Could this be the end of Chappies for us?

[Eddy Gordo]

I suppose they cant hear either!!!

maybe a law should be passed that bikes have mirrors fitted then they can

Edited November 21, 2012 by Riyadh

[Icycling]

@icycling, As a motorist I dont have a problem with guys riding abreast, however as a motorist, wether speeding or not and you are faster than the guys infront of you in they are supposed to move over to let you pass. Why cant cyclist do this to let cars pass, it is that simple, make room let the car pass, instead cyclist dont wanna budge they want to block the road.

 

I too am motorist - but if the only law a motorist is breaking is speed (I must confess I too have broken this rule) then you are breaking the law - why is riding 2 abreast any worse a rule to break rule to break? Pot calling Kettle black! Once again getting back to Chappies from the Noodhoek side toward Hout bay as per the road signage:

 

1. From 2.2 km to go to the top it is a 20km/h zone.

 

2. On the sign it says by way of a pic no overtaking.

 

3. Their is a sold white line all the way to the top and the road is almost all the way to the top quite narrow.

 

4. The road is by no means straight and the vision of the road ahead is limited.

 

To overtake just 1 cyclist (riding as far left as safe) on this road without breaking any road rules is basically impossible - so why not allow cyclist to ride up to 1.5m of the centre line (So cyclist are safe {1.5m} from cars coming down on the other side) if this means enough space to ride 2 (3 or even 4)abreast why not? Riding 1 or 2 abreast on this road has zero impact on weather a car should be trying to overtake. Motorist just should not be even considering an overtaking maneuver on this stretch of road!

 

This is the sign on Chappies - I am sure you can see how narrow the road is with the solid white line!

 

http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg

[Big H*]

I too am motorist - but if the only law a motorist is breaking is speed (I must confess I too have broken this rule) then you are breaking the law - why is riding 2 abreast any worse a rule to break rule to break? Pot calling Kettle black! Once again getting back to Chappies from the Noodhoek side toward Hout bay as per the road signage:

 

1. From 2.2 km to go to the top it is a 20km/h zone.

 

2. On the sign it says by way of a pic no overtaking.

 

3. Their is a sold white line all the way to the top and the road is almost all the way to the top quite narrow.

 

4. The road is by no means straight and the vision of the road ahead is limited.

 

To overtake just 1 cyclist (riding as far left as safe) on this road without breaking any road rules is basically impossible - so why not allow cyclist to ride up to 1.5m of the centre line (So cyclist are safe {1.5m} from cars coming down on the other side) if this means enough space to ride 2 (3 or even 4)abreast why not? Riding 1 or 2 abreast on this road has zero impact on weather a car should be trying to overtake. Motorist just should not be even considering an overtaking maneuver on this stretch of road!

 

This is the sign on Chappies - I am sure you can see how narrow the road is with the solid white line!

 

http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg

 

Why do they not have a stop/go arrangement at Chappies with say a 45 minutes delay with one way only traffic. Then there would be enough space for a cycle lane, as long as you do not come from the front while I am going up!!!!!!!!

[Eddy Gordo]

Let me retry this, as it could be a better solution

 

Like I said before I dont see the problem in riding 2 or 3 abreast, however as you ride a bicycle on the road, you know when a car is behind you, those that dont probably have head phones in.

 

Anyway why cant cyclist try to be as accomodating as some motorist, by giving way, moving into single file to let a car pass?

 

I dont see the big deal in this, and on the odd occassion when riding on the road we as a small group do this, it is all about accomodating and being courteous instead one will say it is my right of way, you blocking traffic bla bla bla

[T-Bob]

Let me retry this, as it could be a better solution

 

Like I said before I dont see the problem in riding 2 or 3 abreast, however as you ride a bicycle on the road, you know when a car is behind you, those that dont probably have head phones in.

 

Anyway why cant cyclist try to be as accomodating as some motorist, by giving way, moving into single file to let a car pass?

 

I dont see the big deal in this, and on the odd occassion when riding on the road we as a small group do this, it is all about accomodating and being courteous instead one will say it is my right of way, you blocking traffic bla bla bla

 

100% - just make life easier on yourself and the rest of everyone. It's easy to moan about the trucks, coaches etc but sort your own business 1st then you have a leg to stand on. Be the better person.

 

Also, just as a thought, how many riders obey the speed limit going down chappies, both sides?

[Icycling]

I

Let me retry this, as it could be a better solution

 

Like I said before I dont see the problem in riding 2 or 3 abreast, however as you ride a bicycle on the road, you know when a car is behind you, those that dont probably have head phones in.

