spare_wheel

why on earth would a driver that intentionally slows down and lingers behind you put you at more risk?
i suspect worrying about slow cars has more to do with "car head" than any real sense of risk.

dynodonn 

Usually the motorist that lingers behind you, will grow impatient over time, and then ends up doing a dangerous passing maneuver at the most inopportune time. Seen this crap time and time again.

FBinNY 

While I agree that there seems to be plenty of distance for a safe pass of the bicycle, I want to remind people that the measure of safe distance isn't to the crest of the hill, but much closer. You have to assume that whatever car may be hidden behind the crest is moving toward you at your speed, so the theoretical or possible point of impact is somewhere about 1/2 the distance to the crest.

dynodonn 

Judging by the photograph that was presented, I would have been around the cyclist and back into my lane even if an oncoming vehicle appeared at the crest of the hill during the passing maneuver. I can see this scenario being played out in motion, and not as a still photograph, which I feel that some here are judging it as.

FBinNY 

As I said, I agreed with you that there seemed to be room. I was only pointing out the actual point of reference for the calculation of passing room.

dynodonn 

Probably the same calculation that I may have unconsciously used, being gained from years of driving experiences.

Now formally logged into the memory bank.

genec

Exactly... not to mention that we are being somewhat deceived by the still shot here, vice the real world moving image. Nor do we know the speed of the cyclist.

mconlonx

That's the crux -- unable to judge the true distance to crest of hill and thus safety of a pass in this situation because of unknown [photo jargon] and camera angle. It could very well be a perfectly safe situation to pass if the crest of the hill is far enough away; could be that it would be a dangerous pass if the crest is closer than it appears.

This. We also don't know the speed of the driver.

Another thing to consider is what's behind the car -- was it a dashed line indicating passing allowed both ways just before the introduction of the single line indicating no passing on the side of these two road users? And if a dashed line turning into solid on one side, how much further back? Those lines are laid down in consideration of motor vehicle passing other motor vehicles, and where it might not be safe to pass another motor vehicle going at a similar speed, it might be a perfectly safe area to pass a slower road user.

Too many unknowns for a definitive statement about a safe pass, either way. Needs qualifications to answer the question posed.

mrodgers

The question as stated assumes it is me driving. Thus, depending on the legal speed limit of the road, I know exactly how fast I would be driving at this point. At this point, I am off the throttle allowing momentum to drift down from my previous speed of 50 in a 45 zone or 60 in a 55 zone. If a 55 zone, knowing that the stop sign is coming up, I would be off the throttle whether the bike was there or not. If a 45, I probably would be still going up closer to the crest before lifting the throttle if the bike wasn't there.

Since the bike is there, no matter what my previous speed, which would have been 5 mph above the limit according to my uncalibrated speedometer, I would be off the throttle, I would move over probably with my left tires just on the other side of the yellow, and would pass and pull back into the lane before ever reaching any impact point of an oncoming car should there be one. Chances are, there would be no impact point no matter what because chances are any oncoming car would crest the hill, see me, see the bike, and move over slightly and pass by without incident.

This picture is not showing an inner city situation. This picture is showing a situation I encounter not with bicycles, but with farm tractors quite frequently out on the rural roads exactly like this that I drive on. A bicycle is a piece of cake. A farm tractor, the same usually applies with everyone on the road, it would be passed, only the speed would probably be less because of the need to move further into the other lane to get around a larger object.

wphamilton

We must all be judging the distance differently in that picture.

I can vaguely make out about eight yellow strips, so I say about 320-350 feet to where the road vanishes over the hill. The cyclist is about a hundred feet ahead. The tree tops makes it look to me to be steep on the other side.

If cars are going 45 and one crests just as you start to pass, that potentially leaves what, about a second, at most two, to swing out, pass, and get back over?

vol

Or how many drivers who think bikes/cyclists do not belong to the road at all.

FBinNY 

I don't know where you ride, and understand that there are significant regional differences. But here in rude and impatient NYC and the area surrounding it, plus most of the Northeast where I've been riding for almost 50 years, drivers are very aware of bicyclist rights to share the road, and drive courteously for the most part.

