General Cycling Discussion - Why are cars immune to the speed limit?

So this is a 25mph road, and i'm going about 25-26mph, so i'm in the middle of the road...


along comes some SUV behind me, and slaaaams on his horn... *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP*



?! is 25mph not fast enough???!

Because they are jack-a$S#'$. I know, and I write them Jack-a$s$'s tickets everyday! I personally don't ride in the middle of the road, but if you are doing the speed limit you should be able to ride where you want to. Peace!!!!!!!!!!!

He was confusing the speed limit as the minimum required speed.

Jerk!

Originally posted by JasBike
[B]So this is a 25mph road, and i'm going about 25-26mph, so i'm in the middle of the road[B]

You have a death wish? Ask almost any cop and they will tell you that hardly anyone actually does the speed limit. Most people drive at the maximum safest speed. They will toe the legal limit only if the see a cop or their radar detecter buzzes.

Say on the side where it is much safer. You may get more flat tires, but you can fix flat tires a lot faster than you can recover from being run over by an SUV.

eeeek, thats not cool. Some people can be very pushy when behind the wheel.

Heck as for the middle of the road bit, If I'm doing the speed limit (or faster) on my bike, its now my lane I will move closer to the center of the lane too. I will however move to the side if i see/hear a car.

Originally posted by JasBike
So this is a 25mph road, and i'm going about 25-26mph, so i'm in the middle of the road...
along comes some SUV behind me, and slaaaams on his horn... *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP*
?! is 25mph not fast enough???!

That's right! You are supposed to yield to faster traffic whether they are obeying the speed limit or not! You are endangering yourself by hogging the road. What if for instance that driver was taking his pregnant wife who's about to pop to the hospital? Think about it....

Originally posted by George
That's right! You are supposed to yield to faster traffic whether they are obeying the speed limit or not! You are endangering yourself by hogging the road. What if for instance that driver was taking his pregnant wife who's about to pop to the hospital? Think about it....

Then he should have had the foresight to leave five minutes earlier. As far as I'm concerned, the whole speed limit thing is one area of the law (one of the few) that needs and demands a fascist police state.

I had a tailgating incident today. I was ending my ride with a long downhill and heading back towards my Jeep (yes, I drove to my ride). I was going a little over 20MPH which is about the speed limit. I saw a 20MPH and also a 25MPH limit sign in a couple of places but wasn't sure which applied at the time. I was fully concentrating on my line when I heard the deep-throated noise of a very large engine behind me. I chanced a quick glance and saw that Joe Redneck with a jacked-up wannabe monster-truck was no more than a bike length's behind me.

At anyrate, I could not ride the shoulder because there was no shoulder. At the speeds I was going at, I needed float room (keep reading and you'll find out why) so I needed to be in the middle of the lane. The road was of variable width and could basically be considered single-lane. I guess I should mention that this road was a deep loose gravel forestry access road. I used it to access the singletrack trails further in the opposite direction. I guess I could have stopped and pulled over but I was almost certain that if I applied my brakes, the truck would have run me over since it was so close. Also, it wouldn't have been wise to hit my brakes on such loose ground. Luckily, the mutual "inconvenience" lasted only a few minutes as the road opened up to two lanes near the bottom of the hill. Of course, the numbnut behind the wheel of the truck swerved over and passed me while gunning his engine and sending rocks my way.

After loading my bike onto my Jeep and driving out of the forest, I happened upon the truck from before. This time, we were on a twisty and hilly 2-lane no-passing paved country road with a speed limit of 35MPH, no shoulders and blind corners. The truck was caught behind a Chevy Suburban and riding its bumper and swerving from one side to another looking to pass. Eventually the Suburban pulled over to let the truck pass. The truck once again sped off and by my estimate was now doing around 50MPH. I had seen "Watch for Bicycles Next 4 Miles" signs on the road in both directions indicating this road was a popular bike route and hoped that no cyclists were out on it today. Ten minutes later, I caught up to the truck again. This time it was stopped off to the side of the road and there was a gunmetal-grey coloured police car pulled up behind it with lights still flashing and the officer having a nice chat with the driver of the truck.

Hope he got a huge fine.

This time it was stopped off to the side of the road and there was a gunmetal-grey coloured police car pulled up behind it with lights still flashing and the officer having a nice chat with the driver of the truck.
I wonder what would have happened if you had stopped and talked to the officer.

