Google sponsored links
Ever since a SUV driver yelled at me to “Share the road” and get out of his way I have been thinking about better ways to get the message across. Typical signage in MD is a picture of a bike with the words “Share the Road” below which reads as “Bikes share the road” which is not exactly the best message we want to convey to the motoring public.
So I came up with the following concept art for “Share the Road” as I think it better illustrates that bikes and cars cannot share the same lane width. The idea would be to put this on bumper stickers or on other types of ads.
31601
Comments?
Note: The art is a hack of something TransAlt did.
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 tend to agree that Share the Road tends to be interpreted as:
"cyclist will giveway to roadhog motorists."
I am not sure your sign helps either, as it seems to be an indicator for motorists to push cyclists off the road. I know the slash should negate that... but...
The only sign I have ever seen that makes it somewhat clear is this:http://home.swbell.net/mpion/usefulllaneSF.jpg
And even that Change Lanes to Pass can be ambiguous to some motorists.
I think it would be better to have the side profiles of a short line of cars and bikes. Like bike car bike car bike car. To show that bikes are legitimate traffic. Might be too long for a sign though.
It's cute, but it could be interpreted as "No Bicycles".
Honestly... it kinda looks like it would make people run bikers off the road because it looks humorous to do so.
The picture Gene posted most clearly gets the point across over anything else I've seen.
In Pittsburgh we have some yellow diamond "Share the Road" signs with a dotted line down the middle and a bike on one side and a car on the other. I think anyway. Maybe my memory is bad.
We have these signs in Texas
HumanCar, I can see how you intend your sign to be read...but I think a lot of motorists will take it to mean, "Cyclists stay out of the lane or you'll get run off the road."
I much prefer "Bicycles in Road" to "Share the Road." STR is just too ambiguous, it's not going to change anyone's beliefs. If someone believes that bicyles don't belong in travel lanes, they can interpret it to mean that bikes have to get out of the way of cars. Yellow road signs are supposed to be cautions; BIR cautions motorists that they might have to slow or leave their lane. It's totally unclear what STR is cautioning about.
I also believe that STR is prefered by transportation officials because it is ambiguous; it allows them to say they are doing something for cyclists, without explicitly endorsing the idea of riding in the travel lane. That's a controversial idea, and political types tend to shy away from controversy.
I tend to agree that Share the Road tends to be interpreted as:
"cyclist will giveway to roadhog motorists."
I am not sure your sign helps either, as it seems to be an indicator for motorists to push cyclists off the road. I know the slash should negate that... but...
The only sign I have ever seen that makes it somewhat clear is this:http://home.swbell.net/mpion/usefulllaneSF.jpg
And even that Change Lanes to Pass can be ambiguous to some motorists.
I like this better than STR.
I almost got into a fist fight with a butthole in a pick-up truck, because he too honestly thought "Share The Road" was meant as a message to cyclists. Due to his interpretation, he started honking his horn for me to get out of his way as I took the lane at a stop sign. Then he proceeded to gun his way around me, doing at least 40 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. I happened to have a camera with me at the time, so I took pictures of his vehicle and him when I caught up with him. He didn't like that and that's when we almost got into it right in the middle of the street. He was old... I would've kicked his ass. :rolleyes:
In general, signs are worthless. Most traffic engineers now consider them to be "visual pollution".
They clutter up the visual environment, and are ignored by at least 70% of drivers.
He didn't like that and that's when we almost got into it right in the middle of the street. He was old... I would've kicked his ass. :rolleyes:
Never get in a fight with an old guy. If you lose you look like a loser, if you win you look like a jerk. It's a no win situation.
Clearly, we need to educate drivers in the country far better than we do. It's not just bicycles, it's everything. So many drivers are completely clueless.
Az
Never get in a fight with an old guy. If you lose you look like a loser, if you win you look like a jerk. It's a no win situation.
Az
I was being facetious.
the problem with the "SHARE THE ROAD"slogan is asshat drivers misinterpret it to mean cyclists need to share the road with THEM, and get out of their way. Several drivers have gotten all huffy in their cages, screaming, "SHARE THE ROAD" at me.
"Bikes allowed full use of lane", or for a pro-cycling ad campaign "Bikes BELONG"
How about motorized vehicles yield to bikes??
I think "Bikes allowed full use of lane" only applies in certain situations where the road might be very narrow or dangerous. What's needed is a "Share the road" message that won't be misinterpreted.
How about motorized vehicles yield to bikes??
I think this gives too much to bikes. Particullarly in situations where the motor vehicle may have right-of-way, or the cyclist may be doing something illegal, like running a redlight.
I think "Bikes allowed full use of lane" only applies in certain situations where the road might be very narrow or dangerous. What's needed is a "Share the road" message that won't be misinterpreted.
