My question is what are they thinking. I would'nt dream of road cycling without a helmet, lights, vis etc. Why do YOU not wear a helmet / vis etc on busy roads ?
That doesn't apply to all of us - I wear both when I'm cycling somewhere.
Safety sun glasses. The bumblies just bounce off them. :cool:
I almost had an accident when I could see this wasp on my left lens. I thought it had crawled to the inside. When I tried to get my glasses off with my left hand, I put too much weight on the right and started moving towards the middle of the road.
Either the driver behind was far enough back or they had very good reactions.
Helmets give people (both cyclists and motorists) a false sense of security. It's been shown you are more likely to have an accident wearing one than not, and given they are flimsy things that only offer protection at low speeds, their life-saving abilities are largely overstated.
I'm always wary of these studies and probably need to look into them in more detail. What concerns me is who the monitor & what sort of cycling they do.
Are the people not wearing helmets travelling equivalent distances to those that are, are the travelling at similar speeds, are they travelling in equivalent traffic conditions, weather conditions, light conditions?
I wear a helmet all the time but have on a couple of occasions left it at work or in the car by accident and taken the bike home only to get on it and realise where the helmet has been left. On the way to get the helmet I feel more vulnerable and have rode more cautiously. To me it's the same feeling as not putting a seat belt on when driving. A few times I've simply forgot the seatbelt and been driving along feeling disconcerted & disconnected from the car.
Riding with a helmet is my default position and my riding style is not more dangerous because of a helmet but riding without does slow me down which won't make me safer on the road really, just appeases my confidence.
Is wearing a helmet more likely to cause an injury than not?
I make the assumption it'll probably not make matters worse and may increase chances of survival so I always wear mine.
Same for a high viz top, I can't really imagine this would make you more of a target for drivers to aim for (unless some of you live in very anti bike areas?!?) - as a car driver I get annoyed when coming up on a cyclist wearing very dark clothing while cycling along a darkened road or along a road with tall dark hedges, trees etc. If wearing a high viz gives a driver a 1 second increase in seeing the bike then it's worth it in my mind.
When I used to commute by bike I always wore high-vis (those vests that builders wear are fine, no need to spend a fortune on special cycling gear) and good bright lights which I used whatever the time of day, like those LED daytime running lights that you get on cars now. It didn't stop people pulling out in front of me all the time though. Never wore a helmet though, can't stand the things.
Since moving to Edinburgh, I now see far more motorists going through red lights than cyclists. Car drivers seem to think stopping at pedestrian crossings is voluntary (even when people are crossing) whereas cyclists on the whole tend to be well behaved.
Why do YOU not wear a helmet / vis etc on busy roads ?
I don't not wear a helmet/vis etc. on busy roads. I just avoid busy roads! Physically separated cycle tracks and quiet pavements can be very helpful, sometimes. :cool:
Ditto. I'm a cyclist who avoids busy roads if at all possible, although I do wear the helmet and fluorescent jacket anyway. Frankly I think bikes have no place on main roads and if the bike was invented now it would probably not be made legal to cycle one except on byroads, cycle paths and off-road.
As a cyclist I disapprove strongly of riding on pavements, unlike it seems most of my fellow cyclists, and if I can't ride on the road I get off and walk. Quaintly old fashioned I know!
Even if it were law I'd still refuse to wear a cycle helmet. I cycle down country lanes and only occasionally meet the odd tractor that I can hear approaching for quite a way away so pull over for them.
I wear the gear too, just not on busy roads as I don't use them! I kindof prefer to improve my chances and my accompanying grandkids' chances of living for a few more years...
But there's pavements and pavements, and there's riding with consideration and with no consideration. Many pavements hereabouts are officially dual use these days, some divided by a white line and some not. They are there to be made use of - but care and consideration is needed just as much on them as on single use pavements. Always and I do mean always give way to pedestrians encountered on a pavement is my motto and is what I teach the grandkids. If it's too busy to make progress, the alternatives are walking with the bikes, risking it on a busy road or finding an alternative quieter route.
The police round here are OK with cyclists riding slowly and considerately even on single use pavements. It's not like central London!
I wear the gear too, just not on busy roads as I don't use them! I kindof prefer to improve my chances and my grandkids' chances of living for a few more years...
