Bell Etiquette

km991148

I wouldn't do or say anything as I overtake, I would simply make sure I had enough space to complete the maneuver and it was safe to so (same as any other vehicle really).

One thing I notice is that often cyclist will overtaking without checking over their right shoulder (to see if there is someone else doing an overtaking maneuver).

rubadub

I have no issue with somebody ringing a bell. I will often have faster people approach from behind and am well aware of them, but they might not know this. So I will often look back and acknowledge them and veer to the left a little and stop pedalling so they know I am aware and expecting them to pass -and also that I am unlikely to suddenly swing out. Some will say thanks or give a wave or some signal of appreciation

Ringing the bell doesn’t make your overtake any safer if you haven’t left room for them to avoid obstacles in front of them safely

I think it can make things safer for the person being passed, a person might swerve out to miss a fairly benign leaf, crisp packet, slightly rough spot etc -while if they heard a bell or somebody saying "on your right" they know it would be safer to cycle over that leaf rather than swing out. They might still think the person is a prick but are better off taking what is now the safer option.

Cars don't beep at each other when they are overtaking and pedestrians don't shout or speak when overtaking other pedestrians.. why would you ring a bell at someone?

I have heard/seen pedestrians do it, a simply "sorry there" on very tight footpaths. If I was in a car and had not been passed for ages, and the driver somehow knew I had no mirrors then I would not mind a tiny beep from a silent electric car behind to let me know of their presence. (I just see the post now saying cars have mirrors & noise.)

DavyD_83

vektarman wrote: »

Sometimes it's hard to know how people react to a bell ringing behind them. I was on the cycle path in the Phoenix Park a couple of weeks ago, didn't ring the bell and I got a torrent of abuse for not warning the walker in the lane ahead of me of my approach.
A week later, same situation, this time I gave the bell a gentle ring to warn the walker ahead of me on the cycle path, this time I got a sneering look and a "so you got a bell for your birthday" remark. It's a no win. :rolleyes:

Ring the bell all you like at pedestrians who are in the way. Same as you would beep a person standing in the road when driving.
Somebody actively getting in the way by standing/walking/dismounting on the cycle path or road shouldn't be there and almost always deserves all bell ringing, shouting etc at your disposal.

I still think ringing your bell at another cyclist who is going slower and therefore 'in your way' is being a bit of a **** in most scenarios. Cyclists can get stuck in traffic too, just gotta sick it up till the is actually enough space to pass

CramCycle

Macy0161 wrote: »

I use my bell for the same reason - to let people I'm overtaking know I am there (in the context of other cyclists). I used to just say "on your right" or "coming through on your right" but according to a previous thread on here apparently that was wrong too...

I think some people just want to be offended, but it could just be she was getting stressed with the traffic and passes and was venting in general. So my opinion is carry on using your bell.

If I recognise the cyclist and know they are OK (a very small subset I know), or they look behind and acknowledge me, I overtake on the bike path. If they don't and I am significantly faster, I hop into the bus lane when clear and carry on. The guy on the N11 with the bell that he uses constantly and in situations where the other party cannot accomodate him is the reason i don't use them. He is actually a massive ******* and I don't want people to think of me in the same league as him.

ED E

Alanstrainor wrote: »

A cyclist overtaking another cyclist is a silent operation

Not with some of the freehubs out there :pac:

plodder

The only time I use the bell is when passing sheep on the road. They don't seem to take offence. I'd consider using it if there are pedestrians taking up the whole width of a bike lane, and there's no reason for them to be there. Though, looking at that video above, it's a vain hope in that case; there are so many pedestrians about.

nomdeboardie

CramCycle wrote: »

If I recognise the cyclist and know they are OK (a very small subset I know), or they look behind and acknowledge me, I overtake on the bike path. If they don't and I am significantly faster, I hop into the bus lane when clear and carry on. The guy on the N11 with the bell that he uses constantly and in situations where the other party cannot accomodate him is the reason i don't use them. He is actually a massive ******* and I don't want people to think of me in the same league as him.

On the infrequent occasions I come up behind a slower cyclist I usually drop down to the road too, if safe; this sometimes results in me shouting and gesticulating back at the path to a bus or taxi that arrives afterwards but before there's an opportunity to roll back on the path, and harasses me. (This is one of the reasons I have problems with most of the "off road cycling infrastructure" - too narrow for safe overtaking without having to alert the person in front, and alerting is too socially awkward!) If it's a pedestrian (usually with headphones and/or dogs) I add a dirty look backwards with head-shake from the road. I usually avoid 'shared use' paths through parks also, as about half the walkers are in the middle of the path, even if alone, or on the wrong side, or playing with a dog - if anywhere should be suitable for bell this situation, but again, I can't imagine having and using a bell, so I usually go past on the grass with a head shake.

