Vehicular Cycling (VC) - When driving, do you slow down to pass much slower traffic?

When you're driving a motor vehicle, do you ever slow down some before you pass much slower traffic, especially when the space to pass is limited?

Would you recommend that slowing down prior to passing much slower traffic is a good practice?

I did here to assess the situation (and moved right to see what the reason for the slow movement was)
I could have merged left early and passed quickly, but until I assessed the situation and determined otherwise, there was a high likelihood one of the following cars may have suddenly merged left.

youtube 9z7lurZACyM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z7lurZACyM)

Al

Black, white, and grey.

I'm grey. It depends on the situation.

Other.

Depends on the situation.

The flip side to that is, as a speed limit driver, I'm normally the one being passed. When this is the case, I maintain speed.

From the Debunking Forester thread:


Forester has nothing to with this unusual scheme [slowing down before passing much slower traffic]. It's a BF A & S Special.:rolleyes:
This "unusual scheme" is standard stuff for defensive driving (http://www.roadtripamerica.com/DefensiveDriving/Rule36.htm).


Rule 36: Beware of Stopped or Slow-Moving Vehicles

...
Use caution when approaching a slow-moving vehicle. It creates danger when vehicles are moving at different speeds in close proximity to each other. If you are flying up behind another vehicle, the risk of a collision is increased if a conflict develops, plus another driver moving at a very slow speed should cause you to think that something might be wrong, so you could expect other erratic behavior as well. Be prepared to react and slow down until you see that it is safe to go around.
(red emphasis above is mine)

I did here to assess the situation (and moved right to see what the reason for the slow movement was)
I could have merged left early and passed quickly, but until I assessed the situation and determined otherwise, there was a high likelihood one of the following cars may have suddenly merged left.

youtube 9z7lurZACyM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z7lurZACyM)

Al
Interesting that the car drivers slowed for another cyclist, and didn't merge into the adjacent lane to pass, but you did. Perhaps they were going to be turning right. That other cyclist (only seen for a moment) looked to be almost in the gutter, yet the car drivers still didn't pass. Any more insight into what was going on?

Is this when I'm on my bike?

I voted other, because there are so many different situations. Other vehicles could include cyclists, cars, horses - and the list goes on. I'll slow down if I think the situation requires it e.g. passing horse riders. On the other hand, passing a car may require an increase in speed, within the legal limit of course.

I want to be a safe, courteous, cooperative and considerate road user. Period.

Ed

Interesting that the car drivers slowed for another cyclist, and didn't merge into the adjacent lane to pass, but you did. Perhaps they were going to be turning right. That other cyclist (only seen for a moment) looked to be almost in the gutter, yet the car drivers still didn't pass. Any more insight into what was going on?

If the video is labeled correctly, that's her SAG crew - they're keeping an eye on her, no reason to pass.


I only slow down if I have to be in their lane, or if I feel that they're about to do something squirrely.

Is this when I'm on my bike?
No. When driving a motor vehicle. See the OP.

am i passing the vehicle on the left or on the shoulder? and how fast am I bicycling compared to the slow moving traffic?

am i passing the vehicle on the left or on the shoulder? and how fast am I bicycling compared to the slow moving traffic?
I don't know about your state, but it is so illegal to pass in the shoulder here.

If the video is labeled correctly, that's her SAG crew - they're keeping an eye on her, no reason to pass.

That right - title is 'Supported Touring Cyclist" and description 'Passing a touring cyclist and her SAG... Passing a touring cyclist and her SAG on a multilane arterial (more...'

If it was not clearly a SAG to me I would not have passed so closely. Thats why in the description I wrote:
"I could have merged left early and passed quickly, but until I assessed the situation and determined otherwise, there was a high likelihood one of the following cars may have suddenly merged left."

I assessed the situation as both vehicles as SAG (both had small signs too). Then I felt there was a sufficiently high likelyhood they would not suddenldy merge left in a surge of impatience.

What is strange to me is why they were riding so far to the right - obviously visibility is not an issue, but pavement quality and room to move is limited.

It was a 111F right then. I remember feeling pretty beat and thought it great to see a 'tour' along my commute - I waved. But wondered why they chose this road, there is an REI a couple miles back. I also wondered why two SAG vehicles and from where and to and why. And how far, they must have been crazy beat (unless they just started) as it was 4pm. That heat sticks till well past dark.

