Cyclists, new Highway Code rules

[Moleman]

Just now, Spacewagon52 said:

No more Viagra for me! Off to buy a bike!

Excellent.

[Malc]

and where does it say anywhere that cyclists are allowed to overtake cars etc .............. on the inside  ?

Malc

[Moleman]

18 minutes ago, Malc said:

and where does it say anywhere that cyclists are allowed to overtake cars etc .............. on the inside  ?

Malc

Malc, come on have a heart. Leave them alone.

They could explode if you make them write another set of long posts explaining the evils of car drivers, while never actually answering the question you pose.

Spread some love instead. 😘

[dutchie01]

Here is how it works and why mixing cyclists and cars is not a good idea;

When driving a bicycle in between cars, vans, trucks, buses you are very well aware you are the weaker one and it really seems most of the cars are there to hit you. Sometimes some cars seem to want you out of the way and those drivers dont seem to care if you get hit or not. 

When driving a car it seems those bikes are a bloody nuisance, always blocking your way, always slower and especially unpredictable, get out of my way please!! 

[Moleman]

16 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

Here is how it works and why mixing cyclists and cars is not a good idea;

When driving a bicycle in between cars, vans, trucks, buses you are very well aware you are the weaker one and it really seems most of the cars are there to hit you. Sometimes some cars seem to want you out of the way and those drivers dont seem to care if you get hit or not. 

When driving a car it seems those bikes are a bloody nuisance, always blocking your way, always slower and especially unpredictable, get out of my way please!! 

Fair comment.

[Moleman]

17 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

Here is how it works and why mixing cyclists and cars is not a good idea;

When driving a bicycle in between cars, vans, trucks, buses you are very well aware you are the weaker one and it really seems most of the cars are there to hit you. Sometimes some cars seem to want you out of the way and those drivers dont seem to care if you get hit or not. 

Does not explain however, why some cyclists appear ( I say appear) to go out of their way to be as difficult as possible while using the road with other users.

I know the same applies to car drivers, but as you say - you are very well aware you are the weaker one - so why would you wish to appear to be so bloody minded as to risk your own life.

I know when I ride a cycle I am very aware of cars, trucks and buses and avoid putting myself at risk. Seems so simple, having rights does not make the world (or the road in this case) a safe place.

Of course, I welcome another lecture about the evils of car drivers, from those posters not as enlightened as you.

[dutchie01]

I guess it fully depends on the situation but it could be safety related. Drive your bike close to the pavement so cars can overtake you without too much fuss. This can be scary as some motorists are almost touching you without realizing. If you drive more to the middle of the lane overtaking is impossible so you are safer?

My Motorcycle instructor told me exactly 43 years ago" defend your lane, drive in the middle! "

 

just a thought...

[Moleman]

3 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

If you drive more to the middle of the lane overtaking is impossible so you are safer?

just a thought...

In a world where people seem to become more angry more quickly than ever, I would still choose to lessen the risk of that dangerous overreaction. 

That applies to all types of road users and situations, being right does not ensure a good or safe outcome.

Apply personal responsibility.

[Malc]

3 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

My Motorcycle instructor told me exactly 43 years ago" defend your lane, drive in the middle! "

I'm thinking traffic volumes 43 years back might have been a tad less than today ???

I can remember the log jams in Westerham kent, the A25 back in the day ....  and then mid 80's ( 43 years ago )  I guess, standing up at Titsey ( yes there is such a place near Kent / Surrey border ) seeing just where the band new M25 was going to be ............... oh for those glorious days where traffic volumes were just tiny and there never was a battle between cars and cyclists, nor motorbikes and even those motorized pedal cycles that I remember Mr Plod had too 

BUT today we have total intolerance from time to time by ALL road users  .. let peace reign please and if cyclists wish to do battle with cars and trucks well, good luck to 'em I say ....  who dares wins unless you're vulnerable road user taking a chance that tolerance prevails in the light of your intolerant behaviour .....  cyclists are vulnerable and can easily get crushed and harmed, helmet or nay  .......  so no good complaing about it . 

Highway Code Law won't protect a cyclist in real time use and with bad behaviour

Malc

[royoftherovers]

1 minute ago, Malc said:

I'm thinking traffic volumes 43 years back might have been a tad less than today ???

