Is it a cyclist's right to take the lane?

[Martin]

the last very close overtake I had was on Ditchling Beacon; I was hardly taking the lane there as it's unreasonable to expect a car to wait 15mins while I grind up the bastard so I was in my usual 1m from the edge. Did that stop some tw@t overtaking me on a bend and nearly going head on into a car coming downhill in the opposite direction? this literally happends all the time locally; it seems to me that they are going to sail past you whatever so you might as well be out of harms way (with enough room to escape when they come really close which they also do)

sorry rights and wrongs is one thing but I lost the will to do battle with these twunts years ago. The biggest offenders are 4x4s and those stupid Nissan half pick-ups; I assume because a) they steer like a cow b) it costs them 50p a time in go juice to decelerate to safe overtaking spped and then floor it.

[Wendy]

the last very close overtake I had was on Ditchling Beacon; I was hardly taking the lane there as it's unreasonable to expect a car to wait 15mins while I grind up the bastard so I was in my usual 1m from the edge. Did that stop some tw@t overtaking me on a bend and nearly going head on into a car coming downhill in the opposite direction? this literally happends all the time locally; it seems to me that they are going to sail past you whatever so you might as well be out of harms way (with enough room to escape when they come really close which they also do)

sorry rights and wrongs is one thing but I lost the will to do battle with these twunts years ago. The biggest offenders are 4x4s and those stupid Nissan half pick-ups; I assume because a) they steer like a cow b) it costs them 50p a time in go juice to decelerate to safe overtaking spped and then floor it.

Did you realise that 1m in some situations is taking up more of the lane than Cyclecraft recommends?  I imagine your judgement of 1m from the edge is probably spot on there, it's been a while since I've been up that hill.

My point again - your riding is IMO very good, and largely top quality cyclecraft from the little I saw of it.  I've noticed before that sometimes people get very down on Cyclecraft, when it's not much different from what most experienced cyclists do most of the time.  It seems to be more of a perception issue than anything else, IMO.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I don't believe we have any right to deliberately obstruct them to prevent that happening.

So if a motorist is doing 25mph in a 30 zone and a queue of cars builds up behind him, do you expect him to pull over and let them pass? (Has this ever happened in the history of motoring?) If not, why would you expect a cyclist to do so? Anyway, it's not a deliberate obstruction, we're just trying to make our way in the safest possible way.

This is precisely what I was instructed to do when I was taking my motorcycle test. In fact, the example given was that even if you're doing 30 in a 30 zone and someone comes up doing 50, you should let them pass when safe to do so, even though their speed is illegal. I think the advice has changed since then, and as to whether anyone put it into practice other than when taking a test, I don't know.

[Charlotte]

Every weekday morning, when I cycle into work, I go over a bloody great big hill.  It's a narrow carriageway and on the brow of the hill, the road bends to the left.  It is quite possibly the worst place that you could attempt to overtake a cyclist for miles around.  As I climb this hill, I keep my position just under a metre from the near side of the road.  I'm not going fast because I'm going up a hill, so traffic often overtakes me.

But when I get within sight of the top of the hill, I move out to a commanding position in the road.  I do this not to piss off the people driving vehicles behind me, but because if I don't, my own safety is about to be massively compromised.

On the occasions I've stayed closer to the side of the road, vehicles have almost always attempted to overtake me, despite needing to move out into the path of oncoming traffic which can't be seen until it's too late.  I've been in the position of having an overtaking vehicle swinging back towards me when they realise that they're about to colide with an oncoming car and it's terrifying.

So now, I accept that I'm not going to be able to account for idiots who chose to an attempt an unsafe overtake and I ride wide.  This isn't delaying anyone's journey any more than if I rode closer to the nearside of the road and the cars behind me drove safely and didn't overtake.

So if someone thinks I'm unnecessarily delaying their journey for a minute or so, my general feeling about the matter is as follows: Fuck'em.

[Gandalf]

Thank you Charlotte for saying what I felt like saying.

Pound to a pinch of sh1t you overtake them further up the road anyway, be it at the next set of lights, queue or whatever.