Al

I do for others what I would want them to do for me. I slow down unless I have enough room to pass safely. If I can merge into another lane safely without slowing, I will. If I'm passing a bike in the same very wide lane, I'll slow down unless I can pass quickly with a safe distance.

When I'm riding, I don't expect cars to slow for me if they can pass safely without slowing. But if I'm in a narrow lane, and the car can't pull into the next lane right away, I expect him to follow me slowly until he can pull over and pass safely. And so far they always have done this. I've never had one hit me because he was in such a hurry to get around me. I've had them honk at me a few times, but not often. This is why I actually enjoy riding in narrow lanes, as long as the traffic isn't extremely heavy. I feel like they're aware of me, as I'm right in front of them.

What is strange to me is why they were riding so far to the right - obviously visibility is not an issue, but pavement quality and room to move is limited.
Only one explanation for why the cyclist was riding so far right despite being followed by a SAG: (arguably bad) habit. The same habit the vast majority of cyclists are afflicted with.

am i passing the vehicle on the left or on the shoulder? and how fast am I bicycling compared to the slow moving traffic?
The ultimate question here is whether faster traffic should slow when approaching much slower traffic, including bicyclists, from behind, and, if so, under what circumstances, and when not.

oh, so this is actually about passing bicyclists and NOT cars then. interesting take on things, mr. head.

do A&S posters slow down while passing bicyclists, is that what you meant to post as a question?


there's something ultimate in your poll? wowsers. i thought it was totally car related. nothing to do with bikes at all.

I'll slow down to pass cars on my bike, because you never know what the cager is going to do. unless it looks like they are going to turn right, with their blinker on. then, i'll take the next lane to their left on my bicycle.

do i slow down while passing other bicyclists while riding my bike? it really depends on the rest of the parameters.

Do I ever slow down when passing a slower vehicle. Sure.

Do I usually slow down when passing a slower vehicle. Nope.

(red emphasis above is mine)
And the distortion is all yours too. Approaching a slow moving atypical vehicle is not the same scenario as routine passing of slower traffic on a 2 lane or multilane road. The kind of typical road conditions where you have written that you expect all passing vehicles to first slow down before passing any slower vehicle. In fact you described your bicycling wiggle waggles as an effort to force all vehicles to slow down prior to passing you on the road, regardless of any other traffic.

Doesn't expecting drivers of cars to slow down to pass a bicycle constitute special treatment? Doesn't that sort of go against the idea that we are vehicles like any other and don't need special accommodations?

Just so I understand, do you expect people to slow down when there is room enough to pass? Or are you talking about the normal kind of slowing you would do to wait until there is an opening to pass? I don't see any reason to slow down if there's room. I don't slow down to pass pedestrians on the MUP unless I can't pass them. In that case, I get behind and wait for an opening.

Only when the traffic in the other lane is unpredictable... such as this morning as I was driving by a freeway on ramp left only lane and the motorist in that LOTL suddenly swerved right before making their left turn turn. (it always baffles me how some motorists swing wide before making a turn, either right or left... where in the heck did they learn this technique).

I call those guys swinger-outers. I hate that. I've had a lot of almost run-ins with those guys. They're too unpredictable and I can't see what advantage it gives them, unless driving other people crazy is their advantage.

^^^I think they think they're Jeff Gordon or something. Or maybe it's something their dad taught them.

And the distortion is all yours too. Approaching a slow moving atypical vehicle is not the same scenario as routine passing of slower traffic on a 2 lane or multilane road. The kind of typical road conditions where you have written that you expect all passing vehicles to first slow down before passing any slower vehicle. In fact you described your bicycling wiggle waggles as an effort to force all vehicles to slow down prior to passing you on the road, regardless of any other traffic. You misunderstood. Or I wasn't clear, or both.

I do not expect them to slow down when there is plenty of passing space, such as when I'm in the outside vehicular traffic lane and they are in the adjacent lane.

I do expect them to slow down as they approach when I'm in a wide outside lane, whether or not there happens to be a bike lane or shoulder stripe demarcating the narrow margin space of the road adjacent to their lane, because they are passing relatively closely.

is this thread about cars passing cars or bikes, mr. head.

your attempts at proving something using entirely different parameters is so, oh, soo Forester-esque.

but then again, i guess you might be confusing your car for a bike once again! or is it your RV this time?

