Hazards of gaggle of cyclists

[PrincessBandit]

I see on the intramaweb tonight an incident where a cyclist is in serious condition in hospital after being involved in a collision on the Coro peninsula. He was taking part in a K2 race when tangled up in a pileup involving a milk tanker and a ute driver. In the article one of the riders blamed an impatient ute driver's overtaking manoevre (obviously behind the cyclists) while the tanker was coming in the opposite direction.
"Cycling organisations say it is time to consider a law which holds drivers responsible for collisions involving cyclists ...Stephen McKernon of the Cycling Advocates' Network says current road rules put cars and cyclists in the way of each other, causing unnecessary accidents." And further..."Police have found and spoken to the ute driver, but suggested that [the injured cyclist's] evasive action was to avoid cyclists, not the vehicle. They themselves claimed that the cyclists were 'using the road as if they owned it' - but it remains their word against those of the competitors".
Surely there must be other locations that large groups of cyclists can "race" without being a hazard to other road users. I am a firm believer in advocating patience on the road but sometimes it's real hard to dig deep for when you get stuck with very few overtaking options. That is not in any way shape or form to absolve the overtaking driver if their actions were directly responsible for the injuries sustained, but gee, there are two sides to every story. It will be interesting to see what the outcome of this is in terms of anything being done to minimise it happening again. Realistically though nothing will probably be done until there are more deaths, and even then I wouldn't hold my breath.

[PrincessBandit]

I meant to add to that post that any law holding drivers responsible for collisions involving cyclists would be the start of the slippery slope for the irresponsible to abuse in order to lay the blame on anyone other than themselves. This practice is already common, but imagine the ramifications if it was legalised in some sort of way! :shit:

[TOTO]

I reacon its the Ute drivers fault. When we did the coro on friday, there were heaps of signs saying "EVENT" so you know something was happening ahead.

Farmers in utes are some of the worst drivers with no tolerance to anyone I reacon. Poor biker.

[Dave Lobster]

How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..

[Boob Johnson]

No sympathy for those fucking cyclist's, they are worse than some bloody motorbike riders :rofl:


But in all seriousness i've seen these dicks myself in large packs on PUBLIC roads exactly as they said "owning the road" including on blind corners ffs! No sympathy here :bash:

[Usarka]

No sympathy for those fucking cyclist's, they are worse than some bloody motorbike riders :rofl:


But in all seriousness i've seen these dicks myself in large packs on PUBLIC roads exactly as they said "owning the road" including on blind corners ffs! No sympathy here :bash:

And on the coro loop too! FFS piss off that's our road :argue:

[Pussy]

Each case has it's own merits... I see heaps of cyclists around Bell Block, a lot of them ride up to four abreast as though they own the road, and show blatant disregard for stop signs etc. Not saying the Coro cyclist was doing this

[EJT]

They have this race on the same weekend every year with heaps of warning. If the ute was overtaking before a blind corner (of whcih there are many around the Coro) then he was an idiot.

But I know how frustrating it can get being held up be slow vehicles around that area. Was on my way back from Whangamata the other weekend and came upon around 20 cars stuck behind a tanker doing around 30kmph up Kopu...suckers! The Kwak was past them all in a flash but I can imagine their frustration because there were no passing lanes for ages.

I didn't overtake on a blind corner though.

[EJT]

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..

Overtake a parked car. That must be hard. What did you expect they were going to do.

[Dave Lobster]

I didn't overtake on a blind corner though.

Wuss. ;)



wordcount..

[Boob Johnson]

How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..
Mate we had a lone cyclists nearly take out one of my best mates only two weeks ago. Two of us shot past him at a reasonable pace, the road was really really wide back country B/C road, this particular part was extremely long & flat so vis was excellent, anyway so we shoot past him & even move right over to the oncoming lane (again this is a long wide straight road with no one else on it) to give him even more room. The third rider (the most conservative rider known to man kind) is pootling along at his usual snail pace when the cyclist decides to for no apparent reason swerve across the road, JUST before he passes him. He had to make a very evasive maneuver to miss him, was really close he reckons and Mike has a fully pimped 05 S4R Duke with Arrows pipes so you can't NOT hear it coming.

If the clown was indeed wearing an ipod then it just reaffirms why I won't ever use one on a bike. The ability to hear what is going on around you is as important as site I reckon

[hayd3n]

i think cyclist should pay acc/rego levys as we have to be aware of them on the road
they have their own lanes and sometimes own traffic light and parks in town
cmon who pays for these??
yes they are good for the environment and its great exercise
but they are a fukin nuisance!!

[mowgli]

I reacon its the Ute drivers fault.

Nah, the ute driver and the cyclist were victims!!! In this broken, politically correct, cotton wool wrapped country (thanks auntie helen) the event organisers will be found at fault for failing to adequately mitigate a known hazard. But punishing them would set a precedent whereby similar events would become unfeasible due to a lack of volunteers prepared to be held accountable. So instead nothing will change and from time to time another cyclist will be sent rapid like to A&E.

Riding two wheels on the road is risky. Sometimes, despite best efforts to avoid them, accidents happen. Hope the cyclist wasn't too beat up and that they recover quickly.

[pete376403]

Was going over the Akatarewas last weekend. It's a really narrow road - my driveway is wider. There was some bicycle event on, looked like it went from Upper Hutt to Waikanae and back. Anyway, I encountered numerous groups of lycra clad dorks coming around blind corners 3 or more abreast. maybe they were in race mode and going hard, but they were relying on the observation and skill of the oncoming traffic not to take them out, because they had no way of stopping or avoiding a pileup if a car was approaching in the normal place on this road ie in the middle.

[Shadows]

What I don't understand is why cyclists are allowed to "race" on an open public road. The race face everybody has on ensures they will break numerous road rules every time, putting other road users at risk (usually because they have to take evasive action to avoid the cunts).

No other road user would get away with it. Why should they?

[FJRider]

I see on the intramaweb tonight an incident where a cyclist is in serious condition in hospital after being involved in a collision on the Coro peninsula. He was taking part in a K2 race when tangled up in a pileup involving a milk tanker and a ute driver. In the article one of the riders blamed an impatient ute driver's overtaking manoevre (obviously behind the cyclists) while the tanker was coming in the opposite direction.
"Cycling organisations say it is time to consider a law which holds drivers responsible for collisions involving cyclists ...Stephen McKernon of the Cycling Advocates' Network says current road rules put cars and cyclists in the way of each other, causing unnecessary accidents." And further..."Police have found and spoken to the ute driver, but suggested that [the injured cyclist's] evasive action was to avoid cyclists, not the vehicle. They themselves claimed that the cyclists were 'using the road as if they owned it' - but it remains their word against those of the competitors".
Surely there must be other locations that large groups of cyclists can "race" without being a hazard to other road users. I am a firm believer in advocating patience on the road but sometimes it's real hard to dig deep for when you get stuck with very few overtaking options. That is not in any way shape or form to absolve the overtaking driver if their actions were directly responsible for the injuries sustained, but gee, there are two sides to every story. It will be interesting to see what the outcome of this is in terms of anything being done to minimise it happening again. Realistically though nothing will probably be done until there are more deaths, and even then I wouldn't hold my breath.

So how come cyclist's are allowed to race on public (open) roads... but we're NOT... ??? the rules apply to all...don"t they...

[Shadows]

So how come cyclist's are allowed to race on public (open) roads... but we're NOT... ??? the rules apply to all...don"t they...

LOL. Great minds.

[Gremlin]

I can see it from both sides, I used to do competitive team time trialling on the road, plenty of open road riding for training, now I am a biker. Like any industry, there are good guys, and wankers (not saying anybody from the story is in either camp). Some cyclists are good guys, respect other road users, go into single file vehicles approach etc.

