good cycling article on Carbuzz.co.uk

jimmypippa

Good to see a car website with an article like this...

EKE_38BPM

As the OP says, its a good article, but I don't understand the bit in bold:

good cycling article on Carbuzz.co.uk wrote:

Allow plenty of space
When overtaking a cyclist you’re required to give them as much room as you would a car. They may need to swerve to avoid hazards. Always anticipate that there may be a pothole, oily, wet or icy patch or some other obstruction. Cyclists endanger themselves by cycling in straight lines!

Maybe the author is saying that cyclist who wobble around get, literally, more wiggle room from motorists and cyclists who ride with laser-like precision are the victims of dangerously close passes.
Maybe the article just needs an emoticon of some sort to show that that sentence is supposed to be a joke.

notsoblue

Surprisingly good article!

meanredspider

EKE_38BPM wrote:

As the OP says, its a good article, but I don't understand the bit in bold:

good cycling article on Carbuzz.co.uk wrote:

Allow plenty of space
When overtaking a cyclist you’re required to give them as much room as you would a car. They may need to swerve to avoid hazards. Always anticipate that there may be a pothole, oily, wet or icy patch or some other obstruction. Cyclists endanger themselves by cycling in straight lines!

Maybe the author is saying that cyclist who wobble around get, literally, more wiggle room from motorists and cyclists who ride with laser-like precision are the victims of dangerously close passes.
Maybe the article just needs an emoticon of some sort to show that that sentence is supposed to be a joke.

I think they are trying to say that if we rode in a straight line we'd hit potholes, oil, ice etc. It is odd and ambiguous.

dhope

meanredspider wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

As the OP says, its a good article, but I don't understand the bit in bold:

good cycling article on Carbuzz.co.uk wrote:

Allow plenty of space
When overtaking a cyclist you’re required to give them as much room as you would a car. They may need to swerve to avoid hazards. Always anticipate that there may be a pothole, oily, wet or icy patch or some other obstruction. Cyclists endanger themselves by cycling in straight lines!

Maybe the author is saying that cyclist who wobble around get, literally, more wiggle room from motorists and cyclists who ride with laser-like precision are the victims of dangerously close passes.
Maybe the article just needs an emoticon of some sort to show that that sentence is supposed to be a joke.

I think they are trying to say that if we rode in a straight line we'd hit potholes, oil, ice etc. It is odd and ambiguous.

Yep, strangely worded but after reading twice I assumed it meant that we need to avoid obstacles so we'll not cycle in a straight line.

StorckSpeed

Really good article and enjoyed reading it - BIG UP TO CARBUZZ for this..

bails87

Good article, one I'll be sharing I think.

Cafewanda

Wot bails87 sed.

Origamist

It's a very good piece and it has all the hallmarks of cycling campaigner Carlton Reid (I see he is credited at the foot of the article). What's really nice is that it has been inserted into Carbuzz and not Bikeradar.

The line about cyclists endangering themselves by riding in straight lines is a bit tongue in cheek, but there is a line of thought that suggest that cyclists who appear more unpredictable (perhaps by using a deliberate wobble), get more room. It also conditions motorists to expect and anticipate cyclists changing position in order to negotiate hazards that may not be immediately obvious.

I'm not entirely convinced by this tactic (I know Chris Juden of the CTC is a firm believer) but I can see how deviation can get you more attention and possibly more room if a driver considers you a bit erratic. However, I can also see some pretty clear disbenefits of consistently changing your lateral position if someone is behind in order to potentially eke out more room/passing distance.

Torvid

I can't see how advising anyone to wobble is safe, what you want from people on the road is predicability.

bails87

True, but what I want from people on the road (drivers) is space. If I give a little wobble, (more a case of moving my body, rather than actually weaving the bike) I seem to get more space.

Kieran_Burns

Torvid wrote:

I can't see how advising anyone to wobble is safe, what you want from people on the road is predicability.

I think the point is that if a driver sees a cyclist set in a straight line he will predict the path and drive accordingly. Giving only the required room (as he sees it) to pass.

Now this required room may be insufficient / dangerous / inconsiderate / yada yada but is brought about by the decision made by the driver based upon predictable events.

If the cyclist is 'wobbling' or veering from a narrow course, the driver's decision making process will be forced to take this into account; and the more unpredictable nature of the cyclists path requires greater room.

There's clear evidence of this when you think about how drivers attitudes change during the longer nights. We've all got anecdotal evidence of cars giving us more room, or greater consideration (happened to me again this morning) when brighter lights make us seem 'larger' on the road.