Bikes should be, here they are, allowed constant full use of the lane. Sure, the law says as far right as prcticable, but the exceptions:
1. When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
2. When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
3. When reasonably necessary to avoid any condition, including, but not limited to, a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, animal, surface hazard, or substandard-width lane, that makes it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge. For the purposes of this subsection, a "substandard-width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and another vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
make this the cyclists call. These situations and hazards are not constant nor consistant, but are dynamic, not only occurring in narrow or otherwise hazardous road conditions.
Now, if a cyclist decides not to use the full lane, that's up to them and how they perceive the situation at hand.
The picture Gene posted most clearly gets the point across over anything else I've seen.
I agree 100% but it’s not in the MUTCD so there is a snowball chance in h*** that we can get that in MD. But I am thinking more bumper sticker type of application and that sign loses impact if it’s only on a bumper sticker.
Shiznaz’s idea of silhouettes is kind of cute but I don’t know if the motorISTs will get it.
How about “Share the road not the lane”?
the problem with the "SHARE THE ROAD"slogan is asshat drivers misinterpret it to mean cyclists need to share the road with THEM, and get out of their way. Several drivers have gotten all huffy in their cages, screaming, "SHARE THE ROAD" at me.
Response: Didn’t we used to play together when we were little?
Driver: [looking puzzled]
Continuing: I remember one kid who thought sharing meant everything was his.
How about “Share the road not the lane”?
or
Share the Road
Take turns with the lane
How about "Play Nice And Share Otherwise The Government Won't Let Anybody Use The Roads." It's the PNASOTGWLAUTR campaign. Think it'll catch on?
My serious comments: Bicycles allowed full use of lane is about the only saying that comes close to letting drivers know that they'll have to burn an extra calorie and turn the wheel 5 degrees to change lanes and pass. Share the Road sounds too much like "Cyclists move over" (honestly my interpretation back in high school and that of a few motorists I've encountered) and Bikes in Road sounds like "Look out, bicycle obstacle course up ahead."
I remember one kid who thought sharing meant everything was his.
That's what my ex-wife used to think.
I also believe that STR is prefered by transportation officials because it is ambiguous; it allows them to say they are doing something for cyclists, without explicitly endorsing the idea of riding in the travel lane. That's a controversial idea, and political types tend to shy away from controversy.
Ding ding ding. I agree completely. Just like how (at least in MD) they seem to be adding completely useless and poorly designed "Bike Lanes" in various areas. They don't serve any useful purpose but they allow politicians to claim they have "added X miles of bike lanes" in the state.
[edit]
To the OP, yea I am not digging the sign. The only one I really like is Genec's. I never thought about the "share the road" being misinterpreted. Personally I think someone has to be pretty dense to do so.
-D
The graphic makes it look like it's ok to run a cyclist off the road.
Those motorists who completely mis-interpret "Share The Road" are so glass half empty types. No wonder there's so much road rage...
What we really need is enough active, fit people on bikes out on the roads every day so that Share the Road signage becomes superfluous...sigh, perhaps in my next lifetime, or maybe I'll move to someplace smart (like Europe).
I was being facetious.
And that was a joke.
Az
What we really need is enough active, fit people on bikes out on the roads every day so that Share the Road signage becomes superfluous...sigh, perhaps in my next lifetime, or maybe I'll move to someplace smart (like Europe).
Or just plain people out on bikes every day. Active and fit really doesn't matter much to me. At least they won't be hogging the whole lane with their 7 foot wide car.
Or just plain people out on bikes every day. Active and fit really doesn't matter much to me. At least they won't be hogging the whole lane with their 7 foot wide car.
Good point...though for personal reasons, I'd like to see more fit women in lycra when I ride. :D
And if there were more folks out on bikes, they would be getting fit, and (hopefully) some of them would be losing weight so the world wouldn't see all Americans as fat slobs.
I think it looks like it's endorsing the squeeze on cyclists. Perhaps if you made the red circle-slash thicker, it'd help. I don't think thickening that line will make it ideal, though.
I think the "Allowed Full Use of Lane" sign is great for streets without bike lanes. I'd personally like to see more "No motor vehicles allowed in bikelane" signs. I'll try to get pics of one of those soon.
I think it looks like it's endorsing the squeeze on cyclists. Perhaps if you made the red circle-slash thicker, it'd help. I don't think thickening that line will make it ideal, though.
I think the "Allowed Full Use of Lane" sign is great for streets without bike lanes. I'd personally like to see more "No motor vehicles allowed in bikelane" signs. I'll try to get pics of one of those soon.
Or, do what London has done to reduce auto traffic in their city center...mark a bunch of streets as "No Motor Vehicles Allowed".
Yah, I think the graphic could just as easily be interpreted as "no bicycles" by a non-cyclist.
Drivers can't even figure out "Keep right except to pass", so you've gotta somehow be 100% unambiguous with them. :)
I can see it as, "Don't squeeze cyclists," but it could easily be seen as, "No Bicycles Allowed."
