Cyclists - your experiences on the road

[LSWR Cavalier]

@Techniquest There are lots of alternatives to Fromes Hill, with easier gradients (up and down).

Generally: increasing speed by whatever means (musclepower, motors legal or not) increases danger. I am happy to cycle quite slowly on shared paths, wait for walkers etc, to avoid being endangered by motors.

 

[Techniquest]

And I’ll say it again, the vast majority don’t, regardless of the fact that some can.

I'd love to see your evidence of 'vast majority'. I put it to you that many of us can, but only when sensible to do so. Many people won't be able to, and that's fine, but I wouldn't describe either party as a 'vast majority'. If I'm out on a busy road, and conditions allow, then yes I'll happily push for 20mph on my human power cycle. I don't aim for 20mph unless I need to, just to be clear.

@Techniquest There are lots of alternatives to Fromes Hill, with easier gradients (up and down).

Generally: increasing speed by whatever means (musclepower, motors legal or not) increases danger. I am happy to cycle quite slowly on shared paths, wait for walkers etc, to avoid being endangered by motors.

Oh indeed, I don't use Fromes Hill or the surrounding area too often. Not necessary and there are plenty of more enjoyable routes to ride. Agreed 100% with your point on greater speed equalling greater danger. No question of it.

There will be a day when I need an e-bike, in the meantime I will happily use my legs. I'm pretty proud of how good they are, but it does take a lot of maintenance to keep them good!

 

[biko]

Of course higher speeds are more dangerous, but that doesn't mean you should ban all e-bikes. I think it would be better to do checks whether e-bikes still have their mandatory cut-off speed intact.

In the Netherlands, we've got something called speed pedelecs (I don't know if this is a known name for this type of bicycle in the UK). This type of e-bikes doesn't have a cut-off speed of 25 km/h, but 45 km/h and are treated as a moped (bromfiets in Dutch terminology). That means they cannot be ridden on most cycle paths inside urban areas and users need to wear a helmet and have an insurance. I believe that these aren't hugely popular (I don't see them often) and are mostly used by longer-distance interurban commuters (10-20 miles). So, it is possible to legally ride very fast, but not on busy cycle paths in towns and cities, only on rural cycle paths parallel to main roads where the speed difference between speed pedelecs and other traffic is huge and cycle paths are quiet. It's unfortunate that the UK lacks this last type of cycle path.

 

[Bald Rick]

I was doing 21mph on my (non-electric) bike yesterday - up a slight gradient and into a headwind. And I was overtaken by someone on another (non-electric) bike. I was not happy!

 

[Techniquest]

I was doing 21mph on my (non-electric) bike yesterday - up a slight gradient and into a headwind. And I was overtaken by someone on another (non-electric) bike. I was not happy!

Ooh I can feel the annoyance! I would be the same, and indeed I was when I got overtaken around Richmond Park yesterday. Twice for that matter, not in the same spot for what it's worth.

I must have got annoyed by it because I upped my game with trying to keep up with the others (I was doing well, and these cyclists were clearly committed to a strict training schedule!) and took a sharp turn too fast. Came off with thankfully only minor injuries, managed to make myself do another 17 miles before my train out of London though!

 

[Bald Rick]

Ooh I can feel the annoyance! I would be the same, and indeed I was when I got overtaken around Richmond Park yesterday. Twice for that matter, not in the same spot for what it's worth.

yep, I took his wheel, and went past him on the downhill. That taught him.

Sorry to hear about your tumble. Hope you are ok.

 

[Techniquest]

yep, I took his wheel, and went past him on the downhill. That taught him.

Sorry to hear about your tumble. Hope you are ok.

The satisfaction of overtaking him must have been epic! Yes, I'm not too bad, bit of bruising to the left of the right knee and some unpleasant significant grazing to the left knee and some minor bruising. Nothing too major, certainly not compared to May last year and a low speed collision, this will knock me out of action for a couple of days but I will soon recover.

The damaged M&S athletic tights annoyed me quite a bit, but I'm glad I had them on as that will have no doubt helped. They're really good tights too, for £19.50 I've been blown away by them. I really want to get another pair, despite them not being padded and so not really suitable for long rides, they're so comfortable it's crazy.

Of course, I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that the male pride took a big hit! At least it wasn't on a main road!

