there is no law that forbids 3 abreast unless you care to share a link to that law, as you’ll be aware I can’t throw up a link to a non existent law. As far as I’m aware the abreast is advisory at best but there is no legal maximum unless again you can throw up a link to it.
Got you. You’re one of those mega-selfish fuck everyone else cyclists. Personally, I like to keep my self safe and think of how my actions affect others. I ride single file, make sure nothing is close if I am swinging out to miss drain or pothole, dont go shaking my fist because of a 1m pass...I expect it and therefore dont have any dramas. Funny that: considerate riding equals no dramas. Same on the other bike.
Charming bladders key warrior supreme, you taking up where Sooty left off ? Try winding ya neck in. Ain’t you full of generalisations. Haha, I’m not, when in groups we never rode more than 2 abreast I’ve never ridden in large enough groups to be using 3 abreast, get your facts straight before you throw accusations at folk. Taking your statement at face value if you’re riding solo you’re bound to be single file. No I don’t worry that much when motorist or motorcyclist ride closer than 1.5 metres I expect it and have no control over how low their standard of driving is. No I don’t shake a fist like you stated again get your facts straight. There’s little point in trying to educate Pork bladders.
I do a bit of cycling, I try and avoid main roads as much as possible as there's no enjoyment in it for me having cars, trucks up your asre making me paranoid about pissing people off. I feel a bit ashamed to call myself a keen cyclist like the lycra clad twats. Its a bit like people calling me a 'biker'. I'm not a scruffy twat on a bandit revving the tits off it at traffic lights. I'm a motorcyclist, not a biker.
Yeah but.....As Motorcyclists, we accept and prepare/protect against injury. We 'Motorcyclists' don't ride significantly slower than other road users, 2 abreast and in a wafer thin Lycra 'Onesie' with a styrofoam hat loosly tied to just the top of our head. We are more sensible and wear full protective leather/substantial helmet/boots/gloves/back, shoulder, knee protectors etc. We also pass a test (by law and specifically for that mode of transport) before getting out on the roads. Our machines also have to pass legal safety checks/standards (annually). Our machines also have such safety features as direction indicators, brake lights, efficient braking systems etc. etc..... Anyone that doesn't comply with all the requirements/sensible protections for motorcycling and then has an accident on one, would probably be met with a 'ouch!!..but you had it coming' sentiment from most of us.
Sounds like a fact to me. Sorry of you dont like it: but thats how most will see it. Laws. Rights. Zero common sense. But a sense of huge entitlement. TBH I haven’t cycled in a few years in Lycra, but when I did (min 2, max 6) it was always single file unless overtaking or chatting. Then it was keep an eye on behind and single file if a vehicle approached. From either direction - some of these country lanes can mean a soft verge tuns into a huge pothole and cars need to avoid it: they cant if you are taking up the space of a 6ft wide car. But you are that type, aren’t you. Leap onto any Facebook cause, to educate wanker drivers on how you have the right to do what you like, where you like, when you like, regardless of how it affects anyone else. Highway Code clauses I printed in your mind like a savant remember pi. Bet you wear a head cam too BTW I’m no key board warrior: F2F or internet all the same to me. There are enough on here like that, there is no need for more Chin up chap - its sunny outside
Non of the above is a legal requirement for a cyclist, not even a helmet. Some cyclists put themselves in harms way some don’t, same can be said for motorcyclists as you’ve stated. End of the day some riders use common sense some don’t, it’s just the way it is. Anyway I’m off out with me lad cycling just to outrage motorists for having the cheek to be out as 2 people enjoying the days. Laters
Rule 66 of the Highway Code states that cyclists “should never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends”. ... In the Highway Code, legal requirements are identified by the words “MUST” and “MUST NOT”.23 May 2017 https://www.driving.co.uk › news
It’s advisory not a mandatory, not everything in the Highway Code is law. IE cyclists can’t be prosecuted for that particular offence. They could well be prosecuted to another offence but not the abreast. Whether it’s legal to do so is not the same as common sense, so spewing the legality of it is false. It merely fuels the outrage of most on here at being delayed or inconvenienced going about their day. For your and bladders righteousness on this thread, can I ask you not break any speed limits whilst out on your motorcycle rides wouldn’t want your haloes to slip now would we.
Someone needs to report all four of them .... ... for driving on the wrong side of the road ! ..... Sorted :- Now let's see if I can un-blur those number plates ....
Further to my previous post, on a road bike sat up your mates chuff you don't exactly have the greatest of views or scenery either. Get out on a mountain bike down a country lane and you spot a byway or a path across a field and the world is your oyster. I've taken pics and friends think I've gone away somewhere nice for a weekend. But no, the scenery is right on your doorstep if you look. Surely much nicer than being sat on a major A road. The worst bit for me is riding on the road to have to get back home.
Must / should........whatever good luck using the distinction as your defence in the event of an accident