 

Anyway why cant cyclist try to be as accomodating as some motorist, by giving way, moving into single file to let a car pass?

 

I dont see the big deal in this, and on the odd occassion when riding on the road we as a small group do this, it is all about accomodating and being courteous instead one will say it is my right of way, you blocking traffic bla bla bla

 

The big picture - If the road were safe (unfortunately mainly due to motorist they are not) more people would be on bicycles and motor bikes which would be a great ease to the traffic! But they not and lets face it whenever you are in a car as just 1 person you (unless car its your work delivery person) are actually basically been selfish as you are using a mode of transport designed for 2 or more people! Everybody will say this argument suck as it is the truth - and motorist all are guilty of it, including myself!

 

Now my question on the odd occasion when you do have a passenger in the car do you make them sit on the back seat or in the front seat - why more than likely for ease of conversation - right? Cyclist are no different except they have the wind noise - to try have a conversation with your cycling friend riding single file is very difficult! Why should you, as a cyclist you only taking the space on the road you need - likewise your friend - unlike the cars on the road with 1 person and burning up the environment! If punishment for that is you have to slow down and wait a few moment for other road users - so be it! I see people on the roads accepting they stationary because of traffic, road works, traffic light etc and just accepting this - why can motorist not accept that cyclist are also traffic - at least they moving granted slower than cars in free flow traffic!

 

As to human life - how often do I see cars either stopping or been stopped for baboon even in Tokai, motorist avoiding pets, Guinea fowl, squirrels etc. But to have to offer a cyclist any room just by moving the steering wheel slightly, some motorist seem to feel this is to much work!

[Icycling]

100% - just make life easier on yourself and the rest of everyone. It's easy to moan about the trucks, coaches etc but sort your own business 1st then you have a leg to stand on. Be the better person.

 

Also, just as a thought, how many riders obey the speed limit going down chappies, both sides?

 

Please don't point that out this is a cycling site - I tried and my blew out my front tire due to over heating of the breaking surface!

[pbp2007]

Let me try to understand this.

 

Cyclists are perceived to be causing a problem on the roads, so the idea is, let's license them. That way, we can identify the problem riders.

 

Here's my difficulty:

1. Motorised vehicles have licences. Yet we've still got moving violations galore anywhere you care to look. A road death toll that skriks vir niks. "Name and shame" campaigns. Tell me again how this licensing thing helps?

2. We used to have bike licences. It was essentially a control and moneymaking scam that turned out to cost more to administer than it was worth. And so we are going to reinvent this how exactly?

3. Pedestrians also use the roads. Should we require them to be licensed as well?

 

Right now, we have got road-users of all kinds behaving like twits. Yet the motorists seem to believe that only the cyclists need to compromise. Strangely enough, many cyclists seem to agree. Is it really only a handful of us that find this kind of thinking idiotic?

Edited November 21, 2012 by pbp2007

[DJR]

 

.............................As to human life - how often do I see cars either stopping or been stopped for baboon even in Tokai, motorist avoiding pets, Guinea fowl, squirrels etc. But to have to offer a cyclist any room just by moving the steering wheel slightly, some motorist seem to feel this is to much work!

 

Oooooh boy, I see this often. I once had a woman swerve out for the baboons where you drive up to the Arboretum in Tokai, only to miss me by the width of a hair. It didn't make me feel very good about my own worth.

[Big H*]

Let me try to understand this.

 

Cyclists are perceived to be causing a problem on the roads, so the idea is, let's license them. That way, we can identify the problem riders.

 

Here's my difficulty:

1. Motorised vehicles have licences. Yet we've still got moving violations galore anywhere you care to look. A road death toll that skriks vir niks. "Name and shame" campaigns. Tell me again how this licensing thing helps?

2. We used to have bike licences. It was essentially a control and moneymaking scam that turned out to cost more to administer than it was worth. And so we are going to reinvent this how exactly?

3. Pedestrians also use the roads. Should we require them to be licensed as well?

 

Right now, we have got road-users of all kinds behaving like twits. Yet the motorists seem to believe that only the cyclists need to compromise. Strangely enough, many cyclists seem to agree. Is it really only a handful of us that find this kind of thinking idiotic?

 

To licence pedestrians would be difficult, where would you affix the licence? They should actually make a law that all should wear a reflective strip at night. Even better put reflective strips on beer bottles and papsakke.

[MuddyMike]

Let me try to understand this.

 

Cyclists are perceived to be causing a problem on the roads, so the idea is, let's license them. That way, we can identify the problem riders.