Then he should have had the foresight to leave five minutes earlier.

Did you think about that before you typed? Child birth (time and day) can't be planned.

As to the original topic: You yourself are admitting to breaking the letter of the "law" by going 26 MPH, and now you gripe about another road user doing the same. Thats very weird thinking.

ehenz

That's right! You are supposed to yield to faster traffic whether they are obeying the speed limit or not! You are endangering yourself by hogging the road. What if for instance that driver was taking his pregnant wife who's about to pop to the hospital? Think about it....
yes and no.

if he were in a car he would have no obligation to pull over to "yeild to faster traffic" thus it's the same for the bike.

most states have some kind of "5 vehicles behind" rule that says when slow-moving vehicles must pull over to yeild to normal traffic, but when you are travelling the speed limit you are no longer a "slow-moving vehicle"

as to the pregnant wife scenario, that's just self-centered car-speak: "nobody should be on the road in case _I_ need it" ---- when travelling the speed limit, the following car can either pass (if allowed and safe) or wait until it is safe to do so... and except for very RARE occasions this should not be long at all...

now if the cyclist decides the lane is wide enough and moves to the right so the vehicle can pass in the same lane, then ok, but when going the speed limit that is his _choice_!

i had a sort of simliar event last sunday here in Germany: i was riding on a road with 2 lanes in my direction and travelling about 40km/h. the limit was about 40 or 45 (not exactly sure) but there was quite a bit of traffic. some cars were turning right so the right lane slowed significantly and the left lane was clear, so travelling in the left lane about 40km/h i passed about 30 cars in the right lane ALL GOING MUCH SLOWER. just as i had passed all the cars (so i had been in the left lane maybe 40 seconds) some a-hole greatly exceeding the speed limit in his "cool" mercedes convertible comes screaming by all the slower cars and then lays on the horn directly behind me... at this point i was just past the slower cars and had started to move right, but when he honked, i sat up and stayed in the lane... like the major a-hole he is, he continued to lay on the horn while driving about 6 inches behind my rear wheel. i enventually pulled to the right and he sped by accelerating to like 100km/h before having to stop for traffic at the next light (how cool he was! and wow, if i hadn't slowed him down he could have started braking even earlier and waited at the light even longer, but i prevented him from having those 3 extra seconds stopped at the light. wow, how inconsiderate of me). why does he feel it is his "right" to have the left lane completely clear so he can speed? (i am talking about while the right lane was full with slower-moving cars and i was _passing_ and then getting back to the right when clear --- if the right lane were clear sooner i would have moved back to the right lane). if i had been in a car instead of on the bike (many cars were travelling slower than me) he probably would have tailgated but not honked... or who knows, the guy seemed like an idiot.

as to the pregnant wife scenario, that's just self-centered car-speak: "nobody should be on the road in case _I_ need it" ---- when travelling the speed limit, the following car can either pass (if allowed and safe) or wait until it is safe to do so... and except for very RARE occasions this should not be long at all...

Right on!!! I love it "Car Speak" or
"Auto-Centric". A mind set in which cars are thought to have absolute supremacy over other road users, often leading to road rage.

If the road is not wide enough to safely share at the speed you are riding, it is safer to "take the lane".

The speed limit does not confer the absolute right to go at that speed. And it certainly does not give the right to endanger slower moving traffic.

One thing I've always noticed on the road while driving is that people forget the simple fact: Driving is a priviledge, not a right. Some motorists think that "traffic" owes them some eternal debt and that they shall be repaid everytime they see someone in a position of the road that they want to be in.

blah blah blah blah

This is why I gave up driving the commute. :)

all this does not detract from the fact that while you are tchnically allowed to ride inthe middle of the road, you must have a death wish to do so. even though it would be nice if the world were perfect, it isn't, so you have to adapt to it. If you get run over, it would be his fault, not yours, but you are dead anyway. thats why as a roadie, I try to stay about a foot or so from the side, like any sane human being.

Originally posted by scarry
Right on!!! I love it "Car Speak" or
"Auto-Centric". A mind set in which cars are thought to have absolute supremacy over other road users, often leading to road rage.

If the road is not wide enough to safely share at the speed you are riding, it is safer to "take the lane".