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

I took part in a 25-mile time trial aged 15, AVERAGED more than 20 mph! Took about 73 minutes. Trained athletes can average more than 30 mph over the distance now.

 

[Techniquest]

I took part in a 25-mile time trial aged 15, AVERAGED more than 20 mph! Took about 73 minutes. Trained athletes can average more than 30 mph over the distance now.

Oh my yes, with the advance in technology, lightweight machines etc, that would not surprise me. 73 minutes to do 25 miles is pretty good!

 

[Bikeman78]

I don't do that speed for too long, in most cases, and my fastest logged on the Fitbit (when it worked properly) I seem to recall was between 32 and 36.5mph.

I got to 35 mph down Rumney Hill this morning. There's a speed camera halfway down but no cars about today so nothing getting in my way!

The fastest I ever managed was 40 mph down Rusper Hill when I was a teenager. That was on my battered heavy mountain bike.

 

[AndrewE]

I got to 35 mph down Rumney Hill this morning. There's a speed camera halfway down but no cars about today so nothing getting in my way!

The fastest I ever managed was 40 mph down Rusper Hill when I was a teenager. That was on my battered heavy mountain bike.

but don't worry, speed limits don't apply to cycles anyway! Only to motor vehicles. They can still do you for "cycling furiously" I think...

My fastest was either down a steep hill near Nempnet Thrubwell SW of Bristol (when the front started hopping about, I think from the unbalanced valve on the front wheel) or on a touring holiday when it got a bit hairy going down a valley in the Eifel mountains!
Since then I always put one spoke-mounted reflector on wheels opposite the valve, but that might well unbalance the wheel to the other side!
A

 

[Bletchleyite]

I got to 35 mph down Rumney Hill this morning. There's a speed camera halfway down but no cars about today so nothing getting in my way!

The fastest I ever managed was 40 mph down Rusper Hill when I was a teenager. That was on my battered heavy mountain bike.

I have exceeded 40 down the east side of the Woodhead Pass on a similar steed when I was a student (based on one of those mini speedometers people used to have). I think I got to just short of 45 before thinking better of it. I doubt I would have the guts to do that today. No helmet, either, they weren't really a thing. I would likely have been killed if I had hit a pothole.

It amazes me how fast people will go on skinny tyred road bikes given the poor condition of our roads.

 

[Ediswan]

I have exceeded 40 down the east side of the Woodhead Pass on a similar steed when I was a student (based on one of those mini speedometers people used to have). I think I got to just short of 45 before thinking better of it. I doubt I would have the guts to do that today. No helmet, either, they weren't really a thing. I would likely have been killed if I had hit a pothole.

I believe my record is 56 mph from Beacon Hill down to Woodhouse Eaves in Leicestershire mid 1980s. Familiar route. No side roads. No potholes. Not repeated.

 

[LowLevel]

I believe my record is 56 mph from Beacon Hill down to Woodhouse Eaves in Leicestershire mid 1980s. Familiar route. No side roads. No potholes. Not repeated.

I've driven that route in my car enough times to say you can keep that record

 

[JohnMcL7]

Of course higher speeds are more dangerous, but that doesn't mean you should ban all e-bikes. I think it would be better to do checks whether e-bikes still have their mandatory cut-off speed intact.

In the Netherlands, we've got something called speed pedelecs (I don't know if this is a known name for this type of bicycle in the UK). This type of e-bikes doesn't have a cut-off speed of 25 km/h, but 45 km/h and are treated as a moped (bromfiets in Dutch terminology). That means they cannot be ridden on most cycle paths inside urban areas and users need to wear a helmet and have an insurance. I believe that these aren't hugely popular (I don't see them often) and are mostly used by longer-distance interurban commuters (10-20 miles). So, it is possible to legally ride very fast, but not on busy cycle paths in towns and cities, only on rural cycle paths parallel to main roads where the speed difference between speed pedelecs and other traffic is huge and cycle paths are quiet. It's unfortunate that the UK lacks this last type of cycle path.

I don't think there's an official name but I've seen them referred to as S-Pedelecs though they're treated the exactly the same as mopeds here, I've seen a couple of people who have managed to register them legally but the UK isn't really set up for it.

