A study of British adults’ attitudes to cycling has found that a large number want to cycle more for everyday short journeys but feel unable to do so because they find sharing the roads with cars, buses and lorries too scary.
The survey also shows that people now believe that cyclists should be taken seriously (68%), that they are doing their bit for the environment and that they are actually rather brave (50%).
Researchers at UWE-Bristol asked YouGov to help survey GB adults in both 2010 and 2013 to get their views on a range of issues linked to cycling in this country. They found that in 2010 33% of the GB sample agreed they were contemplating cycling for short journeys, and 18% agreed they’d actually made plans to take up cycling. However, as the 2013 data makes clear, these plans didn’t materialise, with cycling levels amongst the population remaining broadly flat.
Census data released recently also shows that despite a modest increase in cycling in some areas, especially in cities where provision has been made for cycling, the same proportion of people rode to work in 2011 as in 2001.
.jpg)
A majority of those surveyed agreed cyclists should be taken seriously
(CC licensed image by Tristan Schmurr/Flickr)
One reason why people havent started cycling even thought they say they’d like to is lack of confidence. In the 2013 survey, 34% of GB adults agreed that, ‘I’m not confident enough to consider cycling’.
New cyclists want to be protected from motorised traffic, and this may be why as many as 65% of GB adults support an increase in funding to support more cycling for everyday journeys. Indeed, and contrary to the ‘road wars’ anti-cycling media hysteria of recent times, cycling is very warmly regarded by all but a few.
In the 2013 survey cycling was regarded as good for the environment by 72% (vs only 8% disagree) and a majority – 54% – agreed that Britain would be a better place if more people cycled (just 13% disagreed).
Even the hyperbolic idea that cycling is a great way of solving some of the world’s problems had 30% agreement. Only 10% thought cycling to work isn’t normal and 46% agreed that cycling is cool.
Media bias is increasingly recognised as such: a recent Top Gear piece making jokes at cycling’s expense should be set against the finding that 37% agreed (18% disagree) that TV motoring programmes are too negative about cycling, for example.
Professor Alan Tapp of UWE Bristol said: “Our data is clear that anti-cycling media rhetoric does not represent the views of the majority. A majority of adults in GB support cycling and want to see more money spent on it.
“Moreover, people recognise the environmental and congestion reducing potential of cycling, and many people would cycle more themselves – if only they felt more confident to do so.
“This is more evidence to back up the key recommendation of last year’s All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group: government must meet the urgent need for a safer cycling environment by investing in cycleways.
“At the moment enormous budgets are allocated to road building without any opposition, and yet much more modest recommendations for cycling are prevented from happening. This surely needs to change.”
72 thoughts on “What’s keeping Brits off the bike? In a word: fear, says new study”
Cash…that is the issue.
Cash…that is the issue. Who’s gonna pay?
Simmo72 wrote:Cash…that is
Everyone. Just like everyone pays for the roads. Driving gets about £80 per head of population from general taxation. Cycling gets a tiny amount, despite the fact that more people are able to cycle than drive.
Simmo72 wrote:Cash…that is
I am glad you said CASH. Cash (as in cash flow) is an issue at the moment. Funding in itself shouldn’t be an issue because cycling infrastructure saves money.
At the moment the lack of cash in capital budgets is restricting the ability to save money by investing in cycling infrastructure.
Traffic congestion costs the UK £4.3 bn a year
Road Maintenance Costs due to traffic attrition are hard to calculate in this regard because they invariably include upgrading and cyclists don’t use motorways and not many use A roads but that cost is also £bns per year
Health Service Costs are reduced
Basically anything that reduces traffic, fuel usage and emissions, speeds up traffic, improves public health and reduces the negative balance of payments on imported oil (yes we need to import sweet crude to make petroleum) is going to save a whole heap of money.
But like that little old lady in a big old house we may know that we need a new efficient boiler and that it will save us a heap in the long term but if you don’t actually have the cash to buy one you can’t.
Cash not the financial benefits and gains is the issue.
oozaveared wrote:Simmo72
They appear to be pretty keen to make the cash available for HS2 though on very specious cost benefit grounds as well…
The issue is cants in cars
The issue is cants in cars not giving cyclists enough room, not looking for them properly at junctions, and not understanding roads are there for everyone to use, not just the motorised tin box brigade!
be nice to include a link to
be nice to include a link to the actual study, no?
