Advocacy & Safety - Taking the lane when too narrow

The purpose of this is not a flame thread, just a question. And I don't intend this as a vc/VC/ac debate, either. If the mods feel differently, they're welcome to move this to the VC subforum.

My question is about taking the lane. I often take the lane, so I'm not averse to the idea. And it is ultimately the individual cyclist who ought to decide the safest method for him, as long as it does not put the other users of the road in danger or unnecessary delay.

But here's my scenario:

Let's say we have a 10' wide right lane in a multi-lane road. Even with a compact car, I think most of us would not want to be passed quickly by a driver who stays entirely within the lane.

Some people advocate taking the middle of the lane.

The take-the-lane argument is often, "If you stay too far right, you're only encouraging drivers to buzz you."

I imagine that if we were to hug the curb (or ride really close to a row of parked cars) we might encourage people to pass quickly and more closely. (I think this is not just because they think they have enough room, but also because they feel they can count on a cyclist that hugs the curb to stay there.) But this doesn't affect me much, because my default is to give myself at least 2-3' from the curb. (There are exceptions. I will allow less space if I am filtering slowly forward, and allow more space if I am going fast downhill, and I will usually take the lane or allow at least a car-width to my right at intersections. But 2-3' is my general default).

So my response to the argument "If you stay too far right, you're only encouraging drivers to buzz you.":

1 - You have at least 2-3' to your right which you can move to if a driver is about to buzz you. I see the driver approaching too closely in my mirror, I hold my place at a safe distance from the curb, and if the a55hat doesn't move over before passing, I have space to the right to avoid getting buzzed or clipped. I memorize the license plate, and keep riding.

2 - What exactly prevents a driver from buzzing you if you take the lane? The driver just do a partial lane change and buzz you. It's happened to me as often as I've been buzzed not taking the lane. I find that most drivers do not buzz me.

You might say that this strategy is not remarkably different from taking the lane. In fact, in 10' wide lanes with parked cars, it's almost identical behavior. However, what happens when the lane gets a little wider, and is now hard to evaluate as "too narrow" to share? As roads get wider, the second cyclist continues to ride at least 2-3' from the curb. The take-the-lane cyclist may have a tendency to continue this habit, even when it is not entirely necessary. And then the cyclist gets slapped with an unfair ticket that is difficult to defend.

To each his/her own. Do what you believe is safest.

how narrow is TOO narrow?

I'm adverse to sharing even 14 foot lanes; give me 18 feet, and maybe I'm going to move over to the right a little bit.

I like the left edge of the lane in normal lanes. except if I'm in the far left lane of a one way, then it's right edge.

Unless of course, I've determine the right side of the lane makes more sense.

Drivers buzz riders regardless of lane position or hand waving (wringing), hed nods or buttwaggles to signal vehicularity.

I was buzzed by a driver downtown yesterday as we wove the traffic dance- he let me know at a red light further up he was upset I was breaking the speed limit on my bike,cager barked out his window "you need to do the speeed limit" (ohh, 32 in a 30) thereby justifying his speeding to pass me and the close pass.

Here's how I see it based on these two scenarios. I'm still trying to determine which one is the better of the two evils. This is purely my own opinion based on my limited (two years) of commuting.

1) Hug the right. You'll get buzzed by cars staying within the lane and attempting to squeeze pass you.

2) Take the lane. You'll get buzzed less often, but when you do get buzzed, it's by aggressive drivers who want to "teach you a lesson."

Did you read my post?

Those aren't the only 2 choices. My suggestion was not to hug the curb.

Also, I am aware that it is legal to take the lane in case of substandard width lane. However, there is no clear-cut rule about what is too narrow. While most would agree that 10' is too narrow, and that 14'+ is probably wide enough to share, the 10-14' lanes are a grey zone for most.

Also, in the scenario I provide, if one legally took the lane, one would NOT have to pull over for 5 or more cars. That doesn't apply to multi-lane roads.

when I'm riding 14' lanes at speed, they are definetly NOT safe enough to share with motorists. 14 feet is a marginally wide lane. 3 feet of clearance to the right, 2 feet of bicyclist, (hopefully) 3 feet of passing space, leaves 6 feet for automobile traffic. 14' lanes are NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO SHARE.

If I'm doing 7 MPH up a steep hill, then yeah, 14' is wide enough to share.

It's tough sitation, bordering on no-win IMHO. If you hug the curb, drivers will buzz you. If you take the lane, you'll slow down traffic and drivers will try to pass and buzz you anyway. Solution? Find another route. Seriously. It's not really worth your life.

If that's not possible, well...I saw one cyclist do something I thought was at first crazy insane, but upon further reflection struck me as very gutsy and maybe even smart. He rode all the way to the left, right next to oncoming traffic. Drivers are conditioned not to move or drift into oncoming traffic so the natural inclination was to shy a little bit to the right (for cars in both directions), giving the cyclist more than enough breathing room. And, it didn't slow down traffic in either direction.

I think a larger problem with 10 foot lanes is the bicycling populace as a whole.

Zeytoun, you might know to not hug the curb, and I know not to hug the curb, but presenting 10' lanes on high speed roads and considering that ample for bicyclists, because bicyclists won't hug the curb, is the fallacy of 10 foot lanes on multi lane roads as bicycling friendly.

10' wide 3' into lane is inside right tire track. That qualifies as centerish to me which is most often adocated for vs. the alternate of far right.

I do find that if I ride full center (if road surface conditions permit) or left tire track that far more drivers will earlier merge left to pass and pehaps since they don't feel as 'hindered' they more often tend to use the full next lane.