Likewise, you have cyclists who think they own the road, will deliberately block traffic from passing (seen it) and refuse to show any consideration for other road users (once a decent sized ride came up behind a group, we were all in line, the pack continued to use the whole of our side of the road).

On the other hand, same applies for motorists. Some are very considerate, giving space. Others think its a game of how close they can get (I had a couple of incredibly close calls, with cars almost clipping me). Can also understand that, if the cyclists were using the whole of their side, in a large pack, it would be worse than overtaking a car (car is shorter to overtake).

So where does that leave this? I'd want more information before laying blame on anyone.

[PirateJafa]

Who is keen for a race around the Coromandel then?

If we crash because we're acting like tools, hey it's not our fault eh? :rolleyes:

[Boob Johnson]

What I don't understand is why cyclists are allowed to "race" on an open public road. The race face everybody has on ensures they will break numerous road rules every time, putting other road users at risk (usually because they have to take evasive action to avoid the cunts).

No other road user would get away with it. Why should they?
You can be charged with "drunken in charge of a bicycle" yet they allow them as you say "with race face on" on public roads. I've seen the bastards taking blind corners 3/4 abreast racing on open public roads & even fully getting aggressive at passing drivers as they toot & attempt to go around them like a pack of bloody mindless sheep.

Wouldn't be a lot different to how some car drivers view motorcyclists from time to time except we don't go so slow to hold up other road users...





unless you're a member of the Ulysses :lol:

[AlBundy]

What annoys me is two cyclists thinking they own the road and riding abreast... Then getting upset when traffic gets close...

But really, this is the same debate every time one of them gets hit... I don't think it's fair to hold the driver/rider of the vehicle responsible, unless it was a blatant attempt to take them out... Accidents happen and I'd say often, the cyclists are equally to blame...

[Forest]

The ute driver sounds like a real arsehole. How hard would it have been for him to wait for a clear passing opportunity?

String him up.

[Slyer]

I would never ride one out on the open road like that, so dangerous.
Have to trust that everyone is going to go around you.

[Forest]

How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..

If that cyclist was in front of you when he got to the parked car, you are legally obliged to give way to him.

But you knew that - didn't you?

[Dave Lobster]

But you knew that - didn't you?

Much the same as I'm obliged to give way to a pedestrian crossing the road without looking?

[portokiwi]

Each case has it's own merits... I see heaps of cyclists around Bell Block, a lot of them ride up to four abreast as though they own the road, and show blatant disregard for stop signs etc. Not saying the Coro cyclist was doing this
Its a pain around Glen Dowie, St halliers, mission bay. they take up the whole road. yes Red lights most of them dont stop. I have so many near misses.:(

[MisterD]

A bit of backpedalling (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10540752) by the cop quoted - I've also heard some mutterings in the competitive cycling community that the ute might have been a support vehicle for one of the competitors - which is banned.

[Usarka]

So how come cyclist's are allowed to race on public (open) roads... but we're NOT... ??? the rules apply to all...don"t they...

Would you rather they close the whole road eg paeroa, wanganui etc?

[sunhuntin]

when susan and i went to hawera for the bike show, we saw the signs out for event when we left town. we got away before they did, thankfully. coming back, we saw a few groups of 3 or 4, all riding respectfully in single file. we come to a downhill and find ourselves faced with a pack coming uphill covering the whole road from the gutter to the center line, with a bunch of cars and a motorbike stuck behind them. dunno how many were in that bunch, more than 10 anyways.

im all for respecting cyclists so long as they arent behaving like knobs and blocking the lanes like that. i really think they should close roads if cyclists want to race, or else use cones or the like to highlight where cyclists should be riding. they did that with an intown race a few years back. coned off the corners to limit how wide cyclists could ride. worked too for the most part.

[Swoop]

What annoys me is two cyclists thinking they own the road and riding abreast... Then getting upset when traffic gets close.
Two cyclists riding abreast is allowed. IF they are passing parked vehicles, then they must revert to single file. The law says that.

If the signs are out that say "Event underway" then that is merely a warning to other road users. It does NOT mean that the road is closed.
The problem is that the lycra-clad seem to believe that the road is theirs to do as they please.
A gaggle of psyclists spreading out across the lane, let alone the entire road, needs some Gene-O-Clean.

[JMemonic]

A bit of backpedalling (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10540752) by the cop quoted - I've also heard some mutterings in the competitive cycling community that the ute might have been a support vehicle for one of the competitors - which is banned.

Good link interesting to read the police were concerned with the behaviour of the cyclists, no matter the circumstances they must obey the law, I ought to know having been in a former life a competitive cyclist and occasional race official, the law is clear they must not impede the flow of traffic, must obey all the road rules, and certainly included in that is the no crossing the centreline unless the road is closed of course.

Many of these lycra louts (love that term) will point out the 1.5 meter passing rule etc to you (well if they get the chance) to which when they are informed they are only allowed to rid two abreast and not imped the flow of traffic the get a bit defensive.

To ride a push bike involves no compulsory testing to ensure the rider has even a basic understanding of the rules and laws, a child is allowed to ride on the road as long as the parents give them a helmet, those habits are ingrained by the time they get a licence for a vehicle, far to late by then.

Interesting that you have a photo of a rear derailier as you avatar :)

[Swoop]

Many of these lycra louts (love that term) will point out the 1.5 meter passing rule etc to you
If the psyclist is sitting out in the right hand part of the (LH) lane (not that they would ever do that, of course...:rolleyes:) that would place the overtaking vehicle off the edge of the right hand side of the road...
Their lycra-leaders are calling for this distance to be increased???

[James Deuce]

Did some research. The ute was well past the cyclists before the tanker hove into view.

The ute did not collide with the cyclists. Two blokes in the lead bunch tangled wheels and fell. How they came to tangle wheels is conjecture, but other road users weren't involved.

As much as I hate cyclist gaggles, I always overtake any cyclist/s as I would any other vehicle/s. Indicators and stuff are involved.

[Mikkel]

I get pissed off everytime I see cyclists riding two abreast on narrow roads with tight/blind corners. I know exactly what is likely to happen if a car comes up behind them - he'll go straight into my lane and then I die.

Regarding the 1.5 m rule - if the road isn't wide enough for a car to pass a cyclist in this manner without crossing the center line, the bicycles should be banned from said road.

Some very good points in this thread - especially about racing on the public road.

[scracha]

That's the game. Ban cyclists. Then ban horse riders. Then ban pedestrians. Then ban drivers who can't go above 80. Then ban tractors. Then ban motorcycles.....

[PirateJafa]

A gaggle of psyclists spreading out across the lane, let alone the entire road, needs some Gene-O-Clean.

Or a ute...?

[Jantar]

.....
Regarding the 1.5 m rule - if the road isn't wide enough for a car to pass a cyclist in this manner without crossing the center line, the bicycles should be banned from said road.....
No need to ban the cyclists from such roads, merely enforce the law. In Central Otago we have many narrow roads and cyclists do not pose any problem if they keep well to the left. Its the ones who insist on riding 2 or more abreast and take up the whole lane that cause issues.

I have no sympathy for cyclists who get injured when they are hogging the road, and I have heard of very cyclists being injured when they are keeping to the left.

[jrandom]

There are two real problems here:

Firstly.

The K2 is a pretty fuckin' prestigious bicycle race, and guys train hard all year for it. And, in a race like the K2, the place to gain time on other competitors is when you're pedalling uphill. Which means that on all those big hills on the Coro loop, every cunt is full-on red-misting, trying to pass and gap every other cunt with no thought to road safety.

That approach works fine in the Tour de France and other bicycle races that go up mountains where the roads are closed on race day. Unfortunately, on roads that are still open to traffic, it causes major pains in the arse for everyone else who is trying to get through the typically narrow hilly roads where those crucial parts of the race are happening.

Secondly.

Most car drivers are thoughtless, semi-homicidal oxygen thieves.

