Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Cyril Haearn · Post by **Cyril Haearn** » 23 Apr 2017, 7:06pm

Vehicles should overtake with a minimum distance, what is the rule for traffic going the other way? How much separation distance should there be?

They have no excuse for not seeing cyclists going the other way but almost none wait and / or move over in my experience, even in my leafy suburb

What is the law or HC?

Diolch

foxyrider · Post by **foxyrider** » 23 Apr 2017, 8:03pm

The main thing is that there is some! You know it's not enough when contact is made.

In a utopian world we can say it has to be X but who will police it? What about narrow roads? Like any regulation it's only as good as the enforcement, just look at phones, drinking, speeding.

Username · Post by **Username** » 24 Apr 2017, 6:37am

foxyrider wrote:The main thing is that there is some! You know it's not enough when contact is made.

In a utopian world we can say it has to be X but who will police it? What about narrow roads? Like any regulation it's only as good as the enforcement, just look at phones, drinking, speeding.

You'd be surprised how strict speed limits are enforced. I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine. But I also know absolutely nobody thats ever had a fine for driving too close to the car in front. Tailgating really grips my ****. Why cant the average speed cameras be setup to detect tailgating? This is far more dangerous than speeding, yet traffic police will throw the book at you for 35mph in a 30, its ludicrous! Other bad driving habits are poorly enforced such as driving while under the influence or while distracted, again these are far more serious but are much less enforced. Justice in the UK is harsh on minor offenses and lenient on serious ones. How many murderers actually die in jail these days?

tykeboy2003 · Post by **tykeboy2003** » 24 Apr 2017, 9:21am

Personally I'm comfortable with less space when I can see the vehicle coming towards me - I feel I can react to get out of danger, it's when they come from behind and I can't see where they are till they're almost past me that worries me.

Post by **Vorpal** » 24 Apr 2017, 9:26am

Cyril Haearn wrote:Vehicles should overtake with a minimum distance, what is the rule for traffic going the other way? How much separation distance should there be?

They have no excuse for not seeing cyclists going the other way but almost none wait and / or move over in my experience, even in my leafy siburb

What is the law or HC?

I'm not aware that there are any specific requirements. IMO, speed affects that amount of space needed. Almost touchibng is okay when cyclist & motorist are both under 10 mph. A couple of metres (or more) are needed at 70 mph, and everything else falls in between.

edited to add: If there isn't room for two vehicles, going right down the middle will usually 'make' oncoming drivers wait. But be aware that that can turn into a game of chicken, and be prepared to get out of the way.

BakfietsUK · Post by **BakfietsUK** » 24 Apr 2017, 9:40am

If "we" are talking about vehicles and Highway Code rule 163 then there are a heck of a lot of people ignoring this. To paraphrase the rule, if the obstruction is your side, you wait. Don't like so often happens just continue straight toward any oncoming vehicle.

It is somewhat distressing how many drivers seem to think this rule does not apply if the other vehicle happens to be a cyclist.

I think it is irrelevant whether it is 1.5m or 2m in the context I describe, as the Highway Code has not been adhered to.

How has this issue got anything to do with tailgating "Username" - ? I know it is dangerous, but you could always look for a relevant thread or start one yourself.

thirdcrank · Post by **thirdcrank** » 24 Apr 2017, 9:56am

... Vehicles should overtake with a minimum distance, what is the rule for traffic going the other way? ...

I think there's an unwarranted assumption here because even with the imminent distribution of all those mats, there's no officially prescribed minimum overtaking distance. In short, it's pretty much the same overtaking or passing in the opposite direction: it's what a competent and careful driver thinks is ok. A falling standard.

Audax67 · Post by **Audax67** » 24 Apr 2017, 10:37am

BakfietsUK wrote:It is somewhat distressing how many drivers seem to think this rule does not apply if the other vehicle happens to be a cyclist.

I don't think drivers regard cyclists as vehicles, more like ants at a picnic.