There of course remain the few driver who don't merge left early and instead slow down and get close. With these drivers comunication by looking back or with slowing hand signals can reduce their tendency to close pass.

Al

presenting 10' lanes on high speed roads and considering that ample for bicyclists, because bicyclists won't hug the curb, is the fallacy of 10 foot lanes on multi lane roads as bicycling friendly.
That's not what I'm saying, Bek. On high speed roads I prefer bike lanes, no on street parking, and few intersections.

I don't mind 10' lanes on a multi-lane with a 25mph limit.

The core of what I'm saying is that (a) if you position yourself a safe distance from the curb then (b) is it really necessary to take the lane as a default.

Positioning yourself a safe distance from the curb in a 10' wide lane pretty much means taking the lane, simply because being a safe distance from the curb will plop you just about in the middle of the lane.

What I'm questioning is whether riding in the center of a lane that is any safer then riding a safe distance from the curb on lanes that are in between "definitely too narrow" and "definitely wide enough".

Say for example Bek, you ride 23mph. At that speed, I would suspect that you would want to be farther from the curb then my 2-3' (which is based on my 15-18mph cycling). At 23mph, I would probably be comfortable at 5' or so from the curb.

So how do you position yourself in different size lanes? Between intersections, at that speed, on multi-lane roads that are 35mph+, my position would be pretty much like this:

10' lane - middle to slight left of lane, regardless of speed limit
12' lane - 5' or so from the curb
14' lane - 5' or so from the curb
17' lane - 5' or so from the curb

There are certainly situations where I would take the lane, I'm just trying to show my default thinking. Is that how you decide your position?

When the cyclist is in the center of the lane, more motorist move into the next lane giving the cyclist more room.

If the lane is too narrow to share, then what is the difference between the motorist moving left 1-3 feet into the other lane when the cyclist is 2-3' from the curb vs
the motorist completely changing lanes to pass when the cyclist is in the center of the lane.
In both cases, the motorist needs to check the next lane clear first and I prefer the extra room I get when the motorist completely changes lanes.

I get buzzed less when taking the lane. I take the lane every chance I get. You get the idea about what I think cagers can do if they don't like it....

I think it has to do with a machismo power-struggle that shows I have more ballz than the cager.

LOL

First, good topic.

The answer, I believe, comes from looking at it from the driver's perspective, and what we want to convey to drivers approaching from behind in our lane. Noisebeam and CB HI have already touched on this, but I want to make it clearer.

I believe our goal is to make it clear, in no uncertain terms, that sharing the lane (fully) to pass us is not an option (that overtaking drivers will have to encroach into the adjacent lane to pass). And we want them to get this message sooner rather than later.

There is a point of diminishing returns, but starting at the right edge each position 6" further left generally conveys the above message clearer and sooner. Exactly where the point of diminishing returns is depends on the road and various conditions, but in general I find it is not reached until you're at least as far left as the center point between the left and right tire tracks. Beyond that, moving further left might still help in some cases, but usually not. But time after time I have found a significant difference in terms of conveying the message clearer and sooner by being near the center rather than even between center and right tire track.

The two clips in this slide (http://cyclistview.com/inclusivepdintro/slide22.htm), by the way, illustrate what I'm talking about.

The two clips in this slide (http://cyclistview.com/inclusivepdintro/slide22.htm), by the way, illustrate what I'm talking about.

Was the first clip considered an unsafe pass?

It seems to me that the truck gave him enough room.

That's not what I'm saying, Bek. On high speed roads I prefer bike lanes, no on street parking, and few intersections.

I don't mind 10' lanes on a multi-lane with a 25mph limit.

The core of what I'm saying is that (a) if you position yourself a safe distance from the curb then (b) is it really necessary to take the lane as a default.

Positioning yourself a safe distance from the curb in a 10' wide lane pretty much means taking the lane, simply because being a safe distance from the curb will plop you just about in the middle of the lane.

What I'm questioning is whether riding in the center of a lane that is any safer then riding a safe distance from the curb on lanes that are in between "definitely too narrow" and "definitely wide enough".

Say for example Bek, you ride 23mph. At that speed, I would suspect that you would want to be farther from the curb then my 2-3' (which is based on my 15-18mph cycling). At 23mph, I would probably be comfortable at 5' or so from the curb.

So how do you position yourself in different size lanes? Between intersections, at that speed, on multi-lane roads that are 35mph+, my position would be pretty much like this:

10' lane - middle to slight left of lane, regardless of speed limit
12' lane - 5' or so from the curb
14' lane - 5' or so from the curb
17' lane - 5' or so from the curb

There are certainly situations where I would take the lane, I'm just trying to show my default thinking. Is that how you decide your position?
To answer in these terms, I have two positions in most cases: the primary position where I am by default, and the secondary position where I ride to facilitate passing of me. I also tend to position myself relative to the left edge, rather than the right edge of the lane.

10' lane - primary: 4-5' from LEFT edge of lane. secondary: 7' from LEFT edge.
12' lane - primary: 4-5' from LEFT edge of lane. secondary: 8' from LEFT edge.
14' lane - primary: 4-5' from LEFT edge of lane. secondary: 7-10' from LEFT edge of lane.
17' lane - primary: 4-5' from LEFT edge of lane. secondary: about 3' right of traffic; 12-13' from LEFT edge of lane.

In each case I only use the secondary position when it's necessary, safe and reasonable to allow faster traffic to pass by at least partially encroaching in the lane.

Thus, the secondary position in narrow lanes is rarely used, generally only if it's a 2 lane road, especially if it's on an uphill grade, and the motorist behind has already slowed.

