What irritates you about motorbikers?

[wemorgan]

I'
My way is safer; it leaves no-one in any doubt whether I intend to leave the roundabout at the next exit. My road positioning on the roundabout may not be what the Highway Code recommends as appropriate for the indication given, but there is absolutely nothing misleading about that indication; it accurately reflects my intentions at all times.

I think if you removed the qualifiers more people would agree with you. But you seem blinkered to the obvious point that not everyone is on your wave-length when it comes to driving. It only takes one person to fairly say they don't fully under stand your signalling to disprove your whole statement.

 

[scottydee]

Tasteless maybe however there was no mention of wishing injury or death. So no need to be 'shocked and amazed' at something nothing more than a joke.

I'm sure that you're not as stupid as you're appearing to be... It's quite obvious what the statement refers to. The "clump" and following silence pretty much refers to an accident....

 

[boxbrownie]

No criticism of you, but if you had been indicating right, the bozo on the bike might have seen it and not cut you up.

Problem is if I had been indicating right all the drivers in the right hand lane would have thought I was going to cut them up by going around the outside, also indicating right while approaching the exit straight ahead might have given drivers entering the roundabout the wrong idea and entered thinking I was going around, it is a "fast" roundabout and often there are knobjockeys on it not knowing whats going on!

Nah........I prefer to stick (generally) to the highway code and if anything goes wrong at least I was abiding by the law.

 

[boxbrownie]

If the biker was filtering between two lanes approaching the roundabout, as I suspect he was, it is reasonable to assume that he expected that the OP's car was also taking the first exit.

But why didn't he just assume I was going straight across, as I was not signalling left...........

He just thought he could whizz through, I bet if I was in a marked Police car he would have held back

 

[Spinal]

What irritates me most are road users who don't realise that motorbikes, cars, trucks, buses, etc are all just vehicles controlled by people.

There are morons in every demographic, regardless of what vehicle they drive.

 

[renault12ts]

But why didn't he just assume I was going straight across, as I was not signalling left...........

He just thought he could whizz through, I bet if I was in a marked Police car he would have held back

You did everything correctly, and for anybody to suggest otherwise is wrong...the biker had quite clearly positioned himself incorrectly...he was a plonker.

 

[219]

I'm not unsure of the 'correct' procedure; I just don't slavishly follow it absolutely. Obedience of fools, guidance of wise men....

My way is safer; it leaves no-one in any doubt whether I intend to leave the roundabout at the next exit. My road positioning on the roundabout may not be what the Highway Code recommends as appropriate for the indication given, but there is absolutely nothing misleading about that indication; it accurately reflects my intentions at all times.

If you are in the habit of relying solely on other drivers' signalling to decide whether or not to move out, I am surprised you haven't been involved in many collisions. Better you wait for a few seconds, than be t-boned by the bozo who doesn't indicate at all...

If every driver could be relied upon correctly to understand, interpret, and apply the Highway Code guidance on road positioning and signalling at all times, there would be no need to do otherwise. But they cannot, so I'm sticking to the safer option.

Another scenario that can often befall those who choose to signal right when actually going straight ahead is that , if not in the leftmost lane , a following driver will legitimately read the signal as 'I intend to turn right' and , quite correctly , if space and pace permit , start to pass on the left : if the right signalling but going straight ahead driver then decides to exit there is the potential for a collision .

I don't rely solely on the signals of others , but incorrect or misleading signals certainly don't help when the rules are clear , simple and already published .

If anything , it is better to give no signals and leave others wondering what you are doing than to give a wrong signal and mislead others - for which you could be blamed if it leads to a collision .

 

[dan-mb]

 

[219]

But why didn't he just assume I was going straight across, as I was not signalling left...........

He just thought he could whizz through, I bet if I was in a marked Police car he would have held back

On the roads , you always have to assume the worst case scenario , and plan accordingly .

 

[E55BOF]

I think if you removed the qualifiers more people would agree with you. But you seem blinkered to the obvious point that not everyone is on your wave-length when it comes to driving. It only takes one person to fairly say they don't fully under stand your signalling to disprove your whole statement.

With respect, I think the key point is to start signalling left as you pass the exit before the one you intend to take; your intentions will be entirely clear to all but the doziest driver. If one person does not understand my signalling, that doesn't disprove my point at all. This forum is one thing; the general public is another. I wonder, if a random survey was done, how many people would know that a car entering a roundabout and not indicating SHOULD be going straight on. My problem with the HC guidance is that there is no way to differentiate the driver following that guidance from the dozy bozo who isn't bothering to indicate. Doing it the way I do it is, I think, a better overall bet. If Pontoneer is correct in his statement that 'This is something that the novice driving schools seem to be teaching as it is mainly driving school cars and young/inexperienced looking drivers who mainly seem to do it', perhaps the instructors feel it is safer too, and in ten or twenty years' time it will be in the Code.


So far as somebody overtaking on the left (Pontoneer's point) on the assumption that a car indicating right will turn right is concerned, if you are in the left-hand lane that will not be possible. If it is a large roundabout and traffic is light, so you can use more than one lane, it's all a matter of observation, isn't it? The onus is on the driver exiting the roundabout not to cut up other traffic if it entails changing lanes, and any collision occurring if he failed in that would of course be his fault.

 

[E55BOF]

You did everything correctly, and for anybody to suggest otherwise is wrong...the biker had quite clearly positioned himself incorrectly...he was a plonker.

Nobody has suggested that the OP did anything wrong. Here's a thought, though; where SHOULD the biker have positioned himself so as to get to the head of the queue and take the first exit ahead of the traffic?

 

[boxbrownie]

Nobody has suggested that the OP did anything wrong. Here's a thought, though; where SHOULD the biker have positioned himself so as to get to the head of the queue and take the first exit ahead of the traffic?

