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

Is this aggression "normal"? MOD WARNING: read post #219

Kashkai

Hi all,

Just getting back into some serious cycling after a ten year lay off. During that time as a motorist, I saw some pretty stupid things done by cyclists running through red lights especially but I was never the type to go all "road rage" on them, not even beeping the car horn. "It's your ass" was usually my reaction.

However during my recent reconversion to cycling, I've been pretty shocked by the behaviour of a lot (and I mean a lot) of drivers. My mate and I cycle two abreast but keep into the left of the road allowing plenty of room for cars to overtake. However I've lost count of the number of cars that drive up your ass, beep their horns and then finally overtake, while beeping again. A few morons have even cut in close and hit their brakes after they get in front forcing us to do likewise. Have to say that my mate has gotten pretty aggrieved himself at this and I thought there was going to be a confrontation the other night when some eejit in a corolla overtook us, cut in and slammed on his brakes bringing us all to a halt (with me nearly hitting the back of his car). My mate was off his bike in a flash but the car drove off.

When did this car v cyclist thing kick off? Like I said, I've been on 4 wheels for years but never got aggressive with any cyclist, gave them plenty of room when overtaking etc. And I sure as hell never tried to cut them off or force them off the road. It'd make me think twice before encouraging my kids to come out cycling with me.

I don't want to start a car v cyclist thing here but I'm just curious if the behaviour I've seen from motorists the past month or so when I'm Cycling is "normal" behaviour, or should I just cycle elsewhere

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jawgap

Peter Rodger, head of driving standards at the Institute of Advanced Motorists.....

Passive tailgaters
Dealing with passive tailgaters requires a bit more thought.

“Always leave plenty of space in front,” says Rodger.

As much as it may be tempting to try and put some space between you and the car behind, you don’t want to create the same situation for the car in front.

If the car in front were then to suddenly brake you’ll end up the unwitting filling in a sandwich.

Rodger adds: “Avoid braking sharply. Flashing your brake lights isn’t going to help. It’s better to just ease off your accelerator.”

This is because if you repeatedly brake, the flashing of your brake lights will start to lose impact.

How to deal with tailgaters

mal1

Jawgap wrote: »

Peter Rodger, head of driving standards at the Institute of Advanced Motorists.....

How to deal with tailgaters

Good stuff. The mention of flashing your brake lights is in relation to braking sharply isn't what I'm advocating. Just to clarify, I'm talking about activating the brake lights without activating the brakes. The brake light will always come on before the brake calipers activate. This can only really be done in slow traffic when about to move off from a stationary position or slow traffic.

Red Nissan

Whilst it is illegal, I've found that putting on rear fog lamps tends to draw attention from tailgaters, that and my wife sticking a camera in their face.

I don't go with the brake light trick at all.

Lusk_Doyle

The level of intelligence on display here is something else.

Pinch Flat

Jawgap wrote: »

Have a look at the RSA videos - surely if they thought single file was the way to go they'd promote it in their videos.

In the rules of the road as well. However the rules also state to use single file if it would obstruct or inconvenience other users.

whiteandlight

mal1 wrote: »

Good stuff. The mention of flashing your brake lights is in relation to braking sharply isn't what I'm advocating. Just to clarify, I'm talking about activating the brake lights without activating the brakes. The brake light will always come on before the brake calipers activate. This can only really be done in slow traffic when about to move off from a stationary position or slow traffic.

If you flash the brake lights the guy behind is going to think you are braking suddenly so he will brakes, then the person behind etc etc. how can you not see that this is what causes tailbacks in traffic?

johnty56

lots of comment here about the 'fact' that cyclists are vehicles under the law and constitute traffic and should act as such.

Are there not laws which determine that v slow moving vehicles are in effect guilty of dangerous driving? I have been stuck behind cyclists, who were admittedly single file who were travelling so slowly as to be barely able to stay upright on the bike. I do stay behind them until it is completely safe to pass on the other side of the road, but that often means shifting down into first gear in a van and moving at maybe 10km/h...

Thoughts on this? I am curious as to the opinions of the serious cyclists

Lumen

johnty56 wrote: »

lots of comment here about the 'fact' that cyclists are vehicles under the law and constitute traffic and should act as such.

