you don't default to the travel lanes...

[Bekologist]

there are so many roads across america, rural and otherwise, where the safest and soundest lane position for a bicyclist is to the right. how far right is up to the rider, but on many well acocmodated roads, there is NO GOOD REASON to ride in the travel lane.

many times a rider cannot because of vis or traffic conditions. seems enough reason right there- visibility AND/OR traffic flow, to throw this 'default to the lane peek-a-boo' garbage riding advice right out the window...

a bicyclist does NOT default to the travel lane on roads. there are so many exceptions to riding in the travel lanes, the VC DLLP theory is full of holes, fatally flawed, if it predicates a middle of the travel lane default.

on a road with wide clean shoulders, moderate to steady traffic, bike lanes, low vis, etc, etc, there are many times that riding to the left of the white stripe will never be necessary.

I discredit DLLP if it puts a bicyclist in the middle of the travel lanes by default.

on a road with a well provided and accomodated bike lane, the default lane position for a DLLP bicyclist will be in the bike lane.

[derath]

Most of the roads that I ride on in my area don't have a shoulder. Where do I ride?

-D

[CommuterRun]

Always staying out of the travel lanes is equally fatally flawed. You should ride in the safest road position for the circumstances. Your road position should be dynamic with respect to many factors.

Bike lanes have never been conclusively proven to be safer than riding in the motor vehicle lane and many are dangerous because of poor design, debris, poor sight lines, lack of maintenance, etc.

Bike lanes are for moving cyclists out of the way of motor vehicles, not for the safety of the cyclist.

I discredit always staying out of the way of motor vehicles. Sometimes it's necessary to take the lane, even the far left lane.

[DCCommuter]

Always staying out of the travel lanes is equally fatally flawed. You should ride in the safest road position for the circumstances. Your road position should be dynamic with respect to many factors.

Bike lanes have never been conclusively proven to be safer than riding in the motor vehicle lane and many are dangerous because of poor design, debris, poor sight lines, lack of maintenance, etc.

Bike lanes are for moving cyclists out of the way of motor vehicles, not for the safety of the cyclist.

I discredit always staying out of the way of motor vehicles. Sometimes it's necessary to take the lane, even the far left lane.
Exactly. In the city, I take the lane by default.

Cycling is situational.

[CB HI]

on a road with wide clean shoulders,
Did you not berate cyclist for wanting roads with wide clean shoulders, insisting we should only ride with exceptionally thick, wide tires and bicycles suited for a Mel Gibson “Road Warrior” style of riding?

01-22-06, 02:43 AM #59 Bekologist

Lane position issue excerperted below by Beck....

.....Ironically, what got Randy in trouble may have been being too courteous to start off with.....

Given that he judged the bike lane too debris-filled, Randy was being overyly courteous by sticking so far to the right side of the traffic lane. Being that far over let many cars pass him safely in the lane, but busses are just too big....

....it's a lot safer to ride on clean pavement than gravel, especially when busses are willing to buzz you. I'll sometimes move farther to the left just because traffic has dried out the lane there while the area to the right is still wet.....

.....But the bottom line is that if the bike lane isn't safe for your bike but the traffic lane is, you should be in the traffic lane. And if the bike lane has gravel, dirt or water but the traffic lane doesn't, you should be in the traffic lane.
All true, Daily commute. But that last sentence should read 'if your bike isn't safe to use the bike lane, but it's delicate enough to require smooth pavement, maybe you should be at home on a trainer."


And as a daily commuter, a bicyclist needs to choose equipment suitable to the job. That includes bikes that can handle road debris. Yes, people wearing full kits on expensive road bikes with skinny tires should not delude themselves into thinking they are riding a 'versatile' enough bike to go play in urban traffic- what if the bicyclist was on a push bike, or a unicycle? Should they be allowed full use of the lane?

[Bekologist]

yeah, CBHI, i laugh behind the backs of all the roadies that lament their bikes don't take a little road grit. I laugh at roadies on weekends, when I see groups of grown men in spandex standing by the side of the road, watching one of their weekend peloton try to change a flat while cursing and flailing with totally inadequate skinny tires.

what a freakin' joke! as if pavement isn't going to have crap on it. are you delusionally thinking travel lanes DON'T have potholes and debris? I hit potholes in the lane much more than in a bike lane. seems bikes don't make potholes with the same regularity that cars do....

