Google sponsored links
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass?
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Other comments?
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'm fortunate in that most of the area I ride in, the lanes are wide enough that it's safe to share the lane. For the most part, the only time I take full lane is approaching a stop sign or traffic light, and then I take the lane and wait my turn like everyone else. Other than that, there are times that I'll take the lane on narrow roads. One spot is entering the local downtown area, there's a blind curve and two one-way lanes. I'll take the full right lane to discourage drivers from squeezing me in the blind curve. There's a similar situation leaving the area on the other side.
I know I'm fortunate in the area I live, and in that I can pretty much choose to ride during lower traffic times, both of which means that your mileage may vary.
I will take the lane, but usually just the right 3rd of it, when there's debris or potholes in the bike lane. If there isn't a bike lane and I absolutly, positively need to use that road, I'll take the lane.
For the most part, I stay inside bike lanes. If I'm taking the normal travel lane, it's the exception.
I've only had people get angry while I was taking the lane. I've never, ever had an incident of someone threatening me or getting angry at me while I was in the bike lane.
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Other comments?
Every single day. I have a route that takes me on a two lane downhill with a 25mph speed limit. The road opens up from one lane into a left-lane-straight, right-turn-lane for a parking lot; after the lot entrance, the continuing right lane is a go-straight lane.
From the first light, both lanes are go-straight (with a right-turn option in the right lane.) I take the entire right lane to go straight through the intersection so I don't get hooked. It's a two block sprint to the next light, and one block after the intersection the right lane becomes a right-turn-only at the light. Just past the light is where the bike lane begins. I sprint the two blocks to the light in the right-turn-only lane, and signal my way into the left lane just before the light so I can go through the light and cruise in the bike lane.
I get about 6 blocks of the bike lane before having to make a left at a massive intersection, where I pick up the sprint again to move with traffic and signal my way into the left-turn lane.
I take the lane when approaching Stoplights, on blind curves, and when approaching and crossing bridges. It is important to plan when you take the lane to establish your position in the lane, I also believe that after you've been in the lane for an extended period or through a dangerous section of roadway it is good to look for places where you can let traffic Pass. Both for my peace of mind and to allow the traffic behind me to get through.
I take the lane whenever I am going 25+mph (usually in a 35mph zone) down a hill, or whenever the speed limit is 20mph or less. In these cases I'm able to go so close to the speed limit that passing is not advantageous to the driver, and the passing car would be next to me for a few seconds on the way by.
I take the lane when it's in my interest to do so. Using a mirror makes this fairly routine. If I'm on a narrow or shoulderless road, and notice a vehicle approach from behind that's not moving over, I'll intentionally move a little left in the lane to force the overtaking vehicle to move left. It works quite well, and I hardly ever get yelled at.
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass? On most roads a cyclist can't avoid doing that even if he's hugging the curb. There is just physically not enough room to pass in the same lane.
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?One situation is when lanes are too narrow to be safely shared and there is more traffic than gaps and cars have difficulty changing lanes. The reason is that if it's difficult to change lanes and I'm on the right, it's tempting for drivers to try to pass me without a lane change. Another reason is that when traffic is that heavy, there are usually long lines of cars forming at stoplights/signs all the way, and it's not really fair that I get pushed further and further back to the end of the line just because cars are capable of superior acceleration bursts: after all, my AVERAGE speed on that road is the same as cars': I catch up with them when they are stopped. (In fact, I recently realized this is probably one of my biggest problems on the road - NOT close passes, NOT left-right turners, NOT road rage - perhaps I should open a thread to exchange ideas on this...)
On the other hand, when traffic is lighter, I find that people don't mind shifting their wheels over into the next lane and passing me safely - and with lighter traffic they'll just get through the stop sign/light long before I approach it, so no problems with long lines for me.
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
- If I'm going with the speed of the rest of the traffic (e.g. tiny residential roads, downhills...).
- If lanes are very narrow.
- If I'm changing lanes preparing for a left turn.
- Probably some other times I am not thinking about right now or can't quite accurately describe without much conscious thinking.
I'd do it more often, but it certainly does invite aggression from and conflicts with motorists (I keep reading claims that it does not, and it doesn't jibe with my observations at all). So if on a particular stretch of road I find that keeping three feet away seems to be sufficient measure to ensure safe passing distance from the great majority of motorists - I'll do that.
some roads are so well provided that no lane grabbing or powerswerving is warranted. this picture is an example from last weekends' 165 mile 36'er.
i take the lane more than 99 percent of the bicyclists i see, and i also pull ahead of cars and take the lead position at lights if safe and reasonable for me to do so- sometimes in one of the middle lanes. Cars pass me, i pass them. screw 'em.