But there's pavements and pavements, and there's riding with consideration and with no consideration. Many pavements hereabouts are officially dual use these days, some divided by a white line and some not. They are there to be made use of - but care and consideration is needed just as much on them as on single use pavements.
The police round here are OK with cyclists riding slowly and considerately even on single use pavements, if it's a busy or dangerous road with no alternative to the main carriageway except for a quiet pavement.
Yes, point taken. And there are pavements and pavements. Some paths that pass through housing estates for example, are they pavements or not? Cyclists use them and so do I because I can cycle around pedestrians onto the grass either side of the path. Like you I always assume pedestrians have right of way plus I slow down and am extremely careful around pedestrians. Unfortunately the majority of cyclists are not as considerate. Unfortunately we are as a group of road users a pretty inconsiderate lot.
Unfortunately the majority of cyclists are not as considerate. Unfortunately we are as a group of road users a pretty inconsiderate lot.
The above bit is where I tend to disagree, round here anyway, most cyclists are considerate to pedestrians and yes (SHOCK HORROR!) even cars and vice versa. Heck, we even get cars stopping to let pavement cyclists cross the road at non-signal non-zebra crossing points!
I appreciate that in some busy inner city areas, it's not sensible for cyclists to use pavements at all. But here in leafy suburbia, we have no problems with it.
So cards on the table, I just don't get this whole cycling thing........something I did when I was at school.
You get wet and cold.
It's dangerous (other traffic and numerous pot holes).
It's slow.
It's hard work (lots of hills around here).
I saw another example today of a mother and family on their bikes, the tiny child was in a trailer being pulled along by the fathers bike. I mean, this is highly irresponsible imho.
So cards on the table, I just don't get this whole cycling thing........something I did when I was at school.
You get wet and cold.
It's dangerous (other traffic and numerous pot holes).
It's slow.
It's hard work (lots of hills around here).
I saw another example today of a mother and family on their bikes, the tiny child was in a trailer being pulled along by the fathers bike. I mean, this is highly irresponsible imho.
You only get wet if you wear the wrong kit, so you could ask why people go hill walking.
It can be dangerous, though so can driving. From memory, the stats must be a little higher though.
Some people like exercising and getting keeping fit, so it is only a variation on that and less boring than going to the gym.
Slow, well depends on how urban or rural it is. Where I live, it is the best way to avoid jams and you don't have to think about parking for work or for shopping.
The above bit is where I tend to disagree, round here anyway, most cyclists are considerate to pedestrians and yes (SHOCK HORROR!) even cars and vice versa. Heck, we even get cars stopping to let pavement cyclists cross the road at non-signal non-zebra crossing points!
I appreciate that in some busy inner city areas, it's not sensible for cyclists to use pavements at all. But here in leafy suburbia, we have no problems with it.
Mmmm. My impression is that most 'serious' cyclists fall into the category you describe. But in my daily riding around my small town and surroundings I reckon between one third and one half of all the cyclists I see on any typical day are breaking the law in some way or other. I see them riding the wrong way up one way streets, cycling on the wrong side of the road, cycling across a zebra crossing when people are walking across, cycling through red lights, cycling without lights at night, failing to signal, cycling on (town) pavements ..... I could go on.
I say this not as an angry motorist but as a member of the cycling clan. The behaviour of too many cyclists is simply unacceptable and it's time we accepted this as a group and did something about it. There was a time when most if not all cyclists were aware that they were a vehicle like any other vehicle on the road and that all the laws applied to them as it did to cars and other vehicles. But many cyclists have now more or less gone feral. They don't believe the rules apply to them and cycle accordingly.
Mmmm. My impression is that most 'serious' cyclists fall into the category you describe. But in my daily riding around my small town and surroundings I reckon between one third and one half of all the cyclists I see on any typical day are breaking the law in some way or other. I see them riding the wrong way up one way streets, cycling on the wrong side of the road, cycling across a zebra crossing when people are walking across, cycling through red lights, cycling without lights at night, failing to signal, cycling on (town) pavements ..... I could go on.
I say this not as an angry motorist but as a member of the cycling clan. The behaviour of too many cyclists is simply unacceptable and it's time we accepted this as a group and did something about it. There was a time when most if not all cyclists were aware that they were a vehicle like any other vehicle on the road and that all the laws applied to them as it did to cars and other vehicles. But many cyclists have now more or less gone feral. They don't believe the rules apply to them and cycle accordingly.
