Dreaded cyclists

smithersprime

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
72
Location
'Merica
Car(s)
2002 A6 4.2Q
I live in one of the most bike friendly cities in the country right now(Fort Collins CO) and I swear Im going to have to wash blood off my car one of these days.
 

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,508
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
I don't have a problem with cyclists, and I find people here remarkably intolerant to be perfectly honest. For every cyclists that momentarily inconveniences me, 1000 people in cars/trucks/buses/tractors inconvenience me by either driving 10,20,30 km/h under the speed limit FOR KILOMETRE AFTER KILOMETRE, or because they think the green traffic light signifys the beginning of a camping expedition, which means I miss the green, or because they don't indicate etc, etc.



I am only thankful you're not the one making decisions at number 10, because I shudder to think what your United Kingdom would be like judging from a lot of your posts.
Hitler was my uncle. ...
 
Last edited:

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,416
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
I don't get how everyone rants about cyclists not being regulated. There are tons of laws surrounding the bicycle (in Germany). Sure, not every cyclist follows these laws, so you may of course rant about those.
Additionally, cyclists never get fined for violations? Yeah, right. I've seen tons of cyclists get stopped for not having proper lights. Rant about the lack of enforcement in your area :lol:
Germany is actually a very rare example of bicycle rules done right, most other places they are not. To top it off unlike cars there is nothing that identifies a specific bicycle. So say I get stopped for running a red light on a cycle, I present my employee ID (AFAIK in NYS it is a valid form of identification), if my name is John Smith there is no unique identifier on that ID so I don't have to bother paying the fine. Try that with your driver's license..

Also I have to say 90% of the time when I see a cyclist they ride like an asshat. I had one make a turn in front of my car SLOWLY when I had a GREEN light. Later that day I was going into my parking area (by my building) same asshat tried to yell at me when I didn't yield to him when he was on the SIDEWALK (illegal if you are over 12 here). Well he TRIED yelling at me up till the point where I got out of my car and was twice his size and half his age....

I have seen good cyclists but not that many. As someone else posted already when drivers/riders of motor vehicles act like idiots there are actual consequences to them, if someone is driving aggressively and cutting people off I can call it in with a plate #. If some moron in a car crashes into me it's not going to be automatically my fault and he will have insurance that will pay for my damages.
 
Last edited:

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
Identification of misbehaving cyclists is a troublesome issue, but you get the same problem with pedestrians who for example cross a red light. You could argue that red light cameras for cars are a discrimination against drivers because pedestrians and cyclists doing the "same" offence are not caught by the same measures. Obviously the offence is not the same because a car running a red light most likely causes more harm to others, while a pedestrian/cyclist most lilely only harms himself.

The ID issue you mention with for example employee cards as identification is irrelevant over here of course, you simply are required to produce your government-issued ID card.
 
Last edited:

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,416
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Identification of misbehaving cyclists is a troublesome issue, but you get the same problem with pedestrians who for example cross a red light. You could argue that red light cameras for cars are a discrimination against drivers because pedestrians and cyclists doing the "same" offence are not caught by the same measures. Obviously the offence is not the same because a car running a red light most likely causes more harm to others, while a pedestrian/cyclist most lilely only harms himself.
Thing is pedestrians and cars rarely interact. You only really have to worry about them crossing the road and in most cases a honk will get them out of your way pronto. Also if you hit a pedestrian it is not automatically your fault (at least not here and not yet) if they try to run across at a non designated intersection or when you have a green light.

Cyclists are on the road WITH cars and the ones who are asshats generally assume they have a right of way. I have been yelled at by a cyclist when I was turning right and he was behind me but decided to go around me on the right side. For bonus points it was at night, he had no lights on that could identify him and I had my right indicator on...
 

Cowboy

My name is Sheridan
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,805
I'd agree with you up to a point. One shouldn't intentionally use a car as a weapon without adequate provocation.
Cyclist just being a dick in traffic: Eh, okay, whatever.
Cyclist acting like a rabid zoo monkey and (instead of flinging feces) throwing water bottles, air pumps, tool kits or other gear at your car without provocation or any apparent reason: Oh hell yeah, it's on now! Let me introduce you to my brush bar.
Yeah well, as much as I agree with you , acting on that will get you several decades in jail over here, while the cyclist (if he survives) will get counseling 'for beeing attacked by the big bad cardriver'.
 

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
Cyclists are on the road WITH cars and the ones who are asshats generally assume they have a right of way. I have been yelled at by a cyclist when I was turning right and he was behind me but decided to go around me on the right side. For bonus points it was at night, he had no lights on that could identify him and I had my right indicator on...
Disclaimer: Applying German road rules.