So you are only sharing if you are marginalized to the side? Um, "share the road" is one thing, but "share the lane" is different. I think if you're sharing a lane with some other vehicles, that means there are two of you in one lane, laterally speaking. In that situation the cyclist is usually "marginalized to the right side" of the lane and the motorist is "marginalized to the left side" of the lane, although in some cases that could be reversed. If a cyclist is in the centre, he's taking the lane, not sharing it. I thought that was an agreed-upon terminology.
I have a noarrow 2 way road near my work. Normally I ride close to the edge and cars always give me plenty of space when passing. If there is a car approching in the opposite direction, and I see in my mirror a car the same distance behind me, I move out into the middle of the lane to stop the car behind from thinking of squeezing through. This has never caused the following cars to get excited.
Near my home there is a short stretch of busy 4 lane road that has a terrible surface. I move to the outside lane for a couple of hundred yards, where the surface is just marginally substandard. This is sometimes problematic for following cars
Um, "share the road" is one thing, but "share the lane" is different. I think if you're sharing a lane with some other vehicles, that means there are two of you in one lane, laterally speaking. In that situation the cyclist is usually "marginalized to the right side" of the lane and the motorist is "marginalized to the left side" of the lane, although in some cases that could be reversed. If a cyclist is in the centre, he's taking the lane, not sharing it. I thought that was an agreed-upon terminology.
As far as terminology goes, so we are on the same page together, I define "sharing the lane" the same way you do. I define "taking the lane" as taking enough of the lane to induce overtaking motorists to cross the line into the next lane, not necessarily riding in the center of the lane. Not to argue, just clarifying how I use the terms personally.
All comments are welcome.
There are very few places I take the lane for no reason. In other words, I stay to the right unless there is a real reason (a real object my path, a real need to change lanes, a real and present danger--not a hypothetical danger.)
The law in NY is that a cyclist has to stay right and share the lane unless there's not enough room to share, in which case the bike has the right to take the whole lane. That makes sense to me, so that's what I do. Of course, where there are obstructions in the way, I take the lane as well.
It's better to have a slightly po'd driver who sees you then a happy one that's oblivious to your presence or tries to "squeeze by".
- Jeff
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass?
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Other comments?
I ride outside of the door-zone which puts me nearly halfway into the lane. In residential neighborhoods, I wait until cars get up behind me and there's a long stretch of no parked, then I ride in the parked-car space to let the cars pass, then get back to taking the lane.
If I'm climbing up a mountain I'll stay more to my right. I'm not too concerned about the door-zone when I'm going under 10mph and can see inside each car. But if I'm going near to the speed limit, I'll take the lane. At night in the dark on a downhill where I can almost keep up with the flow of traffic, I take the entire lane even if the lane is wide enough to share a car and a bike. I'm not going to risk not being seen at night by riding to the right and not directly in front of a motorist.
I try to ride and drive defensively. I do not want to be the victim portion of a story where someone else is being tried for assault, attempted murder or vehicular homicide, or cited for behavior in traffic which causes an injury or death. I do not wish to assert myself and attempt to occupy the same space as a motor vehicle no matter which operator is legally behaving correctly.
Sometimes I'm in the lane, sometimes in the bike lane, sometimes on a Multi-Use Path; whichever under the circumstances offers the least obstruction to the orderly flow of all traffic.
In general, I drive and ride defensively rather than assertively. On the bike though I am far more defensive and far less assertive. So far, at least, I haven't been injured or killed and continue to enjoy riding.
some roads are so well provided that no lane grabbing or powerswerving is warranted. this picture is an example.
This picture is also an example of the type of road that I picture when I read about tragedies like this:
The Livingston County sheriff's office said that Dechau was riding westbound on the shoulder of route 20 approximately two feet to the right of the white line. A sheriff's spokesman said a westbound vehicle driven by Sharon Cameron, 61, crossed the white line and struck Dechau from behind at approximately 45-50 mph, and Dechau died at the scene.
Cameron could not provide an explanation to police as to why her vehicle drifted from the travel lane to the shoulder. She freely submitted to a blood test as part of the accident investigation, and police do not believe she was under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Results of investigation will determine if charges will be filed against Cameron.
http://gvcc.11net.com/
Folks, I'm not making this stuff up.
Maybe she couldn't provide an explanation as to why her vehicle drifted from the travel lane to the shoulder. But I can.
