Riding two abreast - Legailty and Morality

rick_chasey

Morality?

For riding two abreast?

awavey

have people seen the current Halfords Keep On Rollin' ad though, as I was suprised it showed at least to begin with a couple of cyclists riding two abreast on a road (and not wearing hi-viz either).

Gets a bit surreal after that, but I wonder if the seed of idea is planted it will start to have an impact on the its wrong crowd...ok I know who am I kidding...but its interesting to see at least.

Ringpeace

buddy_club wrote:

Well the rule is that when you are overtaking a cyclist/group of cyclists you should give them the same space as a car would require, so you should go into the oncoming lane. So riding two abreast is legal and perfectly fine, however it is a bit inconsiderate on narrower roads where cars cannot overtake if you ride two abreast.

A bit inconsiderate is an understatement. Unfortunately I see it regularly on a road close to me, steep hill, blind corner - the two guys having a mothers meeting and dawdling up the hill - when in fact it's close whether a car can overtake one rider safely. This is in a built up area - near no proper rides. Completely unecessary and gives us all a bad name.

Sadly I am seeing more bad behaviour daily by morons on bikes. A lot of the time it is by older MAMILs and middle aged bell ends on MTBs. We all expect chavs on a Sports Direct or nicked bike to be riding on the pavement and without lights. Not really excusable when you have a £1000+ bike, lycra, helmet, high viz - OOPs forgot the lights!

In fact I was just going to start a new thread about cycling etiquette but will just add it here. Apart from seeing full sus MTB MAMILS riding through a pedestrianised city centre, in threes just now there's this.

I was turning right onto a very busy hill. Approaching the hill looking out for traffic - appeared clear but saw a middle aged bloke on a MTB coming down the hill so completely stopped - assumed he was coming past. This tool decided to just turn off in front of me - without making any indication he was going to.

Naturally I gave him some choice words. I saw that he stopped, didn't hear what he said, called him another 4 letter word and went off on the steep hill - that was on my way home.

Got to the top, descended the other side - next thing I know, Napolean Dynamite is in front of me, absolutely shattered and skidding in front of me, blocking my path! WTF?

He's getting in my way. I ask him what the hell he's doing. He asks why I called him whatever 4 letter deserved name I did. I say because he is, I'm waiting to turn and you don't bother indicating. He then proceeds to tell me that it's a cycle lane and he doesn't need to - It isn't - no markings on road - but one of the pointless "pavement" step ups, just in front of where I was turning right - perhaps 2 metres in length - cheers council - spending my money wisely!

I try to get past this moron - who has chased me around 700 metres up and down hills, on a MTB, just to find out why he was called a 4 letter word - pretty obvious no pal?

He's still in my face. I got off the bike and asked him what his problem was and if he wanted something. He did, he wanted me to tell him why I called him a complete +++t and I called it again to his face. It's a cycle lane was his, convinced brain, response.

I told him he was wrong, again, asked him if he wanted something and said I was in a hurry to get home and relate this terribly boring anecdote to fellow users of BR who really couldn't give a +++t!

On the flipside, generally it is idiotic motorists who wind me up - I guess they are a lot more prevalent on the roads. Today, running lights - as I always do - and weather was very dull, a 4x4 driver held way back, allowed me to move into the centre of the road when turning right AND SIGNALLING my intentions and an Audi TT driver coming the other way allowed me to turn.

Sometimes you just can't tell. From experience 4x4 and Audi drivers aren't the most cyclist friendly - guess I had luck with the motorists and not much with this little middle aged guy on a MTB that had obviously never seen a "mountain" .

I would have been quite happy to take things out a different way - even though I had forgotten it as soon as said. Probably better this way?

He was the type of guy that just wouldn't take no for an answer. Chasing someone up and down a steep hill, when you are on your way smacks of reasonablness!

If someone called me a naughty word, when I had been a bit of a massive +++t I'd either wave my hand in apology or ignore it.

No doubt my rant will get lots of people calling me a massive +++t. You know what, like you, you don't know me - bring it on - lol!

Phew - rant over. Much better than someone getting injured or getting locked up.

Cheers!

P.S - if anyone has seen Rev he was just like him lookswise but not personality wise. Personality wise he was like one of those yappy little dogs - that just deserve a kick. The push out my face didn't do it for him or getting told to f off.

In all honesty, if the situation wasn't so public, which he knew - I'd have just chinned him. But very glad I didn't...

Hope I don't bump into this bumptious little fellow again - LOL!

Got a pic of the guy to put it in the REV context. [url][/url]

"Darling, I was just riding my bike. The receptionist? No chance - just check out my hand on hips. I am NEVER in the wrong"!