I really don't see much that can be done. You're never going to manage to close the Coro Loop for several hours on an October weekend. And you're never going to convince cyclists that they shouldn't race around it once every year regardless. And you're never going to make car drivers not be thoughtless, semi-homicidal oxygen thieves.

Shit happens. Nothing to do but accept it and carry on and try to keep your skin intact.

When I get to the point where I can ride the K2, I'll be sticking to the left on the climbs.

[MisterD]

When I get to the point where I can ride the K2, I'll be sticking to the left on the climbs.

Next year? I'm up for it!

[jrandom]

Next year? I'm up for it!

That's the plan! See you there.

Loser shouts the post-race feed at the Thames KFC?

:blip:

[MisterD]

That's the plan! See you there.

Loser shouts the post-race feed at the Thames KFC?

:blip:

Oh bugger, that'll be my bluff called then...yer on. :niceone:

[puddy]

I rode a mountain bike to work for nearly five years. I loved it so much, that I had a 1000cc bike and a car in the garage with flat batteries! But SKY has to STOP showing the Tour de France/Italy etc, because weak minded roadies (lycra-clad fags riding racing bikes about 3-4 metres off the kerb, who travel in groups 3 or 4 abreast) get all carried away.........
Three of the last four times I've crossed the Coro there have been groups of them! I wish that I was in my ute, so I could have run a few of the FAGS over!:2guns::2guns::2guns: I love the MotoGP, WSB, WRC, Formula 1, but PLEASE, no more cycling!:bye:

[puddy]

The ute driver sounds like a real arsehole. How hard would it have been for him to wait for a clear passing opportunity?

String him up.
If it was a HOLDEN ute, would that be different? (Bloody Aussies!):shifty:

[jrandom]

SKY has to STOP showing the Tour de France

But not until after the 2009 edition. A summit finish on Mont Ventoux for the penultimate stage, oh my!

My money's on Contador.


/Italy etc

Oh, that's right, Lance Armstrong's staging a 2009 comeback, and he'll be racing the Giro for the very first time!

I, for one, welcome our new Sky Sport live programming overlords.

:yes:

[Maffoo]

you wanan try changing down 8-10 gears in 40ton because some nonce's in spandex jockeys are doing 10mph down the middle of the road

lots of cyclists round havelock/hasting, all h'ignorant

[McJim]

All you other lycra clad fags should come down here to watch the Tour of Southland. It's on just now. Got some good teams this year too - should be exciting.

Hope you don't all use that Shitmano crap though :Pokey: Campagnolo FTW!

[jrandom]

you wanan try changing down 8-10 gears in 40ton because some nonce's in spandex jockeys are doing 10mph down the middle of the road

lots of cyclists round havelock/hasting, all h'ignorant

I'm sorry you've had cause to find cyclists irritating.

I'd just like to take this moment to say a big 'thank you' to all the big rig drivers who treat cyclists so courteously on the road, even when it inconveniences them.

Based on my own experience, I'd rather share highway space with a 40 ton truck than any other vehicle around.

[jrandom]

Hope you don't all use that Shitmano crap though :Pokey: Campagnolo FTW!

What's Hayden Roulston riding?

[Maffoo]

I'm sorry you've had cause to find cyclists irritating.

I'd just like to take this moment to say a big 'thank you' to all the big rig drivers who treat cyclists so courteously on the road, even when it inconveniences them.

Based on my own experience, I'd rather share highway space with a 40 ton truck than any other vehicle around.

well i always do give them their space, mainly because ive seen what 40ton does to cyclists :gob:

personally, i would like to see more cyclists use rear-view mirrors of some sort

[jrandom]

personally, i would like to see more cyclists use rear-view mirrors of some sort

Head-checking to the rear is an important skill for cyclists. Unfortunately, lots of them never really learn to do it properly.

Track riding should be compulsory for cyclists and motorcyclists before they're allowed out on the road, IMHO...

[jrandom]

What's Hayden Roulston riding?

Actually, you'd think it'd be a Cervelo (http://www.roadcycling.com/articles/Hayden_Roulston_signs_with_Cervelo_TestTeam_002463 .shtml), wouldn't you...

Oh my, that'd be a Shimano/SRAM outfit!

I don't know how he handles the shame, I really don't.

:D

[scracha]

"Lycra clad fags" Sounds like a quote from some fat old motorocyclists in their power ranger romper once piece or black YMCA leather gear.. I've got total respect for anyone fit enough to ride a pushbike around the coro and these guys/gals are entitled to use the road as much as anyone else. Anyone who can't manage to wait a few seconds to pass a small group of bicycles is an arsehole.



I really don't see much that can be done. You're never going to manage to close the Coro Loop for several hours on an October weekend. .

How about we support the cyclists to enable closing the road for a day or two once a year.
.
.
.
.
.
.
that way no fucker will be able argue when we get it closed for a couple of days for the Isle of Coro grand prix

[Maffoo]

"Lycra clad fags" Sounds like a quote from some fat old motorocyclists in their power ranger romper once piece or black YMCA leather gear.. I've got total respect for anyone fit enough to ride a pushbike around the coro and these guys/gals are entitled to use the road as much as anyone else. Anyone who can't manage to wait a few seconds to pass a small group of bicycles is an arsehole.





cyclists don't pay a fee to use the road....so do they really have as much right to use it as anyone else?

[Forest]

cyclists don't pay a fee to use the road....so do they really have as much right to use it as anyone else?

If they pay taxes, then yes they bloody well do have a right to use it.

[Maffoo]

If they pay taxes, then yes they bloody well do have a right to use it.

but i pay taxes.... so i should be able to use the road without paying extra taxes in rego, road user charges, & petrol tax..... is that what your saying?

[reofix]

I remember getting mixed up in a "bike race" to raglan .... huge ignorant groups of sweating people ... loads of support vehicles supporting sweatin people at 15km /hr ... blocking road... after 20 kms of this ... my progress having been fucked up to the tune of 30 mins or so ... i was ready to murder every last one of those bastards and set fire to the bodies... i dont mind bicycles ... just hate stoopid...

[bell]

I would never ride one out on the open road like that, so dangerous.
Have to trust that everyone is going to go around you.You plan for the worst of them (by riding defensively) and hope that you have very few of the sort I've quoted below trying to "share" the road with you. An up-to-date will is recommended too.


I get pissed off everytime I see cyclists riding two abreast on narrow roads with tight/blind corners. I know exactly what is likely to happen if a car comes up behind them - he'll go straight into my lane and then I die.And how many times has this happened to you recently?


Regarding the 1.5 m rule - if the road isn't wide enough for a car to pass a cyclist in this manner without crossing the center line, the bicycles should be banned from said road.The logic in that is stupefying.


well i always do give them their space, mainly because ive seen what 40ton does to cyclists :gob:
personally, i would like to see more cyclists use rear-view mirrors of some sortThese (http://www.cycleaware.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1&products_id=2)are good.


cyclists don't pay a fee to use the road....so do they really have as much right to use it as anyone else? Is that a serious suggestion? Which bits of the road do my income taxes, ACC levies and car and bike rego fees contribute to then?


How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..Ohh, Dave. You don't get it do you? It's your responsibility to look at what's going on ahead of your vehicle and plan whether you're going to squeeze past the bike leaving 44cms between your vehicle and their handlebars OR reduce speed and move over in your lane to give the cyclist a decent amount of space.

There are courteous drivers that choose to move over in their lane to pass a cyclist, and they'll do it when there is nothing approaching from the other direction AND when there is oncoming traffic too (could be something to do with a good driver having an improved spatial awareness of their own vehicles' dimensions perhaps?). And there are poor drivers that choose not to move over in their lane to give the cyclist more than 40cms of passing space when there is NOTHING coming the other way toward their vehicle.