For solo vehicles (not two or more vehicles) with drivers whose thoughts are elsewhere drifting into empty shoulders and bike lanes happens more often that most people realize (drivers that do it don't realize it because their thoughts are elsewhere)
Cyclists to the right of the stripe have low cognitive conspicuity. http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
Inattentional blindness - so even though the cyclist is in the shoulder or bike lane, to the driver, cognitively, the shoulder is "empty". Being inattentionally blind to the presence of the cyclist in the shoulder or bike lane, they are just as likely to drift across the stripe as when it really is empty.
Inadvertent drift.
That's why I take the lane on roads like the one in Bek's picture except when I see faster approaching in my mirror, in which case I look over my right shoulder, then move into the roadway shoulder (or bike lane) about 5 seconds before they reach me (at a 30 mph closing speed that's over 200 feet), and stay there until they've passed me, then I look over my left shoulder and move back into the travel lane (until the next group of 1 or more vehicles is about 5 seconds behind me). It might seem like a lot of work, but, like anything else, once you get used to it it becomes effortless. And, I find it helps keep MY attention on traffic instead of drifting off...
But the main reason I take the lane between intersections on roads like this is to increase the probability motorists approaching from behind NOTICE my presence sometime during the minute or so before they reach me, and therefore, are cognitively aware of my presence up ahead, are watching me and paying attention as I look back and move into the shoulder, and are therefore much less likely to inadvertently drift into the "empty" shoulder as they are passing me.
Is this starting to make sense to anyone who thought it was completely crazy the first time they read me writing about it? Or am I wasting my time?
My lane position varies almost constantly. A large part of the time I'm riding in the nice, decent, debris-free shoulder that we're priviledged to have around here.
If I'm riding straight with no opposing traffic present or only opposing traffic, I ride in the right wheel track. If there's a car approaching from the rear AND from the front, I will move to just inside the white line IF there's room for a safe pass (almost always the case around here). Otherwise I stay left, but I'm ready to ditch if the guy coming up from the rear looks unwilling to slow down (I don't want to be dead right).
If I'm turning left, then I move far left of the left turn lane (or leftmost lane, whichever). If I'm going straight through an intersection, and the light turns red, I move far left in the lane to allow right-turn-on-red cars to get past me without right hooking me.
If there's an obstacle (construction, wreck, etc) I'll go into oncoming lanes when safe.
There are probably a lot of other situations too. As you can see, depending on the situation, my normal riding position could be anywhere on the road surface.
I take the lane when it's in my interest to do so. Using a mirror makes this fairly routine.
+1
In general, I drive and ride defensively rather than assertively. On the bike though I am far more defensive and far less assertive. So far, at least, I haven't been injured or killed and continue to enjoy riding.
I don't see the terms "assertive" and "defensive" as mutually exclusive. I consider being assertive by using the full lane (when needed) as good defensive riding.
My experience on my most recent USA tour, and countless tours before that, is that the vast majority of drivers (especially truck drivers) are so remarkably courteous that they cut over into the oncoming lane (or into the 2nd, 'passing' lane, if there is one) 99% of the time, even if I am well inside the shoulder and many times even if the view of the road ahead is not all that clear. So I find 'taking the lane' is not that necessary in most cases.
Now, when riding in cities or developed suburbs, I think I am much closer to many other readers on this board who say---if you are gonna take the lane, take the lane! and don't be subtle about it. I think this assertiveness is more professional, and understandable by drivers, than trying to 'squeeze enough to the left to get by a parked car but stay far enough to the right to let people pass.'
roughstuff
Sorry Al, I'm with Chephy and Pete on the terminology.
Sharing the road might be sharing the lane (side by side) or controlling the lane (a.k.a. taking the lane - cyclist is positioned centerish in the lane).
By the way, the other big reason I control the lane on roads like the one shown in Bek's picture is so that I'm already positioned correctly (visibly, predictably) for any intersections (including driveways, dirt roads, entrances, alleys) etc. I might be approaching and crossing. So, again, the only reason I move right into the shoulder is if faster traffic is present or approaching, and then only until they've passed me.
On a group ride, I take the lane to 'block' as riders in front move into a left-turn lane. I take the lane when traffic is moving slowly and I'm just taking my place in the line of traffic approaching a light. I take the lane when the road is too narrow to share the lane, for example, a short bridge. I take the lane on steep/fast/curvy descents when I don't want cars to pass and I'm going the speed limit.
I want to avoid talking about other people's choices, and focus on what you do personally, and why. I'd prefer that people not feel they have to defend their choices.
