Colnago unveils all-new, “accessible” V4 based on its flagship V4Rs – but with £5,500 price tag

I entirely agree that in this case the overtake is safe, but the idea that cyclists are not a risk to others "as they themselves are low energy" is false. If there had been a vehicle coming it might easily have swerved off the road to try to avoid the cyclist and suffered serious damage to both vehicle and passengers, and a cyclist coming through the windscreen at high speed can cause significant injury to the car occupants. To reiterate, in this case, in my opinion the overtake is safe but as a general rule saying that cyclists don't pose a risk to others due to their lower mass is incorrect.

Now had eight and seven free articles, but weirdly only seems to apply to the Cannondale Propel article, so either (a) there's a weird issue with that page, (b) that page is being used for testing a forthcoming paywall, or (c) it's an oddly specific paywall that only covers Cannondale-related items...

I think he did the same for the first as you can see he did for the first. He sat on their left flank, looking through the corner till he could see through to the next short straight once they get to mid-corner and then dashes through. Bikes are just /way/ faster on these kinds of roads - sharper steering than motorbikes, far less momentum at a given speed, able to flick in and out much quicker. The cars are something slowing to 30 km/h mid-corner, and the bike can go 50 - with the gradient you can accelerate from the cars ~30 to 40 to 45+ in a few pedal strokes. Or you hold back in corner entry, and keep your speed as you approach the slow car mid-corner, and then mid-corner you decide whether you maintain speed and pass, or slow down and stay behind. He's not a risk to anyone. The cars and motorbikes are much bigger risks to themselves and others.

It doesn't /have/ to be done. If you're on a stretch of road where there isn't a safe opportunity to do it, you should just wait until it is safe, just like a motorist should. It may be that in this case it /could/ be done safely, but it doesn't /have/ to be.

@Dan Yellow Giants are the fastest ;-) Red is for Cannodales and Specialized Stumpjumpers

The overtake is safe. The cyclist is faster, so they can complete the overtake without risk to others, particularly as they themselves are low energy (even when travelling faster, due to low mass). Given there is no intrinsic issue overtaking, it has to be done somewhere, and everywhere is narrow on these roads, so they're going to closely pass. And it's just /not/ an issue - a sub-100kg rider+bike quickly going past a 1.5+-tonne car on a mountain road, at an appropriate point, is not causing them or anyone else an issue here. I'd argue it's also safer for the faster cyclist to get in front of the slower cars.

The ones that any terrorist could just drive round on the road and then bump over a four inch kerb to get onto the pavement anyway? I assume, given the talk of allowing traffic in overnight for deliveries, the barriers will be more along the lines of a swinging gate or those retractable bollards that sink into the ground.

That would be quite some chutzpah given the mess the updates have caused (anybody else getting transparent ads covering half of the text of articles, that's what I'm getting on my Mac?), following the Discovery cycling coverage model, we've made everything a lot worse, now pay more for it.

This would be anti-terrorism barriers like the ones used on various london bridge cycle lanes? The ones designed to stop terrorists in cars or trucks ramming through pedestrians? The ones that cost a small fortune because they need to be big and heavy to stop something with the mass of a car? The ones we can install on cycle lanes without stopping cyclists? Sure, sure; they are spending 5-6 figures on anti-terrorism barriers to stop cyclists rather than (overpriced) £200 crowd control fences...

It's good to see that the police are actually being more aware of the distinction, at least, but do they really need training to identify illegal electric motorcycles? If the hub motor is bigger than a brake disc, if the rider is going more than 15 mph on the flat or uphill whilst only gently turning the pedals, or they are not turning the pedals at all, then it's illegal. That covers 99% of illegal electric motorcycles (yes it's possible to hack a legal 250W bike by overriding the restrictor but virtually nobody bothers). It's not identification that's the problem but the willingness to act. I've mentioned on here before that the Pret A Manger at the bottom of my road always has a crowd of delivery riders waiting outside for orders, without exception using illegal bikes, and the police regularly drive up (parking illegally, but that's another issue), go into the establishment for coffee and snacks and come out and consume them in their cars, all the while gazing on what could be an easy pinch of half a dozen illegal riders, and then drive off.