Doesn't expecting drivers of cars to slow down to pass a bicycle constitute special treatment? Doesn't that sort of go against the idea that we are vehicles like any other and don't need special accommodations?
First, we are not "vehicles", "like any other" or otherwise.

We act like drivers of vehicles, and expect to be treated accordingly.
In particularl, when we act like drivers of slow moving vehicles, we expect to be treated like drivers of slow moving vehicles, not like drivers of Ducatis.


Just so I understand, do you expect people to slow down when there is room enough to pass?
When there is plenty of room to pass safely, say 6' or more, then, no, I don't expect them to slow. Otherwise, yes.


Or are you talking about the normal kind of slowing you would do to wait until there is an opening to pass? I don't see any reason to slow down if there's room. I don't slow down to pass pedestrians on the MUP unless I can't pass them. In that case, I get behind and wait for an opening.
Good analogy.

So on a wide and fairly empty MUP with one (same-direction) person up ahead, if you can see that you can clear them with a wide margin, by moving far left, correct, no reason to slow down. But add another person coming the other way, thus blocking your ability to use the far left part of the MUP and forcing you to pass the same-direction person closely, threading the needle if you will, and slowing down is probably prudent, don't you agree?

More of this, i see.

WHY do drivers need to slow down for bikes when the bike is sharing a wide outside lane OR in another lane of traffic?

It's his thread and his poll, we all recognize the MO, but he can do what he wants here; if you don't like it don't participate.

I'm sorry, maybe I'm 'confused', but there's a large and fundamental difference between cars passing slow moving semi trucks or tractors, and cars passing bicyclists.

the thread is deliberately misleading, filled with doublespeak, and attempts to prove something about passing bikes.

FOR CLARITY, the thread title should be "do you slow to pass bicyclists while driving?" because it is murky as 20,000 leagues in here with all the 'acting like slow moving vehicles' while not being a 'vehicle' or whatever it is mr. head is posting about.

I thought the thread was about cars passing slow moving semis. OR, do i posess the same size and mass as a tractor while bicycling?

Bek,

As you know, the impetus for this poll/thread is in the debunking Forester thread, where ILTB challenged me (once again) on my contention that it is appropriate, at least in some circumstances, for faster traffic to slow prior to passing slower traffic. He challenged me on that point. It was a fair challenge. A BF poll really doesn't prove much, except the implication of his argument was that my point was unique with which almost no one agreed. So I created this poll to test his hypothesis.

According to this poll, well over half of the 20 responding so far believe it is sufficiently normal/appropriate to slow before passing slow moving traffic that they do it often or more than often. That, plus the defensive driving source I cited earlier, is sufficient to debunk ILTB's challenge, as far as I am concerned.

Whatever other "MO" you or Rando think is in play here, I have no idea what you're thinking.

I had NO idea you were attempting to debunk some other thread.

so, this thread IS about "when driving, do you slow to pass bicyclists"?

I see. I guess. I think ILTB was referencing semi trucks in the other thread. or was it tractors, driven by gorillas on the basketball court?

sorry. I guess I'm still confused as to the intent of this thread.

I apologize for being so caustic but all this debunking has left a sour taste in my water bottle.

When I'm riding my bicycle, I hardly expect to be treated like a tractor. I expect to be treated like a bicyclist. in that, some drivers will dislike my being there, regardless of my lane position or resemblance to a gorilla on a basketball court.

If this thread is genuinely about "when driving, do you slow down to pass bicyclists?" should be clearly labelled as such, without grouping me as a bicyclist in with tractors or other 'acting like slow moving vehicles' not-vehicles.

When I'M driving, i speed up to pass slow moving semi trucks, don't do much regards to passing tractors, and slow way down and pass bicyclists wide. Sometimes I 'block.'

are those the same passing situation? HARDLY.

Bek,

As you know, the impetus for this poll/thread is in the debunking Forester thread, where ILTB challenged me (once again) on my contention that it is appropriate, at least in some circumstances, for faster traffic to slow prior to passing slower traffic. He challenged me on that point. It was a fair challenge. A BF poll really doesn't prove much, except the implication of his argument was that my point was unique with which almost no one agreed. So I created this poll to test his hypothesis.

