To quote from another thread "The one question I will ask why is your journey more important then theirs?"
Mine was not important at all, but after coming round a corner at 40mph (road was NSL, so was well under the limit) and finding a cyclist out of his saddle peddling like mad and weaving all over the road it was time to hit the anchors or hit him!!!! Also a car coming the other way was overtaking a bike and came right over to my side of the road making life a bit more interesting for a while.
Are the riders even insured? Even a scooter/moped needs 3rd party cover to be on the road and many of them go slower then these road racing push bikes.
|
Less of the "Push-bike" if you don't mind. Mine is worth twice as much as my car.
|
|
It was better then what it could have been called ;o)
|
|
|
|
|
TU: do you often drive expecting a completely clear road, where you can't see round the corner? Admittedly we all make errors of observation, but that doesn't mean its the fault of the cyclist/broken down car/hay cart, unless you feel that no-one other than motorists have the right to use the highway. BTW, most cyclists are insured, via household and other policies, quite cheaply. But many motorists are not.
|
I was not expecting a clear road, in fact, quite the opposite. As I had seen other bikes coming the other way I was already half expecting something, hence only doing 40mph. Having said that, being confronted by a cyclops "winking" at me whilst snaking from side to side taking up most of the single carriageway doing no more then 10mph was not what I was really expecting.
And a hay cart or broken down vehicle are far larger and easier to spot then a cyclist!!
|
|
|
|
If you had to hit the anchors or a fast moving cyclist then you were lucky he wasn't a stalled truck. Always be ready to stop in the length of road you can see.
As a touring/utility cyclist I am insured as a via membership of the CTC. I'd guess that any reputable competition would be require competitors to be inusred through the BCF or similar.
Their insurance likely includes cover to pursue errant motorists who hit them from behind!!
|
|
|
...after coming round a corner at 40mph (road was NSL so was well under the limit) and finding a cyclist out of his saddle peddling like mad and weaving all over the road it was time to hit the anchors or hit him!!!! Also a car coming the other way was overtaking a bike and came right over to my side of the road making life a bit more interesting for a while.
Sounds as if the car drivers were the problem in both cases, not the cyclists.
I cannot understand why drivers can't wait to give a cyclist proper room, i.e. use the opposite side of the road as they would to overtake a car, and not assume that they should shove their way by regardless. And being below the speed limit does not excuse rounding a blind corner too fast :-0
I learned a long time ago that the safest way to occupy the road on a bike is in the middle of the lane - I have been brushed more than once by a door mirror when riding in the gutter with nowhere to go.
Edited by Manatee on 03/02/2008 at 22:31
|
If I had been too fast for the conditions then I no doubt would have hit the cyclist!!!!
TBH, I could not really give two hoots if they are there or not, it held me up for no more then 2 minutes, and I am never in that much of a hurry that 2 minutes matters - But it does surprise me that people actually want to take their life in their own hands in such a way!!! I mean why not just go bungee jumping or something, why risk your life cycling on a road that was particularly unsuitable for this type of event - I would have thought a nice wide dual carriageway with nice big hard shoulders would be better and safer for all concerned!!!!
|
|
|
I learned a long time ago that the safest way to occupy the road on a bike is in the middle of the lane -
When you pay road tax on your bike for using ALL the lane you can do that, till then use the bit of road you pay for IE Not much
|
AE
When you come out from under the bridge you'll recall that the "Road Fund" was abolished by chancellor Churchill c1920. :-)
Cyclists pay for the roads through general taxation just lke everybody else.
|
Cyclists pay for the roads through general taxation just lke everybody else.
>>
While used to road race and support the rights of cyclists etc I dont accept that point because the motorist's tax burden is far in excess of anything that is ever spent in anything to do with transport yet alone the roads themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
'"The one question I will ask why is your journey more important then theirs?"
But they are not making a journey. They are using the public road to play on for their own amusement.
|
|
|
after coming round a corner at 40mph (road was NSL so was well under the limit) and finding a cyclist out of his saddle peddling like mad and weaving all over the road it was time to hit the anchors or hit him!!!!
I should hope so too - just as if there was someone crossing the road, someone on a horse, in a disability buggy, etc.