[mattc]

I am getting the impression (no statistics, unfortunately) that there is an increasing number of cyclists hit from behind, with serious or fatal consequences. Whilst I doubt many are deliberate, my work with CDF suggests justice is not done in a significant number of cases. Taking the lane might not be all it's cracked to be.

But most cyclists hit from behind could have been riding near the left side of the road, for all we know without stats.  That's what I would expect.

In every case I've read, the driver claimed 'SMIDSY!' . So I would suggest that making ourselves more prominent is validated by Helly's vague observation.

How many people do we know that would choose to kill a complete stranger with their car? Sure, they exist, but this is like worrying about axe murderers, or the next bird flu. Or the next terrorist attack.

[nickp]

So if someone thinks I'm unnecessarily delaying their journey for a minute or so, my general feeling about the matter is as follows: Fuck'em.

Yes agreed - my safety vs their convenience: no contest.

This is all about negotiating road position. Negotiations, like changing road position, can be subtle or, er, not. Depends on the circumstances. A shoulder check and a slight drift outwards is sometimes enough of a clue for cars on your back wheel. Not always though ...

I usually give a thumbs up and beckon cars past if they've hung back and behaved themselves. Sometimes I even point at the pothole I'm trying to avoid to explain what I'm doing, and sometimes it works!

[the snail]

my safety
your safety
my convenience
your convenience

wouldn't the road be a better/safer place if it was

your safety
my safety
your convenience
my convenience

[hatler]

my safety
your safety
my convenience
your convenience

wouldn't the road be a better/safer place if it was

your safety
my safety
your convenience
my convenience

I suspect not. Most people have a pretty good mechanism that keeps them safe regardless. If I were to wander the roads looking out for everyone else's safety, there wouldn't be any bugger at all looking after mine with, most likely, some rather unpleasant consequences for me.

[mattc]

If
your convenience

was our priority - car driver OR cyclist - we would simply stay off the roads!

[EdinburghFixed]

I wouldn't cycle if it was not possible to check following traffic using my position in the road - that's how fundamental I think it is.

I suppose the retort would be, "well, you shouldn't cycle then" - tough 

[teethgrinder]

I don't believe we have any right to deliberately obstruct them to prevent that happening.

So if a motorist is doing 25mph in a 30 zone and a queue of cars builds up behind him, do you expect him to pull over and let them pass? (Has this ever happened in the history of motoring?) If not, why would you expect a cyclist to do so? Anyway, it's not a deliberate obstruction, we're just trying to make our way in the safest possible way.

This is precisely what I was instructed to do when I was taking my motorcycle test. In fact, the example given was that even if you're doing 30 in a 30 zone and someone comes up doing 50, you should let them pass when safe to do so, even though their speed is illegal. I think the advice has changed since then, and as to whether anyone put it into practice other than when taking a test, I don't know.

There are signs on the single track lanes, that are A roads in the far north west of Scotland, which say that you should pull in to allow other vehicles to overtake.
I think it is correct to say that everyone is obliged not to hold up any other traffic and at the very least, it's inconsiderate to hinder people unnecessarily.
But yes, cyclists, just like any other road users, have the right to use whichever bit of the road is appropriate. I ride on every part of the left hand side of the road, from on the dotted white centre line, to the left of the solid line right in the gutter. Where I ride all depends on different things. I couldn't tell anyone which bit of the road is best for them to ride on. Every situation is different.
I do try to have a presence on the road (Great big panniers seem to help). I often ride very wide, but move in if someone is coming up to overtake, so most of the time, I'm riding wherever I like on the road. It all depends though. I wouldn't ride in the centre of the left hand lane of the A303 in the rush hour. In fact, I avoid that road in the daytime. But at night, I'd generally ride in the middle of the left hand lane until something comes up to overtake. So even the same road at the same speeds can be very different.
On a very busy, but very wide road, like the A17, I ride well into the gutter. It's a single carriageway road, but is easilyas wide as a dual carriageway. Most of the cars, trucks and motorbikes stay almost in the middle of the lane, which means that they pass me with plenty of room without even having to steer around me.

[Rhys W]

So now, I accept that I'm not going to be able to account for idiots who chose to an attempt an unsafe overtake and I ride wide.  This isn't delaying anyone's journey any more than if I rode closer to the nearside of the road and the cars behind me drove safely and didn't overtake.

