Fucking Cyclists

[SpanielSprint]

I live in a very rural area that is super popular with cyclists. All of the roads around me are narrow, bendy, single track lanes - no white lines. Wherever I go I get stuck behind cyclists. I accept this, always leave extra time for my journeys and never drive aggressively.

The issue is that the cyclists always seem to try and wave me past when I don’t feel it is safe to overtake. Either into blind corners, or when the road is too narrow so would necessitate going onto the verges which are rutted and full of hidden rocks and pot holes - I’m not willing to risk my tyres driving at pace along them. Obviously I just ignore them but this seems to infuriate them.

I’ve just returned from yet another journey where I was behind a pair of cyclists for several miles. The cyclist at the rear kept waving me on and when I didn’t go past she seemed to get increasingly angry about it, gesticulating etc. when I finally did pass, she screamed fucking twat at me and gave me the Vs.

Nice. So basically that’s my ‘thanks’ for trailing patiently behind them for 10 minutes and almost doubling the duration of my journey.

disclaimer: I realise that not all cyclists do this, but there seems to be a significant enough number of them around here to make this sort of thing a weekly occurrence.

AIBU to overtake cyclists when I’m good and ready, and think that some of them need to learn a few lessons about manners and road safety before they go out on their bikes?

There’s a lot of things which “obstruct traffic” such as lorries , caravans and tractors. And they’re allowed on the roads, same as a group of 12 cyclists. You do realise that a group of cyclists are traffic, just the same as cars. Your attitude stinks.

also it’s not a safety hazard if you drive sensibly. So don’t overtake if you can’t see. No danger at all

@Ktime As far as I know, you can't be banned from cycling. So riding a bike is everyone's right, driving a car is a privilege that can be removed

Can you find the part that specifically says large numbers are allowed? The Highway Code instructs cyclists to ‘be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in a group’. Being considerate when riding in a group surely means ensuring that the group does not get so large or strung out as to become a nuisance to other road users. How would you interpret it?

You see, this is what happens in these discussions. Instead of saying, "Yes, a group of 12 cyclists not only takes up an enormous length of road unnecessarily, when they could easily split into groups of 2 cyclists with spaces in between to allow cars to overtake 2 cyclists at a time, & this is made worse by having someone at the back waving following motorists to overtake the entire group at once, on dangerous country roads," someone will say motorised vehicles are the same (even if correct, that's just 'two wrongs make a right') &/or become verbally abusive. It should be possible to have a reasoned discussion.

Your argument is wrong because:

• a lorry, caravan or tractor cannot help its length, whereas a group of 12 cyclists can - there's no reason for them to bunch up
• lorries, caravans & tractors rarely go as slowly as cyclists do
• I've never been waved on by a lorry, caravan or tractor, yet I've had individual & group cyclists wave me round them on blind bends & once, as I said previously, a car came round the bend just after the cyclist had waved me round, so there would have been a collision & the cyclist either knew the car was there or he was unsighted - either way, he should not have signalled to me
• if a very long, slow-moving motorised vehicle takes to the road, special precautions are generally taken to alert motorists to its presence & the potential danger

If you have any reasons why it's imperative that a group of 12 cyclists should not split into groups of 2 so that the group can be overtaken a bit at a time, I'm very happy to hear it. 'We don't have to' is not an acceptable reason.

It is a safety hazard having large groups of cyclists together on country roads. You can't overtake so are stuck behind them for ages. In that scenario some people will try dangerous overtakes.
It is a similar scenario to a car driving far too slowly on a road.

Do you have a link to that RE: British Cycling because I did a quick search and couldn’t see anything?

but in any case, BC are the governing body for competitive cycling, not an authority on road safety. I stand by my opinion that 12 bikes in a group on the road is too many.

@ifIwerenotanandroid https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloton

Essentially, speed and energy saving benefits.

