Driver Cyclist arguement with a brilliant ending NSFW or kids

John_Rambo

QuinDixie wrote: »

is this what feels to be re-tweeted.

Ha! I guess so! But seriously, I'm more of a motorist than a cyclist, have had plenty of hot-hatches, GTi's, GTV's and a John Cooper car. I've done track days in my cars! I currently drive a 240bhp barge.

The cyclist may be a douche bag, but it's worth hanging back, waiting for a suitable pass point. The last thing you want is an injury or worse. Let them at it! It's not worth the risk.

QuinDixie

John_Rambo wrote: »

Ha! I guess so! But seriously, I'm more of a motorist than a cyclist, have had plenty of hot-hatches, GTi's, GTV's and a John Cooper car. I've done track days in my cars! I currently drive a 240bhp barge.

The cyclist may be a douche bag, but it's worth hanging back, waiting for a suitable pass point. The last thing you want is an injury or worse. Let them at it! It's not worth the risk.

I agree, no one wants to hurt anyone. I rarely go over 60 on a motorway.
I prefer cruising in a car. Sometimes, VERY RARELY, when overtaking a cyclist you might come within a foot from wing mirror to handle bar.
Thats not a problem if done at the right speed, Very Slowly.

StevieGriff

QuinDixie wrote: »

I agree, no one wants to hurt anyone. I rarely go over 60 on a motorway.
I prefer cruising in a car. Sometimes, VERY RARELY, when overtaking a cyclist you might come within a foot from wing mirror to handle bar.
Thats not a problem if done at the right speed, Very Slowly.

Yes it is. 12inches in nothing. One gust of wind, piece of debris, pothole...ect and all of a sudden that gap becomes 0 and me or some other cyclist is on the ground or under your wheels. Any sideswipe or rear impact at any speed is 90% guaranteed to bring a cyclist down.

QuinDixie

StevieGriff wrote: »

Yes it is. 12inches in nothing. One gust of wind, piece of debris, pothole...ect and all of a sudden that gap becomes 0 and me or some other cyclist is on the ground or under your wheels. Any sideswipe or rear impact at any speed is 90% guaranteed to bring a cyclist down.

no matter what answer is given on this subject, it will be incorrect to certain peeps here.
I was at the ras last sat., saw loads of bicycles zipping through traffic and even some cyclists holding onto cars.

1 foot my eye. :pac:

RainyDay

QuinDixie wrote: »

Sometimes, VERY RARELY, when overtaking a cyclist you might come within a foot from wing mirror to handle bar.
Thats not a problem if done at the right speed, Very Slowly.

It is crap driving. As others have pointed out, it would be a definite fail in a driving test. In general, overtakes are better done swiftly, not slowly. Get out, and get back in quickly.

What kind of circumstances would justify this crap driving?

QuinDixie wrote: »

the dubs eh. A dub once asked me when do you milk the bull. :pac:

the cyclist in that video would not want to come to Ireland on a cycling hol.
He would have a mental breakdown somewhere between tipp and kerry, last seen shouting out number plates.

As for the motorist, as punishment for his behaviour he should be made go on the aforementioned hols with the cyclist.

What a TV show that would make.
Ciao.

All very interesting, but would you like to answer the question that I asked? How do you deal with a slow-moving tractor on these narrow roads where it is not possible to overtake a cyclist leaving more than a foot of passing space?

JBokeh

I don't mind a close pass on a country road, chances are the car is in 1st and doing the same speed as me,I just move into a field entrance, someones driveway or into the edge of the road for a bit. I've been doing it for years and have never been hit. I also very much doubt it's going to be an insta-kill making contact with a car at those speeds. I'm just out for a spin on the bike in the evening, and I don't see why my evening arse around should hold someone up because i'm too proud to move in or slow a bit. Chances are they'd be local to me anyway and i'd be seen as a bit of a pariah if I went at that lark

Tractors will always move in bar 2 exceptions
1 - They're not going far up the road
2 - They can tell you're from Dublin, sitting in your fancy clean car giving out about farmers :pac:

QuinDixie

RainyDay wrote: »

It is crap driving. As others have pointed out, it would be a definite fail in a driving test. In general, overtakes are better done swiftly, not slowly. Get out, and get back in quickly.

