Douglas Steel wrote in
:

Martin Underwood wrote:
I would never try to race ahead of cars, because I know they'll only
catch up with me after a few yards, and I don't want to cause an
obstruction to them.

You sound like a timid and/or weak cyclist. Any reasonably fit cyclist
will be well away from the lights when they change to green before 90%
of motorists have started moving. Why should I delay my journey
unnecessarily just because a motorist *may* eventually catch me up ?
At most traffic lights I encounter when cycling, the motorist won't
catch me up before the next queue of traffic anyway.

I agree that a fit cyclist probably has a faster 0-15 mph time that a car [*], but after that the car will catch him up and then, if the road isn't
wide enough to overtake, will be impeded from going any faster. Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights, when I agree
that a cyclists' refuge ahead of the car stop line is a good thing.

[*] Assuming that the cyclist hasn't made the elementary mistake that I
still occasionally make, forgetting to change down while approaching the
junction because derailleur gears don't like to be changed when you're
stationary - the complete opposite of driving when advanced driving
techniques say approach in a moderately high gear and then select the
correct gear to accelerate out of the hazard at the point where you decide
which is the appropriate gear. I spent so long training myself to do this
for my IAM test that I sometimes forget not to do it when riding my bike!
Very embarrassing and I'm sure drivers curse me!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 16:49:53 -0000, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.

That's an interesting presumption! There's an obligation to travel
as fast as possible!

Martin Underwood wrote:
I agree that a fit cyclist probably has a faster 0-15 mph time that a car
[*], but after that the car will catch him up and then, if the road isn't
wide enough to overtake, will be impeded from going any faster. Any vehicle
which cannot achieve the legal speed limit for the road (assuming it is safe
to drive at that speed) is likely to cause an obstruction and should in an
ideal world be segregated from the traffic that can achieve that speed.
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights, when I agree
that a cyclists' refuge ahead of the car stop line is a good thing.

A cyclist making progress along a road is *not* an obstruction by
any legal (or imho moral) definition.

There is no obligation to travel at the speed limit even if it is safe
to do so, if you want roads where cycles are not allowed then please
go and visit the nearest motorway.

The highway code does suggest that:

145: Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if
you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your
mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is
safe and let traffic pass.

That is a courtesy only, but one that I comply with when there
is a *long* queue (one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue
but I will move over if they have been behind for a significant time)
and it as safe and appropriate to pull over.

However, in heavy traffic situations I do not class myself
as a slow moving vehicle as I am generally going at least as
fast as most motorised vehicles - so if I am doing 20mph
and a car is doing 15mph what are the chances it would move
over for me ?

Share the road
Douglas

On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 17:48:52 +0000, Douglas Steel
wrote:

145: Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if
you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your
mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is
safe and let traffic pass.

That is a courtesy only, but one that I comply with when there
is a *long* queue (one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue
but I will move over if they have been behind for a significant time)
and it as safe and appropriate to pull over.


Why wouldn't you do it for one?

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 17:48:52 +0000, Douglas Steel
wrote:


145: Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if
you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your
mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is
safe and let traffic pass.

That is a courtesy only, but one that I comply with when there
is a *long* queue (one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue
but I will move over if they have been behind for a significant time)
and it as safe and appropriate to pull over.



Why wouldn't you do it for one?

It is not required by the Highway Code, but I will be courteous
if it doesn't affect safety or greatly affect my progress.

As I said above:
"one or two cars doesn't count as a long queue but I will
move over if they have been behind for a significant time"

The definition of "significant time" will vary depending on the
circumstances, it may be a few seconds or several minutes.

Douglas

Martin Underwood wrote:
Where that's not possible, the next best thing is for cyclists to keep
left - except when they want to turn right at a traffic lights

Maybe on a flat road - but Kensington, Fulham and Wandswth are full of
holes down the left of the road. It's not really safe to cycle on the
left then swerve out when you see a big hole - far safer to stay away
from the kerb a bit.