Bar the missing lights that would be correct behavior by the cyclist. When a car turns right and there is a cyclist next to the car or behind the car then the cyclist going straight has the right of way.
Him having no lights in the dark would most likely put the blame of an accident on the cyclist though, I believe we all can agree on mandatory lights (go LEDs and hub dynamos!).

Oh, and you having your indicators on does not give you the right of way :lol: it's your duty by the law to use them.
 

brydie76

Viva Las Clarksonistas!
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
3,053
Location
Australia
Car(s)
2012 Suzuki Swift Sport/Aprilia Sportcity 200
On the topic itself, I remain (as I have written here on several occaisions) that where I live, the majority of cylists pose no problem or threat. It?s the 5% Idiots that you notice. In my subjective opinion, "cyclists" are not worse than car drivers or motorcycle drivers ... there are Idiots ... but aren?t they everywhere?

One thing I can?t really get my head around is racing cyclist practicing on publich roads. If I were to use the roads as a training ground with my car ... they?d take away my license. If I want to train with my car ... or with my basketball ... or skateboard ... I am not allowed to do this on the road. Why is there an exemption for racing cylists? It?s a sport. Why do we allow this form of sports on the road and not others?
I agree with you except for the percentage of idiots- I think about 99% of cyclists have the opinion that they will not be hit by a car unless the driver is being stupid and that they can therefore have some "leeway" in the rules and such and are invincilbe from the cops, injury, blame, etc. Cyclists need to do a course like motorcyclists do- the number one thing you learn there (apart from techniques obviously) is that you are a vulnerable road user and that you have to be the one looking out for the cars to make sure you don't get hit. Hence, you ride safer to suit that. Some of the things I see cyclists do (dogde out in front of cars with no warning to avoid obstacles- eg parked cars- on the side of the road- really, see it, stop and wait.) really amazes and scares me- they seem to think they are freaking invicible and that they will automatically be the poor little victim if they ever come off.

And for all those people saying that there is no real point in cyclists being licenced and insured and bikes being registered, when i got hit by that bike crossing the road going into school (again, when 3 cars had stopped for me already and I was halfway across), I needed to go in an ambulance (at the school's insitence) to the hospital for X-rays on my ankle (as they were worried the impact had broken it) and was on crutches for a week (luckily only the bone was bruised, still hurt like a bitch). Who had to pay for all that? Whose insurance was charged for that? Mine and my parents. Who was at fault? Mr "you ruined my lap time", whom I couldn't identify or claim damages from (i.e. get him to pay my bloody excess!) in any way. Police of course couldn't lay charges either over it (again, school covering their ass there).

Also, good point on the training thing Interrobang :)
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,416
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Disclaimer: Applying German road rules.

Bar the missing lights that would be correct behavior by the cyclist. When a car turns right and there is a cyclist next to the car or behind the car then the cyclist going straight has the right of way.
Him having no lights in the dark would most likely put the blame of an accident on the cyclist though, I believe we all can agree on mandatory lights (go LEDs and hub dynamos!).

Oh, and you having your indicators on does not give you the right of way :lol: it's your duty by the law to use them.
See thats another thing, if his next to me, yes it's his right of way and if I see the moron I will absolutely wait, but if his behind me why in the fuck does he get the right of way? Car/motorcycle would not, his behind me, I'm turning right, if I know what I'm doing I will be through that intersection anyway.

I didn't mean that my indicator would give me the right of way, I meant that he could clearly see that I was making a right (BTW in that particular road going 15-20 is normal so I wasn't even slowing down for the turn).

Also as brydie said, what about hit and run? There was a situation a few years ago here where a dude hit some kid and took off (in a car) then another car hit the kid who was laid out in the road. The second driver stopped and called the 5-0, the first driver was charged because some people managed to take down plate, vehicle color, w/e so he was found. Good luck doing that shit with a bike, one can still hurt a kid quite badly but saying "it was a dude on a bike" is really not gonna help....
 
Last edited:

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
See thats another thing, if his next to me, yes it's his right of way and if I see the moron I will absolutely wait, but if his behind me why in the fuck does he get the right of way? Car/motorcycle would not, his behind me, I'm turning right, if I know what I'm doing I will be through that intersection anyway.
Let me explain it differently what I'm on about.
Over here cyclists going on the road either have a marked lane on the right side like pictured below, or ride on the right edge of the rightmost lane. You as a car turning right are in the middle of the rightmost lane, so you will cross the (marked or virtual) bike lane to your right. You cross his lane, so you need to yield even if he is behind you.
It's similar to if you were to turn right from the second lane to the right, and there was a car coming behind you on the right lane. You also need to yield to that, even if it is not next to you.