“In the 2013 survey cycling
“In the 2013 survey cycling was regarded as good for the environment by 72% (vs only 8% disagree) and a majority – 54% – agreed that Britain would be a better place if more people cycled (just 13% disagreed).”
The minority must live near me then.
Sadly Biggins wrote:”In the
I think soem of us cyclists home in on the negative comments about cyclists and also extrapolate from the minority of idiots that drive cars to think that all motorists are like that.
It’s easy to put it all in the same bag with the same label but there’s a whole spectrum out there.
There are altercations between individual cyclists and individual drivers. These are just like the hooting gesturing incidents that drivers give each other. Not really to do with cycling per se
There is non-malicious carelessness by drivers.
There are misunderstandings by motorists about positioning (taking the lane etc) and a lack of knowledge on dealing with cyclists that also end up being seen as anti-cyclist behaviour.
Then there are the anticyclists drivers that actually go looking for trouble or are predisposed to taking issue.
The trouble is a lot of cyclists think all these types of attitude are synonymous with that last category. That leads them to thinking there is a lot more anticycling sentiment than there is.
As a driver and cyclists (I used to drive for a living) I can see why this happens. In my vehicle some idiot hooting or making gestures at me isn’t nearlty such an emotional experience as when I am on my bike.
If most motorist were anti-cyclist or agressive towards us there would be absolute carnage. There isn’t. I am 52 been cycling properly in a club since I was 12 (1973) I ride to work most days around 25 miles round trip.
I wouldn’t be writing this if most drivers out there were anti-cyclist. I’d have been dead in a ditch in the mid 1970s (especially considering how I used to ride about the place as a teenager).
New cyclists want to be
There are 2 protests today that are focused on pushing governments to make road networks better for people who choose to cycle…
At 1pm Stop Killing Cyclists is highlighting the results from its FOI questions put to all London Boroughs in its #WallOfDeath protest at Westminster City Hall.
See STOP THE KILLING: WALL OF DEATH
Then at 2pm the Brake charity is protesting for #GO20 at Parliament, demanding 20mph speed limits on more roads.
See BRAKE: Charity takes campaign to parliament
“New cyclists want to be
“New cyclists want to be protected from motorised traffic, and this may be why as many as 65% of GB adults support an increase in funding to support more cycling for everyday journeys”.
The motorised traffic these potential cyclists are afraid of is made up of themselves…They are basically admitting that they are scared of their own driving, which puts them off. This can’t be admitted by people, as its everyone else who is the problem, but its the same issue I come up against trying to increase the number of children cycling to school. The parents all say “but its not safe with all the cars around the school..” – okay, but who is driving these cars? You.
I am the keenest cyclist out there, but the one thing that puts me off jumping on my bike and going where I want when I want is only ever the thought of the scary/dangerous/bullying driving that I might encounter, particularly around the rush-hours. In no other walk of life would an old chap feel it acceptable to pass me with his middle finger raised, or the fella in the Range Rover the other day force his way past a group of people, just because they are on bikes (I imagine he would do differently if we were on horses?). Until the liability law is changed to match many other countries, (where the driver is assumed to be at fault in an incident unless they can prove otherwise, not “presumed innocent” as in the UK), all the millions in the world can be spent on infrastructure but it won’t encourage many many would-be’s out of their “safe cars” onto bikes.
Until the liability law is
I’m finding myself getting really annoyed by the pervasive view that strict liability will magically make the UK’s roads a nicer place.
Italy, Malta and Poland all have strict liability laws. Are they cycling utopias? Do they even have above average levels of cycling? No. Next!
If for a moment you think
If for a moment you think about this,
A large proportion of adults drive, a large proportion of adults want to cycle but are scared.
What are they scared of, drivers!
So does this mean a large proportion of drivers recognise, maybe unconsciously, that they are incompetent and should not have licences because they haven’t got a frickking clue about how to drive!!!!
Yesterday I had two extremely
Yesterday I had two extremely close calls, both of which shook me. The first was a coach that whipped past me so close I felt it against my arm and shoulder whilst it also pulled me toward it in the airflow. I was doing 25mph+, he had to be doing 50mph+. Complaint to the company filed. The second was as I pulled out in a village to overtake a stationary bus at a bus stop, a taxi then tried to overtake me with not enough room and nearly sandwiched me between him and the stationary bus. Sadly I didn’t clock the taxi firms name as he then sped off after waving his arms at me whilst I was trying to make sure the bus driver then didn’t pull out and finish me off as I was having to lean against it the taxi was that close.