I would like to see others (Bek, AL, CB HI, etc) answer in this detailed format.

You'll also get the people that do the half-assed lane change, where they'll keep one tire on your lane, as if taking the other lane is just way too difficult. ;)

I would think however it's more of being assertive, not that the driver recognizes you as a vehicle. Your giving him no choice... this doesn't educate him, but really, you can't educate most of these people anyway.

Curbs make me uneasy, so I like to take more of the lane.

Was the first clip considered an unsafe pass?

It seems to me that the truck gave him enough room.
It was 2.5' at best (less than the 3'/1 meter legally mandated minimum where one is specified) attained only because the overtaking vehicle was a mini pickup. A driver of a wider vehicle would make it even tighter.

Again, the point is you want to make it clear, as soon as possible, then you don't want them passing you like this, and that they should plan on changing lanes or slowing down.

You'll also get the people that do the half-assed lane change, where they'll keep one tire on your lane, as if taking the other lane is just way too difficult. ;)

I would think however it's more of being assertive, not that the driver recognizes you as a vehicle. Your giving him no choice... this doesn't educate him, but really, you can't educate most of these people anyway.
Right. It's not about educating anyone. It's about getting passed safely and minimizing driver surprise.

Having said that, I think when cyclists ride in ways that invite close passes, that drivers (and cyclists) might get immunized from being concerned about doing it. Presumably discouraging it might help "education" in the other direction.

[SIZE="1"]
2 - What exactly prevents a driver from buzzing you if you take the lane? The driver just do a partial lane change and buzz you. It's happened to me as often as I've been buzzed not taking the lane. I find that most drivers do not buzz me.



I also find I don't have problems with most drivers.

As to what prevents a driver from 'buzzing' you, nothing, no matter where you ride in the lane. But the vast majority of drivers, even those who people here say buzzed them do not buzz cyclists. They may pass too close, even dangerously close, but they really are not buzzing riders, that is an act of intent. (OK in some areas one might claim without excessive exageration that many pickup drivers do buzz).

But if the vast majority are not really buzzing as I assert then taking enough of the lane that they can not share the lane with you then since they are already forced to change lanes then they might as well give some room. I would point out that when this happens it is a good time to sit up a bit. Especially if it is a two lane road they may end up cutting back into the lane quickly. This is rarely with intent to do anything to the cyclist, but is often enough with reckless disregard for a cyclists safety.

Right. It's not about educating anyone. It's about getting passed safely and minimizing driver surprise.

Having said that, I think when cyclists ride in ways that invite close passes, that drivers (and cyclists) might get immunized from being concerned about doing it. Presumably discouraging it might help "education" in the other direction.

Well it seems to be a huge deal, cyclists getting into shouting matches at red lights "educating" car drivers. May not be you, but I see way more posts about cyclists that can't control themselves than I'd like to. :p


For me, it's more about not being so close to the curb than worrying about drivers buzzing me, you'll just buzzed no matter what every once in awhile.

Why don't you want them passing you like that if it's not scary, not dangerous, and safe?

I addressed in this JoeJack's ticket thread. Might as well copy it here too....



I love the dramatic "squeeze share" nonsense and the "mini pickup" qualifier. The way that you try to twist a simple, common and safe pass as something that should be controlled and discouraged is very funny. I can't believe that you guys are so afraid of being passed by cars like that. Really, it speaks volumes about the load of fear that you carry with you when you ride on the streets.

If there is truly nothing "scary or dangerous or unsafe about the passes" then why are you now characterizing them "squeeze share" passes and as something that should be discouraged?



It was a simple pass. It was smooth traffic. The cyclists were passed safely and the traffic flow was not interrupted, nor was the traffic flow disturbed by the driver having to adjust laterally simply because some fearful cyclist is afraid of cars passing them with 2.5+ feet of clearance.



I am continually amazed at how fearful you are of riding in traffic. There was nothing exceptional about the situation in clip #1. It was not dangerous nor unsafe.

If what you are preaching accurately reflects 'VC" then it sure reeks of wacky cultism based upon irrational fears.

It's not "VC". Many vehicular cycling advocates are fine with close passes like that, not the least of which is John Forester. His own Effective Cycling video from the early 90s demonstrates close passes like that. He even shares narrow lanes in the middle of the road during merge passes (he does a 2-step lane change: left edge to right edge, right edge to left edge). Other vehicular cyclists, like those depicted in the video tend to be more assertive about lane control.

Most of us are old enough to remember when hardly anyone even noticed much less complained about cigarette smoke. There was no such thing as a no smoking section in restaurants when I was a kid, much less no smoking at all in restaurants (not to mention bars, and now even beaches, at least in San Diego). Yet we ate at restaurants. Everyone did. It wasn't an issue in the 60s and 70s.

But as awareness about the ultimate harm of inhaling secondary cigarette smoke grew, so did the noticing of it. Pretty soon those of us who weren't bothered by cigarette smoke at all for years, now couldn't stand it. Our tolerance changed dramatically.

I liken close passes to cigarette smoke: one's tolerance of it is almost totally a function of how "inappropriate" one believes the related behavior is.

Taking in a few breaths of cigarette smoke isn't going to hurt anyone. Yet most of us are not tolerant of it, because we have come to believe that breathing it in repeatedly is ultimately damaging. Thus our tolerance for breathing practically any of it is very low.

Similarly, one particular close pass probably isn't going to hurt anyone. But for most of us who are, shall we say, less tolerant of it, the intolerance stems from a belief that the common practice of close passes of bicyclists by motor vehicle drivers is ultimately damaging. Thus our tolerance for just about any close passing is very low.

