Do you have any on-the-road experiences training motorists about cyclists having the same right to the road as do other drivers of vehicles? Have you modeled proper vehicular cycling with positive results?
For example, I often have someone approaching from behind, obviously expecting me to pull over, at a point when it's not appropriate (I might be approaching an intersection, or the lane is too narrow and there is another adjacent lane for them to use to pass me, etc.). So I might issue a short slow/stop signal with my left hand, and observe in my rear-view mirror how they instantly slow down, and give me some space. A few seconds later, when the circumstances change (lane widens, or we're past the intersection), I move aside and let them go by, and they smile, nod or wave as they pass, expressing gratitude for our little interaction, and for my taking control of the situation (I think motorists are looking to us for direction much more often than we realize).
Does this happen to anyone else? What are your experiences?
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
I have a markedly different experience. I was riding on a road with one lane in each direction, narrow lanes, no shoulder, double yellow. A car pulls up behind me and immediately honks. I give the slow signal, because I can see a car coming in the opposite lane. So far, everything the way Forester would have wanted it -- I'm even "center biased."
The motorist pulls out anyway, honks at the oncoming car and causes it to swerve to the edge of the pavement. She then pulls alongside me, matches my speed, rolls down her window, and starts berating me -- even though there are now cars behind her waiting to pass. She tells me I shouldn't be on the road, I tell her she shouldn't be on the road if she can't drive and doesn't know how to pass, and it degenerates into us telling each other to f*** ourselves. Somehow I don't think I did much for advocacy that day.
People are very resistant to education inside their cages. I used to think it was my job to change the world, now I'm happy to leave it the way I found it.
sgtsmile
Somewhere about 1000 of them, if my count is correct.....
Sincerely yours
An ex driving instructor/bike nut
tomg
i "train" cagers all the time, reinforce positive behaviors with positive reinforcement of a nod, wave, smile. if i take a lane, cars usually signal their lane change, merge at approp times. i signal, let them know my intentions, all a work in progress! the behavior of yelling "get off the road" has stopped....
usually, there seems to be 1 or 2 cagers a day who don't quite get it yet (evidenced by close pass bys, passing to get to the red light while i signal left, then catch up to them anyway, etc). i have faith that they can be trained (but i always have escape routes in place).
UmneyDurak
Share whatever you are smoking.
Only thing I got are death threats, and people buzzing me, and police accusing me of doing something wrong when I report the insane drivers.
Do you have any on-the-road experiences training motorists about cyclists having the same right to the road as do other drivers of vehicles? Have you modeled proper vehicular cycling with positive results?
For example, I often have someone approaching from behind, obviously expecting me to pull over, at a point when it's not appropriate (I might be approaching an intersection, or the lane is too narrow and there is another adjacent lane for them to use to pass me, etc.). So I might issue a short slow/stop signal with my left hand, and observe in my rear-view mirror how they instantly slow down, and give me some space. A few seconds later, when the circumstances change (lane widens, or we're past the intersection), I move aside and let them go by, and they smile, nod or wave as they pass, expressing gratitude for our little interaction, and for my taking control of the situation (I think motorists are looking to us for direction much more often than we realize).
Does this happen to anyone else? What are your experiences?
Roody
I use the slow signal to keep 'em behind me when I can't get over to the right. I also beckon them to hurry past me if there's a parked car or intersection ahead, in which case I want to get over to the left behind rather than in front of them. sometimes they wave when I do that. If they're nice I sometimes mouth "Thank you" at them. Sometimes they get angry, I guess if they don't read lips it looks like "F--- you."
I talk with motorists at lights pretty often. Most of the time we have a pleasant little conversation. I find that the rest--the ones who hassle me--are just plain too stupid to grasp the concept of sharing the road with bikes. I guess they were out sick that day in kindergarten when they talked about sharing. Then they were sick again the day in driver ed when they talked about bikes on the road. There's about 1 % of the people for whom I don't hold onto much hope.
mechBgon
By sheer powers of observation, some of ours may have learned or re-learned what the L arm signal means.
twahl
I do that and get the same reaction quite often. I don't know that I'm training them, just interacting like we're supposed to.