Are there not laws which determine that v slow moving vehicles are in effect guilty of dangerous driving? I have been stuck behind cyclists, who were admittedly single file who were travelling so slowly as to be barely able to stay upright on the bike. I do stay behind them until it is completely safe to pass on the other side of the road, but that often means shifting down into first gear in a van and moving at maybe 10km/h...

Thoughts on this? I am curious as to the opinions of the serious cyclists

Overtaking a slow cyclist is safer than overtaking a fast one, since you spend less distance overtaking.

Consider the limit case where the cyclist is entirely stopped and lying down in the road like a dead badger you don't want to run over. That's hardly a difficult overtaking challenge, is it?

mal1

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

The level of intelligence on display here is something else.

whiteandlight wrote: »

If you flash the brake lights the guy behind is going to think you are braking suddenly so he will brakes, then the person behind etc etc. how can you not see that this is what causes tailbacks in traffic?

I don't think it would be a major problem. I described it before, the person behind is stationary. Keeping the brake light on so as to move forward and create room, creating the illusion to the driver behind that you are still stationary since all he/she sees is a brake light. He/she is stationary and will stay so. You are just creating the room as it should be. It's not something you are thought to use all the time, just when you want to drive defensively. We will have to agree to disagree since i think we are annoying Luskdoyle, we should get back to real 'first world problems'.

Tenzor07

johnty56 wrote: »

lots of comment here about the 'fact' that cyclists are vehicles under the law and constitute traffic and should act as such.
Are there not laws which determine that v slow moving vehicles are in effect guilty of dangerous driving? I have been stuck behind cyclists, who were admittedly single file who were travelling so slowly as to be barely able to stay upright on the bike. I do stay behind them until it is completely safe to pass on the other side of the road, but that often means shifting down into first gear in a van and moving at maybe 10km/h...
Thoughts on this? I am curious as to the opinions of the serious cyclists

The law about pulling over applies when you have 6 or more vehicles stuck behind the slow moving vehicle.
Failure to do so would be considered driving "without due care and consideration"...
I'm no legal expert but I believe the above to be true...

So.. how do you apply the points to a bicyclist?

Dermot Illogical

johnty56 wrote: »

Are there not laws which determine that v slow moving vehicles are in effect guilty of dangerous driving?

No. Funerals would be a riot if there were.

Lumen

Tenzor07 wrote: »

So.. how do you apply the points to a bicyclist?

Whoever ends up with the most gets a green jersey?

Jawgap

johnty56 wrote: »

lots of comment here about the 'fact' that cyclists are vehicles under the law and constitute traffic and should act as such.

Are there not laws which determine that v slow moving vehicles are in effect guilty of dangerous driving? I have been stuck behind cyclists, who were admittedly single file who were travelling so slowly as to be barely able to stay upright on the bike. I do stay behind them until it is completely safe to pass on the other side of the road, but that often means shifting down into first gear in a van and moving at maybe 10km/h...

Thoughts on this? I am curious as to the opinions of the serious cyclists

Slow movement is not the issue, it's failure to make progress.

Lusk_Doyle

mal1 wrote: »

I don't think it would be a major problem. I described it before, the person behind is stationary. Keeping the brake light on so as to move forward and create room, creating the illusion to the driver behind that you are still stationary since all he/she sees is a brake light. He/she is stationary and will stay so. You are just creating the room as it should be. It's not something you are thought to use all the time, just when you want to drive defensively. We will have to agree to disagree since i think we are annoying Luskdoyle, we should get back to real 'first world problems'.

It's not annoying me. It rather amazes me.

Panrich

Lumen wrote: »

Overtaking a slow cyclist is safer than overtaking a fast one, since you spend less distance overtaking.

Consider the limit case where the cyclist is entirely stopped and lying down in the road like a dead badger you don't want to run over. That's hardly a difficult overtaking challenge, is it?

Not really the case. A car can accelerate from 40 to 80kph quicker than from 10 to 50kph due to inertia and in less space consequently

Lusk_Doyle

Panrich wrote: »

Not really the case. A car can accelerate from 40 to 80kph quicker than from 10 to 50kph due to inertia and in less space consequently

Marginally. Hardly noticeable though is it?

Panrich

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Marginally. Hardly noticeable though is it?

I might do some maths on this if I get a chance later and we'll see.

Jawgap

Panrich wrote: »

I might do some maths on this if I get a chance later and we'll see.

It's a simple calculation......

......a cyclist is travelling at 15 km/hr on an Irish country road.....

