Cycling club chairman complains of being held up by cyclists riding two abreast

So these cyclists just randomly started giving you the finger (assuming that's what you meant) completely unprovoked? Or were you perhaps sounding your horn at them first, which, of course, would have been an offence in itself?

Oh the irony. The huge queue of impatient drivers builds up behind you regardless of whether there are cyclists on the road or not.

Caravans and the like should move at night during the holiday season to avoid traffic jams. Better still, pay for a hotel.

Caravans should pay road tax.

Mungecrundle wrote:

Caravans should pay road tax.

Owners of caravans probably do pay VED, in all fairness...

Yes, let's do the maths.

Even with a single cyclist 60cm wide riding in the gutter, 0.6 + 1.5 + 2.8 = 4.9, so you'd be 1.9m over the lane marker anyway. That leaves 1.1m for the 1.8m wide cars coming the other way. Math's a bitch.

So motorhome at 2.8m = you need the whole other lane to overtake. Move over.

So that leaves the whole lane clear for the cyclists regardless of whether they be single file or two abreast. Once you are in the other lane it is up to the cyclists how they make use of their lane - just as if you were coming the other way.

How else are you going to overtake?

I think the idea is the cyclists pull over and doff their caps to the gas guzzling, environmentally damaging motor homes.

Well, not quite. If the 2.8m motorhome is in the centre of the 3m far lane, that means they're 0.1m from the centre marking. For that to be a 1.5m pass, the cyclists can't be closer than 1.4m from the centre marking. That leaves 1.6m of lane for them to be in. Take off the 0.6m clearance from the kerb, and to ride two abreast while being passed they'd need to squeeze into 1m of road, which would be a little tight.

If there's a wide load like that behind you, I'd say it is considerate to single out, or even pull over, to let it pass, at a point of your choosing.

I'm still not convinced singling out helps often (if ever). I'm yet to (knowingly) experience a vehicle refrain from overtaking when the opposing lane is completely clear just because the gap left might be slightly less than 1.5m. If the overtaking vehicle is entirely over in the opposing lane, and the speed differential isn't too high (which it rarely is for a wide vehicle) then generally I don't find such overtakes particularly dangerous - certainly no worse than a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction travelling at a much greater relative speed.

As in so many situations, I find it is in fact far safer to be two abreast as this halves the length required to overtake and the overtaking manoeuver can therefore be completed more quickly. I would much rather be two abreast and have the caravan (or whatever) slightly  less than 1.5m away, than single out and have the caravan abort mid-overtake because an oncoming vehicle came around the next corner.

Yes, there are occassionally situations when the only safe and considerate option is to pull over, but those are relatively rare.

All fair. Personally, if something like that came up behind me, I'd be looking to ride fairly central initially, to discourage an overtake until I found a spot where I was happy to let it pass, and then pull over completely, because just moving left I wouldn't trust it to move over enough to pass safely, or not to swing in too early (plus if there's a queue behind it there's a greater chance of a poor overtake from another frustrated driver). If it then attempted to pass before that, it's at least going to be forced to go wider, and I've got room to move left if it starts coming too close.

2.8m wide is not road legal, maximum vehicle width is 2.55m. Most motor homes are 2.3m wide. You must have imagined the problem seeing this is an imaginary vehicle.

My neighbours have an old GMC motorhome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_motorhome

It's abso-f-ing-enormous, but wikipedia still says it's only 2.4 metres wide.

Dhill wrote:

Don’t know why we can’t just be considerate to all. As a bike user, I will pull over to let cars past, when able to. I don’t like being held up by cars being held up by bike riders when I am cycling. This is all a bit tribal, if you are holding up the traffic on your bike, just get out the way.

Mike Drake should be supported in this, well at least I think so. I accept others may not agree, those who insist on riding 2 abreast.

But the point that seems to elude you is that it would not be safe to overtake even if the cyclists were single file. Do you not see the constant stream of traffic in the oncoming lane? Are you suggesting that the chairman crosses the centreline into their path, or that he somehow squeezes by in the lane he's in? Remember, his car is at least 1.8m wide (plus wing mirrors, but they don't hurt too bad), plus 1.5m clearance to a single cyclist, plus the width of the cyclist, plus about 60cm from the kerb. Add it up, a lane just is not that wide!

So at this point your advice is for the cyclists to get off the road to allow the chairman by. Very gracious.

As it is they are doing the best they can; by bunching up two abreast they increase his opportunity to find a break in the oncoming traffic long enough to overtake safely on the other side.

Yes, proves the sense of riding two abreast in the circumstances.

All this shows is that cars are like a magic trick. You can take a cyclist and put them into a steel box and turn them into an asshole…

Why?

I'm sorry to read you had a tiff with your lover. I hope you sort it out soon.

Hmm, social distancing slighly plus also giving room for the one gutter cycling to move in or out easily.TBH, it only looks bad because the one in secondary is probably too close to the curb.

Sometime I will share the footage from my tandem ride with 6y.o. on the back, as a delightful woman yells abuse from the passenger window at us as they pass, merely for our temerity to be on the road.

Sadly, for some people it is simply the existence of cyclists that is the problem, regardless of what they do or don't do.

I wish that when they did the driving test they hammered home that roads are a public right of way, and that they were originally built for any road user. Car drivers seem to think they were built for them because they need the signage and road furniture. I don't think it helps to dissuade this notion that there are pavements and cycle lanes because it reinforces the idea that the road is for them only. Roads are for all.