Google sponsored links
OK, I've been reading much of the advocacy here about VC, and I'd like to bring up a point / pose a question.
I consider myself a vehicular cyclist. I also train and race in triathlons. I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I generally ride pretty fast.
On my commute, I've been in a number of situations where the fact that I can easily maintain and hold +20 mph has kept me out of danger. This includes a daily "traffic sprint" where I make a left turn at a busy intersection. Riding fast enables me to take a lane with the least amount of aggrivation caused to motorists (which would otherwise, I'm sure, be directed back at me.)
So then, should guidlines/credo/ideology or whateiver of Vehicular Cycling come with some kind of warning or disclaimer that states that it should not be tried unless the rider has the physical fitness to hold and maintain a certain speed on a bike?
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
I don't think so. If you look at the entire population of people in the US, few can actually hold 20+ MPH on a bike. I know I can't. I commute at 15 MPH average, and peak out at 20 - 22 for short distances. Most people average 10-12 MPH. I'm happy for you, but we shouldn't base our "movement" based on the abilities of a few.
Speed can be helpful, but it's not necessary, IMO. On a 30 mph road, for example, a 20+ mph cyclist has the benefit of being able to more easily negotiate with traffic to make the lane changes to get to the left turn pocket, while a 10 mph cyclist might have to wait for larger gaps to do the same thing.
Most of my riding is on 45-55 mph roads. So whether a cyclist is going 15 or 20 mph isn't going to make much of a difference.
I think most people on this forum would disagree with me but I avoid VC mainly because I commute at 12 -15 mph on average and I consider myself too slow to merge with traffic. And yes, most of the time I use the infamous bike lane. I do ride with traffic when I have to make a left turn or when there's no room on the side of the street but I feel very uneasy and edgy when I hold up traffic behind me and when, after awhile, angry drivers tailgate me and pass me very fast the first chance they get. I wish I could allow myself to VC but I think I'm scared to because of my speed.
OK, I've been reading much of the advocacy here about VC, and I'd like to bring up a point / pose a question.
I consider myself a vehicular cyclist. I also train and race in triathlons. I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I generally ride pretty fast.
On my commute, I've been in a number of situations where the fact that I can easily maintain and hold +20 mph has kept me out of danger. This includes a daily "traffic sprint" where I make a left turn at a busy intersection. Riding fast enables me to take a lane with the least amount of aggrivation caused to motorists (which would otherwise, I'm sure, be directed back at me.)
So then, should guidlines/credo/ideology or whateiver of Vehicular Cycling come with some kind of warning or disclaimer that states that it should not be tried unless the rider has the physical fitness to hold and maintain a certain speed on a bike?
I think you've hit the nail on the head. I try to ride only on roads where the speed limit is low,under 35 mph and pace myself so that I can ride as fast as the cars as much as possible. I think the safest way to ride is at traffic speed, taking up the entire lane just like any other vehicle.
Doesn't prevent idiot cagers from still getting mad at you however. Many times I've ridden on a road with two lanes in my direction, I will be in the right lane, passing a slower car in the LEFT lane only to have some idiot in a car in back of me honk at ME, telling me to move over.
The principle is the same, regardless of your speed. VC or Cyclecraft, or whatever name you wish to call it, is designed to ensure that the rider behaves, within the limits imposed by speed, etc., as being in charge of a vehicle. This ensures that their behaviour is consistent and therefore foreseeable.
It may be that being able to ride at 20mph+ makes it easier, as merging lanes, moving across/thro' traffic is easier. However, my recent commute (now ret'd) took me along a fast dual carriageway with a RH turn at a roundabout (US LH equivalent) (traffic circle). I had to cross from kerbside to far right of rightmost lane, with traffic often at 50mph or more. My speed on an uphill drag wasn't more than about 13mph yet I managed this on a daily basis, thro' clear signalling, judgement of traffic gaps and the cooperation of motorists. It helped that I have more years on two wheels than I care to think about and plenty of confidence in my own judgement.
Even if you ride at 10-12mph, VC is perfectly possible, although the individual may well prefer to chose less heavily trafficked or better designed roads, because of their lower speeds.
While there are disagreements over the precise details of VC, the broad, general prinicples apply, even if traffic conditions and driver behaviour may possibly be worse in the US than the UK.
