Surrey speeds

[Whorty]

Here’s a descent, look at the rider’s position - overtaking on outside of bends, coming to blind crests, etc. This video is from about 5 years ago, as the oil protesters were still camped out.

Strava considers this a dangerous descent and doesn't do a leader board - it does however show the fastest time on the 4.88km descent which is 5min 28 secs. That's an average of about 33 mph. Granted, in certain sections the cyclist may hit higher speeds but clearly for not that long or the average speed would be higher given the average gradient is -3.5%

And this is the fastest guy - the average cyclist will be nowhere near that speed.

But great disinformation because you hate cyclists.

[Whorty]

OK. What you "fast and safe" cyclists regularly fail to realise is that you are still travelling at on average less than a third the speed of the surrounding traffic, and that your desire to shave a few seconds off an already pointless activity does not justify forcing everyone else to wait behind you for a while until it is safe to get past you without putting you in (even more) danger - which includes you getting off the damn road when a suitable space appears (which it will).

Or, as happened just yesterday, being in line of at least twenty vehicles behind on guy riding up long, steep A-road climb out of Wells at a lot less that 40 mph, ignoring all of several chances to let people past safely. Two miles in 10 minutes.... And you wonder why drivers get irritated.

The needs of the many are supposed to outweigh the wants of the few. Cyclists never seem to have heard of that particular aphorism.

We are indeed totally aware that we are travelling much slower than vehicles. We are also aware that we are not surrounded in 3 tons of metal. Maybe if more car drivers realised that then they'd give cyclists more space and respect.

an already pointless activity

Using that logic, aren't all hobbies pointless? But at least cycling gets you fit, gets you to see parts of the country that you may not see otherwise, and p*sses off idiots like you.

That reminds me, I've not done Cheddar Gorge yet this year ... may have to head that way to annoy you and your pals. Please feel free to have a chat if you see me

which includes you getting off the damn road when a suitable space appears (which it will).

Why should a cyclist stop every time a selfish driver wants to overtake? Using that logic 99% of all other vehicles should get off the road when I get behind them in my car ... or, you can learn some patience and stop being a dick

Or, as happened just yesterday, being in line of at least twenty vehicles behind on guy riding up long, steep A-road climb out of Wells at a lot less that 40 mph, ignoring all of several chances to let people past safely. Two miles in 10 minutes.... And you wonder why drivers get irritated.

Is that why you get road rage and turn your 3 ton car into a weapon? You know, you could also choose to leave the house 10 minutes earlier and you wouldn't need to rush everywhere.

As for those cars behind the cyclist - if they can't overtake this will be because of lots of cars coming in the opposite direction. Maybe of more drivers got out of their cars, then there would be less cars on the road and it would be easier to find spots to overtake.

I never pull over on a hill either going up or down as it's not safe for me to do so. I do however pull over if on winding roads and I have cars or lorries behind me ... but ONLY when it's safe for me to do so.

[malvolio]

We are indeed totally aware that we are travelling much slower than vehicles. We are also aware that we are not surrounded in 3 tons of metal. Maybe if more car drivers realised that then they'd give cyclists more space and respect.


Using that logic, aren't all hobbies pointless? But at least cycling gets you fit, gets you to see parts of the country that you may not see otherwise, and p*sses off idiots like you.

That reminds me, I've not done Cheddar Gorge yet this year ... may have to head that way to annoy you and your pals. Please feel free to have a chat if you see me


Why should a cyclist stop every time a selfish driver wants to overtake? Using that logic 99% of all other vehicles should get off the road when I get behind them in my car ... or, you can learn some patience and stop being a dick


Is that why you get road rage and turn your 3 ton car into a weapon? You know, you could also choose to leave the house 10 minutes earlier and you wouldn't need to rush everywhere.

As for those cars behind the cyclist - if they can't overtake this will be because of lots of cars coming in the opposite direction. Maybe of more drivers got out of their cars, then there would be less cars on the road and it would be easier to find spots to overtake.

I never pull over on a hill either going up or down as it's not safe for me to do so. I do however pull over if on winding roads and I have cars or lorries behind me ... but ONLY when it's safe for me to do so.

Which proves my point. You may be the shining example. 90% of your fellow cyclists aren't.

I and several other drivers (including the bus) crawled along behind the guy yesterday for all that time because we simply couldn't see enough of the road to overtake in the space available, even when there was nothing coming the other way. If you knew the road (rh A39 Penn Hill, coming out of Wells) you would understand why. When I personally did get past it was at the top of the hill where the road is still double-whites, with a blind crest about 400 yards away and, incidentally, while our hero was still going slowly weaving slightly while he took a drink from his bottle, rather than simply pulling into the layby at the top of the hill.

One example out of many. I drive with all the care necessary not to endanger someone on a bike, but that care is rarely reciprocated. We have a large cycling community round here, and most of the time we all get along just fine. It's the odd hero that spoils it for everyone, including their fellow cyclists.

But yes, you are quite right. The needs of one individual must take precedent over those of the fifty or so other people behind him because he's the one on the bike.

[Whorty]

Which proves my point. You may be the shining example. 90% of your fellow cyclists aren't.

