Are we really that provocative?

[Trigress]

Yesterday we were out riding with the club, and on our way back we were only four, riding in two pairs, fairly close. Should think it would be easy to pass us, but obviously not. Approaching junction there was a physical barrier between the lanes, and a car behind us used his horn at us. So we rode as far right as we could. Because of the junction the road was broader, so he passed us easily. Needless to say, he had plenty of space, so he passed us a little closer than necessary (don't they always?). Having passed us, and another few cars about to follow, he skids to a halt, right in front of four cyclists and two other cars!:eek: Fortunately there had been a little gap in our peloton, so we didn't bump into each other, but I was seriously worried that if we passed him, the passenger would smash the door into us. Then he yelled at us, apparently for not using the pedestrian lane (where the speed limit is walking speed), and for being two next to each other. He obvioously hadn't thought of the dangers he exposed us and the other cars to by braking violently like that.:mad: He drove a nice car, almost a pity he didn't get a cyclist on the roof, I would've liked to see the scratches a bike would've made. :cool:

Where does all this aggression come from?! I just don't get it. It was a quiet Sunday, there was little traffic, and we behaved predictably until he stopped. I'm just glad we didn't have a tight peloton, a friend of mine was in a tight peloton practising team time trial when a car drove out in front of them. 16 cyclist in a mess crash, hitting the car in 50kmh (30mph?). My friend's aluminium De Rosa broke in two, and he was perhaps number 10 in the row, just imagine what the impact must've been like in for the two first.

[lph]

That sucks, Trigress. Glad nobody was hurt, that certainly isn't always the case when drivers behave like that.

IMO there's only one thing to do with drivers like that - get the license plate no. and report them to the police. When they act that aggressively NO amount of arguing, pleading, cajoling or threatening will make them see differently, not at the moment at any rate. He'd made up his mind that you were in his way, and were deliberately provoking him, and he felt entitled to "get back" at you. There's an amazing amount of drivers who feel this way, and who are completely clueless as to the very real danger they put cyclists in. They just don't get it, that a cyclist can be killed by just being bumped "gently" by a car, or seriously hurt by hitting the pavement.

More normal drivers seem to respond to cyclists acting responsibly, moving to the side when they can, respecting red lights, waving a car past when possible, but drivers prepared to brake in front of a pack just couldn't care less. They just see red whenever they see anything that looks like a cyclist on "their" road. Funny thing is - you wouldn't see them doing the same thing to a slow-moving tractor... oh, that's right, that would make THEM the weak party. :mad:

[Trigress]

I agree with you lph, there really isn't much point talking to them. Do you have any experience with reporting drivers like that though? Do they care? What can they do?

Where do you normally ride with Ceres? You probably know, but the drivers in Enebakk are notoriously bad, so stay away if you can. I live at Bogerud, so in order to get to Follo and Østfold I either have to cope with Enebakk or to cross Nordstrand, and the hills to Nordstrand isn't always particularly tempting on my way home.

By the way, lph, what is "rulle" in English? I've thought that might be a word that might come in handy on this forum at some point, but my dictionary seriously sucks when it comes to cycle vocabulary! Fish types on the other hand..

[kat_h]

Where does all this aggression come from?!

It comes from life. Some people are just angry and is has nothing to do with you or your bike. I meet them at work, in the grocery store, everywhere. All you can do is try to avoid being hurt physically by them, then feel sorry for them because they don't enjoy life.

[Trigress]

You're probably right, Kat. It's just that I'd say I have a lot of temper as well, but maybe I just have enough sense to realise that my temper is my problem, and hence I'd better not pester other people with it... :)

[lph]

No, I've never reported anyone to the police, but if I were subject to someone trying to endanger a whole group I sure would like to. Most close calls with drivers I've been on my own on a mtb, which makes it easier to just go hopping off the road...

Ceres meets at Kjeller and rides northwards, not much traffic there and we rarely feel harassed.

"Rulle" - I don't know :o Paceline?

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

Though I disagree with how the driver handled the situation, I must say that we NEVER ride 2 abreast if there is traffic sharing our lane and having to pass us periodically. A car can safely pass one bike while still staying in the lane if the bike is reasonably near the right white line in the lane. But a car cannot safely pass two bike abreast without officially going into another lane to get around them. Is there a real reason you need to ride two across and make everyone go into another lane in order to pass you? It seems to me it is creating unnecessary hazard for everyone, cars and bikes.
We have a friend who rides with us sometimes and he likes to chat and ride two abreast while cars lag behind us getting impatient and waiting for an opportunity to pass. After several nerve rattling and unsafe experiences while he blithely ignored the cars coming up behind us, we told our friend that if he wants to ride with us then he can only ride two across if there are NO cars at all behind us. If there are cars coming up, then it's single file or nothing.

On the other hand, we are big fans of taking the whole lane when we are approaching an intersection in order to be safe, be more visible, and to make it clear to all cars our turning intentions at the intersection.

[Tuckervill]

There's a 3-feet law here, so most cars DO have to go into the other lane to pass, and still maintain the 3 feet clearance, even if we're on the edge.


I really appreciate when they do go into the other lane to avoid me!

Karen

[mimitabby]

perhaps the driver was an american?

we routinely get yelled at for riding single file down the side of the road
"GET OFF THE ROAD!"

" RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK!"

[Trigress]

Is there a real reason you need to ride two across and make everyone go into another lane in order to pass you?

Mainly in order to be more visible. Most roads here are so narrow that in order to pass safely the driver needs to use the other lane anyway, and with lots of curves it's certainly not an easy question whether it's better to ride two abreast and shorten the peloton or to ride one by one and stretch it through the curve. Often it's more dangerous for us if we're only one and then the driver gets encouraged to pass with a foot clearing, if we're two at least they see us.

We tend to stretch out one by one if the road really is broad enough to pass safely even with oncoming traffic.

[lph]

I think all the clubs here reckon two abreast as the safest way to move, as the cars have to treat the group like another car and not like some annoying narrow obstruction they could probably squeeze by.

But when there's a lot of traffic we split up into groups of max ten or so, i.e. 5 pairs, which isn't hard for a car to pass if the opposite lane is clear.

[Zen]

When I first read the post heading I thought you were having trouble with men harassing you :o

[Eden]

Though I disagree with how the driver handled the situation, I must say that we NEVER ride 2 abreast if there is traffic sharing our lane and having to pass us periodically. A car can safely pass one bike while still staying in the lane if the bike is reasonably near the right white line in the lane. But a car cannot safely pass two bike abreast without officially going into another lane to get around them. Is there a real reason you need to ride two across and make everyone go into another lane in order to pass you? It seems to me it is creating unnecessary hazard for everyone, cars and bikes.

I respectfully disagree with you. At least out here (perhaps our lanes are more narrow than yours) If there isn't space to pass two riders safely there very likely isn't the space to pass one safely either without changing lanes or crossing the center line. Unless there is a very wide shoulder (which is rare here) I find it best to ride, even when alone, in a position that requires cars move over to pass, otherwise they will pass me with inches to spare rather than the 3 feet that is safe. If they have to move over they tend to pass much more safely. Our lanes just are not wide enough to accommodate both vehicles at one time, so why tempt someone to try it. You should never put motorists convenience ahead of your own safety. There are even a few places that I will not allow a car to pass me (a very narrow one lane each way road on my way to work with a planted divider in the middle)- they are very short stretches and the drivers will survive the extra 10 or 20 seconds added to their trip.

[kelownagirl]

Though I disagree with how the driver handled the situation, I must say that we NEVER ride 2 abreast if there is traffic sharing our lane and having to pass us periodically. A car can safely pass one bike while still staying in the lane if the bike is reasonably near the right white line in the lane. But a car cannot safely pass two bike abreast without officially going into another lane to get around them. Is there a real reason you need to ride two across and make everyone go into another lane in order to pass you? It seems to me it is creating unnecessary hazard for everyone, cars and bikes.
We have a friend who rides with us sometimes and he likes to chat and ride two abreast while cars lag behind us getting impatient and waiting for an opportunity to pass. After several nerve rattling and unsafe experiences while he blithely ignored the cars coming up behind us, we told our friend that if he wants to ride with us then he can only ride two across if there are NO cars at all behind us. If there are cars coming up, then it's single file or nothing.

On the other hand, we are big fans of taking the whole lane when we are approaching an intersection in order to be safe, be more visible, and to make it clear to all cars our turning intentions at the intersection.


I agree, same rule here, even when we're on a club ride. We must go to single file even with 30 people. if there's a car back and the space is tight (ie a median)

[Trigress]

When I first read the post heading I thought you were having trouble with men harassing you :o

:D

Well, sort of - the driver was indeed male!

As lph said, it's safer on these narrow roads to always ride two abreast: the rule is that cars should only overtake when the oncoming lane is empty, so it shouldn't really be much of a difference to the drivers. And two abreast means shorter and more visible peloton. That said, on American roads I think I'd support one at the time - you really di have much better roads.

[Tuckervill]

It's a good point...if bikes are vehicles (and in Arkansas, they are), then it's unsafe to pass anything without going into the next lane. That means drivers have to wait until the the other lane is clear of oncoming vehicles and they can see far enough ahead to determine that. It doesn't always make sense for cars to wait for there to be a single yellow line, but technically, they're supposed to. (I pass tractors all the time on double yellow, if I can see ahead and it's moving slow enough.)