I think most people on this forum would disagree with me but I avoid VC mainly because I commute at 12 -15 mph on average and I consider myself too slow to merge with traffic. And yes, most of the time I use the infamous bike lane. I do ride with traffic when I have to make a left turn or when there's no room on the side of the street but I feel very uneasy and edgy when I hold up traffic behind me and when, after awhile, angry drivers tailgate me and pass me very fast the first chance they get. I wish I could allow myself to VC but I think I'm scared to because of my speed.
Although I commute faster than you at 15-25 mph, I commute on 45-55 mph roads. So in your case and in my case the difference in motorist and cyclist speed is probably about the same.
When I ride on lower speed roads, I can easily negotiate lane changes with individual motorists. When I ride on the 45-55 mph roads, I generally wait for the big gaps that form between "packs" of cars - these gaps occur due to the flow being broken up by the traffic lights. Just because I'm waiting for a gap rather than negotiating doesn't mean I'm riding non-vehicularly. After all, if you're driving on the freeway and the line of cars in front of you slows down very quickly, but you can't change lanes since the traffic in the lane next to you is still going at full speed, would anyone consider that non-vehicular?
On one of my commute routes there is a one mile section of 45 mph road where I have to take the lane on the uphill. I've had no problems, as long I don't let the occasional horn honk bother me, although I won't pretend it's the most pleasant part of my ride. There's another thread on that, though.
CJolson I agree, speed and the ability to accelerate are your friends in vehicular cycling. Grandpop pooping along on his old balloon tire Schwinn is much better off on the sidewalk, better for all of us.
I'm hesistant to use VC on roads with speeds 35 mph+. Which means I don't use VC sometimes, because my area is rife with 35 mph+ roads. Even where it is 25 mph, people are traveling 35-40 mph. These conditions have made me a great sprinter, but there is only so long you can maintain a sprint before you need to recharge. That is when it is good to just dive off to the side (even in the doorzone, god forbid) and slow down a bit for a few minutes. One guy from California mentioned riding 45-50 mph roads. I ride these roads, but only in the country where traffic is sparse enough that I can hear approaching vehicles clearly. In the city, riding fast roads is more complicated because you chronicallly have people up your arse. I say, don't ride VC if you are going really slow and really going to piss people off. If you really love VC, I'd get a few books on racing and training for racing and learn to apply these techniques to your riding. I admit I used to go out and train on weekends just to improve my sprinting and endurance for my commute riding. Also, sprinting in city conditions is more challenging, because you are intaking lots and lots of smog. There is nothing like being next to a bus when you have to sprint or ascend hills. :(
OK, I've been reading much of the advocacy here about VC, and I'd like to bring up a point / pose a question.
I consider myself a vehicular cyclist. I also train and race in triathlons. I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I generally ride pretty fast.
On my commute, I've been in a number of situations where the fact that I can easily maintain and hold +20 mph has kept me out of danger. This includes a daily "traffic sprint" where I make a left turn at a busy intersection. Riding fast enables me to take a lane with the least amount of aggrivation caused to motorists (which would otherwise, I'm sure, be directed back at me.)
So then, should guidlines/credo/ideology or whateiver of Vehicular Cycling come with some kind of warning or disclaimer that states that it should not be tried unless the rider has the physical fitness to hold and maintain a certain speed on a bike?
Interesting that you bring this up. I just finished a Road 2 class that also happened to have one of BF resident VC advocates present.
The class consisted of some folks that were quite experienced, and some not so experienced. Well, the bottom line is that we all faced the same traffic, and whether we were strong and fast or not so strong and fast... didn't matter.
The instructor used simple timing to make his left turns, blending nicely into the widest gaps in traffic and using those to his advantage. The VC advocate used a touch of timing and a burst of speed to blend into traffic and make his turn. The least experienced of the bunch waited until a traffic light put a huge gap in traffic and then she too simply blended right in.
There was no special need for strength and speed in any case... Timing and watching traffic was the key.
I saw the same thing in the Road 1 class where this one woman was very timid about riding in traffic... She had to cross a major freeway on a bridge with on and off ramps on either side with a trasition lane on the right. This was on a Saturday afternoon when afternoon shopping traffic was at about peak speed and density. The traffic in this area was 35MPH+. There were three lanes that had to be negotiated. Again, the key was timing and signaling to open up gaps. She did fine.
