Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Cycling club chairman complains of being held up by cyclists riding two abreast

A proposed revision to the Highway Code would tell cyclists to “ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake”

The chairman of Darlington Cycling Club has complained of “two complete planks” who he says ‘held up traffic’ by riding two abreast on the way into Yarm yesterday. The comments come as the government consults on a proposed revision to the Highway Code which would tell cyclists they should “ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake.”

Writing on the Darlington Cycling Club Facebook forum, Mike Drake said: “We came across these two complete planks riding into Yarm today. They were two abreast, well before Tesco’s roundabout and all the way to the traffic lights.

“I pointed out to them at the traffic lights that they weren’t doing the cause of cyclists any good, to be told the Highway Code tells them to ride like that.

“Read again mate, it applies in certain situations and riding the busy road into Yarm isn’t one of them.”

The current wording of Rule 66 of the Highway Code says that while cycling, “You should … never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.”

While some club members expressed support for Drake’s comments, the majority were critical. Several people said they tended to ride two abreast on that stretch to deter drivers from passing as they felt the road was too narrow for safe overtaking.

“Perhaps the video doesn’t show the full picture, as I didn’t start recording it as soon as we came across them,” said Drake.

“We came across them riding two abreast between the Urlay Nook and Tesco roundabout and I just assumed they would go into single file after the roundabout, but they maintained their position all the way to the lights.

“You can see the volume of traffic going the other way and it was similar going into Yarm, albeit backed up behind these two.

“I’m a big fan of riding two abreast, where it is practical and safe, but don’t feel I have the right to hold up traffic because I think the [Highway Code] says so – which it doesn’t.”

He added: “The point I was making is that the image of cycling will not be enhanced by taking this approach. The [Highway Code] does also say you should not hold up a long queue of traffic.”

The Government this week launched a consultation on revisions to the Highway Code with Cycling UK asking cyclists to support 10 changes it feels will improve safety.

One potential update is to the wording of Rule 66.

The proposed new wording – which could potentially spell the death of the chain gang – would say, “You should … ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so. When riding in larger groups on narrow lanes, it is sometimes safer to ride two abreast.”

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

45 comments

Avatar
wknight | 3 years ago
1 like

Cyclists please do some maths, 

Motorhome width 2.8m

Road width 3m one lane, 6m for total width 

Unless you ride in single file I CANNOT PASS YOU SAFELY giving you 1.5m clearance

Yes you can ride two abreast as you did, but is that being considerate for other road users as you were only doing aboout 12mph. As a result a huge queue built up on the road because you wouldn't pull in for a few seconds

Oh and giving me the figure multiple times is Section 5 Public Order  offence and can land you a fine. 

I am a cyclist too but  I always help other road users by pulling in so they can get pass on STRAIGHT ROAD stretches

Avatar
mdavidford replied to wknight | 3 years ago
1 like

So these cyclists just randomly started giving you the finger (assuming that's what you meant) completely unprovoked? Or were you perhaps sounding your horn at them first, which, of course, would have been an offence in itself?

Avatar
Butty replied to wknight | 3 years ago
2 likes

Oh the irony. The huge queue of impatient drivers builds up behind you regardless of whether there are cyclists on the road or not.

Caravans and the like should move at night during the holiday season to avoid traffic jams. Better still, pay for a hotel.

Avatar
Mungecrundle replied to Butty | 3 years ago
2 likes

Caravans should pay road tax.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Mungecrundle | 3 years ago
1 like

Mungecrundle wrote:

Caravans should pay road tax.

Owners of caravans probably do pay VED, in all fairness...

Avatar
Sriracha replied to wknight | 3 years ago
2 likes

Yes, let's do the maths.

Even with a single cyclist 60cm wide riding in the gutter, 0.6 + 1.5 + 2.8 = 4.9, so you'd be 1.9m over the lane marker anyway. That leaves 1.1m for the 1.8m wide cars coming the other way. Math's a bitch.

So motorhome at 2.8m = you need the whole other lane to overtake. Move over.