...wearing an ipod then it just reaffirms why I won't ever use one on a bike. The ability to hear what is going on around you is as important as site I reckon That'd be sight. You might also do well to treat all cyclists as if they are deaf and haven't heard your cart/bike/truck/magic carpet approaching from behind - that way you'll be giving them a bit more room than you're probably accustomed to. I think allowing 1.5 m when passing is impractical a great deal of the time, BUT anything less than 1 meter is not on.


What annoys me is two cyclists thinking they own the road and riding abreast... Then getting upset when traffic gets close...

But really, this is the same debate every time one of them gets hit... I don't think it's fair to hold the driver/rider of the vehicle responsible, unless it was a blatant attempt to take them out... Accidents happen and I'd say often, the cyclists are equally to blame...Ooooh, you give away a fair bit in there with comments like that.

How close is too close? If you don't ride a bicycle on the road regularly then I think your comments are somewhat misguided.

I wonder how you'd look back on your comments if tomorrow you were called to the hospital to identify the corpse of one of your family members and you discovered that the driver of the car that hit them (while they were cycling along the road in a safe manner and obeying all applicable road rules) was of the opinion that because they weren't "attempting to take them out" they weren't to blame.

Accidents happen in a lot of cases because people fucked up. They were too close to the cyclist who had to swerve to avoid someone pulling out of a driveway and the passing car clipped them....the cyclist is forced to leave the road to avoid a head-on because the impatient driver of a truck decides to overtake another truck without regard for the fact that the cyclist now has a large approaching vehicle in the left hand lane closing fast...the cyclist has a door opened on them on a busy road - they have nowhere to swerve except into a line of following traffic....3 of many more incidents that happened to me in Nelson last year.

Put yourself in the shoes of a cyclist (who's doing the right thing) and you would hopefully conjure up more scenarios to increase your awareness.


Much the same as I'm obliged to give way to a pedestrian crossing the road without looking? Good to see you're catching on.

[MisterD]

Actually, you'd think it'd be a Cervelo (http://www.roadcycling.com/articles/Hayden_Roulston_signs_with_Cervelo_TestTeam_002463 .shtml), wouldn't you...

Oh my, that'd be a Shimano/SRAM outfit!

I don't know how he handles the shame, I really don't.

:D

He's riding for Southland Times / Trek - probably on ShimaNO

[portokiwi]

:nono: Going to work this morning on Riddell Road as usal groups of wanabee road race cyclest racing.... Sh#t they never look behind them.
Saw twice bikes cutting the corner and when a vech tried to pass they pushed out to the center of the road. They didnt see me I used my tinny horn to get their attention. I was soo close to giving the 1 foot kick.
I do believe they should be on the road just like the rest of us. But they should show more respect for other road users.

[scracha]

cyclists don't pay a fee to use the road....so do they really have as much right to use it as anyone else?


Cycles do no damage to the road.
Cycles spill nothing on the road.
Cycles don't cause pollution.
Cycles don't run over and kill people.
Cycles don't require HP cars to issue speeding and careless driving tickets.
That's why cycles don't pay road tax.

By your logic we should pay tax walk across the road.

[nodrog]

Cycles spill nothing on the road.

i beg to differ ...

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2007/08/07/truck-blood.jpg

[Mikkel]

And how many times has this happened to you recently?

At least one time too many. Fortunately no cars were coming the other way...


The logic in that is stupefying.

Yes, I can tell you're stupefied after reading it, hopefully you'll get over it.

[Trouser]

Cycles don't require HP cars to issue speeding and careless driving tickets.
That's why cycles don't pay road tax.

By your logic we should pay tax walk across the road.

Some cyclists do need a HP car to issue careless use charges, drink driving charges and fines for exceeding the speed limit.

A cycle is still a vehicle and the person riding it can be charged.

[Ixion]

Cycles do no damage to the road.
Cycles spill nothing on the road.
Cycles don't cause pollution.
Cycles don't run over and kill people.
Cycles don't require HP cars to issue speeding and careless driving tickets.
That's why cycles don't pay road tax.

By your logic we should pay tax walk across the road.

I know of at least one case where a pedestrian was knocked down and killed by a bicycle. And the cyclist was done for dangerous driving causing death.

[Swoop]

Cycles spill nothing on the road.
Cycles don't cause pollution.
Cycles don't run over and kill people.
Cycles don't require HP cars to issue speeding and careless driving tickets.
That's why cycles don't pay road tax.

By your logic we should pay tax walk across the road.
We could compare motorcycles and bicycles.

There are types that can be used on the road.
There are types that are used off-road.

So, as we know, the types of motorbikes used offroad (racebikes, MX,etc, etc) do not pay road-use fees (rego, etc).

Why not get bicycles onto this setup as well?
Road bikes = road taxes.
Trail bikes = no taxes.

[pzkpfw]

What I hate is when the gaggle acts like one vehicle, not a collection of many, each needing to follow the relevant laws.

I had this coming down the gorge (Wellington), to turn left going to Petone. That puts you in a left lane, of two, that then merge into one and then merges onto the actual motorway.

The right lane is from Wellington, and this long bunch of riders was coming from there.

Understandably, they wanted to get from the right lane to the left lane - but the buggers did it as one big long unbreakable snake of bikes.

I come up in the left lane and had two choices: stop or merge. It's not a give-way or stop - so I chose "merge" (though it was they who were coming into my lane).

I did it nice and slow, carefully and quietly. (Read this line twice).

But none of the buggers would open a gap to let me out into the right lane so I could safely pass them. They boxed me in, like it was my fault for being there.

Eventually I was able to carefully sidle to the right of the left lane, and was then able to pass them - luckily before the two lanes become one.

I couldn't understand why they couldn't just help me safely be on my way.

If I was in a big freakin' logging truck they'd have made a gap.

Cheers,

[Clockwork]

I do wonder if this "pile-up" had as much to do with the distances between riders as the behaviour of the ute driver. For all other road users... if you pile into the back of the vehicle in front, you're in the wrong!

[AlBundy]

(while they were cycling along the road in a safe manner and obeying all applicable road rules)

Accidents happen in a lot of cases because people fucked up. They were too close to the cyclist who had to swerve to avoid someone pulling out of a driveway and the passing car clipped them....the cyclist is forced to leave the road to avoid a head-on because the impatient driver of a truck decides to overtake another truck without regard for the fact that the cyclist now has a large approaching vehicle in the left hand lane closing fast...the cyclist has a door opened on them on a busy road - they have nowhere to swerve except into a line of following traffic....3 of many more incidents that happened to me in Nelson last year.
.

You were in Nelson...

So, do you consider two cyclists abreast going up the Whangamoas as being in a 'SAFE' manner? Or down the main highway between Nelson to Mot?

I think NOT!

No other road user is allowed to ride abreast, why do cyclists think they have the right to?

BTW, I've done a lot of cycling. I used to race as a youngster, so I'm not anti-cycling at all. Cyclists need an attitude adjustment. They don't own the road. Anything other than single-file, is not acceptable.

Oh, also... You comment on motorcyclist spacial awareness and being prepared, yet you claim to have so many incidents while cycling. Why weren't you planning ahead, so you didn't have to swerve and react to any of those situations? Or were you happily sitting in a big group, secure in the caccoon, knowing you are untouchable? It's a two-way street. Curteousy goes both ways and cyclists show and serious lack of curteousy IMO...

[scracha]

Most of you guys talk like all cyclists are arseholes. Yep, there are some total arseholes on bicycles. There are arseholes in cars and there are arseholes on motorcycles. You can't tar one particular group of road users with the same brush. Imagine if they did that to us motorcyclists?

[bell]

You were in Nelson...

So, do you consider two cyclists abreast going up the Whangamoas as being in a 'SAFE' manner? Or down the main highway between Nelson to Mot?

