- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Video: Shared use shenanigans - rider races himself on road vs new infrastructure
A road.cc reader has raced himself on the road against riding the same route on a new shared-use path - and there's no prizes for guessing which was quicker.
The video, from Dave in Dorset - a regular contributor to our Near Miss of the Day feature - was shot on Wallisdown Road in Poole.
We featured a similar video from Bristol back in December.
In that case too, it turned out to be much quicker to be on the road rather than the shared-use path.
Of course, we are big fans here at road.cc of fully segregated infrastructure that keeps cyclists away from both motor vehicles and pedestrians.
But, with anecdotal evidence suggesting that more people are taking to bikes during the current lockdown, whether for infrastructure or commuting to key jobs, where that does not exist, shared use paths do cater to the needs of slower, less confident riders.
For the more experienced, of course, the orad remains there.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- stonojnr 7 min 8 sec ago
The Diverge may have mud guard mounts for Specializeds plug n play fender system, that involes you drilling holes in the mudguard to get the right...
- perce 14 min 36 sec ago
I think it's quite sad that you have to reply to your own comments.
- timscottellis 25 min 2 sec ago
As someone who has spent a considerable amount of time moving trees, I can say it can be done with a good chance of survival. It need some care...
- Patrick9-32 25 min 37 sec ago
"They say they want 1.5 meters but don't give themselves 1.5 meters??"...
- tootsie323 42 min 26 sec ago
How many cars are on the UK roads?...
- jaymack 1 hour 4 min ago
I had my appendix out two years ago, I was 56. I remember the medics describing it as keyhole surgery as I writhed in agony, bloody big keys mind...
- redimp 1 hour 19 min ago
Perhaps Tony Devenish can outline all the benefits to bio-diversity and the species that rely on Palm Trees
- KDee 1 hour 33 min ago
Is it though? I recently replaced the gear cables on my 2021 Scott Addict (not the RC), which has the cables and hoses entering at the side of the...
- essexian 5 hours 58 min ago
Looking at the shaddows, I feel the Sun must have been in the car drivers eyes.....
- wtjs 15 hours 35 min ago
It's a surprising approach by the rozzers, simply closing the case...
Add new comment
24 comments
i was on a section of wide shared path the other day riding respectfully as I always do when there are dogs and people around when a gentleman waved me down. I slowed to almost track stand and he sarcastically said 'the Tour de France is cancelled this year' (I was riding a Condor Fratello with mud guards, rack and pannier and no lycra so hardly a boy racer) Under normal circumstances I would have told him to f**k right off. But in keeping with the spirit of the age I smiled and said 'oh, ok that's good 'cos I'm training for the Giro'. And pootled off.
Round here there are lots of shared use paths - some of which work just fine
BUT - most seem to have been designed by someone who knows what a cyclist is, and probably rode a bike when he (probably) was a teenager but not for a long time - and certainly not on a shared path.
Hence - sometimes they carry on for a long time on a main road and work just fine - then another will go along a similar road witha factory (or similar) every 50 yards- and hence an entrance and it is edged by concrete ramps with a 1 inch lip - fun when you hit them at speed!!!
And in other places it all looks fine until you realise you are in an area with a lot of road junctions and the cars (etc) have to stop once at traffice lights - but cyclists on the path have to stop, pre4ss the button, wait for green light- and then cross - FOUR TIMES instead of once.
Great design and implementation - but should have asked a cyclistbefore doing it!!
Oh - and a few signs shoing that this is a cycle path would be nice - I lived here nearlya year before I worked out which paths were shared cycle paths and which not - and it would be nice to have a sign that shows where they end as well!!!
This! Agree completely.
When they overtake you and pull in across the path in front of you.
When you have to yield at every side road and obscured entrance.
Not sure what point the video is trying to make, beyond the obvious; that shared use paths are no use for people who are not content to share if sharing means they are inconvenienced. And yes, I know, dog lead, too long, Highway Code, etc. There were plenty other inconveniences too. And some could be ameliorated for sure.
Shared use paths are great for occasional cyclists, families out with kids, or just not in a hurry. But for a cyclist "on a mission" - be that the daily commute or a Strava leg - the imperative to "must not lose momentum" is every bit as strong as is MGIF for car drivers.