CramCycle

nomdeboardie wrote: »

On the infrequent occasions I come up behind a slower cyclist I usually drop down to the road too, if safe; this sometimes results in me shouting and gesticulating back at the path to a bus or taxi that arrives afterwards but before there's an opportunity to roll back on the path, and harasses me. (This is one of the reasons I have problems with most of the "off road cycling infrastructure" - too narrow for safe overtaking without having to alert the person in front, and alerting is too socially awkward!) If it's a pedestrian (usually with headphones and/or dogs) I add a dirty look backwards with head-shake from the road. I usually avoid 'shared use' paths through parks also, as about half the walkers are in the middle of the path, even if alone, or on the wrong side, or playing with a dog - if anywhere should be suitable for bell this situation, but again, I can't imagine having and using a bell, so I usually go past on the grass with a head shake.

Its funny how you can tell the regular bus and taxi drivers on that road, they typically just wait, which is fine for me, i often given them a wave when I pull in and get one in return. You then get the ones who go mental, not realising that in reality they are not being delayed at all and you will be gone in a minute. These are usually driven by stars of TV3s next hard hitting documentary, Irelands stupidest drivers.

Rechuchote

schemingbohemia wrote: »

I waited until there was a bit more space and then tinkled my bell to let her know I was coming and overtook her - she says as I overtake - "Ding Ding yourself"

She was being boorish. Very ill-mannered of her.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I'd find it annoying if someone rang their bell while passing me while cycling in a normal fashion.

Read what schemingbohemia says: she or he tinkled the bell before passing. That's just polite.

I use my bell constantly when cycling along streets where there are many pedestrians and there's a danger they'll step out in front of me - eg Dame Street, Nassau Street, O'Connell Street. Though that's more a matter of faith than morals, because I've often had people step out with their back to me and other traffic while wearing earphones…

I also use my bell when going along paths, eg Milltown Park, and approaching people walking and obviously engrossed in conversation or listening to the radio or walking their dogs. It hasn't stopped people leaping out in front of me then shouting "Why didn't you ring your bloddy bell?" :eek:

I'd much sooner someone would give a tinkle on the bell before passing me, I get an awful fright when some great lug whizzes close past me at speed and without warning - a really dangerous thing to do, as I might easily have to move out to avoid a stone or pothole.

Weepsie

Rechuchote wrote: »

Read what schemingbohemia says: she or he tinkled the bell before passing. That's just polite.

.

It's mostly unneccessary. I think it says more that the cyclist ringing a bell doesn't have the confidence to complete an overtake without the audible signals. It's a potential distraction too. I get it more for when there are sleepwalking pedestrians blindly stepping out though.

There is a guy on my commute who rings his bell as he approaches bridges along the canal. They are narrow paths, so it's good to give a warning of something approaching the other way. He doesn't slow down however, and just assumes whomever is already there, or approaching should or will stop. He also continually goes through red lights. I pass him a few times on my commute in the mornings, and don't need a bell to do so.

I do have a bell on my commuter though. But I never use it.

jim o doom

Rechuchote wrote: »

I also use my bell when going along paths, eg Milltown Park, and approaching people walking and obviously engrossed in conversation or listening to the radio or walking their dogs.

On the footpath.. if that is what you mean by "path", the pedestrian has the right of way there. If it's a cycle path fair enough, but ringing at people to get out of the way, where you shouldn't really be in the first place? That's a bit crap.

1874

jim o doom wrote: »

I think the majority of people simply overtake. Cars don't beep at each other when they are overtaking and pedestrians don't shout or speak when overtaking other pedestrians.. why would you ring a bell at someone?

They will be aware you are overtaking them when you go past them, same as every other mode of transport. There is also no need to shout at them either. Just signal as necessary and overtake.

Look at it this way; how often do you see overtaking cyclists make any indication to the person they are overtaking? For me it is never. I'd be confused as to why someone was ringing their bell at me when they overtook.

