To think cyclists should use cycle lanes

[Krispybake]

Today, a massive line of traffic was held up by a cyclist who was using a long main road when a cycle path (tarmacked the same as the road) ran parallel for the entire length of the road. Due to the volume of traffic coming in the opposite direction, it was impossible to overtake the cyclist and leave the safe distance so creating a huge tail back involving service buses, funeral cortege and multiple cars.
Genuine question, why do cyclists do this? If the cycle track has the same surface as the road, why will they not use it? Very annoying!

it often strikes me that ppl complain about "slow cyclists" but no one complains about fat cars. As in, way too wide for the road. The too big vehicles on too narrow road was actually an equal factor in this story.

If all the motorised travellers in OP's story were on motorbikes, the cyclist wouldn't have slowed them down. And before you say the obvious... I have seen a coffin in a sidecar on a motorbike. Someone being sent off in glorious style by his motorbiker mates (about 30 of them)

So rather than you be inconvenienced you would rather inconvenience all the motorists you hold up!

I was just about to post this.

Cycle lanes are better off without bollards so vehicles can use them occasionally and flick the dirt, grit, glass, etc out of them.

YABU the cyclist has full rights to use the road regardless of how good the cycle path and you just need to accept that. They have their reasons and frankly those reasons are up to them.

Ding ding ding! We have the road tax claim.

No one has paid road tax since 1937. Road repairs are paid from the same pot everyone's cash goes into. Motorists pay a vehicle tax based on carbon dioxide emissions.

Check out the highway code. Cyclists can cycle in the lane if they wish. If they choose not to use the cycle lane they absolutely don't have to - it's usually full of rubbish.

You claim it's wide enough - I'm curious as to whether you've cycled it yourself. You need to leave a cars' width to pass a bike. I've yet to see too many cycle lanes that need this criteria.

and you refuse to acknowledge that the problem might be to many cars on the road, its like listening to a psychotic person try to justify their belief that they are Queen Camilla

so you had to stop at every road that was joining the main road to look both ways and cross, but of course if you had been on the main road you could just keep going because that road had right of way.

thats supposed to have changed with the new Highway Code rules, but many drivers don't stop for pedestrians and although it supposed to be for cyclists as well im not sure they'd stop

That’s some serious extrapolation given that my post had absolutely nothing to do with that. But well done for trying

I have acknowledged on numerous occasions (which you seem determined to disregard as it clearly doesn't suit your agenda) that I understand why cyclists won't use unsafe or unsuitable cycle lanes. I have also acknowledged a cyclist's right to use the road. Yes, I will laugh at what I consider to be ridiculous claims that cyclists are not responsible for holding up traffic. I suppose it also the fault of the roads on twisty country lanes that make it unsafe to pass cyclists too! 🤷 I appreciate the time that some people have taken to reply (politely) although many posts mention lanes in a poor state with debris etc. which I have also stated several times was not the case today. I am not so inclined to appreciate those posts in which the implication has been that I am lying, I am incapable of making my own judgement (and yes, I do cycle!) or those posts that are intended to provoke, are unnecessarily rude or are posted (as your's appear to be throughout this thread) just to argue. You have your opinions, I have mine.

I don't like cycling in kerb separated cycle lanes because - apart from the debris - I cycle faster than a lot of pootlers and most of those lanes it's hard to impossible to get round someone so I end up feeling claustrophobic.

With a kerb blocking your exit you are restricted in your movement options as well - say a pedestrian steps out in front of you you can't "escape" right as the kerb blocks your way. The open road -ironically - feels a lot safer.

A little ironic to be complaining about Pootlers 😂😂

For all the posters (not the OP!) who seem to perceive cyclists as only an inconvenience to their journey - maybe think instead that ever cyclist is freeing up one more parking space at the end of your journey.
There is a collective benefit to people cycling, even if it can be hard to see that if you're stuck behind one. I know the pain from both sides; from having a car that was too low powered to overtake anyone unless I had the longest clear stretch of road, to being a slow cyclist on a hill very aware of the long line of cars behind me but knowing full well that if I pulled over I wouldn't be able to get going again on that gradient!

