Close passing

[flecc]

What some drivers do is really anti social I feel.

And far too many cyclists too.

I prefer to use the roads in a co-operative way and not use any device or means that obstructs others. Too often I hear or see expressions like "fighting for road space" or "battling with traffic", showing a questionable attitude. I say we share the roads and thus should help each other to navigate them safely with minimal delay. As for dealing with the occasional advantage taker, that's why nature equipped us with a shrug.
.

 

[trevor brooker]

cyclists who think they own their lane - if you're cycling 1m from the kerb, your handlebars and mirrors are 1m wide and motorists need to allow 1.5 m that's 3.5m you're occupying.To put that into perspective, the standard width of a motorway lane is 3.7m.

Ok I'm a road user. Whatever vehicle I drive I aim for consideration for other users & expect the same.
I've just checked the highway code to see the legislation - no specific guidance.

The best semi-official advice is https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/road-positioning/ which talks about "In normal conditions, a cyclist will ride approximately 1/3 into the carriageway."

So I went back to the highway code for advice to drivers about cyclists
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
Rule 163 "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car" but the guidance illustration

shows the position of the bike relative to the kerb, which relates to the Rospa information.
Now that's the official guidance, but I temper that with the knowledge that I am going slower than drivers, so if someone is stuck behind me for tens of seconds I will do my best to allow them past.

I think neither of us is more important than the other but both are using the road & need to understand each others requirements. As a driver its frustrating to get behind a slow moving vehicle but Rule 169 is surprisingly lax https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
"Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass."

I wonder what would be regarded as a long queue - how many vehicles?

Normally I only have a couple of vehicles behind me at narrow points, until I can let them past.

 

[Andy-Mat]

Ok I'm a road user. Whatever vehicle I drive I aim for consideration for other users & expect the same.
I've just checked the highway code to see the legislation - no specific guidance.

The best semi-official advice is https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/road-positioning/ which talks about "In normal conditions, a cyclist will ride approximately 1/3 into the carriageway."

So I went back to the highway code for advice to drivers about cyclists
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
Rule 163 "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car" but the guidance illustration
View attachment 33289
shows the position of the bike relative to the kerb, which relates to the Rospa information.
Now that's the official guidance, but I temper that with the knowledge that I am going slower than drivers, so if someone is stuck behind me for tens of seconds I will do my best to allow them past.

I think neither of us is more important than the other but both are using the road & need to understand each others requirements. As a driver its frustrating to get behind a slow moving vehicle but Rule 169 is surprisingly lax https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
"Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass."

I wonder what would be regarded as a long queue - how many vehicles?

Normally I only have a couple of vehicles behind me at narrow points, until I can let them past.

You (and the highway code!) make a lot of good sense. Many thanks for sharing with us all.
I have been a bike rider since I was a kid, and except for the 10 years I served in the RN, I have basically always had a bike...
Of course I am also a car driver, and since I retired I have also been a bus driver for a total of 3 years, amongst several other jobs, so careful overtaking of bikes, has been a large part of my experience, both private and professional.
Too many car drivers are too impatient with other traffic, and instead of leaving for work in a good time for the drive, they want to "race" in rush hour traffic.
But sadly, many bike riders make it worse for the hobby as a whole, by basically ignoring road signs, particularly Stop signs, and Red traffic lights....
If all bikers simply obeyed the Highway Code, there would simply be a lot less unfriendly car drivers I feel.
I have actually been run into, from behind, by another e-biker, "because" I stopped at a Red light! To quote him:- "a**e hole, why did you stop without warning me!"
So bad manners are rife within the biking fraternity as well.... He had also been following me far too close in heavy slow moving traffic, where he was unable to pass..... A possibly good reason for brake lights on bikes, which I have actually bought, but been too lazy to fit up to now, but not a legal requirement anyway...
I am also a frequent dog walker (4 - 6 times Daily!), and I can say that probably less than 1 in 20 bikers, have the good manners to warn of their "silent approach", by ringing their bell or similar. A bell of which around 50% of them simply do not even have! But a friendly warning with their voice, and a significant reduction in speed as well, should be automatic, but its not! My dog has been hit twice, with no permanent injury luckily, due to such "W*****S!
Again, many thanks for you diligent appraisal of the Highway Code that you shared with us all!
regards
Andy

 

[Deleted member 25121]

Ok I'm a road user. Whatever vehicle I drive I aim for consideration for other users & expect the same.
I've just checked the highway code to see the legislation - no specific guidance.

