7 cyclist....3 wide no wonder we are hated.

[hatler]

Yes, there is a reasonable hierarchy here. My safety, your safety, my convenience, your convenience.

I try to slip both "The Law" and "The HC" into the middle of that sequence. And I sometimes play around with the sequence of the last two.

 

[mick1836]

As many as fit in one lane. I will ask one last time to explain exactly what the problem is.

What difference does it make how many wide they are if they are in one lane for the person overtaking?

Mark, think coco69 must be a politician who NEVER can answer a straight and simple question?

 

[nickyboy]

The thing is, you are a big roughty toughty sort, and capable of living with that. We need to be generating a more considerate road environment in order to make it safer and more pleasant for more people to use bikes to get about.

Actually I agree with this (the making roads safer and more pleasant bit, not necessarily the roughty toughty bit). I do worry that being so assertive as to ride three abreast is counter-productive. I suspect what you end up with there is a lot of very unhappy and fed up car drivers which is exactly what we would seek to avoid

I've previously said that if cyclists really want to do stuff like two or three abreast then there is a education process required to explain to drivers why it's the right thing to do. At the moment nobody is leading this. the cycling representative bodies should take a lead I think

 

[mjr]

I said "either justifiably or not".
It happens. Recognise that fact. It won't do any harm.

It would do harm of encouraging cyclists to put themselves in danger by riding single file when it's less safe to do so.

If you've no evidence for it, I'll keep believing the simpler explanation: they just abuse all cycles regardless of whether or not they've once seen some people not cycling single file.

 

[benb]

Surely a group of cyclists bunching up are actually making it easier for motorists to overtake them?
They should have thanked the cyclists for their consideration.

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 4244214, member: 9609"]i still want to know how it would be possible for three cyclists to ride side by side in one lane - How do they deal with potholes ? I need an entire lane for myself just to weave in between them[/QUOTE]
The roads must be less holey than yours! Part of the reason why a cyclist's dynamic envelope is a metre when handlebars are between 40 and 70cm is to allow them to deviate by a foot to avoid such things. Any defect wider than a foot should be repaired urgently as dangerous... but austerity

 

[PhilDawson8270]

I'm also a driver, motorcyclist, pilot, and a cyclist. And I still disagree with you.

Are you able to say what issue was being caused by the riding of 3 abreast?

@coco69 any answer to this yet?

 

[nickyboy]

Yup. On club rides its very common for the ride leader to shout "Bunch Up" for this very reason. As @User has already said, its about safety.

Anyone who's still sceptical should a) join a club and b) try and do one of the British Cycling Group Riding courses. Can recommend both IME.

I can get this with a sizeable group as otherwise a car driver is faced with effectively a "long vehicle" overtake which is never easy

What would you think about, say, just 2 or 3 mates cycling together? Would it be preferable to single out or bunch up? My gut feeling is single out as 2-3 single file is pretty short.

 

[coco69]

@coco69 any answer to this yet?

Yes phil i will

In my opinion it was not needed as i didnt see the need for it..others disagree which is perfectly fine...thats was my opinion with that particular instance which im sticking with.
Cheers

 

[ianrauk]

At the moment nobody is leading this. the cycling representative bodies should take a lead I think

It should be the motor lobby and the government. As we all know... car drivers will not listen to what any sort of cycling representative has to say.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Yes phil i will

In my opinion it was not needed as i didnt see the need for it..others disagree which is perfectly fine...thats was my opinion with that particular instance which im sticking with.
Cheers

Thanks, however that was not the question. You said it was not needed, and didn't see the need for it.

The question I asked was;

What issue was caused by them riding 3 abreast?

 

[nickyboy]

It should be the motor lobby and the government. As we all know... car drivers will not listen to what any sort of cycling representative has to say.

Car drivers won't listen to cycling representatives and, I dare say, cyclists won't listen to driving representatives. We're in quite a pickle aren't we?

My serious point was actually that, in the absence of anybody doing anything, maybe the cycling representative bodies should try to do something, rather than nothing

 

[coco69]

Thanks, however that was not the question. You said it was not needed, and didn't see the need for it.

The question I asked was;

What issue was caused by them riding 3 abreast?

Phil....been there pages ago, plenty of info on this thread...some stuff I didn't know, if you are trying to push me into a corner to try and get an answer then it aint happening pal..........again 3 wide 7 cyclists I didn't see the need for it....move on as I have.

 

[benb]

Phil....been there pages ago, plenty of info on this thread...some stuff I didn't know, if you are trying to push me into a corner to try and get an answer then it aint happening pal..........again 3 wide 7 cyclists I didn't see the need for it....move on as I have.

I don't see the need for an adult to wear a onesie in public, but that's not the question you are being asked.

What was the problem that the cyclists were causing by riding 3 abreast? Why is it "taking the piss" if, as you presumably accept, a driver needs to go fully into the other lane anyway.

 

[Scoosh]

MOD NOTE:
This thread has clearly run its course and has needed major cleaning up by the Mods.

Time to Close.