Pete
Just a reminder. I've deleted more specific references in the interest of comraderie.
I take the lane if there's no appropriate shoulder or designated path, as long as I'm going reasonably fast. When i'm climbing very slowly up a steep incline, for example. I stay comfortably far to the right. My comfort and safety comes first. I respect and accomadate the motorist when I can safely do so.
I would like to redirect Helmet Head to stay on topic. Comments about other people's riding choices are not relevant. Please feel free to start your own thread if you wish to do so.
This thread is about how you ride, and why. Please restrict your comments to your own experiences and preferences, not what someone else said. There are perhaps dozens of other thread that have been overtaken by the same arguments, so please be respectful of the original intent of this thread.
Serge, I do, however, respect your personal choices and do thank you for posting your preferences (and your stated reasons why) on this thread. My apologies if my redirect was a bit terse.
It's really more about how people really ride everyday, not about how we think everyone else should ride.
Please reread my post. While I did happen to refer to a photo that another poster provided, that was simply to clarify the context of my own words. I made no comments about other people's riding choices. I wrote exclusively about how I ride, and why. I restricted my comments to my own experiences and preferences, not what someone else said. I also did cite a recent tragic death, but, frankly, if it wasn't for deaths like that I wouldn't ride the way that I do. That example exemplifies why I ride the way that I do.
If you still feel my post was not respectful to the original intent of this thread, please let me know what about it is problematic and I'll be happy to edit it accordingly.
As to the terminology diversion... enough said, but I think it does more good than harm if it remains here. I think it's useful to have that clarified.
I have a fifteen mile commute on roads of varying widths and congestion level - many without bike lanes. I never ride in the door zone, which generally forces cars to cross into the other lane a bit to pass me safely (not all cars bother to pass me "safely," however). I am in the middle of the lane - taking the lane - when I'm going straight and want to leave space for cars to turn right, and when it is a narrow lane with two lanes going the same direction. Imo, if there's a whole other lane going the same way for a car to be in, I can take the one on the right when I want. That's to avoid being doored, and to avoid glass and road conditions so substandard that riding over it can result in "shaken baby syndrome."
Please reread my post.
Serge, I deleted my reference to your post.
Is this starting to make sense to anyone who thought it was completely crazy the first time they read me writing about it? Or am I wasting my time?
Well, while the technique makes sense and I do use it... I wonder what exactly the motorist was doing some two feet out of place... In her case, she might just as easily have been asleep... and I doubt she would have even seen a Mac truck in front of her.
Some friends of mine were rear-ended about 10 years ago in Arizona by a sheriff. They were just driving along on an isolated road (they liked to snake hunt) and a sheriff plowed right into the back of their vehicle.
It is incidents like that one that make me wonder if anything can get the attention of some motorists.
I take the lane whenever there isn't enough room between the right-most lane and the door zone (I never ride in the door zone), which there almost never is, so I'm usually taking the lane. I prefer one way streets and avenues, where I always ride on the left-hand side, again taking the lane on multi-lane one-way roads. Drivers tend to notice me more when I'm on the left side rather than the right side; they also tend not to pass as closely - probably because they can better judge the distance between bike and car when you're on their left.
That's why I take the lane on roads like the one in Bek's picture except when I see faster approaching in my mirror, in which case I look over my right shoulder, then move into the roadway shoulder (or bike lane) about 5 seconds before they reach me (at a 30 mph closing speed that's over 200 feet), and stay there until they've passed me, then I look over my left shoulder and move back into the travel lane (until the next group of 1 or more vehicles is about 5 seconds behind me). It might seem like a lot of work, but, like anything else, once you get used to it it becomes effortless. And, I find it helps keep MY attention on traffic instead of drifting off...
But the main reason I take the lane between intersections on roads like this is to increase the probability motorists approaching from behind NOTICE my presence sometime during the minute or so before they reach me, and therefore, are cognitively aware of my presence up ahead, are watching me and paying attention as I look back and move into the shoulder, and are therefore much less likely to inadvertently drift into the "empty" shoulder as they are passing me.
Is this starting to make sense to anyone who thought it was completely crazy the first time they read me writing about it? Or am I wasting my time?
Instead of taking the lane on that type of road, I ride about 6-12" to the right of the white line. This puts me in position to be noticed by overtaking drivers, and keeps my tires in the zone that's generally swept free of glass and other debris by the passing cars. I use my mirror to monitor overtaking traffic, and shift right in the bike lane as cars get close, then move back over to the left when they pass.
That's why I take the lane on roads like the one in Bek's picture except when ...