I've got the family (4 of us) trained to do a certain thing when we approach stop lights. Lead rider moves left, second rider pulls next to the lead, third rider behind the lead, last rider to the right behind the second rider. If we're in line first, great, if not we line up behind the next car. Since one of us is on a LWB 'bent, we take up the space of a small car and generally trigger the light if in front. Upon leaving the light, if going straight we slide back to the right and allow traffic to pass once we're safely under way again. If turning left, we don't get back in line until we've nearly completed the turn. Drivers see us following traffic laws and being courteous at the same time. I've never had a negative reaction to this.
Do you have any on-the-road experiences training motorists about cyclists having the same right to the road as do other drivers of vehicles? Have you modeled proper vehicular cycling with positive results?
For example, I often have someone approaching from behind, obviously expecting me to pull over, at a point when it's not appropriate (I might be approaching an intersection, or the lane is too narrow and there is another adjacent lane for them to use to pass me, etc.). So I might issue a short slow/stop signal with my left hand, and observe in my rear-view mirror how they instantly slow down, and give me some space. A few seconds later, when the circumstances change (lane widens, or we're past the intersection), I move aside and let them go by, and they smile, nod or wave as they pass, expressing gratitude for our little interaction, and for my taking control of the situation (I think motorists are looking to us for direction much more often than we realize).
Does this happen to anyone else? What are your experiences?
Roody
So far nobody's done a hell of a lot of training. I'm starting to think it isn't such an easy thing to do. Of course twahl has trained his family real well. Maybe it's easier to train cyclists how to ride bikes than it is to teach cagers how to ride around them.
(tom--I get a real kick out of picturing your family doing their precison team riding. :))
twahl
So far nobody's done a hell of a lot of training. I'm starting to think it isn't such an easy thing to do. Of course twahl has trained his family real well. Maybe it's easier to train cyclists how to ride bikes than it is to teach cagers how to ride around them.
It's always easier to teach someone that wants to be taught. I just try to figure out how to best fit in with the givin situation, with safety (particularly when riding with the family) as the primary objective.
Roody - just for you: Some pictures from a charity ride (http://www.4wahls.net/ride/juneride1.htm) we did last June. Forgive the shoulder riding, but the area had such nice shoulders! The vast majority of our riding is done single file about a foot and a half to the left of the line.
genec
I have trained some motorists, not so much in the way HH describes, although I do ride vehicularly. Whether motorists are learning from observing my movement, position, and signals, I don't know... it could be they are just working hard to avoid me.
But I do discuss cycling with many of my co-workers, and I have been able to pass on to my co-workers the issues of cyclist's rights. I also have posted on my office cube several articles on bike laws and safety. Co-workers have asked what the laws mean and how to interpret certain situations, we have discussed what being "traffic" is like to any of us, either motorists or cyclists. I have encouraged co-workers to cycle and had folks join me on BTW day.
As far as training motorists directly, I have spoken to several over the years and tried to explain what they, as motorists did not seem to have knowledge of... the rights of cyclists to use the road.
One can only hope that all of this amounts to some understanding and acceptance of cyclists on the roads.
Whatever method works...
Roody
It's always easier to teach someone that wants to be taught. I just try to figure out how to best fit in with the givin situation, with safety (particularly when riding with the family) as the primary objective.
Roody - just for you: Some pictures from a charity ride (http://www.4wahls.net/ride/juneride1.htm) we did last June. Forgive the shoulder riding, but the area had such nice shoulders! The vast majority of our riding is done single file about a foot and a half to the left of the line.
Thanks Tom. I liked looking at the pictures of your nice looking family, all riding in formation. They look like they have more fun than the families I see making long car trips. And they sure know they have a right to the road! :)
va_cyclist
I like to think I'm training them every time I ride by riding predictably, signaling, acting responsibly, etc.
TRaffic Jammer
With yummy snacks I got two motorists to sit and beg at a light today. :lol:
sauerwald
My father is one of the worst sorts of drivers. I did work with him to explain that cyclists do have a right to use the road (he believed that if there wasn't a bike path, they should be on the sidewalk). I think I made some progress, then he had a bad experience. He was in heavy traffic, and was parallel parking. He had drawn parallel with the car in front of the space where he was to park, cranked his wheels, and saw a cyclist behind him. Decided to wait for the cyclist to pass. The cyclist took a line between him and the row of parked cars, and hit my dads front right tire, which because it was cranked over, was sticking out. Cyclist went over the handlebars and hit the parked car in front. Cop came over, chatted with cyclist. Cop asks cyclist if my dad had his turn signal on - cyclist answers "I don't know, I was going too fast to see". Long story short, my dad is cited, and now believes more than ever that cyclists do not belong on the road. One bad cyclist can do a lot of damage on the education front.
Helmet Head
One bad cyclist can do a lot of damage on the education front.
Exactly. Now, consider that probably more than 99% of cyclists ride improperly, and therefore generate bad education, and you can hopefully begin to understand what the root problem is.
Maybe there is hope for your dad, because of face time with you. But most motorists don't have direct personal access to an advocate like you, and for them there is no hope, until we address the root problem.
sbhikes
I think motorists are looking to us for direction much more often than we realize
I know they are looking for it and appreciate it from me when I'm riding my trike. They are truly not sure what to do when they see me. I nick-named myself the Dominatrikes because of it. I do a lot of traffic coordinating, especially at certain 4-way stop intersections.
And I think overall I have trained the daily ones on my route that I am not going away so they may as well just get used to seeing me.
All that said, I have not had to do any training that I have a right to the road here in SB. They already know that here. In other places they do not, however.
flipped4bikes
Forgive the shoulder riding, but the area had such nice shoulders! The vast majority of our riding is done single file about a foot and a half to the left of the line.
Nothing wrong with using the shoulder if appropriate and safe!
Bekologist
Exactly.... more than 99% of cyclists ride improperly, and therefore generate bad education, and you can hopefully begin to understand what the root problem is.
Hmmmm........ the root problem? thats the problem in mr heads eyes? Almost every single bicyclist in america rides improperly.....
Helmet Head
Hmmmm........ the root problem? thats the problem in mr heads eyes? Almost every single bicyclist in america rides improperly.....
I didn't say every single cyclist in America. But almost... I can't remember the last time I followed a cyclist for more than a mile or so without seeing him do something blatantly wrong, or put himself unnecessarily into a precarious situation, such as:
riding in door zones (closer than 5 feet to parked cars)
going straight across an intersection from the right side of the road without even a hint of a check back to make sure he is not about to be right hooked
going straight from a right turn only lane
riding ambiguously (unpredictably) neither vehicularly nor in accordance to pedestrian rules of the road
merging left without looking back first
starting to merge left for their left turn way too late, requiring them to "cut" across the road, perpendicularly, much like a jaywalking pedestrian.
staying to the right in a lane that is too narrow to be safely shared
blatantly running stop signs and red lights
TRaffic Jammer
consider that probably more than 99% of cyclists ride improperly, and therefore generate bad education, and you can hopefully begin to understand what the root problem is.
I call bull-sheeeeeeeet. :p Put the problem behind the wheel where it belongs. Ever do your follow and troll technique on a car in the city....same result. As the car is the lion of the traffic food chain you can draw your conclusions.
Helmet Head
I call bull-sheeeeeeeet. :p Put the problem behind the wheel where it belongs.
An interesting argument, Jammer, though a bit light on substance...
Mel_bikes
I can say for sure one. The young lady with the driving instructor who thought she'd pull out in front of me. Noticed it the instructor braking, followed by the little lecture about road rights.
LittleBigMan
What are your experiences?
The more familiar the people on the road, the more it seems I get cooperation and courtesy. Being there at the same time/place everyday seems to "train" motorists to my presence.