I can remember the log jams in Westerham kent, the A25 back in the day ....  and then mid 80's ( 43 years ago )  I guess, standing up at Titsey ( yes there is such a place near Kent / Surrey border ) seeing just where the band new M25 was going to be ............... oh for those glorious days where traffic volumes were just tiny and there never was a battle between cars and cyclists, nor motorbikes and even those motorized pedal cycles that I remember Mr Plod had too 

BUT today we have total intolerance from time to time by ALL road users  .. let peace reign please and if cyclists wish to do battle with cars and trucks well, good luck to 'em I say ....  who dares wins unless you're vulnerable road user taking a chance that tolerance prevails in the light of your intolerant behaviour .....  cyclists are vulnerable and can easily get crushed and harmed, helmet or nay  .......  so no good complaing about it . 

Highway Code Law won't protect a cyclist in real time use and with bad behaviour

Malc

What is sadly missing is Respect for all people in all situations at all times. 

We might as well wish for Utopia ?

[Moleman]

2 minutes ago, Moleman said:

In a world where people seem to become more angry more quickly than ever, I would still choose to lessen the risk of that dangerous overreaction. 

That applies to all types of road users and situations, being right does not ensure a good or safe outcome.

Apply personal responsibility.

An example.

Yesterday I was driving locally and saw ahead a cyclist waiting at a crossing, so I stopped to let them cross. Before they crossed another car from the other direction on their side of road went straight through crossing without stopping. Complete idiot.

The point being the cyclist took personal responsibility before crossing, ever though it was their right to cross.   

[Malc]

1 minute ago, Moleman said:

ever though it was their right to cross.

I guess so ..  provided he didn't think he could just jump on his bike and cycle across ...........  as so many would eh ! 

Malc

[Bluemarlin]

17 hours ago, Moleman said:

Does not explain however, why some cyclists appear ( I say appear) to go out of their way to be as difficult as possible while using the road with other users.

I know the same applies to car drivers, but as you say - you are very well aware you are the weaker one - so why would you wish to appear to be so bloody minded as to risk your own life.

I know when I ride a cycle I am very aware of cars, trucks and buses and avoid putting myself at risk. Seems so simple, having rights does not make the world (or the road in this case) a safe place.

Of course, I welcome another lecture about the evils of car drivers, from those posters not as enlightened as you.

Despite your fixation with thinking that people are demonising all drivers, when simply highlighting imbalance when others demonise all cyclists. I'll answer your question.

To me there is no mystery, as some cyclists actually do (not just appear to) go out of their way to be as difficult as possible. I know, I've seen it, when both cycling and driving. They're given a bit of power and authority with the highway code, and abuse it to be a *****. Or possibly they feel victimised, and so stupidly think they're getting their own back. Probably the same mentality as those idiots who don't know how to merge in turn and so try to block both lanes, or those who sit in the outside lane at 70.  Some people think they know it all and feel they have the right to police others.

Youtube is full of people (not just riders/drivers) who take stupid risks, so I guess some people just don't think about the consequences of their actions.

That said, I'm sure there are others who are trying to manage their own safety, or those who are simply ignorant of the right thing to do. I guess that depends on the individual situation.

 

[Bluemarlin]

19 hours ago, Malc said:

and where does it say anywhere that cyclists are allowed to overtake cars etc .............. on the inside  ?

Malc

Highway Code Section 2 Overtaking

"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left and should proceed with caution as the driver may not be able to see you. Be careful about doing so, particularly on the approach to junctions, and especially when deciding whether it is safe to pass lorries or other large vehicles."

[Moleman]

10 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

Despite your fixation with thinking that people are demonising all drivers, when simply highlighting imbalance when others demonise all cyclists. I'll answer your question.

To me there is no mystery, as some cyclists actually do (not just appear to) go out of their way to be as difficult as possible. I know, I've seen it, when both cycling and driving. They're given a bit of power and authority with the highway code, and abuse it to be a *****. Or possibly they feel victimised, and so stupidly think they're getting their own back. Probably the same mentality as those idiots who don't know how to merge in turn and so try to block both lanes, or those who sit in the outside lane at 70.  Some people think they know it all and feel they have the right to police others.

Youtube is full of people (not just riders/drivers) who take stupid risks, so I guess some people just don't think about the consequences of their actions.

That said, I'm sure there are others who are trying to manage their own safety, or those who are simply ignorant of the right thing to do. I guess that depends on the individual situation.