I'm not sure why everyone is talking about what speed they've done on a bike but I don't find in reality e-bike riders go at anywhere the maximum speed constantly instead the real difference is up hills and into head winds where they can maintain their speed rather than struggle as they would without the motor.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure why everyone is talking about what speed they've done on a bike but I don't find in reality e-bike riders go at anywhere the maximum speed constantly instead the real difference is up hills and into head winds where they can maintain their speed rather than struggle as they would without the motor.

And that's why e-bikes are good for the UK. The Netherlands is flat. Most of the UK isn't. Most people aren't fit enough to be cycling up hills. Therefore, e-bikes make people more likely to cycle. Therefore they are good.

If you're fit enough not to need an e-bike, great, don't buy one and save your money. But I don't get why anyone would criticise others for them.

 

[Techniquest]

I hope that most of us are not criticising others for using e-bikes, they have their place and are clearly popular. With good reason, their ability to assist people who want to cycle but have dodgy knees for example, then it means they can still keep up their cycling to some extent.

I know there's too many times I've gone up hills where an e-bike would be so very welcome, and I suspect we've all had those moments on an exhausting ride, on a hill that just never seems to stop, in a wind that's relentless.

My issue with e-bikes is with those illegally tampering with them. E-bikes aren't for me at the moment, one day I suspect they will be, and if they mean there's less people sat in front of their TV and more people out and about exploring the wonderful and beautiful world, then that's truly worth celebrating!

 

[Haywain]

If you're fit enough not to need an e-bike, great, don't buy one and save your money. But I don't get why anyone would criticise others for them

Not an ounce of criticism for anyone buying and using an e-bike in accordance with the law.

 

[185]

I have exceeded 40 down the east side of the Woodhead Pass on a similar steed when I was a student (based on one of those mini speedometers people used to have). I think I got to just short of 45 before thinking better of it. I doubt I would have the guts to do that today. No helmet, either, they weren't really a thing. I would likely have been killed if I had hit a pothole.

ha.. it's around 43mph down Windle Edge, the 'straight down' old road off the moor... but the hairpin left turn catches many out at the bottom just before they rejoin the Transpennine Trail at Dunford Bridge. Fun, but shockingly fast.

The Woodhead Pass main A628 road is equally fast, but i've only done it once when traffic was light due to a closure years back.

 

[PeterY]

I got to 35 mph down Rumney Hill this morning. There's a speed camera halfway down but no cars about today so nothing getting in my way!

The fastest I ever managed was 40 mph down Rusper Hill when I was a teenager. That was on my battered heavy mountain bike.

The fastest I've rode is 38mph down Scots Hill in Rickmansworth. There is a speed camera at the bottom but at that speed I didn't look around and wave.

 

[SCH117X]

Speed limits listed in the Road Traffic Regulation Act and Highway Code relate to motor vehicles and not to bicycles, however cyclists can be prosecuted for “cycling furiously” or “wanton and furious cycling” so it is advisable to seek to conform with speed limits.

 

[ashkeba]

Some of you will know that there have been 2 fatalities on the Cambridge Guided Busway, a cyclist and a pedestrian. Both fell into the path of a bus while avoiding a collision on the adjacent cycle track. That section of the Busway is now closed to buses. I have cycled that section of the busway: it is the fast moving cyclists that cause the danger, not the buses.

If the buses aren't the danger, how have they killed and there not been other no-bus deaths there? It is the combination of bad design (no gap or fence between busway and cycleway due to space constraint squeezing two bus tracks and tarmac into a railway corridor) and bus drivers not slowing when close-passing people (because they feel safe in their track and ignore the usual highway code) that appear like the killer danger, more than any cyclists.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the buses aren't the danger, how have they killed and there not been other no-bus deaths there? It is the combination of bad design (no gap or fence between busway and cycleway due to space constraint squeezing two bus tracks and tarmac into a railway corridor) and bus drivers not slowing when close-passing people (because they feel safe in their track and ignore the usual highway code) that appear like the killer danger, more than any cyclists.

Neither buses nor cyclists are "the danger" - the danger is posed mainly by the track being too narrow in that location. The obvious fix of a fence between the two doesn't really work because the safe nearside exit from a bus on fire would be blocked by it. It's an awkward one, the only sensible fix I can think of is to have only one busway track (converting the other one to a wider cycleway/pavement) and use it only in the peak direction, as congestion the other way is likely to be minimal and dealt with easily by a bit of bus priority work on the road.