What kind of circumstances would justify this crap driving?



All very interesting, but would you like to answer the question that I asked? How do you deal with a slow-moving tractor on these narrow roads where it is not possible to overtake a cyclist leaving more than a foot of passing space?

you are arguing for the sake of it, all your answers you seek are on google maps. Have some fun zooming in on rural Ireland checking out the road network.

Be careful out there, cycle responsibly, we have enough aggressive and volatile road users out there. Dont be one.

RainyDay

QuinDixie wrote: »

you are arguing for the sake of it, all your answers you seek are on google maps. Have some fun zooming in on rural Ireland checking out the road network.

No answer to my question, then? There are very, very few situations where there isn't room to pass a cyclist safely leaving a decent 1.5m passing space. If you find yourself in that situation, be patient - wait until you have a safe place to pass.

QuinDixie wrote: »

Be careful out there, cycle responsibly, we have enough aggressive and volatile road users out there. Dont be one.

Yes, those aggressive and volatile road users who think that it is OK to pass a cyclist leaving about 1/3rd of the required (UK) or recommended (Irl) passing space. Don't be that guy.

QuinDixie wrote: »

I was at the ras last sat., saw loads of bicycles zipping through traffic and even some cyclists holding onto cars.

1 foot my eye. :pac:

You do understand that a cyclist passing a car and a car overtaking a cyclist are very, very different manoevres. It's not a tit-for-tat situation - he passed me like that, so I'm gonna pass him like that. You need to make judgments on the safety of each overtake. If you're passing cyclists with just a foot of passing space, you're making bad judgments.

JBokeh wrote: »

I don't mind a close pass on a country road, chances are the car is in 1st and doing the same speed as me,I just move into a field entrance, someones driveway or into the edge of the road for a bit. I've been doing it for years and have never been hit. I also very much doubt it's going to be an insta-kill making contact with a car at those speeds. I'm just out for a spin on the bike in the evening, and I don't see why my evening arse around should hold someone up because i'm too proud to move in or slow a bit. Chances are they'd be local to me anyway and i'd be seen as a bit of a pariah if I went at that lark

Are you talking about slowing down, or stopping? If you choose to stop, that's your own choice - but it's not one that I'm going to make. I don't see many drivers stopping to let me pass in heavy urban traffic where the bike is generally faster than the car, so I'm not minded to return the favour.

If you're talking about slowing, the problem is that once you move into the edge, you've nowhere else to go if anything goes wrong. If an oncoming car suddenly appears round the bend, there is a good chance that the driver will squeeze you out rather than risking a scratch on their own wing mirror. A cyclist was killed in NZ a year or two back in a situation like this.

John_Rambo wrote: »

The cyclist may be a douche bag, but it's worth hanging back, waiting for a suitable pass point. The last thing you want is an injury or worse. Let them at it! It's not worth the risk.

Is every driver who fails to pull over and let me, the cyclist, through in heavy urban traffic a douche-bag too?
Stop the Douchebags;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNDbo2ghEwo

QuinDixie

RainyDay wrote: »

No answer to my question, then? There are very, very few situations where there isn't room to pass a cyclist safely leaving a decent 1.5m passing space. If you find yourself in that situation, be patient - wait until you have a safe place to pass.

Yes, those aggressive and volatile road users who think that it is OK to pass a cyclist leaving about 1/3rd of the required (UK) or recommended (Irl) passing space. Don't be that guy.




You do understand that a cyclist passing a car and a car overtaking a cyclist are very, very different manoevres. It's not a tit-for-tat situation - he passed me like that, so I'm gonna pass him like that. You need to make judgments on the safety of each overtake. If you're passing cyclists with just a foot of passing space, you're making bad judgments.


Are you talking about slowing down, or stopping? If you choose to stop, that's your own choice - but it's not one that I'm going to make. I don't see many drivers stopping to let me pass in heavy urban traffic where the bike is generally faster than the car, so I'm not minded to return the favour.