Obviously you time yourself to blend in with other traffic based on your speed... as did the VC advocate, and yourself... knowing your abilities, you can either pour on the speed and merge with faster traffic or slow down, signal and make or look for an appropriate gap.
The abilities of the rider did not effect the outcome... but did form the basis for when they chose to actually attempt the move and merge.
So bottom line, I would say a rider needs to know their own strength and skills, and should probably go out and observe traffic before attempting any such moves. The observation of traffic will help one to understand that there are usually some gaps that can either be directly used or negotiated for (to be made bigger) and these gaps and your timing are key to riding in traffic.
I would never advocate for instance that one attempt to sprint between cars... but in your case, your speed and strenth simply allow you use timing to chose smaller gaps than others may be comfortable with.
good one, gene. As a Ferrari and a 1962 Studebaker Lark can both share the streets and follow the same vehicular code, so can cyclists of vastly differing abilities. Sometimes we complain about roads and traffic laws, but they are both actually flexible and user friendly to a wide array of users.
I'm not a particularly fit bicyclist, but I normally accelerate faster than the cars next to me for the first few seconds. When I'm at around 25 mph, they usually catch up. I'm often still accelerating at that point, depending on the traffic situation. Very helpful when trying to make a turn before the cars.
These are sprint speeds, of course. My average "cruising speed" on flat roads is more like 18-22 mph. But then, my commute is only 4.5 miles.
So then, should guidlines/credo/ideology or whateiver of Vehicular Cycling come with some kind of warning or disclaimer that states that it should not be tried unless the rider has the physical fitness to hold and maintain a certain speed on a bike?
--- I have often thought that some of the Vehicular Cycling exhortations on these Forums are actually just disguised braggadocio of the posters.
I saw the same thing in the Road 1 class where this one woman was very timid about riding in traffic... She had to cross a major freeway on a bridge with on and off ramps on either side with a trasition lane on the right. This was on a Saturday afternoon when afternoon shopping traffic was at about peak speed and density. The traffic in this area was 35MPH+. There were three lanes that had to be negotiated. Again, the key was timing and signaling to open up gaps. She did fine.
Obviously you time yourself to blend in with other traffic based on your speed... as did the VC advocate, and yourself... knowing your abilities, you can either pour on the speed and merge with faster traffic or slow down, signal and make or look for an appropriate gap.
You're right about this and I have no problem changing lanes and occupying a whole lane if I have to. However, even it is less safe I wouldn't ride VC on a 40MPH+ road if there is a designated bike lane. The street I have in mind is one I've been on for 4 years and in that time, out of all the cyclists I've seen (the majority of which much faster than me), I have never seen even one that didn't use the bike lane. I wonder what it would look like to a driver if at 7 am I am on the traffic lane at 10MPH (it's uphill) for 4 miles, and that driver is half-asleep, late-for-work, bicycles-don't-belong-on-the-road kind of person that does not expect a cyclist on the street.
You're right about this and I have no problem changing lanes and occupying a whole lane if I have to. However, even it is less safe I wouldn't ride VC on a 40MPH+ road if there is a designated bike lane. The street I have in mind is one I've been on for 4 years and in that time, out of all the cyclists I've seen (the majority of which much faster than me), I have never seen even one that didn't use the bike lane. I wonder what it would look like to a driver if at 7 am I am on the traffic lane at 10MPH (it's uphill) for 4 miles, and that driver is half-asleep, late-for-work, bicycles-don't-belong-on-the-road kind of person that does not expect a cyclist on the street.
This was addressed in Bek's "35 mph ..." thread (sorry I don't know how to link it). Different people define "what is VC" in different ways. I say that a VC would select a lane position as if the bike lane stripe were not there. So in most cases a VC would treat it as a wide outside lane and be far enough right to share the lane - therefore, in the bike lane if you put the bike lane stripe back.
I'm tempted to start a "what is VC" thread. Not that I expect any consensus, but at least for newbie it could show what different people consider what is VC. I don't dare start the thread, as it could just end up in a flame war!