Instead of taking the lane on that type of road, I ride about 6-12" to the right of the white line. This puts me in position to be noticed by overtaking drivers...
(I hope it's okay to comment on someone's comments about my comments)
For your sake I hope that position puts you in a position to be noticed by overtaking drivers, but, frankly, I think being anywhere to the right of that stripe makes you subject to inattentional blindness.
Some evidence of this type of inattentional blindness is how much closer drivers pass cyclists who are just to the right of the white stripe than they do when there is no stripe. The irony is that cyclists tend to be more comfortable with close passes when the stripe is there. And why not. We all have years and thousands of miles of experience of being passed closely like that. We stay on our side of the stripe, they stay on theirs. But if you read this article, carefully,
http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
I think you will see that all that postive reinforcing experience is part of the problem. It makes us oblivious to their close passes, and it makes them oblivious to our presence. Again, as long as everyone stays on their side of the stripe, all is fine.
Now, inadvertent drift is a relatively rare problem. That is, most drivers probably get to their destination without inadvertently drifting across the edge stripe (be it a shoulder or bike lane stripe). But, especially after reading that article, I do believe inattentional blindness is farely common. However, what happens is that even though so many (I would not be surprised if it's 50%) drivers are cognitively unaware of the presence of the cyclists they are overtaking, it mostly does not matter because everyone is staying on their side of the stripe.
But, inadvertent drift does happen, and, though rare, I think it happens much more often than most people realize. However, there again, because most shoulders and bike lanes are empty most of the time, even when it happens it's usually inconsequential, and so not noticed.
But, once in a while everything lines up, and the rare inadvertent drift into the shoulder or bike lane happens while the driver is overtaking a typically unnoticed cyclist.
In short, I hope you're not confusing the strong tendency for motorists to stay on their side of the stripe as evidence of them being aware of your presence 6-12" to the right of the stripe. In the recent incident that I cited in my original post, do you think if the cyclist had been 12" to the right of the stripe instead of 24" to the right of the stripe the overtaking motorist would have noticed and not struck the cyclist?
(I hope it's okay to comment on someone's comments about my comments)
For your sake I hope that position puts you in a position to be noticed by overtaking drivers, but, frankly, I think being anywhere to the right of that stripe makes you subject to inattentional blindness.
Some evidence of this type of inattentional blindness is how much closer drivers pass cyclists who are just to the right of the white stripe than they do when there is no stripe. The irony is that cyclists tend to be more comfortable with close passes when the stripe is there. And why not. We all have years and thousands of miles of experience of being passed closely like that. We stay on our side of the stripe, they stay on theirs. But if you read this article, carefully,
http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
I think you will see that all that postive reinforcing experience is part of the problem. It makes us oblivious to their close passes, and it makes them oblivious to our presence. Again, as long as everyone stays on their side of the stripe, all is fine.
Now, inadvertent drift is a relatively rare problem. That is, most drivers probably get to their destination without inadvertently drifting across the edge stripe (be it a shoulder or bike lane stripe). But, especially after reading that article, I do believe inattentional blindness is farely common. However, what happens is that even though so many (I would not be surprised if it's 50%) drivers are cognitively unaware of the presence of the cyclists they are overtaking, it mostly does not matter because everyone is staying on their side of the stripe.
But, inadvertent drift does happen, and, though rare, I think it happens much more often than most people realize. However, there again, because most shoulders and bike lanes are empty most of the time, even when it happens it's usually inconsequential, and so not noticed.
But, once in a while everything lines up, and the inadvertent drift happens while the driver is overtaking an unnoticed cyclist.
I think my strategy works well where I ride. I'm close enough to the lane that from a distance overtaking cars easily see me ahead...in fact, if I don't drift to the right as they get close, most cars shift left in the lane and/or go over the centerline to get around me (even when I'm just to the right of the white line).
As for inattention and lane drift...if I ride in the lane and the driver is inattentive (e.g., making a phone call, changing the CD, etc.), I'm toast anyway. That's the primary reason I ride with my Take-a-Look mirror - so that I can monitor overtaking traffic and take appropriate action to control the situation.
FWIW, I'm in general agreement with your "take the lane" policy and consider myself a very assertive rider. But I see no clear advantage in taking the lane when there's a wide shoulder on which to ride.
I want to thank everyone for being open to write about your experiences. Please feel free to be honest, it's not about what's "right and wrong," but about what you actually do everyday.
I have learned some things and find reading your comments enlightening. Thanks.
Keep em coming! One thing I'm seeing is not just differences in riding preferences, but in road design. There is such variation across the continent.