Theres no comparison though,
bicycles can and do move along quite silently, and a bell is better to call out a warning, here I am, people can take offence so easily over a spoken comment, but a bell means Im here, Im coming through, its a courtesy, seeing it any other way is ridiculous.
Being aware when they are overtaking you is too late,
If this really has to be explained to people and other cyclists in general, I shouldnt be, but Im dumbfounded, I really have believed it for quite some time, after being offended for being labelled stupid for how long? It turns out in the main, the Irish really are thick.

what_traffic

Interesting thread.
What is the RSA position or instructions on it?

I could only find the following
http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Campaigns/Wrecked/Downloads/Cycle%20safety%20booklet.pdf

apart from stating the following (which is correct)

“It’s the law to have a bell on your bike at all
times and to have working lights.”

cannot find any information on when to use a bell.

CramCycle

1874 wrote: »

Theres no comparison though,
bicycles can and do move along quite silently, and a bell is better to call out a warning, here I am, people can take offence so easily over a spoken comment, but a bell means Im here, Im coming through, its a courtesy, seeing it any other way is ridiculous.

People take offence at a bell declaring you are coming through, and giving it as a courtesy. A spoken word can ask for permission or excuse yourself etc. I find the spoken word can be far more effective.

jim o doom

1874 wrote: »

Theres no comparison though,
bicycles can and do move along quite silently, and a bell is better to call out a warning, here I am, people can take offence so easily over a spoken comment, but a bell means Im here, Im coming through, its a courtesy, seeing it any other way is ridiculous.
Being aware when they are overtaking you is too late,
If this really has to be explained to people and other cyclists in general, I shouldnt be, but Im dumbfounded, I really have believed it for quite some time, after being offended for being labelled stupid for how long? It turns out in the main, the Irish really are thick.

Have you ever driven a car or ridden a motorcycle? There is a very obvious and direct comparison.

If you are in a car with very good seals, or have a radio on.. guess what, you don't hear any traffic. A motorcycle can come along suddenly and overtake, which is a surprise due to the lack of sound.

The same is true on a motorcycle, if it has a loud engine / pipes, the only thing you can hear is.. your own engine and the sound of wind whistling through your helmet. Again, a faster driving motorcycle / vehicle can appear suddenly, surprising you as it overtakes.

In both of the above situations - the overtaking vehicle generally will not sound their horn. Because it's not the done thing, that is not the use of the horn, it's more likely to DISTRACT the person you are ovetaking, as they are trying to ascertain WHY exactly you are beeping at them, the same is true of a bell.

If I heard someone ringing behind me who then overtook, I would be wondering "what is wrong with that r/tard with their bloody bell". It rarely happens as I cycle quickly to get home fast in a sweaty heap though.

Also - a bell means "I'm here, I'm coming through?" As in, give me the right of way? If you are overtaking someone, you don't need that as you don't have the right of way.

Either overtake in the car lane if there is space to do so and traffic is moving, or don't dangerously overtake in an insufficiently sized cycling lane.

jim o doom

From reading through the posts the following is clear:

There is a stark difference of opinion, some people think ringing a bell to overtake makes sense, and an equal amount of others do not. This includes the person who was being overtaken by the OP "ring ring yourself" having been stated by that person.

This means when you ring your bell to overtake (assuming you think that is the correct route), that the person who is the focus of your bell ring is likely to take it either way. Either "oh thanks for ringing at me" or "what a twit with a bell".

If half the people you are ringing your bell at as you overtake do not want you to do it, and will be annoyed at hearing it (as there are plenty of people posting in this thread who disagree with it, myself included), then WHY are are you doing it?

EVEN if you think it's the right thing to do, you are simply being a very arrogant road user since you are doing it to a large number of other cyclists who have no interest in hearing your ringing your bell at them. You confuse and/or annoy those cyclists when all they should be doing is paying attention to the road.

The very fact that there is no clear "should I or shouldn't I ring my bell at this point", and that plenty of people think it's the wrong thing to do, should in itself be a guidance to not do it.

Lumen

Macy0161 wrote: »

I use my bell for the same reason - to let people I'm overtaking know I am there (in the context of other cyclists). I used to just say "on your right" or "coming through on your right" but according to a previous thread on here apparently that was wrong too...

I may have said the same in that thread, but the problem with "on your right" is that if the recipient isn't used to hearing it, they may just hear "<something> RIGHT" and take it as instruction.

I actually experienced this with a runner up in the Wicklow hills last year. He was running away from me bang in the centre of the road. What to do? I chose "on your right", he veered right, I almost hit him. I left loads of space, but he was very nimble.

