Pelotons

[Jacob]

...
From which cyclists benefit. Therefore it is only reasonable that, since cyclists benefit, that they too should make some contribution into the common pot.

They pay taxes too. Most of them also drive. I think they should get a discount off their car tax.

 

[Jacob]

While working outside my house yesterday I saw two cyclists ride past extra slowly and chatting. Behind them were four cars, two vans and a 7.5 tonner.

Chatting!...

Chatting! That's terrible - what kind of R soles are they? :shock:

 

[Eric The Viking]

"I agree about cyclists with no lights. They don't realise how invisible they are. Ditto pedestrians on dark nights with no pavements. We always wear bright yellow if viz is an issue."
I agree on that one. My 1900cc Yamaha, 8'5" long, loads of chrome, reflectors, headlight and me in reflective jacket and reflectors on the helmet together weighing over half a tonne was invisible to many car drivers and cyclists.

The trouble is that many DO see you but ignore you. I have a BMW R80: tourer like this:

Even with the headlight on and a high-viz vest people would ignore me... but...
... I used to ride into work with a friend who owned one of these:

Norton Interpol 2 (Wankel engine)

The bike was bought directly from the Avon & Somerset police (who had a fleet of seven, operating from their old Avon St. garage). The owner, John, used to volunteer for the Blood Transfusion Service, so legitimately had the stripes, blue lights and siren fitted, although he was only allowed to use blues+twos on official blood runs (he replaced the "Police STOP" sign at the back and the radio telephone for bike shows, too). He also had Belstaffs, a fluorescent tabard and a white helmet.

On the ring road on the North side of Bristol, it was like riding behind Moses - the waves just parted! The only trouble was that the thing had fantastic low-end torque, and even when he was "pootling" I got left way behind at the lights...

... happy days. But the point was that people did see him in their mirrors and react, when they apparently didn't see me on my own.

I think it's the same with bicycles - car drivers "tune them out". If they were forced to use a bicycle, at least for a while, that wouldn't happen half as much. And cyclists, driven by the need to pass a test, would probably be better behaved too.

E.

 

[NazNomad]

Whenever I see a MAMIL... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Phil Pascoe]

While working outside my house yesterday I saw two cyclists ride past extra slowly and chatting. Behind them were four cars, two vans and a 7.5 tonner.

Chatting!...

Chatting! That's terrible - what kind of R soles are they? :shock:

Total ones.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Everyone on the road should pass a CBT - that would open people's eyes. Eric - I had a R100RT til 1983 when I braked hard and the front wheel flew into scores of pieces.

 

[RogerS]

...
From which cyclists benefit. Therefore it is only reasonable that, since cyclists benefit, that they too should make some contribution into the common pot.

They pay taxes too. Most of them also drive. I think they should get a discount off their car tax.

Missing the point again. Yes, they pay taxes too. So do I. So do you (possibly). It all goes into the common pot....common..as in benefit for all (something which I thought you would have approved of). So ....no reason at all why cyclists shouldn't also contribute towards the common pot. It's all for the common good.

 

[Eric The Viking]

Everyone on the road should pass a CBT - that would open people's eyes. Eric - I had a R100RT til 1983 when I braked hard and the front wheel flew into scores of pieces.

Mine is the single disc model -- was ist "braking hard"? :shock:

And anyway it needs notice in writing for speeds over 69.5 MPH.
But it will go all day at 68.



E.

PS: Love it to bits but it's really too big and heavy for me now and needs rather a lot of TLC - big, sad decision in the pipeline, I fear.

 

[Jacob]

.....
On the ring road on the North side of Bristol, it was like riding behind Moses - the waves just parted! .....

Similar if you wear bright yellow top on a push bike. It feels immediately safer, people slow down, give you wider berth etc. It's because they are on autopilot and bright yellow means police, ambulance, road workers etc. Bright red means nothing and doesn't work so well.

 

[John Brown]

...
From which cyclists benefit. Therefore it is only reasonable that, since cyclists benefit, that they too should make some contribution into the common pot.

They pay taxes too. Most of them also drive. I think they should get a discount off their car tax.

I agree with Jacob on this point. I would wager that nearly all of the so-called "Middle aged men in Lycra" have cars as well, so even if "Road Tax" WAS ring-fenced for spending on the roads, the argument wouldn't hold water.
The young mother with the clhild seat might not have a car, hence the bike, but the cyclists everyone moans about generally have cars. How do you suppose they transport their bikes without a car?