If you're talking about slowing, the problem is that once you move into the edge, you've nowhere else to go if anything goes wrong. If an oncoming car suddenly appears round the bend, there is a good chance that the driver will squeeze you out rather than risking a scratch on their own wing mirror. A cyclist was killed in NZ a year or two back in a situation like this.


Is every driver who fails to pull over and let me, the cyclist, through in heavy urban traffic a douche-bag too?
Stop the Douchebags;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNDbo2ghEwo

I like your standard system, Double.:pac:

You seem to have very little understanding of measurements.
1.5 metres = 1.5 metres
car width = 1.5 metres
rural narrow road width = 3 metres
Factor in overgrown hedges.
Cyclists must be especially careful on rural roads especially with traffic moving in same direction.

there is no point getting hurt to prove a point, be careful out there.

RainyDay

QuinDixie wrote: »

I like your standard system, Double.:pac:

Are you seriously suggesting that 'tit-for-tat' is an appropropriate method for planning your road movements safely?

QuinDixie wrote: »

You seem to have very little understanding of measurements.
1.5 metres = 1.5 metres
car width = 1.5 metres
rural narrow road width = 3 metres
Factor in overgrown hedges.

It's hard to take advice on measurements seriously from somebody who thinks it is safe to overtake a cyclist leaving 12 inches of passing space. But yes, I understand road widths and car widths thanks - none of which justifies a dangerous overtake.

It's slightly difficult to have a constructive discussion when every time you're questioned, you move on to another red herring.

QuinDixie wrote: »

there is no point getting hurt to prove a point, be careful out there.

And in the light of all this, you still think it is OK to pass a cyclist leaving 12 inches of passing space? You need to take a cold hard look at your driving style before you hurt somebody badly.

See you on the road.

QuinDixie

RainyDay wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that 'tit-for-tat' is an appropropriate method for planning your road movements safely?


It's hard to take advice on measurements seriously from somebody who thinks it is safe to overtake a cyclist leaving 12 inches of passing space. But yes, I understand road widths and car widths thanks - none of which justifies a dangerous overtake.

It's slightly difficult to have a constructive discussion when every time you're questioned, you move on to another red herring.



And in the light of all this, you still think it is OK to pass a cyclist leaving 12 inches of passing space? You need to take a cold hard look at your driving style before you hurt somebody badly.

See you on the road.

Your posts are the reason why cyclists will eventually be regulated, no understanding of bicycle vs car. only 1 winner.

Hypothetically, If I drove past you out cycling and did not leave 1.5 metres what would you do.
Do you record your cycles and also chase after motorists who have come within 1.5 metres of you.
How do you gauge 1.5 metres when out cycling.
you dont seem to understand what a foot is, but maybe your more metric, a foot is just under 1500cm.

RainyDay

QuinDixie wrote: »

Your posts are the reason why cyclists will eventually be regulated, no understanding of bicycle vs car. only 1 winner.

Hypothetically, If I drove past you out cycling and did not leave 1.5 metres what would you do.
Do you record your cycles and also chase after motorists who have come within 1.5 metres of you.
How do you gauge 1.5 metres when out cycling.
you dont seem to understand what a foot is, but maybe your more metric, a foot is just under 1500cm.

Cyclists have always been regulated, and continue to be regulated. I've no idea about winners, but I can see who are the losers easily enough - the 200 people each year killed by motorists, and the many others maimed.

Unfortunately, I don't have the 1.5m measurement shown in the photo, so I tend to use my arm. If you come within arm's reach, you are about 1/2 the distance that you should be. My response will of course vary with the circumstances, the speed, the closeness, the weather, my mood etc.

But that question was just a distraction, right? An attempt to distract attention from your continued proposal to pass cyclists leaving less than 1/3 of the space that you should be leaving them. And for what? So you can get to the back of the next queue of cars a few seconds earlier?

John_Rambo

QuinDixie wrote: »

you dont seem to understand what a foot is, but maybe your more metric, a foot is just under 1500cm.

QuinDixie

John_Rambo wrote: »

a big foot:pac:

QuinDixie

RainyDay wrote: »

Cyclists have always been regulated, and continue to be regulated. I've no idea about winners, but I can see who are the losers easily enough - the 200 people each year killed by motorists, and the many others maimed.

