nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Cyclists mega-thread (WARNING: Before posting you must read post #1)

madra dubh

Moderator warning and notes:

Reminder to all: The Commuting and Transport charter applies -- it is stricter than many forums. You must read it before posting on this or other threads.

And remember, this is a thread on the Commuting and Transport board, so talk about how transport modes compare is relevant and attempts to state otherwise and/or tell people what they can't or can talk about will be viewed as back seat modding.

There's been a few of these threads recently, so this is likely going to become the official give out about cyclists megathread (I'll come up with a better title before renaming the thread).

These will be to contain such discussion away from other threads and bring them off topic and to stop new threads of the same vain from always happening.

This thread will be different than normal thread and arguments should not be repeated unless you have something new to add -- at some point soon in the future a FAQ type first post will deal the repeated arguments and outline both sides of arguments like "road tax" etc.

Normal rules in the charter apply, including not replying to this mod warning.

- moderator

Original opening post follows:

Why do we tolerate them on our roads. I have been a cyclist, motorcyclist, car driver, van driver & minibus driver and by far the worst are cyclists. Colour blind (don't recognise traffic lights). They moan continually about other road users not being considerate yet a large amount make no effort to keep themselves seen and safe. Pay no road tax yet are allocated cycle lanes. Need no insurance yet can cause damage (ever tried to claim off one that is at fault). Motorcyclists tend to get a bad rap mainly due to speed but I have found them to be the best on the road for consideration and road awareness.
There can of worms opened.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

plodder

07Lapierre wrote: »

Gardai have the power to confiscate cars for no road tax/insurance etc. I see no difference between this and confiscating bikes with no lights. They are confiscated because the vehicles should not be on the road and the users of these vehicles are a danger to themselves and other road users. Makes sense to me.

Now that you mention it, I think they do have the power to confiscate "unroadworthy" vehicles already and it has happened with regard to broken lights. There was someone on Joe Duffy recently complaining about it. Though as is usual, the "real" reason that the car was taken was that the driver p!ssed the guard off over something else.

BlinkingLights

magicbastarder wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMLINNMcWj8

That's something that needs to be regulated out of existence. If end users are expected legally (notably in France, the home of Renault...) to have spares and be able to change them at the roadside, that design's just seriously ridiculous!

I changed to bulbs in an infinately more technologically complicated but highly reliable 2008 Prius in about 3 mins without tools.

Macy0161

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I still remember the night I was heading down the quays and realised how little extra visibility the high vis jackets afford. I always wear mine because it's better than my black jacket.

The hi viz or the reflective bits? Reflective strips don't have to be attached to something hi viz.

But less chance of seeing RSA logo so as to be seen to be doing something on an old style browne belt or an ankle/ arm band compared to the advertising opportunity presented by a builders vest...

btw, upland fog/ mist on my commute home last night. Plenty of cars not bothering with headlights, never mind fog lights...

07Lapierre

Macy0161 wrote: »

The hi viz or the reflective bits? Reflective strips don't have to be attached to something hi viz.

But less chance of seeing RSA logo so as to be seen to be doing something on an old style browne belt or an ankle/ arm band compared to the advertising opportunity presented by a builders vest...

btw, upland fog/ mist on my commute home last night. Plenty of cars not bothering with headlights, never mind fog lights...

+1 this is an important point. Most items of cycling clothing have reflective strips which are just as good, if not better than Hi Viz clothing.

Example: Most Overshoes are black, but they all have reflective zippers on the rear which are very effective as they move up and down as you pedal.

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/ie/en/sealskinz-neoprene-overshoe-ss17/rp-prod109157

RichardoKhan

Quick story which kinda sums up why we are seeing this grow......Couple of years ago my folks were stopping at Buswells hotel opp the Dail. I had reason to take a private call on my mobile and stood outside the hotel on the corner. It was fairly dark. As I chatted on phone doing the sum mobile dance. Saw a what looked like a courier cyclist wheeling up the road. On the path, off the path. Zig zagging away. No lights, front or back. No reflective clothing. Dark bike , dark clothes. Wheels up to the two Guards outside the Dail there. Had the chat and away he goes........No comments from the Guards. Nada!

