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

Bell Etiquette

schemingbohemia

So was cycling along Parnell Road beside the Grand Canal the other morning. Lots of slow moving vehicular traffic, I wasn't going at any great pace when I come to a slower moving cyclist ahead of me, no chance to get past so take my time behind her.
A couple of other cyclists thought they had room and overtook both me and her. 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" - is it wrong to use your bell to let someone know you're overtaking?
I wasn't using it as a "get out of my way" just to let her know that I was overtaking as with all the drains there she might have veered to the right as I was doing so.
So should I shout instead, say nothing or continue to tinkle my bell and not worry about reactions?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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.

ED E

Alanstrainor wrote: »

A cyclist overtaking another cyclist is a silent operation

Not with some of the freehubs out there :pac:

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.

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

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.)

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).

Alanstrainor

ED E wrote: »

"On your right".

This is the solution to lots of these posts.

Even though I have a bell, I'm reluctant to use it around other cyclists as a surprising % take offence. There was a comparison made about cars not beeping every time they overtake, but cars have mirrors and make noise. A cyclist overtaking another cyclist is a silent operation and a courtesy ring or noise is a good thing. It's a pity a lot don't seem to understand this though.

vektarman

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:

ULMarc

I think ringing a bell is a good thing. Though, I am fearful of other's attitudes when I use my own bell.

homer911

Cycling along the N11 cycle path this morning when I had to swerve to avoid a slightly sunken man-hole cover, at precisely the moment a cyclist from behind decided to overtake me! Our bikes interlocked for a couple of seconds before we mutually extracted ourselves and carried on. While I felt somewhat responsible and apologized during the tryst, why oh why cant fellow cyclists (a) buy and use a bell and (b) leave reasonable space when overtaking another cyclist. The 1.5m is not just for cars..

martyc5674

tomasrojo wrote: »

Yeah, if you're passing so closely that you're worried them changing line in a small way will result in a collision, then you're carrying out a dangerous passing manoeuvre.

Nail on the head. That’s what it boils down to... some are using it as a “watch out” as I’m not gonna slow down others to alert as to their presence, then of course you have people waiting in the long grass to be offended.
Marty.

tomasrojo

tommythecat wrote: »

What am I wrong about exactly? 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. The onus is on you to make sure you are overtaking safely, not them.

Yeah, if you're passing so closely that you're worried them changing line in a small way will result in a collision, then you're carrying out a dangerous passing manoeuvre.

tommythecat

work wrote: »

This is completely wrong the terrible bike lanes can require evasive action any time and if separated will not leave room for avoiding a colission. As such using your legally required (I believe?) is a good idea. I feel safer ringing to overtake and do it all the time. I do it well in advance of overtaking

What am I wrong about exactly? 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. The onus is on you to make sure you are overtaking safely, not them.

magicbastarder

you could just sing loudly as you cycled?

maybe not as assertively as this though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehh8ZdIMMj4

CramCycle

It's a rare occasion in Ireland where someone using a bell isn't being a pr1ck. Passing with an inch to spare and not actually even waiting to to see if it was noticed, most treat it as a, I've rang my bell, therefore I'm entitled to pass. This is why bell users rarely get unpleasant responses. Some do use bells properly, ring before being right up your ass, only ring once or twice, wait for some indication they were heard. I used to have and use one but the small number of tosspots on the n11 and elsewhere made me not want to look like a pr1ck as well or be confused with them. Get a wheel with a loud freewheel and sit back far enough that your not up their ass, if they don't notice wait until an opportunity to overtake safely without any action from them eg being able to go completely into the lane beside you presents itself.

If you insist on using one, I'd recommend one of the friendlier sounding Dutch bells, ring once or twice before your behind them and if they don't notice leave it. Do not ring it as you pass or are just starting the overtake as you may startle them.

work

tommythecat wrote: »

schemingbohemia wrote: »

I'd rather people let me know they are overtaking me (where there is limited overtaking space) given the occasional need to move off my line due to potholes or drains, I don't tinkle every overtake!
To be honest the other two cyclists who overtook her went too close to her in my mind, if she had veered off course even a little bit there could have been a collision, I was simply making her aware that I was about to overtake so she should ensure she stayed straight.

In fairness it isn't up to her to make your overtake easier. If she needs to avoid a pothole when you are overtaking her it's your responsibility to have left her room to do that. So saying that ringing your bell somehow puts the onus on her to "stay straight" is unreasonable in my opinion.
I wouldn't ring the bell it will just irritate people.

This is completely wrong the terrible bike lanes can require evasive action any time and if separated will not leave room for avoiding a colission. As such using your legally required (I believe?) is a good idea. I feel safer ringing to overtake and do it all the time. I do it well in advance of overtaking

tomasrojo

I brought up this subject before (more about the "on your right" business rather than bells). My objection was that people who do it (outside the context of club cycling and competitions) are usually passing with centimetres to spare, and their warnings aren't courteous; they're excusing their terrible passing and their impatience.

(Not saying the OP was passing with centimetres to spare.)