Now, given that you want to reduce the incidence of close passing, using a more assertive lane position is probably the most effective means to achieve it. That's the main thing the video clips demonstrate. If you don't understand the point of inhibiting close passes, then it's not going to make much sense.

From JoeJack's ticket thread (let's continue the discussion here, since it's more appropriate in this thread).



Less tolerant = fearful. That's easy enough to see. How are safe passes that aren't dangerous "damaging"?
One apparently safe close pass is not damaging, just as one apparently safe inhale of cig smoke is not damaging.

Cig smoke is different in that there is arguably infinitesimal damage with each inhale, not one breath of which alone is damaging in and of itself. It's the cumulative effective of breathing in cig smoke time after time over long periods of time that is damaging.

Close passes are different in that they're not infinitesimally damaging. But, each one puts the cyclist at a tiny risk. Over time, cumulatively, the tiny risks begin to add up. It's like playing Russian roulette with a hypothetical gun with 100,000 chambers and only one bullet. Any one pull of the trigger is reaonably safe. But if you sit there and repeatedly pull the trigger over and over, day after day, week afer week, year after year, sooner or later it's pretty likely for your number to come up. Hence, understanding this makes the rational person intolerant of playing Russian Roulette, even one round with a gun with 100,000 chambers.




The pass was not dangerous or unsafe, according to you. Why do you feel that you have to "control" motorists who are passing you safely?
See above. Same reason I seek to avoid inhaling cig smoke, and avoid games of Russian Roulette, no matter how many chambers.

It's a small risk, but a risk nonetheless, a risk I'd rather avoid exposing myself too, especially repeatedly. Thus, I ride in a manner that minimizes my exposure to it.

Sorry Serge, I'm not interested in playing along with your control games. My replies are where they belong, right in there with the relevant context.
If you don't want to consolidate two parallel discussions, that's fine. I just thought we were highjacking JJ's thread, and our discussion is more approriate in this thread. But if you prefer I post in both threads, I will.

Anyway, from that thread:


I cannot imagine living with such irrational fears.

The irrational fears do explain your odd behavior when riding, and when discussing riding in this forum though.
You can call them irrational if you like, I really don't care.

I just recognize that repeated exposure to low risk events with potentially high severity consequences that are easy to mitigate are best to minimize, when reasonably possible to do so.

Examples of relatively low risk events with potentially high severity consequences and fairly straightforward mitigation include:
running with scissors
playing with matches
inhaling secondary cig smoke
pointing a gun at someone without intending to pull the trigger, even if you think the gun is not loaded
driving in a car without a seat belt
riding a bike without a helmet
rock climbing higher than 5' or so without protection
Multi-day backpacks without appropriate first aid equipment
Drinking and driving (the vast, vast majority of drivers who drink get to their destination without incident)
etc.
and, yes, riding a bicycle in a manner that that does not discourage passing by motorists with clearance of 3' or less.

My deal with taking the lane is that me and a couple million of my closest friends have been not taking the lane over the course of the last handful of decades, and that seems to work reasonably well. There is the argument that taking the lane is safer, but as no one has come up with empirical evidence of it, it remains mere opinion -- and distinctly minority opinion, at that.

So the argument behind taking the lane is that it reduces close passes and "right hooks", and that it sends the message that bicyclists have a right to the road. The counter argument is that I've been avoiding close passes and "right hooks" without taking the lane, so as long as the discussion remains in the realm of anecdote rather than empiricism, it's awfully hard for me understand why I need to start riding in front of cars when I get along fine without riding in front of cars. And I have a very hard time swallowing the argument that interfering with other road users is sending any message other than "Look at me! I'm an A-hole!"

And then, of course, there are the inumerable threads put up by people who have suffered unpleasant consequences resulting from blocking traffic. We even get videotape of angry "revenge" buzzes and verbal confrontations. Not to mention the guy who got ticketed.

And finally, an awful lot of folks have responded to my stuff by claiming that I must live in some kind of bicycle heaven, that I can ride on the shoulder without getting buzzed and honked at and constantly exchanging unpleasantries with motorized strangers. Well, I've lived and ridden all over the world, and that makes me wonder what kind of hell you guys call home, that you can't swing a leg over a bike without it being a battle for your rights, dignity, and life.

IMHO:
Six you and your friends don't need to take the lane, do what feels safe for you, I know there is nothing more dangerous to me than FEELING IN DANGER. When I'm cramped to a curb, I am more likely to have an issue just because I feel unsafe cramped against a curb. Other times I can ride close and feel safe. I can be on the road and feel unsafe, and that can make me unsafe in and of itself.


Generally I will ride to the right and let people pass, I don't mind it, and I acknowledge it's 100% out of my courtesy to drivers to allow them to pass me like that, I'll take the lane if I'm feeling unsafe. I don't expect anyone else to go lane 100% of the time, or curb 100% of the time, or whatever. Evaluate your situation.

Please don't be reasonable, Will. This isn't the place for it.

Seriously, though, that dovetails with a side topic that was being discussed on another thread: at what point does your personal comfort level allow you to inconvenience other road users? Obviously we're all uncomfortable with 6" passing, so it's reasonable to take actions that preclude 6" passes. But then we get into the three feet, four feet, "I need 17.5 feet to myself" business, and it gets ridiculous.

It's kind of like the legal standard for self-defense: "I shot him because I felt in danger" isn't enough. In order for that shooting to have been justifiable, a "reasonable person" would have had to have felt in danger in the same situation.

IMO -- and I believe legally -- "feeling unsafe" is justification for taking the lane only if the average cyclist would feel unsafe in the same situation. And judging by the way the "average person" seems to ride, being within a foot or two of a curb wouldn't qualify.