[I]But, once in a while everything lines up, and the rare inadvertent drift into the shoulder or bike lane happens while the driver is overtaking a typically unnoticed cyclist.
In short, I hope you're not confusing the strong tendency for motorists to stay on their side of the stripe as evidence of them being aware of your presence 6-12" to the right of the stripe. In the recent incident that I cited in my original post, do you think if the cyclist had been 12" to the right of the stripe instead of 24" to the right of the stripe the overtaking motorist would have noticed and not struck the cyclist?
Yes...sh*t happens. Some drivers are inattentive, and some are drunk or on drugs, and some have medical problems. That's the main reason I ride with a mirror, and monitor it every few seconds. If an overtaking driver has his wheels over the line, or even close to it, I'll intentionally move left to force them to respond. If they don't, I still have plenty of room to the right to dive into.
So, to answer your question...if the cyclist had detected that the overtaking vehicle was bearing down on him, then he might have been able to dodge right. In that case, being further right might have helped ensure his escape.
FWIW, I do agree that striped bike lanes encourage inattention by drivers and I've seen the studies that show cyclists are given LESS room by passing cars when there's a typical 3' bike lane. I'm also aware of, and in favor of, some of the traffic engineering techniques being employed in Europe (especially the Netherlands) where "traffic control devices" are intentionally being removed to increase "ambiguity" in traffic, which forces drivers to slow down and negotiate their interactions with other roadway users.
I take the lane when the lane I'm in is narrow enough to require it. If a car could safely pass in the same lane, I don't.
I think my strategy works well where I ride. I'm close enough to the lane that from a distance overtaking cars easily see me ahead...in fact, if I don't drift to the right as they get close, most cars shift left in the lane and/or go over the centerline to get around me (even when I'm just to the right of the white line).
As for inattention and lane drift...if I ride in the lane and the driver is inattentive (e.g., making a phone call, changing the CD, etc.), I'm toast anyway. That's the primary reason I ride with my Take-a-Look mirror - so that I can monitor overtaking traffic and take appropriate action to control the situation.
FWIW, I'm in general agreement with your "take the lane" policy and consider myself a very assertive rider. But I see no clear advantage in taking the lane when there's a wide shoulder on which to ride.
Perhaps there is a significant difference in cognitive conspicuity between being 12" to the right of the stripe and being 24" to the stripe.
I've seen references to the concept of "side friction", and how it affects drivers. For example, on freeways sometimes during construction they make the leftmost lane narrow and put up K-Rails along the left edge. Many drivers are uncomfortable driving so close to the wall, and eschew the fast lane in those situations. That's an example of high friction.
Another example is cars parked parrellel on an unstriped street - that's side friction, and causes drivers to move left and slow down. High friction.
So maybe a cyclist near that edge stripe, even just to the right of it, is sensed as "friction", and avoided accordingly. At least moreso than a cyclist further to the right who therefore is more likely to be unnoticed.
But, that doesn't explain why, if true, drivers seem to tend to pass cyclists closer when there is a stripe then when there isn't.
Perhaps both phenomenons are true. That is, while cyclists close to the stripe are more likely to be noticed than are cyclists riding further to the right of the stripe, and when they are noticed drivers do move left (and cyclists notice those who do that and it comforts them to have their conspicuity confirmed like that), some (many? most?) motorists still do not notice cyclists even when they are riding just 6-12" to the right of the stripe, and the close passes are evidence of at least some of that.
What we do know is that cyclists riding to the right of the stripe are all too often killed by motorists who do not notice their presence and inadvertently drift into the shoulder or bike lane at just the wrong time.
My way of dealing with that is doing all that I can to grab their attention before they reach, which has the major side benefit of positioning me more conspicuously and with improved sight lines for any potential cross-traffic up ahead.
I ride in the middle of the right through lane for about half of my 6.5 mile commute. This is a 4 lane road with 11' lanes and significant driveway and intersection traffic. Posted speed limit varies between 35 and 45 mph.
Other parts of my commute include two-lane sections with enough width or light enough traffic that I can avoid taking the lane, except at intersections, choke points, or when there is a lot of oncoming traffic. There is also a 1/2 mile segment of road with wide outside lanes where I ride very near the right edge most of the time.
-Steve Goodridge
I do it all the time. (Daily)
Two most common scenarios: First- The bike lane on the Brooklyn Bridge is in the center. The entrance to it, if you are travelling straight to the bridge is a left turn from the inside lane going over the bridge. I take that lane. The whole damn thing. I ride to the curb cut/entrance and enter the bridge. I usually get honks and the such from my friendly, tolerant, open-minded, fellow New Yorkers while I do this. Since they then speed past me only to get stuck in bridge traffic I invariably have a moment to warm their hearts with my saccharine sweet smile.