It hasn't been an issue elsewhere on the Busway as the track is wider and in many cases separated from the buses by a bit of greenery.

A bus on the track is not "close passing" in the conventional sense; it is functionally a tram or train, and it is the responsibility of other road users not to enter its swept path.

 

[Haywain]

A bus on the track is not "close passing" in the conventional sense;

Indeed, it has no ability to swerve. I'd be interested to compare this bit of busway with the Luton busway which also has narrow points on the cycle path but, in contrast to Cambridge, they are fenced off from the bus track. This would suggest a design failing.

 

[ashkeba]

A bus on the track is not "close passing" in the conventional sense; it is functionally a tram or train, and it is the responsibility of other road users not to enter its swept path.

I thought English law consisted the busway as a road not a railway, which is what allowed construction and operation to be done "on the cheap" without protection between vehicles or between vehicles and neighbouring users. As such, the driver should still slow when they cannot be sure their stopping distance is clear, such as if someone could fall into it.

Should a mistake or being knocked over by someone else's mistake really be punished by death?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I thought English law consisted the busway as a road not a railway, which is what allowed construction and operation to be done "on the cheap" without protection between vehicles or between vehicles and neighbouring users. As such, the driver should still slow when they cannot be sure their stopping distance is clear, such as if someone could fall into it.

Should a mistake or being knocked over by someone else's mistake really be punished by death?

Not in that sense, but if you are walking alongside a 60mph road on the pavement it is not unreasonable to drive at 60mph alongside. A driver must make reasonable efforts not to hit you if you walk out/fall right in front, but it does not require a change to the driving approach per-se, otherwise one would "fail to make progress" whenever pedestrians were present.

It's not like a shared road at all. It is fully segregated, with each type of user having full knowledge of which bit is relevant to them and responsible for keeping to that bit, and arguably on two completely separate pieces of infrastructure that happen to be next to one another. In essence it's like a tramway, or a German-style unfenced railway. It is definitely not a conventional road, and not intended to be used like one.

 

[PeterY]

The thing that annoys me and I love cycling, is close passes, I usually get 1 or 2 a****holes on each ride. I do try to ride off road, that is towpaths and disused railways. There's sill a lot of mobile use, it's easier to spot when I'm riding and can look into vehicles. Some van drivers think they're above the law.

 

[Bikeman78]

Not in that sense, but if you are walking alongside a 60mph road on the pavement it is not unreasonable to drive at 60mph alongside. A driver must make reasonable efforts not to hit you if you walk out/fall right in front, but it does not require a change to the driving approach per-se, otherwise one would "fail to make progress" whenever pedestrians were present.

Agreed. Most bus lanes are barely wider than the bus so it will be driving along with the wheels almost touching the kerb. I wouldn't expect the bus to slow down every time it passes a pedestrian. The new electric buses are near silent so people might not hear them coming. I've had several catch me up on my bike and I've had no idea they were there unless I glance over my shoulder or a passenger sticks their hand out at a bus stop. To be clear, I've nothing against electric buses, I think they're amazing.

 

[ashkeba]

Not in that sense, but if you are walking alongside a 60mph road on the pavement it is not unreasonable to drive at 60mph alongside. A driver must make reasonable efforts not to hit you if you walk out/fall right in front, but it does not require a change to the driving approach per-se, otherwise one would "fail to make progress" whenever pedestrians were present.

Where in the English law or highway code is that "fail to make progress" offence from? I find only "Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear" and "There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions."

It is unreasonable to close pass at 60mph. The passing distances and speeds in the highway code do not say they can be ignored if there is a kerb.

It's not like a shared road at all. It is fully segregated, with each type of user having full knowledge of which bit is relevant to them and responsible for keeping to that bit, and arguably on two completely separate pieces of infrastructure that happen to be next to one another. In essence it's like a tramway, or a German-style unfenced railway. It is definitely not a conventional road, and not intended to be used like one.

It is "segregated" only in that there is a kerb between the bus part and the rest! I do not think Germany has unfenced railways where people are so likely to fall into them. The busway was built to far lower safety standards than any railway.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone wishes to discuss guided busways further, please create a new thread (if there isn't one already), thanks