Greasy Smarmpot - LOL! Welcome to the internet...

CXrider

Ride two abreast, but assist drivers by giving them an indication if its clear to pass. If it's a narrow road where a car wouldn't be able to get by, then file down to single file.

I will go along with this but , in addition, as one or two people have said - self-preservation comes first. If it doesn't feel VERY safe then don't risk it.

Given the recent spate of deaths in London and the massive increase in cycling as a leisure and fitness pastime over the last handful of years (Olympics and TdF have helped) then the Government should probably start thinking about EDUCATION!

By this I mean I would like to see Advert, similar to the motorcycle THINK BIKE! campaign but aimed at the public being aware of cyclists on the road and the rights that we/they have.
This would help massively and it should be championed by the British Cycling Org.

Though I am usually against legal interference, it might even help to make some new clear rules for road cyclists and for road drivers meeting them.

slowbike

Ringpiece - you can't assume an indicator is showing any intention of the driver to make your way clear. They can indicate left and carry straight on - perhaps then pulling into the side just past you.

Same with cyclists ....

I think it's quite funny that a MTB managed to scalp you.

markhewitt1978

philthy3 wrote:

socistep wrote:

It winds car drivers up simply because they think it's illegal. There is an assumption among car drivers that cyclists cannot cycle side by side. They don't whine about horse riders doing it or them leaving a pile of shite for them to drive through.

I think that's right. As a nation we are very concerned about sticking to 'rules' and we get very wound up and take it as a personal affront of others aren't sticking to the rules. Even if those rules are entirely imaginary.

markhewitt1978

Ringpeace. You need to calm down you are part of the problem. Take a look at your attitude as at the moment you are more of a menace than any of the people you are ranting about.

StillGoing

Ringpiece: If anything, where a road is dangerously narrow to pass even in single file, cyclists protect themselves further by being 2 abreast. Any car driver that fancies their chances of squeezing by, especially as you describe on a hill where a struggling rider may involuntarily wobble, will think twice if the obstacle is larger. Are they supposed to stop and let traffic by even if in single file and then struggle getting moving again if this hill causes so many problems? I don't think so.

Your post reads as if these riders struggling to get up this hill have no right to be on the road simply because of their age. What a sympathetic attitude to have towards fellow cyclists and what a boost to their confidence it must be when they come across you on a ride. Are you jealous or something of the fact that they can afford upper end kit? Does it wind you up so much that their equipment far exceeds their ability? Grow up FFS and you might, just might, appreciate seeing lesser mortals than your perceived self having a go at cycling. :roll:

rickeverett

CXrider wrote:

Ride two abreast, but assist drivers by giving them an indication if its clear to pass. If it's a narrow road where a car wouldn't be able to get by, then file down to single file.

I will go along with this but , in addition, as one or two people have said - self-preservation comes first. If it doesn't feel VERY safe then don't risk it.

Given the recent spate of deaths in London and the massive increase in cycling as a leisure and fitness pastime over the last handful of years (Olympics and TdF have helped) then the Government should probably start thinking about EDUCATION!

By this I mean I would like to see Advert, similar to the motorcycle THINK BIKE! campaign but aimed at the public being aware of cyclists on the road and the rights that we/they have.
This would help massively and it should be championed by the British Cycling Org.

Though I am usually against legal interference, it might even help to make some new clear rules for road cyclists and for road drivers meeting them.

TBH, I think some cyclists need to take more responsibility for others around them and actually look at there own behaviour. Like you said I have a feeling some kind of training / education needs to be implemented. Correct me on this- but I think a cycle is the only "road" user who doesn't get any form of training. You can go out after buying a bike and ride on a A road. Even if the person didn't learn to drive and has no idea about roads or anything about the highway code, road signs or how to ride correctly. Horse riders etc usually have some form of training. ???

Behaviour is pretty shoddy in town / city / commuting cycling. Crossing over pedestrian crossings, running reds, weaving in and out, going up the inside of cars and large vehicles etc. Cutting in, cutting up.
Takes a quick look at vids on Youtube to see this. I also see it myself driving in town and wonder wtf they are thinking.

Seems to be particular groups - no helmeted MTB weaver type, oblivious commuter darting up the inside type, kids/teens/young riders on pave and road type, mr poser thinking his kit is superior and crossings/lights inferior type.
I wouldn't take the stance that its always the driver and cars fault.

markhewitt1978

Which is why we will never get anywhere with cycling safety in this country when even on a cyclists forum we have people saying it's all cyclists fault.

rickeverett

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Which is why we will never get anywhere with cycling safety in this country when even on a cyclists forum we have people saying it's all cyclists fault.

who the F said that ?