The best semi-official advice is https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/road-positioning/ which talks about "In normal conditions, a cyclist will ride approximately 1/3 into the carriageway."

So I went back to the highway code for advice to drivers about cyclists
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
Rule 163 "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car" but the guidance illustration
View attachment 33289
shows the position of the bike relative to the kerb, which relates to the Rospa information.
Now that's the official guidance, but I temper that with the knowledge that I am going slower than drivers, so if someone is stuck behind me for tens of seconds I will do my best to allow them past.

I think neither of us is more important than the other but both are using the road & need to understand each others requirements. As a driver its frustrating to get behind a slow moving vehicle but Rule 169 is surprisingly lax https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
"Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass."

I wonder what would be regarded as a long queue - how many vehicles?

Normally I only have a couple of vehicles behind me at narrow points, until I can let them past.

The photo demonstrates my point exactly, the cyclist is basically occupying the complete lane and consequently needs to show some respect for other road users. Cycling with the intent to "Own the road space" is massively stupid and can only lead to animosity and collisions (note that I use the work "collisions", not "accidents").

Thanks for posting that.

 

[Artstu]

if you're cycling 1m from the kerb, your handlebars and mirrors are 1m wide and motorists need to allow 1.5 m that's 3.5m you're occupying.

Half the width of my handlebars is 30 cm and not 100 cm, so take 70 cm out of your 3.5 metres, and regardless of the way you're implying a cyclist taking up so much room you're only occupying 1.5 metres at most.

What you should be considering is the difference between being 1 metre out or hugging the curb at say 50 cm, which of course is just a 50 cm difference.

 

[Deleted member 25121]

Half the width of my handlebars is 30 cm and not 100 cm, so take 70 cm out of your 3.5 metres, and regardless of the way you're implying a cyclist taking up so much room you're only occupying 1.5 metres at most.

What you should be considering is the difference between being 1 metre out or hugging the curb at say 50 cm, which of course is just a 50 cm difference.

No, look at the photo, the cyclist is occupying the whole lane. How can you deny the fact?

 

[Artstu]

No, look at the photo, the cyclist is occupying the whole lane. How can you deny the fact?
View attachment 33290

It's fair to say some drivers would say you could get a bus through there.

 

[Andy-Mat]

No, look at the photo, the cyclist is occupying the whole lane. How can you deny the fact?
View attachment 33290

I feel that is a correct SAFE distance for the car, even though the legal requirement may be less.
The cyclist appears well placed on the street to my mind.
With the state of some roads noadays, which one of us has not been surprised by a new pothole and possibly loss of full control for a second or two..... That extra space might save a life!
Forgetting completely for the moment that a car driver can also be put off by children, pets and other things, in and outside of his vehicle....
A wider margin is always a good, safe and intelligent way to go.
Andy

 

[Deleted member 25121]

It's fair to say some drivers would say you could get a bus through there.

What's you point?

 

[Artstu]

No, look at the photo, the cyclist is occupying the whole lane. How can you deny the fact?
View attachment 33290

You're also looking at the wrong road user here, your attention really should be on the real reason cars pass cyclists so closely these days, which is because they have become so bloated, blame lies squarely at the motorist for buying such large and wide cars.

Just look how much cars have increased in width https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/features/investigation-why-are-cars-becoming-so-wide

 

[Deleted member 25121]

I feel that is a correct SAFE distance for the car, even though the legal requirement may be less.
The cyclist appears well placed on the street to my mind.
With the state of some roads noadays, which one of us has not been surprised by a new pothole and possibly loss of full control for a second or two..... That extra space might save a life!
Forgetting completely for the moment that a car driver can also be put off by children, pets and other things, in and outside of his vehicle....
A wider margin is always a good, safe and intelligent way to go.
Andy

Yes indeed, it IS a safe passing distance and the cyclist IS cycling a safe distance from the kerb.

Let me repeat, the photo demonstrates my point exactly, the cyclist is basically occupying the complete lane and consequently needs to show some respect for other road users. Cycling with the intent to "Own the road space" is massively stupid and can only lead to animosity and collisions (note that I use the work "collisions", not "accidents").

 

[Deleted member 25121]

You're also looking at the wrong road user here, your attention really should be on the real reason cars pass cyclists so closely these days, which is because they have become so bloated, blame lies squarely at the motorist for buying such large and wide cars.

