Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 92
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yogidave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    478

    Agressive Driver Warning

    OK... while not mountain bike related, my rant is about biking in the FR and nearly being plowed into by a total A-hole who had a MT bike in his pickup and was driving to Hall Ranch, Antelope Trail head.

    Here's the situation:

    I am riding along with 2 other dudes on Apple Valley road headed out of Lyons and there is no traffic, like most days at 12:15PM. The three of us are on roadbikes, 2 in front, 1 behind in a tight grouping that is NOT taking up too much road.

    A dude in a HUGE old (70's era something, bluish/rust coloroed) dualie pickup buzzes us about 1 foot away; clearly he's not a fan of roadies. at the last second, he cuts it even closer forcing the dude in the left front position to swerve into the dude in the right front position, who road (momentarily) off the road. Luckily, we all have good bike handling skills and no one went down.

    Now, I've been buzzed by loads of cars and accept this as part of the bargin, but there are a few things that really bother me about this incident:

    1. Apple valley road has NO traffic mid-day, mid week
    2. We are with in the law being 2-abreast
    3. He had plenty of room to pass us
    4. HE HAD A FVCKING BIKE IN HIS TRUCK!!!!!!
    5. He made no indication that he even saw us or cared, so this was intentional

    So, watch out for this dude. Here's the best description I can give you:
    -70's or 80s dualie long bed pick up, blue with rusty patches
    -Rides a silver/champagne colored Motobicane mountain bike (on an upright bed rack)
    -Rides at Hall Ranch, Antelope Trail.
    -Probably a total A-Hole in regular life as well

    I didn't get the plate as I was too busy trying not to crash into my riding buddies.

    Thanks a lot dude, you're a real winner!

  2. #2
    friend of Apex
    Reputation: WKD-RDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,693
    Just curious, if you knew where he was going to and you were close by...

    Why did you go the internet sandy vag route instead of making a stop @ the TH to say "hello" to said driver?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yogidave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    478

    I thought about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by WKD-RDR
    Just curious, if you knew where he was going to and you were close by...

    Why did you go the internet sandy vag route instead of making a stop @ the TH to say "hello" to said driver?
    I "assume" he went to the Antelope Trail head, but maybe he didn't go there... it wasn't really possible to catch up to him. I debated doing that (and a few other modifications to said truck), but in the end just needed (for time's sake) to get back to work.

    I thought posting here might serve as a warning to other cyclist in the Lyons area.

    PS - I don't really know what "sandy vag" means, but I'm sure it's not flattering.

  4. #4
    I think I can.
    Reputation: JOEMTBR COLORADO's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,234

    Well that sucks

    I can relate and don't understand drivers who show no respect for a fellow rider.

    Just cuz I am a curious kind of guy, were you riding 2x1 in a designated bike lane or were you left of the white line?

    Dam,
    Bikes are FUN

  5. #5
    imaorobbie
    Guest
    ...ina?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yogidave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    478
    Quote Originally Posted by JOEMTBR COLORADO
    I can relate and don't understand drivers who show no respect for a fellow rider.

    Just cuz I am a curious kind of guy, were you riding 2x1 in a designated bike lane or were you left of the white line?
    Apple Valley road has no bike lane. No doubt that single file would be better, but there was PLENTY of room and 2x is legal. Also, there is just about nothing right of the white line except a 3" drop off into the bushes and dirt.

  7. #7
    rubber side down
    Reputation: russman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by JOEMTBR COLORADO
    I can relate and don't understand drivers who show no respect for a fellow rider.

    Just cuz I am a curious kind of guy, were you riding 2x1 in a designated bike lane or were you left of the white line?
    Not sure this question has any bearing since by law motorists are required to give 3 feet to cyclists when passing...

    This kind of situation sucks, and, unfortunately because society is for the most part, intolerant of anyone who is not like them. Sucks. Like it's THAT hard to respect fellow cyclists, much less fellow humans.
    R

  8. #8
    Total Goober
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    861
    "5. He made no indication that he even saw us or cared, so this was intentional"

    Okay...

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yogidave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    478

    hm ok a minor correction

    Quote Originally Posted by BigSteve in CO
    "5. He made no indication that he even saw us or cared, so this was intentional"

    Okay...
    was intentional --> seemed intentional

  10. #10
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,123
    Quote Originally Posted by yogidave
    was intentional --> seemed intentional
    Doesn't matter. Negligence is no excuse, and death/injuries are permanent.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: karpiel666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,127
    I'm assuming you all had a single, red reflector facing rearwards, if not, you broke the law as well. You can't have it both ways, if you pick and chose which laws to follow, why cant he?