Unfortunately, I don't have the 1.5m measurement shown in the photo, so I tend to use my arm. If you come within arm's reach, you are about 1/2 the distance that you should be. My response will of course vary with the circumstances, the speed, the closeness, the weather, my mood etc.

But that question was just a distraction, right? An attempt to distract attention from your continued proposal to pass cyclists leaving less than 1/3 of the space that you should be leaving them. And for what? So you can get to the back of the next queue of cars a few seconds earlier?

the number of cyclists killed in Ireland every year is very small.
All 200 deaths on the road, if your correct, are very sad, but in a pop. of 5 million are a very small number.
Factor in very poor public transport in the sticks, practically making motoring mandatory, and that number is remarkable, its so low.

An arms length, you must have some long arms to be 750cm from handlebar to fingers. So we can say 1 foot and a half is your real threshold.
So a half foot over mine, not arguing over spilt milk.

Tenzor07

This is what we didn't see in the original video edit!

ezra_pound

T-K-O wrote: »

Sure..

That vdeo doesn't do anything for cyclists.

As stated previously my girlfriend cycles and it's a constant worry, this guy and this video doesn't help matters

So would you overtake your girlfriend at that distance and at that speed?

John_Rambo

QuinDixie wrote: »

An arms length, you must have some long arms to be 750cm from handlebar to fingers. So we can say 1 foot and a half is your real threshold.
So a half foot over mine, not arguing over spilt milk.

Half of 1.5 metres is 75cm. Not 750cm. 750cm is 7.5 metres.

You're not helping yourself here.

ezra_pound

QuinDixie wrote: »

the number of cyclists killed in Ireland every year is very small.
All 200 deaths on the road, if your correct, are very sad, but in a pop. of 5 million are a very small number.
Factor in very poor public transport in the sticks, practically making motoring mandatory, and that number is remarkable, its so low.

An arms length, you must have some long arms to be 750cm from handlebar to fingers. So we can say 1 foot and a half is your real threshold.
So a half foot over mine, not arguing over spilt milk.

Then why do the RSA say 1.5 metre ~ 5 feet
Either you drive safely or you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

RainyDay

QuinDixie wrote: »

the number of cyclists killed in Ireland every year is very small.
All 200 deaths on the road, if your correct, are very sad, but in a pop. of 5 million are a very small number.
Factor in very poor public transport in the sticks, practically making motoring mandatory, and that number is remarkable, its so low.

The number of deaths is fairly comparable, though the RSA has expressed concern about the number of cycling injuries. But very few of those incidents are inevitable. They are a result of crap driving, like the "1 foot is enough" approach that you're recommending.

QuinDixie wrote: »

An arms length, you must have some long arms to be 750cm from handlebar to fingers. So we can say 1 foot and a half is your real threshold.
So a half foot over mine, not arguing over spilt milk.

I'm surprised that I have to spell it out, but here you go. The corollory of comment that I know a car is way too close if it is within reach does not hold. This does not mean that every overtake than I can't reach is safe - far from it.

car in the video didn't seem that close to me.

I cycle and drive around Dublin. cyclist seems a wanker in this video.

radia

There seems to be confusion here between a foot and a yard.
1 yard = 3 feet = 91.44 cm (i.e. a little under a metre).
1 foot = 12 inches or approx. 30 cm, the length of a typical school ruler (the type your kids would have in their schoolbag, not the teacher's metre stick).

QuinDixie - when you say a foot, are you actually thinking of a yard?

Anyone who thinks it's ok for a car to overtake a bike by skimming past only a foot (12 inches, 30 cm, one ruler length) away is nuts. The draught caused by a vehicle passing at speed could itself cause the cyclist to be sucked towards the vehicle. The alarm triggered by such a close pass is also quite likely to cause a cyclist to wobble.

QuinDixie

radia wrote: »

There seems to be confusion here between a foot and a yard.
1 yard = 3 feet = 91.44 cm (i.e. a little under a metre).
1 foot = 12 inches or approx. 30 cm, the length of a typical school ruler (the type your kids would have in their schoolbag, not the teacher's metre stick).

QuinDixie - when you say a foot, are you actually thinking of a yard?

