Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

Wombatman

Should out of competition cycling, two abreast, be allowed on public roads?

Hoboo

GRENADE !!!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Hoboo wrote: »

GRENADE !!!

I know, why did I bother responding? :pac:

Hoboo

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, it allows for safer overtaking of cyclists.

Is that because in theory it will make the pack shorter?

Wombatman

Garda say cycling two abreast should only occur when safe to do so and in some locations it should not be done at all.

milhous

Hoboo wrote: »

Is that because in theory it will make the pack shorter?

I think it's because when there is on coming traffic cars will not take the risk to squeeze past. I think if two lads are out for a cycle, there's no car coming and passing them would be safe except that they are two abreast they should try and go single.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Already regretting responding to this thread. I’m out! I do NOT have the energy.

mikhail

Seems like you've little enough to be worrying you. I literally can't remember the last time I met a pair of cyclists riding abreast. I'm fairly sure that I had overtaken them seconds later though.

Oink

As we all know us cyclists are vermin and we should be exterminated with extreme prejudice. That’s what I learnt from the last 74 threads on this topic anyway, feel free to correct me.

I’m just skipping a few pages in the debate here.

tuxy

It should be mandatory for groups, it takes far too long to overtake if they are single file.

Hoboo

tuxy wrote: »

It should be mandatory for groups, it takes far too long to overtake if they are single file.

Try passing 60+ on a country road, 2 abreast, in one long line, it's 120m to get from back to front. No problem with 2 abreast, although the one at the back should be calling file if there's a backup of cars, it's the bunching that makes it dangerous, split packs up and give cars a chance to get by two smaller groups. The local clubs when training do this, it's the casual Garmin sponsored ones that act dangerously, certainly in my neck of the woods.

Wombatman

Hoboo wrote: »

Try passing 60+ on a country road, 2 abreast, in one long line, it's 120m to get from back to front. No problem with 2 abreast, although the one at the back should be calling file if there's a backup of cars, it's the bunching that makes it dangerous, split packs up and give cars a chance to get by two smaller groups. The local clubs when training do this, it's the casual Garmin sponsored ones that act dangerously, certainly in my neck of the woods.

Surely this would be in competition though. Why form these obstructive big groups at all if not in competition?

tuxy

Wombatman wrote: »

Surely this would be in competition though. Why form these obstructive big groups at all if not in competition?

Any of the clubs I know of will split up into smaller groups based on ability.

flazio

Some people get out cycling as a social thing.
Hard to be social if you can't talk to other cyclists.

gozunda

I'm sorry but the title reminds of that old primary school drawing of two men holding one between them.

I'll get my coat ...

Wombatman

flazio wrote: »

Some people get out cycling as a social thing.
Hard to be social if you can't talk to other cyclists.

Using headsets probably much safer.

MarkHenderson

flazio wrote: »

Some people get out cycling as a social thing.
Hard to be social if you can't talk to other cyclists.

They should go to a coffee shop if they want to talk.

tuxy

Wombatman wrote: »

Using headsets probably much safer.

Since two abreast is already safer in most cases I don't think headsets are needed just for the short periods on narrow lanes.

tuxy

MarkHenderson wrote: »

They should go to a coffee shop if they want to talk.

What wrong with talking while cycling?
In groups you will already have someone beside you as that is the safest position to take. Might as well talk to them.

facehugger99

Yes, makes it easier to take out 2 cyclists at once.

beazee

So what do you propose instead?

Should the cyclists cycle in single file so they can be easily overtaken on a narrow country road DESPITE oncoming traffic? And who cares if the cyclist ends in a ditch as a result, right?

Is that the outcome expected?


Was there a one-horse sulky on the road (instead of two-abreast cyclists) would it be safe to overtake?
If not - then you should wait and proceed at the pace of a vehicle in front of you until it is safe to overtake.

tuxy

I'm amazed by the amount of people that can overtake a tractor or even a combine harvester no problem but 4 cyclist cycling 2 abreast is too challenging for them!

Fighting Tao

It’s been a while since there’s been a person on bikes bashing thread. Well done op. You managed to reinvent the wheel.

Beasty

To be clear, cycling 3 abreast is allowed when the cyclist on the outside is overtaking two on the inside

Beasty

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You managed to reinvent the wheel.

Which one? Front? Back? Steering? Or maybe you think it will turn into a wheely good thread?

Hoboo

Wombatman wrote: »

Surely this would be in competition though. Why form these obstructive big groups at all if not in competition?

Ignorance. Its not the local clubs guys, they're out with cars and going hell for leather. These guys are stopping for cake on a Sunday morning, only day they're out.

Absolutely no way should it be allowed, causing needless hold ups for cars and other vehicles where you could get past one easily but two abreast makes it too tight to get past with oncoming traffic.

BeerWolf

I really enjoy being on the back roads and cyclists never ****ing giving way even past large driveway entrances, with a trail of cars behind them.

Stuck up jerks...

ted1

Wombatman wrote: »

Should out of competition cycling, two abreast, be allowed on public roads?

Yes as it’s safer.

Should single occupant cars be allowed during rush hours ?

Fighting Tao

Beasty wrote: »

Which one? Front? Back? Steering? Or maybe you think it will turn into a wheely good thread?

Steering wheel. It looks like it's been replaced with a one directional device. The only way the thread will go now is down.