    You stop at every stop sign and always use had signals, right?

    Learn to share the road, buddy.


    I assume riders who aren't following the law wont care if I don't either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Qatarbhoy
    I have to ask for them to do a "Number two" on my head

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yogidave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    478

    Reflector....No

    Quote Originally Posted by karpiel666
    I'm assuming you all had a single, red reflector facing rearwards, if not, you broke the law as well. You can't have it both ways, if you pick and chose which laws to follow, why cant he?


    You stop at every stop sign and always use had signals, right?

    Learn to share the road, buddy.


    I assume riders who aren't following the law wont care if I don't either.
    Stop @ signs? ... yes
    Hand signals ?... yes.

    I don't enjoy pissing off motorists and do share the road.

    In fact, I've been known to get really annoyed at road cyclist that don't share the road, but I don't try to hit them, yell at them or engage them with my vehicle. I just go around them.

    So are you saying that a 5,000# truck has more right of way than a 185# ride (bike + person) and that a reflector is the arbitrator of right vs wrong? Like it or not, there is a hierarchy of right of way.

    Hmmm.... that sounds a little, crazy.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    466
    I'm not justifying this guy's behavior, but why do you feel you are "with in the law being 2-abreast"?

    I think if you're 2-abreast and on the left of the white line, you need to get in single-file when traffic is approaching.

  14. #14
    rubber side down
    Reputation: russman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs
    I'm not justifying this guy's behavior, but why do you feel you are "with in the law being 2-abreast"?

    I think if you're 2-abreast and on the left of the white line, you need to get in single-file when traffic is approaching.
    Splitting hairs, no? So they were 2 abreast at a particular point in the road, so that gives this a$$clown the ok to do buzz them with his monster truck? Again, it goes back to respect. There's precious little of it to go around. Like it's THAT hard to step on a brake a little, then when it's all clear, give the cyclists a wide berth, and be 5 seconds late to wherever he was going. Laziness-pure and simple. Would he have REALLY made his point if he had knocked 1 or 2 of them over, or god forbid-seriously injured one of them?

    R

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by russman
    Splitting hairs, no? So they were 2 abreast at a particular point in the road, so that gives this a$$clown the ok to do buzz them with his monster truck? Again, it goes back to respect. There's precious little of it to go around. Like it's THAT hard to step on a brake a little, then when it's all clear, give the cyclists a wide berth, and be 5 seconds late to wherever he was going. Laziness-pure and simple. Would he have REALLY made his point if he had knocked 1 or 2 of them over, or god forbid-seriously injured one of them?

    R

    Uhhh, I did note that I wasn't justifying the drivers behavior...

    Read the comments on any article in 9News or the Post about cycling and you'll see a bunch of disgruntled drivers. One of the things they ALWAYS complain about is roadies riding two or more abreast.

    So, my point is that YogiDave may not have been following the law in this case, and giving drivers something to rightfully complain about.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    352
    If you can get the license #, probably the best thing is the *CSP aggressive driver number. It gets the guy in the "system". Makes his defense tougher should a future similar incident end poorly... In fact, there was a case where reports of aggressive driving were used to get a conviction for first degree murder against a guy who repeatedly did stuff like this.

    Here's the link regarding the murder case and other information: http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=63729.

    The Colorado State Patrol's Star CSP (*277) aggressive driver program was implemented on July 1, 1998. The CSP partnered with several cellular companies to provide a phone number, free of charge, to be used by motorists to report "real time" aggressive driving behavior. The phone number is Star CSP (*277). Since the program was started, the CSP has received more than 230,000 reports of aggressive drivers.

    Some examples of aggressive driving behaviors are moving violations that put other motorists at risk, such as improper lane changes, following too closely, weaving, passing on the shoulder, and speeding.

    When observing an aggressive driver that is putting other motorists at risk, the aggressive driver should be avoided by getting out of the way, not making eye contact or giving any indication of disapproval of their driving behavior. Contact the CSP as soon as is safely possible and be prepared to provide the following information: vehicle description, license plate number, location and direction of travel, driver description, and the aggressive driving behavior being demonstrated.

