Road positioning, cyclist ahead

[Custom24]

...I find only about 30% of passes give sufficient room when I cycle keeping to the left...

How do you define sufficient?

That is the core of the issue, isn't it?
I would say sufficient room means that I don't feel threatened or worried.
More precisely, I don't want to risk death just because some unseen pothole or similar causes me to take evasive action. I cycle at night a lot. I have a range of lights but I can't use the brightest on the road because I worry about oncoming drivers.
Even during the day, some of the close passes, and the speed worry me that if the driver were to misjudge it, I would die.

Here's the thing. I cycle the same roads a lot, commuting. I know where there is room for drivers to pass me safely with oncomers and where there is not, because I know where I have had scares. A car driver never gets this lesson unless they knock someone off, because they don't get the scare.

So when I see cyclists cycling in a strong position, I tend to assume that they are not just making a point.

[gannet]

...I find only about 30% of passes give sufficient room when I cycle keeping to the left...

How do you define sufficient?

enough room that both the overtakee and the overtaker are both comfortable.

so many drivers seem to think that 1 inch of room is enough for a cyclist because they are so much slower... without realising that the slipstream of a car can be extremely upsetting.

The highway code itself (Rule 163) says to give as much room as you would when overtaking car - in the situation described there wouldn't be that space so why shouldn't a cyclist in that position take command of the road and give themselves the space other road users aren't willing voluntarily to give?

MGF - how much room would you give or deem sufficient ?

[TripleS]

I cycle the same roads a lot, commuting. I know where there is room for drivers to pass me safely with oncomers and where there is not, because I know where I have had scares. A car driver never gets this lesson unless they knock someone off, because they don't get the scare.

So when I see cyclists cycling in a strong position, I tend to assume that they are not just making a point.

I too can accept it more readily when it is clear that they are doing from a genuine fear for their safety at this time, and not doing it as an automatic action, because being in the primary position is the thing to do in general.

As for drivers getting a scare, I can assure you that some drivers can get the scare: it has happened to me.

Although I have always sought to take care when driving near to cyclists, e.g. giving them plenty of lateral clearance and confining myself to a small speed differential, there has been the odd occasion when I have overtaken a cyclist and then looked in the mirror and thought that perhaps I should have allowed more clearance. Maybe they had a slight wobble after I passed them, leaving me to wonder if I had passed close enough to disturb them a bit. It may have been nothing to do with me, but I note it and wonder.

So, although I object to the excessive and inappropriate use of primary position, please don't think I'm unwilling to show full consideration for cyclists, and their safety.

Best wishes all,
David.

[ericonabike]

Trust me, no-one uses primary 'to make a point'! I'm a confident and experienced cyclist, yet I still feel my sphincter tighten when I'm in the centre of a lane and a car's revving up behind me! I use it when, in my judgement, there isn't room for the following car, me, and an oncoming car, to be side by side. And even then, only in situations where the difference in road speed is relatively low - 'taking the lane ' on an NSL dual carriageway is not something I'd even consider.

Situations that would cause me to do so include:

- passing parked cars. Staying a door's width from them means that I am seen as taking the lane and invariably get hooked or cussed

- going through a pinch point caused by a traffic island. This sometimes causes motorists, frustrated by a 5 second delay in their journey, to go around the outside. Which scares the wits out of me, as it sounds like they're going to run me over

- going over a narrow rail bridge, preceded and followed by a blind 90 degree bend.

In all these situations I know that my safety is enhanced by being assertive. I'm quite sure that many following motorists would see my actions as being aggressive, or that I am 'making a point'. I'm sorry, but that's their problem.

[fungus]

Highway Code rule 163 states that you should give at least the same clearance as you would when passing a car, in other words, about 1 metre. But wasn't there case law going back a good few years where the judge stated that, "a cyclist is entitled to a wobble". IIAC, the recommended passing distance for what was, IIAC, known as the wobble law, is six feet.