I put this (and the bell overtake issue) in the same class of problem as "do I indicate to drivers behind that I think they are OK to overtake", and reach the same conclusion: don't do it, because you have no idea how they will act on it, and you risk being partly at fault.

Rechuchote

jim o doom wrote: »

On the footpath.. if that is what you mean by "path", the pedestrian has the right of way there. If it's a cycle path fair enough, but ringing at people to get out of the way, where you shouldn't really be in the first place? That's a bit crap.

I made two references to footpaths; one was along busy streets, where I use the bell to warn people not to wander out without looking as I ride my bike along. The other was the path through Milltown Park, which is divided along the centre, with one side for bicycles and the other for pedestrians.

In neither case am I ringing my bell to tell people to get out of the way. In both cases I'm politely letting people know that I'm there.

tomasrojo

There are a few small cases where I find it useful to ring a bell.

The most compelling one is going around blind corners, such as on the cycleway from the Sandyford Road out to Marlay Park. The route shouldn't have blind corners with cyclists in close proximity going in opposite directions, but it does, and ringing the bell did help to avoid a collision between me going in one direction and two guys cycling side by side in the other direction going round the blind corner one day.

If you're passing a parked van and there are some people around the front of it that you think might walk out into the road to access something in the van is a similar case.

The other is to let someone know that if they continue on their current trajectory that you're going to collide. Such as pedestrians about to step off the footpath without looking in your direction, cyclists about to ignore the yield sign on their side road, that sort of thing.

But overtaking, you don't need to ring a bell or on-your-right. If the person you're passing is the type that habitually wanders way off-line, they're also the type of person who has no idea what "on your right" means, and they're also the type who'll assume you ringing a bell means you want them to make room for you, or that you're chastising them in some way.

buffalo

jim o doom wrote: »

The very fact that there is no clear "should I or shouldn't I ring my bell at this point", and that plenty of people think it's the wrong thing to do, should in itself be a guidance to not do it.

I understand your point, but in my 20+ years of cycling I've come across more situations where I've regretted to a greater degree not ringing a bell (or at times, not having a bell to ring) than where I've regretted ringing a bell. I've never been actively given out to for ringing a bell for instance.

I find it most useful in parks when people occupy the width of a path 2 or 3 abreast or with dogs and don't notice your approach. It's of limited use in urban areas trying to prevent people stepping out in front of you - I'd be more inclined just to leave space for them to pop out.

buffalo

Also, pro tip: ring your bell from a distance. Ringing from 15-30m away gives more time for people to become aware, and if they turn or move in a weird way, there's plenty of time to brake.

I wouldn't ring right behind someone as I'm about to overtake them, as you're as likely to give them a fright as just overtaking without warning.

Lumen

Possibly the reason people react badly is because they equate it with being beeped at, which is routinely (and wrongly) used as a rebuke.

So maybe we should suck up the bad reactions in an attempt to reassert the classic non-aggressive meaning of the bicycle bell, which is to warn others of our approach.

1874

jim o doom wrote: »

Have you ever driven a car or ridden a motorcycle? There is a very obvious and direct comparison.

If you are in a car with very good seals, or have a radio on.. guess what, you don't hear any traffic. A motorcycle can come along suddenly and overtake, which is a surprise due to the lack of sound.

The same is true on a motorcycle, if it has a loud engine / pipes, the only thing you can hear is.. your own engine and the sound of wind whistling through your helmet. Again, a faster driving motorcycle / vehicle can appear suddenly, surprising you as it overtakes.

In both of the above situations - the overtaking vehicle generally will not sound their horn. Because it's not the done thing, that is not the use of the horn, it's more likely to DISTRACT the person you are ovetaking, as they are trying to ascertain WHY exactly you are beeping at them, the same is true of a bell.

If I heard someone ringing behind me who then overtook, I would be wondering "what is wrong with that r/tard with their bloody bell". It rarely happens as I cycle quickly to get home fast in a sweaty heap though.

Also - a bell means "I'm here, I'm coming through?" As in, give me the right of way? If you are overtaking someone, you don't need that as you don't have the right of way.