 

Hi Bill, other than your first sentence, I agree with the points you have made.

Despite your fixation with thinking that people are demonising all drivers, when simply highlighting imbalance when others demonise all cyclists.

That is your opinion of course, perhaps just once you could take a step back and look at what you say, To myself and others you are not "highlighting imbalance" but obsessing about being right. Shame really because most your last post is one of the most sensible I have seen. My opinion of course.

[Moleman]

12 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

Highway Code Section 2 Overtaking

"Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left and should proceed with caution as the driver may not be able to see you. Be careful about doing so, particularly on the approach to junctions, and especially when deciding whether it is safe to pass lorries or other large vehicles."

Thank you for answering the question asked.

[mdj8]

5 hours ago, dutchie01 said:

I guess it fully depends on the situation but it could be safety related. Drive your bike close to the pavement so cars can overtake you without too much fuss. This can be scary as some motorists are almost touching you without realizing. If you drive more to the middle of the lane overtaking is impossible so you are safer?

My Motorcycle instructor told me exactly 43 years ago" defend your lane, drive in the middle! "

 

just a thought...

Hi Dutchie, I'm a motorcyclist too and interpret "defend your lane" to apply to motorcyclists but not cyclists. On a motorbike you are keeping up with the traffic. Whilst doing so it is important to be seen and not be compromised with other vehicles being too close. For that reason riding in the middle means the driver you are behind can see you in their mirror and the car behind you will stay back as though you are a car. If you ride on the left or even the right you will be in the blind spot of the vehicle ahead and the ones behind can sometimes creep up so they are next to you. That's why you defend your lane and stay in the middle. For a cyclist as motorised vehicles are nearly always overtaking you (at least when outside towns and cities) I feel its just better to stay out of the way and keep to the left without riding in the gutter and whilst avoiding potholes but to the left nontheless.

Cheers

[Bluemarlin]

1 hour ago, Moleman said:

Hi Bill, other than your first sentence, I agree with the points you have made.

Despite your fixation with thinking that people are demonising all drivers, when simply highlighting imbalance when others demonise all cyclists.

That is your opinion of course, perhaps just once you could take a step back and look at what you say, To myself and others you are not "highlighting imbalance" but obsessing about being right. Shame really because most your last post is one of the most sensible I have seen. My opinion of course.

Fair enough Maurice, perhaps I misinterpreted your comment about all drivers being wrong, and wrongly took it as a sarcastic dig at my earlier post. If so, or if I expresssed myself clumsily, then my bad. It appears though that on the details we're probably closer than it appears, and just have different communicating styles. If mine comes across as obsessing about being right, it's not my intention, as often I'm wrong 😀

Back though to the original point by Malc that I replied to yesterday, what are people's thoughts about cyclists running red lights? Pros and cons?

As a driver it doesn't bother me, and as a cyclist and I can see some benefits. In fact at one time Boris pushed for a trial to allow it, but was pushed back by TFL, who favoured staggered lights, allowing cyclists to go first, which is more expensive and lengthier to implement, as well as a bigger delay to motorists. In Paris (along with a number of other cities), they allow cyclists to run red lights under certain circumstances, and have seen no adverse affects, along with an increase in both traffic flow and safety.

For the record, I don't think cyclists should mindlessly plough on ahead at a red light, but left on red (if clear) makes some sense. I think I've said it before, but from a driver's  perspective I find it safer, and that traffic flows better if cyclists clear the lights first, intead of all trying to go together as they wobble their way to stabllity. Perhaps that's different in London (and other big cities) though, where there can be a lot of cyclists gathered at a red light.

 

 

 

[Moleman]

9 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

Fair enough Maurice, perhaps I misinterpreted your comment about all drivers being wrong, and wrongly took it as a sarcastic dig at my earlier post. If so, or if I expresssed myself clumsily, then my bad. It appears though that on the details we're probably closer than it appears, and just have different communicating styles. If mine comes across as obsessing about being right, it's not my intention, as often I'm wrong 😀

 

Same with me, I get it wrong sometimes.

[Moleman]

10 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

Back though to the original point by Malc that I replied to yesterday, what are people's thoughts about cyclists running red lights? Pros and cons?

It is I think about people being sensible.

