cyclinfool

At this point I think we are at the "teaching a pig to sing" point, IMHO we should just let this thread die, nothing new will come out of it.

moth54

+1

AzTallRider

You don't look behind in those situations - no reason to. If you are on the tail end and need to check traffic for the group, you create a little extra space for yourself.

AzTallRider

This is a broad generalization that doesn't always apply. Lots of larger groups do just fine with traffic, going single file when appropriate.

moth54

ack, I seem to be having trouble keeping logged in. And I'm not posting correctly.

To return to the thread: I'd suggest a meeting with the local police (who may have an officer specially designated to handle these kinds of discussions), the club leaders, and yourself. Avoid phrasing questions which include circular logic - your thread question includes the phrase 'more real estate than necessary' but what is necessary and what isn't, is part of why you and the cycling club are at odds in the first place. What is necessary, in other words, is the objective of your discussion. A similar caveat applies to the word 'inconvenience' as used by some of your detractors. We cannot simply dismiss the consequences of unpredictable journey time as being simply inconvenient, since again, defining what is inconvenient and what is a more serious consequence of unpredictable journey time, is one of the goals of the discussion. Neither side can draw any hard conclusions, in advance of knowing detailed road traffic data from an objective source (vehicle click counter stats, for example.)

Sharing the road will often involve incompatible objectives. It may well be that there is no need for any given individual to get to point A by a certain time, but roads must address the needs of populations, not groups or subgroups. Travel at just any speed might - or might not- meet the performance requirements of a particular stretch of road. Cars are not just in competition with cyclists for a given stretch of road, they are in competition with other cars. By 'competition' I don't mean, a head-to-head contest, I mean in terms of a resource (the road) being 'requested' by various numbers of people. At a minimum average speed of say, 30 km per hour, twice as many people can be 'processed' over the course of a day than at 15 km per hour. At some point, slower speeds would seriously compromise performance standards - but based on the data we have here, nobody knows whether that point was reached, or has yet to be reached. That's why the meeting is so important.

Wogster

Your right, it is fairly broad, however it still, makes sense, with a group of 12 or less, it's easy for a leader to keep track of everyone, and keep everyone in control, and for a ride, that can be making sure that everyone stays single file or short double file, has the proper safety equipment, stays reasonably together, etc. When groups get much larger, you need to move to a hierarchy, which is why armies are divided into brigades, brigades are divided into battalions, battalions are divided into companies, companies are divided into platoons, platoons are divided into squads or sections, no group is made up of more then 12 of the next level down, because that makes sense for management.

bigbadwullf

Some you you saying a bike owns the road as much as a car are a little too sensitive. To make anyone wait behind you is rude no matter what vehicle you are in/on. It's rude. End of subject. There is no reason a bike club should clog up the road any more than any other vehicle should clog up the road. Riding/driving so as to cause ANYONE to wait behind you is just rude. Move over and let people by.