Fraid I have to agree. I have seen the above and it has worsened over the last few years.
The strangest thing to me is people in their 60s and 70s being as bad as youngsters, but I should have thought they would follow the rules more closely.
I nearly got run over by some eejit a few years on a bike. It was dark and he was wearing nothing but black and had no lights on his bike. I was wearing hi vis. (I was running)
The above bit is where I tend to disagree, round here anyway, most cyclists are considerate to pedestrians and yes (SHOCK HORROR!) even cars and vice versa. Heck, we even get cars stopping to let pavement cyclists cross the road at non-signal non-zebra crossing points!
I appreciate that in some busy inner city areas, it's not sensible for cyclists to use pavements at all. But here in leafy suburbia, we have no problems with it.
You only get wet if you wear the wrong kit, so you could ask why people go hill walking.
It can be dangerous, though so can driving. From memory, the stats must be a little higher though.
Some people like exercising and getting keeping fit, so it is only a variation on that and less boring than going to the gym.
Slow, well depends on how urban or rural it is. Where I live, it is the best way to avoid jams and you don't have to think about parking for work or for shopping.
I don't understand those trailers either.
Some people cycle for pleasure or excercise and that is fine, each to their own. But as a process of getting to your workplace, or to the shops, or anything else then it just doesn't make sense. You can't carry very much on a bike.
Most work places have a car park, as do supermarkets and other shopping areas. Some places have more than others though.
I would have thought cyclists and motorbikes should stay in line while in a traffic jam. To go down between cars or buses or trucks which could move off is surely a tad dangerous, if there are seperate cycle lanes then great, but not everywhere has these. For the number of cycles vs cars, it wouldn't seem financially justifiable to install them anyway. Reducing the number of car lanes will actually increase congestion and raise local air pollution levels as a direct result of more traffic jams.
The hills here means I see very few cyclists going between the various towns. They almost exclusively stay in town. Except when there is a specific cycle event on.
As well as the rain and cold, when it's even mildly warm it must get very hot cycling. Why do that when u don't need to.
Why do some cyclists go along the road and then ride onto the path (and keep going) or vice versa?
Another thing I can't figure out.
Reading the posts, are cycle helmets a good thing, or not......surely, if your that concerned about safety you would drive a car, or even go by bus or train?
What happens if you want to go somewhere further away......maybe the next county. I sometimes make a 100mile round trip,.......in a few weeks time I will be doing this and some time before Xmas the plan is to have a Xmas meal at a location meaning 120mile round trip.....now I realise the cyclists will say "we use the car for that, obviously" but since you have a car anyway.....why not use it for all the other journeys as well........it would just make life so much easier and more plesent.
Another thing I can't figure out.
Reading the posts, are cycle helmets a good thing, or not......surely, if your that concerned about safety you would drive a car, or even go by bus or train?
What happens if you want to go somewhere further away......maybe the next county. I sometimes make a 100mile round trip,.......in a few weeks time I will be doing this and some time before Xmas the plan is to have a Xmas meal at a location meaning 120mile round trip.....now I realise the cyclists will say "we use the car for that, obviously" but since you have a car anyway.....why not use it for all the other journeys as well........it would just make life so much easier and more plesent.
As I recall David (2), you live in a rural area with what, a 30 min drive to work?
Sure in that case cycling to work isn't an option on a regular basis.
However, in a more urban area, then it can be quicker and easier to cycle.
With respect to danger, I guess relatively speaking, it is worse than a car, but in absolute terms? Then you have to factor in the health benefits of exercise.
100 mi!e round trip. I try and use the train as A12, A14,M25,M11 are never much fun but you shouldn't deduce that makes it convenient for short trips. But then again where I live it was suggested that the electronic signs should read 'welcome to Colchester the grid lock capital of essex'.
You wear the appropriate clothes when cycling; where I wiork, you can have a shower if you like.
I normally overtake on right and there arent many places where one can go in between. On the outside is far safer than hugging the kerb and requires appropriate speed and observation, but I guess after these years I am used to it.
I should add that in passing between 2_lanes I do find a few drivers quite attentive and they will move left or right to ease my passage.