    The information provided is entered into an aggressive driver database. After three complaints are received against a vehicle, the registered owner is sent a warning letter advising them of the complaints and encouraging them to take the necessary steps to correct the aggressive driving behavior. If additional complaints are received against the vehicle, a uniformed CSP member makes personal contact

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    259
    yogi,
    That sucks. While on my road bike I've been buzzed, yelled at and even bumped off the road (while riding to the right of the white line, single file). I know how you feel.
    But Wiggs is right, sort of. Unfortunately the language of the law is rather ambiguous and interpretation subjective.

    "Colorado Statutes : TITLE 42 VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : REGULATION OF VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : ARTICLE 4 REGULATION OF VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : PART 14 OTHER OFFENSES : 42-4-1412. Operation of bicycles and other human-powered vehicles.
    (6) (a) PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES UPON A ROADWAY SHALL NOT RIDE MORE THAN TWO ABREAST EXCEPT ON PATHS OR PARTS OF ROADWAYS SET ASIDE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF BICYCLES.
    (b) PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES TWO ABREAST SHALL NOT IMPEDE THE NORMAL AND REASONABLE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC AND, ON A LANED ROADWAY, SHALL RIDE WITHIN A SINGLE LANE."

    What is "... NORMAL and REASONABLE..."?

    IMHO. On a narrow road with blind corners, like Apple Valley, there's not really enough time for cyclists riding two abreast to react to traffic coming up from behind and go single file without traffic having to cross into the oncoming lane before overtaking and giving three feet.

  18. #18
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,123
    Quote Originally Posted by ajdonner
    yogi,
    What is "... NORMAL and REASONABLE..."?
    IMHO. On a narrow road with blind corners, like Apple Valley, there's not really enough time for cyclists riding two abreast to react to traffic coming up from behind and go single file without traffic having to cross into the oncoming lane before overtaking and giving three feet.
    We went through this a few weeks back.

    The law also clearly states that it is up to the bike rider to determine when he needs extra space, not the driver of a vehicle.

    "Section 5.1. If the right-hand lane then available for traffic is wide enough to be safely shared with overtaking vehicles, a bicyclist shall ride far enough to the right as judged safe by the bicyclist to facilitate the movement of such overtaking vehicles unless other conditions make it unsafe to do so"

    Try as hard as you want. There is absolutely no circumstance in which a driver should be able to use their vehicle as a battering ram to try and "push" someone riding a bike out of their way. If you believe you have the right as a motorist to intimidate people on bikes using a weapon(vehicle), then someone needs to take your car keys and drivers license away.

    Give yogi a break, he just wanted to vent a little.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggs
    I'm not justifying this guy's behavior, but why do you feel you are "with in the law being 2-abreast"?

    I think if you're 2-abreast and on the left of the white line, you need to get in single-file when traffic is approaching.
    single file is required only if riding two abreast impedes traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic at all, or if it is still possible to pass safely with only a minimal delay, then you're not impeding traffic. The law does not say that you have to ride single file so that a driver can pass without any delay or slowing until safe to pass whatsoever.

  20. #20
    I think I can.
    Reputation: JOEMTBR COLORADO's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,234

    Prudent and Safe

    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail
    Try as hard as you want. There is absolutely no circumstance in which a driver should be able to use their vehicle as a battering ram to try and "push" someone riding a bike out of their way. If you believe you have the right as a motorist to intimidate people on bikes using a weapon(vehicle), then someone needs to take your car keys and drivers license away.

    Give yogi a break, he just wanted to vent a little.
    UT your correct, the only intention of my question was that after reading the OP's original comment he felt he was in the right, right or wrong Truck>Bike any day. As for me, riding road or mountain on a dirt road our group always folds into single file when traffic is around or the road narrows with blind corners. A narrow two lane road is no place to ride 2 abreast, IMHO
    Be aware of your surrounding at all times, don't wear head phones on the road and ride defensively, we don't need to read about another fellow rider being run down by stupidity

    Be safe brother.

    Dam,
    Bikes are FUN

  21. #21
    VooDoo user.
    Reputation: TIMBERRR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,394
    Personally I don't like to push my luck with cars..
    if I'm on a road with no shoulder and I hear a car back my friends and I single up. Law or no law 2 wide on a road with no shoulder is not too smart. There are just way too many people txting, chatting, not paying attention, and there also the ones who think roadies just flat out suk so they crowd or run you off the road.

    Just my useless opinion an one that has kept me alive so far.