I ride 32s, 35s, 37s and can ride on any road or gravel trail and don't worry much about wet bridge gratings etc.



Anyway, back on topic, you don't automatically default to the travel lane if there are safe and appropriate ridijng positions to the right.

riding "DLLP" on a road with a well provided bike accomodation will be from the bike lane and not the travel lane.

[galen_52657]

Not sure where Bek rides (but thinking it's la-la land). Here on the urban east end of the country there are virtually no bike lanes. Full width shoulders are few and far between. Roads with shoulders have shoulder widths that undulate from 8' to 2' in a half mile or less. In fact, a 12' lane is not a sure thing! Urban/suburban roads around here have been retrofitted/jerrymandered with center turn lanes condensing the travel lanes to 10' or less.

Default lateral lane position is in the travel lane, left side of the right tire track on a 12' lane. But all in all I have very little problem with traffic even during rush hour. I ride a strait and predictable course and discourage unsafe passing with blocking and hand signals. You have the occasional jerk-off, but after 20 years of riding, they just doesn't bother me.

Average of 5000 miles annually without a crash with a motor vehicle....ever

[Bekologist]

Galen, I ride downtown city Seattle, suburban area and into the rural West. daily rider and bicycle tourist. 3,600 miles this year NOT counting my commute miles.

Lots of wide shoulders, retrofitted roads and big bike lanes here. some are safe and some are not. i take the lane as much as any of you in here, but do not delude this forum by recommending bicyclists ingore safe road positions such as provided by a safe and acceptable bike lanes and wide shoulders.

heres' examples of roads out west here, that don't require a lane grab for safe riding. the rainy pics are from last weekends 200 mile ride to eastern washington. all you VC dogmatists can criticize bike accomodations and wide shoulders all you want and dissect these pictures in vain, but they showcase situations that provide no compelling reason to take the lane and default to the travel lane;

the default lane position on these roads pictured, to ride VC DLLP (or whatever snappy acrynoms currently in vogue) is squarely in the bike lane or shoulder.

absolutely, on roads with narrow lanes or otherwise conditions that require a lane grab, do so. but on well acomodated roads, YOU DON'T ride in the travel lanes by default.

[derath]

Not sure where Bek rides (but thinking it's la-la land). Here on the urban east end of the country there are virtually no bike lanes. Full width shoulders are few and far between. Roads with shoulders have shoulder widths that undulate from 8' to 2' in a half mile or less. In fact, a 12' lane is not a sure thing! Urban/suburban roads around here have been retrofitted/jerrymandered with center turn lanes condensing the travel lanes to 10' or less.

Default lateral lane position is in the travel lane, left side of the right tire track on a 12' lane. But all in all I have very little problem with traffic even during rush hour. I ride a strait and predictable course and discourage unsafe passing with blocking and hand signals. You have the occasional jerk-off, but after 20 years of riding, they just doesn't bother me.

Average of 5000 miles annually without a crash with a motor vehicle....ever


Yes I find it almost ironic in a way that the most popular cycling routes in our area are roads with no shoulder (greenspring, shawan etc).

And hmm. My roadie has 700x25 tires and I haven't gotten a flat yet this year. Of course they are full kevlar armadillos, but hey, they work fine.


Anyway, back on topic, you don't automatically default to the travel lane if there are safe and appropriate ridijng positions to the right.

riding "DLLP" on a road with a well provided bike accomodation will be from the bike lane and not the travel lane.

http://www.btinternet.com/~tonyrichardson/horse.gif


-D

[Helmet Head]

Average of 5000 miles annually without a crash with a motor vehicle....ever

Note that Bek doesn't mention here how many crashes he has had.

Yes, let's follow the advice of the guy who has probably had more crashes than anyone else on BF! :rolleyes:

Based on how Galen writes, and riding on 21s or 23s probably, with virtually no bicycle accomodations, hardly even any shoulders, it's not surprising that he is crash-free.

Based on how Bek writes, and riding on 32s, 35s, 37s, "using" bicycle accomodations as much as he can, it's not surprising that he has had more than his share of crashes.

Coincidence? I think not.

Who's advice would you follow?

[galen_52657]

Galen, I ride downtown city Seattle, suburban area and into the rural West. daily rider and bicycle tourist. 3,600 miles this year NOT counting my commute miles.