So that leaves the whole lane clear for the cyclists regardless of whether they be single file or two abreast. Once you are in the other lane it is up to the cyclists how they make use of their lane - just as if you were coming the other way.

How else are you going to overtake?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Sriracha | 3 years ago
2 likes

I think the idea is the cyclists pull over and doff their caps to the gas guzzling, environmentally damaging motor homes.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Sriracha | 3 years ago
1 like

Well, not quite. If the 2.8m motorhome is in the centre of the 3m far lane, that means they're 0.1m from the centre marking. For that to be a 1.5m pass, the cyclists can't be closer than 1.4m from the centre marking. That leaves 1.6m of lane for them to be in. Take off the 0.6m clearance from the kerb, and to ride two abreast while being passed they'd need to squeeze into 1m of road, which would be a little tight.

If there's a wide load like that behind you, I'd say it is considerate to single out, or even pull over, to let it pass, at a point of your choosing.

Avatar
OnYerBike replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
1 like

I'm still not convinced singling out helps often (if ever). I'm yet to (knowingly) experience a vehicle refrain from overtaking when the opposing lane is completely clear just because the gap left might be slightly less than 1.5m. If the overtaking vehicle is entirely over in the opposing lane, and the speed differential isn't too high (which it rarely is for a wide vehicle) then generally I don't find such overtakes particularly dangerous - certainly no worse than a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction travelling at a much greater relative speed.

As in so many situations, I find it is in fact far safer to be two abreast as this halves the length required to overtake and the overtaking manoeuver can therefore be completed more quickly. I would much rather be two abreast and have the caravan (or whatever) slightly  less than 1.5m away, than single out and have the caravan abort mid-overtake because an oncoming vehicle came around the next corner.

Yes, there are occassionally situations when the only safe and considerate option is to pull over, but those are relatively rare.

Avatar
mdavidford replied to OnYerBike | 3 years ago
1 like

All fair. Personally, if something like that came up behind me, I'd be looking to ride fairly central initially, to discourage an overtake until I found a spot where I was happy to let it pass, and then pull over completely, because just moving left I wouldn't trust it to move over enough to pass safely, or not to swing in too early (plus if there's a queue behind it there's a greater chance of a poor overtake from another frustrated driver). If it then attempted to pass before that, it's at least going to be forced to go wider, and I've got room to move left if it starts coming too close.

Avatar
Philh68 replied to wknight | 3 years ago
1 like

2.8m wide is not road legal, maximum vehicle width is 2.55m. Most motor homes are 2.3m wide. You must have imagined the problem seeing this is an imaginary vehicle.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Philh68 | 3 years ago
0 likes

My neighbours have an old GMC motorhome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_motorhome

It's abso-f-ing-enormous, but wikipedia still says it's only 2.4 metres wide.

Avatar
Dhill | 3 years ago
1 like

Don’t know why we can’t just be considerate to all. As a bike user, I will pull over to let cars past, when able to. I don’t like being held up by cars being held up by bike riders when I am cycling. This is all a bit tribal, if you are holding up the traffic on your bike, just get out the way.

Mike Drake should be supported in this, well at least I think so. I accept others may not agree, those who insist on riding 2 abreast.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to Dhill | 3 years ago
0 likes
Dhill wrote:

Don’t know why we can’t just be considerate to all. As a bike user, I will pull over to let cars past, when able to. I don’t like being held up by cars being held up by bike riders when I am cycling. This is all a bit tribal, if you are holding up the traffic on your bike, just get out the way.

Mike Drake should be supported in this, well at least I think so. I accept others may not agree, those who insist on riding 2 abreast.

But the point that seems to elude you is that it would not be safe to overtake even if the cyclists were single file. Do you not see the constant stream of traffic in the oncoming lane? Are you suggesting that the chairman crosses the centreline into their path, or that he somehow squeezes by in the lane he's in? Remember, his car is at least 1.8m wide (plus wing mirrors, but they don't hurt too bad), plus 1.5m clearance to a single cyclist, plus the width of the cyclist, plus about 60cm from the kerb. Add it up, a lane just is not that wide!