Yes cyclists do sometimes hold up traffic, but what mostly holds up traffic? Sheer weight of traffic. Its not cylists holding up traffic in cities, its motor vehicles.

It blows my mind this is so difficult for you to grasp. Cycling in a cycle lane with bollards on one side and a kerb on the other. You’re travelling at say 15mph. You see a pot hole ahead or large debris. Where are you going? To swerve to crash into the bollard or the kerb? Or, if you were an experienced cyclist cycling in the road, you may only need to swerve slightly in the road to avoid it, just as a car might. And as cars shouldn’t be within 1.5m of you, you can do that safely. Seriously OP, as much as you might claim to be understanding of the dangers cyclists face, you’re not. Those are beautiful new perfect cycle lanes in your eyes as a driver, a pedestrian but not a cyclist (even though you occasionally ride a bike). You want to know his reasoning - many actual cyclists have you given you likely reasons but before you started this thread, you had already decided you were right and they were wrong. So this is all a bit pointless.

Motorists spend far, far more time being held up by other cars than they ever do by bikes. If a few lazy bastards got out of their cars and onto bikes important people like OP would be able to get around fast.

Cyclists are the traffic. Just as much as the car in front of you.

If more people used their legs for local trips we'd get around faster and be fitter. But most people seem to be allergic to active travel on foot or bike.

Have you actually tried using the cycle lane. It may look fine but if you tried using it you may well find any number of issues. A few I find include: Broken glass and debris, the cycle lane crosses over joining roads which can be frustrating as either you are repeatedly having to stop or have the risk of cars turning into you, the surface may look like normal tarmac but actually it is not to the same standard as a road and is very bumpy, there are pedestrians (maybe with dogs on long leads) who stroll nonchalantly across the path, the entrance and exit to the cycle lane maybe really badly designed such that it is quite scary to join and leave, or takes a long detour that adds time to the cyclists journey

Op, if it is so vital that you have to drive somewhere, why not leave more time for your journey?

@Krispybake
Due to the volume of traffic coming in the opposite direction, it was impossible to overtake the cyclist and leave the safe distance so creating a huge tail back involving service buses, funeral cortege and multiple cars

"Volume of Traffic"

There you go... the issue isn't the cyclist, its this...

So too many (and wide cars) not enough roads and too many people who refuse to walk/cycle/use public transport - when possible.

Aside, Cycle lanes are often dangerous places, especially when they cross junctions, drivers will ignore any markings and pull out across the 'lane or the 'lane hasn't priority, so the cyclist has to keep stopping at junctions, several cyclists have been killed due to this, another reason is car drivers will turn left across them, hitting the cyclist, again resulting in death/serious injury.

I wouldn't use them in the UK.

Often the problem is not the cyclists but the poor design and maintenance of cycle paths making them unusable. I often wonder if people who put in the cycle lanes and boxes ever ride a bike.

Where is all this broken glass coming from.

Because OP - cyclists can do what the hell they like on the road, pavements, zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings, one way streets, no entry signs etc. They are sanctimonious in their piety about being higher beings from motorists and pedestrians -nothing is their fault, all harm is done to them not by them!

Woe betide the poor pedestrian who dares to use a pedestrian crossing with the green man alight at the right time as cyclists continue through, swerve across diagonally and get roundly abused for obeying the law.

That little bit of the Highway code which both cyclists and motorists forget - be considerate of other users does not apply to those selfish wankers.

Vandalism, people chucking bottles out of cars, sometimes car accidents where the lights and windows have smashed.

And few local authorities go around and clean it up.

I just struggle with the idea that so many cycle lanes are apparently full of the results of accidents or people chucking bottles out of their cars. Still unless people are massively exaggerating I suppose it must be true.