On my drive back to Dawlish from Exeter I happened to come off the A380 and over the mini roundabout onto Colley Lane B3192, the road that runs passed the Ashcombe Adventure centre and on up passed the golf course on the way to Teignmouth.
As luck would have it ,bad luck that is, a group of around 10-12 or so lycra clad louts on cycles were in front of me and several other cars. During the journey behind them at mostly around 8 mph with a sudden burst of speed to around 30 ish they cycled 3 and 4 abreast and at no time pulled over to allow the long line of traffic to pass.
I was luckier than most and was able to safely pass these ignorants louts just as we ran parallel to the golf course. I feel sorry for the 40 to 50 vehicles stuck behind these cretins.
I am sure there will be some who say that the road is for everyone etc, but they are a current and present danger to all other traffic on the road. Cycles should be banned from all roads that have a speed limit above 30 mph and they should be insured, road taxed and have clear registrations on their cycles.
Ignorance is as ignorance does.
I see you have a profound respect for the law. And yet your acute eye seems not to have observed the 90 per cent of drivers who break the speed limit, the 40 per cent of them who run red lights, or the very similar number who use a handheld mobile phone at the wheel...
If you’re a hard-working motorist paying hundreds of pounds each year on road tax, then it’s time to have a word with your accountant as there’s been no such thing as road tax in the UK since 1937.
In most collisions involving a cyclist and another road vehicle it is the cyclist who comes off worst. It is therefore up to them to decide whether they should take out insurance, not the state. Aside from claiming through home insurance, many cyclists are also members of organisations like Cycling UK or British Cycling – who will also cover damages if a cyclist is liable.
I guess you thought it funny to post a photo that you found on the Internet of a large person riding a bicycle. Rather than ridiculing someone who’s exercising in an attempt to lose weight, I would be applauding him.
That route you chose to get from Exeter to Dawlish is an interesting one as well. Are you sure you were driving to Dawlish?
Traffic is of all kinds. Why does DEEDOODLE think that car drivers have anymore right to a road space than any other kind of traffic?
Three or four riding abreast is indeed selfish. However it is all very well demanding that cyclists pay insurance and tax etc, but enforcing that would be so difficult. Sometimes it is good to take a step back and reflect....just exactly how long were you held back by these selfish cyclists? What has that time wasted behind them actually cost you? Having said that, it is really frustrating to be blocked unnecessarily, and I fully understand the resulting exasperation.
It would be selfish if it were true.
And, btw, cyclists do pay taxes, etc.
I have been a cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver for many decades, keep to the highway code and respect most other road users. These cyclists were riding contary to the highway code. To slow traffic from a national speed limit to an 8 mph crawl is dangerous in itself and for the sake of a hobby for health and/or relaxation is, in my opinion, irresponsible and an outright act of selfishness to other responsible road users.
Some on this site may applaud this behaviour by a pack of self centered cyclists who display a strong disrespect for all other road users, but demand absolute respect and compliance from other vehicle users around them.
There actions created a dangerous environment on what is a high speed road and I will say again cyclists should be banned from any road with a speed limit above 30 mph and be registered for use on the road with a clear registration mark on the cycle.
Diana Mond, It always makes me smile at the figures you produce just to verify for those who are interested.
46% exceed the speed limit on motorways.
8% on single carriageways.
53% in 30mph zones.
to put these figures in perspective the proportion of drivers exceeding the above by more than 10 mph is,
single carriageways 1%
30mph zones 6%.
So the higher percentage figures are those exceeding speed limits by 1-10 mph now most UK police forces allow 10% plus 2 mph before any vehicle is stopped so on the motorway 70 mph plus 10% plus 2 is 79mph.
And why is DEEDOODLES route interesting its the fastest route into Dawlish with the min speed limit at 60mph unlike the route on the A379 although i prefer to go via the Mamhead straight.
