It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

Incorrect content for this thread, but much correctness displayed;

User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

User avatar
Rich B
Posts: 11561
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:22 pm
Currently Driving: T6.1 VW Transporter combi
S1 Lotus Elise

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by Rich B »

where does the fault lie there? obviously the cyclist shouldn’t be on the pavement, but presumably the car should be watching for stuff on a pavement before driving onto one?
IanF
Posts: 3586
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:58 pm
Currently Driving: Ferrari F430 Spider
BMW M4 Comp
Mini Cooper
LR Evoque P300e
Contact:

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by IanF »

I’d normally say it’s the car driver’s fault, but the speed of the cyclist.. there’s no way for the car to manoeuvre any slower and the cyclist shouldn’t be cycling on the pavement that fast! If a child had stepped out, the cyclist couldn’t have stopped in a reasonable distance and so deserves some metre of punishment
Cheers,

Ian
User avatar
Beany
Posts: 8090
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:27 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by Beany »

Yeah the cyclist earned that one, presumably a faceful of tarmac is punishment enough.

And paying for the damage to the car.

Utter bellendery on their part.
User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

Excellent choice and timing of music I thought.
It'd be nice to know more but all I have is that clip :(

I had a rasta bloke lose his shit with me a few days back because I didn't overtake a cyclist on a Z railway bridge, nor immediately afterwards where it would have meant overtaking on a pedestrian crossing. Intense incensed sense- and sensiless incessant nonsense.
Which made me think; imagine Austen partook of the pot, had a reefer and a rewrite.
User avatar
Gavster
Posts: 3887
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:31 am
Currently Driving: A washing machine with heated seats

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by Gavster »

That car wasn't proceeding with caution given they couldn't see the pavement behind the van, it looks like they drove onto the driveway with the assumption it was clear. If that pavement is shared use then I'd put the blame on the driver, because even if the cyclist was travelling at a slower speed they still could have been hit by the car
User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 7929
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by ZedLeg »

Both dafties but the bike was going way too fast so I’m going to say that he suffered consequences for his actions.
An absolute unit
User avatar
dinny_g
Posts: 6634
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by dinny_g »

Gavster wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 10:05 am That car wasn't proceeding with caution given they couldn't see the pavement behind the van, it looks like they drove onto the driveway with the assumption it was clear. If that pavement is shared use then I'd put the blame on the driver, because even if the cyclist was travelling at a slower speed they still could have been hit by the car
Utter twaddle.

If the the pathway user had been proceeding at an acceptable speed, then the car would have seen them or indeed, would have had time to stop themselves.

Sometimes, it really is just the cyclist fault
JLv3.0 wrote: Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:26 pm I say this rarely Dave, but listen to Dinny because he's right.
Rich B wrote: Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:57 pm but Dinny was right…
User avatar
mik
Posts: 14718
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by mik »

I think that one above - for me - would qualify as "reckless speed" from the cyclist.

User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

I remember that crash when it happened. Lucky, lucky bastards;

User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

Ftao those of you who aren't young anymore; https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/ ... hi-313909/
User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 7929
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by ZedLeg »

Winter cyclists, looking for a bit of advice on chain maintenance.

I usually use muc off spray lube and dry chain oil but I noticed rust on my chain after about a week.

The muc off wet lube is the obvious move but just wanted to double check what others use.

Thoughts?
An absolute unit
User avatar
John
Posts: 1475
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by John »

Any normal wet lube should do, or oil as it used to be known :D

I use this though but it's very sticky and good for off road mountain biking with lots of mud.

Image
User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 5218
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by jamcg »

User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 12209
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by Jobbo »

Gavster wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 10:05 am That car wasn't proceeding with caution given they couldn't see the pavement behind the van, it looks like they drove onto the driveway with the assumption it was clear. If that pavement is shared use then I'd put the blame on the driver, because even if the cyclist was travelling at a slower speed they still could have been hit by the car
I’ve only just noticed that one. The car is at fault for not giving way to someone on the pavement, but the cyclist is heavily contributorily negligent for being there in the first place when he shouldn’t and going so quickly. Hard to guess what a court would say (and I suspect it’s one which would get to court as a result if the cyclist has any injuries at all) but maybe 75/80% the cyclist’s fault? I’d argue for 100% if I was solicitor for the driver.
User avatar
ZedLeg
Posts: 7929
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by ZedLeg »

jamcg wrote: Wed Oct 23, 2024 6:45 am
Those cyclists definitely reported that. Hope the fine was worth it :lol:
An absolute unit
User avatar
nuttinnew
Posts: 10768
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by nuttinnew »

User avatar
mik
Posts: 14718
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by mik »

I thought the cycle one was just cvnty and didn't crack a smile, but that one made me chuckle heartily :lol:
User avatar
Simon
Posts: 5510
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

Post by Simon »

Same.
The artist formerly known as _Who_
Post Reply