I thought I'd wait a bit before posting since this seems to be another one of those "I dropped... X" posts to brag about speed.
But I guess I'll chime in, if you can keep around 20mph and can get up to 30mph, that's great in NYC because you can blend right into traffic. I normally do this and stay out of the door zone a lot of times. It's helped me in numerous occassions when I pass a car just as the driver opens the door and then I realize that I'm actually in the middle of the lane buffered by cars in front of and behind me.
I wouldn't try to go VC in a suburban road though.
This was addressed in Bek's "35 mph ..." thread (sorry I don't know how to link it). Different people define "what is VC" in different ways. I say that a VC would select a lane position as if the bike lane stripe were not there. So in most cases a VC would treat it as a wide outside lane and be far enough right to share the lane - therefore, in the bike lane if you put the bike lane stripe back.
I'm tempted to start a "what is VC" thread. Not that I expect any consensus, but at least for newbie it could show what different people consider what is VC. I don't dare start the thread, as it could just end up in a flame war!
Thanks for the comment.
To be honest I'm not sure what VC is and I've also been tempted to start a thread on it, but then I also haven't dared to for the same reason :D
I'm not a particularly fit bicyclist, but I normally accelerate faster than the cars next to me for the first few seconds. When I'm at around 25 mph, they usually catch up. I'm often still accelerating at that point...
--- I have often thought that some of the Vehicular Cycling exhortations on these Forums are actually just disguised braggadocio of the posters.
Yes, I think so; or closet braggers who have novel concepts of typical (non-enthusiast and not in "training mode") cyclists' routine speed and acceleration.
What???
I simply meant that I don't consider myself a very fit person, but I can still get ahead of the cars after a red light. I'm really not fit at all. After a whole summer of riding, I'm still only in the slowest of my club's speed groups. That's the 14 mph group. And sometimes I even have trouble keeping up with that pace for longer rides. Ours is a purely recreational club, by the way. No racing here...
I'm weak and relatively thin. Little muscle, poor stamina, and yet I'm still able to get ahead of the cars. THAT is the point I wanted to make. If I can do it, I think most people can!
What???
I simply meant that I don't consider myself a very fit person, but I can still get ahead of the cars after a red light. I'm really not fit at all. After a whole summer of riding, I'm still only in the slowest of my club's speed groups. That's the 14 mph group. And sometimes I even have trouble keeping up with that pace for longer rides. Ours is a purely recreational club, by the way. No racing here...
I'm weak and relatively thin. Little muscle, poor stamina, and yet I'm still able to get ahead of the cars. THAT is the point I wanted to make. If I can do it, I think most people can!
Gotta excuse ILTB, his diplomatic skills and stubborn insistance that the only 'real' reality is his own indicates that he could be a member of the Bush Administration. ;)
I am 50 years old and I weigh 220 pounds still (after losing over 100). I do not ride all that fast all the time. But even on days when I am just noodling around, I noodle vehicularly. I also ride with my stepson Jerry, who, since an auto accident, can only ride about 8 mph on a good day. We still ride vehicularly with no problem whatsoever. VC was designed to work for all riders, and it does. Evn old people like me can use it, and even disabled people like Jerry. The only secret is that I learned how to ride vehicularly, and I taught it to Jerry.
I don't mean any disrespect, but those who say slow riders can't ride vehicularly don't really understand how to do ride this way. If they understood, they would not make such a mistaken statement. It really surprises me that so many people can say something doesn't work because they are too proud to admit that they don't understand how to do it.
I don't know how to play the violin, but you would think I'm foolish if I said "It's impossible to play the violin." You would even think me foolish if I said, "Only certain people can learn to play the violin," knowing that even very young children learn how to play.
Almost every thing that you do in life must be learned first. Very few skills come naturally. There is no reason to be ashamed to say "I don't know how to ride vehicularly." If you would like to learn VC, you can--even if you are old, slow, disabled, or not particularly bright.
What???
I simply meant that I don't consider myself a very fit person, but I can still get ahead of the cars after a red light. I'm really not fit at all.
So what's with the 25mph and still accelerating shtick - A metric misunderstanding?
Not at all, but that's just for a few seconds. It's not like I keep that speed up for very long... :)
But the fact remains, that I often do accelerate past around 25 mph. But after around 10-15 seconds, I'm down to between 15-20, depending on the grade.