The speed limit does not confer the absolute right to go at that speed. And it certainly does not give the right to endanger slower moving traffic.

Ok.....but why would a cyclist wanna hog the road, even when travelling at the speed limit, when there's plenty of space to simply move over and yield to traffic behind you. It's not a complicated matter to deal with.....

Originally posted by Phatman
all this does not detract from the fact that while you are tchnically allowed to ride inthe middle of the road, you must have a death wish to do so. even though it would be nice if the world were perfect, it isn't, so you have to adapt to it. If you get run over, it would be his fault, not yours, but you are dead anyway. thats why as a roadie, I try to stay about a foot or so from the side, like any sane human being.

I can think of a number of reasons to take a lane. In fact I did yesterday. Riding down a hill on Springvale. The shoulder has scattered gravel and I typically get to the high 30's when braking. The road curves and the descent is over two miles long. You better believe I am in the middle of the lane.

Given shoulder conditions in many circumstances I will take a lane, not just in on downhill run. Immediately branding the original poster as one with a deathwish is premature and 'car-centric' as nathank said.

/Duncan

I can drive down the freeway at 40mph in the fast lane and it is legal. But would I do this just because I can, I don't think so, I'm a bit more considerate to other road users. The same applies to riding a residential street at 25 thinking all cars should stay in line behind me. If you were in a car you would have been passed, the fact that your on a bike is moot at this point.

I think this is more a "how considerate are you" thread.

Originally posted by ehenz
I can drive down the freeway at 40mph in the fast lane and it is legal
Actually, at least not in CA if there's traffic behind you......

if you riding a residential street at 25 miles an hour and the speed limit is 25 miles an hour then all cars should stay behind you.
i guess with your way of thinking if im going 25 miles an hour in my car and you feel the speed limit doesnt apply to you i should move over. i guess cars dont have to stop for stop signs either.

Originally posted by shaharidan
if you riding a residential street at 25 miles an hour and the speed limit is 25 miles an hour then all cars should stay behind you.
i guess with your way of thinking if im going 25 miles an hour in my car and you feel the speed limit doesnt apply to you i should move over. i guess cars dont have to stop for stop signs either.

So you are telling me you never passed anyone without exceeding the speed limit? I suppose you never did an "illegal" rolling stop either.

Common sense and courtesy seem to get lost in these bike vs. car debates.:rolleyes:

ehenz

well it seems to me common sense would be to go the speed limit.
as far as courtesy goes the guy was going the speed limit on his bicycle, he was in the center of the lane (there are plenty of good reasons he might have taken the lane). so someone in a car comes right up on his wheel and blares his horn. who was the one not being courteous?
if the person in the car had acted with some courtesy the cyclist probably would have moved when safe and we wouldnt have this thread.
the person in the car is the one without courtesy and common sense.
as far as your questions for me.
i dont roll thru stop signs believe it or not.
i may go past the speed limit to pass someone on a highway, but once past i slow down again.
and i sure wouldnt pass someone where the speed limit was 25. when i was younger i may have, but i came to realize most places im goin to in my car i'm in no hurry to get to.

If I'm riding the speed limit, I will be in the center of the lane. Likewise, if the right lane is turning, I'll be in the left lane. It is not that I'm inconsiderate. It is faster and I would rather do that then dodge all the crap at the side of the road, like sewar gutters, broken mufflers and whatever. If a car comes up behind me I will start to move over and let them by. If they honk their horn at me then I'm not going ato move over. Why should I be considerate to some *******? It was the driver of that SUV who honked and tailgated the cyclist of the guy in the mercedes that was inconsiderate, not the cyclist. If I was in those situations, I'd stay in the center lane and show them my favorite finger.

Originally posted by Nic
If they honk their horn at me then I'm not going ato move over. Why should I be considerate to some *******? It was the driver of that SUV who honked and tailgated the cyclist of the guy in the mercedes that was inconsiderate, not the cyclist. If I was in those situations, I'd stay in the center lane and show them my favorite finger.

Very brave and IMHO, not very smart. I'd rather have my ego battered than my body. You never know what kind of person is behind the wheel. If I don't move over when an automobile is behind me and I'm moving within the acceptable speed of traffic then it's because I need to be where I am to safely ride that particular section of road and not because I want to show them who's who. I will move over when it's safe. Riding as far to the right as safe and practicable is not just a courtesy to others... it's also the law and is bourne out of safety considerations. The implication is that the middle of the lane may be as far to the right as is safe and practicable given certain situations.

