atbman

So many people seem to be buying into the "difficult to see 'cos his trike is small/low" argument. While simultaneously criticising his lane positioning.

So, you're saying that a recumbent, taking the lane, i.e. almost directly, or actually directly, in front of a driver will be difficult to see. Please explain why this is. It will be a totally different colour to the tarmac/blacktop; it will be moving and therefore changing the the appearance of the roadway inf front of the driver; it will be moving at a reasonable lick and therefore the driver will have a considerable time in which to see him and it. Please explain how his appearance is risky and please explain how the officer will prove such an argument.

Doohickie

I'm with them up to the last statement. The fact of the matter is that while the road markings are lower, they are not things that need to be gaged for speed and avoided, while trikes are. I think once a driver recognizes a trike as a slow moving vehicle, they give it a wide berth, but the reaction time from noticing that the trike is there, to recognizing that it is moving but not very quickly is something I would worry about and try to remedy by calling attention to the trike with flag/blinkies/farm triangle/whatever.

rydabent

We will all be waiting to read how the "ticket" come out in court. Please post when the verdict is in.

This particular cop was just on a power trip. His calling for back up on such a silly and and questionable "violation" was done only to show the cyclist of his power.

dynodonn 

My question about visibility is that if the OP's statement about riding the trike several thousands of miles without any incidents of close passing or collisions is correct, then he must be visible well enough, especially when motorists in the opposite lane are stopping to yell statements at him, as well as him getting a large police escort. One would think that the OP would have been killed or severely injured in a collision long ago if he was not visible to motorists.

himespau 

So is the reason for no flag an aero thing? A don't want to look like a dork thing? A hey, I don't want to use it because I'm an American and you can't tell me what to do thing?

Whatever the case, the cop appears to be in the wrong here, but I'd still think about listening to what everyone is telling you and getting one.

Doohickie

That was one of the Reed Bates arguments when he was ticketed on a Texas highway not too far from me. He took the ticket to trial and was convicted. Thing is, people who drive cars and never ride bikes see things differently than people who regularly ride bikes.

dynodonn 

....and thus goes to show that cyclists have a long way to go in educating non cyclists on a cyclist's rights.

Zaneluke

You will never make a dent in the automobile drivers viewpoint that cyclists should not be on the road. Not all of them , but a vast majority of them look down on the bike.

As a bike rider i understand this so i try to make myself as visible as possible, even if I go above and beyond what is required by law. I like living.

Doohickie

Actually, I would argue that past experience has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

Also, what you see as "along way to go in educating" I see as a pretty much immovable object. People are people, and they will enforce and judge consistent with their personal experience. If they never ride a bike, they will never see the world through the eyes of a bike rider. There are more important issues in society than trying to get drivers to understand what it's like to ride a bike, because they never will understand. Instead, recognize that this is the way the world is, and act accordingly.

Works for me, anyway.

WPeabody 

Just from personal experience, I have found the flag to be important while stopped in traffic, in a bike lane in town with plenty of passing traffic, on a bike path coming to an intersection with shrubbery, and navigating parking lots.

But on the open road, people have no trouble seeing me, and the vast majority of them give me plenty of room as they pass.

Beating a dead critter in saying this, but wanted to add, if recumbent trikes were not street legal, the trike manufacturers would have said something about it by now... riding toys and such that are not street legal come with warning label that say so.

dynodonn 

Looks like we have a difference of opinion, but that's what makes the world an interesting, if not volatile, place.

genec

The driver right behind this 'bent can see it easily, but the driver behind that driver has no idea why the apparent "lead car" is going so slow, and some "idiots behind the wheel" get real antsy when they perceive that something is slowing them down... there is a good chance that a driver behind can swoop around the lead car and then run into the cyclist (just had that happen here when a motorist in an SUV swooped around a city bus, and killed a cyclist). Also folks making left turns will perceive that low vehicle as a gap in traffic... heck those left turners often don't see "diamond frame" bikes; a low trike is invisible.

So while the cyclist in the OP is not required to have a flag... for his own safety, he probably should. This BTW is one reason I don't ride a bent... too low to be seen and too low to see over traffic. I have long considered acquiring a 'bent, but just don't like the visibility factors. Now is this all ticketable... I doubt it. This of course is JMHO.

unterhausen

a trike is significantly wider than a regular bike and thus I see a stronger imperative to take a lane position discouraging close passes. I don't want to jinx any of our recumbent riding friends, but you really don't hear of recumbent riders getting run over very often. If there actually was some kind of problem, you would expect to see evidence of that in the accident reports.

genec

Could their rarity be one reason they don't get run over? How often are these things used in dense city traffic like NYC or Chicago?