Second- any lane where I feel/know a NYC MTA bus is going to try and pass me with less than 200 feet to a bus stop. They do it all the time. They nail the accelerator, scream past, get 75% past me and then slam the wheel to the right as they nail the brakes to screech to the bus stop. I would then be forced to the gutter or often times onto the sidewalk. I may be exaggerating for effect a little.
For a while, whenever they did this I would tweak their passenger side mirror as I rode past. (This really pisses them off.) Then I realized that while this kind of behavior satisfied my adolescent machismo, considering I was an old man with a family to support it was stupid. So now I take the lane.
That's why I take the lane on roads like the one in Bek's picture except when I see faster approaching in my mirror, in which case I look over my right shoulder, then move into the roadway shoulder (or bike lane) about 5 seconds before they reach me (at a 30 mph closing speed that's over 200 feet), and stay there until they've passed me, then I look over my left shoulder and move back into the travel lane (until the next group of 1 or more vehicles is about 5 seconds behind me).
if you ride like that on a road with a 12 foot shoulder, because of 'inadverdent drift' or inattentional blindness, I'll rightfully call you paranoid.
and if helemt head insists on powerswerving in front of EVERY car or pod of vehicles on a highway speed road with a 12' wide shoulder, he puts himself in exponentially more danger with every swerve than an individual that keeps safely right. i'll call helmet head a powerswerving, dangerous fool if i saw him riding like that on this highway last weekend.
Taking the lane when necessary for safety is something altogther different and, like SBikes say, best reserved for ACTUAL dangers approaching or in the roadway conditions or traffic patterns, versus a powerswerve methodology even in the face of wide accomodating shoulders or bike lanes.
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass?
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Other comments?
Almost never. I am never in a position where I would have to do this. I would do it if the road was too narrow for a car to pass me in the same lane.
Bek, wasn't there a story about an Adventure Cyclist leader who was "taking the lane" on a highway similar to this and got rear-end by an off-duty policeman and died? If a motorist is that impaired that he can drift over into that giant shoulder, then it won't do any good if you are "taking the lane" to get noticed. Sometimes **** does happen, no matter where you are on the road.
Bek, wasn't there a story about an Adventure Cyclist leader who was "taking the lane" on a highway similar to this and got rear-end by an off-duty policeman and died? If a motorist is that impaired that he can drift over into that giant shoulder, then it won't do any good if you are "taking the lane" to get noticed. Sometimes **** does happen, no matter where you are on the road.
FYI, I contend that taking the lane up ahead of approaching drivers improves cognitive conspicuity; it certainly does not guarantee it.
In the case you cite, I believe curves and/or rolling hills were a factor, that limited how much time the speeding off-duty policeman had to notice the cyclist up ahead.
Also, that road had a narrow lane with no shoulder, so the cyclist had no choice but to be taking the lane. That's very different from cases where the cyclist has a choice.
Yes, sometimes **** happens, but, I, for one, want to do all that I reasonably can to reduce the possibility that **** like the following will happen to me.
The Livingston County sheriff's office said that Dechau was riding westbound on the shoulder of route 20 approximately two feet to the right of the white line. A sheriff's spokesman said a westbound vehicle driven by Sharon Cameron, 61, crossed the white line and struck Dechau from behind at approximately 45-50 mph, and Dechau died at the scene.
Cameron could not provide an explanation to police as to why her vehicle drifted from the travel lane to the shoulder. She freely submitted to a blood test as part of the accident investigation, and police do not believe she was under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Results of investigation will determine if charges will be filed against Cameron.
http://gvcc.11net.com/
Sorry Al, I'm with Chephy and Pete on the terminology.
Sharing the road might be sharing the lane (side by side) or controlling the lane (a.k.a. taking the lane - cyclist is positioned centerish in the lane).
By the way, the other big reason I control the lane on roads like the one shown in Bek's picture is so that I'm already positioned correctly (visibly, predictably) for any intersections (including driveways, dirt roads, entrances, alleys) etc. I might be approaching and crossing. So, again, the only reason I move right into the shoulder is if faster traffic is present or approaching, and then only until they've passed me.
