Passing a cyclist

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

zipdip

MB Enthusiast
SUPPORTER
Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
4,870
Location
Essex
Car
s320
Well I suspect we have all faced this problem on the road,while not wanting to endanger the cyclist most drivers will pass them with what amount of road they can afford to give them given oncoming traffic.
We have now entered a new era of passing a cyclist where there is assumed safe distance as highlighted by undercover cops riding bikes around the midlands,this resulted in a truck driver getting 5 points and over a £1000 fine.
It would seem we can now loose our licence even though we have not had a at fault accident,after all the truck driver did not hit anybody.

I suppose we might expect this to be extended to us car drivers,after all not many of us get through a days driving without slowing and passing a oncoming car with maybe a foot or less between our door mirrors,maybe undercover cops driving cars will be able to prosecute us for not hitting them.

As always the Highway code makes a idiot of itself,by showing a photo of a car passing a cyclist on the other side of the road,as you would if you passed a horse and rider,totally forgetting you are dealing with a animal which is unpredictable and not a machine ridden by a person.
 
My view point is that I'm not going to be the one who knocked them off and killed them; I'll give them as much room as they want (well, enough that they couldn't reach-out and touch my car as I pass).

I still remember as a lad having a car brush my leg as it passed me when I was riding my bike. It was unsettling, so I made a conscious decision not to do that to someone else.
 
Tolerances

Aren't there different tolerances for passing a child, pedestrian, dog walker, cyclist, motorcyclist or two tonne car at speed?

As a Londoner, I see near collisions every day from minor unanticipated movements. A car sways a little, a bike moves six inches to the side to avoid a pothole, a motorcyclist looks over her shoulder and moves slightly off-line, someone takes a risk to jump in and misses a problem.

The downside of hitting another car is usually just a claim on insurance, a few bruises, and an unwanted change of vehicle. It's admin.

Hit a motorbike, cyclist, dog-walker or pedestrian and you get a lifetime of being woken up in the middle of the night by the memory of the thud, the bits on the car, and the endless replay of your explanations and excuses afterwards, even though you just know it was her fault.

And every time I hold back for a pedestrian, dog walker, horse, bike, or motorbike, I always catch up with the vehicle in front within a few minutes. Holding back doesn't really save anything in terms of journey time.

Pushing past is usually like racing up to an existing queue at a roundabout - it's pointless.

Why do the police try to enforce it ? They don't get the money. The road traffic guys just know what it's like to mop up the bits, wash away the blood and tell the relatives.

080603-bike-accident-hmed-330a.grid-6x2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well I suspect we have all faced this problem on the road,while not wanting to endanger the cyclist most drivers will pass them with what amount of road they can afford to give them given oncoming traffic.
We have now entered a new era of passing a cyclist where there is assumed safe distance as highlighted by undercover cops riding bikes around the midlands,this resulted in a truck driver getting 5 points and over a £1000 fine.
It would seem we can now loose our licence even though we have not had a at fault accident,after all the truck driver did not hit anybody.

I suppose we might expect this to be extended to us car drivers,after all not many of us get through a days driving without slowing and passing a oncoming car with maybe a foot or less between our door mirrors,maybe undercover cops driving cars will be able to prosecute us for not hitting them.

As always the Highway code makes a idiot of itself,by showing a photo of a car passing a cyclist on the other side of the road,as you would if you passed a horse and rider,totally forgetting you are dealing with a animal which is unpredictable and not a machine ridden by a person.

Oh dear.
 
Isn't there a recent regulation/law that says motorists must leave a minimum of two meters from a cyclist when passing them, so in a lot of instances you would need to stop until approaching traffic passes you, or at least creep along at 5mph for some distance?
 
Highway Code stipulates you should give cyclists and horses at least as much room as when overtaking a car.

I am very rarely held up by cyclists, they are the easiest thing on the roads to overtake.
 
As someone who has been clipped by a truck before who couldn't be bothered giving me any room I welcome this law.

An increasing large number of drivers think they need to scare cyclists by showing them 'who's boss'

And before the anti cycle brigade turn up on the thread, try commuting by bike for a couple of days, rather than moan at the cyclists who run red lights.

And no, I don't own any lyrca or own a road bike. I live in Cambridge where nearly 40% of all road users are cyclists.
 
Last edited:
I live in 'Single Lane' Countryside where any access to any main road is via 'Single Lanes'.

The standards of driving around here are truly shocking. Not a week passes without a collision between a car and a: pedestrian, horse, cyclist, cows,,,,,,,, I could carry on, but you get the gist.

In almost every single incident the car driver is 100% to blame with most collisions (not accidents) happening on 'blind bends'. "I came round the bend and they were in the middle of the road" is the pitiful explanation offered in most instances.

The inability of some drivers to comprehend then drive to the road conditions is frightening.

Another increasingly common trend is for drivers to creep up behind you when you are walking, riding a horse, or a bicycle then when they are almost within touching distance.......Give a loud blast on their horn. Not funny, it can and does often result in irrational and direct violent responses from those victims of the 'tooting'.

I don't like bad behaviour of any sort be that a car driver, cyclist or pedestrian. Some do need to try the other side of the fence to appreciate what the word is really like.
 
I think if this is to be law then equally an additional law needs passing making it illegal to ride two or more abreast.

Cyclists (and I am one of them) are a nuisance on the roads. That said, they do have a right to be there. I often wave cars past who are sitting behind me when I feel its safe for them to do so. I dont need two metres or for the car to cross right over to the other side of the road. Two feet is enough. If im wandering across the road whilst cycling then I shouldnt be on the road.