These are so-called ‘professional’ drivers and they are absolutely the worst culprits. I seriously wonder if cycling is worth the risk sometimes. It is no surprise to me that some people are scared when they see and hear about things like that.
There’s an inbuilt attitude of fuckwittery on our roads and it simply and sadly won’t ever change.
A good book I read was called
A good book I read was called “The Way We Drive and What It Says About Us”, by a sociology professor in the States. He claims that humans haven’t developed the social skills which are required when travelling at more than running pace, as its only relatively recently that humans have been able to do so, basically since the motor car was invented. We need eye contact to remain “human”, and sitting in a glass and metal box means we’ve lost the ability to behave in what is a normal way. Thats why drivers in tesco car park are happy to wait, let people pull out, they wave pedestrians across and generally get on ok. Once we hit 30mph and above on the open road we develop our, as you quite beautifully put it, “inbuilt attitude of fuckwittery”.
Interesting view, and the more I ride the more I subscribe to it.
As someone sagely noted on
As someone sagely noted on here the other day, ‘never trust anyone who doesn’t pay their own insurance’ – changing that would be a start to changing behaviours…
As someone sagely noted on
As someone sagely noted on here the other day, ‘never trust anyone who doesn’t pay their own insurance’ – changing that would be a start to changing behaviours…
So the majority of Brits
So the majority of Brits believe that the ‘other people’ on the road are crap drivers? I suppose it’s a start – if they can just accept that we are pretty much all crap at this driving thing, maybe we could agree to stop doing it?
Most drivers are fine, could
Most drivers are fine, could you imagine what the carnage would be like if it actually was a majority that were incompetent.
We do have a bit of a quality issue with driving. From my observation, a difference between commuter cyclists and drivers is that cyclists often brush up on their road craft and knowledge over time. Drivers however develop an over confidence in their ability.
Forcing drivers to at least retake their theory test every decade would help with that, along with a greater use of retraining as a punishment for offences.
bikebot wrote:Most drivers
I wouldn’t say most drivers are fine, I would say most drivers are barely competent and very complacent. Evidence for this is the two lane entry roundabout, something so simple, and yet in my experience something that seems to be beyond the capability of a huge proportion of drivers. Then we have lane discipline on dual carriageways and motorways, a huge proportion will never move over after overtaking, you only have to look at the stream of trucks in the left, the reps on the right and the empty lane in the middle to see that.!
This is before you consider the disregard for parking laws, speed limits, mobile phones, etc etc.
Think about the Sheppey bridge crash last? year, its foggy visibility is reduced, so what happens a major pile up.
bikebot wrote:Most drivers
The majority get away with it. I’m not sure that makes them “fine”.
If we must allow private cars, I’d have thought 5 yearly medicals and retests (the lot, not just theory) would be appropriate – I can’t think of any reason why people should be allowed to wield dangerous weapons, with essentially no constraint from the law, and no check on their fitness or competence, beyond ‘some time in the past they did OK’, probably in different road conditions, with a less powerful car, and in better physical condition themselves.
bikebot wrote:Most drivers
I don’t know about ‘fine’. I’d say ‘could you imagine what the carnage would be like if non-drivers – cyclists and pedestrians alike – didn’t constantly allow for and anticipate bad-driving?’
People operate on a need-to-know basis. Cyclists learn as they go along because their survival depends on it – drivers forget what they knew initially because it doesn’t.
On the other hand, UK drivers I’m sure are not nearly as bad as in many other countries – maybe up there with Northern Europe but way ahead of youtube-dashcam-star Russia or the less developed countries.
The way I’d put it is our drivers are the worst in the world apart from all the other countries!
Update:
In the interests of
Update:
In the interests of fairness, here’s the reply from the coach company (Longstaffs of Amble, Northumberland) in it’s entirety , make of it what you will:
Thank you for your email. Your comments have been noted and our drivers spoken to.
Regards
Alison
ajmarshal1 wrote:Update:
In
never send an email direct to the company without copying in the police, the later may do nothing, but it is on file and it is harder for the company to ignore.
ajmarshal1 wrote:Update:
In
Well that fills you with confidence.
ajmarshal1 wrote:Update:
In
Words like these alone are meaningless. They would struggle to use fewer words in their communique, such is the importance of this to them.