Originally posted by shaharidan
as far as courtesy goes
Courtesy schmertesy! Bicycle, 20 lbs. SUV - 3,000 pounds.
Laws of physics applied equally, bicylce and rider squashed. SUV requires a wash and wax.

It is arrogant to think that just because you are obeying the speed limit that you are safe from the vagaries of the moron contingent that exists everywhere in life, even behind the wheel of an SUV. Famous words said to St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, "I was in the crosswalk and the law says they have to stop."

Bottom line is common sense, which dictates get the Hell out of the way!

so someone in a car comes right up on his wheel and blares his horn. who was the one not being courteous?

I don't think anyone said that, just that he blew his horn as he approached.

Anyway, I'm not trying to argue because you are "technically" correct. I'm just stating that if I get passed on a road when I am going the speed limit, regardless if its illegal or not, I don't need to run to a discussion board to post my experience believing it is an infringement on my cycling rights. I drive and bike about everyday and I get passed all the time. It is what everyone on the road has to deal with. Yes, ideally 25mph should be 25mph, but we ALL know its not. That is just REALITY, and that is the world I wish to live in. Not "its my lane and I'm going to keep it and hope I don't get killed" world some prefer.

Consideration works both ways, If I know the driver behind wants to pass, if there is room, I'll give it to him. If I am being righteous and inconsiderate I'll hold my line and hope for the best (rarely happens). Not knowing the full story (somehow we all think the driver was "riding the wheel", and the rider thought "staying to the right was unsafe" when neither of that was stated) I can only answer to the known facts, and from what I read the fact that he was on a bike is irreverent, getting passed is a part of using the roadway.

It is strange on how some people want it both ways and all for themselves. "Share the Road" a common sign, I think applies to both cyclist and drivers.


Regards,

ehenz

Originally posted by George
That's right! You are supposed to yield to faster traffic whether they are obeying the speed limit or not! You are endangering yourself by hogging the road. What if for instance that driver was taking his pregnant wife who's about to pop to the hospital? Think about it....




theres a quicker route to take, this was a back road, and i was in the road at least a minute before the car showed up behind me

Originally posted by George
Ok.....but why would a cyclist wanna hog the road, even when travelling at the speed limit, when there's plenty of space to simply move over and yield to traffic behind you. It's not a complicated matter to deal with.....

That is based on the assumption that there actually is space to move into. That is not always the case. I also know from experience that in situations where there is no space, it's safer for me to claim the whole lane than to try to move over to space which doesn't exist.

In any case, if drivers can change lanes to pass other cars, why not to pass bikes as well?

Originally posted by Chris L
That is based on the assumption that there actually is space to move into. That is not always the case. I also know from experience that in situations where there is no space, it's safer for me to claim the whole lane than to try to move over to space which doesn't exist.




it was a smallish country road, and the sides are boardline unrideable at speeds above 15mph.


its broken up, at points grass grows out... if you slide out you're in WAY worse shape than if you just ride in the center of the lane.

Originally posted by JasBike
it was a smallish country road, and the sides are boardline unrideable at speeds above 15mph.


its broken up, at points grass grows out... if you slide out you're in WAY worse shape than if you just ride in the center of the lane.

That was my point exactly. Yielding is fine if there is adequate space to do so. However, this is not always the case.

originally posted by George
Ok.....but why would a cyclist wanna hog the road, even when travelling at the speed limit, when there's plenty of space to simply move over and yield to traffic behind you. It's not a complicated matter to deal with.....

taking the lane does not equal "hogging the road" any more than the driver in front of you is "hogging the road" --- i.e. many people think the road is only there for THEM and anyone else is "hogging" _their_ road and wasting _their_ time... selfish attitude, but one that is also perpetuated by the auto industry (adds of empty roads and emphasizing the "freedom" of driving, etc.) - i.e. if the auto also "improves" your self-worth and gives you more power then more autos are sold...

the basic answer to qour question was in Scarry's comment you had quoted above your question:


If the road is not wide enough to safely share at the speed you are riding, it is safer to "take the lane".