Please don't be reasonable, Will. This isn't the place for it.

Seriously, though, that dovetails with a side topic that was being discussed on another thread: at what point does your personal comfort level allow you to inconvenience other road users? Obviously we're all uncomfortable with 6" passing, so it's reasonable to take actions that preclude 6" passes. But then we get into the three feet, four feet, "I need 17.5 feet to myself" business, and it gets ridiculous.

It's kind of like the legal standard for self-defense: "I shot him because I felt in danger" isn't enough. In order for that shooting to have been justifiable, a "reasonable person" would have had to have felt in danger in the same situation.

IMO -- and I believe legally -- "feeling unsafe" is justification for taking the lane only if the average cyclist would feel unsafe in the same situation. And judging by the way the "average person" seems to ride, being within a foot or two of a curb wouldn't qualify.
In the case of bicyclists, the "average person" is responsible for at least half of the crashes in which he is engaged, and arguably (per the fundamental principle of defensive driving) could have avoided the vast majority of the remainder if he did things differently, including pay more attention to where he rides and why. So I, for one, reject the notion that where the "average person" seems to ride is any basis for a rational justification for lane positioning behavior.

The core of what I'm saying is that (a) if you position yourself a safe distance from the curb then (b) is it really necessary to take the lane as a default.




There are certainly situations where I would take the lane, I'm just trying to show my default thinking. Is that how you decide your position?

I agree. If a biyclist positions themself a safe distance from curb, etc, then it is NOT necessary to have to, to be compelled to take the lane as a default position.

That being said, I'm usally trucking along in the middle of most lanes, or to the left, for most of my riding. I don't like to share :D but I also recognize when I should be bike lane biased, shoulder biased, right of lane biased.

If a cyclist places themself on the road safely, they do not have to be in the middle of every lane.

there is no overwhelmingly obsessive, compelling reason to default to take the lane as a 'primary' position and powerweave into 'secondary' positions for overtaking traffic, to allow cars to pass.

a savvy bicyclist will pick a safe lane position, adjust as needed, and keep on trucking.

...

The core of what I'm saying is that (a) if you position yourself a safe distance from the curb then (b) is it really necessary to take the lane as a default.
...

I agree. If a bicyclist positions themself a safe distance from curb, etc, then it is NOT necessary to have to, to be compelled to take the lane as a default position.

...

a savvy bicyclist will pick a safe lane position, adjust as needed, and keep on trucking.
A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.

I see too many positioning themselves a certain distance from the curb, and maintain that distance, independent of where that puts them relative to the left lane stripe of the outside lane. That is, if the lane narrows (either the curb moves in, or the lane stripe moves right relative to the curb), they don't seem to notice and continue maintaining their position a fixed distance from the curb, oblivious to the fact that they are possibly moving into the path of someone else (who has the right of way) by doing that.

Consider a 15' wide lane. An arguably safe distance from the curb is tracking your wheel 4' from the curb leaving 3' to the edge of the road from your right shoulder, and about 10' on your left beyond your left shoulder (assuming you are 2' wide). A 6' wide car could pass you with a 3' buffer and still be 1' from the lane stripe on the left.

Now, as you maintain your "safe distance from the curb", tracking 4' from it, say the road narrows to 12'. Did you look back as the road started to narrow? There is no need since you're maintaining your line, you might think. But as the road narrow you are actually merging into space to which overtaking traffic on your left has the right-of-way. The onus is on you to yield to them, and you didn't even look back? By the time the road is 12' wide, your position tracking 4' from the curb leaves only 7' between your shoulder and the left lane stripe. That 6' wide car now has to scrunch up against the lane stripe just to pass you with a 1' buffer. And if you're hit, it's on you, since you "swerved" (yep, that's what they'll say in the article and police report) into the driver's right of way.

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.

...Now, as you maintain your "safe distance from the curb", tracking 4' from it, say the road narrows to 12'. Did you look back as the road started to narrow? There is no need since you're maintaining your line, you might think. But as the road narrow you are actually merging into space to which overtaking traffic on your left has the right-of-way. The onus is on you to yield to them, and you didn't even look back? By the time the road is 12' wide, your position tracking 4' from the curb leaves only 7' between your shoulder and the left lane stripe. That 6' wide car now has to scrunch up against the lane stripe just to pass you with a 1' buffer. And if you're hit, it's on you, since you "swerved" (yep, that's what they'll say in the article and police report) into the driver's right of way.

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.yep...it took me two close calls where i got squeezed off a narrowing road before i figured this out. very good information...thanks

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.

:roflmao:

Um, NO, they don't. A savvy bicyclist uses all sorts of determinants to their road position.

smart bicyclists exercise much greater nuance in choosing a safe road position than helmies' hamfisted, sophmoric insistence in using the left lane stripe. HH even blatantly contradicts himself- he chooses lane position depending on overtaking traffic!

and where does head get off, claiming he ignores the right hand stripe so religiously, yet postulates lane positioning needs to be zealously adhered to via the left hand one?

But as the road narrows you are actually merging into space to which overtaking traffic on your left has the right-of-way. The onus is on you to yield to them

bull. overtaking traffic does not have the right of way in a narrowing lane that goes from shareable to determined unsharable by the bicyclist, dude. get a grip and stop fearmongering.

yep...it took me two close calls where i got squeezed off a narrowing road before i figured this out. very good information...thanks

And it will take two close calls before you're back to curb hugging, determining your biking methods by close calls and sudden fears is never a good choice.

Observe, evaluate, decide.

And it will take two close calls before you're back to curb hugging, determining your biking methods by close calls and sudden fears is never a good choice.