So at this point your advice is for the cyclists to get off the road to allow the chairman by. Very gracious.

As it is they are doing the best they can; by bunching up two abreast they increase his opportunity to find a break in the oncoming traffic long enough to overtake safely on the other side.

Avatar
bike.brain | 3 years ago
0 likes

Highway code also says that you shouldn't overtake on the approach to a bend which is exactly what is shown in the picture.

Avatar
iandusud | 3 years ago
1 like

Unbelievable!

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 3 years ago
6 likes

Absolute dross.  I cycle central on all roads, because its much safer (for me) to slow down traffic and make them individually overtake instead of squeezing by without slowing down.  

 

Would he have posted a video if there was a single horse/rider?  

 

 

Avatar
andyp363 | 3 years ago
2 likes

Furthest roundabout at Urlay Nook to traffic lights at yarm 0.8 miles

Total time at 18mph 2:43 (is slight downhill and they look reasonably proficient - could be quicker but  going for lower estimate)

At 30 mph limit - 1:36 assuming perfect speedo accuracy, no speeding, no cars slow to turn off the main road and there is no oncoming traffic at the roundabouts.

the injustice!

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
13 likes

Anyone notice the two cyclists riding in the opposite direction single file who were being close passed by everyone who passed them. About 10 seconds in you notice them just as the partner says something. A white Kia slighly moves over but barely goes over the white line but the two cars beforehand don't alter their line at all. 

Avatar
Philh68 replied to AlsoSomniloquism | 3 years ago
11 likes

Yes, proves the sense of riding two abreast in the circumstances.

All this shows is that cars are like a magic trick. You can take a cyclist and put them into a steel box and turn them into an asshole…

Avatar
DonLogan | 3 years ago
9 likes

At no point in that video could I see it would have been safe for him to overtake - single file or two abreast.  

Avatar
hmas1974 | 3 years ago
0 likes

I don't have an issue with them riding 2 abreast. I do have an issue with the huge gap between them.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to hmas1974 | 3 years ago
3 likes

Why?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to hmas1974 | 3 years ago
2 likes

I'm sorry to read you had a tiff with your lover. I hope you sort it out soon.

 

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to hmas1974 | 3 years ago
5 likes

Hmm, social distancing slighly plus also giving room for the one gutter cycling to move in or out easily.TBH, it only looks bad because the one in secondary is probably too close to the curb.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 3 years ago
9 likes

I know we all change our behaviour when we get behind the wheel of a car, but this example is a bit extreme, and shows how far we still have to go to persuade drivers to share the roads.  I'm pretty sure that rather than not doing the cause of cyclists any good, agreeing with self-entitled drivers and not knowing the HC isn't going to do you or your club's reputations any good.

Maybe it's because two cyclists made you look bad in front of your other half, but I really don't think that there's any excuse for making yourself look such a plank Mike.  Maybe next time take the tandem, eh?

Avatar
Velo-drone replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
5 likes

Sometime I will share the footage from my tandem ride with 6y.o. on the back, as a delightful woman yells abuse from the passenger window at us as they pass, merely for our temerity to be on the road.

Sadly, for some people it is simply the existence of cyclists that is the problem, regardless of what they do or don't do.

Avatar
Colin Peyresourde replied to Velo-drone | 3 years ago
1 like

I wish that when they did the driving test they hammered home that roads are a public right of way, and that they were originally built for any road user. Car drivers seem to think they were built for them because they need the signage and road furniture. I don't think it helps to dissuade this notion that there are pavements and cycle lanes because it reinforces the idea that the road is for them only. Roads are for all.

Avatar
Butty | 3 years ago
6 likes

"The proposed new wording – which could potentially spell the death of the chain gang – would say, “You should … ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"
It looks like they were already doing their new civic duty and preventing the car from overtaking in an unsafe location.
How was the driver communicating to them that he wished to overtake?

Avatar
Sriracha | 3 years ago
10 likes

Maybe if he and his wife were not travelling two abreast the problem would not have arisen.

Pages

Latest Comments