Nutter..was it you.

disco1

SOME NUTTER ..this evening going down howth village in the dark...wet roads..at 70 kph..I was doing 50 and he flew past..almost missed a car Coming up the hill.

Was it you.

Your neither brave or skilled..just stupid..and must have no regard for your family.if you have one that it.

There was no way in hell to avoid an accident if one small thing happened.

Anyway each to their own.

silverharp

sorry!

sullzz

disco1 wrote: »

almost missed a car Coming up

You mean he hit a car ?
Hope he's ok.

Alexzont

Yeah, sorry about that. Was trying to KOM a downhill segment like Phil Gaimon.

fatbhoy

I am Spartacus!

disco1

No he didn't hit car...but he will do soon.

king size mars bar

No I'm Spartacus

rodneyTrotter.

He must have been on a Raleigh Burner to be going that slow into the village . I’ve seen lads do that heading into the Abbey Tavern . Great thread in fairness

magicbastarder

don't think it was me, i was cycling up howth head at 70 this evening.

Wishbone Ash

He slowed to 70 because it was wet. Not worth the risk.


....and last year it was complaints about cyclist holding up other traffic in Howth!

07Lapierre

More importantly was he wearing a hi viz vest?

eagle eye

The response here is so childish.

Fact of the matter is that bad cyclists give everybody a bad name and lead to laws which are unfair to a responsible person.

at1withmyself

eagle eye wrote: »

The response here is so childish.

Fact of the matter is that bad cyclists give everybody a bad name and lead to laws which are unfair to a responsible person.

Could you please explain why you think that they are a bad cyclist?

magicbastarder

eagle eye wrote: »

Fact of the matter is that bad cyclists give everybody a bad name

*everybody*?
taxi drivers will be livid about being tarred with this brush.

Wildly Boaring

Was fully expecting that he was looking for a member called nutter

eagle eye

at1withmyself wrote:

Could you please explain why you think that they are a bad cyclist?

The op says he is neither brave nor skilled just stupid.
He was there so I'm taking his word. None of the rest of you were.

07Lapierre

eagle eye wrote: »

The response here is so childish.

Fact of the matter is that bad cyclists give everybody a bad name and lead to laws which are unfair to a responsible person.

I'm just jealous of his descending skills!

eagle eye

magicbastarder wrote:

*everybody*? taxi drivers will be livid about being tarred with this brush.

Again, childish.

Taxuser1

eagle eye wrote: »

The op says he is neither brave nor skilled just stupid.
He was there so I'm taking his word. None of the rest of you were.

But his nutter tag suggests more one with a mental incapacity but with a fleeting sense of chapeau thrown in.

Did anyone check Strava for actual speeds tonight?

letape

He was trying out his new disc brakes, so he was grand.

Personally it doesn’t bother me when someone gets the better of me on a descent!

sy_flembeck

king size mars bar wrote: »

No I'm Spartacus

I'm Spartacus and so's my wife!

07Lapierre

Strong southwesterly winds forecast for tomorrow...75 might be doable?

Hurrache

He could have hit one of those lethal fence posts someone warned us about some time back. He'd be dead then, apparently.

Pinch Flat

Sorry it was me. Those Shimano brake pads on alibaba are ****e, BTW

FanadMan

Most of the responses here are a perfect example why a lot of people think that cyclists and the people on this forum are dicks. So much condescension.
The op came on with a genuine complaint and was met with derrision and sniggers. Not really on.

Fighting Tao

rodneyTrotter. wrote: »

He must have been on a Raleigh Burner to be going that slow into the village . I’ve seen lads do that heading into the Abbey Tavern . Great thread in fairness

I miss my 80’s Raleigh Burner and my Activator 2. This thread is bringing the memories flooding back.

ted1

eagle eye wrote: »

The response here is so childish.

Fact of the matter is that bad cyclists give everybody a bad name and lead to laws which are unfair to a responsible person.

Do bad country people give country people a bad name ?
Do bad white people give white people a bad name?
And so on

Wishbone Ash

FanadMan wrote: »

...The op came on with a genuine complaint and was met with derrision and sniggers. Not really on.