Anyone who thinks it's ok for a car to overtake a bike by skimming past only a foot (12 inches, 30 cm, one ruler length) away is nuts. The draught caused by a vehicle passing at speed could itself cause the cyclist to be sucked towards the vehicle. The alarm triggered by such a close pass is also quite likely to cause a cyclist to wobble.

everyones feet are different.:pac:

1 foot, 12 inches, from handle bar to wing mirror is perfect in certain situations.
It happens everyday.
Its a non issue.

But the hatred SOME motorists and cyclists have for each other is a very real and dangerous issue. I dont understand it, never will.
Some road users believe their car, bicycle, motorbike is an extension of them and that is something I find verges on psychotic.
Courtesy is the word. More Courtesy. Dont take it all so personal.

QuinDixie

ezra_pound wrote: »

Then why do the RSA say 1.5 metre ~ 5 feet
Either you drive safely or you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

do you drive
do you cycle
have you ever broke the rules
who hasnt:pac:

RainyDay

I take that you are somehow missing the huge, gaping contradiction between

QuinDixie wrote: »

1 foot, 12 inches, from handle bar to wing mirror is perfect in certain situations.
It happens everyday.
Its a non issue.

and

QuinDixie wrote: »

Courtesy is the word. More Courtesy.

'Courtesy' generally involves at a minimum, complying with the law, and as a general rule, being considerate of the other party's personal safety.

If you have even the slightest commitment to courtesy, leave more than 1 foot when you pass a cyclist. Multiply it by 3 and you'll be heading in the right direction.

I'm still confused that having seen the UK Highway Code role and the RSA recommendation, why would you NOT want to do this? What is so urgent about your overtake that you can't wait 30 seconds or in unusual circumstances 60 seconds to find a safe place to pass?

ezra_pound

QuinDixie wrote: »

do you drive
do you cycle
have you ever broke the rules
who hasnt:pac:

Yes I drive. Yes I cycle. Yes of course I have failed to always exercise adequate respect of all safely guidelines and road traffic law.

But you are trying to condone dangerous driving and dangerous overtaking.

1 foot overtaking distance is nowhere near OK. It is indefensible. If you don't recognise this then you shouldn't be let behind the wheel.

QuinDixie

RainyDay wrote: »

I take that you are somehow missing the huge, gaping contradiction between


and



'Courtesy' generally involves at a minimum, complying with the law, and as a general rule, being considerate of the other party's personal safety.

If you have even the slightest commitment to courtesy, leave more than 1 foot when you pass a cyclist. Multiply it by 3 and you'll be heading in the right direction.

I'm still confused that having seen the UK Highway Code role and the RSA recommendation, why would you NOT want to do this? What is so urgent about your overtake that you can't wait 30 seconds or in unusual circumstances 60 seconds to find a safe place to pass?

I think you are very confused.
I do not overtake every bicycle and leave 1 foot gap. That does not happen.
I have done it, but very rarely and involving low speeds.
I suppose it comes down to skill of driving, mine is very high. You dont drive so wouldnt understand.

You be careful out there. Always keep it real and show some courtesy.

QuinDixie

ezra_pound wrote: »

Yes I drive. Yes I cycle. Yes of course I have failed to always exercise adequate respect of all safely guidelines and road traffic law.

But you are trying to condone dangerous driving and dangerous overtaking.

1 foot overtaking distance is nowhere near OK. It is indefensible. If you don't recognise this then you shouldn't be let behind the wheel.

In future read while you are typing, might help before pressing submit.

You admit to breaking the law, let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

ezra_pound

QuinDixie wrote: »

I think you are very confused.
I do not overtake every bicycle and leave 1 foot gap. That does not happen.
I have done it, but very rarely and involving low speeds.
I suppose it comes down to skill of driving, mine is very high. You dont drive so wouldnt understand.

You be careful out there. Always keep it real and show some courtesy.

Quite clearly you're suffering from cognitive bias.

ezra_pound

QuinDixie wrote: »

In future read while you are typing, might help before pressing submit.

You admit to breaking the law, let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

There is a very big difference between guilt and condoning bad and dangerous behaviour. I stand over everything o have said.