RD10

07Lapierre wrote: »

I'd go further and say a Garda should confiscate a bike from a cyclist he catches cycling at night with no lights! When they turn up at the station to collect their bike (and pay the fixed penalty notice) the next day, they don't get the bike back until they fit lights. Introducing fines and then not enforcing the rules is a total waste of time and effort!

spot on.

LeinsterDub

RichardoKhan wrote: »

Quick story which kinda sums up why we are seeing this grow......

If we are seeing this grow it's because the growth in the number of cyclist

Roadhawk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

If we are seeing this grow it's because the growth in the number of cyclist

There is definitely a growth in the number of cyclists which would contribute to the number that is see without lights but I would also think that motorists would notice them more over the last few months because of the dark morning and evenings. Coming into the summer with brighter mornings and evenings you can be sure that motorist wont notice them as much.

LeinsterDub

Roadhawk wrote: »

There is definitely a growth in the number of cyclists which would contribute to the number that is see without lights but I would also think that motorists would notice them more over the last few months because of the dark morning and evenings. Coming into the summer with brighter mornings and evenings you can be sure that motorist wont notice them as much.

Aka lights not needed when it's bright?

HugoRune

Deleted User wrote: »

Not always, no. Not everywhere I go is it well received to have a handful of bike lights. If people would stop interfering with other people's stuff in the first place it wouldn't be an issue.

I'm just throwing out a theory as to why some people might not have lights on the bikes.

Lights can be tiny now, around the size of your thumb. Half twist to remove and put in your pocket. USB rechargeable as as well. And nobody will bother taking the mounts.

It can be pretty difficult when people go the other way though. One cyclist on my commute seems to provide enough light for half the city. The front light is really distracting when she's behind me because I keep thinking there's a truck lining me up. And I'm practically blinded by the blinking (not a substitute swear word) red light when she's in front, meaning that there's essentially no chance of seeing a pothole or anything.

PeadarCo

LeinsterDub wrote:

Aka lights not needed when it's bright?

To be fair a good red rear light can be very useful when the sun is very low in the horizon and in a drivers eyes, typically in around mid December and early morning/late in the evening other parts of the year. In those type of situations you'll have no problem seeing a car because its size blocks a lot of light. Bikes/pedestrians have a far smaller shadow from behind particularly in the case of bikes. A good red light can provide a better contrast in that situation.

Roadhawk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Aka lights not needed when it's bright?

Lights may or may not be needed when its bright out but as it stands a cyclist is not legally required to use a light during the day unless they want to. Its optional.

At night however, they are legally required to have a front and rear light.

What distinguishes weather they are required or not it the "lighting up hours". This is usually when the street lights are on.

magicbastarder

an aside, but the design of a lot of streetlights leaves a lot to be desired. ideally you should not see the light(bulb) itself, but only the objects the light is actually reflecting off. makes it easier for your eyes to see what's actually ahead. and is better for the environment too.

07Lapierre

Roadhawk wrote: »

Lights may or may not be needed when its bright out but as it stands a cyclist is not legally required to use a light during the day unless they want to. Its optional.

At night however, they are legally required to have a front and rear light.

What distinguishes weather they are required or not it the "lighting up hours". This is usually when the street lights are on.

See, the Law assumes that people would use their god given intelligence/ common sense and switch on lights on dark/dull and wet days.

If More people did use a bit of common sense/intelligence, we'd need less laws, less enforcement etc. etc.