According to this poll, well over half of the 20 responding so far believe it is sufficiently normal/appropriate to slow before passing slow moving traffic that they do it often or more than often. That, plus the defensive driving source I cited earlier, is sufficient to debunk ILTB's challenge, as far as I am concerned.

Whatever other "MO" you or Rando think is in play here, I have no idea what you're thinking.
All I said was that I recognize your MO. Whenever you are 'challenged' you 'create a poll'. I've watched you do it for going on 3+ years now. So what do you have to say about that?

;) :)

PS = there's a diff btwn randya and rando...

:o

:beer:

I think this'll get a lot of use over here:

http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/expressive/soapbox.gif

:D

As you know, the impetus for this poll/thread is in the debunking Forester thread, where ILTB challenged me (once again) on my contention that it is appropriate, at least in some circumstances, for faster traffic to slow prior to passing slower traffic. He challenged me on that point. It was a fair challenge.
HH is only debunking himself and really does not need to anymore. Anyone who takes him and his polls seriously are debunking-challenged.

The qualifier "at least in some circumstances" is new and a contrived face-saver. The poll response qualifier, "regardless of how little passing space there is" to steer responses away from the "wrong" response is all about HH polling technique.

HH's contention all along had been that approaching fast traffic should slow down before passing a bicyclist, regardless of how much space was available. Another poster stated that "safe" driving also requires motorists to slow down when passing all vehicles if the speed differential was relatively high. Period. No qualifier of "regardless of how little passing space there is": No qualifier of "at least in some circumstances." The absolute dictate that safe drivers must slow down before passing bicycles of slower motor vehicles on the highway is was what was being challenged.

No matter how much space there is? So if the road I'm on is parallel to one in India I should slow down because on a cosmic level I'm passing a bicycle on a street somewhere in Hyderabad?

I'm joking. Sorry that was lame.

I still don't understand why anyone needs, wants or expects motorists to slow down for them if they are riding in the right-hand portion of the road, in a bike lane or a WOL. Thinking this is proper only inserts unnecessary conflict where it currently doesn't exist.

Here's what I think, and you can accuse me of having a tin-foil hat if you want. With a reasonably accommodating roadway, the expected outcome of the cyclist and the motorist is the same. The motorist expects he can continue along his merry way without having to change course or speed as he passes by the bicyclist. The bicyclist expects he can continue along his merry way without having to fret over the motorist as he passes because there's enough room.

But if one tries to instill in the motorist that the proper behavior for him is to slow down, even when there is no hazard by his passing at speed, now you've inserted a confict. The bicyclist now can be angry or offended at every passing motorist for not slowing down, and every passing motorist can be angry and offended by every bicyclist he sees for expecting him to.

What possible healthy outcome could we have from inserting conflict where none is necessary? Ban bikes because they get in the way of efficient transportation? Stop building bike lanes and WOLs because they just cause more trouble for motorists than they are worth? Start building only narrow lanes so that most people will never consider riding a bicycle ever again, and only "professional" cyclists will attempt it?

This sounds like something only the American Dream Coalition could think up. Another way to enlist bicyclists to advocate against themselves. Another way to exploit people's fears to nurture support pro-motorist urban sprawl.

In short, I smell something stinky in this whole idea.

AZ Law. my bold:
"D. The maximum speed provided in this section is reduced to the speed that is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and with regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing, including the following conditions:
1. Approaching and crossing an intersection or railroad crossing.
2. Approaching and going around a curve.
3. Approaching a hillcrest.
4. Traveling on a narrow or winding roadway.
5. A special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions.
E. A person shall not drive a motor vehicle at a speed that is less than the speed that is reasonable and prudent under existing conditions."

Very slow traffic in adjacent lane could be considered a special hazard if speed differential is very high and passing clearance is marginal. AZ required 3' for bikes and recommends 5'

Al

I think Diane has added a respectable dose of reality to this thread.

Yes, there is no reasonable need for cars to slow to pass bikes when bikes are in another lane. the original posters swervy lane positioning to get traffic to slow down and notice him shows his fear of traffic.

Expecting, demanding, attempting to make a car slow down when a bike is in another lane, or a safe, same lane position in a WOL is unrealistic and speaks directly against safe vehicular operation of bikes in traffic.