.....a car 10 metres behind the cyclist is travelling also at 15 km/hr maintaining the same gap....

....the bike is 2 metres long and the car is 3 metres long

....at this constant speed how long will it take before the driver forms the opinion that the cyclist is
(a) inconsiderate

(b) a twat

No Pants

Armelodie wrote: »

If an accident did occur and a judge asked as to why the cyclists were going 2 abreast I can bet you wouldn't be using the phrase ' forcing cars to do x,y,z'

I most certainly would. As I mentioned earlier, I spend 95% of my time cycling alone and for the other 5%, I don't have the breath to waste on chatting. Normally I wouldn't be side-by-side either. If you see me beside another cyclist, I'm overtaking or being overtaken most likely.

fits

Passed twice at speed on a windy country road with less than a foot of space last night. I am raging.

07Lapierre

Has this ever happened to anyone?

Your cycling along a long, straight, country road (Kilmacanogue to Roundwood for example) into a strong headwind. All you can hear is the wind..then suddenly, some muppet comes from behind you on a motorbike travelling at 100+ kph and passes you with just inches to spare!

(You don't hear him coming because of the wind noise..you only hear him as he's inches from your right ear!)

Scares the sh*t out of me every time! :mad:

fits

I dont know. I was really frightened last night. I am going to email the RSA today and say more needs to be done about sharing the road. (I ride horses as well ). they did a good job with the speeding and drunk driving etc.

No Pants

07Lapierre wrote: »

Has this ever happened to anyone?

Your cycling along a long, straight, country road (Kilmacanogue to Roundwood for example) into a strong headwind. All you can hear is the wind..then suddenly, some muppet comes from behind you on a motorbike travelling at 100+ kph and passes you with just inches to spare!

(You don't hear him coming because of the wind noise..you only hear him as he's inches from your right ear!)

Scares the sh*t out of me every time! :mad:

Never had it with a motorbike that I can recall. Have had a number of close overtakes by cars though, one approaching a rather tight pinch-point earlier in the year. Didn't like that one bit.

mossym

driving home last night. pedestrian walking towards us, can see her form a distance. bike approaching her, travelling same direction as me, and one car in front of me.

bike pulls out, passes her, pulls back in. car in front moves out, gives her 6/7+ feet of clearance, then for no reason as there was no cars coming against us, swerves back in hard so that they can buzz the cyclist as close as possible. culd have held their line easily( i did ) and left the cyclist room, but buzzing the cyclist was more important

on the flip side, i;ve seen cyclists intentionally piss off drivers as well

argue all people want about what rules mean and how people interpret them, but while people are intent on being agressive anyway it doesn't matter what the rules say. that case last night was nothing about safety, rules of the road, speeds people were doing, or any of the other arguements that were being made. it was done either out of anger or for some sense of fun.

T-Maxx

Panrich wrote: »

Not really the case. A car can accelerate from 40 to 80kph quicker than from 10 to 50kph due to inertia and in less space consequently

Since th eincrease in speed is the same (40kph) the time will be the same. The crucial thing would be the engine's power and torque curves and gearbox ratios. An electric car is a good example of this since it will neutralize these factors and accelerate all the same.

Jawgap

I think it's time we addressed the real problem........time to end all this 'us and them' attitude and unite to fight the real problem.......the common enemy.....

........runners!!

They hardly ever say 'hello' - rarely acknowledge you when you wave or nod at them and are feckin' useless for drafting behind even when they are running in the direction of the traffic.

Tenzor07

Speaking of slow moving vehicles blocking up the roads...

some-cnt-in-tractor-to-purposely-ruin-every-motorists-day-today

main site: Link

office.ie

I have to say in general there is no room for cyclists to ride 2 a breast go single file ,interested in what the actual law on this is

07Lapierre

office.ie wrote: »

I have to say in general there is no room for cyclists to ride 2 a breast go single file ,interested in what the actual law on this is

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/en/si/0294.html#zzsi294y1964a29

"9.—(1) A pedal cyclist shall not, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists (and then only if to do so will not endanger other traffic or pedestrians) drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cycles driving abreast."

The rules for Pedestrians are also worth reading..

Lusk_Doyle

office.ie wrote: »

I have to say in general there is no room for cyclists to ride 2 a breast go single file ,interested in what the actual law on this is

What strange places are you frequenting that there is room for a car but not for two bikes side by side?