What makes you think it's a genuine complaint? Perhaps the OP is a crap descender (like me) and just envious of another's confidence in the wet/dark?

The reason many of us made light of it is because these type of threads are just so pointless. If I see a motorist/motorcyclist driving in a manner which I don't approve, I don't feel the need to start a thread about it in the Motoring/Motorcycle Forum. Nor do I feel it gives anyone else a bad name.

Get In There

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

The reason many of us made light of it is because these type of threads are just so pointless. If I see a motorist/motorcyclist driving in a manner which I don't approve, I don't feel the need to start a thread about it in the Motoring/Motorcycle Forum. Nor do I feel it gives anyone else a bad name.

THIS +1

Fighting Tao

If I say +2 to WAs post would it be considered childish?

sham58107

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

What makes you think it's a genuine complaint? Perhaps the OP is a crap descender (like me) and just envious of another's confidence in the wet/dark?

The reason many of us made light of it is because these type of threads are just so pointless. If I see a motorist/motorcyclist driving in a manner which I don't approve, I don't feel the need to start a thread about it in the Motoring/Motorcycle Forum. Nor do I feel it gives anyone else a bad name.

Maybe not you but many do ! check the cycling forum.

Why guys wear black without lights beats me, same as dicks in cars without lights it is November !! evenings are dark and dismal, and if some unfortunate driver pedestrian had been involved in accident with this guy, who would be on keyboards now!!

I probably cycle 6-7000 km a year and drive maybe 60-70000, so I see both sides, a lot of fools on both sides, but recently in Dublin the cycle behaviour is shocking, guys in black no lights passing on inside when cars at lights are clearly indicating to go left, drivers have enough to do trying to negotiate traffic without this. Yes some drivers are very bad as well and the one eyed car on country roads really gets me, as do phone usage. Most modern cars tell you if you have bulb out and all have Bluetooth, BTW I came across a very special Ford last week , the only one factory forgot to fit with indicators.

07Lapierre

sham58107 wrote: »

Maybe not you but many do ! check the cycling forum.

Why guys wear black without lights beats me, same as dicks in cars without lights it is November !! evenings are dark and dismal, and if some unfortunate driver pedestrian had been involved in accident with this guy, who would be on keyboards now!!

I probably cycle 6-7000 km a year and drive maybe 60-70000, so I see both sides, a lot of fools on both sides, but recently in Dublin the cycle behaviour is shocking, guys in black no lights passing on inside when cars at lights are clearly indicating to go left, drivers have enough to do trying to negotiate traffic without this. Yes some drivers are very bad as well and the one eyed car on country roads really gets me, as do phone usage. Most modern cars tell you if you have bulb out and all have Bluetooth, BTW I came across a very special Ford last week , the only one factory forgot to fit with indicators.

Do you feel better now that you got that off your chest? I agree with you...lots of numpty's out there on the roads (i met a few myself this morning). I use lights in the dark, i wear bright clothing and obey the ROTR. I can't change other people's Driving/cycling habits. All i can do is try and not be a numpty myself.

Budawanny

sham58107 wrote: »

Maybe not you but many do ! check the cycling forum.

Why guys wear black without lights beats me, same as dicks in cars without lights it is November !! evenings are dark and dismal, and if some unfortunate driver pedestrian had been involved in accident with this guy, who would be on keyboards now!!

I probably cycle 6-7000 km a year and drive maybe 60-70000, so I see both sides, a lot of fools on both sides, but recently in Dublin the cycle behaviour is shocking, guys in black no lights passing on inside when cars at lights are clearly indicating to go left, drivers have enough to do trying to negotiate traffic without this. Yes some drivers are very bad as well and the one eyed car on country roads really gets me, as do phone usage. Most modern cars tell you if you have bulb out and all have Bluetooth, BTW I came across a very special Ford last week , the only one factory forgot to fit with indicators.

You know that 99% percent of us drive too?
15 years no penalty points.
your driving gives you no moral authority here.
"drivers have enough to do trying to negotiate traffic".
NO!. Drivers ARE the traffic.

A Pointless thread. if everyone of us raised a thread on the motoring forum for everytime i saw a car breaking a red light The servers would run out of space.

Ray Bloody Purchase

I do have to admire taxi drivers making the comment about road tax. I'd love to know how they fare out when they complete their income tax return for the year. I'd say the biro could be fairly light when it comes to making a true and accurate statement of their annual earnings.

/totally off the point.

Tombo2001

Is it just me, or is 50 also a bit fast to be going down the hill on a wet day?

07Lapierre

I don't think 50kph is that fast. Depends on the ability of the rider i suppose.

Tombo2001

07Lapierre wrote: »

I don't think 50kph is that fast. Depends on the ability of the rider i suppose.

So the OP is saying

There was no way in hell to avoid an accident if one small thing happened.

Why does that apply at 70 and not at 50.

Going down hill on a wet day.

magicbastarder

FWIW, braking from 50 means scrubbing off half the kinetic energy that braking from 70 would involve.

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

FWIW, braking from 50 means scrubbing off half the kinetic energy that braking from 70 would involve.

what does that mean in plain English?

Macy0161

Tombo2001 wrote: »

what does that mean in plain English?

More chance of avoiding an incident at 50 than 70! :pac:

Tombo2001

Macy0161 wrote: »

More chance of avoiding an incident at 50 than 70! :pac:

Yes, obviously.

However

One small thing that causes an accident at 70k, will also more than likely cause an accident at 50.

Furthermore, come off the bike at 50 is no joke.

Plastik

I came off at 50. It was no joke.

07Lapierre

Tombo2001 wrote: »

So the OP is saying

There was no way in hell to avoid an accident if one small thing happened.

Why does that apply at 70 and not at 50.

Going down hill on a wet day.

I disagree. It depends on what the small thing is. it depends on the experience/skill of the rider. if were talking about an incident with another road user, their reactions may also influence the outcome.

there are a lot of factors involved..maybe travelling at 70 would avoid an incident that might happen if the rider travelled at 50?

magicbastarder

Tombo2001 wrote: »

One small thing that causes an accident at 70k, will also more than likely cause an accident at 50.

braking distance would be roughly halved, though.
that said, you don't want your braking surface to be your face, even if it is "only" 50km/h.

deandean

I feel bad now.
Fastest I ever got on that descent was only 66km/h.

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

braking distance would be roughly halved, though.
that said, you don't want your braking surface to be your face, even if it is "only" 50km/h.

OK.

I did not make the point that 50k is as dangerous as 70k.

I didn't make the point that 50k is nearly as dangerous as 70k.

I made the point that 50k is quite dangerous, in its own right, if 'one small thing goes wrong'.

That has nothing to do with braking time compared to 70k.

What happens if you hit a pothole at 50k.

What happens if a dog runs out in front of you at 50k.

Wider point being that OP is pitching him/ herself as moving nice and safely....while a nutter flies past them.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Tombo2001 wrote: »

One small thing that causes an accident at 70k, will also more than likely cause an accident at 50.

That's complete and utter crap.

thejaguar

Tombo2001 wrote: »

what does that mean in plain English?

This explains it really well I think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3D7XYQExt0

Mercian Pro

at1withmyself wrote: »

Could you please explain why you think that they are a bad cyclist?

See post #1

Ferris

I cycle down that hill every morning at 50+kph but slow to 30-40 through the village, its what I feel is safe(r). I cycle an MTB with disks btw. 70kph imo is nuts through there considering the hazards, for instance you have diagonal parking spaces past the church which cars have to reverse uphill out of. Considering the poor visibility out of the average family car there is no way the driver can see a bike coming down the hill at 30kph, let alone faster. Lets not forget that the limit is 50kph and most cars are travelling well under that. Also there is a pedestrian crossing there, wouldn't fancy trying to stop from 70 for that.

Fighting Tao

Who had the lazer gun to measure the speed?