Oh, and bicycles are expressly allowed to undertake on the right when cars are waiting at an intersection.
 

brydie76

Viva Las Clarksonistas!
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
3,053
Location
Australia
Car(s)
2012 Suzuki Swift Sport/Aprilia Sportcity 200
Just saw this on twitter. Very funny and pretty accurate actually, given hte demographics of your average lycra brigade! :lol:
 

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
My bicycle was over 500 pounds, do I have midlife crises now? :lol:

I don't wear lycra though, it's mostly used as a tool for commuting.
 

argatoga

Can't Start His Wank
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
17,976
Location
Seattle
Car(s)
'13 Moto Guzzi V7, '08 Pontiac Solstice GXP
My bicycle was over 500 pounds, do I have midlife crises now? :lol:

I don't wear lycra though, it's mostly used as a tool for commuting.
That's a heavy bike. :drums:

I bought my mountain bike used for $300 (around two Euros). I have yet to see a car drive down a single track, but I will give right of way if I do.
 

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
Tehehe.

A lot of the money goes towards making the bicycle work in everyday city traffic.
Schwalbe Marathon Plus tyres with thick protection against glass, nails, etc for example, those are 40? each. Quite worth the money considering I would else have to fix a flat tyre every few months. They also come with a reflective ring on both sidewalls, so you'll spot me in the dark easily.

Road-legal LED lights in the back have been common for years, but in the front they are a relatively new thing, so a good pair with about 15min of capacitors in each will set you back maybe 50?.
Add a nice hub generator to that and lights + tyres alone will set you back 200?/$300 :cry:
 
Last edited:

SirEdward

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
1,769
Location
Bologna, Italy
Car(s)
VW Golf MkV
Let me explain it differently what I'm on about.
Over here cyclists going on the road either have a marked lane on the right side like pictured below, or ride on the right edge of the rightmost lane. You as a car turning right are in the middle of the rightmost lane, so you will cross the (marked or virtual) bike lane to your right. You cross his lane, so you need to yield even if he is behind you.
It's similar to if you were to turn right from the second lane to the right, and there was a car coming behind you on the right lane. You also need to yield to that, even if it is not next to you.

And this is bad desing for sure. I explain:

Cars have blind spots, particularly on the rear right (or left, if you drive along on the left). To partly cope with this, when you are turning right you need to be on the rightmost lane (you are not allowed to turn right directly from the second lane if the first one allows to proceed straight on), indicate, check for pedestrian, turn. If a cyclist (or someone else, for what matters) pass you on the right at this moment (no bike lanes), then it's not your fault.

Similarly, when you need to move from one lane to the next one on the right, you indicate, check and wait for room, then move. The incoming cars on the right have right of way, but can not simply speed up and pass, they have an obligation to help you complete your movement safely; this means that if they are behind you they should slow down. Again, not everyone does this, but it is a car, it is registered and identifiable, and you are not necessarily at fault (even if this is most likely so if you have no witnesses). Also, a car is bigger, more visible, and has strong lights.

To sum up: a car is bigger, more visible, traceable, should help you when you move, is not allowed to overtake on the right (city streets) and you can physically leave not enough space for a car to pass you on the right, if you so choose.

Bycicles (no, it's bicycle. They even manage to mess up my english, grrr...), on the other hand, CAN overtake you on the right, you can rarely leave no room for them to pass, they can skip on the "help another road user" rule, they have no law punishing them for not behaving safely, they are not well visible, they are small and noiseless, they have no great brakes and/but they can go quite fast.

So, if you are in slow moving traffic (about the same speed as a bicycle), you might well not know if there is a cyclist on your right, who, on his/her part, can and will ignore your indicators and pass you on the right "'cause I'm on a bike lane". A solution to this, a solution I myself adopted in Germany, for example, is when I wanted to turn right I indicated, I check, I move ONTO the bike lane, then turne right. But there is a problem more. If the bike lane is on the kerb, you can not get onto it with your car, but you will still experience all the problems of cyclists speeding around in your blind spot because "I'm on a bike lane". Even worse: they are on the kerb, so they (I say "they", but it's really a bad design issue, I would do exactly the same, automatically) think even less of what they are doing and cross roads at high speed, directly in car's blind spot.

Clearly, since you are the bad, polluting, aggressive, heavy, evil car, you are at fault in every one of these situations.

Other examples of bad design?

Here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/32dnbpk

the small street is merging into the bigger one, passing directly on the bike lane. Bicycles pass on both direction and since there are arches, before you can actually see something you need to put all the front part of the car ON the bike lane. Yet, if something happen, it's YOUR fault.

