I have had too many close calls on rural roads coming around a blind corner at 50km/hr only to find an arrogant group of the above mentioned lycra clad “social” wannabes riding 2-4 abreast at 15km/hr

What would happen if a car driver came around the same corner and found an ambulance officer attending a fallen motorcyclist in the middle of the road?

At least the cyclists are moving away at 15km/hr, whereas the ambulance officer would be staionary.

Car drivers (yes, I am one) need to realise that their vehicle is just as dangerous as a gun. There is no road rule that says a car driver is somehow more important than a cyclist. Let alone two cyclists riding side by side.

Perhaps the whole arrogant anti-cyclist mentality has it’s roots in the law that says two cyclists abreast is less important than a single car driver. Two people more important than one??

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

Last time I read the relevant piece of law, and I don’t promise that it was New Zealand law, it said that:
– on an unlaned road, you had to drive so as to stop in half the distance you could see
– on a laned road, you had to drive so as to stop in the distance you could see

It sounds like you were complying with the law, but only just.

Yes, I know that no night driver on an unlit open road, with dipped lights and oncoming traffic complies.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I’m a car driver and occasional (recreational) cyclist (not one of the arrogant Lance Armstrong/Spiderman-wannabe lyrca-wearing nobs). My cycling is confined to cycle paths and the rural road I live on near Nelson. As a cyclist, I am acutely aware of cars and ALWAYS move to the shoulder whenever I hear a car coming. If riding with my girlfriend, when we hear a car approaching, we NEVER continue to ride two abreast, and immediately move to the shoulder and ride single file until the car has passed. We do this out of common curtesy, safety, and self preservation. “Curtesy and safety” because at the lesurely pace we ride at (10-20km/hr), cars are going to have to pass us, and we don’t want to have to force them out into the other lane. As a driver, I have had too many close calls on rural roads coming around a blind corner at 50km/hr only to find an arrogant group of the above mentioned lycra clad “social” wannabes riding 2-4 abreast at 15km/hr. In one case there was a large dump truck in the on-coming lane and I only avoided running down the whole lot of idiots by going into a full panic stop (luckily I have antilocking brakes and the road was good seal). This was totally irresponsible behavior and I was obeying the posted speed limit and “driving to the conditions.” Arrogance and irresponsible behavior by some cyclists is definitely causing car driver road rage and anticycle behavior. The law which allows cyclists to legaly ride 2 abreast on narrow roads is unsafe. If cyclists what to “chat” with each other while riding, they should buy cheap two-way radios fit them in their helmets with boom mikes, ride singel file, and not endanger themselves and car drivers.

Like or Dislike: 0  1 (-1)

Su Yin said “@greengeek: Here is my example of a silly cycle lane (with a signpost in the middle) terminating dangerously, …”

To comply with international practice cycle lanes should terminate 100 metres before any signalised intersection and the cyclelane should abut the carriageway at a 45 degree angle so that cyclists can easily check that the way is clear and motorists can more easily see cyclists prior to the merge manuevre.

From SUNflower+6 – An extended study of the development of road safety in
Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands.
SWOV research in the 1980s showed that cycle paths along urban through roads were
safer for cyclists than cycle lanes, and that cycle lanes were less safe than no bicycle
facilities (i.e. cyclists on the carriageway). In the same research it was also found that on
through-roads intersections, paths were less safe for cyclists than separate lanes or no
facilities. This led to the recommendation to terminate (truncate) cycle paths some distance
from an intersection. These results were completely different for mopedists, which resulted
in the recommendation for the ‘moped on the carriageway’ measure in 1999.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Try
http://www.theage.com.au/national/transport-revolution-to-get-city-moving-20100206-njxf.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Nice Little article in the Melbourne age as to Victoria’s new stratergy for Raod congestion…

VicRoads warns that unless innovative action is taken, population and economic growth will cripple the city’s road network within a decade.

”Maintaining the road quality and adding capacity by building new roads is reaching the limits of affordability, practicability and political acceptability,” the report says.

”Into the future, Melbourne’s road network cannot hope to cope with ever-increasing demands from a range of users. A more active approach to allocating priority is needed that separates … many of the conflicts by route, place and time of day.”

The plan, expected to be released by the government this month, centres on the creation of a ”road use hierarchy” that gives priority to cars, cyclists, pedestrians and public transport at different times of the day to improve travel times.

…>http://www.theage.com.au/national/transport-revolution-to-get-city-moving-20100206-njxf.html

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

You should visit Japan.
I spend a month there every year.
Took a moutain bike one year.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Genji, that’s complicated. May I recommend “The Enigma of Japanese Power” by Karol van Wolferen?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

In Tokyo cyclists have to use footpaths, where they exist. Difference is that Japanese motorists are incredibly courteous to all road users. You don’t have to arrogant to succeed. Japan is and has been for some time the second largest economy on the planet. And did I mention Honesty, Crime, Rapes, Murder. We sure can learn a lot from Japanese way of life.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Would it not be better to have cyclists on the footpath?

genji, here you go, start an import and distribution company.

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/242949747/bicycle_airless_inner_tire_tube.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The cost to cyclists of having to repair frequent punctures caused by motorists throwing empty beer bottles onto roads should also be taken into account.
Since virtual nationwide liquer bans have been introduced, most drinking is done in moving vehicles. Thus empty bottles are heaved out to break and produce tiny shards which cause ultra thin nylon tyres to flatten.
Does anyone know where I can get solid rubber tyres.
Also can I get a rebate on the fuel tax I don’t pay when I use my bike, and offset that against my use of footpaths instead of broken beer bottle filled gutters – which is where most motorists prefer I ride.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Alan – thats a very good point that many cyclists will be happy to co-exist slowly with pedestrians.

My own preference is to focus on acceptance of electric bikes as commuter tools, which means co-existence with cars, rather than risking co-existence with foot traffic.

Really there are very few opportunities for cyclists of any description to go about their business without suffering conflict with other traffic (be it foot traffic or road traffic).

I think there is so much that can be done to use reserves and public parks etc, as well as encouraging requirements in new subdivisions to facilitate a broader uptake of cycling.

It’s good for tourism, good for energy use, good for health, good for air quality and good for bringing back a slower form of living – I think we’ve lost something by constantly being on the treadmill.

Like or Dislike: 2  0 (+2)

Like or Dislike: 3  0 (+3)

Like or Dislike: 3  0 (+3)

There’s also the current (LTSA – can’t remember and too late to go linky searching) estimate of $2-4 BENEFIT per cyclist per Km. That, combined with my taxes, AND the fact that I also own a car and therefore pay road tax anyway seems to cover all bases.

Like or Dislike: 2  0 (+2)

Like or Dislike: 5  0 (+5)

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Like or Dislike: 0  11 (-11)

Not a lot of point taxing cycles when you consider the difference in weight, damage and killing power between cars and bikes.

Like or Dislike: 2  0 (+2)

- “Where’s my cycle lane, dammit?”

Where’s the cyclist road tax, dammit?

Like or Dislike: 1  7 (-6)

gsv_nfa – that “Strict Liability” link was a real eye opener.

Kind of makes you wonder why one single person sitting comfortably inside a 1 ton sardine tin on wheels is considered more important and worthy of protection than one single person saving the planet by riding a bike.

It’s a no-brainer really – the car is a killing machine unless you give the cyclists road priority.

Why should a gun user who kills someone get a harsher penalty than a car user who kills someone??

There has to be a move to make car drivers face the danger they cause for other people.

Like or Dislike: 2  0 (+2)