the cyclist is in his own lane therefore it is perfectly reasonable and legal to pass on the left.The car may be making a left turn across the cycle laneOriginally Posted by DangerousBastard
Forum whore
the cyclist is in his own lane therefore it is perfectly reasonable and legal to pass on the left.The car may be making a left turn across the cycle lane
Double shot!!
Well it's illegal for that reason - in any vehicle. It amazes me what dangerous shit cyclists have done for so long.
I'd never pass on the left, but I pass everywhere else - usually scaring the bejezus outa them in the process with a sudden application of the loud handle.
Steve
"I am a licenced motorcycle instructor, I agree with dangerousbastard, no point in repeating what he said."
"read what Steve says. He's right."
"What Steve said pretty much summed it up."
"I did axactly as you said and it worked...!!"
"Wow, Great advise there DB."
WTB: Hyosung bikes or going or not.
111000101000100010011110
you've missed my point, how is using a cycle lane any more dangerous than using a normal lane on a multi lane road. In either case cars will not see you sometimes, and will cut you off sometimes. Does the frequency increase as the lane width decreases?
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Rider Coach
Oh, see your point now.
Thing is it is all about where other road users EXPECT to see you.... Granted, some don't look EVER, but that is a minority thankfully.
Another lane on a road is almost always full of traffic. Cycle lanes are usually empty..... apart from just before, or just after school/ work...
After considering all the dangers, I actually think cycle lanes lull people into a false sense of security in the end.... Will be paying much more attention when I use one (on my push bike) from now on.
Forum whore
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/new...-city-cyclists
Regardless of how right you are, it's the vulnerability of being a motorcyclist that makes me cautious.
Read the story, substitute the word motorcycle for the word cycle, and imagine the carnage that might happen.
Forum whore
You can turn across a cycle lane, you just can't drive in it.
Basically, the person who designed cycle lanes meant well, but didn't realize he was inventing a time bomb.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/new...-city-cyclists
111000101000100010011110
the same could be said for cars couldn't it? It sucks that cyclist are getting injured but as Jack saidI know riding is a risky business, and riding in certain ways can increase or decrease that risk, but if I just wanted to get from A to B as safely as possible I wouldn't be on a bike at all. Its debateable if motorcycling in cycle lanes increases the risk, but how illegal is it? like at fault for any accident you are in? refusal of insurance cover for accidents?Even if someone leaves a gap, it's still the motorist's responsibility to check the way is clear
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Double shot!!
Well thats just great innit. Now you can't get rid of them because the public will scream you down. A classic example of someone with a good idea and no brains.
Steve
"I am a licenced motorcycle instructor, I agree with dangerousbastard, no point in repeating what he said."
"read what Steve says. He's right."
"What Steve said pretty much summed it up."
"I did axactly as you said and it worked...!!"
"Wow, Great advise there DB."
WTB: Hyosung bikes or going or not.
Rider in training
You'd think they have a look at some other countries and see what did and didn't work. Nup.
Unfortunately sometimes when someone in control in the public sector gets something in they mind they want to make it happen, no matter what.
Wearing Hi-Viz Black.
They do. Unfortunately our retards only look at Victoria in Australia. As pretty as she may appear, she is a bit dim... like the public servants who bow to "Her Greatness" and deduce that "speed kills" and a lot of other crap.
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
GOOD ROADS, NUTHIN 2 RIDE
I've never met a treadie in a bike lane yet when mopedding down them, but then I'm using the ones on the HWY. Govt funded cycle lane from one end of the country to other..might as well use it...no other fecker does.
Forum whore
If the car is indicating and you are in the rear...............you give way.....................no matter what lane you are in.
I thought everybody knew that.
Skyrder
Free Scott Watson.
Don't forget to bring a towel
That must mean that a moped is the wrong vehicle for the purpose of travelling in a 50kmh zone. They're legally not allowed to exceed 50kmh, and travelling at exactly 50kmh in a 50kmh zone is often dangerous for the moped rider, so it can't be ridden safely in accordance with the road rules.