Fairness would include:
– ensuring the driver understood the seriousness of the incident
– he recognises the consequences of his actions
– him (and the company) finding a way to address the failure and prevent it happening again to their staff.
– communicating something of all the above to the complainant.
This happens in other areas, why not so-called ‘professional’ drivers?
Simon E wrote:Words like
True. This in fact says “Get lost”.
In the world of meetings, it is put thusly: “Thank you for your input. We’ll take that point under advisement.” [Nod to minute-taker]
(This post refers the Langstaffs incident)
harman_mogul wrote:Simon E
Yep, that’s what I took from their reply. I kind of read it as “Bugger off mate, we don’t care” The lack of apology was telling. Sadly, I didn’t expect anything more from them than that if I’m honest, knowing that people who don’t ride a bike really don’t care at all.
What is worse is that most of the time I just shrug things like this off for fear of becoming one of those mad blokes covered in cameras that shouts number plates every five minutes. I can’t be doing cameras, not aero. 😉 It’s bloody dangerous out there though and I wonder what it will take for it to ever change.
ajmarshal1 wrote:Update:
In
I would struggle to write a more blatant piss off I’m busy reply than that of Alison’s. It is fairly obvious that your email got deleted directly afterwards and I for one don’t think any of their drivers have been spoken to.
It’s true many drivers cannot
It’s true many drivers cannot perceive bike riders as equal road users. Probably this is a generational thing. If you’re middle-aged or older, you grew up when the prevailing attitude was that people who ride bikes ‘don’t really count’.
(You might recall Jeremy Clarkson’s crack that ‘anybody over 23 on a bus is a failure’. JC projects that ‘cyclists-don’t-really-count’ attitude.)
Fewer young people are learning to drive, and fewer still buying cars. With time, a generational change in attitude will come, just as it did with drunken driving.
Meantime…I am surprised that nowhere in the study’s findings is there mention of ‘fear of getting your bike nicked’.
Speaking for myself, this is an important reason to prefer some other form of transport, for example when going out in the evening.
harman_mogul
thinking about it, I never really worry about my bike being nicked, but I won’t ride into town because there is no where safe to lock my bike up. Not sure if that makes sense! I am lucky I live a few minutes walk from town.
Issues I face, I won’t cycle to the supermarket as I have no faith in my bike not getting trashed and have no space for another bike. Cycle parking is very much an afterthought in so many places, tucked round the back just where a thief or vandal can have some peace and quiet. I cycle to work but there is nowhere to lock the bike up. I just chain the bike to the structural steelwork, the building isn’t going anywhere so should be safe! but there is a nice big carpark.
The cycle-hoops that do exist in town, don’t protect your bike from idiots scratching the bike by dumping there bike on top. No one deals with the bikes that have been abandoned and that occupy the very few spaces that exist.
mrmo wrote: I won’t cycle to
My local Tesco Extra (a really big one, next to an Ikea) has room for about twelve bikes around the back, next to the exit that they permanently closed because too many shoplifers were fleeing through it.
I hadn’t been there for a while, but went at the weekend and… drum-roll … – they have got rid of half of the bike stands. There is a now a small kiosk-type shop for a popular key cutting chain of stores. So, the bike stands are now completely out of sight, in an area between a key cutting store and a permanently shut rear exit.
Anyone would think they didn’t want cyclists to shop there…
The problem with other people scratching your ride when they lock their own up, is apparently just one of those things – I was reading an article with someone visiting Amsterdam and the locals said not to ride their good bike, because it’ll get damaged by other people and their huge heavy town-bikes.
And, our local police do seem to go through from time to time and cut off all of the abandoned bike carcasses and locks.
brooksby wrote:The problem
Which meets
head on.
There is so little storage that if you want a few bikes you soon have a problem, and this is before you run into n+1, I am just talking 2-3 people living in a house and having one bike each.
mrmo wrote:brooksby wrote:The
Which meets
head on.
There is so little storage that if you want a few bikes you soon have a problem, and this is before you run into n+1, I am just talking 2-3 people living in a house and having one bike each.— brooksby
Surely the council will let you park them in the street outside your home. There is a precedent for that…
In fact buy a very old van, excise exempt, and park it in the road. Store your bikes in the back. Free secure storage right outside your home. The van doesn’t even need to be a runner, get it towed into position!
paulrbarnard wrote:mrmo
Which meets
head on.