20% of drivers run red lights
25% of cyclists run red lights
50% of cyclists ride on footpaths
50% ride without lights at night a legal requirment
85% dont have a warning device bell horn it is a legal requirment to have one on.
I luv your picture of the fat guy riding his bike. It's an inspirational shot. I hope lots of folk see it and are moved to buy lycra and get on their bikes. All hail to him and lang mae his lum reek.
All this talk about what happens, figures produced etc,etc. Does not solve anything and I don't think it ever will.
You will always get inconsiderate people whatever mode of transport they use, be it pedal power, foot or motorized power.
Leatash, re the route supposedly taken, why would any sane person drive 4 extra miles just to save 2 minutes out of 31 minutes?? Times and distances verified on Googlemaps.
Tut tut, Mrs C, you berated me recently for using tax-dodging Amazon, and there you are making use of tax-dodging Google.
Tut-tut Bernard. Nothing constructive to add to a thread, as usual.
I don’t give a single penny to Google. As far as I’m aware, they’re not trying to kill our High Street - unlike you and your mates at Amazon.
"If you are not paying for the product, you are the product"
And you have just used Google. I take it you never use an Apple or Android product, or use Facebook - all tax avoiders.
Bloody tax-dodging cyclists...
Anyway. I prefer to Ask Jeeves about people who defraud the public purse (ask your screen-shotting sister about the people I’m referring to).
I’m not sure whether my Nokia 3610 could cope with Facebook...
You only post on here because you’re obsessed with me. However I’m not the one that takes pride in killing our countries High Street. As you’re a UKIP supporter, you should be ashamed about your promotion of the death of the UK High Street.
Careful petal, I could have you for libel. I'd better take a screenshot before you delete your post.
Libel? No you couldn’t.
Though I’m sure I could “have you” for stalking...
Bloody cyclists eh,,,?
Diana Mond why would anyone use that route on Bank Holliday Monday the A379 was a grind with folk trying to get to Dawlish and caravaners and motorhome users trying to get out the traffic was queued back to Kenton west bound and back to Cockwood east bound and google didnt tell me that. And i dont understand your obsession with the High Street the future is shopping online, a example my treat Pontefract Teacakes i love them but only a specific brand in Dawlish £1 per 100 grams online 3kg delivered £17.21 thats 57pence per 100 grams, why would any sane person buy from the High Street it makes no sense. And before you ask i only shop online do i care about the High Street not one jot if they want my cash they have to be competative if they cant compete then hard luck my money has been earned the hard way and only those offering the very best deal get it.
Back at the point...
Groups of cyclists, unless racing, will almost never cycle three abreast or more (unless someone is passing someone else).
most likely what @DEEDOODLE saw was sereral pairs of cyclists all two abreast, but staggered slightly when seen from behind.
Bit like this:
(which looks like three abreast seen from behind).
Love this site, very rarely stays on topic and it's always the few that bicker between themselves, hilarious!
Behind a cyclist with one leg today, wouldn't have known if he hadn't been wearing shorts. Very skilful.
Having studied this video several times it is clear that any form of overtaking was not possible for almost its entire length. That is, no car could safely pass for all but about 1 second of the video. The car in front could not see far enough forward to make a safe manoeuvre. Cyclsist were proceeding properly at all times and, given that they have a legal right to be on the road, they did nothing wrong.
Car drivers seem to have a view of the world that dictates that they, and they alone, sould be able to proceed unhindered by anything. Sorry, but that is incorrect.
Deedoodle says, " These cyclists were riding contary to the highway code." The question for him is to explain how. In fact the assertion is nonsense and that is clear from the video.
He also says that cyclists should be banned from any road with a speed limit above 30 mph. Well, no doubt he will offer himself up for election so that he can pursue this idea in the appropriate forums. It is unlikely to be supported but maybe he should try. In the meantime, perhaps he could explain how such a system would work. Now that could be interesting.
@ER113 13 jul 2018 10:58 - i can only assume you must be a blind person not to see the obvious on the video.