On ordinary roads, in traffic? (i.e. not in racing conditions)

Because we’re friends and it’s a social thing and we enjoy chatting as we cycle.

because we will chain gang on the ride taking it in turns to be at the front which is harder work and having rests in the middle of the group. Major energy saving benefits.

because it’s safer and more visible regardless of you thinking it’s not safe it actually is

and yes absolutely because we’re allowed to.

you’re entitled to have a different opinion to me. You think my argument is wrong. I know your argument is wrong. If it was as dangerous as you think it is it would be banned.

Yes, hugely so. When you’re knackered someone else comes up front.

So it happened again today, 2 cyclists on a 1:4 hill (going up) clearly marked not suitable for cyclists (there's a properly marked cycle route that's shallower) on a blind corner, car in front of me caught the rear cyclists wheel. Nobody hurt but bike damaged. Signs are there for good reason, 1mph uphill isn't safe (it's 20 mph for cars on that stretch)

You can have your opinion all you want doesn’t make it right. I ride with an affiliated BC club which won’t allow more than 12 as they say that’s BC advice. no idea if it’s true or not maybe it’s their own rule.

Bloody hell so a cyclist got hit by a car and it’s the cyclist fault? Couldn’t make this up. Not suitable doesn’t mean it’s banned. Just advising the average cyclist won’t make it. But a fit cyclist would and even if they go up at 1mph cars can’t just ram them from behind

With any luck it soon will be banned, along with dangerous signalling. It's obvious from this thread that many drivers experience the dangers of it & yet many more people seem unaware of it, which may explain why it hasn't been banned or controlled in the Highway Code. It seems to depend on the type of road/topography. So much is London-centric that it doesn't really surprise me that it's been overlooked. For the time being, perhaps more cyclists should take note of this:

'The Highway Code instructs cyclists to ‘be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in a group’. Being considerate when riding in a group surely means ensuring that the group does not get so large or strung out as to become a nuisance to other road users.' @SpanielSprint

So as you admit your reasons are all selfish ones. Riding in a small group may improve safety for cyclists but it doesn’t have to be 12! I agree with pp that larger groups may well increase the likelihood of dangerous manoeuvres from other road users. Just because something isn’t specifically banned (yet) doesn’t mean it can’t be an extremely inconsiderate or risky thing to do.

Your ‘because I’m allowed’ attitude says it all though.

Surely most people's reasons to use the roads are 'selfish' ones, the roads would be a hell of alot nicer, if people didn't drive everywhere all the time

Sounds like you just do as you’re told by your club without putting any critical thinking of your own into it.

I’m not talking about reasons to use the road, I don’t have a problem with cyclists using the roads considerately (unlike you in reverse with drivers). I’m talking about selfish reasons for the particular activity of riding in very large groups.

The people faffing behind cyclists are the same faffing at junctions and roundabouts and every other obstacle to making progress.

Whereas you just blunder along regardless and hope everyone else gets out of your way in time, ey?

Op, so these cyclists are selfish because they slow you down? Cars slow down other road users all the time. What's the difference?

Cyclist shouldn’t have been there. If you do something you’ve been told not to do, you do it anyway and your bike gets damaged that’s on you. Use the cycle path that has been put there specifically for your needs and safety. What’s wrong with expecting people to take some personal responsibility in situations clearly labelled as dangerous?

To be clear, by cyclists do you mean the large groups? I don’t come across many cars that deliberately slow down other road users in the way these groups are. The equivalent in terms of other vehicles would be a long string of tractors all heading to the same destination together so close nose-to-tail that cars couldn’t overtake them individually. It’s not a common scenario.

If groups of bikes are deliberately slowing down other road users, then traffic jams are are also deliberately slowing down other road users. We all have to share the space. Besides, I thought being slowed down wasn't the issue.

You’re so determined to have a go aren’t you?

I’ll happily go out riding with the club without putting any critical thought into it you’re correct. I was new to cycling when I joined the club so happy to be guided by people who had been doing it longer inc a good friend who I trusted. I’m happy to carry on now because it feels very safe and I trust them. The club is very professional, very well organised, takes safety seriously, has ride leaders who all go on external group leader training run by British cycling which I believe not all clubs do.