:D
Oh, well, it's not us, its them!
;)
But I like the idea of stark simplicity. Signage is most effective if brief and attention-grabbing, because a scanning eye will skip over most it does not care to see, then when it stops on something "bright and shiny," it only pauses a moment before moving on.
I like, "Yield to Bicycles," but that probably wouldn't fly. :rolleyes: Or maybe, "Watch for Bicycles"
How about a simple and consise: "Make Room For Bikes"
It does not say yield, it does not say we get the whole lane... it does say "share," but in a more aggressive way.
How about a simple and consise: "Make Room For Bikes"
It does not say yield, it does not say we get the whole lane... it does say "share," but in a more aggressive way.
Maybe we need to spell it out for them even more
"Make Room for Bikes, they are helping your gas prices"
-D
"Yield to Bikes You Gas-Guzzling, Lard-*ss, Girlie Man"
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
MAKE ROOM FOR BIKES
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
The graphic makes it look like it's ok to run a cyclist off the road.
This should get the message across. :D
http://www.lamanchadesign.com/images/Share the road.jpg
^^^ time for the futher adventures of Spike Bike.
http://members.aol.com/clubnbc/spike_1.htm
What we really need is enough active, fit people on bikes out on the roads every day so that Share the Road signage becomes superfluous...sigh,
On the northeast side of Baltimore, this is my quest, as I -will- take the entire lane, as the circumstances dictate, whether there is a sign or not.
it look slike no bikes allowed on the road.
Work on something though as if you come up with something good it will be popular.
something like "bikes allowed full lane" is probably the simplest to understand and straight to the point. Anything else leaves it up to drivers to think they get everything.
Thank you all for your comments they have been very helpful.
I like this
Arizona revised statue 28-735
I like this
Arizona revised statue 28-735
Why does the cyclist look like he is falling over, or turning off the roadway?
I like this
Arizona revised statue 28-735
I don't particularly like it.
I think the share the road message needs to be separate from the 3ft passing clearance law.
Share the road should show bicycle and motorvehicle using road equally, that is one in front of the other.
The passing law should show similar as your graphic does, but without cyclist falling over, and with reference to curb, showing cyclist at least as far from curb as motorist passing clearance.
al
I don't particularly like it.
I think the share the road message needs to be separate from the 3ft passing clearance law.
Share the road should show bicycle and motorvehicle using road equally, that is one in front of the other.
The passing law should show similar as your graphic does, but without cyclist falling over, and with reference to curb, showing cyclist at least as far from curb as motorist passing clearance.
al
Well if you had a passing law for bicycles, then wouldn't the bicycle already be allowed on the road?
So what would be the point of having two signs. Considering your sending a message of share the road.
Second if you
If had to give them three feet to pass safely, and then if the cyclist is in the middle of the lane that would renforce what the sign says. It would even enforce it in a WCL.
Third if you look at the law it will back up what I just said above. Which Motorists should already know. Why we have to point it out in the first place is beyond me. ( I know you know the law)
A. When overtaking and passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction, a person driving a motor vehicle shall exercise due care by leaving a safe distance between the motor vehicle and the bicycle of not less than three feet until the motor vehicle is safely past the overtaken bicycle.
Yea ok I will send that msg to my graphic designer about the falling bicycle and the curb, I will also add some arrows to the 3 ft line. :)
Wheel, I like it. Here is my revision:
32524
Al; As far as showing one vehicle in front of the other, there are few problems when the motorV is in front of the cyclist it’s when the motorV is behind the cyclists problems arise, one in particular problem is when the motorV tries to pass.
Well if you had a passing law for bicycles, then wouldn't the bicycle already be allowed on the road?
So what would be the point of having two signs. Considering your sending a message of share the road.
Second if you
If had to give them three feet to pass safely, and then if the cyclist is in the middle of the lane that would renforce what the sign says. It would even enforce it in a WCL.
Third if you look at the law it will back up what I just said above. Which Motorists should already know. Why we have to point it out in the first place is beyond me. ( I know you know the law)
A. When overtaking and passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction, a person driving a motor vehicle shall exercise due care by leaving a safe distance between the motor vehicle and the bicycle of not less than three feet until the motor vehicle is safely past the overtaken bicycle.
I am not suggesting two signs. My only concern is putting the words 'share the road' on a sign that shows a cyclist close to the gutter. Too many motorist believe that share the road means cyclist should ride far to the right. I do not like any signs that re-enforce that belief.
to give an idea... the attached edit of THC's graphic gives a curb reference that places cyclist closer to center of lane
Al
The only sign I have ever seen that makes it somewhat clear is this:http://home.swbell.net/mpion/usefulllaneSF.jpg
Does anyone make or sell jerseys and shirts like the sign anywhere online? I'd buy one!
ding, ding, ding.... idea for someone to make a few bucks since I'm too lazy to do it myself!
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.