There is so little storage that if you want a few bikes you soon have a problem, and this is before you run into n+1, I am just talking 2-3 people living in a house and having one bike each.— mrmo
Surely the council will let you park them in the street outside your home. There is a precedent for that…
In fact buy a very old van, excise exempt, and park it in the road. Store your bikes in the back. Free secure storage right outside your home. The van doesn’t even need to be a runner, get it towed into position!— brooksby
won’t work, you may be “excise exempt” but you still have to obtain a VED disk to prove your vehicle has a current MOT and has insurance…
harman_mogul wrote:
(You
worse than that he was quoting Thatcher –> A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure
RedfishUK wrote:harman_mogul
worse than that he was quoting Thatcher –> A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure— harman_mogul
Ah thank you, we even have fact-checkers on this board. Interesting that la Thatch should have characterized the bus-bound 26-year-old failure as a man.
Presumably in her day the chap would have had the car to drive to work, while his missus schlepped around on the bus doing the shopping, and that was all as it should be.
But that generation’s attitudes, as noted, are gradually atrophying.
RedfishUK wrote:harman_mogul
worse than that he was quoting Thatcher –> A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure— harman_mogul
To be fair to Thatcher (not a sentence I use often) I don’t think its established that she really said that. It also has mutated to ‘only losers take the bus’, which I vaguely remember became the title of a Fatima Mansions album.
Its true though that buses have a plebian image. For some curious reason its been noted by transport planners that higher-income people are happy to take trams but not buses. Social signifiers take strange forms.
This is the response I got to
This is the response I got to a complaint about a bus cutting me up
.
To risk sounding totally
To risk sounding totally dramatic…
That high you get post exercise… I think my high after a ride is actually elation from still being alive!
Cars seem to believe we are holding up their journey, then 2mins later we will pass them again as they are stuck in traffic. It’s all so silly really. ~X(
If only drivers would view us as Top Gear tried to portray… one person on a bike is one less car on the road, therefore making their journey easier.
fancynancy wrote:Cars seem to
This. On my way to work I frequently get passed at 40+ mph on a blind bend, only to catch up to the vehicle in question seconds later at the junction 200m down the road…..
fancynancy wrote:
Cars seem
Earlier this evening I was the recipient of a ‘must-pass-the-cyclist’ moment (unsurprisingly enough featuring an AL Galaxy). He needed a full emergency stop to avoid hitting the back of the queue we were approaching… I laughed so hard I nearly crashed into a bus.
Apart from the obvious fear
Apart from the obvious fear factor, there’s a couple of other things that prevent huge numbers from getting on their bikes.
Firstly, many new homes, and especially flats, are being built without bicycle storage in mind.
And secondly, there may be millions of people, often whole families, who already own bikes, and perhaps want to cycle just occasionally, but who are confronted by an obtuse industry doing everything it possibly can to change the perception of a bike from a machine capable of lasting 50 years or more, to that of one to be treated almost as a disposable item.
My office recently moved out
My office recently moved out of Nottingham city center – my 3 mile commute became a 6 mile one. The new route proved to be so dangerous that I’ve had to add another 3 miles on to it to reduce risks / stress levels to something I can live with. Only alternative is buy a car and become part of the problem…
I cannot understand our
I cannot understand our government and local authorities.. we have a country not that far away that has implemented a cycle scheme that has been tried and tested and they paid all the money to make sure that its works and even better they would not charge us if we started to use it ourselves, but in hindsight we have decided to spend loads of money and try and do it our way because we always not best …
Also if we all jumped onto bikes tomorrow and spent less on fuel in cars, bus and trains were would the government get enough money to give themselves a 11% pay rise .. good to know we are all in it together
Quote:Italy, Malta and Poland
Actually Malta doesn’t – Romania, Malta, Bulgaria and Ireland are the 4 European countries without strict liability.
Malta is bloody lethal. For such a tiny island, (and not even an especially hilly one either) there is virtually no cycling and certainty no cycling provision. The roads are either beautifully surfaced but dual carriageway or little more than cart tracks. And everyone drives everywhere, its just insane.
Like London but higher speeds and because there are far fewer cyclists, far less awareness of them from motorists. Which comes back to the point made so well earlier. Everyone would ride if it wasn’t for the pesky motorists…but “everyone” is the problem because they’re the ones choosing to drive and making it dangerous!