Lots of wide shoulders, retrofitted roads and big bike lanes here. some are safe and some are not. i take the lane as much as any of you in here, but do not delude this forum by recommending bicyclists ingone safe road positions such as provided by a safe and acceptable bike lanes and wide shoulders.

heres' examples of roads out west here, that don't require a lane grab for safe riding. the rainy pics are from last weekends 200 mile ride to eastern washington. all you VC dogmatists can criticize bike accomodations and wide shoulders all you want and dissect these pictures in vain, but they showcase situations that provide no compelling reason to take the lane and default to the travel lane;

the default lane position on these roads pictured, to ride VC DLLP (or whatever snappy acrynoms currently in vogue) is squarely in the bike lane or shoulder.

absolutely, on roads with narrow lanes or otherwise conditions that require a lane grab, do so. but on well acomodated roads, YOU DON'T ride in the travel lanes by default.

The roads with the wide (over 12'?) shoulders as pictured, I would ride on the shoulder, as I do on the few State roads around here (mostly outside the metro area) that do have shoulders. With shoulders that wide, most all road debris would be to the far right side of the shoulder leaving plenty of debris-free, unencumbered shoulder to ride on and I would use it.

I do not agree completely with HH regarding riding in the travel lane when an ample shoulder is provided.

However, I would not consider the bike lanes in your photos as ample. They are way too narrow. Slow moving single-track vehicles tend to wobble. 5' is just insufficient, especially when sandwiched between a through lane and a turn lane. Insufficient margins for safety.

I have no beef against using the shoulder where a wide, well-paved and debris-free shoulder is provided. As far as HH's inadvertent drift is concerned, I believe it happens, but I believe the frequency and likelyhood of it happening at the same time I am in the shoulder are so infinitesimally small as to be meaningless.

My beef is with bike lanes:

1) Second (third?) class accommodation (not so with shoulder - all slow moving vehicles can use the shoulder).

2) Unnecessary segregation leads to expected segregation

3) No proven safety benefit to cyclists

4) False sense of security for unseasoned cyclists

5) Money could be better spent elsewhere

[derath]

Yes, let's follow the advice of the guy who has probably had more crashes than anyone else on BF! :rolleyes:

Sorry HH but I don't follow. Has Bek talked about lots of crashes. I don't recall hearing about them.

-D

[noisebeam]

Sorry HH but I don't follow. Has Bek talked about lots of crashes. I don't recall hearing about them.

-D
Yes, he has on several occasions mentioned different crashes.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=3146100&postcount=87
....i think i've been there, Mech. I've crashed soo much over the last 35 years, i can only remember the really BIG ones that usually landed me in the hospital. I grew up in snow country (UP of Michigan) and we rode the winter months (when not skiing across town) like it was a birthright! i remember icy cold, clear nights, the borealis lighting up the northern sky, as i rode in 15 below, the snowbanks reflecting a dim glow....

-didn't even use studded tires then. the didn't make them at the time, people were doing the wood screw and tuffy's-n-tape method.....some of us considered studded tires for pussies...oh what a couple of decades have taught me!

sure did get good at the rear drift turn....

I think my last crash was a couple weeks ago. riding thru parks at night without my main front lights, or

I might have low speed crashed on last weekend's 3 day tour, i can't rememember if i duffed it off a gravel road berm. seems I did, now that i'm thinking about it.....

http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=3146170&postcount=89
i think my first crash was when i was three. some other noteables-

I put her down in the traffic lane when i was about eight.
got hit by a taxi downtown from behind once.

Flew off a breakwall into Lake Superior one time. i think i did that semi willingly....

and broke my leg at the hip socket (femoral neck) from a high speed collision with a jeep cherokee. Just last year, by Snoqualamie Falls. i was laying on the ground, apologizing i had ruined the drivers day and his windshield, but I couldn't get up or move my right leg at all....

oooh, and those crashes without a helmet, those are always doozies! a couple of hospitalizations, a couple of concussions from those.....

Remember the early 90's, when the SPD mountain pedals came out, was it 1991?

-That was a really fun time, we all thought we had to have them really tight to be secure and crashed all summer long. SO MANY slow speed biffs in the woods....
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=2126513&postcount=5
drinking heavily before cycling helps you learn to 'roll with it' when you crash.