Fighting Tao

Branson Angry Circus wrote: »

Absolutely no way should it be allowed, causing needless hold ups for cars and other vehicles where you could get past one easily but two abreast makes it too tight to get past with oncoming traffic.

You should buy yourself a super fast tank and just drive over all the vehicles that are slowing down your (self)important journey.

Kimbot

mikhail wrote: »

Seems like you've little enough to be worrying you. I literally can't remember the last time I met a pair of cyclists riding abreast. I'm fairly sure that I had overtaken them seconds later though.

I come across it all the time and in some cases they are 3-4 abreast holding up traffic.

PeadarCo

Tyler Famous Sailfish wrote:

Absolutely no way should it be allowed, causing needless hold ups for cars and other vehicles where you could get past one easily but two abreast makes it too tight to get past with oncoming traffic.

If its not safe don't pass. Basic driving. In general on most roads if its not safe to pass one cyclist its not safe to pass 2 that are abreast. And when it comes actually passing its safer for the driver. 10 cyclists 2 abreast is shorter than 10 cyclists single file.

And when it comes to unnecessary hold ups for drivers surely accidents M50 are the worst. Not a cyclist in sight and a someone can be held up for an hour plus on top of the rush hour standstill. All caused by drivers driving too close together.
.

Fighting Tao

Kimbot wrote: »

I come across it all the time and in some cases they are 3-4 abreast holding up traffic.

So they had 3-4 breasts? Was this on Mars by any chance? I heard the floozies in the bars there are a bit better endowed than on Earth.

Sam Quentin

https://youtu.be/E9eSYSjDrDo

Fighting Tao

Sam Quentin wrote: »

https://youtu.be/E9eSYSjDrDo

Cool...a video dump without comment always goes down well. :P Although I have to say the car in front of you was doing so well until some magic forcefield moved him across a solid white line.

tuxy

Sam Quentin wrote: »

https://youtu.be/E9eSYSjDrDo

Very good example of how much safer riding two abreast can be.
If they were single file the SUV could have been tempted to overtake on a bend and with a long single file the only place to go with oncoming traffic is back in on top of the cyclists.

I see lots of crazy stuff out on public roads but that's a good example of both drivers and cyclists sharing the roads and being considerate of others.

PeadarCo

Fighting Tao wrote:

So they had 3-4 breasts? Was this on Mars by any chance? I heard the floozies in the bars there are a bit better endowed than on Earth.

To be fair in most cases the issue here is limitation of human depth perception. If the cyclists are not directly in line one another it can appear that they are more spread out than they actually are. Apparently the human eyes can't see the gap between the rows of cyclists.

Fighting Tao

PeadarCo wrote: »

To be fair in most cases the issue here is limitation of human depth perception. If the cyclists are not directly in line one another it can appear that they are more spread out than they actually are. Apparently the human eyes can't see the gap between the rows of cyclists.

Yes I know that and it has been said many times on Boards. However, people who post about 3, 4, 5, 6 abreast are not normally the type that care about the facts of the matter and so my attempt of a joke reply.

Fann Linn

They should be made wear hi viz also.

Kimbot

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Yes I know that and it has been said many times on Boards. However, people who post about 3, 4, 5, 6 abreast are not normally the type that care about the facts of the matter and so my attempt of a joke reply.

So your saying that no cyclists anywhere ride 3-4 abreast?

Fighting Tao

Fann Linn wrote: »

They should be made wear hi viz also.

I'm getting so close to shouting "bingo"!

Fann Linn

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I'm getting so close to shouting "bingo"!

That was the intention.

tuxy

Fann Linn wrote: »

They should be made wear hi viz also.

All cars should come in hi viz colours only.

Fighting Tao

Kimbot wrote: »

So your saying that no cyclists anywhere ride 3-4 abreast?

Well it would be a very stupid comment to say that something has never ever happened somewhere in the world and you know that. Of course it has happened...look at cycling races and you'll often see it. They even do 4 abreast while standing around at the start line! :eek:

Seth Brundle

Kimbot wrote: »

So your saying that no cyclists anywhere ride 3-4 abreast?

Have you?
Evidence from some dash cam footage will suffice.

tuxy

Yes it not uncommon in large races but there will be cars motorbike and marshals working on traffic safety.

The only other time I've seem 6 abreast was children playing in a housing estate.

I'm sure at some point 6 cyclists out on their own have done it but I've never seen it and I would be happy to see the Garda pull them over if I ever did come across such a thing.

Wombatman

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It’s been a while since there’s been a person on bikes bashing thread. Well done op. You managed to reinvent the wheel.

What are you on about? This is very topical considering the scrapping of the minimum passing distance proposal. I cycle to work every day. Where am I bashing exactly?

Kimbot

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Have you?
Evidence from some dash cam footage will suffice.

Unfortunately I don't have a dash cam so can't provide it but if I do come across it again I'll be sure to get my passenger to take a video of it.

Beasty

Wombatman wrote: »

Where am I bashing exactly?

Starting a thread on Cycling in AH? Seriously??

Seth Brundle

Kimbot wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have a dash cam so can't provide it but if I do come across it again I'll be sure to get my passenger to take a video of it.

You imply that it is a common sight so maybe come back to us tomorrow or Tuesday with that footage so!
Thanks.