and as others have said there are plenty of times to "take the lane"
* when you're going the speed limit - you're now longer a "slow-moving vehicle" and cars who want to go above the speed limit can pass you as they would a normal car - when it is safe and legal to do so --- IF _you_ decide to be nice to some guy who wants to speed and move over so he can squeeze by in the lane with you, then that is _your_ choice --- just like the common southern practice to drive on the shoulder to let faster drivers go by - it's _optional_
* when there is traffic and you're going the speed of traffic
* when the right lane is blocked by turners - most often riding on the far right of a left or middle lane is not good as there is no shoulder to your right - rather there is another traffic lane that you _cannot_ safely move to if need be

Especially on downhills i take the lane --- i did yesterday on a road descent on the way back from my MTB ride. i took the lane and then passed 2 cars (left of the dividing line) and then moved back to the right and took the lane. if i had passed 2 cars and then moved to the FAR right of the lane that would be dumb -- it decreases my visibility and would encourage a car to share the lane with me which at high speed is usually not a good idea.

---> finally, just to be clear i want to restate that i am very courteous when i ride. if i see that a car is waiting behind me for a while and not able to pass b/c the road is narrow, i will try and find a spot and wave him to come on by. BUT as the following vehicle, he either has to safely/legally pass or else WAIT. *if* _i_ decide to be nice, then cool... but laying on the horn or tailgating or revving the engine on my tail is NOT cool.

example: on my 9-day translp tour i led 2 weeks ago we had a group of 13 riders. we had quite a few road sections where we rode through the valleys between mountains and often there was only one lane in our direction of travel w/o a shoulder and traffic was heavy. we rode to the right of the road, but with 13 riders it's not always easy to get by quickly as 13 riders is longer than your average 18-wheeler and most of the lanes were too narrow to share the lane if there was traffic in the other direction (on 2 occaisions we had drivers who thought this _was_ possible and a truck passed with about 3" to spare and a BMW was very close at about double the speed limit). On the road, i was the tail rider watching to make sure we all stayed together, helping those who had problems (and "pulling" to catch back up to the group). i also kept on eye on cars behind us and would wave cars and particularly trucks by when i thought the way was clear enough (and then would yell "truck" or "car" up the line). i legally could have just ridden on and made all the cars/trucks wait, but when i thought it was safe enough i would wave them on by.

All of this is why when driving the environmental destruction device, I stick religiously to speed limits--and revel in holding up people who want to speed, especially if they're in large 4x4 vehicles and/or talking on the phone.

interesting thread and my opinion is this............Why do they do it?????
There is nearly no physical effort in driving, you take one foot off the peddal and apply it to the other (slowing down) then when theres room, you put it back on the other peddal (speeding up) and off you go!
The more people understand that its "all" of our roads, the safer it will be for us bikers, and it would be enjoyable to ride, like it should be.
I know they have the advantage in power and weight, but that should not be the reason to let them have control.
Just my opinion

Originally posted by oscaregg
All of this is why when driving the environmental destruction device, I stick religiously to speed limits--and revel in holding up people who want to speed, especially if they're in large 4x4 vehicles and/or talking on the phone.

Are you a police officer? Unless you have no other place to get out of the way, that is neither safe nor prudent. Your role as a motorist or cyclist should be to contribute to a safer traffic environment. By intentionally holding up traffic regardless of whether they want to speed or not, you are creating a potentially dangerous situation.

Originally posted by khuon
Are you a police officer? Unless you have no other place to get out of the way, that is neither safe nor prudent. Your role as a motorist or cyclist should be to contribute to a safer traffic environment. By intentionally holding up traffic regardless of whether they want to speed or not, you are creating a potentially dangerous situation.

WRONG. The speeder is quilty of "a potentially dangerous situation", not the law abiding prudent driver.

You sound like you condone breaking the law for cars, but you want the book thrown at CM'rs.

Originally posted by scarry
WRONG. The speeder is quilty of "a potentially dangerous situation", not the law abiding prudent driver.

So by impeding the vehicle, you're not only playing cop but you're also playing judge as you've just declared them guilty. Speed does not always equate to a dangerous situation regardless of the speed limit. My point is that it is not up to you to make that decision for them. Let the the other vehicle pass if you can do so safely.


Originally posted by scarry
You sound like you condone breaking the law for cars, but you want the book thrown at CM'rs.

