2 Abreast

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
DevonDamo
Posts: 1036
Joined: 24 May 2011, 1:42am

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by DevonDamo »

Ayesha wrote:When there is a steady stream of traffic, two cyclists riding ‘Two-a-breast’ just because they can, gets cyclists a BAD name.


Couldn't agree more.

The simple fact is that we are slower than cars by a factor of around 4. We will impede their progress. People will tolerate being held up, if it's nothing 'personal.' If you impede their progress AND are going two abreast, it's likely to become personal - the same as when the road's being blocked by two cabbies having a chat. Forget what the highway code says - this is about psychology, and regardless of your good reasons for doing so, riding two abreast says "don't give a toss about you people behind." In a fraction of a second, you've flicked a switch in the subconscious mind of the driver behind turning you from a neutral entity into an adversary.

If you want to spend the rest of your life complaining on forums about punishment overtakes and so forth, fine - take primary and ride two-abreast etc. I keep as far over to the left as I can, and take every opportunity to let following traffic past. In return, they tend to hold back until it's safe and then give me loads of room when they do pass.
drossall
Posts: 6115
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by drossall »

mnichols wrote:Does that mean it is illegal to drink from a sports bottle or take a bite from a snack bar/gel when moving?

This is important and, with respect, basic stuff. The uses of "must" and "should" in the Highway Code are defined in the introduction. As that explains, you are being told that you "should" keep both hands on the handlebars so, if you were to cause an accident whilst taking a drink, it could be held that you were at fault. However, a court would have to decide this in the light of the circumstances. If it were illegal, the Code would say that you "must" keep both hands on, and you could be prosecuted simply for taking one hand off. Of course, this would be silly, because you have to do that to signal.
Last edited by drossall on 23 Apr 2014, 11:34pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
StellaLdn.
Posts: 626
Joined: 6 Jun 2013, 12:29pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by StellaLdn. »

DevonDamo wrote:
Ayesha wrote:When there is a steady stream of traffic, two cyclists riding ‘Two-a-breast’ just because they can, gets cyclists a BAD name.


Couldn't agree more.

The simple fact is that we are slower than cars by a factor of around 4. We will impede their progress. People will tolerate being held up, if it's nothing 'personal.' If you impede their progress AND are going two abreast, it's likely to become personal - the same as when the road's being blocked by two cabbies having a chat. Forget what the highway code says - this is about psychology, and regardless of your good reasons for doing so, riding two abreast says "don't give a toss about you people behind." In a fraction of a second, you've flicked a switch in the subconscious mind of the driver behind turning you from a neutral entity into an adversary.

If you want to spend the rest of your life complaining on forums about punishment overtakes and so forth, fine - take primary and ride two-abreast etc. I keep as far over to the left as I can, and take every opportunity to let following traffic past. In return, they tend to hold back until it's safe and then give me loads of room when they do pass.


While I agree that it's silly to just ride two abreast because you legally can, I think it's also silly to assume that riding as far to the left as possible leads to car drivers being 'thankful'. In my opinion it lets drivers think we have to stay in the gutter and make space for them because we're a mere inconvenience to them (many, not all). As a cyclist you have to cycle where it's safe for you. That doesn't mean you can't cycle considerately. As I said on another thread: it's all about seeing the big picture and not being an egoistic idiot. Problem is that an egoistic cyclist will most possibly just be inconvenience whereas an egoistic driver can kill someone.
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall."
-- Confucius

http://theviscountaffect.blogspot.co.uk/
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Far left is not a good plqce to cycle. Under virtually any circumstance.

You are traffic, and I really don't know where you get the factor of 4 from. In a town you can easily be doing 2/3rds of the speed limit, when not impeded by motorvehicles, or a hill.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
DevonDamo
Posts: 1036
Joined: 24 May 2011, 1:42am

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by DevonDamo »

Far left is the safest place to be by far. By placing yourself well out into the lane, you put a great big neon sign above your head telling drivers that they must get past you quickly at all costs or they'll be stuck behind you for the rest of the day. That's when the dangerous manoeuvres start happening. On the other hand, show them that you're looking to facilitate their overtake, and they'll take a more relaxed approach about getting past. I've spent the past 35 years making sure traffic has an easy time getting past me, and I just don't see the sort of behaviour frequently reported on here. I have encountered idiots on the road, but to respond by demonising all drivers as though they were some kind of homogenous group is an irrational, self-fulfilling prophecy.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by mjr »

DevonDamo wrote:Far left is the safest place to be by far. By placing yourself well out into the lane, you put a great big neon sign above your head telling drivers that they must get past you quickly at all costs or they'll be stuck behind you for the rest of the day. That's when the dangerous manoeuvres start happening. On the other hand, show them that you're looking to facilitate their overtake, and they'll take a more relaxed approach about getting past.

I couldn't disagree more. By placing yourself on the far left, you put a great big neon sign next to you telling drivers that you think they can pass safely without pulling out. That's when the dangerous manoeuvres start happening. On the other hand, sit just to the right of the left motor wheel rut - visible but not blocking typical driver vision of oncoming traffic - and 98% of drivers will overtake properly.

