Hazards of gaggle of cyclists

[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.

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.

[nodrog:Me]

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

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/wate...T0288KBQB6SJI9

[JMemonic]

I'm not implying that all cyclists are saints.

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

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.
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.
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.

[vifferman]

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

"piss" and "fuck"?
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"?
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.

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

[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

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