I do not condone any such action because it is not clear that they are breaking the law. There are a variety of clauses in the law which may apply to their situation and circumstances which I have no knowledge about. I don't assume. OTOH, a CM cyclist running a red light and standing in the middle of an intersection impeding traffic creates not only a dangerous situation for themsef but for other road users. I will leave judgement up to the proper authorities and the end of the trial but suffice it to say that past history has shown that they do not have a legitimate reason to perform such actions within the confines of the law. I do not want the book thrown at all CMers... only those that break the law. I expect the same treatment to be handed out to any road user found guilty of breaking the law as well.

So by impeding the vehicle, you're not only playing cop but you're also playing judge as you've just declared them guilty. Speed does not always equate to a dangerous situation regardless of the speed limit. My point is that it is not up to you to make that decision for them. Let the the other vehicle pass if you can do so safely.

I don't think so.
I could say other things that wouldn't be as polite.

Lawfully driving within the speed limit is not impeding traffic.
We are not talking about a freeway here, but a city street.
Palo Alto has even started a program called NEIGHBORHOOD PACE CAR PROGRAM.
http://www.city.palo-alto.ca.us/ntcp/pacecar.html

:p

Scarry, Palo Alto's idea is absolutely brilliant. Thanks for posting the link!

Originally posted by scarry
Lawfully driving within the speed limit is not impeding traffic.
We are not talking about a freeway here, but a city street.


We are also taking common sense. If you are impeding the flow of traffic, you are going to make the drivers mad. They will possibly become aggressive, take a chance and whip around you when it isn't save.

The laws of physics apply here. The bitter the vehicle, the flatter it will squash bicycle and rider.

Common sense also says don't be an arrogant fool. Get the hell out of the way.

ChrisL

Most of the time you are reight on, but there are times when in a hurry is justified. So I always try to give others a chance to get to the hospital or ticketting officer -;)

Not my job to asses thier motive. Take the lane when I can but riding or driving give right of way when ever it is safe to do so.

Joe
Joe

Originally posted by khuon
So by impeding the vehicle, you're not only playing cop but you're also playing judge as you've just declared them guilty. Speed does not always equate to a dangerous situation regardless of the speed limit. My point is that it is not up to you to make that decision for them. Let the the other vehicle pass if you can do so safely.

First you tell us a story on p. 1 of this thread about how YOU held up a monster truck tailgating you when riding in this situation, and now you're defending abusive motorists by telling other cyclists to get the heck out of the way? I don't get it.

A following motorist must yield to the traffic in front of them, regardless of the speed the leading vehicle is travelling. If the leading vehicle is a cyclist, then it is up to the cyclist to decide whether it is safe to pull over to let the following vehicle pass, or not. In other words, the cyclist is more aware of and must consider the road conditions and safety hazards of pulling over (i.e. bad pavement, broken glass or hazardous drainage grates in the ROW, parked cars/opening car doors, etc., etc.), and it is therefore the cyclist who is responsible for deciding when it is safe to allow the following vehicle to pass, if at all.

As far as the speed limit is concerned, I will echo others posting here--the speed limit is supposed to be the maximum speed, not the minimum, and not a 'guideline' or 'recommendation' to motorists. Too bad 99% of motorists don't understand this and regularly violate the law every time they exceed the speed limit. Think about that and remember the danger speeding motorists put all other road users in every time they exceed the speed limit. And how motorists almost universally brush this abuse of their privlidges off every time they accuse cyclists, either individually or collectively, of not obeying the rules of the road.

Originally posted by TrekRider
The laws of physics apply here. The bitter the vehicle, the flatter it will squash bicycle and rider.

Common sense also says don't be an arrogant fool. Get the hell out of the way.

Say, you aren't related to that columnist from St. Petersburg Florida, are you? You know, the auto-centric anti-cyclist bigot?

PS--Bitter vehicles; I like that!! Applies to their owners too, I guess...

Originally posted by randya
First you tell us a story on p. 1 of this thread about how YOU held up a monster truck tailgating you when riding in this situation, and now you're defending abusive motorists by telling other cyclists to get the heck out of the way? I don't get it.

[1] If you read my story, you will have noticed that I had no choice in the manner. Because of the truck's positioning and the condition of the "road" I was on, I did not have the ability to safely allow him to pass. I therefore held my line.

