"Addiction to more obese cars" means cyclists "bullied off the road", warns Cycling UK in call for govt action on manufacturers; How a carbon frame shouldn't look; Bike lane blockage; Geraint Thomas to take on Giro/Tour double + more on the live blog

I called in a shoe shop the other day - they had some heavily discounted shoes but they were all in black. I don't wear black shoes I wear brown. Do you have any disappointing shoe shop stories?

Trolling isn't what it was...

Really sorry for your partner's disability, I hope it is a mild one. This is a very special case that excempts should be provided for any proposed measures. I have a friend that is forced to use a wheelchair at all times, yet manages to drive a modern B-segment SUV now, while previous car was an even smaller sub-4m car and on the other hand I know an even more unfortunate case that had to use a special van with wheelchair lift, so these are very special needs.

But big cars are not good for all for various reasons, here are few for a start:

1) Occupying more space for parking =>less parking spaces=>more cars in the road searching for parking.

2) More width either parked either on the road, less side safety space, creating more chances for close passes.

3) Taller vehicles can obscure visibility for other users.

4) Taller vehicles for the same weight have been proved to be more damaging to other users in crashes. It goes without saying that this happens too for heavier vehicles.

5) Heavier vehicles that are not EVs, have greater harmful emmissions that us cyclists feel them directly to our lungs as we are super close to motor traffic. I am sure the years lost of all cyclists breathing harmful emmissions are more than accidents.

(6) Taller driving position subconsiously makes you speeding more and  hesitant to stop. Not any proof, but I have noticed it.

It's also perfectly possible to drive a bus or a truck carefully, but for some reason most people are not keen to cycle around them. And indeed having them passing through places with vulnerable road users around is increasingly seen as something to be avoided, even in the UK.

There are a wide range of drivers in the UK because we have mass motoring and treat this as a club you only have to qualify for once. Unfortunately in the UK it's likely easier to change the vehicles (or the roads and the rules) than the drivers. Indeed the increased safety of driving over the years is mostly down to safety features in vehicles, infra improvements - and better trauma care.

Public space is not infinite - we also have growing demand on it (more people) so have to prioritise. Cars are by far the least space-efficient transport mode - even when they're moving! Bigger cars are exactly the opposite of what we want - even if we only care about "space for driving" and don't care about the same for cycling at all!

I have a large 4x4 with a bed, kitchen and bathroom in the back, it's my daily driver. Can you see an exception to your reasoning?

I also fit in the category of respecting (most) speed limits and not close passing cyclists.

I have some sympathy. You have to pay out for excise duty and MOT irrespective of how often you use a vehicle so it probably makes economic sense to have one vehicle and use it for everything. A change to taxation by usage, and hence damage caused to roads and the environment, is what's needed, along with better public transport.

Thank you for respecting speed limits and not close passing cyclists but you will have to accept that your emissions (exhaust, tyre and brake) are not doing them any good.

You have to pay out for excise duty and MOT irrespective of how often you use a vehicle

Maybe in some places, but both are now optional in Lancashire, as WR56 ZVO demonstrates. First detected and reported 11.10.23

Bungle_52 wrote:

I have some sympathy. You have to pay out for excise duty and MOT irrespective of how often you use a vehicle so it probably makes economic sense to have one vehicle and use it for everything. A change to taxation by usage, and hence damage caused to roads and the environment, is what's needed, along with better public transport.

Thank you for respecting speed limits and not close passing cyclists but you will have to accept that your emissions (exhaust, tyre and brake) are not doing them any good.

Why? I do, but do they have to accept that their emissions (concrete manufacture, plastics and carbon fuelled heating), assuming they don't live in Passiv Houses or houses of a similar standard, are not doing me any good?

Drivist entitlement.

Shouldn't you have at least some facts?

I was overtaken by an electric monster a few days ago.  It was huge and I still think about it. It was so close and so impatient I could 'feel' its aggressive intent.  It makes me so frustrated that drivers of these monsters don't understand how scary it is to be tailgated and then close passed. 

Are you sure it was electric- that sounds more like an energon monster?

Almost makes you want to fall off and be run over just to teach them a lesson. 

My wife got a ticket a good few years back for exactly that.

dubwise wrote:

My wife got a ticket a good few years back for exactly that.

Just how big is your wife?

Does she get a centimetre wider every two years?

Terry Hutt wrote:

Does she get a centimetre wider every two years?

We all do.

I saw this in a local multi-storey car park recently - had to take a photo...

Does it count as "off road" if they're on the footway?

Part of that statistics is that car manufacturers have shifted models into the SUV category, eg, the Ford Kuga a mini-suv, replaced the b-max a cutdown mpv. Both are about the same maximum dimensions, but the newer vehicle is more "rugged" in its styling and the category of vehicle has shifted accordingly.
Not saying it's right, but there are fewer non suv options if you're looking for a new vehicle.

Is that a photo you've taken or is it from the meeja?

twitter - but not everyone on here wants to login to X !

And abroad.