Curbs jump out of nowhere..

And this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=1873149&highlight=crash#post1873149

Al

[derath]

Yes, he has on several occasions mentioned different crashes.
Al

Ok,

Personally I still don't think that necessarily has relevance, depending on the nature of the crashes.

So to HH. Please man, I have spent a good bit of time and energy ripping on those who have engaged in lowball personall attacks against you rather than arguing the facts. Don't let me down by doing the same in the other direction. You generally do a good job of staying civil.

-D

[galen_52657]

Bek has sort of bragged about his crashes from time to time, so I think it's public record and fair game. That being said, the fact that he has had a few crashes does not necessarily mean that he lacks cycling skills... it's just and indicator.

[noisebeam]

Bek has sort of bragged about his crashes from time to time, so I think it's public record and fair game. That being said, the fact that he has had a few crashes does not necessarily mean that he lacks cycling skills... it's just and indicator.
Look, I agree, but if he going to say this:

yeah, CBHI, i laugh behind the backs of all the roadies that lament their bikes don't take a little road grit. I laugh at roadies on weekends, when I see groups of grown men in spandex standing by the side of the road, watching one of their weekend peloton try to change a flat while cursing and flailing with totally inadequate skinny tires.
...
I ride 32s, 35s, 37s and can ride on any road or gravel trail and don't worry much about wet bridge gratings etc.

and this:

I might have low speed crashed on last weekend's 3 day tour, i can't rememember if i duffed it off a gravel road berm. seems I did, now that i'm thinking about it.....
And brag is equipment prepares him for the worst road conditions ??

Anyway it appears many of his crashes (in the earlier years of riding) were borderline intentional or expected for the style of riding. This actually makes one a better more skill rider, so credit is due there.

Al

[sggoodri]

a bicyclist does NOT default to the travel lane on roads. there are so many exceptions to riding in the travel lanes, the VC DLLP theory is full of holes, fatally flawed, if it predicates a middle of the travel lane default.

on a road with wide clean shoulders, moderate to steady traffic, bike lanes, low vis, etc, etc, there are many times that riding to the left of the white stripe will never be necessary.

>95% of my cycling miles are on roads with no paved shoulder or striped bike lane. Most of the paved shoulder sections have only 1-2 feet of shoulder width.

So yes, I ride in the travel lane by default, and have no real problems doing so. I do have problems when I try to ride right of the stripe in those few street segments here that feature combination debris/parking lanes.

I see people here posting photos of wide, clean bike lanes on fast roads with very few junctions. That's swell, but those pictures are nothing like the roads I must use to travel by bike, and therefore have no bearing on how my family and I ride.

-Steve Goodridge (never had a car-bike crash in 29 years of cycling, no puncture flats since I started avoiding crappy shoulders in 1991)

[galen_52657]

I do my share of gravel roads and never use anything wider than a 23. But, Bek may be packing saddlebags or something so wider rubber would be in order.

Unless one is riding laden or on raw dirt (a la mountain-biking) I am not convinced wider rubber does anything other than decrease road shock.

In fact, I have ridden both my mountain bike and road bike on glare ice and snow-covered roads. Guess what? high-pressure road bike tire gave better traction than a full-knobby mountain-bike tire. Why? on snow, road tire penatrated down to the road surface better. On ice road tire had larger contact patch.

[LittleBigMan]

there are so many roads across america, rural and otherwise, where the safest and soundest lane position for a bicyclist is to the right. how far right is up to the rider, but on many well acocmodated roads, there is NO GOOD REASON to ride in the travel lane.

many times a rider cannot because of vis or traffic conditions. seems enough reason right there- visibility AND/OR traffic flow, to throw this 'default to the lane peek-a-boo' garbage riding advice right out the window...

a bicyclist does NOT default to the travel lane on roads. there are so many exceptions to riding in the travel lanes, the VC DLLP theory is full of holes, fatally flawed, if it predicates a middle of the travel lane default.

on a road with wide clean shoulders, moderate to steady traffic, bike lanes, low vis, etc, etc, there are many times that riding to the left of the white stripe will never be necessary.