My pulse shoots up to 175-180 for a few seconds, according to my HRM.
Having clipless helps, of course...
Not at all, but that's just for a few seconds. It's not like I keep that speed up for very long... :)
But the fact remains, that I often do accelerate past around 25 mph. But after around 10-15 seconds, I'm down to between 15-20, depending on the grade.
My pulse shoots up to 175-180 for a few seconds, according to my HRM.
Having clipless helps, of course...
And my point remains, some posters have a strange idea of what is typical behavior for non-enthusiast bicyclists; in this case speed attained after traffic stops.
Almost every thing that you do in life must be learned first. Very few skills come naturally. There is no reason to be ashamed to say "I don't know how to ride vehicularly." If you would like to learn VC, you can--even if you are old, slow, disabled, or not particularly bright.
Well stated, Roody. I can attest the the 'not particularly bright' myself. ;)
And my point remains, some posters have a strange idea of what is typical behavior for non-enthusiast bicyclists; in this case speed attained after traffic stops.
I agree with your point. Many (most?) cyclists don't have computers or HRMs and don't have any idea how many MPH they are riding at, what their heart rate is, how many watts they are producing or how many rpms their wittle wegs are spinning at, yet they manage to ride in traffic just fine. Indeed, people were riding in traffic long before computers, speedometers or other doo-dads were attached to bicycles.
My point is still that I believe it's possible for a good number of people to get out ahead of cars from a standing start, for long enough to make a safer turn, if that's necessary.
My point is still that I believe it's possible for a good number of people to get out ahead of cars from a standing start, for long enough to make a safer turn, if that's necessary.
Let me see if I understand your scenario. You are at a stop, to the right of the traffic lane, and you sprint forward, then across the lane to make a left? I'm confused, if you are stopped, aren't the cars in the lane stopped as well...and as far forward as you, which means you are sprinting into the intersection and cutting across it? If this is what you are describing, I don't see how this could be safer for anyone...even slvoid who is friggin superman and probably crazier than even me.
...I don't mean any disrespect, but those who say slow riders can't ride vehicularly don't really understand how to do ride this way. If they understood, they would not make such a mistaken statement. It really surprises me that so many people can say something doesn't work because they are too proud to admit that they don't understand how to do it.
...
...To be honest I'm not sure what VC is...
I've no problem admiting that I don't fully understand VC. I always thought that in part it meant riding in the middle of the traffic lane and not riding to the right so that you could negotiate your lane with other vehicles. I think VC means something different to everybody and I don't know what is the best way to learn about it. What I know is that all the cyclists I see commuting always ride in the bike lane if there is one designated.
Let me see if I understand your scenario. You are at a stop, to the right of the traffic lane, and you sprint forward, then across the lane to make a left? I'm confused, if you are stopped, aren't the cars in the lane stopped as well...and as far forward as you, which means you are sprinting into the intersection and cutting across it? If this is what you are describing, I don't see how this could be safer for anyone...even slvoid who is friggin superman and probably crazier than even me.
No, the main reason I'm sprinting is because I think it's fun. But if I needed to make a turn (or, more likely in my case, change lanes), that's easier to do if you're ahead of traffic than in the middle of it...
No, the main reason I'm sprinting is because I think it's fun. But if I needed to make a turn (or, more likely in my case, change lanes), that's easier to do if you're ahead of traffic than in the middle of it...
I have no problem with the changing lanes aspect, space is always a good thing, but what is confusing me is that you were talking about sprinting from a stop to make a turn, I am having a difficult time 'seeing the picture' in that case.
even slvoid who is friggin superman and probably crazier than even me.
The stories of my life have been greatly exaggerated...
The stories of my life have been greatly exaggerated...
Don't go screwing with my hero worship perceptions! :eek:
I've no problem admiting that I don't fully understand VC. I always thought that in part it meant riding in the middle of the traffic lane and not riding to the right so that you could negotiate your lane with other vehicles. I think VC means something different to everybody and I don't know what is the best way to learn about it. What I know is that all the cyclists I see commuting always ride in the bike lane if there is one designated.
