Motorists vs Cyclists.... again

[dave303e]

27 minutes ago, Graham S said:

My point was not that cyclists are lesser road users.

My point is that "almost all" road users know those roads are narrow and not ideal for cycling.

So by cycling there, you are accepting the risks.

Im not saying cyclists have less rights to use the roads than any other road user, they are just exposed to more risk, which they accept when riding on those roads.

You are more than welcome to go and use the roads, but people cant be surprised when dangerous roads produce dangerous results and then act all shocked...

I must say I saw that picture and thought to myself- rock wall on the left, no yellow lines and a lovely steep drop down to the ocean on the right. I wouldn't be riding there regularly if I didn't need to. Same reason I wouldn't want to ride a motorbike or drive a car there regularly either, just a high risk that really doesn't need to be taken. 

Yes accidents happen on safe roads all the time, but if you look at controlling the controllable, you give yourself that element of a chance by sticking to 'safer roads.' The same way we pick and choose roads to avoid potential bike jackings, work the odds in your favor.

I saw a youtuber the other day let slip that he doesn't ride his garden features daily, he hits those when he needs to film content only, it is just too risky for a daily ride. I was so glad to see it and think we all need that taste of reality.

[Andymann]

3 hours ago, Hairy said:

120kph on the highway and you're still in 3rd gear. Big, powerful machines that only come alive at 180kph to drive on roads with a max speed limit two thirds of that.

A person can ride a high powered sports bike on the road and not break the law. That same bike could be taken to the track on the weekends for sports racing. 

Why should we dictate what another person decides to purchase and enjoy, as long as they are safe on the roads.

Roads are a serviceway for people to get to and from work and for goods and services to be provided. They should be regulated as such. 

Roads are a way for people to travel and explore. Humans and animals have been creating their own paths since they have roamed earth. The only regulations that should be in place are those that keep people safe.

Having vehicles on the road that can easily violate traffic laws and giving them to idiots who only learn when the fan has already been soiled?

Then ban shoes too, as may a pedestrian has illegally j-walked and caused an accident, or walked on the roads while intoxicated and caused accidents.

The motor industry and government need to figure out what it is they want. These superbikes belong on the track, not the roads.

As per above, they can travel anywhere. You can take this same mindset and say that cyclists may only ride heavy steel framed single speed bicycles with commuter geometry as those on light weight bicycles are riding too fast and pushing the boundaries on the roads. Not much of an argument here, both versions are not really thought through

Keep your Harleys and other big loud vehicles as well. A V8 roadster and a Harley pulling up in residential areas is deafening, amazingly inconsiderate and pointless.

My Harley is not noisy. 

 

And to be fair - those that know their bikes, a Hyosung GT650R is at best a spirited commuter bike. It's hardly a bike that only comes alive at 180kph. 

[Emuraan Hendricks]

I was with the bunch. Injured Cyclist at Chris Barnard hospital (hopefully out of the woods now). Prayers go out to him. Guys please please please be careful the next 2 weekends. Roads are are busy with the last rides you want to get in. 

Good luck guys and please be safe on roads. 

Don't want to sound like a nag but there are cyclists who ride through red traffic lights and there's a bad stigma attached. Sorry for the mourn.

[Shebeen]

50 minutes ago, Skubarra said:

With re to cycling on passes like Franschoek & Chappies I am with @DieselnDust  I get uncomfortable when we reinforce the idea amongst ourselves that we are lesser road users that should avoid certain roads purely because by being there is asking for trouble. To a large extent you can apply that "rule" to any public road

is riding Chappies too risky to consider??

according to strava, 2500+ logged rides just during the month of february going south bound like this incident.

https://www.strava.com/segments/3211261 

 

I'll take those odds.

[Duane_Bosch]

14 minutes ago, Andymann said:

And to be fair - those that know their bikes, a Hyosung GT650R is at best a spirited commuter bike. It's hardly a bike that only comes alive at 180kph. 

THAAT's what it is. I was going to say it looks like a Suzuki SV 650. Most certainly not a superbike.

Edited February 19 by Duane_Bosch

[lechatnoir]

1 hour ago, Skubarra said:

With re to cycling on passes like Franschoek & Chappies I am with @DieselnDust  I get uncomfortable when we reinforce the idea amongst ourselves that we are lesser road users that should avoid certain roads purely because by being there is asking for trouble. To a large extent you can apply that "rule" to any public road

You're spot-on.

