I have always signalled and given cyclists loads of space when passing (at least I have since I started cycling :-) ). However I have recently had to modify this behaviour to take into account the moron in the vehicle behind and the particular stretch of road being travelled at the time. When on a road in the country with no significant turnings to the right signalling is not a problem, but in town when moving slowly and with turnoffs to the right it is inevitable that moron behind thinks that the slow-moving PiTA in the Land Rover in front (that'll be me then) is about to turn right and get out of the way. The upshot of which is a near collision between said moron as they move to the left to squeeze past me, and the bike I have just overtaken. I now only signal when not in town and would like to know if this is correct / stupid / recommended or what other course of action is sensible.
I now only signal when not in town and would like to know if this is correct / stupid / recommended or what other course of action is sensible.
I reckon that if your intention to overtake is unambiguous you shouldn't worry. The main thing is not to come into conflict with other road users - if a signal helps to prevent this, then give one; if it doesn't, don't. Well, that's my £0.02 anyway.
Guy === ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and dynamic DNS permitting) NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer work. Apologies.
I have always signalled and given cyclists loads of space when passing (at least I have since I started cycling :-) ). However I have recently had to modify this behaviour to take into account the moron in the vehicle behind and the particular stretch of road being travelled at the time. When on a road in the country with no significant turnings to the right signalling is not a problem, but in town when moving slowly and with turnoffs to the right it is inevitable that moron behind thinks that the slow-moving PiTA in the Land Rover in front (that'll be me then) is about to turn right and get out of the way. The upshot of which is a near collision between said moron as they move to the left to squeeze past me, and the bike I have just overtaken. I now only signal when not in town and would like to know if this is correct / stupid / recommended or what other course of action is sensible.
Regards Simon
If the signal you give could confuse others (Can car drivers be easily confused ?) then I'd say don't give a signal.
"Simon Galgut" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Is this a Good Thing ?
When I'm passing a slower cyclist on my cycle I would *not* normally indicate as (much to the annoyance of cagers) I will have moved out into the overtaking position WELL before I get anywhere near the slower cyclist, so by the time I actually approach the cyclist I am not moving to the right, but simply continuting my current course (as per my previous post!).
Generally I reserve a right signal for changing lanes on multi lane roads, and making right turns.
I would generally follow these same rules when piloting a cage.
Yes if you need road users behind to hang back or give more room, but normally I don't feel the need. I look behind, wait for a suitable moment, then accelerate past them. Only takes a jiffy if you put some welly into it.
.....Hold on, hold on!!!! :-) I've just realised from the rest of your post that you're talking about overtaking in a car. I dunno. Perhaps ask on a motoring newsgroup?
My advanced driving instructor (who also trains all the police class 1 drivers) was most particular that signalling should NOT be used in this instance in any situation. (Contrary to what I'd been taught when learning to drive). Same applied to parked cars.
The basic idea was to indicate my intentions by my position on the road taken early and to only indicate when changing lanes on multilane roads or turning right and even then only when this was necessary ie. there was someone to indicate to and the signal was unambiguous.
Russ
Simon Galgut <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Is this a Good Thing ?
I have always signalled and given cyclists loads of space when passing (at least I have since I started cycling :-) ). However I have recently had to modify this behaviour to take into account the moron in the vehicle behind and the particular stretch of road being travelled at the time. When on a road in the country with no significant turnings to the right signalling is not a problem, but in town when moving slowly and with turnoffs to the right it is inevitable that moron behind thinks that the slow-moving PiTA in the Land Rover in front (that'll be me then) is about
to
Quoted message said:
turn right and get out of the way. The upshot of which is a near collision between said moron as they move to the left to squeeze past me, and the
bike
Quoted message said:
I have just overtaken. I now only signal when not in town and would like to know if this is
correct
Quoted message said:
/ stupid / recommended or what other course of action is sensible.
"Simon Galgut" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Is this a Good Thing ?
I have always signalled and given cyclists loads of space when passing (at least I have since I started cycling :-) ). However I have recently had to modify this behaviour to take into account the moron in the vehicle behind and the particular stretch of road being travelled at the time. When on a road in the country with no significant turnings to the right signalling is not a problem, but in town when moving slowly and with turnoffs to the right it is inevitable that moron behind thinks that the slow-moving PiTA in the Land Rover in front (that'll be me then) is about
to
Quoted message said:
turn right and get out of the way. The upshot of which is a near collision between said moron as they move to the left to squeeze past me, and the
bike
Quoted message said:
I have just overtaken. I now only signal when not in town and would like to know if this is
correct
Quoted message said:
/ stupid / recommended or what other course of action is sensible.
Regards Simon
I go for the 'couple of flashes' approach. This usually confuses them enough to cause them to stop and ask 'What's this prat playing at?' and take a couple of secs to assess the situation, by which time it's clearer that I'm overtaking a cyclist... Dave.
Am I unusual..... one two separate occaisons I have been out riding, signaled to turn right and motorists have slowed to let me move across to the centre of the road.
Thank you to those two considerate drivers, if only there were more.
My final thought is..... do I look so scary on a bike that drivers wont even get close enough to worry me?
Perhaps we could insitgate a 'Driver of the Month' award for any driver showing consideration for cyclists!
In article <[email hidden]>, one of infinite monkeys
at the keyboard of 'Simon Galgut said:
Is this a Good Thing ?
I have always signalled and given cyclists loads of space when passing (at least I have since I started cycling :-) ). However I have recently had to modify this behaviour to take into account the moron in the vehicle behind and the particular stretch of road being travelled at the time.
Precisely. Who is your signal supposed to benefit?
Quoted message said:
The upshot of which is a near collision between said moron as they move to the left to squeeze past me, and the bike I have just overtaken.
That situation suggests a certain road width, which in turn suggests that you must've had sufficient space to pass the cyclist without crossing the centre line. Best policy there is to move out well in advance (claim the middle of the road), but then not signal. That way, moron won't try and pass on the left, and will only overtake if there's genuinely enough room.
