BBC helmet cam film to explore cyclist-motorist conflict

[Dusty66]

So after 25 years of cycling you think cyclists who filter are as bad as aggressive poor drivers.

Not done 25 years on a bike, probably more like 10 when added up! And no I don't mean ALL cyclists who filter shouldn't filter I'm talking about those who do it thinking they are as visible as a car and take risks squeezing through tiny spaces.

 

[Scruffmonster]

My point was I am pretty sure non cycling drivers do not have a clue that it should be that sort of distance for a safe overtake, I am also sure none of them know the feeling a close pass gives. Even some of the cam shots <apart from Mags> truly give the sensation you feel in real life. At no point did the programme try and explain why cyclists should not be passed with inches to spare, nor why primary postion is taken.

That's not what the programme intended to do.

It achieved what it intended to do, that much is clear.

 

[Scruffmonster]

In cities, cyclists are often quicker than motorists, so there's no need for them to overtake.

That's a myth. Average speed, absolutely, but traffic surges. 0-30mph routinely. Bikes cruise at 10-20mph on the whole.

Cyclists need to be overtaken.

 

[mickle]

I don't know that bit of road personally, I'm just describing how it looked on TV. Now I've read that there can be 30 cyclists (WOW) at the junction just before it, and that it's a narrow stretch of road etc., etc., I can now say that the taxi driver was at fault! I was just describing how I saw it (prior to more info) and how most other TV viewers would have seen it.

I have read all the comments on the Daily Mail site and have seen many comments from cyclists who are able to see it from both sides. It seems on this forum (not surprising) that the majority just can't accept any argument at all. I am a cyclist myself! And a car driver. I can see both sides. When on my bike I know how drivers are thinking and it's not going to change, infact the more congested the roads get, the worse it's going to become. 30 cyclists at one junction, plus backed up traffic is unimaginable. No wonder everyone is at eachothers throats. Human nature is to think of number one, and on congested roads it leads to mayhem. But you can make a decision not to be a part of it. You can have a relaxing ride if you let all the speed freaks and impatient road users pass on by. There's no real need to weave in and out to save a few minutes, in fact doing that makes you just as bad as the drivers you are complaining about.

You know I'm not a driver how?

 

[Leodis]

Not done 25 years on a bike, probably more like 10 when added up! And no I don't mean ALL cyclists who filter shouldn't filter I'm talking about those who do it thinking they are as visible as a car and take risks squeezing through tiny spaces.

I agree, don't see it in Leeds mainly RLJ

 

[Andrew_P]

But you can make a decision not to be a part of it. You can have a relaxing ride if you let all the speed freaks and impatient road users pass on by. There's no real need to weave in and out to save a few minutes, in fact doing that makes you just as bad as the drivers you are complaining about.

I commute in the SE from a Greater London Borough out to Surrey, most of my roads are busy with fast moving commuting traffic, I seldom even get the chance to weave in and out. I have low speed compared to my motorist travelling buddies, so primary would be pretty difficult and yet I still get close passes, bullied etc. I really cannot see what I could do to avoid it, other than to stop cycling during peak traffic.

 

[SportMonkey]

That's a myth. Average speed, absolutely, but traffic surges. 0-30mph routinely. Bikes cruise at 10-20mph on the whole.

Cyclists need to be overtaken.

They do not need to be overtaken. When I drive in to Manchester I'll sit behind cyclists, I get better fuel efficiency and brake wear as a benefit, I lose no time. If you feel you need to overtake I suggest that you're a dangerous driver.

 

[PK99]

They do not need to be overtaken. When I drive in to Manchester I'll sit behind cyclists, I get better fuel efficiency and brake wear as a benefit, I lose no time. If you feel you need to overtake I suggest that you're a dangerous driver.

so the speed of the motor traffic is to be determined by the speed of choice of the slowest cyclist? - or so would appear to be the logic of your post

 

[Andrew_P]

so the speed of the motor traffic is to be determined by the speed of choice of the slowest cyclist? - or so would appear to be the logic of your post

Surely you would expect a driver to wait for safe overtake?

 

[User482]

That's a myth. Average speed, absolutely, but traffic surges. 0-30mph routinely. Bikes cruise at 10-20mph on the whole.

Cyclists need to be overtaken.

Traffic surges and joins the back of the next queue, rendering the overtake completely pointless. Faster traffic also reduces the carrying capacity of the road, making congestion worse.

It would all work far better if cars cruised in cities at 20mph max.

 

[Scruffmonster]

Traffic surges and joins the back of the next queue, rendering the overtake completely pointless. Faster traffic also reduces the carrying capacity of the road, making congestion worse.

It would all work far better if cars cruised in cities at 20mph max.

Absolutely true.

Yet moot.

 

[User482]

so the speed of the motor traffic is to be determined by the speed of choice of the slowest cyclist? - or so would appear to be the logic of your post

Try reading it again. The point is that going at the speed of cyclists does not increase the journey time of motor traffic.

 

[User482]

Absolutely true.

Yet moot.

If my post is absolutely true, then cyclists do not need to be overtaken.

 

[Scruffmonster]

If my post is absolutely true, then cyclists do not need to be overtaken.

This is also true. If every single car complied, we'd have an efficient, calmer, saner, transport system.

It's just that it's as likely as the suggestion that we should simply make all cars fly to free up the roads for cycles.

 

[dellzeqq]

That's a myth. Average speed, absolutely, but traffic surges. 0-30mph routinely. Bikes cruise at 10-20mph on the whole.

Cyclists need to be overtaken.

sorry, but that's a stone cold certain fact. I can get from my place to Islington (7 miles) in 35 minutes in rush hour by Brompton and 30 minutes on the C50. It could easily take a car over an hour. Traffic speed in London has stayed at or around 9mph for decades - less when crossing the City. And that, my scruffy friend, is one of the big reasons why we are so resented by some (not all) drivers. We swan down bus lanes, heads in the air, flies in our teeth, looking like gods while they swelter in stationary tin cans. If I were them I'd be saying 'that man's half my age, yet his buttocks are made of welded steel and the smile on the face suggest that somebody loves him with a passion that is undiluted. I should give that a try', but, instead of that they say 'hhhmmmppphhhh, I know I'm inadequate and this upholstery is giving me piles, but this car is the sum total of my identity and I'm not about to give it up'.