Does passing distance apply to oncoming vehicles?

[LancsGirl]

For overtaking vehicles there's a recommended (?) passing distance of 1.5 metres, or 2.0 if travelling at over 30mph.

Does the same apply to vehicles coming in the opposite direction? Common sense says it should, but I can't find a reference anywhere.

Reason I ask is a lot of the roads round here are single track with passing places. But some drivers seem to think we should be able to squeeze past each other. Only some mind, most are good at using passing places to pass each other.

Thanks.

[Jdsk]

I don't know.

Related question here, with some responses
viewtopic.php?p=1697410#p1697410

give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders and horse drawn vehicles at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215). As a guide:
leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mph, and give them more space when overtaking at higher speeds
pass horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles at speeds under 10 mph and allow at least 2 metres of space
allow at least 2 metres of space and keep to a low speed when passing a pedestrian who is walking in the road (for example, where there is no pavement)
take extra care and give more space when overtaking motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and pedestrians in bad weather (including high winds) and at night
you should wait behind the motorcyclist, cyclist, horse rider, horse drawn vehicle or pedestrian and not overtake if it is unsafe or not possible to meet these clearances.

My emboldening.

Is there any reason why it sometimes says overtaking and sometimes pass?

Jonathan

[DaveReading]

HC says slow down when passing cyclists on a single-track road, but is silent on any recommended distance. Perhaps the assumption is that common sense will apply.

[Cugel]

HC says slow down when passing cyclists on a single-track road, but is silent on any recommended distance. Perhaps the assumption is that common sense will apply.

Well, riding mostly narrow back roads as I do, I've noticed that it's impossible to pass oncoming motorists with the full 1.5 metre gap; or for those behind to do so.

Generally I try to go past the oncomers with a wave and smile if they slow down, as 99% do. The on-rushers get a dirty look but so far I've never had to jump in the hedge to avoid one. But as an experienced cyclist I don't worry about passes as close as 10-12 inches if the vehicle is going slowly and carefully. Or even if it isn't.

Those coming from behind get held back by my "taking the road" until a wider bit comes. I then slow down or stop and, if I can see well ahead that it's clear, give them a gentle wave-on invitation to consider passing. Normally, they see my intention before any wave.

Out here in West Wales it's very unusual to come across an impatient or even a rude driver. They're used to having to compromise on the narrow roads with oncoming cars so don't seem to have any issue with compromising if it's an oncoming bike. In car or bike, there's a general habit of raising a hand as a thank-you. "Diolch, bach!"

Your mileage may vary. Some spots about the nation are rather stuffed with rude & nasty folk, becoming especially rude & nasty when their car amplifies the tendencies.

Cugel

[TrevA]

There has to be a bit of give and take on narrow lanes, as some are barely wide enough for a bike and car to pass. I expect an oncoming motorist on a very narrow lane to either slow down or stop, so I can negotiate my way around them. Most do, but some don’t.

[Tangled Metal]

Oh dear. The waving you through cyclist. A pet hate when in the van in the country roads around here. Bendy roads which are too narrow for central road markings but wide enough for cars to pass each other, albeit with the nervous shutting their eyes at the last moment. With the bumps and rises in the road the upright cyclist can often see what the following motorist cannot. Cue the cycle through wave!

I'm no HC or driving expert but from a young 17 year old learning to drive and within weeks of passing my test going on an advanced driving course I got told many times by both sets of lessons not to proceed unless I could see the way forward is clear.

I find it especially bad form if the often still moving cyclist then gets annoyed and starts doing the exasperated version of his earlier wave. I would say to my fellow cyclists that the wave you do in good faith is not the best. Aiui only police have the right to wave traffic through all the cyclist is doing is giving the less aware driver a signal he/ she should not follow but should determine for themselves when it is safe to do so.

Another point, if the cyclist intends to alter their motion to let a following driver through, I often think it should be their change in speed and/ or direction (eg into a passing point) that indicates their intention towards the driver not the use of a hand signal directing the driver past. Even then we need to be aware that safety in overtaking is the following road user's responsibility not you, the cyclist. That road user should not feel they must do as the cyclist intends if they're not certain of the pass being safe.

[Pebble]

very happy to pass oncoming vehicles very closely providing they slow down. Like Crugel most of my cycling is on very narrow roads. My ploy is always to ride in the middle towards oncoming vehicles, when they slow to sensible speed I move to the left and we squeeze past each other with a nod and a wink. On coming wagons and tractors who are obviously not going to play the game - I will slowly come to a stop, dismount in the centre of the road and walk to the side, it annoys them that they have had to stop too, but that's better then them steaming by on the limiter.