- going through a pinch point caused by a traffic island. This sometimes causes motorists, frustrated by a 5 second delay in their journey, to go around the outside. Which scares the wits out of me, as it sounds like they're going to run me over

Isn't that why local authorities paint short broken line cycle lanes where there are traffic islands, to discourage motorists from passing cyclists at such narrowings? However, isn't there an opinion held by many cyclists, that cycle lanes encourage motorists to pass too close?

[sussex2]

I wonder where the antagonism that seems to exist between some cyclists and other wheeled road users in the UK has its origins.
When driving in Spain I simply don't see, or hear about it, to the same level. I'd say the same about France as well.
I use the road in the photo a lot as it avoids an expensive toll on the autopista (the highest toll in Spain) and has spectacular scenery.
The road is twisty with drops down to the sea in some places the other side of the quite recent barrier. It has a 60kph limit and solid white lines for most of its 15 or so kilo length (there are few 'blanket' speed limits in Spain).
It is a popular road for both cyclists and all other types of road users including strings of massive cement lorries.
Yet I see no antagonism and everyone is polite for the most part; cyclists often wave you on when safe to overtake.
Motorcyclists will also always thank you with a raised leg if you allow them to pass.

http://vimeo.com/84145563

[ericonabike]

Nigel - it depends on the cycle lane! I ride along the A47 into Leicester, which in part has a 1.5 metre cycle lane, in a 40 limit, on each side of the road. Motorists respect this [unless they want to park..] and I rarely if ever feel ill at ease when using it. But taking just half a metre of the width changes the situation completely. Then, I will be riding at the edge of the lane, but motorists still want to 'drive to the lane'. And when there is a pinch point in the road, traffic engineers discontinue the lane, leading motorists to believe that they and the cyclist can go through together.

Sussex2 - I totally agree about the reality of cycling abroad. The sigh of relief I express when riding off a ferry isn't just because I've stopped work! But I don't put that down to inherently different mindsets. It's instead created by all other EU countries [apart from Ireland and Malta I believe] adopting the principle of 'strict liability'. So that in the event of a collision between a cyclist and a motor vehicle, the motorist is automatically liable [in civil, not criminal law]. This makes drivers much more wary of cyclists, knowing that any coming together is likely to impact on their insurance position, and involve them in a shedload of bureaucracy.

Generally - isn't it the case that positioning in the road is considered an essential feature of advanced driving? I suspect that any IAM candidate who failed to adjust their position according to conditions would get short shrift from an examiner. Yet when a cyclist adopts the same practice, they are assumed to be 'making a point'. Clarkson sure has a lot to answer for...http://road.cc/content/news/107809-point-making-rider-hits-back-jeremy-clarkson

[sussex2]

I also by the way feel much more safe crossing the road as a pedestrian in Spain and France and vehicles are much more likely to give way.
This is partly because the emphasis has been shifted away from 'the car goes first' and there are far more places where both pedestrians and wheeled road users can expect pedestrians to be crossing.

[sussex2]

Nigel - it depends on the cycle lane! I ride along the A47 into Leicester, which in part has a 1.5 metre cycle lane, in a 40 limit, on each side of the road. Motorists respect this [unless they want to park..] and I rarely if ever feel ill at ease when using it. But taking just half a metre of the width changes the situation completely. Then, I will be riding at the edge of the lane, but motorists still want to 'drive to the lane'. And when there is a pinch point in the road, traffic engineers discontinue the lane, leading motorists to believe that they and the cyclist can go through together.

Sussex2 - I totally agree about the reality of cycling abroad. The sigh of relief I express when riding off a ferry isn't just because I've stopped work! But I don't put that down to inherently different mindsets. It's instead created by all other EU countries [apart from Ireland and Malta I believe] adopting the principle of 'strict liability'. So that in the event of a collision between a cyclist and a motor vehicle, the motorist is automatically liable [in civil, not criminal law]. This makes drivers much more wary of cyclists, knowing that any coming together is likely to impact on their insurance position, and involve them in a shedload of bureaucracy.