Of course on the flip side, they tend to be rather unusual, so perhaps they attract enough attention to actually be seen.

SactoDoug

I have had incidents with police officers that had the same tone as was described in the article. They were no bicycle related but I know the attitude displayed by the police Lt. quite well.

I wish the OP luck in court. Traffic courts in particular are stacked against the average citizen. They are basically just revenue collection points. The judges/magistrates half heartedly listen, bang their gavel and collect the fine. The LEO is automatically given complete credibility and the citizen next to none. The only things that can trump a LEO's testimony is either a video, their own statements, or several witnesses that all say the LEO was wrong. Innocent until proven guilty does not apply to traffic tickets.

dynodonn 

From the article I posted in #63:

"Q: Will cars and other vehicles be able to see me?"

"A: Yes, We find that other vehicles tend to give trike riders a wide berth as they are not used to seeing trikes on the road."

chipcom 

Yes, you found the words that fell through the cracks in my widdle head!

chipcom 

Personally, whether he has a flag or not is irrelevant to me and his choice. That said, if drivers in the US were safe, courteous and observant drivers, we wouldn't have near the amount of dead critters, flowers and little crosses scattered about the shoulders of our roads.

chipcom 

While the cop was in the wrong, if he would have just shot the OP for being a hammock jockey, no jury would have convicted him.



I keed, I keed!

unterhausen

I think the issue is that there are a significant number of drivers that curse the idiots that are putting on their brakes and speed up because they are smarter and better looking than the rest of us. I know I'm often guilty of cursing the idiots with the brakes, but at least I get ready to slow down in case they had good reason to do it.

CommuterRun

Let's try this one last time:

Okay; first of all, in order to be street legal vehicle in FL, a bicycle must be human powered. Of course. That right there eliminates the pocket bikes and mini scooters.

It may have a helper motor as long as that motor is not powerful to drive the bicycle to more than 20 mph on level ground. A helper motor with more power than that and now the bike must be registered, insured, etc., etc., as a motor vehicle. Good luck with that. But I have heard of it being done.

It must have two wheels, but may have up to three wheels. That eliminates unicycles and four wheeled pedal cars, the trike is okay. So far.

The term (bicycle) does not include such a vehicle with a seat height of no more than 25 inches from the ground when the seat is adjusted to its highest position. This is where 'bents like the one pictured in the article run into trouble. The wording in this sentence in the actual definition above says nothing about any kind of motor vehicles; not mini scooters, not pocket bikes, not cars that sit low to the ground, etc. It also says nothing specifying motorized bicycles. It simply says that in order to be a street legal vehicle, the seat of a bicycle must be at least 25" from the ground when adjusted to it's highest point.

That's not my opinion. That's the way I read the law. My opinion is that any kind of bicycle like device, regardless of the number of wheels or seat height should be street legal everywhere and on all roads, streets and highways; but I don't write legislation.

Incidentally, while the law does not specify that a bicycle must have a seat; because of the seat height requirement, bicycles without a seat, such as trials bikes, are not street legal either.

Now, I have never, ever, heard of this law being enforced; and I have seen 'bents being ridden in the presence of law enforcement officers. So if I had such a 'bent, would I worry about it? Not one little bit. I would ride the daylights out of it.

And I do sincerely apologize for being a smart-adze on this thread yesterday. I could try to blame it on the cold longnecks; but that would be a copout to my responsibility.

Doohickie

No problem. If you can budge the prevailing attitude, more power to ya, but I don't expect miracles.

Truth.

CommuterRun.... It's nice that you're in Florida, but Connecticut law is what's important here.

CommuterRun

Yes, you are right. I apologize for the deflection. I was only trying to clarify something I brought up in my first reply that received following replies in regards to a state's law that I am familiar with that I still don't know if Connecticut has the same.

Again, my apologies for the deflection.

Doohickie

You are absolved. Go and live a righteous life, my son.

cellery

How many routine traffic stops have you seen that involved four police cruisers and a blockade? Around these parts they reserve that much force for serious collisions, belligerent drunks, crackheads in stolen vehicles and DWB cases. That is why he called his lawyer wife.