It's not that vehicular cycling is different for everybody (at least it shouldn't be), it's that vehicular cycling's application is different depending on the situation. Not all roads are created equal so they need to be addressed seperately. You can't make a blanket statement about where to ride. So many people assume vehicular cycling means riding down the middle of the road regardless of the surrounding conditions which goes to show that the VC advocates on this forum aren't doing the job they think they are doing and/or the reader isn't doing a good job of sorting out what applies to their situation and what does not.
I have no problem with the changing lanes aspect, space is always a good thing, but what is confusing me is that you were talking about sprinting from a stop to make a turn, I am having a difficult time 'seeing the picture' in that case.
Ok, I'll give you an example so...
Not along my normal route, but along a shorter but slower one, there's a four-way intersection where I'm coming from the north, and I need to turn left (towards east), through the parallel traffic (I'm to the right of the cars at this point). However, there's no lane separation for traffic turning left (my direction) and cars continuing on straight ahead (otherwise, I'd be in the left-turning lane and turn with the traffic), so in order to make the turn, I need to get well ahead of the cars to make the turn, or else go straight ahead and face waiting for up to a minute or two for all the cars to pass, and then cross the street along the east-west bike lane that runs there.
However, as that's not the route I normally take, this isn't really a concern of mine. But it's an example of a situation where sprinting ahead of the cars can be beneficial.
I can understand if this sounds dangerous, but if you knew the intersection, you'd understand that it's not as bad as it sounds.
Interesting that you bring this up. I just finished a Road 2 class that also happened to have one of BF resident VC advocates present.
The class consisted of some folks that were quite experienced, and some not so experienced. Well, the bottom line is that we all faced the same traffic, and whether we were strong and fast or not so strong and fast... didn't matter.
The instructor used simple timing to make his left turns, blending nicely into the widest gaps in traffic and using those to his advantage. The VC advocate used a touch of timing and a burst of speed to blend into traffic and make his turn. The least experienced of the bunch waited until a traffic light put a huge gap in traffic and then she too simply blended right in.
There was no special need for strength and speed in any case... Timing and watching traffic was the key.
I saw the same thing in the Road 1 class where this one woman was very timid about riding in traffic... She had to cross a major freeway on a bridge with on and off ramps on either side with a trasition lane on the right. This was on a Saturday afternoon when afternoon shopping traffic was at about peak speed and density. The traffic in this area was 35MPH+. There were three lanes that had to be negotiated. Again, the key was timing and signaling to open up gaps. She did fine.
Obviously you time yourself to blend in with other traffic based on your speed... as did the VC advocate, and yourself... knowing your abilities, you can either pour on the speed and merge with faster traffic or slow down, signal and make or look for an appropriate gap.
The abilities of the rider did not effect the outcome... but did form the basis for when they chose to actually attempt the move and merge.
So bottom line, I would say a rider needs to know their own strength and skills, and should probably go out and observe traffic before attempting any such moves. The observation of traffic will help one to understand that there are usually some gaps that can either be directly used or negotiated for (to be made bigger) and these gaps and your timing are key to riding in traffic.
I would never advocate for instance that one attempt to sprint between cars... but in your case, your speed and strenth simply allow you use timing to chose smaller gaps than others may be comfortable with.
Great Post Gene.
I am one of those that can ride at 20 mph if I choose and I ride VC, but I also putter on some mornings. To me riding safely and VC has nothing to do with speed and everything to do with confidence. I don't buy the, you have to be fast to ride VC argument.
-Marcus
I have no problem with the changing lanes aspect, space is always a good thing, but what is confusing me is that you were talking about sprinting from a stop to make a turn, I am having a difficult time 'seeing the picture' in that case.
I see you had a more flattering portrait made for your avatar. You know this isn't a dating site don't you?
I've no problem admiting that I don't fully understand VC. I always thought that in part it meant riding in the middle of the traffic lane and not riding to the right so that you could negotiate your lane with other vehicles. I think VC means something different to everybody and I don't know what is the best way to learn about it. What I know is that all the cyclists I see commuting always ride in the bike lane if there is one designated.
I see that you haunt thes forums, so eventually you will wade through the trivial details an come to the meat of vehicular cycling. Or go to Wikipedia (a collaborative online encyclopedia) and search for the article on vehicular cycling.