Maybe had he not been able to get to the head of the queue safely and correctly positioned he could have waited?

Just a thought.........

 

[frostbite]

I work in the motorcycle industry and I am a biker. I am also a yachtie, a hillwalker, middle-aged, atheist, non-smoker and many other categorised things, including being a car driver and a Mercedes driver. There are utter tossers in every category, no more or less than in any other. Some stand out more because they are not the 'norm', even when doing exactly the same good or bad thing as some other, more 'usual' category.
You should hear what many bikers say about car drivers (even though hardly any biker is not also a car driver) and in particular how drivers of some cars attract more criticism than others. Mercedes drivers are I'm afraid, higher up the list of those who should have been shot the moment they passed (or obviously didn't) their driving test. This will be because Mercs are not 'the usual', Fords and Vauxhalls are.
Of the bikers I met this week in my place of work, at least three are doctors, one is a paramedic, one is an offshore engineer, one an airline pilot, one a care assistant, then there is the retired cop who runs a ski chalet, another who is a driving instructor and one is a top industrialist whose advice anyone would follow. Also the 'Blood Bikes', guys who give up their own time to carry urgent blood products to hospitals and who get the stuff where it's needed by getting to the front of the queue. Amongst the cars in the customer car park have been Mercs, a Range Rover or two, an MGB, a Lamborghini and, last week, a 1913 Chalmers 5-litre.
We all hate to be associated with any bad behaviour, by having the same mode of transport or by being the same colour or religion or from a particular country of origin etc etc. So it is equally unfair to tar all of any category with the same brush.
Entirely reasonable however, to say, 'What irritates me about the way some people ride their bikes'. Which is what I trust the OP meant 16 pages ago.

 

[E55BOF]

Maybe had he not been able to get to the head of the queue safely and correctly positioned he could have waited?

Just a thought.........

We've seen the video; that biker wasn't going to wait. If I had been driving the OP's car, and (wrongly by the HC) indicating right, maybe, just MAYBE, the biker would have waited. I think that encapsulates my point, really.

"Nah........I prefer to stick (generally) to the highway code and if anything goes wrong at least I was abiding by the law." Me too; it's just that the parts I do not stick to may not be the same as the bits you do not stick to...

 

[boxbrownie]

"Nah........I prefer to stick (generally) to the highway code and if anything goes wrong at least I was abiding by the law." Me too; it's just that the parts I do not stick to may not be the same as the bits you do not stick to...

Who know's........who know's?

 

[WDB124066]

With respect, I think the key point is to start signalling left as you pass the exit before the one you intend to take; your intentions will be entirely clear to all but the doziest driver. If one person does not understand my signalling, that doesn't disprove my point at all. This forum is one thing; the general public is another. I wonder, if a random survey was done, how many people would know that a car entering a roundabout and not indicating SHOULD be going straight on. My problem with the HC guidance is that there is no way to differentiate the driver following that guidance from the dozy bozo who isn't bothering to indicate. Doing it the way I do it is, I think, a better overall bet. If Pontoneer is correct in his statement that 'This is something that the novice driving schools seem to be teaching as it is mainly driving school cars and young/inexperienced looking drivers who mainly seem to do it', perhaps the instructors feel it is safer too, and in ten or twenty years' time it will be in the Code.


So far as somebody overtaking on the left (Pontoneer's point) on the assumption that a car indicating right will turn right is concerned, if you are in the left-hand lane that will not be possible. If it is a large roundabout and traffic is light, so you can use more than one lane, it's all a matter of observation, isn't it? The onus is on the driver exiting the roundabout not to cut up other traffic if it entails changing lanes, and any collision occurring if he failed in that would of course be his fault.

Just had a mate bowled today on KTM950 in this exact same scenario - knee and hip damage - driver didn't stop...

 

[E55BOF]

B*****d! Good bike for the cut-and-thrust of traffic, too. I'm sorry to hear that. It could be me rolling down the road one day, but I hope not.

I was knocked off my bike (VX800) three years ago by a foreign lorry driver turning right in the extreme left-hand lane of a roundabout - three lanes going in, left and middle lanes marked with arrows for straight on. Even then, if he had been indicating right, whichever lane he was in, I would have dropped in behind him to see what he would actually do; doubly so now. (It cost his insurers £12.5K, and I got to keep the bike).

I get the impression from the media that hit-and-run is becoming increasingly common, though. More police on the roads (not more cameras; fat chance...) might help, but I don't see any way to stop it entirely. At least with driverless cars, once they are on the roads, they will presumably stop after a collision.

 

[renault12ts]

Just had a mate bowled today on KTM950 in this exact same scenario - knee and hip damage - driver didn't stop...

I am very sorry for your friend and hope he recovers well. But, has he learnt anything from the experience?

 

[Power_n_Glory]

I dare not respond to that one!

During advanced triaining indicating on exit is promoted on the basis as actually being useful to other road users - those in the following entry to your exit to say you are intending taking it.

Assuming anything on indication (or not) is risky, that is the reality. And we all balance the risks. My daughter is risk-averse and roundabouts are a nightmare for her as she learns to ride and drive.

Mind you, I do get frustrated on my bike by very early right indication on a motorway showing intention to pull out sometime in the next ten minutes. I hang back not knowing if I have been seen or not, as if I have not I get in a very difficult situation. So we end up in an indicating Mexican stand off. Both annoyed!

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Not sure how this will sound in print but I treat every motorist around me as though they're all one second away from trying to kill me and treat any biker in my vicinity as though it's one of my own children riding.

Even when road rage feels inevitable, as long as I rember those things, it diffuses the situation in no time.