Cyclists riding side-by-side is biggest gripe for rural drivers claims survey

Bluebug wrote:

Listening to music in a car or other vehicle is not the same as listening to music while cycling, running or walking simply because in a car or other vehicle you aren't wearing headphones.

Headphones block out a lot of the sound around you due to their placement directly over or in your ears.

When you play music in a vehicle like when you play it in a room you can hear other sounds around you if you don't play it too loud. However if you do decide to play it loud as a motorist and the police think so, they can and do fine motorists. Cyclists, runners and walkers aren't fined for this.

Oh and every road user whether using a motor vehicle or shanks pony should banned from fiddling with a smartphone or similar device while in motion.

Seems to me cars by their very design blot out outside noise more than headphones do, even without a pumping stereo with extra bass-bins in the back.

I seem to keep seeing car adverts that directly emphasise that very feature - the car's ability to completely insulate you from that nasty noisy world outside and ensure you (and your children, who often seem to feature in those sorts of ads) are in a world of your own.

I often get disturbed in my own living room by someone's car stereo as they pass by in the street or park outside. I somehow doubt they can hear anything outside their vehicle. And, no, the police never do anything about such things - don't be absurd.

And the idea that walking while using a phone is as dangerous as driving is even more silly.

brooksby wrote:

That said, many motorists seem to miss the irony (think it's ironic: always get confused about that) - they will complain about cyclists taking up the whole road (whether in single file or side by side) while they (the Angry Motorist) sit in the driver's seat of their (otherwise empty) six feet wide, two tonne metal box made to carry five or more...

I think the word is 'hypocrisy' rather than 'irony'.

Carmic0 wrote:

I can understand why drivers get annoyed with us riding two a breast on country lanes.   On a recent holiday to the UK I was stuck behind a couple of lads on quality road bikes riding from Malham Cove, Yorkshire.   At no time did they move into single file, as is their right, and therefore I slowly drove behind them for about four miles.   It gave me the chance to enjoy the beautiful scenery.    This was not annoying for me as I was on holiday, but the cars gathering behind me were really pissed off, flashing their lights and gesturing for me to overtake the cyclists.   The lane was too narrow for overtaking.   My usual action when riding two a breast is to get into single file when I hear a motor vehicle behind.   Just common dog f*ck really.

The fact that you're criticising the cyclist when they do no wrong and accept the irrational behaviour of the impatient drivers is telling.

If the lane was too narrow for overtaking, it was too narrow for overtaking. I had a complete and utter asshat in a BMW pass me on a singletrack road, 25m before I was going to pull into a gate and let him pass. Zero justification for that pass except being a selfish, ignorant twat.

don simon wrote:

If the lane was too narrow for overtaking, it was too narrow for overtaking. 

And that, right there, is the whole f-ing point and should be the end of the debate IMO.

leqin wrote:

The extension of this logic is that all motor vehicles need to be made so that the passengers sit behind the driver and not side by side - otherwise all that 54% of the tossers are moaning about is something that they are doing themselves and actually taking up even more room on the roads that bicycles originally helped bring about in the first place.

Riding two abreast for a car would be two cars traveling side-by-side.

leqin wrote:

The extension of this logic is that all motor vehicles need to be made so that the passengers sit behind the driver and not side by side - otherwise all that 54% of the tossers are moaning about is something that they are doing themselves and actually taking up even more room on the roads that bicycles originally helped bring about in the first place.

Do you have a problem with letting traffic pass?

biketime wrote:

No traffic on rural roads, abreast. "Car back" or a lot of activity, tandem, please.  Mirrors will help immensely. We have a bad enough rep, much of it undeserved.  Inisiting on abreast on a busy-ish two lane, shoulderless road is poor PR at its worst.

Perhaps that's the way forward, we just wear "Car stay back" stickers/jerseys and the cars will stay back, OR ELSE!

I'm waiting for Virgin to justify why they have "cyclists stay back" stickers on their contracted vans.

biketime wrote:

No traffic on rural roads, abreast. "Car back" or a lot of activity, tandem, please.  Mirrors will help immensely. We have a bad enough rep, much of it undeserved.  Inisiting on abreast on a busy-ish two lane, shoulderless road is poor PR at its worst.

If there's not enough room to overtake safely, don't. Unless you're a first responder or taking an MI victim to hospital, waiting will not cause anyone to die. Impatience might.

biketime wrote:

No traffic on rural roads, abreast. "Car back" or a lot of activity, tandem, please.  Mirrors will help immensely. We have a bad enough rep, much of it undeserved.  Inisiting on abreast on a busy-ish two lane, shoulderless road is poor PR at its worst.

Mirrors don't help one iota unless you're physically incapable of not turning your head, you're more likely to keep checking it andbe distracted and the 'moving out the way because I saw something close' reasoning woud have you shifting off your line constantly especially in built up areas.

As for the old "car/oil up", frankly it's wasted and not necessary, instead of deferring all the time it's the responsibility of those that wield more power/want to overtake (and ultimately present massively more harm) to modify what they are doing to ensure those around them are safe, NOT the other other parties.
I think I'm a very courteous person, whether riding a bie, in the car or even whengod forbid I'm walking, I won't defer and make my journey more difficult/less safe for the convenience of someone that can potentially kill me. I don't see that gives me a 'reputation'or that that should apply to others who go about their business by same mode just as I don't walking or driving, that people do is the problem forthe mentally deranged and thus motorists need tobe modified or removed from the roads until they can behave correctly.
If I can drive and not kill/maim or put fear into the mind of the vulnerable and cede priority/way whilst in my 1440kg machine then it's entirely possible for all to do it.
It takes a lot of thinking at times but I have the life of others at stake, I also wouldn't do something to someone I wouldn't want done to me.
Change the thinking of drivers not people on bikes/foot as has happened for over 100 years!

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

I was riding single file as I do being on my jack jones last Sunday and some selfish, sorry dane=gerously reckless cnut 'rural' driver decided they'd drive within 6-7" of my elbow dspite all the other lane to use.

basically it doesn't matter how you ride, there are an awful lot of drivers who live in the sticks who can't drive for shit, are simply selfish bastards and shouldn't be in charge of a wheelbarrow never mind something with an engine and the capability to kill people!

That these types count people doing something lawful as their top hate just shows you what cretins they are.

'Kin townies, innit?

alansmurphy wrote:

So people are more annoyed by people doing something totally legal which may hold them up for between 0 seconds and in all likelihood a couple of minutes than they are by people putting their life in danger or the road surface damaging their car.

Unfortunately, yes. Didn't you read the article? And, no I don't believe it is totaly legal to do so ... that seems to be a myth based on incorrect interpretation of what constitutes a 'busy' road.

When was the last time you let someone jump in front of you in a queue at a supermarket checkout?

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

So people are more annoyed by people doing something totally legal which may hold them up for between 0 seconds and in all likelihood a couple of minutes than they are by people putting their life in danger or the road surface damaging their car.

Unfortunately, yes. Didn't you read the article? And, no I don't believe it is totaly legal to do so ... that seems to be a myth based on incorrect interpretation of what constitutes a 'busy' road.

When was the last time you let someone jump in front of you in a queue at a supermarket checkout?

Well, sometimes I have anger issues, and I'm a strong guy, but I cannot recall ever having killed a queue jumper.

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

So people are more annoyed by people doing something totally legal which may hold them up for between 0 seconds and in all likelihood a couple of minutes than they are by people putting their life in danger or the road surface damaging their car.

Unfortunately, yes. Didn't you read the article? And, no I don't believe it is totaly legal to do so ... that seems to be a myth based on incorrect interpretation of what constitutes a 'busy' road.

When was the last time you let someone jump in front of you in a queue at a supermarket checkout?

But the question in the survey didn't even specify they were doing so "illegally" yet compared it to "dangerous overtaking". Also, it says rural, this you'd suggest that busy isn't too often, furthermore you are actually correct in that 'busy' is subjective like 'safe passing distance'.

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

alansmurphy wrote:

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

If someone jumps in front of you in a checkout queue, then it will only hold you up a minite, but you will be pretty pissed off as you didn't give them permission to do so and you may be in a hurry. That's a bit like cycling two-abreast holding up other traffic just so you can have a chat. I couldn't think of a better example at the time, but hopefully it illustrates the point I was trying to make. No one likes being forceably held up because someone decides they want to chat to their cycling buddy. Its selfish and unneccessary. Single out, let traffic past, then pull back out and chat.