[2] I am not defending abusive motorists by telling other cyclists to get out of the way... well yes I am but you neglected to mention that I do advocate allowing the abusive motorist to pass only when it is safe for the cyclist to do so. A cyclist or motorist holding up traffic unnecesarily creates a more dangerous situation.


Originally posted by randya
A following motorist must yield to the traffic in front of them, regardless of the speed the leading vehicle is travelling.

True and I do not dispute this. But I also maintain that it is not worth ascerbating a dangerous situation unnecessarily by impeding a speeding motorist if there is a safe way to allow them to pass.



Originally posted by randya
If the leading vehicle is a cyclist, then it is up to the cyclist to decide whether it is safe to pull over to let the following vehicle pass, or not. In other words, the cyclist is more aware of and must consider the road conditions and safety hazards of pulling over (i.e. bad pavement, broken glass or hazardous drainage grates in the ROW, parked cars/opening car doors, etc., etc.), and it is therefore the cyclist who is responsible for deciding when it is safe to allow the following vehicle to pass, if at all.

You are preaching to the choir.



Originally posted by randya
As far as the speed limit is concerned, I will echo others posting here--the speed limit is supposed to be the maximum speed, not the minimum, and not a 'guideline' or 'recommendation' to motorists. Too bad 99% of motorists don't understand this and regularly violate the law every time they exceed the speed limit. Think about that and remember the danger speeding motorists put all other road users in every time they exceed the speed limit. And how motorists almost universally brush this abuse of their privlidges off every time they accuse cyclists, either individually or collectively, of not obeying the rules of the road.

A speed limit is actually the maximum suggested speed limit under nominally good conditions for the road. A vehicle may exceed the speed limit and be perfectly legal under certain circumstances. A vehicle may also be travelling quite a bit under the speed limit but still be ticketed for exceeding the maximum safe speed of the road for conditions.

Did you fail high school physics? Speed does not by itself kill... speed differential does. I do not disagree that motorists often abuse their priviledges. However they too are exercising their "better judgement". Whether or not this better judgement is well founded is yet to be determined and on a case-by-case basis. You may view all motorists as being of another race but I do not. They are human beings like you and I and I too am sometimes a motorist. They are subject to acting just as stupidly as the rest of the human race. Just as cyclists can act stupidly. The choice of vehicle does not inherently absolve nor condemn the operator. And just as a motorist is wrong by universally singling out a cyclist or all cyclist for disobeying the rules of the road, so are cyclists in the wrong for proclaiming that all motorists are just as guilty.

Originally posted by TrekRider
We are also taking common sense. If you are impeding the flow of traffic, you are going to make the drivers mad.

Actually, they are making themselves mad with their inability to cope with the situation. Either way, build me a decent shoulder and I'll use it. Until then, I'll be taking the lane.


Originally posted by TrekRider

They will possibly become aggressive, take a chance and whip around you when it isn't save.

This is why in narrow lane situations I take the whole lane so that they simply can't get past. Make it a non-option. In over 100,000km of riding I've yet to have been squashed flat or had anyone even attempt to pass me doing this. I have, however, had people attempting to pass when I've tried to move over where there simply wasn't room.


Originally posted by TrekRider
Common sense also says don't be an arrogant fool. Get the hell out of the way.

There's no such thing as an arrogant fool. The fools are the ones lacking in sufficient arrogance to be assertive whent he situation demands.

I've gone 35 in a 20 mph zone on my bike. Could I get pulled over for this?

Originally posted by Chris L
There's no such thing as an arrogant fool. The fools are the ones lacking in sufficient arrogance to be assertive whent he situation demands.

Perhaps, perhaps not. But I will tell you this, your description of how you would ride in those situations tell me that you are riding like an arrogant fool.

The laws of courteous behavior will always apply. Commit a random act of courteousness and it will come back a 1000-fold. Don't be a statistic - a nice way of saying a big sticky spot on the side of the road. Be nice, pull out of the way, and let the car go by.

Originally posted by crucifixion12
I've gone 35 in a 20 mph zone on my bike. Could I get pulled over for this?

Yes. I got pulled over for doing 50MPH in a 35MPH zone on my bike but was let off with a warning. The officer believed me when I told him I would overcook my brakes by riding them all the way down the hill.

