I presume sammy1 isn't a cyclist?

I wonder how they do up their seatbelt, reaching across with their left hand for it and putting it in the holder? Much the same as the HC's suggesting for opening the door?

Doesn`t matter if your a cyclist or not or how you do your belt up as long as you concentrate on the road so you see any pedestrians or cyclists, it isn`t rocket science, drivers have to be more alert than other road users as they do tend to do things you do not expect so have to allow for it.

I try not to drive close to the kerb line due to the amount of rubbish and sheer potholes around them without dips for the manhole covers in the kerb so can imagine how a cyclist would feel riding through that lot

I presume sammy1 isn't a cyclist?

I wonder how they do up their seatbelt, reaching across with their left hand for it and putting it in the holder? Much the same as the HC's suggesting for opening the door?

Sammy1 used to be a cyclist and it is a great activity and hobby. It has become a more dangerous activity as the years go on and coincidently there is a current thread of how dangerous the roads have become. Cyclists should be more aware themselves instead of head down and blindly carrying on as some do.

The Highway code advises the driver to be more aware but this is only common sense. As regards the door opening a cyclists can see themselves when a car door may open and should make due allowance that a driver may be negligent. Cyclists as road users have the same responsibility as drivers but you see and increasing number disregarding the rules of the road and pavements.

That's precisely what you are supposed to do..and has been the case for years.

If you are not giving cyclists that degree of space when overtaking them, then you are simply wrong.

The new rule Advises Cyclist"" to ride in the middle of the lane in certain circumstances to make them selves more visible"""

It does not specify which circumstances which is ambiguous therefore my reference to the ""selfish""

Irrelevant...No matter where the cyclist might be positioned in the lane...you should be overtaking as if you are overtaking another vehicle.

Don't see how you can class it as selfish.?

The new rule Advises Cyclist"" to ride in the middle of the lane in certain circumstances to make them selves more visible"""

It does not specify which circumstances which is ambiguous therefore my reference to the ""selfish""

So you feel cyclists making themselves more visible is being selfish?, hmm.

Not that it changes the fact that for many years now the Highway Code has advised drivers to give as much space passing a cyclist as they would a car.

Maybe you should familiarise yourself as to what you, as a driver, should already be doing rather than complaining about what cyclists are being advised to do.

I have no objection to a cyclist avoiding the rough outer edge of a road, but I think advising them to hug the centre line is going too far.

Nobody Is saying they should hug the centre line, what they are being advised to do is cycle in the centre of the lane.

"""

Don't tell me you can't be bothered to take a little effort to ensure you're not endangering a cyclist! """

If this is directed at the OP nowhere in the thread have I indicated that I do NOT take adequate care when passing cyclists. Indeed I made it quite clear that I was a cyclist and there is no need for your sob story and indeed referring to your ex-colleague as a ""brain dead c------

This tread regarding the new Highway code rules is on much larger media than this and the overwhelming verdict seems to be that it is unpopular and in some respects unsafe to some road users and pedestrians. Some have described it as a recipe for road rage.

I would not be surprised to see a re-write in the near future to include E Scooters which would fit nicely with this nonsense when they are legalised.?.

[quote] I gave up cycling mainly because of age....[/quote]

How old are you Sammy1?

You may not have noticed, but there are a lot of old(er) cyclists out there.

[Quote] on... today's main roads as they are too crowded and dangerous. [Quote]

You don't always have to cycle on main roads. It is possible to use quiet lanes and less busy roads. Surely if you've ridden thousands of miles on a bike you would have come across them? If not, you definitely limited your enjoyment of riding.

[quote]I have little sympathy for the cyclists that ride recklessly and do not obey their part of the Highway code.[/quote]

In your own words, define "riding recklessly".

[quote]I am alive today having ridden thousands of miles on a bike and do not mind where cyclists position themselves as long as they are considerate to others. I always keep to the left but not in the gutters and drains.[/quote]

Cyclists tend to do this too.

Lots of people are alive today who may, or may not have ridden thousands of miles on a bike!

<< You don't always have to cycle on main roads. It is possible to use quiet lanes and less busy roads. >>

It is probably 50 years since I cycled anywhere for pleasure, and I can assure you that 'quiet lanes and less busy roads' are less quiet and a lot busier than they were. I now drive on such lanes and roads, and some of them are narrow with blind bends. I'm not surprised that few cyclists frequent them compared to the 'old days'.

One irritation for me is cyclists who choose to cycle abreast when there is traffic about. Clearly it wouldn't matter if they travelled faster, but if any car occupied a road at their speed there would be a lot of annoyance.

You said you gave up cycling due to age. One wonders how old you are.

Didn't your thousands of miles of cycling keep you in good health? (genuine question, since you have now given up the activity).

You say that roads are busier than they were. Surely your irritation should be with the drivers of the extra motorised traffic?

Your cycle experience is obviously different from mine. I can assure you that there are quiet roads and lanes to cycle on (and I've been cycling for decades).

Cycling two abreast is allowed and is safer for cyclists. Overtaking motorists will be able to overtake cyclist riding two abreast much quicker than a large group in single file.

I've often used my left hand to open the car door, long before I knew it was a thing. Particularly where there's a risk of opening the door onto a passing cyclist. I can't say I always do this though. I think I picked up the habit when driving the old-type Ford Transits in the 1970s.

As a cyclist it's always best to leave a little space to the left, not least because the edge of the road is often in poor condition.

When A-roads are upgraded or new sections built, they include a margin to the left of the edge-marking line which is ideal for cyclists to use while keeping out of the way of motor traffic. You just need to watch for the drain covers but they're easy to avoid. But these days the council lets roadside vegetation overhang these margins, so cyclists are forced to use the main carriageway.

As for the 'new' rule that vehicles should give way to pedestrians at junctions, it's just turning previous Highway Code advice into a rule. I think the main danger is that a lot of drivers won't know the new rule, or they think it doesn't really apply. I think the main implication is that if a driver collides with a pedestrian while they are turning into a side road, then the driver will definitely be at fault.

Edited by Sofa Spud on 24/01/2022 at 13:17

An interesting article about the changes:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/24/common-my...n

""""In your own words, define "riding recklessly"""

How about riding on the pavement. Pulling wheelies down the centre of the road. Belting through pedestrian precincts. Riding without lights and in dark clothing on these dark winter nights. No bells. Ignoring red lights and other rules in the HC

De Sisti Are you sure your not that Jeremy V character off the TV? This is a Motoring Forum!

Maybe I am. I'm sure you mentioned you gave up cycling due to age.

Yes I know this is a motoring forum, but you did mentioned cycling before I did, so define driving recklessly ("in your words").