What annoys car drivers most about cyclists?

[HLaB]

I had a new varient of the 'get on the cycle path' abuse today: this time it was 'why don't you ride on the pavement?!

I wasn't sure whether the beetroot-faced company car driver thought the pavement was a cycle path (other drivers make that mistake as there is a shared use cycle path further up the road, though the different signposting ought to provide a clue...), or whether he now assumes that all pavements are for cyclists. From his physical appearance he doesn't walk much either, so probably isn't bothered by the distinction.

I've not had it verbally but I've had somebody ponting angrily geusturing me to get on the pavement. The footway in question has quite uneven slabs, passes by the front of shops, by bus stops and behind parked cars. Not to mention the fact its illegal, they wonder why I don't use it

 

[Over The Hill]

In the letters section of my local paper (Basingstoke Gazette) a cyclist wrote in complaining about cars parking in a cycle path (about the only decent bit of cycle path in Basigstoke).

This prompted a car drive to respond with a rant which basically was that he pays road tax and we do not so we should be on the pavement and as he paid for the road it was his by right.

Is this behind the mentality of car drivers? In paying car tax where we do not they think we are somehow freeloading on their provision of a road and see us as a parasite. They then get tipped over the edge when we are able to filter through a queue or are given a bit or road space to ourselves.

 

[Tynan]

tell him/them that trucks pay well over a £1,000/year and likewise think they own the road and cars should piss off, I used to hitch a lot and thats what they all said every time a car got in their way

that and most cyclist will be drivers too and will pay road tax too, and then go on to cycle and do far less damage to the road surface

in short, an imbecilic argument

 

[magnatom]

tell him/them that trucks pay well over a £1,000/year and likewise think they own the road and cars should piss off, I used to hitch a lot and thats what they all said every time a car got in their way

that and most cyclist will be drivers too and will pay road tax too, and then go on to cycle and do far less damage to the road surface

in short, an imbecilic argument

You've fallen into the trap Tynan, you don't and they don't pay road tax....

 

[jely]

that and most cyclist will be drivers too and will pay road tax too, and then go on to cycle and do far less damage to the road surface

oh oh - i don't even own a car to pay road tax (or whatever) ... i'm going to be in so much trouble!

And thighs like tree trunks.

and being a female with my new bike, this is a somewhat worrying statement for the future!

 

[Renard]

The sad thing is car drivers' arguments are regurgitated claptrap. Not an original thought between them and I blame motoring journalists for putting half these ideas in their heads. I drive quite a lot during the course of a day's work and I have only seen two rlj cyclists in the past couple of years, for example. I think a lot of the common perceptions about cyclists are unfounded.

 

[Twenty Inch]

We're their shadow selves. We're fitter, faster, leaner, younger, more likely to be in higher income brackets and to have higher education.

Every time a cyclist whips past a motorist, the motorist is potentially reminded of their failed resolutions to get fit, drive less, save the world, their annoyance at life and the "unfairness" of someone on a £250 machine going faster and having more fun than someone in a £20,000 machine.

Add the crappy cycle lanes that we sensibly don't use, the UK's deteriorating standards of public life and mutual respect, and the poisonous bile spread by Clarkson, Parris, Havers et al., and it's surprising we don't face more abuse.

Still, we will inherit the future, and I am looking forward to lines of cars rusting in peace as fuel becomes too rare to allow private motoring.

 

[beanzontoast]

We're their shadow selves. We're fitter, faster, leaner, younger, more likely to be in higher income brackets and to have higher education.

Every time a cyclist whips past a motorist, the motorist is potentially reminded of their failed resolutions to get fit, drive less, save the world, their annoyance at life and the "unfairness" of someone on a £250 machine going faster and having more fun than someone in a £20,000 machine.

Add the crappy cycle lanes that we sensibly don't use, the UK's deteriorating standards of public life and mutual respect, and the poisonous bile spread by Clarkson, Parris, Havers et al., and it's surprising we don't face more abuse.

Still, we will inherit the future, and I am looking forward to lines of cars rusting in peace as fuel becomes too rare to allow private motoring.

Not sure that's going to happen. There's going to be a huge demand for alternative fuels - an incredibly lucrative market - and this kind of opportunity will have huge technical resources thrown at it. I think solutions will be found that, though they may have other drawbacks, will enable car drivers to keep on driving.

Now, congestion - that's a problem that they will still have to face....

 

[User482]

You've fallen into the trap Tynan, you don't and they don't pay road tax....

Unfortunately, arguments about VED and how roads are really paid for go over the heads of these morons. I just tell them that I do pay road tax, and that I'd like a refund seeing as my car is sitting on the drive at home.

 

[nethalus]

You've fallen into the trap Tynan, you don't and they don't pay road tax....

I think what they mean is that they have to pay tax on there car, without which you are not allowed to drive it on a public road regardless of where that tax ends up. Where as a bike maybe ridden without the need for tax to be paid, other than say VAT when you purchased it like. Yes we all pay council tax, income tax etc but if you don't have a car you don't pay a vehicle tax like.
Saying that, it does not give motorists the right to threaten or bully other people simply because they are on a bicycle.

 

[bonj2]

We're their shadow selves. We're fitter, faster, leaner, younger, more likely to be in higher income brackets and to have higher education.

source, please?
I think it's probably true, but this claim keeps cropping up in cars vs cyclists threads and I think people just trot it off when the only place they've heard it is on here, in a previous similar thread. I asked magnatom this a while back and he basically confirmed my observation.

 

[fossyant]

I love it, when some fella or lady is sat in their big fast car and I scream past them on my MTB (not even the road bike)..... you can see their faces when they realise the speed you are doing.... and they are going no-where fast.....

I also love sitting at the traffic lights and having a sip of water when it's hissing it down, hailing and stuff - they must think we are mad....

I hate sitting in traffic these days (after a number of lengthy years commuting 25-30 miles each way by car) so at weekends, my local large supermarket (read lots of traffic) hasn't been visited by me in ages - I'll pop off the other way to the small local Somerfield !

 

[nethalus]

We're their shadow selves. We're fitter, faster, leaner, younger, more likely to be in higher income brackets and to have higher education.
.

When I used to cycle to work it was because I couldn't afford a car and sometimes didn't have sufficient money for bus fare.

 

[HLaB]

I found out that a cyclist overtaking a bus at a bus stop annoys car drivers. I did so but as I was turning right instead of swerving back in front of the bus to commit suicide, I stayed in the right turn lane indicating all the time. From the sound of their horn they didn't like that.

 

[02GF74]

Originally Posted by 02GF74
this is done at the cyclists risk

But it's often not just at their own risk - it can place others in danger too.

Like who? A car driver in a stationary steel box?

Tell me which do you consider is the safer situation.
1. Traffic behind and in front is not moving. There is nothing coming from the left.
There is nothing coming from the right.
2. Traffic is passing by on your right from behind, which may decide to push you into the kerb or to cut across you in order to turn left, sometimes without indicating. Traffic froming from the opposite direction that again may want to turn to the left (from your point of view) again crossing your path. Traffic on the left and right stationary or as above not there.
The first would be the RLJ scenario.

only do it when there is no other traffic about

How can you be sure?

By using those three items that through evolution have helped humans to survive - eyes, ears and brain.

A lot of the time the lights are on red anyway even when there is no traffic coming across, so what difference does it make?

How about, 'It's against the law.'?

Agreed it is against the law but it is hardly the most serious and heinous cirme ever commited?
What about the drivers jabbering on mobiles, speeding, not indicating or going through red light at 3 or 4 times the speed of a pedal cyclist??

NOT THAT THAT IS AN EXCUSE but if a cyclist can gain some advantage in making their cycling environment safer,which may inlude RLJ, then why is that so wrong?

In USA they have system where you can turn right on a red light - over here that would be termed as RLJ - yet that system is working very successfully. Obviously in all situations you used eyes/ears/brain to determine when you should be driving and when you should be waiting.