Peter T

IF you're being overtaken in a car there's a good chance you'll spot them in your mirror and hopefully vice versa. I wouldn't take offence to someone ringing a bell, someone isnt going to know you're there unless they look over a shoulder. I dont commute on my bike just head out for spins but if I'm catching someone I usually give a "Rider up" so they know I'm there and will be passing

Wishbone Ash

Benny Biscotti wrote: »

...If people take it in annoyance well that's the way they choose to see it, it's not your fault.

Have you read the first post? The cyclist the OP passed was not weaving in and out, hence her annoyance at the unnecessary use of a bell.

When you are driving, do you sound a horn at every other vehicle you pass?

Lumen

schemingbohemia wrote: »

she says as I overtake - "Ding Ding yourself"

The correct response to this is...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV0lKD3KPsc

Benny Biscotti

Safety should trump etiquette. I would continue to use the bell in the manner you said; if they are weaving in and out. The amount of cyclists I see moving out to the right before looking or not looking at all.

The bell is for precisely this reason. If people take it in annoyance well that's the way they choose to see it, it's not your fault.

martyc5674

I think we don’t use bells enough in this country.
It’s important the bell has a pleasant tone if that makes any sense.
I use mine a fair bit on shared surfaces where you have a lot of pedestrians etc that might have headphones on or might be in their own little world.
I’d always pass leaving plenty of space and slowing down a little to ensure I don’t come across as aggressive.
I’d often use it in circumstances where sailing past might spook someone... but I’d ring way ahead.
I think it’s just courtesy... in France if you hear a bell you just move over... I suppose out on the road there should be less use for it but as greenways etc start to develop in this country it’s a good thing to have on the bike.
I encourage my kids to use them all the time, but to use them in time and not aggressively.
Marty.

ED E

"On your right".

Sidenote: Apologies to the cyclist at Lamb Doyles last Sunday, scared the living daylights out of him when calling him out to the club members behind.

Chartsengrafs

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Ok so no agreement on etiquette, fair enough.
It was definitely a short Ding rather than a long ding just to be clear.

I had waited quite some time to overtake in what I regarded as a safe manner where I would be giving her a lot more space than the previous cyclists had.
I'm not a quick cyclist at all and where possible on that road I do keep to the left to leave as much space as I can for other cyclists to overtake me.

Don’t worry about how much space the previous person left, that’s irrelevant.
If you feel you could pass the slower cyclist safely, without endangering her or yourself, then there’s absolutely no need to ring a bell.

Macy0161

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I'd find it annoying if someone rang their bell while passing me while cycling in a normal fashion.. Totally unnecessary. If space is limited why not wait until it's safer. The only time I'd consider it acceptable would be if a cyclist was weaving all over the road/cycle track.

Just to clarify, I don't do it every time I overtake, it's normally if someone is weaving, or taking the centre of the lane, when a slight shift to the left would allow an overtake.

schemingbohemia

Ok so no agreement on etiquette, fair enough.
It was definitely a short Ding rather than a long ding just to be clear.

I had waited quite some time to overtake in what I regarded as a safe manner where I would be giving her a lot more space than the previous cyclists had.
I'm not a quick cyclist at all and where possible on that road I do keep to the left to leave as much space as I can for other cyclists to overtake me.

OleRodrigo

Depends on the tone.

A loud BRING BRRING can come off as ' Outta my way missus '

A short DING will say ' coming up on the right '

Best not use the bell, just overtake quickly and leave her some space, with a flick of the left hand to say ' excuse me ' .

Bells are best for the smartphone pedestrian about to step out in front of you. In the absence of a bell , an inner city drug dealers whistle will catch attention (if you can perfect it - but a half assed effort is still effective )

Alanstrainor

I don't do it generally, but when I do I would say thanks as I pass. It might make more sense to the other cyclist then. Most don't use bells, and most don't know of any etiquette, so I can see how the person got mad as a result. I've been sworn at by pedestrians in bike lanes when I ring mine, full on aggression, so I reckon most just see it as a car horn equivalent.

Wishbone Ash

I'd find it annoying if someone rang their bell while passing me while cycling in a normal fashion.. Totally unnecessary. If space is limited why not wait until it's safer. The only time I'd consider it acceptable would be if a cyclist was weaving all over the road/cycle track.

Some motorcyclists sound their horn when overtaking cyclists but they don't do it while overtaking other motorcyclists. Don't know why.

tommythecat

schemingbohemia wrote: »

I'd rather people let me know they are overtaking me (where there is limited overtaking space) given the occasional need to move off my line due to potholes or drains, I don't tinkle every overtake!
To be honest the other two cyclists who overtook her went too close to her in my mind, if she had veered off course even a little bit there could have been a collision, I was simply making her aware that I was about to overtake so she should ensure she stayed straight.

In fairness it isn't up to her to make your overtake easier. If she needs to avoid a pothole when you are overtaking her it's your responsibility to have left her room to do that. So saying that ringing your bell somehow puts the onus on her to "stay straight" is unreasonable in my opinion.
I wouldn't ring the bell it will just irritate people.