bike lanes again

[andys wood shed]

......
Where did I say that?
modern cars in general are capable of fast acceleration and perfectly capable of overtaking 2 cyclists in line who would normally take up no more than the length of a family car but only half the widtth

....

That is utter nonsense. Think about it...the width of a cyclists handlebars is roughly that of a car seat..so your assertion 'half the width' is just plain daft.

I agree the quote was Lons

 

[Lons]

His opinion is one sided

More assumptions Andy!

Because I said I'm not a cyclist doesn't mean I haven't used one. I actually do own one just haven't used it for a couple of years which reminds me, I must dig it out of the shed and get rid of it. :lol:

 

[Lons]

......
Where did I say that?
modern cars in general are capable of fast acceleration and perfectly capable of overtaking 2 cyclists in line who would normally take up no more than the length of a family car but only half the widtth

....

That is utter nonsense. Think about it...the width of a cyclists handlebars is roughly that of a car seat..so your assertion 'half the width' is just plain daft.

I don't quite understand that Roger?

An average family car, say a golf is 4.5 x 1.8 mtrs approx ec mirrors, so a couple of cycles one behind the other wouldn't be much longer and as handlebars / rider shoulders are say 500 to 600mm the width is less than half that of the car. How is it nonsense?

 

[stuartpaul]

In your opinion as a car driver

Yes of course it's my opinion surely that's what discussion and argument is all about, but you can't say with any authority that my opinion is wrong. I consider myself to be as good a car driver as no doubt you view your own capability as a cyclist. All just opinions right or wrong!

But my opinion is that of a cyclist and a car driver whilst yours is just of a car driver........

For which you need training, pass a test together with insurance, roadworthyness test and of course taxes (road fund and insurance).

Cyclists need none of these.

Bit one sided isn't it?

 

[RogerS]

But my opinion is that of a cyclist and a car driver whilst yours is just of a car driver........

And so because he never rides a bicycle, his opinion is invalid?

Are you sure you're not Jacob's brother ?

His opinion is one sided

You are assuming that he has never ridden a bicycle

 

[RogerS]

......
Where did I say that?
modern cars in general are capable of fast acceleration and perfectly capable of overtaking 2 cyclists in line who would normally take up no more than the length of a family car but only half the widtth

....

That is utter nonsense. Think about it...the width of a cyclists handlebars is roughly that of a car seat..so your assertion 'half the width' is just plain daft.

I don't quite understand that Roger?

An average family car, say a golf is 4.5 x 1.8 mtrs approx ec mirrors, so a couple of cycles one behind the other wouldn't be much longer and as handlebars / rider shoulders are say 500 to 600mm the width is less than half that of the car. How is it nonsense?

My bad, lons, although I blame Andy's garbling of your quotes :wink: I thought the reference was to two cycles riding abreast.

 

[Lons]

My bad, lons, although I blame Andy's garbling of your quotes :wink: I thought the reference was to two cycles riding abreast.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I note it was Jacob who started the thread. Maybe because many members now ignore sharpening threads, he hoping to troll another subject :lol: :lol:

 

[andys wood shed]

For which you need training, pass a test together with insurance, roadworthyness test and of course taxes (road fund and insurance).

Cyclists need none of these.

Bit one sided isn't it?

I bet we could dig up statistics about how many drivers don't have the above these days or even read the Highway Code since passing their test many years ago

How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL

Cyclists can of course choose to have training and insurance

 

[andys wood shed]

His opinion is one sided

More assumptions Andy!

Because I said I'm not a cyclist doesn't mean I haven't used one. I actually do own one just haven't used it for a couple of years which reminds me, I must dig it out of the shed and get rid of it. :lol:

Perhaps you should dust it off blow up the tyres, oil the chain and go for a spin

Good for the environment and yourself and then your option and attitude to cyclist and other road users might change

 

[Jacob]

....
How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL....

Er, a bit vague myself so looked it up. Interesting:

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

 

[andys wood shed]

....
How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL....

Er, a bit vague myself so looked it up. Interesting:

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

Yes Jacob

Whilst car drivers have passed a test their training is so far out of date

 

[Wuffles]

....
How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL....

Er, a bit vague myself so looked it up. Interesting:

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

Yes Jacob

Whilst car drivers have passed a test their training is so far out of date

"Out of date", but at least exists. As you said yourself, bicycle riders are not required to do any kind of test at all. What's your point?

I think everyone (bicycles or car drivers) should be forced to do a CBT at the very least, you can feel the terror of wobbling around on an underpowered 50cc bike with a bus brushing past your shoulder.

 

[andys wood shed]

Whilst car drivers have passed a test their training is so far out of date

"Out of date", but at least exists. As you said yourself, bicycle riders are not required to do any kind of test at all. What's your point?

I think everyone (bicycles or car drivers) should be forced to do a CBT at the very least, you can feel the terror of wobbling around on an underpowered 50cc bike with a bus brushing past your shoulder.

