Thread: Cyclists.

I'm not playing hypotheticals with you, just pointing out you can't expect a car to slow down to 20 or 30 when cresting a hill 'just in case'.

See, the way you are responding is half the problem - you only see it from a cyclists perspective. The other half of the problem are the car drivers that only see it from a cars perspective.

I'm not 'the enemy' here, not should anyone be - as I mentioned in my last post it's the 'us v them' mentality from both sides that is the problem - you are clearly displaying that from your cycling side as others here are from the cars perspective.

This thread, like every conversation on the topic is pointless because one eyed cyclists can't see the other side and one eyed motorists can't see the other side - no amount of debating this will change those points of view, so why keep going on about it?

That's all I'll say on the topic as it really is a complete waste of time. I know how I drive and how I treat cyclists - the same way I would like to be treated when on a bike. We all know that isn't going to be the case in every situation, so you just ride/drive to stay alive and do it all again another day. ANY activity on an open public road is inherently dangerous, and in reality is probably the most danger we put ourselves in day to day.

As I mentioned, when I rode a bike, I looked out for myself, as I now do when riding a motor bike - I assume everyone else is out to kill me and ride accordingly. To do it any other way is asking for trouble IMO and being injured or killed just to prove a point about who is technically right in a given situation is just plain dumb.

I don't care if you agree or not - I don't post my thoughts here for any personal affirmation, just putting my 2 cents in as everyone does.

Over and out on this topic for me.

Originally Posted by bacicat

I'm not playing hypotheticals with you, just pointing out you can't expect a car to slow down to 20 or 30 when cresting a hill 'just in case'.

See, the way you are responding is half the problem - you only see it from a cyclists perspective. The other half of the problem are the car drivers that only see it from a cars perspective.

I'm not 'the enemy' here, not should anyone be - as I mentioned in my last post it's the 'us v them' mentality from both sides that is the problem - you are clearly displaying that from your cycling side as others here are from the cars perspective.

This thread, like every conversation on the topic is pointless because one eyed cyclists can't see the other side and one eyed motorists can't see the other side - no amount of debating this will change those points of view, so why keep going on about it?

That's all I'll say on the topic as it really is a complete waste of time. I know how I drive and how I treat cyclists - the same way I would like to be treated when on a bike. We all know that isn't going to be the case in every situation, so you just ride/drive to stay alive and do it all again another day. ANY activity on an open public road is inherently dangerous, and in reality is probably the most danger we put ourselves in day to day.

As I mentioned, when I rode a bike, I looked out for myself, as I now do when riding a motor bike - I assume everyone else is out to kill me and ride accordingly. To do it any other way is asking for trouble IMO and being injured or killed just to prove a point about who is technically right in a given situation is just plain dumb.

I don't care if you agree or not - I don't post my thoughts here for any personal affirmation, just putting my 2 cents in as everyone does.

Over and out on this topic for me.

Cheers Bacicat, it's all about mutual care and respect isn't it. As the car is in the position of power, so the car slows down momentarily to allow space for the cyclist and a safe time to pass. The cyclist is aware and does their best to hold their line.

Originally Posted by MrLandy

What does obstruct mean? I was doing 40kmh in a 50kmh zone the other day. There was an angry woman flashing her lights and honking me, then she pulled a ridiculous over taking manoeuvre on a blind corner in a built up area. Now who was obstructing traffic there?

Slowing down won't kill you.

Actually it could.
Your doing 20 up a hill in hilly area thats a 80 zone, car slows down behind, you both crest hill and a truck who cannot see car comes over crest doing 80kph, car drivers dead, your sitting on the bonnet of the car as it's sandwiched between the truck and a tree.
Or more simply reasonable busy road flowing along at 80-90 in 100 zone and a car.has to jam on brakes for cyclists, he may not get rammed up the rear bumper, but highly likely someone behind does.

Originally Posted by frantic

Actually it could.
Your doing 20 up a hill in hilly area thats a 80 zone, car slows down behind, you both crest hill and a truck who cannot see car comes over crest doing 80kph, car drivers dead, your sitting on the bonnet of the car as it's sandwiched between the truck and a tree.
Or more simply reasonable busy road flowing along at 80-90 in 100 zone and a car.has to jam on brakes for cyclists, he may not get rammed up the rear bumper, but highly likely someone behind does.

If a cyclist is doing 20 up a hill then he's hardly going to be doing only 20 down the other side, is he? More like 40-60. And if the truck driver is doing 80 up a hill with a crest so sharp he can't see over the top then he's going too fast, see the post I put up earlier. A stupid truckie becomes a dead truckie in short order.

Originally Posted by MrLandy

A 110km/hr zone doesn't mean you have to do 110km/hr. It's the maximum limit. A cyclist is just as entitled to ride on any road with any speed limit, except some freeways. The 4WD is not king, it is just one of many vehicle types SHARING the roads. Cyclists need to be protected by responsible drivers. The mentality that cyclists should simply get out of the way is both selfish and illegal. When you see a cyclist you simply slow down and give them room. As a cyclist it's actually often more dangerous to move to the far left, because cars are more likely to squeeze past and road shoulders are often very rough and dangerous for cyclists. Patience is a virtue.

How this reply is relevant to my suggestion of a safety device to 'alert' cyclists where they don't use mirrors, is beyond belief. I suggested a safety device for cyclists, and it invokes a rant entirely unrelated (and that has been raised repeatedly in this thread). As said before, I cycle and so does my family, I am not however oblivious to other road users, especially those behind me, neither will I rely on their ability to see and avoid me.

There are clearly two sets of cyclists out there, those with common sense and those with an attitude that ruins the image for the first set! Thanks a lot...

Rants about cyclists having to invest in early warning systems to avoid dangerous drivers are equally tiresome. I've been in too many bad situations as s cyclist to go soft on this. It's the vehicle drivers responsibility to be courteous towards the far more vulnerable cyclist. Full stop. Cheers.

Originally Posted by MrLandy

Rants about cyclists having to invest in early warning systems to avoid dangerous drivers are equally tiresome. I've been in too many bad situations as s cyclist to go soft on this. It's the vehicle drivers responsibility to be courteous towards the far more vulnerable cyclist. Full stop. Cheers.

No it's not.
It is equal responsibility for all to drive/ride/walk in a safe and courteous manner observing the road rules at all times.

Originally Posted by MrLandy

Rants about cyclists having to invest in early warning systems to avoid dangerous drivers are equally tiresome. I've been in too many bad situations as s cyclist to go soft on this. It's the vehicle drivers responsibility to be courteous towards the far more vulnerable cyclist. Full stop. Cheers.

It's th cyclists responsibility to be courteous to the far more valuable car.
See... I can make up laws too.