Yes, it can and does get crowded, but I don't see the type of conflict that so many here on BF seem to.

spare_wheel

scofflaw! don't you realize this makes all of us drivers look bad. the next time a cyclist throws a u-lock at me it will be your fault!!!

mconlonx

Wow, I totally missed the "stop sign ahead" sign over on the right, in the trees.

If this is the case, and considering the stop sign coming up, I might even stay behind the cyclist. Especially if I was going to be making a right hand turn at the stop sign.

It would probably depend on where my head was at on any given day.

genec

I missed the stop too... and tend to agree with you regarding how I might treat that situation with this new found knowledge...

I can't help but wonder how many drivers, etc might also miss that stop sign "warning" in the bushes...

JanMM

If I were the cyclist, I would absolutely expect to be passed in that situation. If I were a motorist, I would pass - with caution, as always.

jyl

Yes, go over the centerline and pass. Distance to cyclist depends on my speed. If I'm doing 40 mph, I'd give him 5+ feet.

I ride on roads like this and would expect drivers to pass me in a similar manner, there is no drama involved.

In the cyclist's position, I would be riding in the shoulder, not to the left of the fog line. Unless the shoulder is full of tacks or bricks. Just being a typical dirty shoulder with a lot of road crud, pebbles, etc doesn't matter. I would also have, and use, a helmet mirror.

rdtindsm

I've only read the first page, pardon me if I repeat another post.

While the drivers on the county roads I ride here in Iowa are generally pretty good about passing, every once in a while one is overly passes into oncoming traffic and I see a puff of dust and hear the ping of gravel as oncoming traffic is forced to pull over.

Note that there is a wide shoulder on the opposite of road. No problem. One can pass with minimal risk.

In other cases, cars regularly slow to my speed if the sight lines are short I am a bit surprised and grateful that I don't get abuse.

vatdim

Lane's looking rather wide for the small car I usually drive and I'd probably be able to give at least 1-1.5 meters to the cyclist so I'd probably pass him after I slow down somewhat just to feel safer.

In the more realistic situation that this happens to me on a narrower lane like most in Europe, I'd almost certainly slow down and give the cyclist enough space so he doesn't feel intimidated. After traversing the hill and making sure there is no oncoming traffic, I'd probably cross the yellow line and give the cyclist at least 2-3 meters of lateral distance just to be sure he's OK.

billyymc

This.

If I were the cyclist in that situation, going up a grade at something under 15 mph, I'd have no problem moving a bit to the right of that white line until the driver passes. I do that all the time.

If I were the driver, I'd ease off the throttle, move to the left most part of my own lane or just slightly into the oncoming lane, and pass at a reasonable non-threatening speed.

One thing worth mentioning - roads / travel lanes seem much more narrow from the perspective of a driver in a car than they do from the perspective of a cyclist. If you drive the same roads on which you ride, you'll know what I mean.

fsdddd

There is only one answer. Wait until there is a broken yellow passing line.

RidingMatthew

+1
+1

+1

+1

I agree!!! I hate horn honkers. it is usually too late and I already know you are there because I ride with mirrors.

I would pass, if I was driving a car, after the crest of the hill and I could see where the stop sign is. If the stop sign is close, I would not pass him, especially to stop in front of him at the stop sign. I would not speed up to pass either. I would either maintain the speed limit.. If he is going the speed Limit, I wait. I would not pass a car moving the speed limit.

RidingMatthew

It depends on your state law. I know that VA and NC you can pass safely you can cross anywhere to pass a cyclist... not other cars.

If a bicyclist is a vehicle, why would you ride outside the travel lane?

rumrunn6

not fair to ask to judge a dynamic situation from a static photo

Daniel4

If 8 hours of on-road bicycle experience were a requirement for getting a drivers licence, the communication would be clear to both. As a cyclist, I see he is not taking the lane. In situations like that it appears clear the cyclist is riding far to the right allowing vehicles to pass. As a motorist, when I'm on the road with a faster vehicle behind me I drift to the right to allow the vehicle to see far ahead when it will be safe to pass.

So pass at a slower speed than you are driving. Don't accelerate until you've finished your pass and see the cyclist in the rear view mirror. Give the cyclist the 3ft as required by law unless it is not practical and won't jeopardize his safety.