I think NOT!
Whether they are permitted to do so under our current laws is perhaps a moot point. FWIW I don't ride two abreast when I am riding with a mate or my wife as I don't have any need to. Nor did I want the extra hassle of the Nelson portion of NZ's dimwitted driving population trying to squeeze past us further endangering our lives.

And so what if you or I did happen to approach a cyclist (or two riding abreast) going up the Whangamoas or between Motueka and Nelson? If anyone is worthy of having their name on the plastic card with Driver Licence on it, they will give the bikes a decent amount of room and show some respect.

Patience is so fucking underrated.

No other road user is allowed to ride abreast, why do cyclists think they have the right to?

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/about-other-road-users/information-for-cyclists.html (fifth point down)

BTW, I've done a lot of cycling. I used to race as a youngster, so I'm not anti-cycling at all. Cyclists need an attitude adjustment. They don't own the road. Anything other than single-file, is not acceptable.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/about-other-road-users/information-for-cyclists.html (and again...)

Oh, also... You comment on motorcyclist spacial awareness and being prepared, yet you claim to have so many incidents while cycling.

Not claiming this mate, it's the truth. I wouldn't make shit up to justify my point.

Why weren't you planning ahead, so you didn't have to swerve and react to any of those situations?

Planning ahead has been my saviour for many years on the road. You cover your brakes when you assess that someone is likely to pull out on you/open a door on you (which you've tried to identify by looking over the tops of drivers' headrests or because you've seen a car pull into a parking space ahead of you), you check behind you before changing position on the road, and so on and so forth.

The years I spent riding bicycles in heavy traffic and also on open roads have served me well in the transition to a motorcycle. There are many transferable skills.

Read my post again. No, don't bother I'll reproduce it here to save any problems with comprehension.
1.They were too close to the cyclist who had to swerve to avoid someone pulling out of a driveway and the passing car clipped them
If you're on the bicycle and you have 0.5 seconds to react to the car that has just stuck its nose out from between a line of parked cars across the shoulder of road that you are riding on it doesn't leave a huge amount of time to do a shoulder check and decide if you've got the option of either going over the bonnet of the car tha pulled ou, or whether you;ll do a quick swerve.

My issue on this occasion was with the idiot that pulled across my path, rather than the car that was following me that clipped me. IF, however, the following car had seen the bicycle ahead of them and decided to move over another 50cms toward the centreline I would not have made contact with their vehicle. And yes, the car did have sufficient room because I was able to see where their wheels were positioned in relation to the white line when they hit me.

2. the cyclist is forced to leave the road to avoid a head-on because the impatient driver of a truck decides to overtake another truck without regard for the fact that the cyclist now has a large approaching vehicle in the left hand lane closing fast

Aside from telepathy, I am not aware of how I can control the actions of a large truck (or its driver) that is approxiamtely 150 metres ahead of me, in clear daytime conditions without any other traffic behind me (for my bike to have blended in with).

3. the cyclist has a door opened on them on a busy road - they have nowhere to swerve except into a line of following traffic

I was planning ahead dude. Always do. It's just that sometimes you don't have sufficient time or space to react.

Or were you happily sitting in a big group, secure in the caccoon, knowing you are untouchable?
As outlined above:
No.
No.
And no.

Pfffftt. "Untouchable" is so fucking far off the mark that you would have trouble understanding.

There is no fucking "COCCOON" when you're on a bicycle. Your head and the smarts that you take with you on the road are it. The rest is unfortunately a large degree of chance and the smarts or lack thereof, that every other road user brings to the equation.

It's a two-way street. Curteousy goes both ways and cyclists show and serious lack of curteousy IMO...

I'm glad that you noted it was only your opinion. For a sec there I thought you were generalising about all cyclists.


wordcount...

[bell]

Most of you guys talk like all cyclists are arseholes. Yep, there are some total arseholes on bicycles. There are arseholes in cars and there are arseholes on motorcycles. You can't tar one particular group of road users with the same brush. Imagine if they did that to us motorcyclists?

Ditto......

[AlBundy]

I'm sorry Bell.

SOME of those are just not paying attention.

When I cycle down the road and there are a lot of parked cars, I'm always looking for someone possibly coming out a drive...
I also compulsively check to see if anyone is in the driver seat, possibly going to get out. I also look behind me to see if anything is coming, so I know whether I'll have safe-routes.

As for swerving, the driver has already taken you into account, based on where you were at the time. The fact you got caught and had to swerve is as much of a surprise to him as it is to you. You can't apply the logic that he had to give more room.

Granted, some people spend more time on the road than me as a cyclist. That said, I'm paranoid when I'm out on the open road. That's riding single file. I don't even consider riding two abreast... That's the difference as I see it. I'm vulnerable.

As for the road code... Just because it says you can, doesn't make it safe.... And it was more a rhetorical question anyway... Why should cyclists have the right to ride abreast. Maybe years ago with less traffic it was safer but nowadays with more cars on the road, it's definately not...

We'll debate this 'til the cows come home and everyone has their opinions. I'm set in mine, you in yours....

I'll side on the side of Murphy and physics...... Shit happens and bikes/cars/trucks are bigger and harder than me... By all means, go and tempt fate by riding two abreast. Just don't bitch about it when you get hit...

[AlBundy]

Most of you guys talk like all cyclists are arseholes. Yep, there are some total arseholes on bicycles. There are arseholes in cars and there are arseholes on motorcycles. You can't tar one particular group of road users with the same brush. Imagine if they did that to us motorcyclists?

I don't dispute that...

[hayd3n]

Cycles do no damage to the road.
wel they make fukin cycle lanes that require paint repairs etc


Cycles spill nothing on the road.

like fuk they dont
they throw out drink bottles chocolate bars

Cycles don't cause pollution.

how are the bike made without pollution???
how are the tyres made ??
where does the used rubber go?
where does the chain oil go??
it all wears off and pollutes!!!!

Cycles don't run over and kill people.
yes they do and they knock over old grannys/granpas


Cycles don't require HP cars to issue speeding and careless driving tickets.
That's why cycles don't pay road tax.

so i cant get a speeding ticket on a bike bullshit it is possible!
a m8 of mine got one on a skateboard!!!!!!!!
and ppl get them when drinking and riding a bike !!!
you are still on the road so you have to abide by the rules !!!!!!!!!

bike should pay some kind of one of levy added to the original cost as some traffic lights also accommodate cycle crossings
they have cycle lanes (some of which are also footpaths) and bicycle parks who the fuck pays for all of these???
yes we all do!!!!!!!!!!!
every single one of us tax earners!!!!!!!!!

[Dave Lobster]

Ohh, Dave. You don't get it do you? It's your responsibility to look at what's going on ahead of your vehicle and plan whether you're going to squeeze past the bike leaving 44cms between your vehicle and their handlebars OR reduce speed and move over in your lane to give the cyclist a decent amount of space.

There are courteous drivers that choose to move over in their lane to pass a cyclist, and they'll do it when there is nothing approaching from the other direction AND when there is oncoming traffic too (could be something to do with a good driver having an improved spatial awareness of their own vehicles' dimensions perhaps?). And there are poor drivers that choose not to move over in their lane to give the cyclist more than 40cms of passing space when there is NOTHING coming the other way toward their vehicle.


Scenario.. Manukau Road, Epsom, heading out of the city. Travelling along the inside lane (as I wasn't overtaking anything). Sitting in the right hand side of the lane, as there's a cyclist ahead. Be aware, I'm not going fast. 50ks, as that's the limit, and there's a lot of dorks about.
Up ahead, there's a parked car. I have plenty of space to pass it, without changing my position. Pushbike decides to pull into my path. No looking, no indicating. Nothing.
Now, when I grew up, all children had to do a cycling test. I did mine at the age of eight. If children can be taught to look behind them and indicate before pulling out in to the path of a vehicle, why can't an adult cope? Surely an adult should have enough brain capacity to cope with it.
As it was, he pulled out far earlier than he needed to, and my clairvoyant powers shouldn't have been needed.

[bell]

As for swerving, the driver has already taken you into account, based on where you were at the time. The fact you got caught and had to swerve is as much of a surprise to him as it is to you. You can't apply the logic that he had to give more room.

In this case the driver had not "taken me into account". They had not allowed sufficient/safe room to pass me - regardless of the fact that I had to swerve. In my 5 years of riding in NZ I observed that there was roughly a 1/3 to 2/3 split in the number of drivers that passed bicycles with what could be called sufficient room. That's 2/3 that didn't unfortunately.


... By all means, go and tempt fate by riding two abreast. Just don't bitch about it when you get hit...

Never have, don't plan to. I actually stated that in my post.


...who the fuck pays for all of these???
yes we all do!!!!!!!!!!!
every single one of us tax earners!!!!!!!!!
You didn't think to consider that cyclists might also be tax payers. Hmmm? Or that a fair percentage of people that cycle also pay car/bike rego and ACC, etc? Hmmm?


Scenario.. Manukau Road, Epsom, heading out of the city. Travelling along the inside lane (as I wasn't overtaking anything). Sitting in the right hand side of the lane, as there's a cyclist ahead. Be aware, I'm not going fast. 50ks, as that's the limit, and there's a lot of dorks about.
Up ahead, there's a parked car. I have plenty of space to pass it, without changing my position. Pushbike decides to pull into my path. No looking, no indicating. Nothing.
Now, when I grew up, all children had to do a cycling test. I did mine at the age of eight. If children can be taught to look behind them and indicate before pulling out in to the path of a vehicle, why can't an adult cope? Surely an adult should have enough brain capacity to cope with it.
As it was, he pulled out far earlier than he needed to, and my clairvoyant powers shouldn't have been needed.

What you term "clairvoyant powers" is actually a well developed awareness of traffic - in this case, a bicycle.

I seriously doubt that the majority of the driving public think ahead as you have indicated you do here. They're the ones that need to get onto a bicycle and see how much riskier their shoddy driving makes it to ride a bicycle on the road.

I like the idea of this cycling test.

[scracha]

wel they make fukin cycle lanes that require paint repairs etc

Oh aye...I'm sure that's a huge chunk of the road budget. You can't move for cycle lanes around here......not.




like fuk they dont
they throw out drink bottles chocolate bars

I'm sure cyclists chocolate bars and drink bottles don't account for the majority of the $hit lying next to roads in this country. I don't see many cyclists going through the Maccas/burglerking/KfC drive in then depositing their "leftovers" at their arse.



how are the bike made without pollution???
how are the tyres made ??
where does the used rubber go?
where does the chain oil go??
it all wears off and pollutes!!!!

Compared to a car their "footprint" is teeeeeny weeeny.



yes they do and they knock over old grannys/granpas

Not nearly as often as cars.



so i cant get a speeding ticket on a bike bullshit it is possible!
a m8 of mine got one on a skateboard!!!!!!!!
and ppl get them when drinking and riding a bike !!!
you are still on the road so you have to abide by the rules !!!!!!!!!

I'm sure if we all ran about on skateboards and pushbikes there'd be much less HP cars out there. You'd have to be a particular type of arsehole to get a ticket for riding a skateboard or pushbike.



bike should pay some kind of one of levy added to the original cost as some traffic lights also accommodate cycle crossings

What? Like 1 in 100 traffic lights have specific lanes and lights for cyclists? Ok, so they should pay 1% of the car tax by your logic. Hmm...it'd cost more to collect and administer than it'd generate.



they have cycle lanes (some of which are also footpaths) and bicycle parks who the fuck pays for all of these???

Certainly not just car drivers and motorcyclists.



yes we all do!!!!!!!!!!!
every single one of us tax earners!!!!!!!!!
Cyclists pay tax too.

I don't have kids so should my tax pay for schools and universities?
I've been to a doctor once in 10 years so should my tax pay for medical centres and hospitals?
I rarely walk in the local park so should my tax pay for its upkeep?
I'm not disabled so should my tax pay for those who are?

I could go on but I'd sound like a right winged fascist.

Tax earner? I'm a tax payer mate.


I'm with the cyclists on this one. Yes, we can all cite specific examples of arseholes on pushbikes but the majority of them are well behaved, safe and courteous. The same could not be said about a huge percentage of drivers that pass them. Treat them with the same respect that you'd expect towards you from a car or lorry driver when you're on your "vulnerable" motorcycle.

Now did I mention the large amount of fuckwits who pass horses within inches at ridiculous speeds?

[Forest]

Scenario.. Manukau Road, Epsom, heading out of the city. Travelling along the inside lane (as I wasn't overtaking anything). Sitting in the right hand side of the lane, as there's a cyclist ahead. Be aware, I'm not going fast. 50ks, as that's the limit, and there's a lot of dorks about.
Up ahead, there's a parked car. I have plenty of space to pass it, without changing my position. Pushbike decides to pull into my path. No looking, no indicating. Nothing.
Now, when I grew up, all children had to do a cycling test. I did mine at the age of eight. If children can be taught to look behind them and indicate before pulling out in to the path of a vehicle, why can't an adult cope? Surely an adult should have enough brain capacity to cope with it.
As it was, he pulled out far earlier than he needed to, and my clairvoyant powers shouldn't have been needed.

In that situation, as the following vehicle, you are legally required to slow down and give way to the cyclist.

The cyclist is not required to look behind or indicate that he is pulling out. Though it obviously would be wise for him to do so.

[puddy]

All you other lycra clad fags should come down here to watch the Tour of Southland. It's on just now. Got some good teams this year too - should be exciting.

Hope you don't all use that Shitmano crap though :Pokey: Campagnolo FTW!

Thanks Jamie! All this time I thought the rattle from exotic bikes like Ducatis were dry clutches etc.........but all this time it was the flash Campag groupset. I think I'll stick with the shitty Shimano stuff, that must be hiding in Suzukis etc.

[hayd3n]

Oh aye...I'm sure that's a huge chunk of the road budget. ((You can't move for cycle lanes around here......not.))
huh??


I'm sure cyclists chocolate bars and drink bottles don't account for the majority of the $hit lying next to roads in this country. I don't see many cyclists going through the Maccas/burglerking/KfC drive in then depositing their "leftovers" at their arse.
yes but they still make a lil bit of mess


Compared to a car their "footprint" is teeeeeny weeeny.


Not nearly as often as cars.
well they still get shipped over on a boat and then transported to shops via truck


I'm sure if we all ran about on skateboards and pushbikes there'd be much less HP cars out there. You'd have to be a particular type of arsehole to get a ticket for riding a skateboard or pushbike.
yes but there would be more on the streets


What? Like 1 in 100 traffic lights have specific lanes and lights for cyclists?
Ok, so they should pay 1% of the car tax by your logic. Hmm...it'd cost more to collect and administer than it'd generate.
but there is already a admin system so why make another??

Certainly not just car drivers and motorcyclists.


Cyclists pay tax too.
(to be on the road??)

I don't have kids so should my tax pay for schools and universities?
well you have been to school before haven you?
I've been to a doctor once in 10 years so should my tax pay for medical centres and hospitals?
HTFU medical insurance is the only way yo will get proper treatment in this country
I rarely walk in the local park so should my tax pay for its upkeep?
Choose your govt wisely
I'm not disabled so should my tax pay for those who are?
are they on the road? then they should pay their onw regos/wof/ road mileage etc

I could go on but I'd sound like a right winged fascist.
so if you stop now you arnet?

Tax earner? I'm a tax payer mate.


I'm with the cyclists on this one. Yes, we can all cite specific examples of arseholes on pushbikes but the majority of them are well behaved, safe and courteous. The same could not be said about a huge percentage of drivers that pass them. Treat them with the same respect that you'd expect towards you from a car or lorry driver when you're on your "vulnerable" motorcycle.