Are the riders even insured? Even a scooter/moped needs 3rd party cover to be on the road and many of them go slower then these road racing push bikes.
They have no need to be insured. That's part of the burden of resopnsibility that must be shouldered by the motorised road user.
|
|
|
|
A cyclist taking part in a time trial (As has already been intimated here) may be more interested in completing their journey quickly rather than taking as much care passing pedestrians, horseriders or even other motorists on the road.
The OP's journey may have been no more important than the cyclists but as he wasn't taking part in a time trial he may have been taking more care over his journey and his manner of driving. Most motorists who want a competitive blat will take part in a track day safely away from other road users who just want to get from A to B. The OP was also (I assume) taxed, insured and identifiable to the authorities before he left the driveway.
Why cant cyclist book a track? The Marshalls come as part of the package.
|
A cyclist taking part in a competitive event is covered by the governing bodies insurance, has a race number which will identify him to the organisers and is bound by the rules of The Highway code and the Road Traffic Act. Breaches incur a much heavier penalty from the governing body that a driver would get from the courts, for example six months ban for crossing a white line. He will most likely also be a motorist and paying VED like all of us.
A motorist may well be distracted by using his mobile phone, reading his sat-nav and driving like a prat, but we are prepared to put up with that.
|
Well it is a public highway and cyclists are members of the public...?
But hey, getting away from that I do all assume we believe in sport as a motivator to our young (don't want 'em hanging round on street corners), as a means to encourage fitness in a growingly obese society (don't want to waste NHS cash on obesity pills) and we do all enjoy GB winning medals at Olympics and World Champioships (cycling has provided a large number of Olympic medals)
|
|
So does sailing, but I don't see them racing in the shipping channels of the Dover straights!!!!
|
Can't fault logic like that...????
Edited by jmaccyd on 03/02/2008 at 22:24
|
|
|
|
road use should include give and take, not just take????
|
>>>>.road use should include give and take, not just take???? <<<<
What an excellent idea, now all we have to do is take this logic over to the HGV thread and watch them pull it to pieces!!!
Should they be allowed? yes, of course they should, the sight of all that Lycra does any female HGV driver the world of good.
Pat
|
I used to time trial and hill climb in my teens, nearly 30 years ago!
In those days both, where the riders start a minute apart, were easy for the club to organise however a mass start road race required road closures, policing etc.
|
|
Why do some car drivers think they have any more right to use the road above other users.
|
Might be something to do with the vast amount of tax they contribute in order to use the roads..you know, road tax, fuel duty, tax on motor insurance.
Don't see many tax discs stuck to push bikes, horses, skateboards.
|
|
None of that goes to roads they are paid for by everyone out of general taxation anything a motorist pays is to repair the damage they do which cyclists don't.
|
|
Please, not that old saw about roads being paid out of general taxation and RFL now being VED. Whatever the government changes the name to it was set up to pay for the road and a name change does not alter that, the car driver pays much more in taxation than the road building/repairs cost.
|
|
"Roads" includes maintaining them, and other societal costs, so the net effect is that motorists do no cover the whole costs, by any means. In fact, the motorised road user is subsidised:)
|
Roads have been mostly funded out of general taxation since the end of the turnpikes 130 or so years ago.
Roads for horse drawn traffic, most of which was relatively local after the advent of the railways, became increasingly inadequate when motor traffic grew rapidly in the early 20th century. Massive improvements were required, and it was thought unreasonable for the cost to fall on the counties. The so called Road Fund, on a levy on vehicles with the cash earmarked for roads, was introduced in response.
It lasted only a few years, Winston Churchill abolished the road fund - but kept the tax - shortly after WW1.
Since then MVL duty is an impost on the pleasure and convenience of car ownership. No more reason for it to be dedicated to the roads then for beer duty to be spent on developing pubs!!
|
None of that goes to roads they are paid for by everyone out of general taxation anything a motorist pays is to repair the damage they do which cyclists don't.
Its nothing do with just repairing the roads. The roads are of such good quality, and so many new ones becuase of cars. NOT bikes.
If we all still only had bikes there would be no roads
The muddy track is for horses and ramblers, the pavement is for people, the road is for Cars and the gutter is for bikes. So stay there!
|
|
|
|
|