[tim-b]

I'd echo common-sense and some of the tactics above. Another instance is you turning right; on any road it might be sensible to take a position further from the road centre to accommodate those passing from in front and stop those trying to squeeze through from behind

[Carlton green]

For overtaking vehicles there's a recommended (?) passing distance of 1.5 metres, or 2.0 if travelling at over 30mph.

Does the same apply to vehicles coming in the opposite direction? Common sense says it should, but I can't find a reference anywhere.

Reason I ask is a lot of the roads round here are single track with passing places. But some drivers seem to think we should be able to squeeze past each other. Only some mind, most are good at using passing places to pass each other.

Thanks.

I too had wondered about this issue but think it not quite the same as being overtaken, when passed from behind we are blind to the hazard but when passed from the front we are not.

[Paulatic]

[
I too had wondered about this issue but think it not quite the same as being overtaken, when passed from behind we are blind to the hazard but when passed from the front we are not.

My understanding, I can only pass by you if you are stationary or coming towards me. If you are moving in the same direction then I must be overtaking you.

[DaveReading]

[
I too had wondered about this issue but think it not quite the same as being overtaken, when passed from behind we are blind to the hazard but when passed from the front we are not.

My understanding, I can only pass by you if you are stationary or coming towards me. If you are moving in the same direction then I must be overtaking you.

The Highway Code uses "pass" and "passing" extensively to include overtaking, for example

"pass horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles at speeds under 10 mph and allow at least 2 metres of space"

"make sure that you have enough room to complete your overtaking manoeuvre before committing yourself. It takes longer to pass a large vehicle"

[Paulatic]

My understanding, I can only pass by you if you are stationary or coming towards me. If you are moving in the same direction then I must be overtaking you.

The Highway Code uses "pass" and "passing" extensively to include overtaking, for example

"pass horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles at speeds under 10 mph and allow at least 2 metres of space"

"make sure that you have enough room to complete your overtaking manoeuvre before committing yourself. It takes longer to pass a large vehicle"

Does it?
The first example does not mention overtaking. I see that as applying to both directions.
Second example is in two sentences first applying to overtaking and second one covers travelling in both directions.
That’s how see it.

[squeaker]

For overtaking vehicles there's a recommended (?) passing distance of 1.5 metres, or 2.0 if travelling at over 30mph.

Does the same apply to vehicles coming in the opposite direction? Common sense says it should, but I can't find a reference anywhere.

Was wondering this the other day whilst driving towards a cycling group riding side by side on a lane where I'll happily drive past an oncoming car, but would exercise caution for a bloated 4x4 (AKA 'light truck'). When cycling on the same road I would expect to 'single out' if in a group should there be oncoming motor traffic, but wouldn't expect an oncoming motor vehicle to slow down if driving at 30 to 40mph.

My 'wondering' the other day was because one pair of the oncoming group didn't single out, hence the gap between my vehicle and their shoulder was going to be less than 2m, so I slowed down (below 20mph).

Just file under 'it takes all sorts!' ?

[axel_knutt]

Since vehicles travelling in opposite directions have to pass one way or another, then in circumstances other than reversing to the nearest passing place, it comes down to a matter of passing speed rather than passing distance. Any distance is fine as long as the speed is appropriate.

There was a video on twitter a few weeks ago of a Land Rover whizzing past a few inches from cyclists on a country lane without slowing, causing a woman to fall in the ditch. The motorists had no conception of what was wrong: "He didn't hit her, it's her own fault if she can't balance the bike".

[brianleach]

I too cycle a lot on narrow country roads and as has been said it is virtually impossible to give the HC passing distance in either direction especially given the increasing size of motor vehicles.

The problem in Hampshire and I am sure elsewhere is that the edges of the road are very damaged due to unofficial widening by said motor vehicles so it often becomes rather gravelly.

If a car is coming towards me and I am on the road bike I insisting on staying on the tarmac and usually the vehicle gives me just enough tarmac to get past, they might stop they might not.

If I am on the gravel bike I MIGHT go on to the gravel but not voluntarily. We had a club member fall off recently doing just that.

My main concern with oncoming passes is that the wing mirrors are quite likely to do damage to my right elbow as they sweep majestically past!!!!

I think it is an increasing problem with Mr Google sending increasingly large vehicles down inappropriate routes. Passable of course but not easily.