Originally posted by TrekRider
Perhaps, perhaps not. But I will tell you this, your description of how you would ride in those situations tell me that you are riding like an arrogant fool.

If being an arrogant fool is going to enhance my safety, then I will continue to do it, and furthermore, I won't even regard "arrogant fool" as being particularly insulting.


Originally posted by TrekRider
The laws of courteous behavior will always apply. Commit a random act of courteousness and it will come back a 1000-fold. Don't be a statistic - a nice way of saying a big sticky spot on the side of the road. Be nice, pull out of the way, and let the car go by.

It's interesting, for a few years I tried the whole "courteousy" thing when riding on narrow roads with no shoulder - I got hit by cars four times in the space of two years (six months of which I was off the bike with a knee problem). In 1999 I made the change to be more assertive in these situations. Having done by far the bulk of my riding in that time (averaging around 20,000km per year) I've yet to be hit.

The whole idea that being assertive is going to get you killed is just codswallop that can be supported by neither personal experience, nor statistics. As I said before, I'll move over if there is space to do so, but I'm not going to make myself late for work or put myself in danger by attempting to ride through potholes or whatever else so I can enhance somebody else's convenience. I'm sorry, but courteousy simply doesn't work that way.

I've also just come back from the supermarket. I noticed when I was queing at the checkout, there were people taking far longer to get through than I did. I also noticed that none of them were moving aside to allow the faster person (i.e. me) to go through faster. If these people want courteousy, they've got a funny way of demonstrating what it is. Perhaps if they had "courteously" moved out of my way at the supermarket, I wouldn't still be on the road to "hold them up" for three seconds now.

Let me explain a far more relevant act of courteousy - it's called waiting one's turn. If it's good enough for me to wait my turn in a queue, it's good enough for them to wait their turn on the road.

I've also just come back from the supermarket. I noticed when I was queing at the checkout, there were people taking far longer to get through than I did. I also noticed that none of them were moving aside to allow the faster person (i.e. me) to go through faster. If these people want courteousy, they've got a funny way of demonstrating what it is. Perhaps if they had "courteously" moved out of my way at the supermarket, I wouldn't still be on the road to "hold them up" for three seconds now.

Let me explain a far more relevant act of courteousy - it's called waiting one's turn. If it's good enough for me to wait my turn in a queue, it's good enough for them to wait their turn on the road.
thanks for the analogy Chris.

ok, i have a related story from my ride yesterday... at the end of my MTB ride with my new girlfriend (ah, how sweet that is! we rode 80km with 2100meters or 6900ft vertical - what a ride!) we had a stretch on a paved road in what is basically the equivalent of a state park in the US. it is a dead-end road that doesn't service anything but trail-heads for recreation and cars have to pay a fee to use it (bikes free as it should be). anyway, the road is pretty wide, although no shoulder and the traffic is light and it is generally easy to pass. So my girlfriend and i were riding 2-abreast most of the time (a few times it was more curvy and/or a few more cars so i switched to single-file). anyway, a few cars approached from the rear, moved to the left lane and passed, no problem, but one guy (in a Mercedes, no surprize) pulls up behind us and honks - the road is straight, the left lane is clear and he has all the room he needs to pass - and we weren't riding horribly slow either - 35km/h in a 50km/h zone - i assessed the situation and decided he had plenty of room to easily safely pass so i kep riding next to my girlfriend. he waits a few seconds, honks again (left lane still clear with PLENTY of visibility to pass) then he guns it and speeds by and then applys the brakes in front of us and makes a bunch of hand gestures - i smiled and waved to him! i mean WHAT is the guy's problem? if he had simply passed he would have been long gone. none of the other cars had a problem and there was no "impeding traffic" -- actually at one point later we caught up to 2 road bikers so we were riding 4 single-file and there were some curves and so i could see better and waved cars to pass (as i frequently do).

as i see it the guy wasn't concerned with being slowed down or inconvenienced, but was more that _he_ wanted the road all to himself and didn't want lowly bicycles riding as a car would -- and note again this is in a park where everyone is there for recreation! he obviously wasn't in an emergency as he would have simply passed and sure wouldn't have applied the brakes and taken the time to "communicate" with us. anyway, i do not understand what the (fortunately) small number of motorists who act that way are thinking. as i said, i smiled and waved at him!

oh well, i didn't let it spoil my ride!