Just look how much cars have increased in width https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/features/investigation-why-are-cars-becoming-so-wide

What??? The width to the passing cars, lorries, buses etc etc is totally irrelevant, it's the distance between the near side of the vehicle and the offside of the cycle that's relevant. This is commonly called the "passing distance" and the latest recommendations are for drivers to leave at leave 1.5m (irrespective of size of vehicle).

 

[Artstu]

What??? The width to the passing cars, lorries, buses etc etc is totally irrelevant, it's the distance between the near side of the vehicle and the offside of the cycle that's relevant. This is commonly called the "passing distance" and the latest recommendations are for drivers to leave at leave 1.5m (irrespective of size of vehicle).

I'm sure most here are aware of the recommended passing distance. I'm talking about reality.

 

[Artstu]

Yes indeed, it IS a safe passing distance and the cyclist IS cycling a safe distance from the kerb.

Let me repeat, the photo demonstrates my point exactly, the cyclist is basically occupying the complete lane and consequently needs to show some respect for other road users. Cycling with the intent to "Own the road space" is massively stupid and can only lead to animosity and collisions (note that I use the work "collisions", not "accidents").

Seeing as you ignored my post about your maths earlier I'll repeat it in part. So you want the cyclist to hug the gutter and in doing so gain say 50 cm, would you be happy then? and go on tell me how this helps the driver of the Audi in the photo apart from being able to position himself 50 cm to his left, or perhaps that would really make you happy about it all after all?

 

[Amoto65]

I think ebiker needs to go to Specsavers if he thinks that is occupying the whole lane......

 

[flecc]

You're also looking at the wrong road user here, your attention really should be on the real reason cars pass cyclists so closely these days, which is because they have become so bloated, blame lies squarely at the motorist for buying such large and wide cars.

They can't help but buy them as Autocar notes, even the small cars have got just as wide. Most "small" cars today are a struggle to fit into existing home's garages and still be able to get out of them.

And worse still are large trucks and buses. Up until 1948 they had a maximum permitted width of 7' 6", but back then the law was changed to allow 8', a huge sudden increase. Gradually over the next twenty years as all of them got changed they started to choke the roads.

But EU standardisation to 2.55 metres also added over 4 inches bringing their maximum width to 8' 4.3" maximum. That's a massive total increase in width of 10.3 inches each on the same roads.
.

 

[Andy52]

As a driver I have always believed that I should give a cyclist enough room to fall off his/her bike safely. As a cyclist, I just wish more motorists would do the same.

 

[Andy-Mat]

As a driver I have always believed that I should give a cyclist enough room to fall off his/her bike safely. As a cyclist, I just wish more motorists would do the same.

Well put, I agree 110%!
Regards
Andy

 

[vfr400]

You can't make any rule, except to apply common sense and not to put anyone in danger.

I was driving out of Chelmsford recently along the B1008, which is quite narrow and gets very busy in both directions during rush hour. The traffic in my direction suddenly became very slow. After about 10 minutes I could see the problem. About 100 meters ahead was a cyclist , and the car behind didn't want to overtake him. This went on for about another 15 minutes, by which time the road would have been jammed all the way back to the town centre (4 miles). Eventually the car got past the cyclist. Nobody else seemed to have a problem passing him. He was cycling fairly close to the edge of the road, and when I passed him, I'd say that I had around 2 ft clearance. Bear in mind that due to the solid traffic, speed was still very low. I was able to claim a bit more clearance than most by positioning my car as far to the right as possible before passing him, which forces the cars coming in the other direction to move to the left

I can imagine that if a pothole had turned up in front of the cyclist, there would have been an uncomfortable situation for someone - mainly the cyclist.

Along some of the road, there was an empty footpath, which I would have used when the driver was refusing to overtake, but I would have been happy cycling along the road with minimal clearance like the cyclist was as long as the drivers kept passing.

In the situation shown in the photo above, where nothing is coming in the opposite direction, why wouldn't you give the cyclist as much clearance as possible?

 

[Deleted member 25121]

Seeing as you ignored my post about your maths earlier I'll repeat it in part. So you want the cyclist to hug the gutter and in doing so gain say 50 cms, would you be happy then? and go on tell me how this helps the driver of the Audi in the photo apart from being able to position himself 50 cms to his left, or perhaps that would really make you happy about it all after all?

I ignored your pedantic post, if you're so concerned about 50 cm here and there then you should also include a safe distance to avoid the possible potholes and debris at the side of the road, how much would you add 50.000cm?
Where have I EVER suggested that cyclists "hug the gutter"????
You seem to have missed my point entirely, never mind