Is wearing a helmet more likely to cause an injury than not?
I make the assumption it'll probably not make matters worse and may increase chances of survival so I always wear mine.
Same for a high viz top, I can't really imagine this would make you more of a target for drivers to aim for (unless some of you live in very anti bike areas?!?) - as a car driver I get annoyed when coming up on a cyclist wearing very dark clothing while cycling along a darkened road or along a road with tall dark hedges, trees etc. If wearing a high viz gives a driver a 1 second increase in seeing the bike then it's worth it in my mind.
bib - to be honest, I have this problem with pedestrians too! They seem to wear dark coats more often than not, you often can't see them stepping out into the road until you are almost on top of them, what with half the street lights being turned off and the rest being that strange orange light that doesn't seem very bright.
With regard to cycling, I don't understand why anybody would argue the point about being visible to other road users. People are quick enough to point at a car when the driver hasn't turned on their lights at night, it's the same thing with cyclists surely?
Helmets - well that's up to the user I guess, they are taking the decision and it's their head.
Even if it were law I'd still refuse to wear a cycle helmet. I cycle down country lanes and only occasionally meet the odd tractor that I can hear approaching for quite a way away so pull over for them.
That's fine in daylight. I used to drive all narrow country B roads on my work commute and a local guy had a crazy habit of cycling along part of one road at night with no hi-vis and no lighting at all! Utterly insane.
Driving the roads in daylight was ok but you had to be ready to hit the brakes because if you met a tractor, none ever slowed down or stopped. You had to find somewhere to get out of the way sharpish!
Comments
That doesn't apply to all of us - I wear both when I'm cycling somewhere.
Either the driver behind was far enough back or they had very good reactions.
I'm always wary of these studies and probably need to look into them in more detail. What concerns me is who the monitor & what sort of cycling they do.
Are the people not wearing helmets travelling equivalent distances to those that are, are the travelling at similar speeds, are they travelling in equivalent traffic conditions, weather conditions, light conditions?
I wear a helmet all the time but have on a couple of occasions left it at work or in the car by accident and taken the bike home only to get on it and realise where the helmet has been left. On the way to get the helmet I feel more vulnerable and have rode more cautiously. To me it's the same feeling as not putting a seat belt on when driving. A few times I've simply forgot the seatbelt and been driving along feeling disconcerted & disconnected from the car.
Riding with a helmet is my default position and my riding style is not more dangerous because of a helmet but riding without does slow me down which won't make me safer on the road really, just appeases my confidence.
I make the assumption it'll probably not make matters worse and may increase chances of survival so I always wear mine.
Same for a high viz top, I can't really imagine this would make you more of a target for drivers to aim for (unless some of you live in very anti bike areas?!?) - as a car driver I get annoyed when coming up on a cyclist wearing very dark clothing while cycling along a darkened road or along a road with tall dark hedges, trees etc. If wearing a high viz gives a driver a 1 second increase in seeing the bike then it's worth it in my mind.
Since moving to Edinburgh, I now see far more motorists going through red lights than cyclists. Car drivers seem to think stopping at pedestrian crossings is voluntary (even when people are crossing) whereas cyclists on the whole tend to be well behaved.
I don't not wear a helmet/vis etc. on busy roads. I just avoid busy roads! Physically separated cycle tracks and quiet pavements can be very helpful, sometimes. :cool:
As a cyclist I disapprove strongly of riding on pavements, unlike it seems most of my fellow cyclists, and if I can't ride on the road I get off and walk. Quaintly old fashioned I know!
But there's pavements and pavements, and there's riding with consideration and with no consideration. Many pavements hereabouts are officially dual use these days, some divided by a white line and some not. They are there to be made use of - but care and consideration is needed just as much on them as on single use pavements. Always and I do mean always give way to pedestrians encountered on a pavement is my motto and is what I teach the grandkids. If it's too busy to make progress, the alternatives are walking with the bikes, risking it on a busy road or finding an alternative quieter route.
The police round here are OK with cyclists riding slowly and considerately even on single use pavements. It's not like central London!
The above bit is where I tend to disagree, round here anyway, most cyclists are considerate to pedestrians and yes (SHOCK HORROR!) even cars and vice versa. Heck, we even get cars stopping to let pavement cyclists cross the road at non-signal non-zebra crossing points!