There's an intersection where motorists actually stay out of the right lane as I approach, allowing me to roll up and time the change to green. They used to jockey for position to get in front of me in the right lane.
TRaffic Jammer
An interesting argument, Jammer, though a bit light on substance...
Train the drivers to see and react to more than other cars, coffee shops, lurking cops and road kill.
chipcom
With yummy snacks I got two motorists to sit and beg at a light today. :lol:
I appreciated the snack too!!!
Helmet Head
I call bull-sheeeeeeeet. :p Put the problem behind the wheel where it belongs. Ever do your follow and troll technique on a car in the city....same result. As the car is the lion of the traffic food chain you can draw your conclusions.
Bull-sheeeeeeeet right back at ya. While I do see motorists making blatant errors every day, it's very different with cyclists.
With motorists, if you're watching dozens of them, sooner or later one of them will do something that's blatantly wrong or puts himself or someone else in a dangerous situation. But if you pick one motorist at random and follow him for a while, even for miles and hours, he might roll a stop or go over the speed limit by 5 or 10 mph, but odds are he probably won't do anything blatantly wrong that puts him or anyone else in a precarious situation.
With cyclists, you can pick one, any one, and watch him for a mile or so, and odds are almost certain that he will will do something blatantly wrong from The List:
riding in door zones (closer than 5 feet to parked cars)
going straight across an intersection from the right side of the road without even a hint of a check back to make sure he is not about to be right hooked
going straight from a right turn only lane
riding ambiguously (unpredictably) neither vehicularly nor in accordance to pedestrian rules of the road
merging left without looking back first
starting to merge left for their left turn way too late, requiring them to "cut" across the road, perpendicularly, much like a jaywalking pedestrian.
staying to the right in a lane that is too narrow to be safely shared
blatantly running stop signs and red lights
The fact that there are many more motorists than cyclists, and that they can cause more damage, arguably makes even a tiny percentage of motorists being "bad" be a bigger problem overall for society than almost all cyclists being "bad", but that's a separate issue.
In terms of reducing the number of bike-car collisions, reducing bad cyclist behavior has much more promise than reducing "bad" motoring, since bad motoring is a factor in a relatively small number of bike-car collisions, and because almost all of even those can be avoided by "good" or "proper" traffic cycling habits.
If the average motorist drove as badly as the average cyclist operates in traffic, our streets would be carnage. We'd have not 50,000 deaths per year, but 5 million or more.
chipcom
Exactly. Now, consider that probably more than 99% of cyclists ride improperly, and therefore generate bad education, and you can hopefully begin to understand what the root problem is.
Bulltwinkle. Let's phrase this more accurately shall we:
HH: "In my OPINION 99% of all cyclists ride improperly, according to my OPINION of what riding properly is"
WTF died and appointed you as the authority of what cycling properly is? Earth to Serge, Earth to Serge, you aint got no super powers or superior knowledge.
Helmet Head
Bulltwinkle. Let's phrase this more accurately shall we:
HH: "In my OPINION 99% of all cyclists ride improperly, according to my OPINION of what riding properly is"
WTF died and appointed you as the authority of what cycling properly is? Earth to Serge, Earth to Serge, you aint got no super powers or superior knowledge.
It's not my opinion, Chip. I'm using standards for traffic cycling behavior developed by the League of American Bicyclists (bikeleague.org) as a result of studying actual bike-car crashes and how to avoid them.
If you don't like the standards I'm using, take it up with the League.
Brian Ratliff
Hey chip,
Didn't you know that 89.3% of all statistics are pulled directly from one's ***** without stopping to check at head level? You've got to forgive HH for doing exactly the same as 56.8% of the population already does on a regular basis.
TRaffic Jammer
In terms of reducing the number of bike-car collisions, reducing bad cyclist behavior has much more promise than reducing "bad" motoring, since bad motoring is a factor in a relatively small number of bike-car collisions, and because almost all of even those can be avoided by "good" or "proper" traffic cycling habits.
Balls. In my 20+ years of CITY TRAFFIC riding, I've never seen a bike just throw itself in front of a car.
I have several times seem inattentive drivers wipe out a cyclist though. If your riding is out in the open then yes you won;t see much bad car activity. Mass up the cars and see the fun start.
Or is the "more promise" because the drivers gave League of American Bicyclists the finger before pushing them off the road and driving away? Did you know many city riders have no choice BUT to ride in the door zone.... 5ft... you're frikkin' joking. It IS however against the law to open a car door if it affects ANYONE in traffic, cars and bikes. WOW even the law agrees it's the drivers' responsibility.
Helmet Head
I've never seen a bike just throw itself in front of a car.
If you think that a bike throwing itself in front of a car is even remotely related to anything I've written here, you have serious reading comprehension problems, and this discussion is pointless. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and hope you just quickly skimmed the posts I've made in this thread. If you want to have an actual discussion on this or any other topic, please read with a little more care and thought. Thank you.
Helmet Head
Hey chip,
Didn't you know that 89.3% of all statistics are pulled directly from one's ***** without stopping to check at head level? You've got to forgive HH for doing exactly the same as 56.8% of the population already does on a regular basis.
Please, Brian, don't feed the troll.
Even folks like Jeffrey Hiles ("Listening to Bike Lanes") and Robert Hurst ("The Art of Urban Cycling") who openly criticize Forester and some of his stuff, accept the underlying crash statistics and their implications that forms the basis for the VC techniques and practices taught by the League, CAN-BIKE (Canada) and the British equivalent (forget the name off-hand) in their traffic cycling courses.
The biggest problem by far is intersections, and the best antitode by far is vigilance and conspicuous lane positioning.
noisebeam
Does this happen to anyone else? What are your experiences?
Yep. Similar.
The key is continuous communication to benefit all, not just communication when you require it.
It is easy to see the need to signal to merge left and one has to do it.
But signalling when you want a motorist to pass or direct them to a more convienient location for them, even if it doesn't directly benefit you, is just as easy to do, but even easier not to do.
It seems humans do best the lower the ambiguity is. Giving clear communication both of your intents and direction to motorists does wonders ot eliminate this ambiguity. (i.e. Let 'em know when to pass and when not to, then they don't get into stress fits about if they should or not.)
Al
TRaffic Jammer
If you think that a bike throwing itself in front of a car is even remotely related to anything I've written here, you have serious reading comprehension problems, and this discussion is pointless. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and hope you just quickly skimmed the posts I've made in this thread. If you want to have an actual discussion on this or any other topic, please read with a little more care and thought. Thank you.
It's amazing how many times you've written these words in 'x' number of posts as to how everyone can't possible understand what you are talking about. Is it really ALL of us?
And how is a bike and it's movement NOT what you were you talking about?
Helmet Head
Is it really ALL of us?
There seems to be about half a dozen of you. But I'm happy to report that there is hope, for there are some who have graduated, shall we say. While we may still disagree, at least they can now read and comprehend what I'm saying.
TRaffic Jammer
AS a rider and I driver..... I seriously don't need a rider to tell me when it's safe to pass, unless the rider does plan on swinging out of course. As a driver I can see through the rider to the road beyond. I am prepared for just about anything when I'm driving. I don;t see the issue here as being one of rider education, but one one training motorists to better defensive drivers. And yes HH we can agree to disagree :lol: I am being catty, I apologize.
twahl
I'm not taking sides here, but I see assigning the responsibility for my safety, and more importantly for my family's safety, to drivers when we are riding to be foolish. My own safety is always primarily my responsibility, so riding in a manner that makes me conspicuous and predictable while expecting drivers to be unpredictable seems to be the best approach. I take a similar approach when driving, after all the people that we see as driving poorly while we are riding are still driving poorly when we are driving.