Mr. Head is a bit of a whack. and he states this thread was a response to a challenge, a gauntlet thrown down to his wacky lane positioning constructs? pretty dang wacky

I wonder how much the original poster actually rides his bike, versus driving. I think he sometimes thinks he is ON his bike while driving.....

Yes, there is no reasonable need for cars to slow to pass bikes when bikes are in another lane.
Generally, no, but in specific cases yes.

Should a 55mph motorist pass a 10mph cyclist riding in a BL with 3' of passing clearance?

Al

Generally, no, but in specific cases yes.

Should a 55mph motorist pass a 10mph cyclist riding in a BL with 3' of passing clearance?

Al
Why not?

Why not?
Because they don't have to and slowing to 45mph may be more courteous.
Personally I don't care.

Because they don't have to and slowing to 45mph may be more courteous.
Personally I don't care.
Would 25 mph be even more "courteous"? How about following without passing at all?

You and HH have weird expectations of overt courteous gestures from motor vehicle operators; i.e. motor vehicle operators owe some sort of gratuitous courteous gesture to all slower vehicles, (bicycle or motorized) that is expressed by unnecessary slowing down before passing. HH even recommends that cyclists weave about the road to extract this tribute of courtesy.

Wacky!:rolleyes:

Would 25 mph be even more "courteous"? How about following without passing at all?
Its a sliding scale of course. I don't expect (as in want, not in assume) any motorist to do anything except follow the law. The law calls for safe passing, the law calls for prudent speed for traffic conditions, both of these are judgment calls as well.

I don't get myself in the slowing to pass a cyclist situation often if at all. I merge excessively left instead or if insufficient pass clearance, I wait (which by the way means slowing before passing). I also don't speed ever so slowing to respectful levels is less often needed.

I don't even know what we are arguing or why. The only point I have is that slowing when passing slow vehicles is one option of several in the toolbox of safe and/or courteous behaviors. Its application depends on very specific factors.

Al

I ride on the freeway from time to time. Motorists and large trucks pass me with the normal amount of distance you would expect for a bike lane on the freeway. The pass at 65mph or more (or less if traffic is congested.) Nobody slows for me. Nobody slows for little kids riding with their dads on the freeway either. I wouldn't even slow for little kids riding with their dads on the freeway. Doing so would cause more of a hazard than just driving along normally.

I ride on the freeway from time to time. Motorists and large trucks pass me with the normal amount of distance you would expect for a bike lane on the freeway. The pass at 65mph or more (or less if traffic is congested.) Nobody slows for me. Nobody slows for little kids riding with their dads on the freeway either. I wouldn't even slow for little kids riding with their dads on the freeway. Doing so would cause more of a hazard than just driving along normally.
What is the passing clearance?
Al

I don't even know what we are arguing or why.
The issue is HH's recommended lane swerving techniques until he extracts a "courteous" slow down gesture from motorists who have the misfortune to be approaching him from the rear.

No, in fact I do not.

What is the passing clearance?
Al
Here is a photo:
http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~pengcal2/Biking/Santa%20Barbara%20to%20Santa%20Monica/images/Biking%20to%20SM%20026_jpg.jpg
Let me explain what you see. On the left, the right lane of the freeway. Next over, the bike lane, Directly in front of the person who took the photo, the no-parking zone (some people ride there instead of the bike lane). To the right, the parking zone.

On the other side of the freeway it's about the same clearance but without the no-parking zone and no parking.

Would you really expect motorists to slow down for people riding on the freeway in the bike lane (and not in the no-parking zone like this guy)?

I put other - If I am passing a horse and buggy or a tractor, and I am going into an opposing lane (two lane hwy, passing allowed), I would probably not slow down.

If I am going into another lane going the same way (4 lane hwy, passing allowed) it's a bad idea to slow down as you go into the fast lane.

If there is not enough room to pass, then I slow down and possibly lane share (2 lane hwy, passing not allowed - passing cyclist or pedestrian on shoulder, etc), so as not to buzz someone while going at 100 km/h (we're talking rural conditions here).

If there is not enough room to pass/lane share I slow down, stay behind cyclist/tractor/pedestrian/horse and buggy/just horse, until an opportunity to pass presents itself <pray no semi comes from behind at 100km/h>