Observe, evaluate, decide.never was a curb hugger...tires won't last down here in the land of the long neck bottles...or am i now going to labeled a flat-fear monger??? :D

fear never entered the equation...a little excitement sure but not fear. people just are not familiar to seeing bikes on the road where i commute and unless you position yourself based on the line of traffic (not curb), more close-calls seem to happen.

"Observe, evaluate, decide." sounds nice but by itself doesn't work on the fly...things transpire too fast when comparing closing speeds between a bike and a motor vehicle. experience is far more important, and helmet head described exactly what i have observed.

sounds like each region/city may require different riding styles/tactics. i have adapted my riding style to fit this area's road design and driver's habits. here we have zero bike lanes (with zero plans in the future) and cops with zero knowledge (or inaccurate knowledge) of bike laws (i have to carry a copy with me)...maybe if i commuted in a town where bikes were seen more as a method of transportation, things would be different.

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.

10' 11 12 14 16... honsestly I really don't know how many feet every lane I ride down is.

I do know what position I need to be in to be highly visible and strongly encourage early passes.

I also know what is going on me at all time and don't create quickly developing opportunities for a close pass.

I only consider three kinds of lanes. Narrow (must ride center to left) Medium Wide (ride in middle, can move 3-4' to right to encourage a pass after a single driver with no other behind slows and there are no other potential hazards) Fully Wide (again ride towards middle, move right ~4' from curb when vehicles approach (and no other potential hazards)

It works great for me, but I couldn't tell ya very accurately how wide any particular lane I ride is.

Al

never was a curb hugger...tires won't last down here in the land of the long neck bottles...or am i now going to labeled a flat-fear monger??? :D

fear never entered the equation...a little excitement sure but not fear. people just are not familiar to seeing bikes on the road where i commute and unless you position yourself based on the line of traffic (not curb), more close-calls seem to happen.

"Observe, evaluate, decide." sounds nice but by itself doesn't work on the fly...things transpire too fast when comparing closing speeds between a bike and a motor vehicle. experience is far more important, and helmet head described exactly what i have observed.

sounds like each region/city may require different riding styles/tactics. i have adapted my riding style to fit this area's road design and driver's habits. here we have zero bike lanes (with zero plans in the future) and cops with zero knowledge (or inaccurate knowledge) of bike laws (i have to carry a copy with me)...maybe if i commuted in a town where bikes were seen more as a method of transportation, things would be different.
Well thats just everyone's story as to what makes their riding style, stories of a few close calls, and now they don't want to do it anymore. It kind of makes people choose their riding style based on almost-accidents, which frankly can occur at random, having nothing to do with proper placement or riding style, you can be riding PERFECT and have a couple of close calls, and now the person will do something incorrect simply because of that.

And it does work on the fly, it's what determines accidents all the time, it's what will determine if I can make an abrupt lane change while I'm driving, experience wont tell me if there is a car next to me, it will tell me if perhaps just spilling the bike may be a better idea than hitting whatever may be coming up (and I hope experience isn't where you're drawing that idea). If you can't think fast in a situation and evaluate your choices, you'll be like every other person who just locks their brakes and slides into whats in front of them, or dodges out in front of a car or into a ped.

Every accident situation requires situational awareness and the ability to quickly evaluate your choices. Experience is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to a situation, and can be the wrong one easily.


And the more I hear about Helmet Head from other people, the more I notice he's just a head case that takes advantage of more unexperienced riders such as me thats gullible to ideas that sound safe, but are nothing more than brainless follow-one-rule unsafe riding.

I do know what position I need to be in to be highly visible and strongly encourage early passes.
I also know what is going on me at all time and don't create quickly developing opportunities for a close pass.
It works great for me, but I couldn't tell ya very accurately how wide any particular lane I ride is.good points and it got me to thinking a little. :eek: when deciding my riding position, i don't think i use the lane stripe to the left as much as i use the tire grooves. if i deem it is safe (for a vehicle) to pass i'll ride to the right of the right tire groove; if not (and car(s) are approaching) i'll ride to the left of the right tire groove (read in the middle of the left and right tire grooves); otherwise i just ride in the right tire groove. i vary rarely ride in the left tire groove unless i'm in a left lane or turning left.

would using the tire grooves to position myself in the lane more along the same lines/tract as the drivers vs. the curb?

And the more I hear about Helmet Head from other people, the more I notice he's just a head case that takes advantage of more unexperienced riders such as me thats gullible to ideas that sound safe, but are nothing more than brainless follow-one-rule unsafe riding.why did you go there? :( name calling and bashing other users only serves to discount your posts.

maybe your inexperience makes you feel like an unsafe rider?


Experience is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to a situationi think you are confusing instinct with experience.

To each his/her own. Do what you believe is safest.
My experience, not some internet gab, has taught me that some motorists will try to squeeze by me without crossing the middle line. Other times, on 4-lane, 2-way roads with narrow lanes, motorist will try to squeeze past me regardless of the traffic in other lanes, trying to "shoot the gap."

When I have ridden dead-center, nobody has ever squeeze-played me (but one or two has still buzzed me, I guess that I still don't have the power to control other humans. :p)

just one or two? ;)

I bet you get the lazy pass by many, many more motorists than that laudatory analysis of drivers seems to indicate.

many, the vast majority of drivers, pass a bicyclist with the minimum of lateral correction necessary to pass a cyclist regardless of the cyclists' lane position, hand waving (wringing), steely eyed (internet technique induced) g(l)azes, or buttwaggles.

you can be noticed a half mile back, and drivers will still pass with the bare minimum of lateral correction necessary. HOWEVER, if you ride the Helemt Head "duckdodge" powerweave, it will appear motorists give you more clearance, because the rider dodges out of the path of the motorist when the vehicle is mere car lengths behind.