I and several other drivers (including the bus) crawled along behind the guy yesterday for all that time because we simply couldn't see enough of the road to overtake in the space available, even when there was nothing coming the other way. If you knew the road (rh A39 Penn Hill, coming out of Wells) you would understand why. When I personally did get past it was at the top of the hill where the road is still double-whites, with a blind crest about 400 yards away and, incidentally, while our hero was still going slowly weaving slightly while he took a drink from his bottle, rather than simply pulling into the layby at the top of the hill.

One example out of many. I drive with all the care necessary not to endanger someone on a bike, but that care is rarely reciprocated. We have a large cycling community round here, and most of the time we all get along just fine. It's the odd hero that spoils it for everyone, including their fellow cyclists.

But yes, you are quite right. The needs of one individual must take precedent over those of the fifty or so other people behind him because he's the one on the bike.

So one dick cyclist, and you tar us all with the same brush? Inneresting.

Thankfully 100% of vehicle drivers are perfect examples of road curtesy and safety and it's only cyclists that have the odd dick in their midst.

I drive with all the care necessary not to endanger someone on a bike, but that care is rarely reciprocated.

Love to know how a cyclist endangers you in your 3 tonnes of metal. Yes, he may slow you down, but he/she is hardly endangering you unless you choose to try and overtake when it's not safe to do so .... and if you do, you'd be done for dangerous driving, so no, even in that circumstance it's not the cyclists fault.

You'll be bringing up the old road tax argument next

[malvolio]

So one dick cyclist, and you tar us all with the same brush? Inneresting.

Thankfully 100% of vehicle drivers are perfect examples of road curtesy and safety and it's only cyclists that have the odd dick in their midst.


Love to know how a cyclist endangers you in your 3 tonnes of metal. Yes, he may slow you down, but he/she is hardly endangering you unless you choose to try and overtake when it's not safe to do so .... and if you do, you'd be done for dangerous driving, so no, even in that circumstance it's not the cyclists fault.

You'll be bringing up the old road tax argument next

Well if you won't listen, no point in arguing the point.

A for "endangering", to pass safely (i.e. safe for him, not me) put me on the wrong side of the road and the double whites for about 50 yards, travelling at speed, approaching a blind crest. I judged it safe enough, my old police driving instructor probably wouldn't. Or I could have just stayed behind him for a few more miles-and risk some impatient twat behind me doing something stupid. All because one road user cba to move over for a couple of minutes at most.

[WTFH]

Strava considers this a dangerous descent and doesn't do a leader board - it does however show the fastest time on the 4.88km descent which is 5min 28 secs. That's an average of about 33 mph. Granted, in certain sections the cyclist may hit higher speeds but clearly for not that long or the average speed would be higher given the average gradient is -3.5%

And this is the fastest guy - the average cyclist will be nowhere near that speed.

But great disinformation because you hate cyclists.

Ah, it’s a DANGEROUS descent according to the Strava website. Why’s that?
Average of 33 means that some times they are doing less, and sometimes more. It’s not a “may hit higher speeds”, you can’t have an average without slower and faster.

But great disinformation because you have no sense of respect or responsibility for the roads, the conditions and other road users.

[Whorty]

Well if you won't listen, no point in arguing the point.

A for "endangering", to pass safely (i.e. safe for him, not me) put me on the wrong side of the road and the double whites for about 50 yards, travelling at speed, approaching a blind crest. I judged it safe enough, my old police driving instructor probably wouldn't. Or I could have just stayed behind him for a few more miles-and risk some impatient twat behind me doing something stupid. All because one road user cba to move over for a couple of minutes at most.

Soo ... you went across double white lines to overtake and you're blaming the cyclist? Again, inneresting.

And your argument for this is that some potential impatient car driver behind you forced you to do it ... but you're still blaming the cyclist for this?

I'm glad you judged it safe enough to do ... most drivers make a similar safe judgement just before they end in the ditch, or worse.

Good for you though. You're my hero, looking out for us cyclists

[WTFH]

Whorty, do you consider the video posted of the descent shows a rider in control, showing respect and responsibility, riding in a safe manner?

[Whorty]

Whorty, do you consider the video posted of the descent shows a rider in control, showing respect and responsibility, riding in a safe manner?

Do I think the cyclist taking the video, the cyclist ahead of them, or the other 20 or so cyclists in the video, in control then yes. At no time did they emergency break, or interfere with any other road user. And there is no speed indicator on the video (unless I missed it) to show that they are moving too fast for the conditions.

Would I descend like that ... no probably not. I'm not a great descender so I come down like the majority of the other cyclists on that video.

But I'm happy for someone to show me exactly where the cyclist is being dangerous. And to link that back to the highway code.

I get that non cyclists don't understand bike handling skills, or think all cyclists have a death wish, but that's really not the case. There are, of course, dick cyclists but in my personal experience I meet more dick drivers when I go out than I ever do cyclists - the reason being, we know we are vulnerable and so cycle very defensively to protect ourselves. Car/lorry/van drivers are less safe - and road accident stats back that up.

[malvolio]

Soo ... you went across double white lines to overtake and you're blaming the cyclist? Again, inneresting.

And your argument for this is that some potential impatient car driver behind you forced you to do it ... but you're still blaming the cyclist for this?

I'm glad you judged it safe enough to do ... most drivers make a similar safe judgement just before they end in the ditch, or worse.

Good for you though. You're my hero, looking out for us cyclists

Go read your Highway Code. Rule 129.

HTH