 

Here's my difficulty:

1. Motorised vehicles have licences. Yet we've still got moving violations galore anywhere you care to look. A road death toll that skriks vir niks. "Name and shame" campaigns. Tell me again how this licensing thing helps?

2. We used to have bike licences. It was essentially a control and moneymaking scam that turned out to cost more to administer than it was worth. And so we are going to reinvent this how exactly?

3. Pedestrians also use the roads. Should we require them to be licensed as well?

 

Right now, we have got road-users of all kinds behaving like twits. Yet the motorists seem to believe that only the cyclists need to compromise. Strangely enough, many cyclists seem to agree. Is it really only a handful of us that find this kind of thinking idiotic?

 

Actually, cyclists riding in the middle of the road 3 or 4 abreast or not stopping at stop streets or traffic lights are a problem. Yes, I want licences so those idiots giving the majority who ride responsibly a bad name can be identified and dealt with or would you prefer not to have any licences for bikes, cars or trucks and lets just have anarchy? I dont want compromise, I want rules to be followed.

[Icycling]

Their is a move in this country like has been achieved in other cycling freindly countries that cyclist may go on a red light. Naturally they need to make sure it is safe to do so, think this is done already out of habit. Cape Town my be the 1st city n RSA to pass this as a By-Law in this regard!

[Cippo]

There are only a few places on Chappies to ride 2 abreast. Most places you need to ride single file to avoid being knocked down by a bus or car. We need to play our part here and consider there are others as well using the road. Yes others are at fault too. Most of the vehicles going up or down on Chappies are not adhering to the speed limit, buses included. Believe me when I say the tour operators have a lot more financial clout than us cyclists to make a ban possible. I read a club's newsletter recently where it was actually mentioned that someone lodged a complaint with PPA about a group of club riders in club kit riding 3-4 abreast with cars queuing up behind them. Are we gonna have this 'F U' attitude and jut do what we want to and when a ban is imposed then we wanna have protests against it. My 2c

[pbp2007]

Actually, cyclists riding in the middle of the road 3 or 4 abreast or not stopping at stop streets or traffic lights are a problem. Yes, I want licences so those idiots giving the majority who ride responsibly a bad name can be identified and dealt with or would you prefer not to have any licences for bikes, cars or trucks and lets just have anarchy?

 

I am not advocating doing away with licensing (that's a discussion for another time), simply pointing out the absurdity of looking for solutions in licensing when they lie elsewhere.

 

Licences don't stop some motorists from driving like fools. What we need is an overall attitude change; more enforcement is part of that picture and, to the extent that licensing forms part of enforcement, it is also part of that picture.

 

Why the concern about the few bad apples giving cyclists a bad name? That's a defensive attitude. I doubt that motorists look at an errant driver and worry that he is giving them a bad name. We cyclists need to grow a backbone and point out that our taxes pay for the roads, so we are as entitled to use the roads as any motorised roaduser is. And yes, I drive, too.

 

I dont want compromise, I want rules to be followed by riders and motorists alike..

FTFY

Edited November 21, 2012 by pbp2007

[Big H*]

 

 

I am not advocating doing away with licensing (that's a discussion for another time), simply pointing out the absurdity of looking for solutions in licensing when they lie elsewhere.

 

Licences don't stop some motorists from driving like fools. What we need is an overall attitude change; more enforcement is part of that picture and, to the extent that licensing forms part of enforcement, it is also part of that picture.

 

Why the concern about the few bad apples giving cyclists a bad name? That's a defensive attitude. I doubt that motorists look at an errant driver and worry that he is giving them a bad name. We cyclists need to grow a backbone and point out that our taxes pay for the roads, so we are as entitled to use the roads as any motorised roaduser is. And yes, I drive, too.

 

 

FTFY

 

FTFY........ I hope this means "fixed that for you" ....... Dangerous one to use!!!!!!!!!!!

[T-Bob]

There are only a few places on Chappies to ride 2 abreast. Most places you need to ride single file to avoid being knocked down by a bus or car. We need to play our part here and consider there are others as well using the road. Yes others are at fault too..... Are we gonna have this 'F U' attitude and just do what we want to and when a ban is imposed then we wanna have protests against it. My 2c

 

What he said... +1

 

If you ride 3 across and your excuse is it's because you can't hear each other then spend the morning in the coffee shop or at virgin on a spin bike... Why does tucking in when cars come and not going more than 2 wide seem as offensive as Obama asking everyone to give up their guns? It's safer and not that hard.