  22. #22
    FleshwoundGravityResearch
    Reputation: mtn hack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,285
    Quote Originally Posted by mudge
    single file is required only if riding two abreast impedes traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic at all, or if it is still possible to pass safely with only a minimal delay, then you're not impeding traffic. The law does not say that you have to ride single file so that a driver can pass without any delay or slowing until safe to pass whatsoever.
    Quote Originally Posted by ajdonner
    yogi,
    That sucks. While on my road bike I've been buzzed, yelled at and even bumped off the road (while riding to the right of the white line, single file). I know how you feel.
    But Wiggs is right, sort of. Unfortunately the language of the law is rather ambiguous and interpretation subjective.

    "Colorado Statutes : TITLE 42 VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : REGULATION OF VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : ARTICLE 4 REGULATION OF VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC : PART 14 OTHER OFFENSES : 42-4-1412. Operation of bicycles and other human-powered vehicles.
    (6) (a) PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES UPON A ROADWAY SHALL NOT RIDE MORE THAN TWO ABREAST EXCEPT ON PATHS OR PARTS OF ROADWAYS SET ASIDE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF BICYCLES.
    (b) PERSONS RIDING BICYCLES TWO ABREAST SHALL NOT IMPEDE THE NORMAL AND REASONABLE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC AND, ON A LANED ROADWAY, SHALL RIDE WITHIN A SINGLE LANE."
    What is "... NORMAL and REASONABLE..."?

    IMHO. On a narrow road with blind corners, like Apple Valley, there's not really enough time for cyclists riding two abreast to react to traffic coming up from behind and go single file without traffic having to cross into the oncoming lane before overtaking and giving three feet.
    Ride Single File!

    Normal and reasonable are not the issue on that road. It is a laned roadway, so you are supposed to ride single file. [Laned roadway: A roadway which is divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for vehicular traffic.]

    I see it all the time here up north. It seems that a lot of roadies (and half-assed, weekend warrior roadies) seem to think the 3' law entitles them to ride however the h3ll they like. This includes riding 2 abreast, and riding outside existing bike lanes. This only infuriates the people who don't want us on the road anyway, and worse, gives them the feeling that they are entitled to bi-tch at us, buzz us, and run us off the road.

    Let's face it, we are at a massive disadvantage to as-sclowns in trucks so maybe we ought to ride within the law and not with a sense of entitlement.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by mudge
    single file is required only if riding two abreast impedes traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic at all, or if it is still possible to pass safely with only a minimal delay, then you're not impeding traffic. The law does not say that you have to ride single file so that a driver can pass without any delay or slowing until safe to pass whatsoever.
    There are very few places on that road where you have enough visibility to pass 2 cyclists riding abreast. I don't know if that qualifies as "impeding traffic." That said the road is primarily used by cyclists (road and mtn.) and the locals and as such is pretty mellow. This guy obviously has a problem and decided to take it out on you. It probably would have been worthwhile to roll up to the Antelope TH and say something.

    I can't believe there are people saying that it's ok to run someone off the road. That is just ridiculous.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    259
    UncleTrail,
    Since you quoted me, let me respond. At no point in my most did I support the idea that motorists have the right to intimidate people on bikes. In fact, I empathized with yogidave since I have been on the receiving end of motorists aggression while riding my bike. My intent was to provide reference to the CO law Wiggs mentioned, to point out that it does not necessarily give cyclists carte blanche to ride side by side, and that the vague wording can, unfortunately, lead to different real-world interpretations. Lastly, I stated I would choose to ride single file up Apple Valley as it is my opinion that riding two abreast, on that road, might impede the "normal and reasonable movement of traffic" [Edit to add] and seems unsafe.

  25. #25
    killin clear creek
    Reputation: backcountryislife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    762
    Oddly enough, I've NEVER been buzzed, bothered, intimidated or any of the like by a vehicle while riding ON TRAILS!!

    I'll never understand the desire of people to ride a bike on a road filled with jackasses. People are scary enough when you're in a car, why in the hell would you ride next to them on purpose on a bike????

    Sorry, I'll just never understand road biking. Still, in the future, take checkred's advice, and call the guy in. If someone attempts to injure you, DO SOMETHING (like, aside from whining about it on the intreweb) that may keep it from happening to other riders.

    Btw, road geeks that ride 2 abreast when cars are around are a pain in the ass.
    Quote Originally Posted by thump View Post
    How about we take the "let it burn approach" with the rotting cesspool of the Denver metro?

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •