• @li10
    link
    English
    1448 months ago

    As a cyclist, two people cycling side by side while other vehicles are waiting to pass is a bit of a dick move tbh.

    Not illegal, and nothing compared to the shit that drivers do to cyclists, but still a bit of a dick move.

    • SonnyVabitch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      54
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Cycling two abreast is better for the driver, since they can overtake much quicker.

      • @li10
        link
        English
        258 months ago

        That image is quite a niche scenario and doesn’t represent the situation in the original image.

        Obviously it’s different with a group of eight compared to just two people…

        • @Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          108 months ago

          niche scenario

          Never been to a country where road cycling is massive then? Try living in anyplace that has Alps in it lol

          • @li10
            link
            English
            238 months ago

            You’re right. I live in a city and have never seen more than four people cycling together.

            It’s almost like cycling in the alps is a niche situation, and cycling in cities happens much more frequently 🤔

        • SonnyVabitch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          98 months ago

          How is it different though? In the original picture you can safely overtake the two of them in about half the time and half the available opening in traffic compared to them riding single file.

          • MeanEYE
            link
            fedilink
            English
            37 months ago

            That’s not safely overtaking. That’s squeezing through and if there’s a chance vehicle will get hit he will push the cyclists out.

          • @li10
            link
            English
            -188 months ago

            Because the image assumes that a driver can only ever safely overtake if they’re completely in the other lane, which simply isn’t true.

            It also assumes that there will be an opportunity where the other lane is completely free for them to move into it.

            Overtaking eight people in a line is going to have a large time saving if they’re cycling in twos, but when you scale that down to just two then the difference is negligible and the space saving is more important.

            • SonnyVabitch
              link
              fedilink
              English
              138 months ago

              Your theory rests on the assumption that I value my life and safety lower than two seconds the driver could shave off of their journey time. Or thirty seconds. Or two days.

              Well, buddy, you’re wrong.

              Even if I’m riding alone I’m not riding in the gutter where I have a greater risk of puncture from debris, and a greater risk of some idiot close passing in a 3 ton umbrella.

            • @biddy@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              57 months ago

              Have a closer read of points 2 and 3 in the image. For most lanes there isn’t enough width for cyclist + wobbling side to side + 1.5m margin + car. So the car needs to overtake in the other lane, which means the other lane needs to be completely free of cars.

        • MeanEYE
          link
          fedilink
          English
          67 months ago

          In my experience this is like 80% of overtaking situations when cycling. Far from niche.

      • MeanEYE
        link
        fedilink
        English
        147 months ago

        Great image, but you see people really don’t want to use their steering wheels. And if possible they’d like pedestrian crossings removed as well. In ideal world there would be a race track from their home to exactly where they need to go and everyone else in traffic is a dick. Including other car drivers. Learning traffic laws and rules is too much of an effort anyway.

        • @theplanlessman
          link
          English
          4
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          The image appears to be from the UK. Here in the UK cyclists are supposed to stay at least 0.5m from the kerb, with a recommendation for more distance if possible (rule 72 of the Highway Code). Cars are supposed to keep at least 1.5m away from cyclists when overtaking (rule 163). Taking an average cyclist width of 60cm (some handlebars go much wider than that, as might pannier bags, but let’s use that as an average), that means a single cyclist should have control of ~2.6m of the lane at least.

          Let’s say that the average lane on urban roads in the UK are around 3m wide (an estimate based on a quick google, not a rule), this means a legal overtake of a cyclist should have the car leaving no more than 40cm of the car in the lane. It’s not a big jump from that to moving entirely into the other lane.

          Admittedly almost no one in the UK actually follows these rules, but this is how it’s supposed to be. Given that, adding another cyclist riding abreast shouldn’t affect overtaking time significantly, whereas the two cyclists riding in line will double the amount of time in the oncoming lane.

      • @systonjon
        link
        English
        -11
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • @biddy@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          97 months ago

          it doesn’t actually ever say why they should. It completely ignores that it obviously takes longer to drive across into the other lane and then back than to pass the cyclists

          Because it’s SAFER. Oh my god, have we really got so selfish that a human life is worth like a second.

        • @theplanlessman
          link
          English
          47 months ago

          As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, in the UK (which is where this image seems to be from), the “safe” passing distance for a car overtaking a bike is supposed to be 1.5m. Add that to the 0.5m minimum distance the cyclist is supposed to be from the kerb and the width of the cyclist themselves, and overtaking even a single cyclist should have the car almost entirely in the other lane anyway (UK lanes are typically narrower than their US counterparts).

          Whether anyone actually follows those rules is another question, but that is how motorists are supposed to behave.

          It is also written into our Highway Code that motorists should “give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders and horse drawn vehicles at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car”

    • @AgileLizard@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I disagree since overtaking a cyclist in the same lane is unsafe anyway. In the city I always cycle in the middle of the lane because it prevents unsafe takeovers and dooring.

    • MeanEYE
      link
      fedilink
      English
      117 months ago

      So it’s a bit of a conundrum. Because there are pros and cons in riding abreast.

      On one hand, cyclists are more compact and more visible. On the other filling whole lane would mean drivers behind them would have to time their overtaking. However, car drivers almost never leave enough space when overtaking cyclists and 100% never think about wind that might push them or that cyclist might need more space to avoid potholes and stuff. So being a dick driver is not exclusive to cyclists.

      Traffic law, at least where I live, states when overtaking cyclists driver must leave enough space between him and the cyclist so as to not inconvenience cyclist. Which is vague and not helping one bit. However I think it’s far better to be forced to slow down and time overtaking than not slowing down and flying next to a single lane of cyclists. Because if and when there’s a car coming from opposite direction, car driver won’t care or look twice to move closer to the edge of the road and push others out.

    • @yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      107 months ago

      Where do you see another vehicle “waiting to pass”? There’s absolutely nothing in this picture telling you how much traffic there is, how wide the road is, etc. Nothing.

      What can be seen in the picture, however, is a car that, no matter the speed, is tailgating way too close. Which is a misdemeanor in some countries.

    • @Player2@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      58 months ago

      If cyclists can use the whole lane (common situation in the United States for example), it is (almost always) illegal for a driver to leave their drivable portion of the road to pass someone, bicyclist or otherwise. That includes crossing any lines, going to the opposite side of the road, being on the shoulder or sidewalk, etc.

      Without a separate bicycle lane, it is not permitted to pass a bicyclist.

      • @meowMix2525@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        I’m not sure I’m understanding… as a driver you can legally pass by going into the opposing lane momentarily, as long as the line in the center is dashed (not solid) on your side and there is no oncoming traffic. That’s kind of the whole reason the center line is painted like that, combined with those signs that say “do not pass” and “pass with caution” when the line goes solid and back to dashed.

        • @Player2@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          In that scenario, that would be part of the drivable area yes. However, that is exceedingly rare in the United States at least from my experience in smaller cities/suburbia (east coast). I regularly see people breaking the law by driving on the shoulder to go around someone turning left, and illegally crossing a solid double yellow line to pass a bicyclist.

          • @meowMix2525@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            In my experience in midwest suburbia the center line is almost always dashed unless there’s poor visibility (seeing around a tight curve or over a hill) or more than one lane of traffic in each direction (eliminating the need to overtake in opposing traffic). Or its a pedestrian zone, with reduced speed regardless.

            True, some people break the laws. I don’t see it nearly as often as you claim to, and usually not in especially unsafe conditions, but the point stands that those people are selfish and impatient. I don’t see why bicyclists should have to sacrifice either their freedom (to bike to where they please and utilize existing public infrastructure) or their safety (by leaving the illusion that a full size vehicle might squeeze by at cruising speed) for such people. It’s not bicyclists’ fault that the infrastructure fails to serve all of its users equally.

        • @Player2@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          218 months ago

          If a sign is posted saying ‘Bicyclists may use full lane’ then that lane is now a bicycle lane with cars being allowed on it for some reason. Check your car brain.

        • @biddy@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          147 months ago

          Don’t hate the cyclists, hate the government. We all want separate cycle lanes.

          • @Player2@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            77 months ago

            In my city people are literally protesting new separated bicycle lanes by slashing the tires of rental bikes… Ridiculous

            • @biddy@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              117 months ago

              Some of those same people will then unironically complain about being “stuck behind a cyclist”.

    • ntzm [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      28 months ago

      Wrong, it’s easier and safer to overtake two cyclists abreast because you don’t have to be in the oncoming lane for as long

    • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -47 months ago

      And just so we’re clear, the reason it’s a dick move is the car can move faster than the bike so blocking the car robs the people in the car if its full utility. They’re now forced to go your speed, which is probably less than the speed limit.

      • @Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -97 months ago

        While we’re at it let’s just block emergency vehicles cuz they are even bigger taking up more space. Boo them for not all just havin bycycles and saving on emissions