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

If someone jumps in front of you in a checkout queue, then it will only hold you up a minite, but you will be pretty pissed off as you didn't give them permission to do so and you may be in a hurry. That's a bit like cycling two-abreast holding up other traffic just so you can have a chat. I couldn't think of a better example at the time, but hopefully it illustrates the point I was trying to make. No one likes being forceably held up because someone decides they want to chat to their cycling buddy. Its selfish and unneccessary. Single out, let traffic past, then pull back out and chat.

not at all the same because 1) we didn't jump in front of someone, we were already there.

2) in most cases there is enough room to pass simply by using the other side of the white lines

3) in cases where there is not enough space to pass, there is only enough space to pass if the over take is dangerous. I don't feel like facilitating drivers who consider a few seconds of their time more imprtant than my safety.

4) even then I don't think any driver has been behind for a minute

5) And more often still the driver in question is caught up at the queue at the next junction. who is really losing time here? 

remember that everyone in  a car is travelling two abreast, even when they are on their own. Perhaps if they were so concerned they should get a motorcycle and pass at will. 

The roads were wide enough for people travelling at different speeds to poass each other until people started driving vehicles that fill the lane, and now those people are the ones complaining about there not being enough room. The vast majority of roads in this country predate cars.

wycombewheeler wrote:

remember that everyone in  a car is travelling two abreast, even when they are on their own.

Nicely put!

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

If someone jumps in front of you in a checkout queue, then it will only hold you up a minite, but you will be pretty pissed off as you didn't give them permission to do so and you may be in a hurry. That's a bit like cycling two-abreast holding up other traffic just so you can have a chat. I couldn't think of a better example at the time, but hopefully it illustrates the point I was trying to make. No one likes being forceably held up because someone decides they want to chat to their cycling buddy. Its selfish and unneccessary. Single out, let traffic past, then pull back out and chat.

You are like those people who say that people keeping to the speed limit on winding rural roads with a 40 limit are ‘forcing’ people to overtake dangerously. 

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

If someone jumps in front of you in a checkout queue, then it will only hold you up a minite, but you will be pretty pissed off as you didn't give them permission to do so and you may be in a hurry. That's a bit like cycling two-abreast holding up other traffic just so you can have a chat. I couldn't think of a better example at the time, but hopefully it illustrates the point I was trying to make. No one likes being forceably held up because someone decides they want to chat to their cycling buddy. Its selfish and unneccessary. Single out, let traffic past, then pull back out and chat.

Yep doesn't quite work as suggested above, I am ahead in the queue. As for the 'having a chat' thing, again I don't understand why one person's leisure is any less worthy of road space than another person's trip to the recycling centre, Costa with a mate etc. Do the motons get more pissed off sat behind a car doing the speed limit with a passenger on board.

It's the absurdity of people's perceptions that I'm arguing here. On a group ride we will shout car back as appropriate and dib in, wave them thru if the front of the group can see it is safe etc. Strangely, we are more inclined to do so if we here an engine purr up behind keeping its distance rather than a late brake, rev and stupid position on the shoulder.

I'm still baffled that people sit doing a survey and their blood boils about being held up for a few seconds, every so often, rather than someone endangering them...

nbrus wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

I'm not sure what point you're making with the queue jump? In fact if I'm in front and someone has a wider trolley than me, I don't think I'm expected to give up my space...

If someone jumps in front of you in a checkout queue, then it will only hold you up a minite, but you will be pretty pissed off as you didn't give them permission to do so and you may be in a hurry. That's a bit like cycling two-abreast holding up other traffic just so you can have a chat. I couldn't think of a better example at the time, but hopefully it illustrates the point I was trying to make. No one likes being forceably held up because someone decides they want to chat to their cycling buddy. Its selfish and unneccessary. Single out, let traffic past, then pull back out and chat.

Well, while on the subject of permission, I don't recall ever giving permission for oversized cars to clog up the roads and get in the way of my bike/walking/bus. Still less did I give permission for their deisel fumes to clog up my lungs.

That said, dropping back into single file occasionally, if there's traffic building up behind, seems to be the polite thing to do (like letting someone ahead of you in the checkout queue if they only have one item vs your trolley full). Is anyone arguing that nobody should ever do that?