I discredit DLLP if it puts a bicyclist in the middle of the travel lanes by default.

on a road with a well provided and accomodated bike lane, the default lane position for a DLLP bicyclist will be in the bike lane.
I think there are times when riding in the travel lane is better, and times when it is not. Flexibility, and the discernment to know when to do it, and when not to, is key.

Roads, traffic, weather and travel conditions all vary greatly, which influences lane position at a given time and place.

I find that a default center lane position is sometimes the safest, most easily understood choice by motorists. Other times, I keep right.

[sbhikes]

95% of my riding is done in the bike lane.

So yes, I ride in the bike lane by default, and have no real problems doing so. I do have problems when I try to ride on roads that have no space to share adequately at all, both from on-coming traffic and from traffic behind me, especially when sight lines are poor.

I have only seen Al's photos of his bike-lane-less roads. I would probably not ride on those roads. I'm just an average person, not a super hero like he is.

-Diane (never had a car-bike crash in 38 years of cycling, very few flats ever in my life, and none of them were related to the bike lane.)

[derath]

I have only seen Al's photos of his bike-lane-less roads. I would probably not ride on those roads. I'm just an average person, not a super hero like he is.


No need for dramatics Diane. According to your description there are a ton of super hero's in MD cycling. Our state is not as enlightened to the wonders of bicycle accomodations.

-D

[Helmet Head]

Bek has sort of bragged about his crashes from time to time, so I think it's public record and fair game. That being said, the fact that he has had a few crashes does not necessarily mean that he lacks cycling skills... it's just an indicator.
Right. I did not mean to imply it was conclusive evidence that his opinions should be ignored. In fact, I wouldn't ignore his opinions, or anyone's for that matter.

But, when evaluating his opinions, and contrasting them to say those of Galen, I think it's advisable to take into account Bek's apparent propensity for crashing, and to consider the possible relationship between such a propensity and the advice he shares here.

[noisebeam]

95% of my riding is done in the bike lane.

So yes, I ride in the bike lane by default, and have no real problems doing so. I do have problems when I try to ride on roads that have no space to share adequately at all, both from on-coming traffic and from traffic behind me, especially when sight lines are poor.

I have only seen Al's photos of his bike-lane-less roads. I would probably not ride on those roads. I'm just an average person, not a super hero like he is.

It doesn't take any super hero skills to ride in narrow lanes, only confidence and assertiveness. Skills like this are used the world over by cyclists who don't have WOLs.

Anyway, you know we are not debating narrow lanes vs. roads with BLs. The debate is over the BL stripe, not the extra space. I have always advocated for WOLs and removing stripes on roads with existing BLs where the stripe creates confusion and/or guides cyclists in to an unsafe road position.

Al

[Helmet Head]

No need for dramatics Diane. According to your description there are a ton of super hero's in MD cycling. Our state is not as enlightened to the wonders of bicycle accomodations.

-D
This is a common theme for Diane. After a trip to Atlanta some time ago, she declared she would never ride a bike there (due to lack of bike accomodations).

Diane is living proof of the debilitating effects of living in a "bike friendly" area where "95% of my riding is done in the bike lane".

[sbhikes]

Well, all I recall from your photos was that there was no extra space and you were surrounded by big trucks and buses. I wouldn't ride a road like that if I can help it. Just too much exhaust, noise as well as stress. Look at this thing I ride. You just don't want to be boxed in between big trucks when you're lower than the height of their wheels.

[noisebeam]

Well, all I recall from your photos was that there was no extra space and you were surrounded by big trucks and buses. I wouldn't ride a road like that if I can help it. Just too much exhaust, noise as well as stress. Look at this thing I ride. You just don't want to be boxed in between big trucks when you're lower than the height of their wheels.
I'm pretty sure this was the last batch of photos I posted:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?p=3177148&highlight=armchair#post3177148

and I added a few more as attachments

Al

[sbhikes]

I think they were before that batch. It was a thread that you started. But the picture with the school bus looks familiar.

Compare those photos with mine along the ocean (even though I'm on the freeway) or Bek's in the mountains. Yours look a lot more stressful. I think I would look for a side-street instead, something with a few more trees or a few less trucks or lanes or something. I'm not hard-core enough for the sort of riding that you do.

[noisebeam]

II think I would look for a side-street instead,
In the thread link of photos I provided R1-C3 (http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=26583&d=1160164842) is a 25mph road - is that really stressful?