Grandad · Post by **Grandad** » 24 Apr 2017, 3:51pm

I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine]

I must be in a well behaved minority then

if the obstruction is your side, you wait. Don't like so often happens just continue straight toward any oncoming vehicle.

It is somewhat distressing how many drivers seem to think this rule does not apply if the other vehicle happens to be a cyclist.

Strangely enough I have recently had several drivers wait whilst I rode past an obstruction on their side of the road. Needless to say they get a grateful wave.

Cyril Haearn · Post by **Cyril Haearn** » 24 Apr 2017, 4:04pm

Grandad wrote:
I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine]

I must be in a well behaved minority then

if the obstruction is your side, you wait. Don't like so often happens just continue straight toward any oncoming vehicle.

It is somewhat distressing how many drivers seem to think this rule does not apply if the other vehicle happens to be a cyclist.

Strangely enough I have recently had several drivers wait whilst I rode past an obstruction on their side of the road. Needless to say they get a grateful wave.

It is better not to wave to thank them for obeying the law. You might be stopped by a traffic cop for taking a hand off the bars and not being in full control. In this situation it is quite usual for the driver to move off and steer towards you before you are clear. N e v e r trust them!

Cyril Haearn · Post by **Cyril Haearn** » 24 Apr 2017, 4:11pm

Username wrote:
foxyrider wrote:The main thing is that there is some! You know it's not enough when contact is made.

In a utopian world we can say it has to be X but who will police it? What about narrow roads? Like any regulation it's only as good as the enforcement, just look at phones, drinking, speeding.

You'd be surprised how strict speed limits are enforced. I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine. But I also know absolutely nobody thats ever had a fine for driving too close to the car in front. Tailgating really grips my ****. Why cant the average speed cameras be setup to detect tailgating?

You do know someone now who has never had a speeding fine, me! Have been driving for nearly 30 years maybe 200 000 km in GB and EUR. I am very proud to report that I was once accused by the cops of going too slowly

Few murderers die in gaol because we have an enlightened regime that tries to rehabilitate them

Cyril Haearn · Post by **Cyril Haearn** » 24 Apr 2017, 4:13pm

Vorpal wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:Vehicles should overtake with a minimum distance, what is the rule for traffic going the other way? How much separation distance should there be?

They have no excuse for not seeing cyclists going the other way but almost none wait and / or move over in my experience, even in my leafy siburb

What is the law or HC?

I'm not aware that there are any specific requirements. IMO, speed affects that amount of space needed. Almost touchibng is okay when cyclist & motorist are both under 10 mph. A couple of metres (or more) are needed at 70 mph, and everything else falls in between.

edited to add: If there isn't room for two vehicles, going right down the middle will usually 'make' oncoming drivers wait. But be aware that that can turn into a game of chicken, and be prepared to get out of the way.

Sorry Vorpal, almost touching is not ok at 10+10=20 mph. When there is little room one should go "dead" slow, when driving I stop for cyclists

Revolution · Post by **Revolution** » 30 Apr 2017, 9:23pm

Username wrote: I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine.

Seriously?
you are mixing with the wrong crowd.

irc · Post by **irc** » 1 May 2017, 6:07am

Cyril Haearn wrote:
Grandad wrote:[quote I know absolutely nobody that has never had a speeding fine]

I must be in a well behaved minority then

Me too (38 yrs driving) . And my wife. Though both my sisters, my parents, and my brother have had the odd speeding ticket.

Richard D · Post by **Richard D** » 1 May 2017, 6:10pm

tykeboy2003 wrote:Personally I'm comfortable with less space when I can see the vehicle coming towards me - I feel I can react to get out of danger, it's when they come from behind and I can't see where they are till they're almost past me that worries me.

This. Absolutely spot-on. The head-on approach I can see and react to if necessary; the pass from behind I can't tell whether it's safe, frightening or life-ending until it's happened.

Cycling UK Forum

Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic

Re: Passing distance 1.5 or 2 m, opposing traffic