Italy has a well deserved reputation for mental driving and a love of fast cars too but the difference is that Italy has a rich cycling heritage and culture so its appreciated out there.
crazy-legs wrote:
Malta is
I remember Malta being mentioned in relation to the UK’s embarrassing obesity rates. Weren’t they one of the tiny number of countries we could point to as being worse than us?
here we go…
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110501/local/Maltese-are-among-world-s-most-obese.363119
I think they are pretty much level-pegging with the UK, though.
Malta does have strict
Malta does have strict liability, according to this briefing from Roadpeace: http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/RoadPeace_Strict_liability_discussion_paper.pdf
Point is, loads of countries already have strict liability laws. But not all of them have high rates of everyday cycling.
By the time someone’s knocked you off your bike and you’re arguing over who pays the medical bills, it’s a bit late, isn’t it?
Mr Agreeable wrote:Malta does
I agree that the evidence is that strict liability doesn’t do much, if anything, on its own. Personally I like the idea for simple moral reasons, it seems morally right to me that the onus should be on the one who creates the danger by wielding a dangerous weapon. It might help get back to the idea that driving is a _choice_ and a privilege, not an essential right.
But as a practical measure it probably won’t change anything, plus I don’t think many people in this country agree with me about the morality of it either, so I think its not the best place to expend political effort.
Most people in the UK are too
Most people in the UK are too fat and too lazy to cycle. End of.
Airzound wrote:Most people in
Laziest. Comment. Ever.
Also… steady on. I’m a bit of a podger and as lazy as they come, yet I manage fine.
seven wrote:Airzound
You can’t be that lazy if you cycle regularly. I’ll take your word for it with regard to your waistline.
I think a lot of people are actually scared of change, as much as they are of the roads. The fact is that the UK road network is actually a good deal safer than it was in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s. But so many scare stories about the dangers of cycling have put people off. Yes there are aggressive and careless drivers out there but the level of drink driving is a fraction of what it was and that was the real killer back in the day.
OldRidgeback wrote:I think a
But what about the sheer volume of motorised traffic? That’s something that has grown markedly since the 70s and 80s.
When the car is sat in the driveway or parked on the road/pavement outside the house then the easy option will always win for most people. They’ll whine about the queues, the cost, the weather, the bad driving… and then get back in the car again to go shopping or pop round to someone’s house.
As for drink-driving, I wouldn’t be so sure it’s been confined to history. Arrests are on the increase where I live:
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2014/03/04/shropshire-drink-drive-arrests-soar-by-45-per-cent/
The article indicates arrests are up by 45% but doesn’t give the number of drivers stopped compared to previous years. If police resources are stretched further and further, as we are told, then you’d be forgiven for thinking that there are fewer police on the roads, leading to fewer drivers being stopped (so more getting away with it).
Simon E wrote:OldRidgeback
The fatality rate from drink driving for 2013 was 1/6th of what it was in 1979 according to DfT figures. Road deaths in the UK peaked in the late 70s and early 80s. The fatality rate on the UK’s roads is now at much the same level as it was in the late 1940s. This is of note, given the massive increase in vehicle numbers and total distance travelled since then.
The perceived danger of cycling on the road today is something quite different from the actual risk, which was significantly higher in the 70s and 80s and when road deaths simply weren’t reported in anything like the detail they are now.
Paul_C wrote:paulrbarnard
Which meets
head on.
There is so little storage that if you want a few bikes you soon have a problem, and this is before you run into n+1, I am just talking 2-3 people living in a house and having one bike each.— paulrbarnard
Surely the council will let you park them in the street outside your home. There is a precedent for that…
In fact buy a very old van, excise exempt, and park it in the road. Store your bikes in the back. Free secure storage right outside your home. The van doesn’t even need to be a runner, get it towed into position!— mrmo
won’t work, you may be “excise exempt” but you still have to obtain a VED disk to prove your vehicle has a current MOT and has insurance…— brooksby
If it’s pre-1960 it won’t need an MOT. And insurance on classic vehicles is quite cheap anyway.
Find yer local backroads and
Find yer local backroads and stick to them if you’re worried about traffic. I ride near Bedford – in the busy centre of the country – and can ride for hours, only seeing cars very occasionally. I have no interest in riding in towns or cities.
Beaufort wrote:Find yer local
Might work in Bedford, but not possible in large chunks of London, back roads = rat runs. Some councils stop the rat runs, some don’t (Westminster does nothing about them).