Yes. HH. I find your description/distinction between 'sharing' and 'controlling' the lane to be very informative, as I often do one or the other as the situation merits. I often like to imagine I am more in 'control' of the road than just about any other type of rider...though erphaps this is optimistic. :)
roughstuff
The Livingston County sheriff's office said that Dechau was riding westbound on the shoulder of route 20 approximately two feet to the right of the white line. A sheriff's spokesman said a westbound vehicle driven by Sharon Cameron, 61, crossed the white line and struck Dechau from behind at approximately 45-50 mph, and Dechau died at the scene.
The motorist did not drift into the bicyclist and hit him on the side. The motorist was driving behind the bicyclist and hit him. In this scenario, one could argue that both the motorist and bicyclist were "taking the lane" (more correctly, "taking the shoulder"), however, the setup is the same: Bicyclist in front of motorist in the most visible position. Unfortunately, it didn't matter.
The motorist did not drift into the bicyclist and hit him on the side.
No one said she did.
The motorist was driving behind the bicyclist and hit him.
Well, the motorist was driving in her lane, the bicyclist was in the shoulder, then the motorist suddenly drifted into the shoulder and hit him. It is true that we don't know how long she was driving in the shoulder before she hit him, but I think it's reasonable to assume that it wasn't very long. The reason I think that's reasonable, is that usually as soon as people notice that they drifted out of the lane, they correct it and move back into their lane, and that usually doesn't take very long. Also, when they drift into the shoulder, they are moving at an angle. They don't normally straighten out and continue travelling in the shoulder. They usually catch it, and move back into the lane. Or, they just drift across the shoulder and off the road. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to assume she didn't drift into the shoulder and just drive along in the shoulder for a very long time.
In this scenario, one could argue that both the motorist and bicyclist were "taking the lane" (more correctly, "taking the shoulder"), however, the setup is the same: Bicyclist in front of motorist in the most visible position. Unfortunately, it didn't matter.
The point of my taking the lane in the manner I've described is to be in the approaching motorist's intended path, where ALL (yes, ALL) drivers pay attention MOST (not all) of the time, for some significant period of time - enough time to make it very, very unlikely that they won't become aware of my presence up ahead some time before they reach me.
The technique is NOT based on the assumption that appearing out of nowhere suddenly in someone's path makes you instantly noticable. In fact, if you're driving along with what you perceive to be an empty road in front of you, and suddenly inadvertently drift towards the shoulder, the cyclist who "suddenly" appears in the shoulder is likely to NOT be immediately noticed. If I understand inattentional blindness correctly, it could take time for the cyclist's presence to sink in the driver's mind - by then it could be too late. I highly recommend reading the article I cited earlier, if you haven't already.
http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
That, again, is why I want to spend some TIME in the driver's "zone of attention" before they reach me.
Good luck and take care out there.
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass?
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Please folks, try to restrict your comments to the above questions. If you have already posted, give others an opportunity to chime in.
Nobody needs to defend their posts.
Thanks.
Okay, okay. Even I can finally get the hint. Mac or anyone else who might be interested in continuing the discussion about why one may or may not want to take the lane even when there is a perfectly good shoulder or bike lane, let's take it here:
More fodder for the bike lane/lane position debate (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=228556)
Aside from intellectual discussions about taking the lane, lane positioning, etc., and apart from any debate over how/where is safest to ride, I was curious how many people are here who, on a regular basis, ride far enough into the lane that motorists must cross into the next lane (or straddle both lanes) to pass?
If you are one of these riders, what circumstances are present that influence your choice to take the lane?
How often do you ride dead-center in a lane, and why?
Other comments?
The main roads are quite wide here and lane sharing is easy. Furthermore, all my riding is done during rush hour, so the cars in the lane are about one second apart. Consequently, taking the lane is something that I do in only preparation for a left merge or as positioning to go straight at a controlled intersection. I am typically riding to the right, but outside the door zone. When there is a painted bike lane, this means I am in the left or center portion of it.
The roads in my neighborhood are far less travelled. I'd say it is a vehicle every minute or less. The lanes are typically not sharable. This is a very different situation. I ride in the right tire track position and pull over when there is a car behind me. Usually there is no car.
There is a downhill segment on the way home. I'm able to travel at the speed limit because of the downslope. I merge out into the right tire track position to have more manuvering room should I hit or need to avoid an object in the road. As I slow, my position moves into the right side of the lane.
When ice or snow slows the traffic to a cruising speed that is comfortable to me, I take the lane. If the cars are gridlocked (this can last for miles), I'll pass left or right depending upon road conditions. If they can't move, they can't right-hook! If the road is obstructed by deep snow, frozen ruts, or ice blocks, I'll take whatever lane position is safest for me to ride in.
Paul
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.