Why any vehicle that can only attain speeds of a few miles an hour for pleasure purposes only and no requirement for road tax, insurance, mot or a license, registration should be allowed to use roads with a 30mph plus speed limit should be obvious. You weren't one of the cyclist's in the video, where you?
Imagine if you found yourself behind a fleet of mobility scooters, what you have to say about that when their top speed on the road is 10mph?
As usual Deedoodle resorts to slurs and innuendo to make a point. What is obvious, as I stated, was that overtaking was simply not possible based on the available video evidence. Road to twisty, too narrow and no adequate visibilty.
His claim about the speed of vehicles is irrelevant. Speed limits everywhere relate to maximum speeds only and say nothing about minimum speeds. Cycles are permitted to use roads. Simple. Straightforward. No question. Check the Highway code. Anyway, the claim that cycliets can only obtain a speed 0f a few miles an hour is patently ridiculous. All one needs to do is to watch the Tour de France to check that fact out.
As for his continuing nnonsense about Road Tax, it is about time that he learnt that it does not exist and was abolished in 1937. This has been stated many times before. Its about time that he paid attention to this fact. Vehicle Excise Duty, which is payable on all motorised vehicles is based, purely and simply on emissions. Please check the Government web site for this explanation. Cycles make no emissions. Therefore, they pay no 'Road Tax'. As for the the remainder of the claims: I pay insurance. I do not need an MOT - I am not a driving a motor!
So, when are you intending to take your 'idea' to the public for a vote?
Finally , No I was not one of the cyclists. But I do ride a bike. On the roads.
@majorp - at least mobile scooters serve a useful purpose of transporting disabled people form a to b.
@ER113 - 'cycles make no emissions' maybe not directly, but the emissions they cause by the tail back of vehicles sitting behind them as they part take in their hobby does, may be they should be taxed on that then.
As to road tax, insurance, mot, license etc you are missing my point - they should be required to.
As to the speeds of the average joe on the roads down here. I do not see how the speeds obtained by cyclists on the tour de france relate to these lycra louts. Other than they act as if they are on the tour de france with no respect for other road user's.
'Slur's and innuendo' please, stop trolling.
I thought the road tax (or whatever you like to call it) was no longer based on emissions, certainly not for new cars since last year! Clearly the government weren’t raking in enough money with that scheme and it has now reverted to the previous scheme. Low emission cars no longer pay £20 but now pay £170, none of which will go to pay for filling in the pot holes!
So you don't mind being held up behind a MS but you detest being held up behind the lycra louts - is that correct?
Vehicle Excise Duty: This statement is to be found on Wiki and clearly indicates the logic of charges; Thus before 2017 it was as follows:
The pre-2017 VED structure based on CO2 bands was introduced in 2001 when average UK new car emissions ratings were 178 gCO2/km. The Band A threshold of 100 gCO2/km below which cars pay no VED was introduced in 2003 when average new car emissions ratings were 173 gCO2/km. Since then, to meet EU emissions ratings targets average new car emissions ratings have fallen to 125 gCO2/km. This means that an increasingly large number of ordinary cars fell into the zero- or lower-rated VED bands, creating a sustainability challenge and weakening the environmental signal in VED. This is set to continue as manufacturers meet further EU targets of 95 gCO2/km set for 2020.
In 2017 a new system was introduced as follows:
The reformed VED system retains and strengthens the CO2-based First-Year-Rates to incentivise uptake of the very cleanest cars whilst moving to a flat Standard Rate in order to make the tax fairer, simpler and sustainable. To ensure those who can afford the most expensive cars make a fair contribution, a supplement of £310 will be applied to the Standard Rate of cars with a list price (not including VED) over £40,000, for the first five years in which a Standard Rate is paid. The minimum payment is £140 per annum..
Money collected for VED goes into the tax fund that pays for, well, everything. This has been the case since 1937.