Strict liability is a tough
Strict liability is a tough sell to your average tabloid reader. It’s also widely misunderstood to mean strict criminal liability. It’s nothing of the sort, and only kicks in when deciding what (if any) civil damages to award to the victim of a traffic accident.
Something similar already exists for accidents involving rear-end shunts, does that mean that roads are full of people carefully observing the Highway Code’s recommended stopping distances? =))
Personally I’d like to see it introduced nonetheless. But it’s not a catalyst for mass cycling. Make cycling normal, make it safe, and then worry about the obscure details of insurance law.
Let’s make no bones about it
Let’s make no bones about it – riding on the UK’s roads is very scary!!! Even for very experienced riders, it pushes you to the limits – just to try to stay alive!!! Every ride I’ve had in the past 5 years or so has involved at least one near madness encounter. Sometimes more. You have to keep your wits about you – at all times – and expect that the driver behind you – or coming at you – will do something stupid. Frequently – they do!
I don’t know how you overcome that – even with “quiet” and isolated roads, or dedicated cycle paths – cos there’s always a nutter on a bike there whose primary aim seems to be to scare the shit out of everyone else!
My wife won’t ride now. She is simply too scared. I mean jittery, unpleasantly scared. A danger to herself and to others too. It’s a crying shame, but the roads have done that to her and to many others too.
If the drivers don’t care – and many don’t – and the politicians do nothing to help – what chance has anyone got???
Stay strong, keep safe, ride smart!!! And remember the arse behind you is likely to be just that!! A total arse. =D>
I live in rural France which
I live in rural France which is the total opposite of your post, in the 4 years I have been riding over here (4 or 5 times a week) in that time I have had two incidents.
One with an English driver! But he could have misunderstood the insane priority to the right rule over here not realising (forgot, didn’t care) I actually had right of way from the minor road to his right (maybe).
The other was with a BIG lorry passing me and the driver pulled right over to give me room it was just the suction caused by this humongous truck. Pulled me all over the place.
Further I have just come back from a 3 day visit to the South East of England and the traffic is just bloody awful no way would I ride there.
Strange thing is except for that one incident with the UK vehicle I have had no problems with other UK cars and the continental drivers always give plenty of room some have sat behind me on narrow roads for the best end of half a mile possibly more before overtaking when it was safe to do so, and no revving of engines, shouted obscenities or any of that other crap.
But even with the situation over here I still ride defensively cause as you say the arse behind could be just that a total arse!!
comm88 wrote:Let’s make no
I cant agree enough…..I would say that easily 80/90% of my rides have some incident and I am a very very defensive rider as I value my legs.
Generally I would say these incidents fall into the non malicious kind, people just not thinking (caring) but I have had occasions when people have pulled alongside to shout abuse or driven behind blowing the horn. Its is just beyond words.
comm88 wrote:Every ride I’ve
My sympathies, but in the last five years, and riding almost every day, I haven’t experienced any “near madness encounter”.
Admittedly I’m extra cautious, often riding a quieter (but less direct) route, slowing right down when in town, only putting the hammer down when I’m well away from people and traffic, wearing a hi-viz, using cycle paths if they’re half decent, staggering my ride times to avoid the rush hour, and often walking across a complex junction rather than cycling through it. I can honestly say that I haven’t come across anything remotely close to a near miss.
However, and this isn’t aimed at you because I obviously don’t know what riding you do, but I do see a depressingly large number of cyclists riding in a manner, or at a particular time and location, that give me the distinct impression that their day to day survival is purely a matter of luck.
Neil753 wrote:comm88
You seem to be insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists. Perhaps all cyclists should avoid rush-hour, wouldn’t want to get in the way of traffic now would we.
You say you haven’t experienced a near miss, what about close passes, tail-gating, speeding, ASL hogging and all of the other rudeness that is typical on the roads.
Neil753 wrote:comm88
I agree more with comm88. I’m not sure about ‘near miss’ exactly, but every single ride I encounter some kind of arrogant, law-breaking, and plain annoying behaviour by drivers. There’s a never-ending burden on _me_ to watch out for _them_ which is far more tiring than the physical exertion involved. Not to mention getting annoyed is also exhausting!
And your final paragraph just seems to point to its own flaw – if so many cyclists ride like that, how do they, statistically, all manage to be so lucky all the time? “Luck” evens out across a large sample. Such bad riding would be self-limiting for, crudely, Darwinian reasons.
(A big exception would be the pavement-jockeys. They of course put pedestrians at risk rather than themselves.)
And riding a ‘quieter’ route isn’t always possible. Quiet roads have masses of parking with cars coming at you fast and head-on down the very narrow remaining part of empty roadspace. Its particularly impractical if you don’t know the route, as personally I usually get lost on those quiet routes and end up on the busy one anyway.
I have a car, a (fast, noisy)
I have a car, a (fast, noisy) motorcycle, and several bicycles.
Maybe I ought to get some kind of multiple personality thing going on so I can hate and fear myself properly.
Transport history can perhaps
Transport history can perhaps inform us why cycling has never been given government backing in Britain. With very few exceptions, successive governments over the last two centuries have failed to create integrated transport systems, from the canal age to Britain’s early railways, both of which relied on private investment, including the development of the London Underground.
And investors were attracted to back such projects because they saw money to be made. Cycling offers no such incentive.
With the exception of projects such as Concorde and the Channel Tunnel, and now HS2, British governments have repeatedly under-invested in transport.
As to why they cannot learn from the Continent, well,
Britain is an insular nation which takes no notice of what they do over there.
Ride the back lanes, they’re
Ride the back lanes, they’re much nicer all round.
In response to kie7077 you
In response to kie7077 you get all the rudeness etc on UK roads be you on a bike, motorbike or in a car.
Also he is not insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists just the some of them are and I do agree the behaviour of some cyclists is insane.
Remember at all times the rule of gross tonnage 100 kg of cyclist and bike against 1500kg of car in a collision who do you think is going to be worse off?
But this doesn’t absolve many motorists from their lousy driving or their insane behaviour behind the wheel to save 30 seconds off a trip. Maybe they should just leave 30 seconds earlier.
In response to kie7077 you
In response to kie7077 you get all the rudeness etc on UK roads be you on a bike, motorbike or in a car.
Also he is not insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists just the some of them are and I do agree the behaviour of some cyclists is insane.
Remember at all times the rule of gross tonnage 100 kg of cyclist and bike against 1500kg of car in a collision who do you think is going to be worse off?
But this doesn’t absolve many motorists from their lousy driving or their insane behaviour behind the wheel to save 30 seconds off a trip. Maybe they should just leave 30 seconds earlier.
In response to kie7077 you
In response to kie7077 you get all the rudeness etc on UK roads be you on a bike, motorbike or in a car.
Also he is not insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists just the some of them are and I do agree the behaviour of some cyclists is insane.
Remember at all times the rule of gross tonnage 100 kg of cyclist and bike against 1500kg of car in a collision who do you think is going to be worse off?
But this doesn’t absolve many motorists from their lousy driving or their insane behaviour behind the wheel to save 30 seconds off a trip. Maybe they should just leave 30 seconds earlier.
In response to kie7077 you
In response to kie7077 you get all the rudeness etc on UK roads be you on a bike, motorbike or in a car.
Also he is not insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists just the some of them are and I do agree the behaviour of some cyclists is insane.
Remember at all times the rule of gross tonnage 100 kg of cyclist and bike against 1500kg of car in a collision who do you think is going to be worse off?
But this doesn’t absolve many motorists from their lousy driving or their insane behaviour behind the wheel to save 30 seconds off a trip. Maybe they should just leave 30 seconds earlier.
I evidently need to get out
I evidently need to get out more then – ok, the occasional driver passing a little closer than I’d like, but generally I don’t have significant issues with bad driving.
[[[[[ Well lucky you then,
[[[[[ Well lucky you then, ALLEZ NEG. Are you a big geezer? I’m positive the size, weight and height, –and sex– of a cyclist will affect the degree of road-space and respect given by a certain kind of driver. I’m just average height and weight, male, a very experienced ex-club rider, in SW London (and, as far as I know, not yet been killed) and still about 10% of vehicles around me get too close, at least three have knocked me off, and I assure you my riding style HAS to alternate between “defensive” and “assertive” for much of my time on two wheels.
So much for city cycling….hit the country lanes outside the centre and you’re among boy-racers, and girl- racers, tearing round blind bends at 60mph or more and, b4 long, you just wanna get back to the relative safety of the Big Smoke! I could go on….or maybe I just did.
P.R.