a lot of token gesture shared cycle/pedestrian paths which force you to give way at every road crossing. These are generally not suited to cycling (though they probably are ideal for young children to cycle on) and so I don't really consider them as cycling infrastructure. Cycle paths on the roads are a white line painted too close to the curb, full of rubbish and are treated as car parks despite this being illegal.
ThatFragranceGuy
Well-known member
Many are covered in cracks and bumps where weeds push through, or tree roots.
They're often used by children or other slow moving people which makes them dangerous. I nearly crashed into a kid once when I was going full pelt, went to overtake her using the path side so as to give her a wide berth and called out ahead, she had headphones on though and suddenly swung out in front of me and nearly sent me flying. I don't use them anymore because of incidents like that
ThatFragranceGuy
Well-known member
It's amazing how little this happens when you have a helmet mounted camera on that they can see
RedAsABeetroot
Well-known member
Two dogs fighting and a dog on a long lead on the opposite side of the path to its owner have taken me off twice on cycle paths.
newusername
Well-known member
Unfortunately it is only illegal if it is a solid white line, if it is dashed then normal/no parking restrictions apply.