Cyclists should have insurance too. All too often there is an incident caused by stupidity on the cyclists behalf just as much as the car driver but the driver is presumed to be the guilty party. The presumed 'right' of the cyclist also needs addressing. If I see a lorry stopped at a set of lights I dont ride up the inside of it. Stupidity. I wait behind the vehicle until I know what he is going to do when the lights change.
 
In the incident mentioned by the OP the cyclist in question wasn't a police officer out to catch a motorist who had done nothing wrong it was a 56 year old member of the public who had to take evasive action to avoid serious injury or death. The level of fine / points was purely down to the fact that the driver chose to go to court to defend his innocence despite being offered driver improvement or a fixed penalty (I assume in the face of undeniable evidence).
It is behaviour like this, and attitudes like the OPs, that has led the police to proactively police what is a genuinely life threatening action on the part of some drivers.
I commute by bike every day and ride for pleasure whenever I can so experience this on a regular basis (It would probably be less regular if less people used smartphones at the wheel) so I welcome this approach especially as it has now been extended to my home constabulary.

Talking to lots of people it is close passing and the resultant fear of riding on the road that is preventing many more people from using cycling as a viable form of transport and also pushes less confident riders on to the pavement (which I am sure also annoys a lot of people)

I've been hit by cars, both whilst behind the wheel and whilst cycling, and I can assure you that the level of consequence has been far greater on two wheels than 4, for that reason I give other vulnerable road users plenty of space when I pass and only do so when it is necessary to maintain progress and to be fair to most drivers this seems to be the position of the majority of drivers
 
We have now entered a new era of passing a cyclist where there is assumed safe distance as highlighted by undercover cops riding bikes around the midlands,this resulted in a truck driver getting 5 points and over a £1000 fine.
It would seem we can now loose our licence even though we have not had a at fault accident,after all the truck driver did not hit anybody.

I suppose we might expect this to be extended to us car drivers,after all not many of us get through a days driving without slowing and passing a oncoming car with maybe a foot or less between our door mirrors,maybe undercover cops driving cars will be able to prosecute us for not hitting them.

As always the Highway code makes a idiot of itself,by showing a photo of a car passing a cyclist on the other side of the road,as you would if you passed a horse and rider,totally forgetting you are dealing with a animal which is unpredictable and not a machine ridden by a person.

In the incident mentioned by the OP the cyclist in question wasn't a police officer out to catch a motorist who had done nothing wrong it was a 56 year old member of the public who had to take evasive action to avoid serious injury or death. The level of fine / points was purely down to the fact that the driver chose to go to court to defend his innocence despite being offered driver improvement or a fixed penalty (I assume in the face of undeniable evidence).

What a difference a cool head and unbiased thinking makes.
 
Surly its about being patient and waiting for the road ahead to become clear

another example

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=C...&biw=1366&bih=638&dpr=1#imgrc=AroOH_X6pSZdeM:

I've seen that argument before, as put forward by a lycra lout. My answer was, why not stay in single file but leave holding spaces between every three or four bikes so cars have the chance to leapfrog a large group?

The roads in the South East are invariably always rammed and whilst we all have a right to use them, we don't have a right to use them selfishly or to make up our own rules....

Section 66
This section explains what cyclists should and should not do when riding on the road.

You should:
Keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear.
Keep both feet on the pedals.
Be considerate of other road users, taking extra care around blind and partially sighted pedestrians. Use your bell when necessary to signal you are nearby.
Ride single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends

You should not:
Ride more than two abreast.
Ride close behind another vehicle.
Carry anything that will affect your balance or get tangled up in your wheels or chain.
 
We should consider ourselves lucky there are, apparently, nine million of them in Beijing.

Imagine steering around nine million of the swines.
 
Whatever the obstacle!! That obstacle, is still there in front of the driver. Why then, do some drivers choose to disengage their brains when they see the obstacle and attempt overtakes that are simply dangerous, can and do, end in collisions (not accidents).

I will have a guess here.

When these fools see a cyclist in their path. They think the cyclist can/will move, when they intimidate them with their vehicle. If the cyclist doesn't yield, they will get knocked off with little damage to the driver who will blame them anyway.

When that obstacle is another vehicle, there is a recognition that a collision is the likely outcome, so they hold back, recognising that if there is a collision, they themselves may come off worse.

So (in my opinion) it is selfish in the extreme for people to bully other road users simply to enable the bully to get up the road quicker.

People leave their brains at home when hey get in their cars. Yesterday in Maidstone we have a 43 year old lady in court charged with causing death by dangerous driving and having an unsafe load on her vehicle.

Why?

She found it acceptable to toss a mattress onto the roof of her car and set off down a main arterial dual carriageway at speed. The mattress came off causing the drivers behind to swerve in avoidance. One of the drivers lost control, hit a tree before rebounding back across the carriageway, losing his life in the process. All for somebody who could not be bothered to check that their load was properly secured or to pay a professional to move it for her. Just another example of the casual way we treat our cars and each other.

Three weeks ago where I live we had the sight of dead horses in the road with their injured teenage riders standing distraught at the roadside as the driver of an Audi R8 attempted to explain how he came to have his car embedded in their horses. The riders stated that they heard him coming (high revs) for some minutes and were attempting to get to a "safe place" when he rounded the bend at speed at drove straight into them.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom