- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Screengrab from A Clown Takes a Pratfall road rage video (YouTube)Road rage on the rise according to cyclists
Almost two-thirds of UK cyclists (63 per cent) have experienced aggressive behaviour from motorists, according to a recent survey, while over half (56 per cent) believe the problem has increased significantly over the last five years.
Over 1,500 experienced and intermediate cyclists were questioned by cycle wear brand Fat Lad at the Back with the results released to coincide with National Road Safety Week.
The survey also found that 85 per cent of cyclists were concerned about the behaviour of motorists whilst on their bikes, whereas 94 per cent said they felt safe and confident on the road whilst driving.
Over a third said they had become better drivers since taking to two wheels.
Motorist hospitalised Cotswolds cyclist using ice cream cone
Speaking about the results, Fat Lad At The Back founder Richard Bye, said: “Cyclists feeling intimidated by UK motorists is not new news. What is concerning however is that cyclists feel that the problem of aggressive driver behaviour is on the rise.
“With more and more riders taking to the road we would encourage motorists to pay extra attention. It’s not about slamming drivers or pointing the finger of blame, it’s about encouraging everyone to take that little extra care and consideration. Providing riders with just a little more space can make all the difference in the event either party hits an obstacle in the road or has cause to swerve.”
Driver anger at cyclists often borne of ignorance of the law finds survey
Another finding was that 70 per cent reported having experienced a near miss with a car – something we regularly document here at road.cc via our Near Miss of the Day feature.
In contrast, only four per cent said they had experienced a near collision with another cyclist.
Cyclists were also concerned about the condition of British roads with 83 per cent of those polled believing them to be a real risk.
Last week we reported that nearly 100 cyclists a year are injured by potholes that councils deem too small to fix. Cycling UK has called for the Government to reallocate funding from its £15bn Road Investment Strategy and is also advocating a risk-based approach to assessment, pointing out that a pothole’s position in the road is as important as its size.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Jitensha Oni 6 hours 9 min ago
If it’s the same FOI response I saw ( FOI-0538-2425 ), in Richmond Park (local to me so the one I had a good look at in the FOI tables), from 2019...
- Gbjbanjs 6 hours 17 min ago
As an Irish person, I am embarrassed for this guy and the judge. He is clearly a thug, so do not get where he takes pride in wearing the country...
- ktache 6 hours 23 min ago
I don't think the fine toilet roll holder is made of an old chainset, looks more like the two biggest rings on a carrier from a cassette, my 9...
- Rendel Harris 8 hours 28 min ago
Far be it from me to tell you your business, but if you want to promote your product sneakily on a website without paying for advertising then...
- JMcL_Ireland 10 hours 32 min ago
I absolutely stand by my criticism of Elite (note: I'm not criticising the volunteer marshals). They charge an arm and a leg for these events but...
- Destroyer666 10 hours 45 min ago
There's a lot of good stuff here, but shoe reviews are still lagging on average when comparing to for example bike or tire reviews. Specs relating...
- galibiervelo 11 hours 18 min ago
Loved the Bastion in the flesh but Lemond's bike has the soul. Nice event and met some friends and contacts but like the magazine, it does promote...
- Hirsute 13 hours 28 min ago
All in the article - road tax.
- chrisonabike 14 hours 42 min ago
Ah, but: in UK, if a motorist drives into you (or simply parks in a cycle lane, forcing you out into the path of another motorist) then the council...
Add new comment
61 comments
Actually, I find the majority of car drivers are very courteous to cyclists.
It's a very small minority that are incompetent, inconsiderate, impatient or ignorant. And an even smaller minority are just imberciles.
In a car, if you have a close call, you can hoot and flash your lights. The chances are the problem would not have been life threatening, but the other driver gets the message.
On a cycle, if you have a close call, you can shout, but you may not be heard. One option is to let the motorist know how you feel when (if) you catch up with them. The problem is that the shock has probably sent your emotions high and that approaching the driver can be seen as confrontational. It is easy for the situation to escalate (as it did in this video).
On the other hand, if you say nothing, where is the feedback to the driver so they can learn to adapt their behaviour?
In the last 12 years, I have covered over 30,000 miles commuting on my pushbike. There have been a number of incidents where I could have been killed. On some of those, the driver was totally oblivious to the danger they had put me in.
I use a video camera and have reported incidents to the police. It doesn't help that the police are unwilling to prosecute unless I have actually been knocked off my bike! All too late.
Prevention is far better than punishment. We need better education for car drivers. Public information campaigns (similar to "think bike" for motorcyclists) would help. Road safety courses could be used to help drivers modify their behaviour. Send drivers on a course where they have been reported, rather than prosecuting. Perhaps even a register to identify persistent offenders.
I apologise for shortening your post... but these two points are spot on.
'Think bike' is acknowledged as having had huge impact in the 70s. Reviving it today, for cyclists, could have a similarly dramatic effect.
Who's going to take this on?
Motorists do this because they get away with it. I was deliberately run off the road the other day, the Police refused to do anything because I was not injured.
The Police say their top priority is our safety. If it was then they wouldn't be wasting it on anti terrorism and investigations, they would be out on the roads putting points on licenses which changes behaviour. Thousands of people die every year on our roads and it's virtually ignored, but an incident kills a few people and millions is spent and resources found.
Its time the Police focused on making our roads safe for all users and they could start by prosecuting using dash cam. Ideal job for an older officer instead of paying him a pension after 30 yrs.
I'm so tempted to sell my road bikes and buy one awesome MTB instead, the roads are getting worse in every way. It's a damn shame, society sucks.
Last month I had some clown lose it and I wasn't on the bike for more than a minute....to this day I haven't the foggiest idea why.. another motorist saw what happened and just shook his head...go figure
He's surely right on the F of
"Put your fucking mouth shut!"
I keep looking at the still from the YouTube video illustrating this story: I think road.cc are missing a trick.
Why don't we have a competition where you have to imagine what that person in a YouTube headcam video still might be saying, in a humorous way, if they weren't just turning the air blue?
Its interesting that folk always look for something/someone to blame for increasing aggression.
Notwithstanding a psychiatric condition, one thing is responsible for the way you feel, and the way you respond to situations and treat others. You.
There is such a thing as external reality, you know. Don't be so solipsistic.
Had to google Solipsistic... new word for the day, thanks!
I am now questioning if this website actually exists.
Have things changed... really? I believe we have simply become more aware, more questionning of road behaviour. There have always been angry nutters on the road, and nearly all motorists have the ability to be an over aggressive idiot when pushed the wrong way.
But now we have youtube showing examples of the very worst of this behaviour; we have online forums dwelling on the subject; we have the MSM normalising this activity.
Fundamentally people are angry in cars because they feel invincible in their boxes (can express themselves without societies normal shackles). People are angry in cars because they are frustrated by congestion.
As touched on before, the general language of motoring is one of power, dominance, aggression. Cyclists are a pinch point in this language, because we represent humanity, vulnerability, responsibility. By responsibility, I mean that as vulnerable road users, our presence forces drivers to be responsbile for our safety.... i.e. not run in to us.
Car v car, motorists will get out of the way because of insurance, because of rights of way, because it'll still hurt to hit another car... but when its a car v bike interaction, the only reason for a car driver to take action is to protect our safety.
At a base level, I can understand why that alone is enought to piss some drivers off. Cyclists make the assumption / force the issue that the driver will do the right thing.
This is why I believe we get so many accusations of arrogance... "how dare they make such an assumption?"
But is not just that.
Drivers generally receive minimal to no practical training of how to negotiate cyclists. When coming across cyclists, many drivers are immediately reminded of their lack of training and inadequecies as a driver. "how do I pass this cyclist quickly, and safely?" and believe me it is in that order.
The top factor in the motorists minds eye is not looking weak, to not appear controlled by external factors etc. This isn't because drivers are asses, its just that they are playing to the language of the road, which is aggression and power.