I would not say that VC means riding a bike as if it were a car, because that would inflame some people here. But, you know, 95% of the time that is what VC is like. Of course, cars can do things that bikes cannot, so you can't totally ride your bike like a car. But a lot of times the correct lane to be in, or the correct part of the lane, is the same for a bike as for a car. For example, you make a left turn from the left turn lane, be you bike or car. And the important thing is that you do have the same right to use the road as a cager does.
In my opinion, You can use the bike lane if you are riding vehicularly, when and if it is the best place on that particular road to ride.
I see you had a more flattering portrait made for your avatar. You know this isn't a dating site don't you?
I guess you and I having cyber sex is out of the question then? :p :eek:
Only those super fast folks can feel confident enough to take the lane by default. The rest of us can happily ride off to the side, bike lane or not, and move over as needed to make lane changes and still call ourselves vehicular cyclists.
Unless you happen to be blocking the only lane on a road where cars normally travel at 25mph and you're doing 10, ignoring the honking from the 50 cars piled up behind you. Odds are... someone will turn their back and someone else is going to take you out (if the attitudes of NYC residents are any indication of how people behave).
VC has more to do with when and where than a person's abilities but there are limits to how "confident" someone can be..
Great Post Gene.
I am one of those that can ride at 20 mph if I choose and I ride VC, but I also putter on some mornings. To me riding safely and VC has nothing to do with speed and everything to do with confidence. I don't buy the, you have to be fast to ride VC argument.
-Marcus
Ok, I'll give you an example so...
Not along my normal route, but along a shorter but slower one, there's a four-way intersection where I'm coming from the north, and I need to turn left (towards east), through the parallel traffic (I'm to the right of the cars at this point). However, there's no lane separation for traffic turning left (my direction) and cars continuing on straight ahead (otherwise, I'd be in the left-turning lane and turn with the traffic), so in order to make the turn, I need to get well ahead of the cars to make the turn, or else go straight ahead and face waiting for up to a minute or two for all the cars to pass, and then cross the street along the east-west bike lane that runs there.
However, as that's not the route I normally take, this isn't really a concern of mine. But it's an example of a situation where sprinting ahead of the cars can be beneficial.
I can understand if this sounds dangerous, but if you knew the intersection, you'd understand that it's not as bad as it sounds.
Fair enough, but the standing still part is still eluding me. BTW, I noticed (I'm so friggen observant) you are in Sweden - do they drive on the left or the right over there?
Unless you happen to be blocking the only lane on a road where cars normally travel at 25mph and you're doing 10, ignoring the honking from the 50 cars piled up behind you. Odds are... someone will turn their back and someone else is going to take you out (if the attitudes of NYC residents are any indication of how people behave).
VC has more to do with when and where than a person's abilities but there are limits to how "confident" someone can be..
I agree that going against increasingly fast and dense traffic is difficult, and frankly I am rather disgusted with local traffic engineers who have somehow managed to push speed limits on several local streets to speeds above 45 MPH... I see speed limits of 55, 60 and 65MPH on local surface streets and these make no sense to me what so ever.
But speeds below 40 MPH are quite "cyclable" with the confidence that most of us can muster, even those that typically ride at 10-15MPH. Observe traffic, signal and look for a gap and motorists that slow for your signal... with the co-operation from other users of the road, your confidence will be boosted.
Unless you happen to be blocking the only lane on a road where cars normally travel at 25mph and you're doing 10, ignoring the honking from the 50 cars piled up behind you. Odds are... someone will turn their back and someone else is going to take you out (if the attitudes of NYC residents are any indication of how people behave).
VC has more to do with when and where than a person's abilities but there are limits to how "confident" someone can be..
In the rare case where cars might pile up behind a cyclist and be stuck there for an unreasonable period, the smart thing to do would be to stop in a safe area and let them by. Then continue on in VC fashion. No harm, no foul.
On my commute, I've been in a number of situations where the fact that I can easily maintain and hold +20 mph has kept me out of danger. This includes a daily "traffic sprint" where I make a left turn at a busy intersection. Riding fast enables me to take a lane with the least amount of aggrivation caused to motorists (which would otherwise, I'm sure, be directed back at me.)