The HH "duckdodge" powerweave technique, as we all know, does NOT work in moderately steady, heavy, or congested traffic.

why did you go there? :( name calling and bashing other users only serves to discount your posts.

maybe your inexperience makes you feel like an unsafe rider?

I don't feel like an unsafe rider. What gives you that idea? I have only a couple hundred miles under my belt and was looking to advice, once I started agreeing with Helmet, I started getting PMs about how he isn't exactly known as the best rider, and started digging up dirt from him in the SoCal forums.

However, I admit I'm new, and will always look to more experienced riders for suggestions, as long as I don't immediately have it pointed out that some self-proclaimed experts here have quite the name for themselves.


i think you are confusing instinct with experience.
No, because if you're saying you don't have time to evaluate anything around you, and then claim that you're doing it through experience, they're one in the same for time requirements, experience just gives you a little more weight during the evaluation time as to WHAT to do, of course that is if you're not arguing that you don't have time to evaluate.

Solution? Find another route. Seriously. It's not really worth your life.


Where I live this is not an option. The topology of the land is canyons and mesas, often with only one road that goes through, and of course that "one road" is almost always a multilaned high speed arterial road. Now most of those arterials do have BL, so they are not a problem... but there are cases where the only road is does not have a BL, or is not multilaned... there is no other choice but to take a lane. (or you don't go to "that destination"). Now bear in mind that often motorists do have another choice; the freeway, which is not an option for cyclists.

BTW I notice that the OP lives in this area too, so he may have encountered the same situations of "no other route."

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.
So you're saying if you were riding a 10' wide lane, and position yourself, say, 4' from the left stripe... and then the lane widens to 20' you would still ride 4' from the white stripe?

Either your a bad cyclist, or you're just making up that idea. I think if the road widens you tend to move right, and if the road narrows you tend to move left. Which means that you are tracking against the curb, not the left stripe. Of course other factors come into play.

Actually, I think the duckdodge powerweave might be pretty effective. If I'm in my car and I come across some guy riding in the middle of the lane and wobbling all over the place, I'm going to assume he's drunk, high, or insane. So folks will give him plenty of room, because nobody will want their fingerprints on that train wreck.

Call it the "I'm completely nuts, stay away from me" technique.

So you're saying if you were riding a 10' wide lane, and position yourself, say, 4' from the left stripe... and then the lane widens to 20' you would still ride 4' from the white stripe?

Either your a bad cyclist, or you're just making up that idea. I think if the road widens you tend to move right, and if the road narrows you tend to move left. Which means that you are tracking against the curb, not the left stripe. Of course other factors come into play.

If no one is behind you trying to pass, why move right just because the lane widens?

The whole point of tracking against the lane line is to be part of the normal traffic flow. Most traffic (excluding most cyclists) tracks agains the center yellow line (or left line of the right lane). Doing so as a cyclist puts you right where other traffic will be looking for traffic. Following the (in my experience) arbitrary placement of the right edge of the road often puts you in a place you don't want to be (i.e. stuck against the curb in a narrowing lane).

...many, the vast majority of drivers, pass a bicyclist with the minimum of lateral correction necessary to pass a cyclist regardless of the cyclists' lane position, hand waving (wringing), steely eyed (internet technique induced) g(l)azes, or buttwaggles.
:lol: That's pretty funny! "Buttwaggles?"

"Here, Mr. Cardriver, see me shakin' ma booty...gimme space!"

:D

Ennyway, Mr. Beck said, "...most drivers pass cyclists with as little space as necessary...."

If that's true in your neighborhood, I'll stick to mine. I don't get that nonsense.

But you're the expert on "most drivers," Mr. Beck, so I won't argue with your expert opinion.

(The trouble I have is waving timid motorists forward to pass, they are too afraid. It's like, I move over just to encourage them, "It's ok...really!" Plus, I wave my hand a little, and shake my booty... ;) )

little big man, if you're claiming you don't have drivers close passing you, don't have drivers lazily crossing the line to pass,

getting instead complete lane changes to pass you soley because of your lane position, I'm calling your bluff.

you're making that up. there is no way that all drivers in Atlanta, virtually without exception, pass bicyclists by completely changing lanes. I call bull.

you might try to convince the forum of that, and you might even be convinced of it yourself, but I do not, cannot believe it. your rose colored analysis of atlanta drivers is one mighty tall tale.

drivers in atlanta are not soooo different from other parts of the country its all politeness and howdydoos to bicyclists taking the lane where you ride.

bull. overtaking traffic does not have the right of way in a narrowing lane that goes from shareable to determined unsharable by the bicyclist, dude. get a grip and stop fearmongering.
When two drivers, a slower one a bit ahead, and an overtaker a bit behind, are on parallel paths, then each has the right-of-way to continue along his path. But the one behind does not have the right to move into the path of the slower one ahead (without slowing down so as not to hit him) and the one ahead does not have the right-of-way to move into the path of the overtaker.

When a lane narrows "from shareable to determined unsharable by the bicyclist", and prior to the narrowing the bicyclist is off to the side in a sharing positing, then his moving left without yielding into the path of the overtaker is no more justified by lane narrowing than by any other reason. Perhaps the diagram below will be useful in conveying this.

55795

Assume the purple rectangle is a motor vehicle following the purple path and the green is a bicyclist following the red path. Note how the motor vehicle driver is maintaining a straight path relative to the lane stripe to his left, and the cyclist is maintaining a steady course a "safe distance from the curb", yet they are on a collision course.

This is the CA version, but every state has a similar law:



Turning Movements and Required Signals

22107 (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22107.htm). No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.


The diagram shows that the cyclist is clearly moving left upon the roadway, and, thus, it is incumbent on him to not do so "until such movement can be made with reasonable safety". He has to look back and yield to make sure he does not violate the right-of-way of the overtaking vehicle.

Yet I almost never see a cyclist in this situation even look back, much less yield.

A savvy bicyclist learns to position himself relative to the lane stripe to his left, which all other drivers track against, not the curb to the right.

10' 11 12 14 16... honsestly I really don't know how many feet every lane I ride down is.

I do know what position I need to be in to be highly visible and strongly encourage early passes.

I also know what is going on me at all time and don't create quickly developing opportunities for a close pass.

I only consider three kinds of lanes. Narrow (must ride center to left) Medium Wide (ride in middle, can move 3-4' to right to encourage a pass after a single driver with no other behind slows and there are no other potential hazards) Fully Wide (again ride towards middle, move right ~4' from curb when vehicles approach (and no other potential hazards)

It works great for me, but I couldn't tell ya very accurately how wide any particular lane I ride is.

Al
Yes, what matters is whether there is enough width to safely share. In real time you get a feel for this, of course, which is not related to consciously even estimating the width in actual number of feet. Never-the-less, it is primarily the actual number of feet of lane width which determines whether you feel comfortable sharing a given lane or not.

But my point is it is important to note your position relative to the lane edge on the left, because moving closer to the left lane edge constitutes a lateral position change, and requires yielding to overtaking traffic using that space. Most cyclists, who position themselves what they consider to be safe distance from the right edge of the road, can easily miss the fact that they are effectively merging left in a lane narrowing situation, because they are maintaining what they perceive is a consistent course, relative to the right edge.

See the diagram in my previous post.

Well thats just everyone's story as to what makes their riding style, stories of a few close calls, and now they don't want to do it anymore. It kind of makes people choose their riding style based on almost-accidents, which frankly can occur at random, having nothing to do with proper placement or riding style, you can be riding PERFECT and have a couple of close calls, and now the person will do something incorrect simply because of that.
That's a good point, and why it can be misleading, in either direction, to go strictly by your own experience.


And it does work on the fly, it's what determines accidents all the time, it's what will determine if I can make an abrupt lane change while I'm driving, experience wont tell me if there is a car next to me, it will tell me if perhaps just spilling the bike may be a better idea than hitting whatever may be coming up (and I hope experience isn't where you're drawing that idea). If you can't think fast in a situation and evaluate your choices, you'll be like every other person who just locks their brakes and slides into whats in front of them, or dodges out in front of a car or into a ped.

Every accident situation requires situational awareness and the ability to quickly evaluate your choices. Experience is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to a situation, and can be the wrong one easily.
I don't think anyone would disagree with this.



And the more I hear about Helmet Head from other people, ...

Please judge what I say based on what you hear from me, rather than what you hear from others. That's how I judge what you say.


... the more I notice he's just a head case that takes advantage of more unexperienced riders such as me thats gullible to ideas that sound safe, but are nothing more than brainless follow-one-rule unsafe riding.
Huh? What is this brainless "one-rule" that you think I advocate others follow?

good points and it got me to thinking a little. :eek: when deciding my riding position, i don't think i use the lane stripe to the left as much as i use the tire grooves. if i deem it is safe (for a vehicle) to pass i'll ride to the right of the right tire groove; if not (and car(s) are approaching) i'll ride to the left of the right tire groove (read in the middle of the left and right tire grooves); otherwise i just ride in the right tire groove. i vary rarely ride in the left tire groove unless i'm in a left lane or turning left.
Since the tire grooves generally parallel the left lane stripe, positioning yourself relatively to them is essentially the same as positioning yourself relative to the left lane stripe.


would using the tire grooves to position myself in the lane [be?] more along the same lines/tract as the drivers vs. the curb?
If I understand your question, yes, using the tire grooves to position yourself in the lane would better than positioning yourself relative to the curb.

The main thing is to be aware when you're in sharing vs. lane-control modes - and to be clear as to which you are in when - and to yield appropriately when transitioning from a sharing position to a lane-control position, including when you're forced to do so due to a lane narrowing situation.

just one or two? ;)

I bet you get the lazy pass by many, many more motorists than that laudatory analysis of drivers seems to indicate.

many, the vast majority of drivers, pass a bicyclist with the minimum of lateral correction necessary to pass a cyclist regardless of the cyclists' lane position, hand waving (wringing), steely eyed (internet technique induced) g(l)azes, or buttwaggles.

you can be noticed a half mile back, and drivers will still pass with the bare minimum of lateral correction necessary. HOWEVER, if you ride the Helemt Head "duckdodge" powerweave, it will appear motorists give you more clearance, because the rider dodges out of the path of the motorist when the vehicle is mere car lengths behind.

The HH "duckdodge" powerweave technique, as we all know, does NOT work in moderately steady, heavy, or congested traffic.
Beck, this thread is about taking the lane when it is too narrow to be safely shared. I generally don't move out of my lane-controlling position on narrow lanes, and never do if there is more than one lane in my direction. I only move out of the way of faster same direction traffic when the lane is wide enough to safely share (and it is safe, reasonable and necessary to do so), or, when there is only one lane in each direction, when the traffic behind me has slowed due to my lane-controlling position and relatively slow speed, I will temporarily move "as far right as practicable" to facilitate their passing of me (again, only when safe and reasonable to do so).