So if someone thinks I'm unnecessarily delaying their journey for a minute or so, my general feeling about the matter is as follows: Fuck'em.

I agree with this in general, and practice it. However, I can think of many instances when I've taken the lane deliberately and assertively (after checking behind to see what's behind), only to be almost mown down by an idiot who thinks he can scare me out of the way.

9 times out of 10, it works and nobody gets wound up, but one of these days I'm going to be run over by someone who thinks bikes shouldn't be on the road.

[mattc]

@Rhys: we've done this already:

How many people do we know that would choose to kill a complete stranger with their car? Sure, they exist, but this is like worrying about axe murderers, or the next bird flu. Or the next terrorist attack.

You're far more at risk from the dope that hits you by accident cos he thought there was room to squeeze past.

[Biggsy]

I'm sure it would be super-rare for a driver to deliberately hit you from behind without a warning first.  When you hear the horn, you can make a judgement and decide whether to continue taking the lane or give in and pull over.  Base the decision on the speed and surroundings, any other signs of aggression, what the driver and car looks like, and just your intuition.  Of course don't be too bloody minded because you've got no chance if he/she really does want to get you.

Personally so far I've just always continued, after making a flat-palm gesture, but so far I haven't had to continue for more than a few tens of seconds like this anyway.  If it goes on for more than a minute then you better get out of the way.  Lose the argument but save your life.

[Cudzoziemiec]

The danger of being hit from behind while taking the lane comes from a driver underestimating the speed difference, overestimating their braking or assuming that you will jump to the verge at the last second. It is a danger that exists but it's probably less than that of, say, having your bars hooked by someone's mirrors, and it's not homicidal maniacs.

[mattc]

The danger of being hit from behind while taking the lane comes from a driver underestimating the speed difference, overestimating their braking or assuming that you will jump to the verge at the last second. It is a danger that exists ...

Scaremongering bollox. Do you have any evidence?

Collisions occur at junctions, then occasionally when vehicles overtake each other. You're imagining a risk that is practically zero.

[Biggsy]

^ I would have thought that's very rare too.  Not something I worry about.

However, braking hard suddenly can get you hit from behind - and this has happened to me - but it can happen regardless of your position on the lane.

[Cudzoziemiec]

The danger of being hit from behind while taking the lane comes from a driver underestimating the speed difference, overestimating their braking or assuming that you will jump to the verge at the last second. It is a danger that exists ...

Scaremongering bollox. Do you have any evidence?

Collisions occur at junctions, then occasionally when vehicles overtake each other. You're imagining a risk that is practically zero.

Did I say it was common? I was pointing out that if it happens, it's by accident not by intention.

but it's probably less than that of, say, having your bars hooked by someone's mirrors, and it's not homicidal maniacs.

[mattc]

It's so uncommon that there is NO POINT mentioning it. Except to generate fear.



... unseen potholes, bee stings,  urine icicles, stray dogs running out, badly driven emergency vehicles ...


oh my god we're all going to die, get off the roads, or buy  a Humvee !!!

[Biggsy]

I agree with you Matt, but take a chill pill, mate. 

[mrcharly-YHT]

Blimey, this is getting a bit heated.

Being run down from behind is a bit rare, but yes it happens. That army chap, run down by a lorry comes to mind. ISTR a TT rider being run down. There have been others.

It's not something I particularly worry about tho'.

[Wendy]

This is a pretty amazing video of a cyclist in the US getting the horn:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/kG3MFebtemM&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/kG3MFebtemM&rel=1</a>

[Cudzoziemiec]

It's so uncommon that there is NO POINT mentioning it. Except to generate fear.



... unseen potholes, bee stings,  urine icicles, stray dogs running out, badly driven emergency vehicles ...


oh my god we're all going to die, get off the roads, or buy  a Humvee !!!

Time for second breakfast?

[mattc]

I agree with you Matt, but take a chill pill, mate. 

no I won't. There are real threats to our lives everywhere. To ignore them is to risk really nasty death.

... swine flu, nuclear war, cancer of organ X, earthquakes, banging your head in the bathroom, cancer of organ Y, falling down the stairs when noone else is home,  zombie hordes ...

Why aren't you all panicking?!? You could die any minute !!!