Originally Posted by Bald Paul

Oddly enough, the one and only time I've been hit by a car in all my years of riding was when I was riding solo, on a straight, flat road with almost zero traffic. I was riding along the white line on the right side of the road. For some unknown reason, the driver didn't want to cross the center line to pass, even though there was no oncoming traffic as far as one could see.

To each his own. Enjoy your rides.

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy

Average ride speed is a useless metric.

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy

Everyone I know who rides a lot, rides for fitness

Originally Posted by Bob Ross

We can hang.




Oh, my... okay, maybe we can't hang.

Originally Posted by Bald Paul

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

"Many people want to keep it simple and just ride as it pleases them."
True, but not all people find riding solo is what they enjoy. Personally, I've adjusted my speed down to stay with a slower rider, sometimes just to converse, sometimes to give a little encouragement. If I ask "how are you doing?" and get "Okay, I'm fine, you go ahead" then I'll leave them to ride alone.

"Why do people want to ride hard on group rides and even challenge each other? Because it's impossible to ride as hard by one's self as one can when presented by a challenge to ride harder. It's a health and fitness thing. You want to ride strong, you have to ride with someone stronger. That's really the basis for most group rides. And going on a group ride to converse with your voice is a really bad idea. That means riding abreast which is not a good idea at all. On a path, you take up too much room and on a road, you force vehicles to increase their exposure time to the oncoming traffic, plus you're distracted. It's exactly as dangerous as using a phone while driving. On a ride, you talk with your bike, which many times is more expressive and interesting than casual conversation. Riding abreast is generally forbidden on group rides around here unless one is passing another rider."
Believe it or not, there ARE actual 'social rides' that people participate in. If you wish to participate in a group training ride, that's fine. Oh, and during those social rides, people will actually converse with each other in the normal manner, rather than talking with their bike (what the heck is that, anyway? Can I just use a translator app on the phone?) Riding abreast - at least around here - is the preferred method on a group ride, and is perfectly legal. The idea is to force vehicles to wait until it's safe for them to pass, rather than trying to pass too closely while other vehicles are coming the other way.

"Of course it's a whole 'nother story if one doesn't see cycling as a sport but rather as a recreational activity like fishing, walking, or photography."
Imagine that.

Originally Posted by downhillmaster

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.
It just so happens in this case that his opinions are logical and commonplace.
Yours are more of a personal wish list and a bit daffy. You seemingly want to encourage large groups of slow riders to ride two abreast for no other reason than to chit-chat in traffic

Originally Posted by Bald Paul

A large group of fast riders, riding two abreast in traffic, is still a slow group to a driver that wants to go 40+ MPH.
And your opinions seem, to me, like a certain part of the human anatomy that everyone has, but believes that theirs is the only one that doesn't stink.

Originally Posted by Kabuki12

I ride solo most of the time and have never been involved in a formal club. I am in my late sixties and although I still ride classic racing bikes , I have no interest in going faster than what is comfortable just to try to keep up with younger folks. I have been passed on narrow rural roads by large groups on modern racing bikes that show no courtesy to others . I met a few guys from my neighborhood that ride and about once a month we get together and ride the rural roads and canyons . It is fun and no one pushes too hard just a friendly ride of about 30 miles or so. The rest of the time I’m on my own.

Originally Posted by Monkey Face

I seek out the quiet country lanes and avoid rush hours and 'beer' times, to try to minimise the risk.

Originally Posted by Daniel4

In other threads, people post their frustration with group rides holding up traffic whether it's two cyclists or 75. I'm thinking bike clubs should start getting police ******* just in case angry motorists might start taking matters into their own hands.

Originally Posted by Daniel4

In other threads, people post their frustration with group rides holding up traffic whether it's two cyclists or 75. I'm thinking bike clubs should start getting police ******* just in case angry motorists might start taking matters into their own hands.

Originally Posted by mschwett

or they could ride single file as far to the right as safely possible, only taking a wider part of the lane when they’re traveling at similar speeds to traffic (downhill, 20-25 speed limits) or it’s unsafe to stay to the edge. we have a right to be on the road, I don’t believe we have a right to “block” more of the road than otherwise required because we’d like to chit chat. if the drivers of two convertibles took both lanes of a two-lane-each-direction road going half the speed limit because they were chatting…. I doubt that would be considered socially acceptable.

Originally Posted by BlazingPedals

If you crunch some numbers, it's unsafe to try sharing a lane that's less than about 12.5-13 feet wide. That is, 18 inches for the rider's shoulders, 18 inches on either side for wobble room, and 8.5 feet for a standard pickup truck or SUV. Because you position yourself based on what you're likely to meet, not what's actually behind you at a given moment. Even that number ignores 'safe passing distance.' How many roads that you ride in have lanes that are that wide? There are more and more states that are like Michigan and enacting laws that allow the cyclist to take the full lane under specific conditions, 'sub-standard' lanes being one. Your convertibles example is senseless because, well, cars are already twice as wide as needed to hold the driver. So they're doing all the time what they don't want cyclists to do. Maybe if I rode an 8-foot-wide bicycle they wouldn't have anything to complain about?

Originally Posted by mschwett

it’s really rude to take more of the width than needed for safety simply because you want to chat.

Originally Posted by Bob Ross

You may have missed the earlier post where someone pointed out that riding two abreast makes your group half as long, and therefore allows the overtaking motor vehicles to pass you more quickly. Since cars are going to have to pass with ample space and caution (ha!) anyway, I think most automobile drivers would appreciate the courtesey of us allowing them to resume their normal [sic] driving habits in half the time.

Originally Posted by mschwett

or they could ride single file as far to the right as safely possible, only taking a wider part of the lane when they’re traveling at similar speeds to traffic (downhill, 20-25 speed limits) or it’s unsafe to stay to the edge. we have a right to be on the road, I don’t believe we have a right to “block” more of the road than otherwise required because we’d like to chit chat. if the drivers of two convertibles took both lanes of a two-lane-each-direction road going half the speed limit because they were chatting…. I doubt that would be considered socially acceptable.

Originally Posted by mschwett

i understand all that (i’m a principal of a firm that does, among other things, urban design), and in california the law is very clear that if the lane is of substandard width, or the bike lane / shoulder is unsafe, you don’t need to be right-justified. my point may not have been clear - it’s really rude to take more of the width than needed for safety simply because you want to chat. my car example holds with the narrowest two cars available, driving side by side at a slow speed simply for their own pleasure. safety absolutely first, but some consideration for other users second, personal preference or entertainment value third.