If you ride a bike occasionally, you will probably come to the realization that a lot of road users, bike and cars, are totally inconsiderate of others - motorists who can't be bothered to indicate(most SUV drivers, in my experience), for example, can make life difficult for cyclists. And vice-versa.

What pisses me off, as a car owner who also cycles, are pedestrians who jump out in front of my bike at zebra crossings, causing me to convert my kinetic energy into heat. They are inconsiderate b*astards.

 

[DiscoStu]

The overwhelming issue is that slow things and fast things do not mix.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bugbear]

The overwhelming issue is that slow things and fast things do not mix.

Indeed. I'm sure Porsche drivers hate Landrovers. :wink:

BugBear (deliberately misunderstanding for comic effect)

 

[gwaithcoed]

My wife and I have just bought this to help us keep fit. I'm 79 and she is 77. Will all the folk that hate cyclists and maybe thinking of coming to North Wales please could you give me a warning as to when you will arrive and we will keep out of your way.

Alan. :shock: :shock: :shock:

 

[Eric The Viking]

The overwhelming issue is that slow things and fast things do not mix.

Indeed. I'm sure Porsche drivers hate Landrovers. :wink:

BugBear (deliberately misunderstanding for comic effect)

Ha, but not t'other way around. They make a very satisfying "crunch" sound...

... sorry, forgot for a second: I'm an ex-Landrover owner, sadly.

:-(

E.

 

[RogerS]

...
From which cyclists benefit. Therefore it is only reasonable that, since cyclists benefit, that they too should make some contribution into the common pot.

They pay taxes too. Most of them also drive. I think they should get a discount off their car tax.

I agree with Jacob on this point. I would wager that nearly all of the so-called "Middle aged men in Lycra" have cars as well, so even if "Road Tax" WAS ring-fenced for spending on the roads, the argument wouldn't hold water.
The young mother with the clhild seat might not have a car, hence the bike, but the cyclists everyone moans about generally have cars. How do you suppose they transport their bikes without a car?

It doesn't matter if cyclists have cars or don't. The fact is that they benefit from that common pot. So it is not unreasonable for them to make a contribution like everyone else does.

I have absolutely no idea as to the relevance of a woman with a child seat 'might not have a car'. Where does she put it then? On her back ?

What waters me off, as a car owner who also cycles, are pedestrians who jump out in front of my bike at zebra crossings, causing me to convert my kinetic energy into heat. They are inconsiderate b*astards.

As a pedestrian I'd say it depended on the circumstances, how much time did they give you to brake, was there a continuous stream of traffic etc.

 

[RogerS]

The overwhelming issue is that slow things and fast things do not mix.

Indeed. I'm sure Porsche drivers hate Landrovers. :wink:

BugBear (deliberately misunderstanding for comic effect)

Ha, but not t'other way around. They make a very satisfying "crunch" sound...

... sorry, forgot for a second: I'm an ex-Landrover owner, sadly.

:-(

E.

You just reminded me of a delightful phrase made by Ian Banks (sadly missed) who when asked if his Land Rover had crumple zones, replied 'Yes, other people's cars' :lol:

 

[RogerS]

It's interesting to see how this thread has got hijacked.

Back to the original point, I think that there is consensus that a peloton riding four abreast is out-of-order.

 

[Jacob]

It's interesting to see how this thread has got hijacked.

Back to the original point, I think that there is consensus that a peloton riding four abreast is out-of-order.

You are quite right.
That is why you will rarely if ever see cyclists 4 abreast. It's not even practical as a way of getting a peloton going.
Similarly it's out of order to do a host of other things which also rarely happen - but it'd be tedious if every uninteresting incident was reported on a woodwork chat group; "bus delayed by ducks in the road" and that sort of thing. :roll:

 

[bugbear]

It's interesting to see how this thread has got hijacked.

Back to the original point, I think that there is consensus that a peloton riding four abreast is out-of-order.

You are quite right.
That is why you will rarely if ever see cyclists 4 abreast. It's not even practical as a way of getting a peloton going.

So why did Roger see them doing it?

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

Dunno.
They may have been doing a sensible manoeuvre such as the chaps in your video link.
They may have set out to have a laugh by annoying the red faced old geezer following them!
Most likely Roger is exaggerating. 10 miles four abreast sounds very improbable to me - I bet it was half a mile three abreast.
These things happen (rarely). An anti-cycling enthusiast would take it as significant, but it isn't.
I see car drivers doing stupid things regularly but I'm not going to waste your time posting them up on here and getting hot under the collar!