Generally - isn't it the case that positioning in the road is considered an essential feature of advanced driving? I suspect that any IAM candidate who failed to adjust their position according to conditions would get short shrift from an examiner. Yet when a cyclist adopts the same practice, they are assumed to be 'making a point'. Clarkson sure has a lot to answer for...http://road.cc/content/news/107809-point-making-rider-hits-back-jeremy-clarkson

It's long been my view that the attitude of some wheeled road users to the more vulnerable is a lingering hangover from the class system.
These days people are less likely to tug a forelock and nod a head as Lord and Lady Muck sweep by

[jont]

Isn't that why local authorities paint short broken line cycle lanes where there are traffic islands, to discourage motorists from passing cyclists at such narrowings? However, isn't there an opinion held by many cyclists, that cycle lanes encourage motorists to pass too close?

Hah. My experience in Bristol is the exact opposite. The cycle lane tends to disappear into narrowings, across junctions and other areas where the cyclist is at risk.

[gannet]

Isn't that why local authorities paint short broken line cycle lanes where there are traffic islands, to discourage motorists from passing cyclists at such narrowings? However, isn't there an opinion held by many cyclists, that cycle lanes encourage motorists to pass too close?

Hah. My experience in Bristol is the exact opposite. The cycle lane tends to disappear into narrowings, across junctions and other areas where the cyclist is at risk.

and same here in London & Surrey...

There is however one road which they have just resurfaced and repainted where there size of the cycle lane rather wide... and coupled with the size of the centre lane markings, actually leave the car driver with little choice but to infringe on one or the other, the car lane being too narrow

[MGF]

"Comfort" is an interesting standard. I am sure there are plenty of drivers, overtaken by advanced drivers, who don't feel comfortable with the overtake. Personally, I am happy with 30mph limits where pedestrians regularly share the road (not the carriageway) with vehicles, to improve their comfort. I doubt many here would agree.

The HC advises us to keep left but that wouldn't be accepted by many drivers here who are keen to offside to gain a view.


I prefer to use the word 'intimidate' negatively. All road users should understand that they can intimidate other road users with their vehicles and intimidation isn't acceptable. I try not to intimidate cyclists and I am aware that lateral separation is key to this.

Another factor to consider is lateral change of direction by the cyclist to maintain balance or to avoid obstructions on the carriageway. At the extreme is the possibility of the cyclist falling off into my path.

If I have a clear offside I will try to adjust my speed to use that to pass and not worry to much about my passing speed.

If not I will match the speed of the cyclist, observe his conduct and that of the oncoming traffic and will consider a closer pass at a low speed differential if I am happy with the stability of oncoming traffic and the cyclist.

I consider lateral separation even if the cyclist is on a cycle path/way seperated by a kerb.

[revian]

In Carbuyer just now...

ForTwo models and the previous electric version. You get 74bhp and unparalleled flexibility around town, as it easily navigates around buses or taxis, while its tiny dimensions means it can easily squeeze in beside a flock of cyclists at the traffic lights.

Read more: Smart ForTwo Electric Drive review | Carbuyer http://www.carbuyer.co.uk/reviews/smart ... z2rWt3pH6q

I fear there's a deal more to be done on cycle safety...

[7db]

I'm quite sure that many following motorists would see my actions as being aggressive, or that I am 'making a point'. I'm sorry, but that's their problem.

Do you thank them?

[TripleS]

Trust me, no-one uses primary 'to make a point'!

Well I'd like to be able to trust you, but you are simply not in a position to justify such a sweeping statement.

Look: badly behaved individuals are readily to be found in all categories of road user from time to time, so I'm not going to claim that anybody is beyond criticism. Please can we try to accept that? Thanks.