Oh, and bicycles are expressly allowed to undertake on the right when cars are waiting at an intersection.
This is no problem, as long as they are not allowed to do so when the light is green and the cars are moving. Turning right when the light goes green and you have a crowded bike lane on your right can rapidly turn into a frustrating, endless series of cyclists yelling at you because they have the right to pass even if you were in front of them before, if you are indicating and if you struggle to see them approaching. I know cyclists are the same people who drive cars, but this situation could make even their blood boil if they were in the car rather than on the bike.

All of this not mentioning bicycles' behaviour in pedestrian areas.

The incredibly annoying thing, however, is that it is incredibly difficult to explain all of these issues to someone who is more of a cyclist than a car driver. They simply won't understand. They will say: "the law says I'm doing right, so you pay attention and don't bother me".
 
Last edited:

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,108
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'16 VW The Beetle Cabrio
And this is bad desing for sure.
You'll find that design all over Germany.

Cars have blind spots, particularly on the rear right (or left, if you drive along on the left). To partly cope with this, when you are turning right you need to be on the rightmost lane (you are not allowed to turn right directly from the second lane if the first one allows to proceed straight on), indicate, check for pedestrian, turn. If a cyclist (or someone else, for what matters) pass you on the right at this moment (no bike lanes), then it's not your fault.
Bicycles about to pass on your right appear in your right mirror before they pass. To cover the blind spot you're obliged to turn your head before you turn your car.

Similarly, when you need to move from one lane to the next one on the right, you indicate, check and wait for room, then move. The incoming cars on the right have right of way, but can not simply speed up and pass, they have an obligation to help you complete your movement safely; this means that if they are behind you they should slow down.
There is no rule to slow down to let other cars move into your lane (merging lanes, construction zones etc excepted).

a car is not allowed to overtake on the right (city streets)
Cars are allowed to overtake on the right in city streets.

Bicycles on the other hand, CAN overtake you on the right, you can rarely leave no room for them to pass, they can skip on the "help another road user" rule, they have no law punishing them for not behaving safely, they are not well visible, they are small and noiseless, they have no great brakes and/but they can go quite fast.
They are governed by laws. In poor visibility weather they are required to turn on their lights, in clear weather you just need to open your eyes. Not making noise should be no factor in whether you as a car driver yield to them or not. My brakes work fine, the rear ones are able to lock up and the front ones are able to get rear lift-off.

So, if you are in slow moving traffic (about the same speed as a bicycle), you might well not know if there is a cyclist on your right
If the cyclist is on your right, where should he go when you want to turn? Vanish into thin air? Engage reverse?

Clearly, since you are the bad, polluting, aggressive, heavy, evil car, you are at fault in every one of these situations.
This is unrelated to badness, pollution, aggression, weight or evilness. You have two lanes with travelling vehicles, a vehicle from the left lane wants to move across the right lane. It's quite obvious that the vehicle from the left lane needs to yield for any vehicle on the right lane.
Imagine a bicycle wants to turn left - it needs to cross your car lane. Guess what, the bicycle has to yield to your car because it crosses your lane.

http://tinyurl.com/32dnbpk

the small street is merging into the bigger one, passing directly on the bike lane. Bicycles pass on both direction and since there are arches, before you can actually see something you need to put all the front part of the car ON the bike lane. Yet, if something happen, it's YOUR fault.
How is this different from a driveway going through a house? You slowly inch your car forward as long as you can't see anything, giving everyone else enough time to decide whether to pass in front of you or to stop. If however you dart out of such an enclosed exit at speed you can only expect carnage, no matter if there is a bicycle lane or pedestrians or just other cars.

This is no problem, as long as they are not allowed to do so when the light is green and the cars are moving. Turning right when the light goes green and you have a crowded bike lane on your right can rapidly turn into a frustrating, endless series of cyclists yelling at you because they have the right to pass even if you were in front of them before, if you are indicating and if you struggle to see them approaching.
If the bicycles are approaching then they will appear in your right mirror, just look into it. If they already are next to your car then you will see them by turning your head to the right. If there are lots of bicycles then why should you make lots of people wait? Instead lots of people should pass making only one wait.

All of this not mentioning bicycles' behaviour in pedestrian areas.
Which is illegal.

The incredibly annoying thing, however, is that it is incredibly difficult to explain all of these issues to someone who is more of a cyclist than a car driver. They simply won't understand. They will say: "the law says I'm doing right, so you pay attention and don't bother me".
I'm both. Guess how difficult it is to explain the laws to a car driver :tease:
 

Cowboy

My name is Sheridan
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,805
See...for some reason cyclists never yell at me or get angry, infact, whenever they see me they make sure to get as far away from me and out of my way as fast as possible, this is especialy so for the lycrapricks........think its the way I dress? the hair?
 
Last edited:
Top