Torvid

I just don't see it like when i'm in a car and I see a cyclist doing the wobble thing all I think some d1ck in his corsa is going to clip you. The people that are affected by the wobble to give you more room are mostly the same people that would just give you more room anyway. When I'm on a bike and I get a wobbler in front of me it worries me even more most of the time cause i'm spending more time looking for what they are fantom avoiding and not the rest of the traffic flow as closely as I other would.

I know we arn't racing and I know we arnt group riding but the first thing I was taught on group riding is that you hold your line it makes it safer for everyone.

bails87

I'm assuming the 'wobble' you're talking about is like the one that I do, that only results in movement to one way or the other by a couple of inches. If people are veering out by a few feet without looking at what's coming then that is silly. When I'm driving, a 'wobbly' cyclist isn't a problem because I'm not close enough to them for even a large wobble to be a problem.

FWIW, I took the "cyclists endanger themselves" line to mean that riding in a straight line, straight over a manhole cover/ice/diesel/oil/pothole is dangerous, so drivers should be leaving 'wobble' space in case there's something like that ahead. That way cyclists can avoid it.

Torvid

Yeah i'm not talking about a couple of inches most of the fine examples I see leaving B'Ham look like they're on a slalom run all over the bike lanes.

bails87

Torvid wrote:

Yeah i'm not talking about a couple of inches most of the fine examples I see leaving B'Ham look like they're on a slalom run all over the bike lanes.

Well you probably shouldn't be driving in those anyway

Seriously though, I have seen one person on a bike who was in a very high gear, and not just 'nodding' but pushing down with their whole body each time they pushed a pedal down. That meant that they veered out by about a metre each time, from against the kerb, to a metre away, back to brushing the kerb, back out again. To be fair, if I was riding there I'd have been a metre or so away from the kerb, but at least I'd have been consistent.

But it worked, I gave them loads of space!

My 'wobbles' are more like twitches, the wheels probably follow the same path, but I just give the illusion of movement, just to remind the driver that I'm not on rails and I won't necessarily be going in a perfectly straight line.

bails87

Back on topic: http://www.carbuzz.co.uk/blog/Road-Tax-Doesnt-Exist

rick_chasey

bails87 wrote:

Back on topic: http://www.carbuzz.co.uk/blog/Road-Tax-Doesnt-Exist

Below the line:

I bought a beer in the pub but couldn't get a seat so I asked someone who was drinking orange juice to give me theirs; it's only fair as I'd paid duty on my pint; pubs aren't for lightweights!

Gallywomack

bails87 wrote:

Seriously though, I have seen one person on a bike who was in a very high gear, and not just 'nodding' but pushing down with their whole body each time they pushed a pedal down. That meant that they veered out by about a metre each time, from against the kerb, to a metre away, back to brushing the kerb, back out again. To be fair, if I was riding there I'd have been a metre or so away from the kerb, but at least I'd have been consistent.

But it worked, I gave them loads of space!

Wasn't this bloke was it?

notsoblue

bails87 wrote:

My 'wobbles' are more like twitches, the wheels probably follow the same path, but I just give the illusion of movement, just to remind the driver that I'm not on rails and I won't necessarily be going in a perfectly straight line.

Same here, but I've still had comments from motorists that I was "weaving all over the road". And if I'm honest I can see why. But theres so much to avoid when you're near the kerb, I'm not going to bunny hop or drive straight over potholes and nasty looking debris, I'm going to ride around it. If only they all followed the highway code and gave cyclists enough space when overtaking, then it wouldn't be a problem

Bassjunkieuk

Re: The wobble technique, I think the whole problem is that SOME drivers don't give us enough space when passing. I saw SOME as the vast majority do an adequate job. But for each rather close pass I've had I'll say I've had another driver who has passed almost as the highway code shows, giving me a nice clear 1/2 to a full lane clearance.

The whole point of leaving a decent gap is to allow for a rider to deviate from their line a bit, after all the driver isn't to know if the cyclists wants to go round a pothole or drain cover and this could need to be done at a moments notice which may mean the cyclist can't always shoulder check. As the overtaking vehicle the duty of car is with the driver NOT the cyclist to ensure it is completed safely.

The article itself is very good and I think the road-tax one is a cracker, I have a few people I could forward that one onto :-)

The Rookie

I guess the 'wobble' has the same psychological effect as that alleged for non helmet wearers in that article, it conveys an increased air of vulnerability and therefore the driver takes more appropriate levels of care, this sounds to me like subscribing greater awareness and intelligence to most drivers that evidence suggests is the case!

Simon