We wont get anywhere if people don't take responsibility on any side.
:roll:


so its not the fault of a cycle to go down the left hand side of a turning large vehicle? not the fault of a cycle smashing into a pedestrian at a crossing ?

Look at this Youtube Channel from a ACTUAL CYCLIST and his encounters ....
https://www.youtube.com/user/sillycyclists/videos

markhewitt1978

My point is that every time there is a call for cycling safety there are cries from the likes of yourself that well look at these stupid cyclists. Just because some do stupid things strengthens the need for safety measures.

QuarterPounder

My local country park has just had its roads redone in preparation for the commonwealth triathlon, it's a nice wide road with a 15mph limit through the park with very light traffic and loads of cyclists. Yet a fortnight ago a friend and I were given a mouthful for riding side by side, and probably at or above the 15mph limit. What is it with these drivers? Bad enough on the main roads but through a country park surely they expect to be held up by people using the park for it's intended use, no?

Bozman

Yesterday I rode up to a club run which I'd guess was the slow group, they were riding along two or three abreast at about 16mph in a 50, I rode past them on the white line but due to the nature of the road cars couldn't pass.
To me they should've been in single file over that stretch of road, you're going to wind drivers up and in the end the driver will make a rash decision that could endanger somebodies life, all for the sake of not riding single file for a couple of miles.

CXrider

What about cyclists like these putting road drivers in danger!

http://a3.img.mobypicture.com/5f0a60b6e ... 1_view.jpg

On a serious note, I think it is possible that one day we will have to have a test and license (and tax disc - bloody Government) to ride a bike on a ROAD. Also, daytime lights will be mandatory.
So long as we don't have to have a full size number plate! Though, if the above happens then some form of ID under the saddle may be brought in.

The Government need to add something about cyclists into the driving test (written and practical) which will 'start' to raise awareness.

DavidJB

What I do love is if you're two abreast you get honks even when you're on a big long straight wide quiet country b-road at 6am...but you ride behind the other other person, out to thier right where you would if you were 2AB no one honks you

CXrider

DavidJB wrote:

What I do love is if you're two abreast you get honks even when you're on a big long straight wide quiet country b-road at 6am...but you ride behind the other other person, out to thier right where you would if you were 2AB no one honks you

Yeah, I think the most common opinion here is that drivers just do not like riders two abreast whether they believe it is rude, unfair and unjustified blocking of the road or just that they think it is actually illegal to do so. :roll:

This is why I believe new drivers should be made more aware, and current drivers can be targeted with 'bikers awareness' campaigns. Just my 2p.

slowbike

CXrider wrote:

DavidJB wrote:

What I do love is if you're two abreast you get honks even when you're on a big long straight wide quiet country b-road at 6am...but you ride behind the other other person, out to thier right where you would if you were 2AB no one honks you

Yeah, I think the most common opinion here is that drivers just do not like riders two abreast whether they believe it is rude, unfair and unjustified blocking of the road or just that they think it is actually illegal to do so. :roll:

This is why I believe new drivers should be made more aware, and current drivers can be targeted with 'bikers awareness' campaigns. Just my 2p.

I think the most common problem is that drivers often have a skewed opinion on what is right/wrong anyway - cyclists 2 abreast is just one of them.

the other day I heard that, whilst driving a car it's illegal to perform an emergency stop to avoid fox cubs in the road as the car behind may crash into you and if their passengers are killed then it's all the driver of the car in front's fault ....
and that was from someone I expected to be a safe and knowledgeable driver ...

izza

All very clear how to behave. You just need the correct hand signals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-zJK3HnM_s&hd=1

HellsCyclist

CXrider wrote:

I have never known the answer to this.

Is riding two abreast ever actually illegal or just not good form?
It sounds silly as I type it but is there anything in the highway code about it?
I haven't seen that in 25 years! :oops:

Of course, there are some safety issues as two riders is logically a larger target than one.
However, I am starting to think that its a false safety.
Case in point - I was riding with a few mates and as we are newbies we are moving all over the place anyway and rarely nice and singular linear. More than once a car would just miss us as it tries to keep in our side of the road with oncoming traffic.
When two abreast the car HAS to move into the other side of the road and it's very safe as there is a lot more space to play with.

I would add that I like to ride two abreast when out with my mates or my father as I am a bit mutt and jeff in the left ear and we have a conversation but its only once in a while and nearly always only on the country roads (we ride in the weekday and its very quiet) and i always look behind me before pulling alongside.

The thing is, about 1 in 10 cars will press their horn in clear anger and others will shout profanities.
I do not know who is the right so I mainly don't do a lot of twp abreast out of fear of being embrrassed by angry motorists. It comes to patience I know and I am the first to admit that I don't like being held up when in the car.