Either overtake in the car lane if there is space to do so and traffic is moving, or don't dangerously overtake in an insufficiently sized cycling lane.

yes I have and do, and no it isn't.
There is no expectation for a car or motorbike to be whizzing past pedestrians on the path, pedestrians can and do move out, but there is an understanding among people (mostly) that know where vehicles will be on a road and a convention for which way they travel (and I exclude children, who may not know and is why drivers should proceed with care where children may be present) the only comparable aspect you mention is the noise, so engines or rolling noise of tyres on the ground, mostly vehicles arent silent, it's possible to hear an approaching motorised vehicle in advance, have had twits on bikes whiz past me when walking my dog or out with my son, a brief bike bell ring fron 20m back would help, never heard them coming, one idiot crashed into me on a bike on the path before, its painful, wouldnt fancy getting gouged with pedals and I don't recommend whizzing past people unannounced.

downtheroad

Lumen wrote: »

Possibly the reason people react badly is because they equate it with being beeped at, which is routinely (and wrongly) used as a rebuke.

So maybe we should suck up the bad reactions in an attempt to reassert the classic non-aggressive meaning of the bicycle bell, which is to warn others of our approach.

Agree with this. I was cycling along Baggot Street earlier this week and there was a guy crossing the road looking at his phone walking directly into my path so I rang the bell just to let him know I was there. He threw a banana skin at me. Maybe he would have preferred me to collide with him.

magicbastarder

buffalo wrote: »

Also, pro tip: ring your bell from a distance. Ringing from 15-30m away gives more time for people to become aware, and if they turn or move in a weird way, there's plenty of time to brake.

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

CramCycle

I understand all the comments above but I just don't see what it achieves better than your voice. The only reason I can see people wanting to use it is so they can carry their speed through, and to be honest, that's not a good enough reason for me. No different than any other vehicle, slow down and move past when safe and there is space. Maybe that's why I and some others have such a dim view of them because typically it is someone carrying on through whether you have heeded the bell or not.

DavyD_83

DavyD_83 wrote: »

I'd take it as equivalent of beeping a you pass somebody when driving.
Generally indicates that the person was in some way in the wrong and 'in your way'.
The response you received sounds fairly typical, especially if as you say other had already passed her, so there was obviously enough space being left etc.

What did you intend to indicate or achieve by ringing the bell?

Depends on the beep.

In a car a quick double tap is a notification of something whereas a single long blast is a F.U.

I live in a cycle heavy rural area and will hang behind cyclists until I get a safe overtaking patch, I will tend to double tap beep as I start my manoeuvre just as a heads up. I've yet to get anything but a wave through before or a polite nod/slight wave as I pass, from anyone.

I do the same to tractors or other slow moving traffic because generally you are accelerating from a fairly sedate speed to overtake as quickly as the conditions allow.

buffalo

CramCycle wrote: »

I understand all the comments above but I just don't see what it achieves better than your voice. The only reason I can see people wanting to use it is so they can carry their speed through, and to be honest, that's not a good enough reason for me. No different than any other vehicle, slow down and move past when safe and there is space. Maybe that's why I and some others have such a dim view of them because typically it is someone carrying on through whether you have heeded the bell or not.

My experience of using my voice usually involves waiting until I'm right behind a person and then giving them a fright and causing general confusion and some awkwardness on the part of the other person (and occasionally getting given out to for not using a bell). Giving ample warning would involve shouting at them, which I obviously don't want to do.

My speed is most situations where I'm using my bell is about 15-20kph, so that's not really a concern for me. If I'm going faster then 25kph and a pedestrian is in my line, braking and avoidance measures take precedence over the bell.

CramCycle

buffalo wrote: »

My experience of using my voice usually involves waiting until I'm right behind a person and then giving them a fright and causing general confusion and some awkwardness on the part of the other person (and occasionally getting given out to for not using a bell). Giving ample warning would involve shouting at them, which I obviously don't want to do.

My speed is most situations where I'm using my bell is about 15-20kph, so that's not really a concern for me. If I'm going faster then 25kph and a pedestrian is in my line, braking and avoidance measures take precedence over the bell.

Get a more expensive rear wheel and freewheel from a distance.

tomasrojo

what_traffic wrote: »

Interesting thread.
What is the RSA position or instructions on it?

I could only find the following
http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Campaigns/Wrecked/Downloads/Cycle%20safety%20booklet.pdf

apart from stating the following (which is correct)



cannot find any information on when to use a bell.

Not sure whether I mentioned it in this thread, but The Unbelievable Truth had a bit about the original law in the UK, repealed in the 1930s IIRC, which was that cyclists were supposed to ring the bell *constantly* while in motion. I guess it was based on the bike being the quietest form of transport that was also potentially pretty fast.