Look at R2-C1 (http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=27756&d=1161282156) and C2 (http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=27757&d=1161282169) of the attached photos I added as an edit. I can't ride roads like this for my commute - also no club roads use roads like this either. Too many stops and turns and they go nowhere.

But would you ride on this road without a BL? Would a BL make it safer?

Al

[derath]

I think they were before that batch. It was a thread that you started. But the picture with the school bus looks familiar.

Compare those photos with mine along the ocean (even though I'm on the freeway) or Bek's in the mountains. Yours look a lot more stressful. I think I would look for a side-street instead, something with a few more trees or a few less trucks or lanes or something. I'm not hard-core enough for the sort of riding that you do.


It's all relative. I find riding in my area pretty low stress, even though I have no BL and in many cases no shoulder. Yet I look at riding conditions in say, NYC and think "no friggin way". But if I moved there I would probably get used to it, cause I wouldn't want to give up cycling.

-D

[Bekologist]

you guys are hilarious. Don't discredit my sound advice, pick on my crash record- none of my crashes have been in bike lanes!

and i crashed on tour this last weekend- twice! on gravel, where you boys on skiny tires wouldn't even fear to tread.

people that have ridden a bike 35 years and HAVEN'T crashed I wonder about....

[chipcom]

there are so many roads across america, rural and otherwise, where the safest and soundest lane position for a bicyclist is to the right. how far right is up to the rider, but on many well acocmodated roads, there is NO GOOD REASON to ride in the travel lane.

many times a rider cannot because of vis or traffic conditions. seems enough reason right there- visibility AND/OR traffic flow, to throw this 'default to the lane peek-a-boo' garbage riding advice right out the window...

a bicyclist does NOT default to the travel lane on roads. there are so many exceptions to riding in the travel lanes, the VC DLLP theory is full of holes, fatally flawed, if it predicates a middle of the travel lane default.

on a road with wide clean shoulders, moderate to steady traffic, bike lanes, low vis, etc, etc, there are many times that riding to the left of the white stripe will never be necessary.

I discredit DLLP if it puts a bicyclist in the middle of the travel lanes by default.

on a road with a well provided and accomodated bike lane, the default lane position for a DLLP bicyclist will be in the bike lane.

Can't agree with this Bek. On many roads, if I am not in the travel lane, I must not be riding because there is no other place to ride.

[galen_52657]

95% of my riding is done in the bike lane

That statement alone proves that you are not so much a cyclist, as a pedestrian with wheels. What do you do when your destination is not on a road with a bike lane? Give up? That's ridiculous!

I guess all the women on my bike club who ride hundreds of miles from down-town Baltimore, through the inner suburbs and the exurbs into the countryside week in and week out are 'super-human'????

No, they just know the rules of the road, they are well trained and properly prepared to take their place on the road with other users.

It's really not that difficult.

[chipcom]

you guys are hilarious. Don't discredit my sound advice, pick on my crash record- none of my crashes have been in bike lanes!

and i crashed on tour this last weekend- twice! on gravel, where you boys on skiny tires wouldn't even fear to tread.

people that have ridden a bike 35 years and HAVEN'T crashed I wonder about....

Define crash? There is a difference between falling-down-going-boom, crashing to the extent that you are thrown from the bike and/or you and/or the bike is mangled, and a full-out furball with a car.

Personally, over the past 40 years I have had minor little falls, a couple of crashes, and minimal (saying zero is like Murphy suicide) furballs with cars. I'm sorry if you can't keep the rubber side down...maybe you can take up driving and be HH's driver?

[chipcom]

I have only seen Al's photos of his bike-lane-less roads. I would probably not ride on those roads. I'm just an average person, not a super hero like he is.

Does that make me....

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/warner_brothers/batman/michael_keaton/batman2.jpg

[galen_52657]

I have crashed on a bike, just not involving a car. Two crashes were in races and one was after hitting a tree-root heave that lifted the blacktop abruptly about 4". Had I seen the tree-root heave (it was camouflaged by being in the shade on a bright day) and/or had both hands on the bars I most likely would not have fallen. I don't count mountain bike crashes as they just come with the territory....

Best almost-fall and recovery was several weeks ago when me and two buds were finishing up our Saturday training ride, flying down a slight incline at over 35 MPH in a tight paceline. There was a brick in the middle of the road and the front man did not see it 'till the last moment. He veered over abruptly to miss it, leaving the second guy to hit it dead center.