So then, should guidlines/credo/ideology or whateiver of Vehicular Cycling come with some kind of warning or disclaimer that states that it should not be tried unless the rider has the physical fitness to hold and maintain a certain speed on a bike?
I have to disagree, but I don't consider myself any kind of expert on the subject.
I often feel safer if I am clipping along at 20 mph. or more, but have you ever driven behind a car that's going 20 mph.? That's just way too slow. No matter how fast I feel I'm going on my bike, cars are still braking like crazy behind me.
I think the issue is not just safety, it's that we cyclists often feel like drivers are aggravated with us, which is quite possibly true. But if we just realize that at top sprinting speed we're snails in traffic anyway, we'd be amazed at how much more relaxed we can ride. The extra few mph. just doesn't matter to drivers.
Then let drivers understand the concept of "average speed" when we catch up to them at the next light.
Only those super fast folks can feel confident enough to take the lane by default. The rest of us can happily ride off to the side, bike lane or not, and move over as needed to make lane changes and still call ourselves vehicular cyclists.
Often times there is no choice but to take the lane on 45mph streets. I do this at 25mph, I do this at 10mph. My last 20mi ride I averaged ~12mph and rode vehiculary the whole time.
Al
It's not that vehicular cycling is different for everybody (at least it shouldn't be), it's that vehicular cycling's application is different depending on the situation. Not all roads are created equal so they need to be addressed seperately. You can't make a blanket statement about where to ride. So many people assume vehicular cycling means riding down the middle of the road regardless of the surrounding conditions which goes to show that the VC advocates on this forum aren't doing the job they think they are doing and/or the reader isn't doing a good job of sorting out what applies to their situation and what does not.
Quite a few of us have been trying to correct the oft-stated misconceptions about VC. That's also one of the reasons I added the "misconceptions of VC" section to the Wiki page on Vehicular Cycling. Here is an excerpt:
"VC is needlessly blocking cars"
Cyclists who ride in the center of a lane needlessly impeding faster traffic are sometimes mistakenly referred to as vehicular cyclists; yet by definition a cyclist who needlessly impedes faster traffic is violating the vehicular rules of the road and is hence not riding vehicularly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling
I've no problem admiting that I don't fully understand VC. I always thought that in part it meant riding in the middle of the traffic lane and not riding to the right so that you could negotiate your lane with other vehicles.
Peregrine, where did you get this thought?
To me riding safely and VC has nothing to do with speed and everything to do with confidence. I don't buy the, you have to be fast to ride VC argument.
+1
I think the issue is not just safety, it's that we cyclists often feel like drivers are aggravated with us, which is quite possibly true. But if we just realize that at top sprinting speed we're snails in traffic anyway, we'd be amazed at how much more relaxed we can ride. The extra few mph. just doesn't matter to drivers.
+1
The instructor used simple timing to make his left turns, blending nicely into the widest gaps in traffic and using those to his advantage. The VC advocate used a touch of timing and a burst of speed to blend into traffic and make his turn. The least experienced of the bunch waited until a traffic light put a huge gap in traffic and then she too simply blended right in.
There was no special need for strength and speed in any case... Timing and watching traffic was the key.
Right. And I have it on good authority that if the "VC advocate" happened to be riding his mountain bike pulling a 60 lbs trailer then he would do pretty much the same thing, but without the "burst of speed".
Peregrine, where did you get this thought?
My erroneous understanding of VC is entirely my fault. I think it came from reading discussions on bike lane use / adequacy without reading about what exactly VC is first.
Thanks all of you guys for correcting me :)
Quite a few of us have been trying to correct the oft-stated misconceptions about VC. That's also one of the reasons I added the "misconceptions of VC" section to the Wiki page on Vehicular Cycling. Here is an excerpt:
"VC is needlessly blocking cars"
Cyclists who ride in the center of a lane needlessly impeding faster traffic are sometimes mistakenly referred to as vehicular cyclists; yet by definition a cyclist who needlessly impedes faster traffic is violating the vehicular rules of the road and is hence not riding vehicularly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling
I was just reading the VC article in wiki this morning (in more detail) and that section was really helpful. Thanks.
BTW, I noticed (I'm so friggen observant) you are in Sweden - do they drive on the left or the right over there? They changed over from left to right circa 1967. (How's that for a scary concept?)
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.