So anyway, cyclists on the road challenge the competency of drivers. No on likes to be challenged; one of the most common reactions to being challenged is to attack the person / thing challenging them.
And then there is the other, often untalked about reason... the 'can't be arsed' conundrum.
Deep down most people know they are fat, know their diets make them so, know that their lack of exercise is slowly killing them. Equally, deep down they know that many of their car journies could perfectly easily be completed by other means, be it walking, cycling, public transport. But people can't be arsed.
Collectively, everyone is supported by seeing everyone else making the same decision to get in their car... "it's alright, we re all in this together" When coming across a cyclist there is an underlying resentment of cycling, a barely conscious one I'd imagine, as cyclists are making a different choice, are demonstrating that the car isn't defacto, that you can control your destiny. We are a reminder that life choices are exactly that, choices not destiny.
Its for this reason why I believe so many motorists are so keen to label cycling dangerous, to label lycra as obscene, to apply status to car ownership. They are simply seeking justification for their own choices. Lycra is obscene simply because it is a tangible display of someone making a choice the majorty can't be arsed to make.
All of the above means we see more than our fair share of angst, it has always been the case, only now we are talking about it... not unlike sexual exploitation in the performing arts hey?
I agree with most of your points, but I think generally these complexities don't come into play as often as just simple, ignorant, frustration.
In a scenario where a car is approaching a slower-moving cyclist, I think 'MGIF' is almost subconscious: the cyclist is generally not blocking the road, but is a slow obstacle to be negotiated with as little thought as possible.
When the cyclist is blocking the road (primary) I think there is frustration that something that a driver should just be able to buzz past, is stopping them do just that, particularly if the road is clear ahead. I'd take a (completely immeasurable) punt that the same level of frustration would be exhibited towards a car moving as slowly and 'holding up' the driver behind as much. Dunno about tractors, because they're massive and farming seems to broadly have the nation's sympathy as some sort of noble pursuit.
I think the way round this is empathy and propaganda.
Empathy in the form of everybody learning to drive needs to understand the perspective of other, particularly vulnerable, road users - so build that in to the driving test. Get out on a bike. See for yourself. Get tested on giving bikes space.
Propaganda in the form of ad campaigns and police enforcement targeting impatient and ignorant driver behaviour, including lazy bastard short , single-occuipancy journeys, in an attempt to make it as anti-social as drink-driving has become.
Neither of those approaches is difficult to implement, but we have a chancellor who called for an end of a fictitious 'war on the motorist' and a transport secretary who doored a cyclist and then tried to blame the cyclist, so nothing is going to change any time soon.
Unfortunately you don't even need to be on your bike on a road to be a victim of "road rage" The other day I went into a local pub to have a quiet pint (or two) in my alter ego as a lycra lout when a rather obese man asked me if I was a cyclist (just how do you answer a question like that whilst in lycra and wearing a cycle helmet!) then started ranting and raving at me because I dont pay road tax ride in the middle of the road etc etc (btw I am not using his exact words as there might be youngsters reading this) his volume increased as did his colouring thought he might blow a blood vessel then started with the threats of violence, needless to say have not been back to said pub.
Drivers are probably more aggressive simply because there are more of them (in much larger vehicles taking up much more space) and they wind each other up by getting in each other's way. Then they displace that anger on to those not of their 'tribe'.
Please tell me that's intended as a joke ...
Don't get you. Which element do you think isn't true?
That there are more motorised vehicles than there used to be, that they are larger than they used to be, that the increasing number and size leads to increased delay and aggravation for each driver, or that they don't have a tendency to direct the resultant frustration disproportionately at those road-users not like themselves?
That there is a single, simple reason for the rise. That it's purely due to cars "getting in each other's [sic] way". That there's a car tribe that is universally behaving like this. The rest of it I agree with.
Do you have any reason to believe it's down to any other factors? By all means give them (though I'm not convinced by vague ideas about 'society getting more angry', because people always seem to think behaviour/grammar/ spelling/whatever is getting worse and worse)
Your second reason appears to be the same as the first, stated in different words, so I'll skip that. The third point seems to be based on a misunderstanding of what I said (which was about the psychology of motorist anger, not about the existence of'a car tribe that is universally behaving like this'), so I'll skip that as well on the grounds that it's a straw man argument.
So that leaves the first point, which so far lacks any supporting argument or evidence.
OK. Firstly there seems to indicators that there is a general rise in crime, including violent crime, which may indicate that there is a higher chance of such confrontations occuring, e.g. the ONS statistics out recently. There are other indicators that the it's not that simple, including the usual annual spate related to the ONS stats and the ONS crime survey - basically reporting vs perception, some of which could be said for the road rage report as well of course. So, in my mind, not as clear cut as put forward. Of course traffic conditions will have an effect, but i'm not convinced it's 'simply' a product of that. (Only one effect)
The second is merely stating that cars 'getting in each others way' is also an overly simplistic argument that probably doesn't deal with the messy details of reality (What that effect is).
The third was what I saw as the use of over generalisations, so often hated in the road.cc comment threads (at least in one direction), of the driving 'tribe' - from what you've said, i've mis-interpreted that, please elucidate.
I'm more inclined to think they are more aggressive simply because they can be. Want to hurt or intimidate someone? Use your car as a weapon. Pick on the wrong person? Drive away, quickly.
Humans have two significant weaknesses that generally make being passive the best survival strategy for a given mortal situation - we are soft and we are slow. Put a human in a car and suddenly those weaknesses are gone - we are invincible! And therefore given to dealing with any frustration or "threat" aggressively. Particularly if we are used to feeling inferior in other areas of our lives, as I assume the star of the above youtube video does.
Depends what the 'more' is in comparison to. I thought we were comparing them with motorists in the past - your explanation doesn't explain a difference on that 'axis', rather it (probably correctly) explains the difference in motorists vs other road-users.
Cars are cheaper, faster and safer than they have ever been. Would you rather crash an old Mini, or an Audi Q5?
No idea what point you are making. That doesn't relate to what I said at all.
I said they are larger and more numerous, leading to more conflict between them on more crowded roads. What does cheapness and safety have to do with that?
Also I wouldn't crash either of them, but I'm not sure it would be much better to be driven into by one rather than the other (though maybe the Audi would have better brakes?)
One of my little cats is super tough in standing up to the big neighbourhood tom. When in the house, staring him down through the window.
From most of the posts I read on here, it's probably in line with forum rage.
Here's my tuppence (and over-priced at that).
A lot of folk out there are facing a myriad of problems which include, but are not limited too:
A sedentary lifestyle with not enough exercise.
Bills going up while wages stagnate.
Societal expectations increasing thanks to social media, which makes all of the above worse.
Now, I am not a mind reader, but many people who struggle with these issues seem to be far happier moaning about it than being constructive. And when they see someone on a bike demonstrating that you can fit in some exercise, save a few quid on the commute and not seem to care what anyone else thinks (they will not know about Strava) it really pisses them off.
Because if you can do it they cannot pretend that the odds are stacked against them. Or they might be bad tempered muppets.
When Thatcher made everyone a selfish cunt, we lost our way.
Yes, I do blame her.
Me too, even if her recession meant that I got a degree. She was the epitome of stupid selfishness, and the UK has never really recovered. Still, the tories are now self-destructing at a rather alarming rate, and will soon be out, and hopefully, whatever replaces them will be a lot more considerate of the poor and powerless, like cyclists.
Arguably she also pushed the idea that anyone not in a car isn't a real person: she's on record saying that any adult using public transport is clearly a failure in life, for example.
She was referring to buses, which, let's face it, are hateful things. Wait for ages and three come at once. Slow. Stop every 300 yards. Circuitous routes. Rub shoulders with the general public. Slow down all the other traffic. 'orrible machines! Whenever I cycle past a huge queue at a bus stop, my first thought is the same as when I ride through a traffic jam - how do you do this every day? Get on your bike! (to quote a friend of Mrs. Thatcher...)
Pages