Guy hit the brick so hard his left hand came off the bar drop. In a split second, just as he was about to loose control and going into a wobble, he caught himself with the left hand by hitting the front tire with his palm and bounced himself back up and grabbed the bar again.

He had a burn mark through the palm of his glove and strained his thumb ligament, but was otherwise, unscathed...

[sbhikes]

That statement alone proves that you are not so much a cyclist, as a pedestrian with wheels. What do you do when your destination is not on a road with a bike lane? Give up? That's ridiculous!

I guess all the women on my bike club who ride hundreds of miles from down-town Baltimore, through the inner suburbs and the exurbs into the countryside week in and week out are 'super-human'????

No, they just know the rules of the road, they are well trained and properly prepared to take their place on the road with other users.

It's really not that difficult.
Give me a break. 95% of the roads I ride on have bike lanes.

[galen_52657]

Give me a break. 95% of the roads I ride on have bike lanes.

Yeah, we get that....

So do 95% of all the roads in your area have bike lanes? If not, what if you want to go where there is no bike lane? What then????

Are you one of those folks who is afraid to drive your car on the interstate???

Inquiring minds want to know....

[noisebeam]

95% of my riding is done in the bike lane.

95% of the roads I ride on have bike lanes.
So you never leave the BL, ever? How do you make left turns?

These two comments also bring up the question as to your familiarlity of riding on roads with a WOL and no bike lane striping. If 5% of your experience is divided between WOL/NOL roads how can you even know enough about riding on a WOL to know if they are better or worse than the same road with a BL stripe?

Al

[Bekologist]

Can't agree with this Bek. On many roads, if I am not in the travel lane, I must not be riding because there is no other place to ride.

Chip, that's on roads with no other place to ride. using a shoulder when there is none is pretty self-evident.

[sbhikes]

So you never leave the BL, ever? How do you make left turns?

These two comments also bring up the question as to your familiarlity of riding on roads with a WOL and no bike lane striping. If 5% of your experience is divided between WOL/NOL roads how can you even know enough about riding on a WOL to know if they are better or worse than the same road with a BL stripe?

Al
Oh puleeze.

Yes, bike lanes are present on most roads with speed limits above 25 around here, and in business districts where the speed limit is 25, they are present on a few roads.

Using a bike lane does not preclude destination positioning, nor does it go against vehicular cycling. It's clear that most of you who disapprove of bike lanes either live in areas where you have none or they are substandard. This, I believe, disqualifies you from making informed opinions on the subject. You haven't got bike lanes so how can you possibly understand how to use them? Your bike lanes are bad so how can you possibly blanket advocate against them?

Even some clone of Galen who once took his place on this forum visited a region with excellent bike lanes and declared that he could see how nice they make riding, and he could understand how we could advocate for them. He also declared that when you have good facilities like that it makes perfect sense that you can use a bike lane AND be a vehicular cyclist.

[galen_52657]

Just to venture with a wild guess:

I will guess that less than 10% of the roads in greater Santa Barbara (interstate/limited access highways not included) have bike lanes. That would leave 90% of the area inaccessible to Diane or other cyclist too afraid to ride anyplace without a bike lane.

[sbhikes]

Just to venture with a wild guess:

I will guess that less than 10% of the roads in greater Santa Barbara (interstate/limited access highways not included) have bike lanes. That would leave 90% of the area inaccessible to Diane or other cyclist too afraid to ride anyplace without a bike lane.
Oh puleeze.

[noisebeam]

Using a bike lane does not preclude destination positioning, nor does it go against vehicular cycling. It's clear that most of you who disapprove of bike lanes either live in areas where you have none or they are substandard. This, I believe, disqualifies you from making informed opinions on the subject. You haven't got bike lanes so how can you possibly understand how to use them? Your bike lanes are bad so how can you possibly blanket advocate against them?
1. You said you ride in the BL 95% of the time and that 95% of your roads have BLs. You did not say you ride on roads with BLs 95% of the time.
2. You never responded to my post (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=3239033&postcount=346)where I indicated I have a broad experience wtih different type of facilities, including many that include BLs that meet standards. Instead you suggested I take a class or read about how to ride in BLs.