I thought it was about an indirect route, poor signage, lack of clarity as to where it stops and starts and continues and at the end, the point was made about the return journey - how do you get on this cycle path ?
And in other news...
Bears/woods.
Pope/Catholic.
Trump/self-centred idiocy.
Why doesnt the government just have strict liability and presumed liability for vehicle drivers to protect walkers and cyclists+horse n riders etc
I think that's part of the announced comprehensive review into road traffic safety/sentencing...
I'm sure they'll get around to that eventually... It's only been ten years or so, hasn't it?
It's a crap cycle path, and money that could have certainly been better invested has been wasted.
But I don't understand the urgency to get passed the old guy walking his dog (at the start of the video). Swap him for a cyclist and the cyclist for a car and it's got all the elements that cause us issues on the road: vulnerable user, pinch point, MGIF syndrome. Or is the argument that despite inherent benefits the slower user should yeild to faster transport options?
No doubt it was included to highlight that shared use paths are a pain in the ass. They are. They're no substitute for good cycle infrastructure. But they have a shared purpose and annoying the other users doesn't get anyone anywhere fast.
The sooner an increased portion of road (and path) users adopt a friendly, shared, help-the-flow approach the better.
Cyclist slowed down to a safe speed, rang a bell, politely asked to come past. Cyclist was legally using a shared path.
Walker didn't acknowledge the cyclist, made no attempt to stick to one side of the path and, in fact, by using an extendable dog lead, took up as much space as possible.
I don't think that this was a case of MGIF, there was plenty of space for a safe pass if the walker hadn't deliberately blocked the path.
I think you missed the bit where the lead was about 10m long and the bloke and dog were taking up a huge amount of space.
Also it was unclear whether the bloke had any idea that there was a cyclist and what would happen if the dog suddenly ran towards the cyclist.
56
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders.
I don't see it as a MGIF, more as a polite notice on a shared use path that the other user should not block the path, as per the highway code. There is clearly room for both of them in this context, if the dog was a bit closer and on a proper lead
According to the highway code, the dog owner is at fault
Rule "56 Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders." (highlight for emphasis)
I think a closer analogy would be if the dog walker was a rider bumbling along down the middle of a single track road while a queue of fifty tractors and ambulances built up behind them. Actually, no that doesn't work either.
I suspect the dog walker knew full well that the cyclist was there, but had decided that the cyclist ought not to be "on the footpath" and so they were going to be as passive-aggressively obstructive as they possibly could.
i said it very clearly and loudly, twice to him, and he did seem to twist his head at me, so yes i think he knew i was there but thought sod it, im walking my dog so i'll ignore him. Then when i did go past, i had a feeling the dog was going to lunge at me, which they often do. The general point of the video was for three reasons,one, bad signage, the council need to do it properly and make it clear which way to go, not just have it stop suddenly. Youll end up having old people on the pavement run over by cyclists thinking they're still on a shared path, or uni students taken out whilst staring at their phones not realising theyre walking where cyclists will now be riding. It gets very hectic in there in summer as it is. The other point was how do you get to it, if coming from the other way. Its impossible. I cannot see how they could make it so you cross over, without being hit by a car from the other way, to join the path, especially if buses are pulled in where i went up the ramp. Only way would be turn right in the junction road, bump up the kerb, then follow it onwards, but thats stupid. I swear the council should just grab a dutch cycle path designer and make them do it, because no council ive seen in britain has a clue how to design something that works for a cyclist. A child going at 5 miles an hour to school, yes. But not for someone cycling up to 30 mph. All it does is lead to yet more ignorant morons in car yelling at cyclists to use something either substandard or downright dangerous, and i feel this new [design] is going to do just that.
The only winner is Entropy.
There had to be someone with a long extendable dog lead.
Which, of course, is not allowed under the highway code:
"56 Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders."
"
The analogy I would use for cyclists and cars is if you were on a going slowy on a narrow road oblivious to traffic behind and wouldn't pull in to obvious laybys or stopping places to let people by.
Can we please call it seperated or protected infrastructure.
Segregation is wrong.
Don't think I'll ever call it seperated infra
separated maybe
I headed off to orad.cc but the spooling & last paragraph's no better there