Now did I mention the large amount of fuckwits who pass horses within inches at ridiculous speeds?
wtf have horses got to do with it?
have you got a fetish that noone knows about?
all answers in bold

[Dave Lobster]

In that situation, as the following vehicle, you are legally required to slow down and give way to the cyclist.

The cyclist is not required to look behind or indicate that he is pulling out. Though it obviously would be wise for him to do so.

Ok.. I didn't learn to drive in this country. However.. I find it hard to believe that ANY road user isn't obliged to look behind them before changing their position in the road.

I thought it was just asians that pulled out without looking. Is it everyone that isn't taught to do it?

[Ixion]

In that situation, as the following vehicle, you are legally required to slow down and give way to the cyclist.

The cyclist is not required to look behind or indicate that he is pulling out. Though it obviously would be wise for him to do so.

Bollocks. Please cite your legislative authority for that claim.

[jrandom]

When cycling to the left and swinging around parked cars, I make a point of being super-conscious of the twin risks of drivers' doors opening and cars coming up and side-swiping me from the right.

And I see a lot of other cyclists around central Auckland doing a good job of that, too.

I think that cyclists really do tend to be invisible to car drivers and, to a lesser extent, motorcyclists, until something bad happens. There are actually quite a lot of them out there, y'know. You folk hatin' on us pedalling sorts, consider for a moment that you may be tarring the innocent 95% with the brush of the naughty 5%-ers.

I'm sure I don't need to draw parallels from that.

The undertones of this thread speak more to sad facts about thoughtlessness and intolerance in human nature than they do to any truths or untruths about cyclists being worse than other road users.

:no:

[hayd3n]

When cycling to the left and swinging around parked cars, I make a point of being super-conscious of the twin risks of drivers' doors opening and cars coming up and side-swiping me from the right.

And I see a lot of other cyclists around central Auckland doing a good job of that, too.

I think that cyclists really do tend to be invisible to car drivers and, to a lesser extent, motorcyclists, until something bad happens. There are actually quite a lot of them out there, y'know. You folk hatin' on us pedalling sorts, consider for a moment that you may be tarring the innocent 95% with the brush of the naughty 5%-ers.

I'm sure I don't need to draw parallels from that.

The undertones of this thread speak more to sad facts about thoughtlessness and intolerance in human nature than they do to any truths or untruths about cyclists being worse than other road users.

:no:
yes peddlers have there place and should be on the road!!
and yes drivers need to look out for em !!
we are kinda lucky as theres heaps of bike lanes here!!

but peddlers do need to look out aswell
and use their signals more

[Forest]

Bollocks. Please cite your legislative authority for that claim.

A bicycle is defined as a vehicle under the Land Transport Act 1998 No 110.

This means that bicycle riders are subject to the same regulations as other road users. Namely the Land Transport (Road User) Rules 2004 (SR 2004/427).

The relevant section from the regulations is section 2.6, which I've posted below. These clauses apply to the driver overtaking the cyclist (as they would also apply to a driver overtaking any other vehicle).


2.6 General requirements about passing other vehicles
(1) A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless—
(a) the movement can be made with safety; and
(b) the movement is made with due consideration for other users of the road; and
(c) sufficient clear road is visible to the driver for the passing movement to be completed without impeding or being likely to impede any possible opposing traffic; and
(d) until the passing movement is completed, the driver has a clear view of the road and any traffic on the road for at least 100 m in the direction in which the driver is travelling.
(2) Subclause (1)(c) and (d) does not apply if the passing vehicle and the vehicle being passed are in different lanes and are, throughout the passing movement, either on a one-way road or on the same side of the centre line.
(3) A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

[bell]

The undertones of this thread speak more to sad facts about thoughtlessness and intolerance in human nature than they do to any truths or untruths about cyclists being worse than other road users.

:no:

Well said that man. Superb clarity of thought shown there.

[AlBundy]

I think that cyclists really do tend to be invisible to car drivers and, to a lesser extent, motorcyclists, until something bad happens. There are actually quite a lot of them out there, y'know. You folk hatin' on us pedalling sorts, consider for a moment that you may be tarring the innocent 95% with the brush of the naughty 5%-ers.

I'm sure I don't need to draw parallels from that.

The undertones of this thread speak more to sad facts about thoughtlessness and intolerance in human nature than they do to any truths or untruths about cyclists being worse than other road users.

:no:

So, what you end up with is 5% bad cyclists interacting with 5% drivers, which results in an accident, then all hell breaks loose.

Just keep in mind, that thoughtlessness you mention goes both ways and I'd hazzard a guess it'll be your 5% that think they own the road...

BUT, I suppose in this day and age, common sense has no place. It's always someone elses fault or responsibility.

[scracha]

all answers in bold
Not worth responding to.

[jrandom]

Just keep in mind, that thoughtlessness you mention goes both ways...

I'm not implying that all cyclists are saints.

I mean, jeez, have you ever met Gordon McCauley?

:laugh:

[MisterD]

I'm not implying that all cyclists are saints.

I mean, jeez, have you ever met Gordon McCauley?

:laugh:

Gordie's in yellow in Southland. W00t!

Tis a good way to kill a few amusing hours listening to that fella's stories...

[Bass]

The undertones of this thread speak more to sad facts about thoughtlessness and intolerance in human nature than they do to any truths or untruths about cyclists being worse than other road users.

:no:

Now ain't that just the truth.
What's really sad is that the discussion in here seems to reflect the opinions of the population at large, if letters to the Herald are any indication.

It seems to me that it's just another result of NZ'rs being competitive rather than cooperative drivers.

[jrandom]

Gordie's in yellow in Southland. W00t!

Oh dear; that'll only encourage him...

[Katman]

There's probably an 'SUV and People Movers Forum' saying similar things about motorcyclists.

:msn-wink:

[nodrog]

There's probably an 'SUV and People Movers Forum' saying similar things about motorcyclists.

:msn-wink:

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/waterbury-ct/TTBT0288KBQB6SJI9

[JMemonic]

I'm not implying that all cyclists are saints.

I mean, jeez, have you ever met Gordon McCauley?

:laugh:

Yes, enough said.

[vifferman]

I think two of the things that piss off motorists are the failure of cyclists (particularly on road bikes) to stay left, and the tendency to not ride in single file. It gives the impression they're saying, "Fuck you - I'll ride where I like; it's MY road".
Kinda the same as the way many motorcyclists ride, I guess. :Oops:
As for the "failing to keep left" thing, I'm guessing here, but I think it's largely because the edge of the road - particularly on country roads - is often in poor condition, not smooth (as it gets little traffic), and all the shit (stones, nails, car parts, rubbish) gets swept onto it by the traffic.
The riding two or more abreast thing may be understandable if they're in a race, but it kinda signals to other motorists, "I don't really give a toss about my safety". Doesn't being safe on the road start primarily with the rider? If they don't keep left, and ride in a bunch, they're relying on the other tards on the road to look out for them. And if one of the other tards happens to have to make a split-second decision between hitting one or more cyclists, or hitting an oncoming truck, it's a tough call.

[Katman]

I think two of the things that piss off motorists are the failure of cyclists (particularly on road bikes) to stay left, and the tendency to not ride in single file. It gives the impression they're saying, "Fuck you - I'll ride where I like; it's MY road".
Kinda the same as the way many motorcyclists ride, I guess. :Oops:
As for the "failing to keep left" thing, I'm guessing here, but I think it's largely because the edge of the road - particularly on country roads - is often in poor condition, not smooth (as it gets little traffic), and all the shit (stones, nails, car parts, rubbish) gets swept onto it by the traffic.
The riding two or more abreast thing may be understandable if they're in a race, but it kinda signals to other motorists, "I don't really give a toss about my safety". Doesn't being safe on the road start primarily with the rider? If they don't keep left, and ride in a bunch, they're relying on the other tards on the road to look out for them. And if one of the other tards happens to have to make a split-second decision between hitting one or more cyclists, or hitting an oncoming truck, it's a tough call.