GOOD ROADS, NUTHIN 2 RIDE
Legally no faster than 50 but who has ever got a ticket under 60kph?
Why do I have a problem with an individual law enforcement drone telling me to get off the road because I use a vehicle that's physically restricted (by law) to a certain speed but deemed unsafe to use that vehicle because...is fecken restricted (by law) to that certain speed?
Full size bikes only have two wheels and hardly any of the safety devices numbing the responsibility of a cager, can they be deemed unsafe to?
Maybe so, no kids ride bicycles to school any more...
Loops more fecken endless loops.
Forum whore
Completely correct. Mopeds are not safe for use in traffic, as by definition they don't have the power to live in traffic flows, so they cause the riders to hug the left hand side of the road. Inviting cars to squeeze past where they clearly shouldn't.
The moped licence rules are, frankly, a joke. That's why the gubbermint is reviewing them. Here's why.
A total numpty, who has never ever ever ridden or driven anything (except a skateboard) goes into an AA office, and sits the theory test for a car licence. He/she then, with piece of paper in hand, goes and buys a moped, and rides off into the heavy metro traffic flows. Totally legally. Absurd.
The next person, a 50 year old who has driven cars but has never ridden even a bicycle, decides to save money on commuting and parking, so goes and buys a moped. Trouble is, they live in a leafy suburb like Halswell, where you have to ride on an 80 km/h road to get into the city. So they ride down the cycle lane (if one exists) expecting the law to be ignored so they can use their preferred (but not suitable for purpose) moped. If a cycle lane doesn't exist, they surf down the hard shoulder with traffic flying by at 80 - 100 km/h.
The moped laws are just a farce. Forget the 50cc limit, it went out decades ago. The law says no more than 2 k/w, and designed to travel at no more than 50 km/h. How exactly does one tell what power output a bike has? So, some enterprising young male (coz it's normally males who do it) goes and buys a moped. Coz it's cheaper to reg a moped, it doesn't need a WoF and you can ride it on your car licence. Right, then they go an de-restrict the motor, causing it to be a motorcycle. So now they have cheaper reg, no WoF as required (and subsequently no idea how safe the thing is), and suddenly it's the cops who enforce the actual law who are wrong.
Further (soapbox off and running now), mopeds are not required to be presented for certification prior to going on the road at their first registration. So, someone imports a total death trap, and nobody ever has to inspect it to make sure that it is actually a moped, that the frame etc isn't just going to fall apart, that it actually has functional brakes etc. Coz it's a moped, nobody actually checks.
The rash of Ezi-Rider electric bikes just perpetuates the shambles. They are arguably a power assisted pedal cycle. Or so the retailers say. That class (PAPC) was always a bicycle frame with a small motor attached. Whether it is electric or petrol makes no difference, again it comes down to power output (200 watts, I think) .In fact, the Ezi-Rider is a moped with pedals attached, making use of the legal exemption for registration, WoF, licence, and the requirement to wear a motorcycle helmet. Cycle helmets are good enough for that class. Here's the kicker, most people take the pedals off their Ezi-Rider, as they have no intention of ever actually pedalling them. And that instantly makes them a moped. They can't be a PAPC if they have no pedals.
It's time the whole moped issue was taken and shaken up.
Here's my ideas.
You have to have a motorcycle licence to ride a moped. That way you would have at the very least done the basic skills test, and had to do some study on the laws thay pertain to motorcycle use, as opposed to simply car use.
All vehicles to be used on the roads must be examined prior to first hitting our roads. Exempt cycles, but anything with any sort of motor. That way it will enter the vehicle fleet at the correct class.
Require mopeds to have a WoF. The law currently says they have to be up to WoF standard, byut because there is never an inspection (like a WoF inspection) they fairly quickly fall below the standard. Then the cops (who largely have no idea what is required on a bike, as most aren't bikers and actually don't give bikers a second thought) won't have to be the bad-news-bears with enforcement.
The whole moped thing is a 'mare.
Sermon concludes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks