sbhikes
06-10-06, 09:46 PM
Why would A be better than B? Don't read anything into this picture. There's nothing there that you cannot see.
View Full Version : Why would A be better than B?
twahl
06-10-06, 09:55 PM
Because you are more in control in the first diagram. You can give room to pass when it's safe to do so. You can expect people to see your signals. You can be sure that drivers know you are there. You only have to worry about the one car behind you at that moment. You can expect to be treated (more) like traffic rather than like a "third wheel".
However, my opinion is based on my experience. In my experience with bike lanes, they are rarely occupied by bicycles. Drivers feel free to use them for other purposes because they see them as unused space. My experience with them is limited, there aren't many where I live. In one location, I frequently see a car or two with a "for sale" sign in the bike lane. There aren't enough users to lodge a complaint apparently. I think the environment plays a big part in the effectiveness of bike lanes, and in the environments where I have seen them, they are rarely used.
However, my opinion is based on my experience. In my experience with bike lanes, they are rarely occupied by bicycles. Drivers feel free to use them for other purposes because they see them as unused space. My experience with them is limited, there aren't many where I live. In one location, I frequently see a car or two with a "for sale" sign in the bike lane. There aren't enough users to lodge a complaint apparently. I think the environment plays a big part in the effectiveness of bike lanes, and in the environments where I have seen them, they are rarely used.
cudak888
06-10-06, 10:12 PM
Why would A be better than B? Don't read anything into this picture. There's nothing there that you cannot see.
I use A when riding down (not stopped) some of our two lane residential streets (single lane each way with NOL), specifically when there is close-range oncoming traffic. This controls the cagers behind me from attempting to pass at the exact moment when all three vehicles (auto, auto and bicycle) will converge abreast of each other, requiring the cyclist to make his own lane.
Once it is safe, I return to position B and give the traffic behind me the signal to pass.
Works like a charm. I've had a few who have attempted to pass at the wrong moment, but a quick few extra inches to the left always discourages them from trying.
Take care,
-Kurt
I use A when riding down (not stopped) some of our two lane residential streets (single lane each way with NOL), specifically when there is close-range oncoming traffic. This controls the cagers behind me from attempting to pass at the exact moment when all three vehicles (auto, auto and bicycle) will converge abreast of each other, requiring the cyclist to make his own lane.
Once it is safe, I return to position B and give the traffic behind me the signal to pass.
Works like a charm. I've had a few who have attempted to pass at the wrong moment, but a quick few extra inches to the left always discourages them from trying.
Take care,
-Kurt
Helmet Head
06-10-06, 11:17 PM
B is better.
The lane is the same width in both diagrams, and the one on the left shows that it is wide enough to accomodate a 5' wide bike lane. Therefore, the lane on the right is wide enough to accomodate a bike and a standard width motor vehicle side by side, yet the cyclist is taking the lane, even though he has (presumably) faster traffic behind him. Why?
The cyclist in "A" is improperly positioned, assuming he is going no faster than about 20 mph, and substantially slower than other traffic, and assuming he's not approaching any kind of intersection (which you said not to assume).
The lane is the same width in both diagrams, and the one on the left shows that it is wide enough to accomodate a 5' wide bike lane. Therefore, the lane on the right is wide enough to accomodate a bike and a standard width motor vehicle side by side, yet the cyclist is taking the lane, even though he has (presumably) faster traffic behind him. Why?
The cyclist in "A" is improperly positioned, assuming he is going no faster than about 20 mph, and substantially slower than other traffic, and assuming he's not approaching any kind of intersection (which you said not to assume).
LateNite
06-11-06, 12:37 AM
When the red car decides to make a right turn into a parking lot, the cyclist in 'B' is going to end up in his door or run off the road.
Helmet Head
06-11-06, 02:24 PM
When the red car decides to make a right turn into a parking lot, the cyclist in 'B' is going to end up in his door or run off the road.
That's true, except when Diane said "there is nothing there you can't see" I assumed that "nothing" includes no parking lot entrance that is being approached.
That's true, except when Diane said "there is nothing there you can't see" I assumed that "nothing" includes no parking lot entrance that is being approached.
LandLuger
06-11-06, 02:32 PM
Ok, I read your post, but just to make sure I got the diagram correct.
The red vehicle is the dually pickup with the sideview mirrors that stick out four feet to either side.
The green vehicle is the soccer mom applying makeup and swerving into and out of the bike lane.
The yellow vehicle is the @$$&#% nursing a case of road rage wondering why the two vehicles blocking his progress aren't going 20 MPH over the speed limit.
Have I about got it right?
The red vehicle is the dually pickup with the sideview mirrors that stick out four feet to either side.
The green vehicle is the soccer mom applying makeup and swerving into and out of the bike lane.
The yellow vehicle is the @$$&#% nursing a case of road rage wondering why the two vehicles blocking his progress aren't going 20 MPH over the speed limit.
Have I about got it right?
noisebeam
06-11-06, 03:15 PM
Why is the cyclist in A in the middle of what is a WOL (assuming the pavement width is the same as in B)?
The only reason they are in the center can be for things that we have been told not to read into the picture, such as a right turn/intersection up ahead, the cyclist is about to make a left or that the cyclist is going the same speed or faster as the vehicles behind can go.
Al
The only reason they are in the center can be for things that we have been told not to read into the picture, such as a right turn/intersection up ahead, the cyclist is about to make a left or that the cyclist is going the same speed or faster as the vehicles behind can go.
Al
chephy
06-11-06, 04:05 PM
I hope the diagram is not to scale. Otherwise - no way there is room to share; bike lane or no bike lane, it better be single-file.
derath
06-11-06, 05:14 PM
Why is the cyclist in A in the middle of what is a WOL (assuming the pavement width is the same as in B)?
The only reason they are in the center can be for things that we have been told not to read into the picture, such as a right turn/intersection up ahead, the cyclist is about to make a left or that the cyclist is going the same speed or faster as the vehicles behind can go.
Al
Likely because Diane attempting to bait the VC crowd. Probably the same reason she hasn't responded to HH, since he didn't take the bait.
Personally I would take road A but be in position B. I see no real benefit to the stripe vs WOL.
-D
The only reason they are in the center can be for things that we have been told not to read into the picture, such as a right turn/intersection up ahead, the cyclist is about to make a left or that the cyclist is going the same speed or faster as the vehicles behind can go.
Al
Likely because Diane attempting to bait the VC crowd. Probably the same reason she hasn't responded to HH, since he didn't take the bait.
Personally I would take road A but be in position B. I see no real benefit to the stripe vs WOL.
-D
sbhikes
06-11-06, 06:14 PM
Actually I thought HH's response was rather interesting. He's finally making some sense. Sorry if I didn't get back to him immediately. I do actually ride my bike, (and wash it too).
Perhaps you should include diagrams with your topics, Serge.
The only "baiting" I was hoping for was to see if anybody thought it unfortunate that when we ride like the cyclist in A we're taking up as much space on the road as a single person in a car. I've always thought one of the benefits of cycling is that you can move more people in a given space than you can with a car, and for a lot less energy and pollution. So anything that keeps us moving, especially when the motorists are stuck in congestion, is a good thing in my book.
It's kinda like when I filter to the front of the line I feel like I'm helping out the motorists because I'm not making them have to wait for one more "car".
If anything, I think bike lanes should be squeezed into narrow roads just so WE can zip on by when everybody else is stuck in traffic. One thing I really resent is getting stuck in traffic on a bike. There's just something very WRONG about that.
Perhaps you should include diagrams with your topics, Serge.
The only "baiting" I was hoping for was to see if anybody thought it unfortunate that when we ride like the cyclist in A we're taking up as much space on the road as a single person in a car. I've always thought one of the benefits of cycling is that you can move more people in a given space than you can with a car, and for a lot less energy and pollution. So anything that keeps us moving, especially when the motorists are stuck in congestion, is a good thing in my book.
It's kinda like when I filter to the front of the line I feel like I'm helping out the motorists because I'm not making them have to wait for one more "car".
If anything, I think bike lanes should be squeezed into narrow roads just so WE can zip on by when everybody else is stuck in traffic. One thing I really resent is getting stuck in traffic on a bike. There's just something very WRONG about that.
noisebeam
06-11-06, 06:30 PM
Don't read anything into this picture. There's nothing there that you cannot see.
And that is the problem. Perhaps the attempt is at starting discussion on simple options, but traffic/roads are never so simple. One can not look at a snapshot of a very short linear space frozen in time and make any assesments on it that will translate into reality - even when we look at photographs that are often discussed here.
For example: There has to be more than we can see. Why would these cars be so close together (and in A so close to the cyclist) unless they were stopped or traveling at less than 5mph? And then why would they be stopped unless there was an intersection or perhaps an accident up ahead?
Then Diane in your latest response after your nice ride, you talk about filtering and the disadvantage of being in lane causing more congestion - now you didn't say this (congestions, filtering) is what is happening in diagrams, but why bring it up unless you have read more into the picture than we can see?
If you want to talk about impeding traffic and causing congestion: I see more cyclist going straight from gutter or BL preventing right turning vehicles (with drivers who see cyclist) from turning right, causing often 2-3 cars less from getting thru intersection vs. taking the lane thru intersection and letting traffic flow smoothy. Even on a bike I sometimes miss a light if I am in line, some cyclist filters forward as traffic starts to move, then everyone slams on brakes as a right turner up ahead does to avoid hitting them. If that cyclist had lined up with me, we both and a couple extra cars would have made it thru intersection.
Al
And that is the problem. Perhaps the attempt is at starting discussion on simple options, but traffic/roads are never so simple. One can not look at a snapshot of a very short linear space frozen in time and make any assesments on it that will translate into reality - even when we look at photographs that are often discussed here.
For example: There has to be more than we can see. Why would these cars be so close together (and in A so close to the cyclist) unless they were stopped or traveling at less than 5mph? And then why would they be stopped unless there was an intersection or perhaps an accident up ahead?
Then Diane in your latest response after your nice ride, you talk about filtering and the disadvantage of being in lane causing more congestion - now you didn't say this (congestions, filtering) is what is happening in diagrams, but why bring it up unless you have read more into the picture than we can see?
If you want to talk about impeding traffic and causing congestion: I see more cyclist going straight from gutter or BL preventing right turning vehicles (with drivers who see cyclist) from turning right, causing often 2-3 cars less from getting thru intersection vs. taking the lane thru intersection and letting traffic flow smoothy. Even on a bike I sometimes miss a light if I am in line, some cyclist filters forward as traffic starts to move, then everyone slams on brakes as a right turner up ahead does to avoid hitting them. If that cyclist had lined up with me, we both and a couple extra cars would have made it thru intersection.
Al
sbhikes
06-11-06, 06:49 PM
All I meant was that you post a simple picture like this and everybody starts going "if this if that". No ifs. There's no driveways and shopping centers and nobody's turning right or left and there are no parked cars up ahead or potholes or whatever. It's just a bike in the lane with cars behind vs a bike in a bike lane with cars next to him.
Now of course, if the bike is in front of the cars, everybody couldn't possibly be going more than 20 or so (unless that's Serge and then of course everybody is going 45.) And if it's picture B the speed of each really is independent of each other, but likely the bike is going about 20 and the cars are going faster than that.
A lot like your NOL pictures, I'm just curious what gets said.
Now of course, if the bike is in front of the cars, everybody couldn't possibly be going more than 20 or so (unless that's Serge and then of course everybody is going 45.) And if it's picture B the speed of each really is independent of each other, but likely the bike is going about 20 and the cars are going faster than that.
A lot like your NOL pictures, I'm just curious what gets said.
CommuterRun
06-11-06, 06:50 PM
What bike is as long as a car? A tandem might be as long as a very short car, but then you're moving two people. No matter how you look at it, a bike takes up less room on the road than a car. Regardless of road position.
Bike lanes on an NOL? Don't expect to see me supporting this, or utilizing them, ever. Bad idea and unsafe. Encourages unsafely close passing by both motorist and cyclist and encourages cyclists to pass on the right. Now, multiple narrow lanes I agree with. Then cyclists can utilize the entire right lane, with regards to road position being destination dependant, and motorists can pass in another lane.
It's kinda like when I filter to the front of the line I feel like I'm helping out the motorists because I'm not making them have to wait for one more "car".
I think you might be justifying actions that you think will make motorists upset with you.
As to the question in the OP, Twahl's first paragraph hit it right on the head.:)
Bike lanes on an NOL? Don't expect to see me supporting this, or utilizing them, ever. Bad idea and unsafe. Encourages unsafely close passing by both motorist and cyclist and encourages cyclists to pass on the right. Now, multiple narrow lanes I agree with. Then cyclists can utilize the entire right lane, with regards to road position being destination dependant, and motorists can pass in another lane.
It's kinda like when I filter to the front of the line I feel like I'm helping out the motorists because I'm not making them have to wait for one more "car".
I think you might be justifying actions that you think will make motorists upset with you.
As to the question in the OP, Twahl's first paragraph hit it right on the head.:)
joejack951
06-11-06, 06:52 PM
The only "baiting" I was hoping for was to see if anybody thought it unfortunate that when we ride like the cyclist in A we're taking up as much space on the road as a single person in a car. I've always thought one of the benefits of cycling is that you can move more people in a given space than you can with a car, and for a lot less energy and pollution. So anything that keeps us moving, especially when the motorists are stuck in congestion, is a good thing in my book.
If all 4 people in all 4 vehicles were on bicycles instead of 3 being in cars, they would all take up less space than one car. In my opinion, that would be the best scenario.
If I had to go by the scale of the picture, I would go with A as being in B would encourage motorists to try and pass in the same lane when there is not enough room to safely share the lane. I feel as though I'm causing a dangerous situation if I bait motorists into trying to pass me when it is not safe. If I feel a lane is even marginally not wide enough to share, I take the lane if there is oncoming traffic. I will move over to facilitate faster passing if there is no oncoming traffic and I feel it is safe to move over, i.e. if traffic behind me has slowed to reasonable speed.