On the other hand, when I get invited to ride those roads, my consideration is that I can't face it at all. I get the 'reclaiming spaces' thing, but I guess I'm too afraid. But kudos to those who aren't and can cope with all that comes with riding on those roads.

[Oli4]

3 hours ago, 117 said:

To add some info: I'm on a biker group that has a connection to the rider that hit the cyclist. 

Want to sit down quickly?

The rider was at the back of a group of riders and was on the outside of the lane close to the white line

He was not overtaking on a blind corner as thought and has a few car driver witnesses to back it up. 

The cyclist (ebiker) was the one that cut the corner into the oncoming traffic and impacted the side of the biker as shown in that one photo. 

That to me makes sense, juding by the impact on the right side on the motorbike and where the bicycle ended up. If the biker was on the oncoming side that ebiker cyclist would be swimming instead.

Help was given to the cyclist but the cyclists' group thought it to be better to verbally climb into the lone biker instead of helping their fallen pal. I hear the cyclist was concused and is now in icu for standard check ups

Please don't jump on your high horse at me, rather keep your emotional reply at me at bay, im merely passing on information that i find to be factual

I was 1 or 2 minutes behind the accident yesterday morning. Your group of bikers are talking utter sh!t and there is nothing factual about their story. They were speeding BIG BIG time when they passed us, swerving across the lanes. Accident absolutely bound to happen - and it happened a few minutes later. They all belong to jail - no exception.

Chappies is a narrow road - but if everybody adheres to the speed limits, runners, cyclists, cars and motorbikes can safely co-exist. If d!pshits are allowed to use it as a race track, you can close it down for all other road users.

[DieselnDust]

3 minutes ago, lechatnoir said:

You're spot-on.

On the other hand, when I get invited to ride those roads, my consideration is that I can't face it at all. I get the 'reclaiming spaces' thing, but I guess I'm too afraid. But kudos to those who aren't and can cope with all that comes with riding on those roads.

Well chappies is a fairly soft target due to the low speed limit and generally touristy vibe, most drivers are moving slowly if somewhat carelessly by mid morning.

its the early morning when the pass is o my used by motor commuters when it’s most dangerous because those drivers are travelling so fast they never see the speed limit sign and everyone thinks they’re Walter Rohl dancing a Lancia S037 in the Monte Carlo rally.

the risks are purely man made leaving any other road user at the mercy of chance because there’s no enforcement and a stupid campaign telling cyclists that they must stay 1m away from motorists…..

[Skubarra]

5 minutes ago, lechatnoir said:

You're spot-on.

On the other hand, when I get invited to ride those roads, my consideration is that I can't face it at all. I get the 'reclaiming spaces' thing, but I guess I'm too afraid. But kudos to those who aren't and can cope with all that comes with riding on those roads.

I get both sides of the argument... Control the risks you can and all that. I daily commute to work by mtb so that I have the option to hop onto the pavement whenever I pick up the vibe that the road is too busy or risky for my liking.

What I won't do is blame (or insinuate) a cyclist that was taken out by a road user riding recklessly/illegally for being irresponsible. I think it is a very unhelpful slippery slope to find ourselves on.

[Graham S]

Clearly not understanding my point. 

If you choose to go to to Afghanistan on holiday and you end up being captured or killed is that considered victim blaming? Surely not since the general concensus is "You shouldnt have been there since everyone knows its dangerous"

Nothing is stopping you from going there, the land itself isnt dangerous, its just the people.....

The road itself isnt dangerous, its just the people using it

So by using a known dangerous section of road you are accepting the consequence of your action.

How is this victim blaming?

You are also putting an assumption on road user to act accordingly. 

The reality is that certain roads are dangerous and you cant rely on all road users to drive and use the road safely.

Putting your safety in other road users hands because "They should drive according to the law and pass when its safe" is pretty stupid tbh.

[117]

28 minutes ago, Oli4 said:

I was 1 or 2 minutes behind the accident yesterday morning. Your group of bikers are talking utter sh!t and there is nothing factual about their story. They were speeding BIG BIG time when they passed us, swerving across the lanes. Accident absolutely bound to happen - and it happened a few minutes later. They all belong to jail - no exception.

Chappies is a narrow road - but if everybody adheres to the speed limits, runners, cyclists, cars and motorbikes can safely co-exist. If d!pshits are allowed to use it as a race track, you can close it down for all other road users.