There happen to be many many more cars on the roads than bikes. Like any minority, we must choose our fights carefully and always watch our backs. I'm not 100% VC, but I am probably 90%. Situations change, and sometimes I decide to give some common courtesy (while making it obviously that I am yielding, not cowering) to foster good will. We have the right to the road, but sometimes commons sense should prevail. Somewhat similar to freedom of speech. Even though you have it, sometimes you should just shut the hell up.
Helmet Head
AS a rider and I driver..... I seriously don't need a rider to tell me when it's safe to pass, unless the rider does plan on swinging out of course. As a driver I can see through the rider to the road beyond. I am prepared for just about anything when I'm driving. I don;t see the issue here as being one of rider education, but one one training motorists to better defensive drivers. And yes HH we can agree to disagree :lol: I am being catty, I apologize.
Well, you're a better mind reader than I, for I fairly regularly encounter cyclists whose intent and purpose is difficult to ascertain. I just slow down and give them as wide a berth as is reasonable, but some assistance from them would be appreciated. I can only imagine that it would be even more helpful for less understanding drivers than you or me.
Besides, on a 2 lane road where there is either oncoming traffic or passing is illegal (double yellow stripe down the center), the driver has no choice but to look to the cyclist to decide when to pass. Ifthe cyclist is taking the lane, the driver has to stay back. If he moves aside, it's time to pass.
But when a cyclist is just riding down the center of the lane for no apparent reason, the driver behind has no way of knowing if the cyclist even knows he's there, much less whether and when he is going to pull over to let him pass. He's understandably tempted to honk. Maybe the cyclist has moved left because of a blind alley he's approaching, that the driver did not notice. The point is, the cyclist issuing a brief slow/stop signal/wave to the motorist behind him can be very helpful to the motorist. "Ah, so he knows I'm here... I'll back off (they almost always do)... oh, I see .. a blind driveway, that's why he moved left... and now he's looking back to his right, and moving aside. Wow, I wish all cyclists were so courteous..."
genec
I'm not taking sides here, but I see assigning the responsibility for my safety, and more importantly for my family's safety, to drivers when we are riding to be foolish. My own safety is always primarily my responsibility, so riding in a manner that makes me conspicuous and predictable while expecting drivers to be unpredictable seems to be the best approach. I take a similar approach when driving, after all the people that we see as driving poorly while we are riding are still driving poorly when we are driving.
There happen to be many many more cars on the roads than bikes. Like any minority, we must choose our fights carefully and always watch our backs. I'm not 100% VC, but I am probably 90%. Situations change, and sometimes I decide to give some common courtesy (while making it obviously that I am yielding, not cowering) to foster good will. We have the right to the road, but sometimes commons sense should prevail. Somewhat similar to freedom of speech. Even though you have it, sometimes you should just shut the hell up.
Nothing wrong with your view, it is a good one. But when you have done everything in your power to do the best you can, what's left over? What other variables remain that might be changed to make your cycling experience better. Oh, those other users of the road... now if they too actively co-operated... my my wouldn't that be wonderful.
sbhikes
With cyclists, you can pick one, any one, and watch him for a mile or so, and odds are almost certain that he will will do something blatantly wrong from The List:
riding in door zones (closer than 5 feet to parked cars)
going straight across an intersection from the right side of the road without even a hint of a check back to make sure he is not about to be right hooked
going straight from a right turn only lane
riding ambiguously (unpredictably) neither vehicularly nor in accordance to pedestrian rules of the road
merging left without looking back first
starting to merge left for their left turn way too late, requiring them to "cut" across the road, perpendicularly, much like a jaywalking pedestrian.
staying to the right in a lane that is too narrow to be safely shared
blatantly running stop signs and red lights
The only way you can determine if the above are right and proper is to apply your own opinions. Only the last one can be concrete enough to be determined objectively.
Whenever someone points a finger at someone, three fingers are pointing back at himself.
I can ride my bike any day and see most cyclists are behaving quite well, riding quite well. Really only the last one is a problem.
Helmet Head
The only way you can determine if the above are right and proper is to apply your own opinions.
Diane,
These are not my opinions.
Again, these are standards based on material used by the League of American Bicyclists to train their instructors (LCIs), and that LCIs use to train their students. While there is a lot of contention regarding how bikeways and "improper riding" are related, there is very little controversy over the basic data based on the study of bike-car collisions, their causes, and the skills, techniques, methods and habits used to avoid them.
The League, Hurst, Glowacz, Hiles and even Allen have had their differences with Forester, but they all agree on the basic premises underlying vehicular cycling. In fact, I don't know of anyone who has looked at these issues closely who disagrees, and I believe that that is because such a person does not exist. Yes, it's that clear and obvious. Cyclists who use roadways and engage in the behavior in the list above are much more prone to being in a collision than those who don't.
sbhikes
It's purely your opinion whether or not some other guy is "too" close or did something "too" late. Going straight from a right turn only lane is not always wrong. Riding poorly is subjective. It isn't up to you whether or not somebody needs to turn their head or look this way or that. Maybe they have a mirror or can hear what is happening or maybe you didn't see them do it or maybe they have a neck problem.
Opinions clouded by judgment. Much of your list is total MYOB. I would hate to be in your class.
Helmet Head
It's purely your opinion whether or not some other guy is "too" close or did something "too" late. Going straight from a right turn only lane is not always wrong. Riding poorly is subjective. It isn't up to you whether or not somebody needs to turn their head or look this way or that. Maybe they have a mirror or can hear what is happening or maybe you didn't see them do it or maybe they have a neck problem.
Opinions clouded by judgment. Much of your list is total MYOB. I would hate to be in your class.
Do you feel the same about driver ed teachers?
chicharron
I try to avoid contact, confrontation,or consversation with all motorist. If I can get them to pass me, so much the better.
RobertHurst
The League, Hurst, Glowacz, Hiles and even Allen have had their differences with Forester, but they all agree on the basic premises underlying vehicular cycling.
Dude, are you sure about that?
Yes, it's that clear and obvious. Cyclists who use roadways and engage in the behavior in the list above are much more prone to being in a collision than those who don't.
Speaking of the entirety of cyclists, including all beginners and children, that may be true. But among experienced adult riders, those involved in car-bike collisions are most likely to have been riding in a proper, legal, vehicular manner at the time of the collision.
Robert
Helmet Head
But among experienced adult riders, those involved in car-bike collisions are most likely to have been riding in a proper, legal, vehicular manner at the time of the collision.
Dude, are you sure about that? ;)
Reasonable people can disagree on what "proper, legal, vehicular manner" is, but I and every other VC advocate and LCI that I know who has read your book agree that what you describe as "going beyond VC" (isn't that how you put it?) is very much like what Forester and we mean by "proper, legal, vehicular manner", and the interpretation of VC in your book appears to be overly simplistic, something like, "as long as it's legal, it's VC". I say "something like", because though the book makes many references to vehicular cycling, it never defines exactly what the author thinks it is (or at least I could never find such a definition), and the reader can only surmise based on the references to it...
So, yes, while experienced adult riders are likely to not be doing anything illegal at the time of the collision, they are still likely to be engaged in one of the improper behaviors in my list above, which are technically legal (like riding in a bike lane across a mall driveway intersection after passing traffic that is stopped, unbenownst to the cyclist, to allow a left turning SUV across the road into the driveway), but are contrary to the basic vehicular rules of the road (and, thus, contrary to VC methodology).
That many VC contrarians seem to not recognize that unsafe but legal behavior practiced by many "experienced adult riders" like passing slow or stopped traffic on the right at normal speeds and using speed positioning rather than destination positioning at intersections with driveways is contrary to the basic rules of the road is really too bad. That's the behavior VC methodology is intended to address, not just the blatantly illegal behavior.
Almost every bike collision I hear or read about involving an adult experienced cyclist, the cyclist was violating basic VC methodology as described in Forester's book, and as taught by the LAB.
rando
Robert, I like your book.
Helmet Head, ... I admire your perseverance and consistency.