I'm having an identity crisis here. Change a couple of those words and it could have been written by me.

:msn-wink:

[vifferman]

I'm having an identity crisis here. Change a couple of those words and it could have been written by me.

:msn-wink:
"piss" and "fuck"? :confused:
What should I change them to - "annoy motorists" and just delete the "Fuck you" bit?

I'm pretty sure you're not me, so don't worry too much...

[Katman]

"piss" and "fuck"? :confused:
What should I change them to - "annoy motorists" and just delete the "Fuck you" bit?

I'm pretty sure you're not me, so don't worry too much...

No, the "piss" and the "fuck" weren't the words I was thinking of.

(In fact, you'd need to add a few more of those to make it really sound like one of my posts).

[Badjelly]

I find it hard to believe that ANY road user isn't obliged to look behind them before changing their position in the road.


The relevant section from the regulations is section 2.6, which I've posted below. These clauses apply to the driver overtaking the cyclist (as they would also apply to a driver overtaking any other vehicle)
...
A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.


I think "line of passage" is the key phrase here. In my opinion, a sensible and responsible cyclist, when riding along a ride with parked vehicles (or other obstacles), will move to the left when there are large gaps between the obstacles/vehicles and will move smoothly out to pass the obstacles when necessary. And a sensible and responsible motor vehicle user will anticipate this line of passage and allow for it. (I'm thinking here of Evans Bay Parade in Wellington, which I ride/drive every day and which has lots of bends, lots of parked cars and, in summer, lots of cyclists.)

Should the cyclist indicate every time he/she pulls out to pass an obstacle? On Evans Bay Parade they generally don't and the 1 or 2 times I've ridden a bicycle along there I didn't either. It's usually pretty obvious to a following vehicle what's going to happen.

[Badjelly]

Oh, and by the way, I used to do a lot of cycling, sometimes in groups, and I never made a practice of riding two abreast. It just didn't feel safe. But it is definitely allowed by the law in NZ.

[Ixion]

A bicycle is defined as a vehicle under the Land Transport Act 1998 No 110.

This means that bicycle riders are subject to the same regulations as other road users. Namely the Land Transport (Road User) Rules 2004 (SR 2004/427).

The relevant section from the regulations is section 2.6, which I've posted below. These clauses apply to the driver overtaking the cyclist (as they would also apply to a driver overtaking any other vehicle).

That applies to OVERTAKING. Your statement was that a bicycle PULLING OUT IN FRONT of another vehicle is under no obligation to obey the rules governing such an action (indicate etc). By definition if the cycle can pull out IN FRONT of the bike/car (which was the original complaint) it is not being overtaken. If indeed the cycle was being overtaken then the cyclist need do not more than continue on his path straight ahead. If he did pull sideways he would go into the side of the overtaking car (and his legal situation would be no different to any other vehicle doing so.). Do you really mean to argue that if you, on a motorbike, are overtaking a car, then the car is at liberty to swing to the right whilst being overtaken, without looking or indication, and that when he does so and knocks you off your bike, he is entirely within his rights?

As you note, bicycles are subject to the same regulations as other road users. A pity that so very few of them are aware of that fact.

[PrincessBandit]

I'm having an identity crisis here. Change a couple of those words and it could have been written by me.

:msn-wink:

Nah, there is only one Katman. The one and only.

On a side issue, I always have a laugh when I see lycra clad guys (complete with the obligatory shaved legs) standing on their pedals, bottoms in the air displaying their "wares" for anyone behind them! Some intriguing profiles :eek:

[Badjelly]

By definition if the cycle can pull out IN FRONT of the bike/car (which was the original complaint) it is not being overtaken.

It seems to me that's based on a very narrow definition of "being overtaken". You're saying that I'm not being overtaken until the front of the overtaking vehicle passes the back of my vehicle?

[Badjelly]

On a side issue, I always have a laugh when I see lycra clad guys (complete with the obligatory shaved legs) standing on their pedals, bottoms in the air displaying their "wares" for anyone behind them! Some intriguing profiles :eek:

It's funny, I've never noticed that. There are some lycra clad gals who make an interesting sight tho.

[Ixion]

The law actually says "passing". It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Is that car half a kilometre back overtaking you ? He is closing up on you, he may intend to overtake you when he gets there ?

[Bass]

There are some lycra clad gals who make an interesting sight tho.

Mumblepants

[Swoop]

On a side issue, I always have a laugh when I see lycra clad guys (complete with the obligatory shaved legs) standing on their pedals, bottoms in the air displaying their "wares" for anyone behind them! Some intriguing profiles :eek:
Likewise...

[Badjelly]

It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line?

Where indeed? Not where you draw it.

Think about this one:


A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.
If "when passing" meant "alongside" then moving into the line of passage of another vehicle *when passing* would mean hitting it (which is forbidden, obviously, but the intent of this clause is clearly a little wider than that.) The wording of the clause implies that the passing manoeuvre continues (or perhaps it's better to say the obligations associated with the passing manoeuvre continue) some time after the two vehicles are alongside each other. I suggest that the manoeuvre starts (the obligations start) some time before too.

Back to the question of cyclists "pulling out" without warning: there are times when it's clear to operators of following vehicles that the line of passage of a cyclist is going to deviate around a parked car. Common courtesy (and possibly the law) forbid you from impeding this line of passage.

[scracha]

The law actually says "passing". It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Is that car half a kilometre back overtaking you ? He is closing up on you, he may intend to overtake you when he gets there ?

You draw the line when it will cause the following vehicle to have to modify their speed and direction (i.e. swerve, hit the picks or even come off the gas). Just the same as pulling out of a junction or side road. You know, the plebs that pull out in front of you when you're blatting along at 100 and then accelerate very gently.

Parked vehicles and other obstructions are different though....AFAIK. the cyclist (car or motorcyclists) overtaking the vehicle has the right of way if they stay within their lane.

[Forest]

That applies to OVERTAKING. Your statement was that a bicycle PULLING OUT IN FRONT of another vehicle is under no obligation to obey the rules governing such an action (indicate etc). By definition if the cycle can pull out IN FRONT of the bike/car (which was the original complaint) it is not being overtaken. If indeed the cycle was being overtaken then the cyclist need do not more than continue on his path straight ahead. If he did pull sideways he would go into the side of the overtaking car (and his legal situation would be no different to any other vehicle doing so.). Do you really mean to argue that if you, on a motorbike, are overtaking a car, then the car is at liberty to swing to the right whilst being overtaken, without looking or indication, and that when he does so and knocks you off your bike, he is entirely within his rights?


The situation you mentioned (as I understood it) was that a cyclist on the left side of the lane came up behind a parked car and then moved to the right so he could clear the parked car.

As the following vehicle, you are required by law to allow the cyclist to clear the parked car. You cannot overtake him or move into his line of passage unless you can do it "safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle". The following clause is the key:

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.


As you note, bicycles are subject to the same regulations as other road users. A pity that so very few of them are aware of that fact.

No argument there.

However motorbikes also get away with bending the rules (lane splitting, filtering, undertaking etc) so I'm fairly relaxed when it comes to cyclists doing their thing.

[Grahameeboy]

How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..

Dude surely it would be obvious to the following car driver to realise that the cyclist would need to overtake / pass a parked vehicle and allow the cyclist space to do so like hanging back, wide berth etc...

This is NZ's car drivers today...

[Dave Lobster]

Dude.. I was on a bike. He pulled out WAY sooner than was necessary.

I ride a pushbike myself, and had no reason to think he would pull out as early as he did, hence my clairvoyance not being up to scratch.