Al

[galen_52657]

She won't answer the question. She is afraid to admit that she won't venture off the bike lane.

[sbhikes]

Oh puleeze. I was just copying Al's post and turning it around. For my commute I estimate that about 75-90% of that has a bike lane or bike path. Maybe I'll do a more accurate measurement.

We do have a significant amount of roads without bike lanes. However they tend to be two-lane country-style roads. And all this whining about right/left turns. Hell, half the time a turn in that direction on my commute would send me right into the sea.

We don't have any 3 or 4 lane in each direction roads in town at all. And roads around here that you would call arterials, are usually one lane in each direction, only occasionally two, and are always striped. Plus our lanes are more generous overall than what I've seen in other areas.

So it's not that I can't go anywhere without a bike lane, it's just there's no place that isn't well accommodated to begin with.

On Saturday I went for a 60 mile bike ride and there was a bike lane almost the entire way. The only place without one was the residential neighborhood where I live, Ortega Hill Road, and a bridge where it was posted that cyclists must dismount and walk (which I ignored like everybody else.)

[noisebeam]

I looks like there were quite a few one way multilane roads in SB.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=santa+barbara,+ca&ie=UTF8&z=16&ll=34.4207,-119.700851&spn=0.009275,0.022058&t=k&om=1

Al

[Roughstuff]

Most of the roads that I ride on in my area don't have a shoulder. Where do I ride?

-D

Ya have to more specific. If they are urban areas and/or really dense suburbs, than spending money to put in shoulders if possible is money well spent. If shoulders are impossible (businesses line the road and there is only a sidewalk between you and them), then to me you are plainly and simply in an area where cycling is not an attractive form of transportation, and you'll just have to accept that.

But there must be some creative ideas and middle ground. Can the roads be converted to a system of one way streets, with one side parking and thus gaining space that would make cycling more feasible? Haven't some cities tried closing some roads to traffic entirely (on a rotating basis) to make them feasible for bicycle commuters?

To me cycling is such a priority that it determines where I live, even to some extent my choice to become self employed.

roughstuff

[sbhikes]

I looks like there were quite a few one way multilane roads in SB.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=santa+barbara,+ca&ie=UTF8&z=16&ll=34.4207,-119.700851&spn=0.009275,0.022058&t=k&om=1

Al

The one-ways have two lanes in one direction. Plus parking on each side.

This Saturday I'm riding from Ventura to Ojai and even better--I'll be on a bike path the entire way, except for the very end when we ride to the lunch spot. Really good bike paths are even better than bike lanes.

Check out this bike path (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=santa+barbara,+ca&ie=UTF8&om=1&z=16&ll=34.428611,-119.795716&spn=0.010602,0.021157&t=k) that goes to the University. The prominent light line is a creek and the bike path is the small road just above, paralleling the creek and running along the edge of the subdivision. Not an MUP. It's a bike path.

Good facilities not only make biking more pleasant, they make it a complete joy.

[Bekologist]

what's wrong with a clean bike lane?

helemt head uses them all the time when it is to his advantage to position himself in.
his method fits in partially with using a bike lane as the default position for DLLP when the bike lane is acceptable for use....head only uses it as his lane position when there ARE cars.

Bike lanes are used correctly in the same way when the cars AREN'T present.

you don't default in the travel lanes when there is an acceptable and safe lane position to the right. simple. QED. almost glaringly obvious.

[genec]

Good facilities not only make biking more pleasant, they make it a complete joy.

While I cannot disagree with that... and I do enjoy a good path from time to time... if I had to rely on using lanes or paths, I flat out could not leave my house.

The main connecting road near my house is a 35 MPH boulvard that does not contain one bike facility, and has on street parking, and varies from 2 to 3 lanes and crosses a couple of major freeways.

If I want to go anywhere, I have to take a lane and start on that street.

Anywhere else I go, I may or may not have facilities... not all areas are as bike facility "built out" as say Santa Barbra or Portland or...

Now bear in mind that San Diego was listed as the top bike friendly city in the US over 1 million in population... but there is no way this city has the bike "friendly attitude" of some cities to the north.

That's just the way it is. Facilities are nice... I fully agree... co-operative motorists are nice; but sometimes you gotta play the cards you are dealt... and they ain't always nice.

Being able to ride any street anywhere, means I don't have limits.