Carawaystick

07Lapierre wrote: »

I'd go further and say a Garda should confiscate a bike from a cyclist he catches cycling at night with no lights! When they turn up at the station to collect their bike (and pay the fixed penalty notice) the next day, they don't get the bike back until they fit lights. I

You'ld have the gards lettin fellas with shivs/sharp instruments into a lockup?!:eek:

ted1

All bikes that are intended for use on the road other than actually racing should be sold with Dynamo hubs as standard. Integrated lighting should be the norm not the exception

magicbastarder

my wife was asking the other day (after seeing a cyclist tailgated by a bus) whether there are rear lights for bikes which can be triggered by a brake pull. i've certainly never heard of them.

07Lapierre

magicbastarder wrote: »

my wife was asking the other day (after seeing a cyclist tailgated by a bus) whether there are rear lights for bikes which can be triggered by a brake pull. i've certainly never heard of them.

There are "intelligent" lights that react to traffic..

https://seesense.cc/?gclid=COWBormqlNICFam87QodGcMBjA

(although i doubt the bus was tailgating the cyclist because he couldn't see the cyclist..i suspect he was trying to intimidate the cyclist to get out of the way!)

magicbastarder

it was at a point (in drumcondra) where the cycle path swings to a ludicrous off-road position (and my wife is familiar with it from me giving out about it); but a car was parked across the entry to the cycle lane, so the cyclist continued on the road. my wife reckons the bus driver was annoyed the cyclist wasn't using the cycle path.

07Lapierre

When I was a kid I connected a micro switch to the rear brake caliper and had it linked to my rear light!....although it had to be constantly adjusted as the switch kept moving due to vibration from the road I thought it was brill!

Roadhawk

Lets not run away with ourselves...there are loads of lighting options out there but the main issue is that not many cyclists are using them. If they could just use a basic (and decent) light it would be more than acceptable.

My favorite lights for bikes are:
https://revolights.com/

RobertFoster

magicbastarder wrote: »

my wife was asking the other day (after seeing a cyclist tailgated by a bus) whether there are rear lights for bikes which can be triggered by a brake pull. i've certainly never heard of them.

Some dynamo rear lights can detect braking and get brighter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoCAhxAy7tE

Macy0161

magicbastarder wrote: »

my wife was asking the other day (after seeing a cyclist tailgated by a bus) whether there are rear lights for bikes which can be triggered by a brake pull. i've certainly never heard of them.

No need - we have hand signals. I'm sure all our super dooper highly trained people driving cars know and remember them!

07Lapierre

Macy0161 wrote: »

No need - we have hand signals. I'm sure all our super dooper highly trained people driving cars know and remember them!

To be fair...when was the last time you saw a cyclist using the "I'm Slowing down" hand signal? We do use it on group spins to signal to other cyclist behind us that were slowing/stopping, but I never use it when cycling solo.

magicbastarder

also, if you do need to brake suddenly, do you really want to be using one of your hands to signal to motorists behind?

MrMorooka

ted1 wrote: »

All bikes that are intended for use on the road other than actually racing should be sold with Dynamo hubs as standard. Integrated lighting should be the norm not the exception

I agree with this, seems like the best solution.

Roadhawk

07Lapierre wrote: »

To be fair...when was the last time you saw a cyclist using the "I'm Slowing down" hand signal? We do use it on group spins to signal to other cyclist behind us that were slowing/stopping, but I never use it when cycling solo.

So you would signal to a fellow cyclist but not a motorist? Why not?

Roadhawk

MrMorooka wrote: »

I agree with this, seems like the best solution.

It is great a solution with the extra benefit of a break light but its useless if cyclists dont buy (and fit) them. The options are out there...

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

So you would signal to a fellow cyclist but not a motorist? Why not?

how many motorists would understand an 'i'm slowing down' cycling hand signal?

Macy0161

I've used it when I've been pulling into the kerb rather than taking a left, in traffic. Even at my fatest, I'd say a car or bus could see around me to see traffic stopping or some other reason for me to slow.

I learnt the hand signals initially when I did cycling proficiency in primary school, but they were (potentially) something you could asked in your driving test (I predate the actual theory test). They're still included in the rules of the road I'd assume?