I appreciate that in some busy inner city areas, it's not sensible for cyclists to use pavements at all. But here in leafy suburbia, we have no problems with it.
You get wet and cold.
It's dangerous (other traffic and numerous pot holes).
It's slow.
It's hard work (lots of hills around here).
I saw another example today of a mother and family on their bikes, the tiny child was in a trailer being pulled along by the fathers bike. I mean, this is highly irresponsible imho.
It can be dangerous, though so can driving. From memory, the stats must be a little higher though.
Some people like exercising and getting keeping fit, so it is only a variation on that and less boring than going to the gym.
Slow, well depends on how urban or rural it is. Where I live, it is the best way to avoid jams and you don't have to think about parking for work or for shopping.
I don't understand those trailers either.
I say this not as an angry motorist but as a member of the cycling clan. The behaviour of too many cyclists is simply unacceptable and it's time we accepted this as a group and did something about it. There was a time when most if not all cyclists were aware that they were a vehicle like any other vehicle on the road and that all the laws applied to them as it did to cars and other vehicles. But many cyclists have now more or less gone feral. They don't believe the rules apply to them and cycle accordingly.
The strangest thing to me is people in their 60s and 70s being as bad as youngsters, but I should have thought they would follow the rules more closely.
It's much the same round these parts.
And why do you mount the pavement to avoid traffic lights?
Some people cycle for pleasure or excercise and that is fine, each to their own. But as a process of getting to your workplace, or to the shops, or anything else then it just doesn't make sense. You can't carry very much on a bike.
Most work places have a car park, as do supermarkets and other shopping areas. Some places have more than others though.
I would have thought cyclists and motorbikes should stay in line while in a traffic jam. To go down between cars or buses or trucks which could move off is surely a tad dangerous, if there are seperate cycle lanes then great, but not everywhere has these. For the number of cycles vs cars, it wouldn't seem financially justifiable to install them anyway. Reducing the number of car lanes will actually increase congestion and raise local air pollution levels as a direct result of more traffic jams.
The hills here means I see very few cyclists going between the various towns. They almost exclusively stay in town. Except when there is a specific cycle event on.
As well as the rain and cold, when it's even mildly warm it must get very hot cycling. Why do that when u don't need to.
Why do some cyclists go along the road and then ride onto the path (and keep going) or vice versa?
Reading the posts, are cycle helmets a good thing, or not......surely, if your that concerned about safety you would drive a car, or even go by bus or train?
What happens if you want to go somewhere further away......maybe the next county. I sometimes make a 100mile round trip,.......in a few weeks time I will be doing this and some time before Xmas the plan is to have a Xmas meal at a location meaning 120mile round trip.....now I realise the cyclists will say "we use the car for that, obviously" but since you have a car anyway.....why not use it for all the other journeys as well........it would just make life so much easier and more plesent.
But not everyone who cycles can drive.
Clearly
*this only applies to cyclists who also own a car*.
Sure in that case cycling to work isn't an option on a regular basis.
However, in a more urban area, then it can be quicker and easier to cycle.
With respect to danger, I guess relatively speaking, it is worse than a car, but in absolute terms? Then you have to factor in the health benefits of exercise.
100 mi!e round trip. I try and use the train as A12, A14,M25,M11 are never much fun but you shouldn't deduce that makes it convenient for short trips. But then again where I live it was suggested that the electronic signs should read 'welcome to Colchester the grid lock capital of essex'.
You wear the appropriate clothes when cycling; where I wiork, you can have a shower if you like.
I normally overtake on right and there arent many places where one can go in between. On the outside is far safer than hugging the kerb and requires appropriate speed and observation, but I guess after these years I am used to it.
I should add that in passing between 2_lanes I do find a few drivers quite attentive and they will move left or right to ease my passage.
With regard to cycling, I don't understand why anybody would argue the point about being visible to other road users. People are quick enough to point at a car when the driver hasn't turned on their lights at night, it's the same thing with cyclists surely?
Helmets - well that's up to the user I guess, they are taking the decision and it's their head.
Driving the roads in daylight was ok but you had to be ready to hit the brakes because if you met a tractor, none ever slowed down or stopped. You had to find somewhere to get out of the way sharpish!