Should cycling two abreast be allowed?

the_pen_turner wrote: »

https://www.cyclemanual.ie/manual/thebasics/width/
this calims a cyclist to be 750mm wide

Measure your shoulders and allow for the extra layers of fat you probably have from being stuck in your vehicle. Once you subtract the amount for the fat layer pull your shoulders forward as that’s what happens when holding the hoods of a road bike.

the_pen_turner wrote: »

im not sugesting that a person is 750mm wide.
i dont know how they worked that out but i would asume that includes any movement side to side caused by pedalling or maybe your knees stick out as they bend .

its there for some reason.

And the law permitting 2 abreast is there for some reason.

andekwarhola wrote: »

True.

I can't enjoy driving myself without somebody to talk to in the passenger seat.

Not even with a phone held up to your ear?

If you can't overtake cyclists two abreast, you can't overtake them safely if they single out. The only way would be to close pass.

I live in the Wicklow mountains. Popular with cyclists and day trippers/ tourists. I'm held up far more by slow people in vehicles than I ever am by cyclists or cycling groups.

People seem happy enough stuck km after km behind slower drivers, but wait 30 seconds to safely overtake a cyclist and they lose their minds!

meeeeh wrote: »

Weepsie wrote: »

Then yes it should be absolutely legal. That standard of driving here is pretty crap, and there are far, far bigger issues than cyclists being 2 abreast on our roads.

Energy consumption, environmental damage, societal health issues, deaths caused by vehicular accidents are all far bigger problems.

There is an article about new puritans in Guardian atm. Apparently they are all eco warriors. You are avoiding answering very simple question with pointing to separate issues. I cycled in central Europe where one abreast is what you are supposed to do. I would much prefer that to Ireland.

Strangely enough, traffic laws are not built around your, or anyone's, personal preferences.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

if it's holding up traffic then it isn't safe to overtake. It's not hard to understand that concept really!

no
its very simle to understand

it is safe and legal to overtake 1 cyclist on a road 15.5 foot wide with my van for example


that same road would need to be 19 foot wide to legally and safely overtake 2 cyclists with a foot between them.


if the road is wider than 15/5 foot but narrower than 19 foot then cyclist 2 a breast is holding up traffic and creating a dangerous situation .

the_pen_turner wrote: »

no
its very simle to understand

it is safe and legal to overtake 1 cyclist on a road 15.5 foot wide with my van for example


that same road would need to be 19 foot wide to legally and safely overtake 2 cyclists with a foot between them.


if the road is wider than 15/5 foot but narrower than 19 foot then cyclist 2 a breast is holding up traffic and creating a dangerous situation .

On a blind bend, yeah?

Sam Hain wrote: »

do you ride your high horses two abreast also?

Go through horsie areas and you’ll often see people on horses riding 2 abreast.

f@steddie wrote: »

Therefore cycling 2 abreast should be banned?

Or how about in that situation cyclists drop back for 5 seconds to let people past?

Which has happened everytime I've ever been out in a group both club, social or sportive/ audax.

But, when it's safe to do so - hold 2 abreast until you can see far enough that an overtake can be done safely (rather than on a bend or brow of a hill) - so some idiot in a van doesn't try to squeeze past when they can't see what's coming.

flatface wrote: »

This old chestnut? Cycling 2 abreast makes overtaking easier not harder, but most importantly safer for all. The only overtaking it hampers is bad overtaking.

Thanks for the simplistic drawing, but two abreast hardly ever looks like that, sometimes its 3 or more abreast in a staggered fashion. Two abreast only properly works with 2 cyclists. Maybe groups larger than 2 should be illegal on roads without cycle paths.

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i was allowing a foot of potholes etc then the 2 ft 6".


is another foot too much to allow between cyclists. i would asume not

Surely the with of the road in your calculation should be narrowed by a foot each side then if it is not available to cycle or drive on. Therefore, you are agreeing that the road is too narrow to pass on. Congrats.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How is it creating a dangerous situation?
The reality is that they are cycling completely legally and whilst it is advisable that they allow others to overtake when safe, you're pissed off because they are slowing you down.
Also what you percieve as a safe place to pass may not be the same as what they judge. Perhaps they are discouraging you from driving in a manner that endangers them.
What would you do if you met a tractor or someone on a horse?

im not saying its ilegal. it is legal
but it is stupid, dangerous and selfish on narrow roads.

saying that i am very seldom held up by cyclists. and even then its only a short time. its usually larger groups that hold you up .
i am very good to overtake cyclists. i only overtake when its safe to do so and would rather wait than risk hurting someone

i often get held up by tractors . its the selfish ones that dont pull in that is the problem. horses arnt an issue either

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Weepsie wrote: »

My point is that 2 cyclists are occupying less space than a single vehicle, yet people have no problem sharing the road with these, overtaking them, going around bends, driving in roads in which they are coming the other direction .

Single out if it's safe to do so, by all means, but if a car can't overtake 2 abreast safely, its often the case that it can't overtake a single cyclist safely either

the diference is that i can overtake a vehicle allowing 1 foot between us and its fairly safe

No, it's not.

Sam Hain wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you find it hard to believe that cubs and scouts use roads?

If there is anything factually incorrect in any of my posts, feel free to point it out.

I have never seen a group of scouts or cubs on the far side of bend. Surely scouts would hike in an area that is not as dangerous as a bendy road.

Try the roads around Larch Hill as the weather warms up, and see what you can find.

Regardless, even if no scout troop ever does this, you still can't drive blind around bends.

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Fighting Tao wrote: »

But that is not the reality when out cycling. Many motorists love overtaking cyclists on blind bends. Many drivers see cyclists and just think that they have to pass them regardless of safety. So two abreast discourages idiotic behaviour from drivers and makes the world a safer place. It’s a good thing.

everyone on all sides does stupid and dangerous things.

i dont think 2 abreast helps. all it does is piss off drivers and if you have one of stupid ones behind they will overtake anyway.

i would much rather be cycling closer to the ditch than 2 abreast when someone comes around a bend in the middle of the road etc.

Do you cycle much in groups?

Hurrache wrote: »

Your post makes no sense whatsoever in the context of Ireland. You want to pick and choose laws from other countries to suit you?

But the question was should two abreast be allowed. Why is Ireland so different than countries where it is not allowed. As it happens the cycling facilities in Ireland are poor and the numbers of people cycling are pretty low and yet it seems that every cycling forum activist thinks how things are done here is superior to Central Europe with 1000s of km of dedicated cycling paths and fairly strict rules how to behave on roads (including not cycling drunk, using cycle paths or obeying red lights). I don't know maybe they have it wrong and the wild west type traffic in Dublin is what we should all strive to.

meeeeh wrote: »

But the question was should two abreast be allowed. Why is Ireland so different than countries where it is not allowed.

List all the countries where it's not allowed (not Germany) which proves the fact that Ireland is an outlier on this.

And you'll get bonus points if you find one cycling advocate who claims Ireland do things better than Europe when it comes to how to do all things cycling. You'll find it's quite the opposite.