RobertHurst
So, yes, while experienced adult riders are likely to not be doing anything illegal at the time of the collision, they are still likely to be engaged in one of the improper behaviors in my list above, which are technically legal (like riding in a bike lane across a mall driveway intersection after passing traffic that is stopped, unbenownst to the cyclist, to allow a left turning SUV across the road into the driveway), but are contrary to the basic vehicular rules of the road (and, thus, contrary to VC methodology).
Dude, sir, this is not the case. Trying to gather useful info from accident stats is a tricky enterprise but from the available mish-mash it is pretty clear to see what kind of incidents claim adult riders who have been riding for a while: charging motorist turns left into cyclist, motorist restarts from stop sign into cyclist, motorist completely blows red light or stop sign and nails cyclist... The common theme is that the cyclist was unnoticed, or the motorist didn't even really look before blasting into the cyclist's right of way. The cyclist is typically riding in a style that is well in line with the 'basic vehicular rules of the road' and VC methodology/ideology, as described by you, not crowding the right side or sneaking between lines of stopped traffic as in your examples. The critical problem for these cyclists when facing the inevitable trials of normal traffic was not their positioning--it was their mindset at the Moment of Truth. When the inevitable occurs, will you be ready, or will you be cruising along, satisfied with your positioning?
The fact is that cyclists are often overlooked, no matter how or where they ride. My riding style proceeds from this fact, whereas the VC ideology of you and Forester proceeds from the assumption that one's riding style can effectively dictate whether motorists notice you and how they behave. Ultimately, I contend, that seductive assumption fails, and the auto-pilot mode in which the rider was invited to cruise in the name of VC method-ideology comes to a screeching halt, hopefully not at the business end of a left-turning vehicle. I wrote a book about that, sorta.
Almost every bike collision I hear or read about involving an adult experienced cyclist, the cyclist was violating basic VC methodology as described in Forester's book, and as taught by the LAB.
That's contrary to what I hear and read, and contrary to the statistics as well. Maybe you are hearing what you want to hear and wishing away the rest?
Robert
RobertHurst
So, yes, while experienced adult riders are likely to not be doing anything illegal at the time of the collision, they are still likely to be engaged in one of the improper behaviors in my list above, which are technically legal (like riding in a bike lane across a mall driveway intersection after passing traffic that is stopped, unbenownst to the cyclist, to allow a left turning SUV across the road into the driveway), but are contrary to the basic vehicular rules of the road (and, thus, contrary to VC methodology).
Dude, sir, this is not the case. Trying to gather useful info from accident stats is a tricky enterprise but from the available mish-mash it is pretty clear to see what kind of incidents claim adult riders who have been riding for a while: charging motorist turns left into cyclist, motorist restarts from stop sign into cyclist, motorist completely blows red light or stop sign and nails cyclist... The common theme is that the cyclist was unnoticed, or the motorist didn't even really look before blasting into the cyclist's right of way. The cyclist is typically riding in a style that is well in line with the 'basic vehicular rules of the road' and VC methodology/ideology, as described by you, not crowding the right side or sneaking between lines of stopped traffic as in your examples. The critical problem for these cyclists when facing the inevitable trials of normal traffic was not their positioning--it was their mindset at the Moment of Truth. When the inevitable occurs, will you be ready, or will you be cruising along, satisfied with your positioning?
The fact is that cyclists are often overlooked, no matter how or where they ride. My riding style proceeds from this fact, whereas the VC ideology of you and Forester proceeds from the assumption that one's riding style can effectively dictate whether motorists notice you and how they behave. Ultimately, I contend, that seductive assumption fails, and the auto-pilot mode in which the rider was invited to cruise in the name of VC method-ideology comes to a screeching halt, hopefully not at the business end of a left-turning vehicle. I wrote a book about that, sorta.
Almost every bike collision I hear or read about involving an adult experienced cyclist, the cyclist was violating basic VC methodology as described in Forester's book, and as taught by the LAB.
That's contrary to what I hear and read, and contrary to the statistics as well. Maybe you are hearing what you want to hear and wishing away the rest?