2 Abreast cycling is simply not safe.

[beany_bot]

Do you stop and pull over when you see two riders abreast coming from the opposite direction?

no, but i don't much like it. I do pull way over to the left. Hearts in my mouth. It only takes a wobble from the inside rider to send the outside rider into the otherside of the road.

By telling drivers "it's fine to pass 2 abreast" we are also saying "it's fine to pass a primary rider without being fully on the otherside of the road". Because its the same distance.

 

[beany_bot]

Assuming a car would take up the same width of road as this group of cyclists, would you overtake a car on this road?

Yes of course I would.

A car isnt a vunerable road user. Its not going to topple over. A car does not need the same clearance as a cyclist (door to door - door to cyclist)

 

[Mugshot]

I suspect you're looking at this from the perspective of being both;

A) A motorist being hindered
B) A cyclist being a hindrance

Overtaking two abreast is perfectly safe providing the overtake is performed in a safe and controlled manner.

 

[Markymark]

I think you are being concerned for the cyclists which is good. But as I stated early on, it's not ideal but it does stop far more dangerous passes so on balance it;s a good idea.

 

[Brandane]

We constantly (and rightly) demand that cars pass us at a safe distance. Quite right.
Yet by riding 2 abreast we suddenly say that this is no longer important.

I have illustrated below what I mean.
When I am driving a car behind 2 abreast cyclists I simply will not pass them. Ever. For the reasons in the graphic below.

I don't understand how so many people claim "cars should give me 5/6 feet" etc and then also claim they should be able to ride 2 abreast and cars will be able to get past.

Illustration.

And this image from the highway code itself, How could this be possible is riding 2 abreast?

I know the haters will comes, and I will be attacked. but I am sick of the hypocrisy with us cyclists over this issue.
By telling cars it's OK to overtake 2 abreast. You just tell them that it's ok to give the same distance to ALL riders. (which would be a squeeze past when riders are in primary).

I think you are getting confused by the term "give vulnerable road users at least as much space as you would a car". In your diagram with the cyclists 2 abreast, let's replace the 2 cyclists with a car. The car would still be to the left of the centreline. Are you saying you wouldn't pass that car? If not, why not? Your 2 cyclists riding abreast of each other are perfectly safe for an overtake.

 

[G3CWI]

Didn't Team Sky give some advice on this recently?

 

[jarlrmai]

I think the dichotomy in some minds is this

There is a feeling that some cyclists complain when they riding solo and are overtaken by a car driver who gives them the same space a cyclist would be given by a car driver overtaking a group of cyclists riding two abreast.

So in this case it's a case of either

Two abreast is not safe as it's impossible to to give that much room and overtake and therefore all cyclists should ride single file.

or

Cyclists who are complaining about close overtakes when riding solo have double standards with regards to this matter.

My own feeling having ridden many miles in 2 up groups and solo is that when the road is in good condition groups ride close enough left that in most roads a car passing as given in the highway code is giving enough room. If the group is riding more central for whatever reason the car should wait as they would for a tractor/milk float etc if overtaking is impossible due to vision or lack of a safe distance being possible.

Groups should also and often do single out when encountering these situations, but sometimes it is just not safe to over take a group of cyclists.

Using your car as a weapon to threaten people is not acceptable even if those people are not obeying regulations (ie riding 2 abreast on a busy road)

 

[screenman]

How do you overtake a car if you cannot overtake 2 cyclist?

 

[screenman]

But they're on the wrong side of the road!

Or reversing.

 

[Leaway2]

Looks OK to me.

 

[Apollonius]

Might it not be that it is the overtaking that is not safe? In that case, don't do it.

 

[Bollo]

Has anyone asked the obvious question - where's the evidence that it's "not safe". You've stated its not safe, but how many KSIs are primarily caused by riding two abreast? The truth is it's not something you like, because you feel it inconveniences you as a driver. Thats a long way from "not safe".

 

[glasgowcyclist]

@beany_bot If you don't feel you can complete the pass safely, wait until it is safe. And don't look at it as being irksome to you, look at it as there being one or more cyclists who appreciate you looking out for them.

GC

 

[Ajax Bay]

Those such as Chris Boardman, you mean?

Shameless Exeter Wheelers advertising. [and an excellent video]

As a cyclist and a motorist I hate riders riding two abreast

As a cyclist, don't you enjoy (rather than hate) the opportunity to overtake a pair or more cyclists two abreast, thus demonstrating how fast a cyclist you are?

 

[outlash]

since i don't have any friends

I can't say I'm surprised by that, calling people stupid can be quite offensive to some.