Karen

[OakLeaf]

In most states, it's only forbidden to cross the double yellow to pass another "motor vehicle" (which excludes farm equipment and horse-drawn buggies as well as bicycles). Vehicles in the road that are not defined as "motor vehicles" by state law are considered "obstructions" (more equivalent to a fallen tree, a piece of truck tire or an enormous pothole ;)), and it's perfectly legal to cross the double yellow (when safe) to pass us.

(This is a general rule - I haven't researched the law of every state.)

ETA: one point nobody's mentioned is that when there's a long line of vehicles behind you, whether you're riding a bicycle or driving a car below the speed limit, it's common courtesy to pull over and let them pass when you have a safe opportunity to do so. Yes, it's inconvenient, and a long paceline makes it very difficult to do, but it's still common courtesy. Sometimes there just isn't a safe place or time to pull over (e.g. in rush hour traffic, once you pulled over, you'd never get back in line), and in those cases the cars do just have to deal with it IMO.

Several years ago I was looking at the California vehicle code (which is much more detailed than most states'), and IIRC, even when you're in a car, if you're holding up five or more vehicles, you are required to pull over. Something to think about.

Additional edit: here's the California statute:

Turning Out of Slow-Moving Vehicles

21656. On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving vehicle, including a passenger vehicle, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed. As used in this section a slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place.

Amended Ch. 448, Stats. 1965. Effective September 17, 1965.

[Trigress]

I haven't heard anything like that here, but out of courtesy one might as well take it up. I'll keep it in mind in fact, although I have rarely had the problem of holding up more than one or two cars. In the incident I mentioned there were three, but the reason why the two last cars were held up was the first one that stopped. But it's sensible to do as you mention, in those cases where it would be relevant.

[Fujichants]

Nobody abides by that California statute. I've seen some slow cars on the road that hold up more than 5 cars, and the driver is completely oblivious. Or just doesn't care. They are real dangers, because they piss everbody else off, and those people in turn take out their road rage on us bike riders.

[OakLeaf]

I know :D The only reason I looked it up was after our annual trip to the Monterey area, I started going off on "there oughta be a law," and then I found out there is one :rolleyes:

[rhyme]

Well... I think I know where the anger comes from..... A few rotten apples.

I used to get frustrated with bike messengers. Here in Chicago, they routinely do stupid things like run red lights (badly, really badly), swerve and in out of cars or lanes completely disregarding any common sense. Worse, they frequently cut people off forcing people to slam on their breaks. I've seen many of them make right hand turns in front of cars from left hand lanes - or even left hand turns from right hand lanes (without signaling) forcing traffic moving straight to somehow anticipate and react to someone doing something completely unexpected. People get mad when their heart skips a beat.

Bout a year ago, a bike messenger ran a red light and I had to slam on my brakes to avoid him. I honked at him, he pulled up next to me and gave me the finger than pulled in front of my car and slammed on his brakes forcing me to stop. I sighed. He than ran the red light in front of me and went away. Or so I thought anyway. A minute later I find him at my passenger window yelling at me holding up his keys threatening to key my car. I ask him not to and when the light turns green I try to pull away. He keys the car. I put it in park and get out and he runs away.

Like I said, a few rotten apples.....

[mimitabby]

no, Rhyme, I don't agree. The anger and aggression comes from within the angry aggressive person. While he's cussing you out, he's not thinking of bike messengers in Chicago, he's thinking about the fact that you're slowing him down.

I don't think very many people are driving down the street thinking about the idiot on the bike they saw a month ago. They're thinking about the fact that they are late to a job they hate, their girlfriend just left them, some personal stuff, and there's a bike. I HATE BIKES!!! instant anger. that bike's in my way. how dare they get off the sidewalk!

And then there's that thing about being in a car that somehow dehumanizes people. They are protected by this glass and metal box from having to see your eyes, your skin, your human-ness and all they see is something that is impeding them.

[rhyme]

Wow, people in your area must have some crappy lives! Jobs they hate, girlfriends that left them?? :)

I'm sure your right though - a lot of people are probably just pissed off that they are momentarily slowed down.... although I don't think its just some kind of ingrained hate for bikes - I think they'd be just as irritated with someone in a car who was slowing them down or someone blocking the road or double parked or whatever.

Then again, some people are just born mean.

[Fujichants]

I just think we need to get rid of the assholes on the road. Bikes, cars, trucks, even pedestrians. Now if only there was a way to do this...

I've had pedestrians give me dirty looks while on my bike and while in the car. Doing nothing wrong. I don't know what their problem is.

Today I almost got hit (I was driving my car) by a pick-up truck who decided to disobey the stop sign...there was no sign for me, but yet he honked at me and gave me the finger!

And then the countless times that snobbish, arrogant cyclists have almost made me have to ride off the road while on my bike because they are racing each other and going into uncoming traffic. I can't stand them!

But then again...we all have our days where we act like jerks as well.