Maybe roads near DevonDamo are wider and cars can actually overtake without changing lane. That isn't the case here, where either we've roads with narrow lanes to try to squeeze as many cars as possible along them, or narrow lanes so they don't have to spend any more than the minimum on tarmac. The one exception I can think of is a road that used to have a so-called chicken lane up its middle, but even there they've preferred to put in wide shoulders and a central ghost island, rather reallocate any road space for cycling.

From here, 5 miles outside town, into the centre, bikes relatively easily average the same speed as cars during the day. I've timed it and I was surprised by the result: just over 20 minutes by either. The car has a higher top speed but the limit is 30 or 40mph all the way and a car can't overtake or bypass congestion as easily as a bike. The bike would be even quicker if it wasn't for all the pesky cars in the way and how they get prioritised over bikes at crossings!
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by mjr »

drossall wrote:This is important and, with respect, basic stuff. The uses of "must" and "should" in the Highway Code are defined in the introduction. As that explains, you are being told that you "should" keep both hands on the handlebars so...

Two abreast is also only a should. It's quite fun to ride quiet fen roads five abreast across the full width of the road when you can see that there's no other road user within 3 miles :lol: but be careful doing that.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by [XAP]Bob »

DevonDamo wrote:Far left is the safest place to be by far. By placing yourself well out into the lane, you put a great big neon sign above your head telling drivers that they must get past you quickly at all costs or they'll be stuck behind you for the rest of the day. That's when the dangerous manoeuvres start happening. On the other hand, show them that you're looking to facilitate their overtake, and they'll take a more relaxed approach about getting past. I've spent the past 35 years making sure traffic has an easy time getting past me, and I just don't see the sort of behaviour frequently reported on here. I have encountered idiots on the road, but to respond by demonising all drivers as though they were some kind of homogenous group is an irrational, self-fulfilling prophecy.

Could not agree less.


Far left puts you:
- Over drain covers
- In road debris (increasing likelihood of - potentially sudden - fairy visits)
- with no escape route
- with no wobble room
- out of drivers sight line

It tells the driver that "I need 2" on my left, so you can give me as little as 2" on my right"
It tells the driver "You're right, I'm not important enough to be on the road"

More over it is against all (current) official advice.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by Si »

Ride in the gutter - be treated like you belong in the gutter.
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by TonyR »

DevonDamo wrote:The simple fact is that we are slower than cars by a factor of around 4. We will impede their progress.


Average traffic speed in inner London is 12mph. And motorists seem to have no qualms about impeding cyclists' progress by blocking the streets with wide vehicles carrying three or more empty seats or indeed impeding each other..
User avatar
Vantage
Posts: 3050
Joined: 24 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
Location: somewhere in Bolton
Contact:

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by Vantage »

DevonDamo wrote:Far left is the safest place to be by far.


With all due respect, how have you lived as long as you have?
I couldn't care less how wide, narrow or busy the road is, 3 feet at least from the edge of the road is where I ride. If it's a narrow road and traffic is building up behind me, unless there's a turn off or safe place to stop and let them past, then that's where they'll stay until a safe opportunity to pass comes up.
The roads do not belong to the driving masses and we have as much right to use them as they do.
Bill


“Ride as much or as little, or as long or as short as you feel. But ride.” ~ Eddy Merckx
It's a rich man whos children run to him when his pockets are empty.
Ellieb
Posts: 905
Joined: 26 Jul 2008, 7:06pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by Ellieb »

I think it is fair to say that in almost every single case where I have had a close pass, it has been when I have bottled it and been insufficiently assertive with my road position. Primary isn't about asserting your right to the road or delaying people 'because you can'. It is about adopting the safest position on the road. Is anyone seriously suggesting that sitting far left at a pinch point is safer than adopting the middle of the lane and physically preventing a dangerous pass?
WMarkLancs
Posts: 42
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 7:56pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by WMarkLancs »

I think that the OP's question, and indeed much of the following discussion about road position, can be improved by making drivers more aware of why cyclists are doing these things.

In the long term, cycling courses for children are currently popular, at least in the various primary schools attended by children whose parents I know. This is great and I believe it should be followed up by campaigning to make older children and then adults in general aware that (a) road position is about safety and (b) the whole point of two abreast is to take up less space and allow safer overtaking.

Tell them its for their benefit and most people will find cycling two abreast more agreeable.
Ayesha
Posts: 4192
Joined: 30 Jan 2010, 9:54am

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by Ayesha »

What seems strange is there have been designs for side-by-side tandems, but the design that is most popular is where one rider is behind the other.

If it is REALLY more safe to ride two-a-breast, side-by-side tandems would sell like hot cakes.

Now go and waste half an hour scribbling a response to that :lol:
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: 2 Abreast

Post by Bicycler »

But that's ignoring the great advantage of the bicycle that it is agile and can manoeuver through narrow gaps. I don't think anyone is suggesting that it is always advantageous to be wider, rather that there are times when there is an advantage in being able to prevent unsafe overtakes by riding side by side. Elsewhere it makes sense to ride in single file. A bicycle has that flexibility.

30 seconds or so... :lol:
Post Reply