My biggest problem when based in London was cyclists going through red lights at speed when pedestrian's were walking across the junction during the very short time you have available. They would also hit you or miss (just) and swear at you for being in the way. This sort of behaviour does unfortunately leave an impression with you which then passes onto cyclists in general. I know not everyone is like that.

So I do feel it is better for all road users to stop at red lights.  As Bernard has said on a number occasions it would be better to separate out cars and cycles at busy points if possible. If not then we all need to relax a bit more and work together.

I know, wishful thinking. 

[Bluemarlin]

5 minutes ago, Moleman said:

It is I think about people being sensible.

My biggest problem when based in London was cyclists going through red lights at speed when pedestrian's were walking across the junction during the very short time you have available. They would also hit you or miss (just) and swear at you for being in the way. This sort of behaviour does unfortunately leave an impression with you which then passes onto cyclists in general. I know not everyone is like that.

So I do feel it is better for all road users to stop at red lights.  As Bernard has said on a number occasions it would be better to separate out cars and cycles at busy points if possible. If not then we all need to relax a bit more and work together.

I know, wishful thinking. 

I agree, I've nearly been hit as a pedestrian too, and was more thinking about left on red (possibly a good idea for cars too), but obviously only when clear. Usually these would be signed, so not carte blanche, and so presumably wouldn't be allowed at busy pedestrian crossings.

Actually, now I think about it, there are some junctions near me where the lights are seperate for bikes and cars, but usuallly when the cycle lanes are contraflow. That makes things a bit easier for cars and bikes, but I've seen some pedestrians confused by the fact that cars are stopped and so are not expecting bikes to be carrying on.

I also agree that people need to relax a bit more (easier in a big Lexus😀), and don't think the media help matters by stirring the pot on either side and creating division. Bit like how panic buying only seems to occur after the media report on shortages.

[Moleman]

1 hour ago, Bluemarlin said:

I also agree that people need to relax a bit more (easier in a big Lexus😀), and don't think the media help matters by stirring the pot on either side and creating division. Bit like how panic buying only seems to occur after the media report on shortages.

So true.

[doog442]

On 5/5/2022 at 7:43 AM, Moleman said:

Why would that amaze me, I am one of them. Unlike some I hold balanced views, not obsessive views.

I'm not sure you hold 'balanced views', be honest now. You're clearly an obsessive (your word)  'anti cyclist', more so than anyone on this forum I'd wager. One comment from me and the forum is subject to a  disproportionate amount of replies and innuendos as demonstrated on this thread, however it would be nice if you could back up your posts with facts, something you've failed to do. We then have a salient argument or debate.  

I also appreciate you say you are a cyclist (I don't believe you are - you may own a bike but that's probably it) however you'll find those commuting or who do many miles on the road tend to hold stronger views than folk who get their bike out twice a year. That's down to experience in dealing with halfwits be it school run mums, white van man or the myriad of others who really shouldn't be on the road in a mechanically propelled vehicle. 

Going back to the thread title, do we have any stats yet to prove that as a result of the changes anything has actually changed ?  Are pedestrians flinging themselves in front of vehicles like lemmings, are cyclists holding up miles of traffic because allegedly 'they can'. The answer is more than likely no. 

Toodlepip

[Moleman]

36 minutes ago, doog442 said:

I'm not sure you hold 'balanced views', be honest now. You're clearly an obsessive (your word)  'anti cyclist', more so than anyone on this forum I'd wager. One comment from me and the forum is subject to a  disproportionate amount of replies and innuendos as demonstrated on this thread, however it would be nice if you could back up your posts with facts, something you've failed to do. We then have a salient argument or debate.  

I also appreciate you say you are a cyclist (I don't believe you are - you may own a bike but that's probably it) however you'll find those commuting or who do many miles on the road tend to hold stronger views than folk who get their bike out twice a year. That's down to experience in dealing with halfwits be it school run mums, white van man or the myriad of others who really shouldn't be on the road in a mechanically propelled vehicle. 

Going back to the thread title, do we have any stats yet to prove that as a result of the changes anything has actually changed ?  Are pedestrians flinging themselves in front of vehicles like lemmings, are cyclists holding up miles of traffic because allegedly 'they can'. The answer is more than likely no. 

Toodlepip

Some people just cannot help themselves.

[doog442]

4 minutes ago, Moleman said:

Some people just cannot help themselves.

Aye, cyclists posting their thoughts on an anti cycling thread...who would have thought it.