You clearly didnt read my last paragraph did you? 

Let the authorities sort it out then, yes? 

 

[Shebeen]

22 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Clearly not understanding my point. 

If you choose to go to to Afghanistan on holiday and you end up being captured or killed is that considered victim blaming? Surely not since the general concensus is "You shouldnt have been there since everyone knows its dangerous"

Nothing is stopping you from going there, the land itself isnt dangerous, its just the people.....

The road itself isnt dangerous, its just the people using it

So by using a known dangerous section of road you are accepting the consequence of your action.

How is this victim blaming?

You are also putting an assumption on road user to act accordingly. 

The reality is that certain roads are dangerous and you cant rely on all road users to drive and use the road safely.

Putting your safety in other road users hands because "They should drive according to the law and pass when its safe" is pretty stupid tbh.

https://www.penguintravel.com/Offer/RoundtripsandCulturalTours/1819/WherethePamirsmeettheHinduKush-TajikistanandAfghanistan.html

 

Weird analogy, but hey go for it!

[Graham S]

Just now, Shebeen said:

https://www.penguintravel.com/Offer/RoundtripsandCulturalTours/1819/WherethePamirsmeettheHinduKush-TajikistanandAfghanistan.html

 

Weird analogy, but hey go for it!

Oh sorry i forgot about all the good parts of the country to nullify my argument. 

brb just going to Phillipi Farms to drop off my TV because the guy cant make it to my house and will pay more more for delivery. 

[ChrisF]

1 hour ago, dave303e said:

I must say I saw that picture and thought to myself- rock wall on the left, no yellow lines and a lovely steep drop down to the ocean on the right. I wouldn't be riding there regularly if I didn't need to. Same reason I wouldn't want to ride a motorbike or drive a car there regularly either, just a high risk that really doesn't need to be taken. 

Yes accidents happen on safe roads all the time, but if you look at controlling the controllable, you give yourself that element of a chance by sticking to 'safer roads.' The same way we pick and choose roads to avoid potential bike jackings, work the odds in your favor.

I saw a youtuber the other day let slip that he doesn't ride his garden features daily, he hits those when he needs to film content only, it is just too risky for a daily ride. I was so glad to see it and think we all need that taste of reality.

 

The first time I did Chappies was late afternoon of a weekday.

 

Hardly any cars.

 

All went well until the last bit to the toll booth .... the wind was bad in that spot, I simply had to cycle in the middle of the lane.  Thankfully no cars caught up to me until I passed the toll booth and got out of the wind.

 

For the rest of the trip, as well as the return cycle, cars gave me space.

 

The only danger was the wind.

 

 

The second time I again started from Noordhoek.  I got halve way to the viewing point.  As I came around the "bend" the wind picked up drastically !!!  It simply was not safe to cycle in thos conditions, with a fair number of cars on the route.  I turned around.

 

 

 

Chappies is no more dangerous than any other route we cycle.

 

Weekend racers in cars or on bikes makes ANY road unsafe.

 

 

The extremely high number of cyclists out and about in the lead up to CTCT makes MANY roads in the Western Cape a challange ...

 

[Oli4]

3 minutes ago, 117 said:

You clearly didnt read my last paragraph did you? 

Let the authorities sort it out then, yes? 

 

I read your entire post. I am not sure what you wanted me to do - let you "pass on information that [you] find factual" when it directly contradicts what I witnessed? You were not by the scene. You have nothing "factual". I was there. And I know speeding & reckless driving when I see it. 

When you write "I hear the cyclist was concused and is now in icu for standard check ups", it also contradicts all the information given so far (family and Stay Wider of the Rider).

And no - I don't trust "authorities to sort it out" in SA, especially when the victim is unconscious in ICU and certainly not in a position to lay charges. 

 

[Shebeen]

9 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Oh sorry i forgot about all the good parts of the country to nullify my argument. 

brb just going to Phillipi Farms to drop off my TV because the guy cant make it to my house and will pay more more for delivery. 

You're the one who compared riding on Chapman's peak to a holiday in Afghanistan.

Sure it's a windy twisty road, but I'm not sure it's actually seen as being incredibly dangerous and avoid at all costs? I wouldn't avoid it due to safety reasons.

In fact there's not even a single logged here

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=10tzB6FghNBHk7dK1SJSG53q6lYk&usp=sharing