I think all road users should be compulsory trained
And reassessed

 

[Lons]

I think all road users should be compulsory trained And reassessed

One of the few things I wouldn't argue with you about Andy assuming you include cyclists and the larger (licenced) mobility scooters in that.

Drivers at 75 for example shouldn't be allowed to renew every 3 years just by a tick box on line. Disturbingly though a driver could lose his licence due to say dementia but quite legally get on his bike and ride down the main roads. :shock:

I know the vast majority of cyclists are responsible riders and are usually motorists as well so would of course keep their equipment well maintained, would comply with recommendations in the highway code and wear a helmet however: As general law though local bylaws may differ:

A cycle can be obtained for almost nothing of free without any obligatory checks to roadworthiness and as t the only items of equipment that must be fitted to legally ride a bike on British roads are reflectors, brakes and lights (if used at night), it's very easy for people to ride unsafe cycles with almost no chance of being stopped by the police as they simply aren't interested.

There is no age limit before they can ride on busy main roads and no requirement for training.

Whilst new cycles are fitted with a bell in the shop there is nothing to prevent a bell / horn being removed, neither is it compulsory to wear a helmet or to use cycle lanes where provided. Interestingly a cyclist can ride over a zebra crossing though he's then not considered a pedestrian and motorists are not obliged to give way - I'll remember that one!

You don't need a licence or anything else to ride an electric assisted cycle under 250 watts and cyclists generally can't be prosecuted for speeding which is ludicrous as it's not difficult exceed the 30mph limit on a modern bike. I wonder what the stopping distance is at 20mph? Or how many cyclists would actually know that?

Neither is there a specific offence for using a mobile phone while cycling though you could be pulled over for a not paying due care and attention offence - STUPID.

The common practice of wearing earphones and listening to music isn't clever either imo as I'd want to hear the traffic around me if I was interested in my safety.

While it is an offence to jump a red light, as I said previously, unless caught in the act there is no chance of being prosecuted whilst a motorist is likely to get a nasty letter through the post 'cos he's quite rightly been snapped by the cameras.

There have been several attempts by politicians to push through regulations regarding compulsory registration and insurance for the use of cycles on public roads and hopefully one day that will come for the benefit of all road users.

 

[RogerS]

For which you need training, pass a test together with insurance, roadworthyness test and of course taxes (road fund and insurance).

Cyclists need none of these.

Bit one sided isn't it?

I bet we could dig up statistics about how many drivers don't have the above these days or even read the Highway Code since passing their test many years ago

How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL

Irrelevant.

Cyclists can of course choose to have training and insurance

Stuart makes a valid point. It should be compulsory. There is no reason why not. I agree that cyclists don't necessarily need to pay anything like the equivalent of the VED as roads etc come out of the common pot. But there is no reason why they should not be made responsible for their own actions and carry insurance.

 

[Jacob]

.... But there is no reason why they should not be made responsible for their own actions and carry insurance.

They are responsible for their own actions but don't need insurance because bike incidents are extremely unlikely to incur high cost to any third parties. Ditto pedestrians, dog walkers, pram pushers etc.

 

[andys wood shed]

For which you need training, pass a test together with insurance, roadworthyness test and of course taxes (road fund and insurance).

Cyclists need none of these.

Bit one sided isn't it?

I bet we could dig up statistics about how many drivers don't have the above these days or even read the Highway Code since passing their test many years ago

How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL

Irrelevant.

The relevance is although car drivers passed a test (could be many years ago) they are not up to date with the current edition of the Highway Code

 

[Lons]

.... But there is no reason why they should not be made responsible for their own actions and carry insurance.

They are responsible for their own actions but don't need insurance because bike incidents are extremely unlikely to incur high cost to any third parties. Ditto pedestrians, dog walkers, pram pushers etc.

Tell that to my insurance company who paid out well into 4 figures to repair the scratches on my BMW. Or to me who had to stump up the excess for those plonkers who did the damage.

I wonder what a visually impaired pedestrian would say to that if he was confronted by a cyclist doing 20 mph with no bell, head down and ears stuffed full of earphones. If you say they don't do that Jacob then you're going around with your eyes shut!

 

[RogerS]

.... But there is no reason why they should not be made responsible for their own actions and carry insurance.

They are responsible for their own actions but don't need insurance because bike incidents are extremely unlikely to incur high cost to any third parties. Ditto pedestrians, dog walkers, pram pushers etc.

I could have written this for you, Jacob, as you are so predictable dragging in red herrings, such as pedestrians, that are not only irrelevant but stupid.

So you think it perfectly fine for a cyclist to scratch a car causing maybe a couple of hundred pounds worth of damage? Next time it happens to me I'll send you the bill.

And don't come out with some soppy comment such as 'Ooh, £200 for a bit of paint...blah, blah, blah'. It just makes you look even sillier.

 

[RogerS]

....
I bet we could dig up statistics about how many drivers don't have the above these days or even read the Highway Code since passing their test many years ago

How many cars drivers for instance know about ASL

Irrelevant.

The relevance is although car drivers passed a test (could be many years ago) they are not up to date with the current edition of the Highway Code

And cyclists are ?