The thing that my mate argues is that if we were a slow moving car, or a tractor, or had a problem then the car would have to overtake us anyway using the other side of the road. Bikes are a LOT quicker to overtake given relative speeds so what is the bloody problem?
I suspect it comes down to motorists having zero patience although we are all Mr Slow when we come across a horse and everyone knows they need a wide birth.
Shouldn't cyclists be afforded the same courtesy?

If you say that cyclists don't tend to jump out when spooked then you haven't cycled behind my 67 year old father!

Personally I like to avoid the potential to cause anger or confrontations. For this reason I would not cycle 2 abreast. I also often yield to motorists behind me even when not strictly necessary. Its just less hassle for me in the long run. Not keen on motorists driving behind me for too long.

When Im driving, people cycling 2 abreast on an open road doesnt bother me. Plenty of opportunity to pass. On a busy city street then it would do my nut in just like all slow drivers do. I dont shout abuse unless they create a risk for me.

markhewitt1978

If I'm riding with one other person then it's sensible to single up more often, but if you're riding with 4 or more then you'll want to be 2 by 2 most of the time as it's easier for cars to overtake.

dee4life2005

I was out riding with a friend a couple of weeks back, and we normally drop to single file if we hear / see a car approaching from the rear. On this occasion we were cycling into a fairly strong headwind, so we couldn't hear the cars approaching from behind. All of these cars could pass safely as it was a wide country road, and riding two abreast we were taking up at most 25% of the road width.

The only driver that had a problem with this, and blasted it's horn as it passed, was a car heading in the opposite direction who we had not inconvenienced in the slightest ... and there were no cars behind us at that time, so god only knows what his problem was. Needless to say it was a BMW driver, as usual. :evil:

CXrider

dee4life2005 wrote:

I was out riding with a friend a couple of weeks back, and we normally drop to single file if we hear / see a car approaching from the rear. On this occasion we were cycling into a fairly strong headwind, so we couldn't hear the cars approaching from behind. All of these cars could pass safely as it was a wide country road, and riding two abreast we were taking up at most 25% of the road width.

The only driver that had a problem with this, and blasted it's horn as it passed, was a car heading in the opposite direction who we had not inconvenienced in the slightest ... and there were no cars behind us at that time, so god only knows what his problem was. Needless to say it was a BMW driver, as usual. :evil:

Ha. don't get me started on BMW drivers!

Rodrego Hernandez

the highway code is a guide, not the law.

As long as you are abiding to the law you are OK. As far as I know, the law states that as long as you are on your side of the road, you can ride as many abreast as is safe.

Obviously this isn't practical in many situations and traditionally social and training rides are 2 abreast.

Using a bit of common sense, groups will single out / wave traffic past / pull over and try to minimise traffic disruption should there be a build up of traffic behind. A little consideration helps but so does knowing the law. Being considerate helps all of us.

StillGoing

dee4life2005 wrote:

I was out riding with a friend a couple of weeks back, and we normally drop to single file if we hear / see a car approaching from the rear. On this occasion we were cycling into a fairly strong headwind, so we couldn't hear the cars approaching from behind. All of these cars could pass safely as it was a wide country road, and riding two abreast we were taking up at most 25% of the road width.

The only driver that had a problem with this, and blasted it's horn as it passed, was a car heading in the opposite direction who we had not inconvenienced in the slightest ... and there were no cars behind us at that time, so god only knows what his problem was. Needless to say it was a BMW driver, as usual. :evil:

Simply because the bell-end assumes it is illegal to cycle 2 abreast.

CXrider

Thinking of getting a new cycling shirt to point out that riding two abreast is not breaking the law!

daniel_b

CXrider wrote:

Thinking of getting a new cycling shirt to point out that riding two abreast is not breaking the law!

Riding on the wrong side of the road is though

jeannot18

This is what councils should put more on the roads. I do get really nervous sometimes when i a vehicle overtake me and is about 30 cm away from me, with no incoming traffic. Why they do that, I wonder.
J

CXrider

Daniel B wrote:

CXrider wrote:

Thinking of getting a new cycling shirt to point out that riding two abreast is not breaking the law!

Riding on the wrong side of the road is though

Haha, yeah, bloody yanks...

Mind you, their roads are seriously wide. I have been over there twice but never cycled.

CXrider

I am definately noticing, quite logically, that where cycling is common, such as Box Hill, that you you get more understanding motorists, even when they are stuck behind you for ages.

Still.. had a mad BMW M3 driver whiz past at what must have been 100 MPH on a country road on Sunday during the 3 counties cycle ride in Berkshire.