If all 4 people in all 4 vehicles were on bicycles instead of 3 being in cars, they would all take up less space than one car. In my opinion, that would be the best scenario.
If I had to go by the scale of the picture, I would go with A as being in B would encourage motorists to try and pass in the same lane when there is not enough room to safely share the lane. I feel as though I'm causing a dangerous situation if I bait motorists into trying to pass me when it is not safe. If I feel a lane is even marginally not wide enough to share, I take the lane if there is oncoming traffic. I will move over to facilitate faster passing if there is no oncoming traffic and I feel it is safe to move over, i.e. if traffic behind me has slowed to reasonable speed.
AndrewP
06-11-06, 07:04 PM
Since there is only a 1/4 car length between cars they must be stopped in a traffic jam. Therefore B is better, as the bike is able to proceed at its own speed. I have a narrow two lane work near my work. I ride close to the right hand side. Cars pull over into the opposite lane to pass me. If there is a car coming in the other direction, I check my mirror for cars behind me. If there is a car behind me I pull out into the middle of the lane, so it wont think it can squeexze through. None of these cars have hassled me yet.
John E
06-11-06, 07:56 PM
To me, differential speed should be a crucial part of this discussion. On a recent weekend ride, I noticed that if I am going downhill in light traffic on a road with a narrow bike lane (in this instance, La Costa Av. descending from Rancho Santa Fe Rd., for those who know southern Carlsbad CA), I tend to eschew the bike lane, and not just on approaches to intersections.
Daily Commute
06-12-06, 02:58 AM
All I meant was that you post a simple picture like this and everybody starts going "if this if that". No ifs. There's no driveways and shopping centers and nobody's turning right or left and there are no parked cars up ahead or potholes or whatever. It's just a bike in the lane with cars behind vs a bike in a bike lane with cars next to him. . . .
Those are the situations I think well-designed bike-lanes can work. But I doubt you would agree to limit the use of bike lanes to roads without intersections, driveways, potholes and road hazards.
If anything, I think bike lanes should be squeezed into narrow roads just so WE can zip on by when everybody else is stuck in traffic. One thing I really resent is getting stuck in traffic on a bike. There's just something very WRONG about that.
Part of riding and driving in traffic is that sometimes other traffic slows you down. Sometimes cars get stuck behind us. Sometimes we get stuck behind them. Big deal.
Those are the situations I think well-designed bike-lanes can work. But I doubt you would agree to limit the use of bike lanes to roads without intersections, driveways, potholes and road hazards.
If anything, I think bike lanes should be squeezed into narrow roads just so WE can zip on by when everybody else is stuck in traffic. One thing I really resent is getting stuck in traffic on a bike. There's just something very WRONG about that.
Part of riding and driving in traffic is that sometimes other traffic slows you down. Sometimes cars get stuck behind us. Sometimes we get stuck behind them. Big deal.
MichaelW
06-12-06, 04:00 AM
Rider A is controlling the traffic around him. If there is a vehicle parked up ahead, the position allows him to ride past without having to swerve out or fight off overtaking cars.
I should have used that position last night when approaching a broken down bus in heavy traffic. Instead, I rode further to the curb and the car behind me was tempted into a half-overtake , ie drive alongside, swerve in and hit the brakes.
I should have used that position last night when approaching a broken down bus in heavy traffic. Instead, I rode further to the curb and the car behind me was tempted into a half-overtake , ie drive alongside, swerve in and hit the brakes.
FLBandit
06-12-06, 10:26 AM
Well, if it's a 45 (or higher) mph road the cyclist would be seriously hacking off the traffic behind him (or her) if they maintained the "A" position for long. Taking the lane in this instance would seem deliberate and confrontational. However, residential streets, approaching traffic signaling devices, preparing for a left turn, or avoiding obstuctions would be a different story. I feel position "A" is justified then.
rando
06-12-06, 02:51 PM
if you are a specialized, serious, VC riding bike lane hater, A is better. if you are a curb-hugging cowardly rider who does not want in on the ground floor of the revolution, B is better.
Helmet Head
06-12-06, 03:28 PM
if you are a specialized, serious, VC riding bike lane hater, A is better. if you are a curb-hugging cowardly rider who does not want in on the ground floor of the revolution, B is better.
Since I said "B is better" in #4, I must be a "curb-hugging cowardly rider who does not want in on the ground floor of the revolution".
Stellar logic, Rando.
Since I said "B is better" in #4, I must be a "curb-hugging cowardly rider who does not want in on the ground floor of the revolution".
Stellar logic, Rando.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.