On a matter of cycling practice in difficult circumstances.

Here's one. Driving on the right (USA) It can be difficult at times to judge the correct time to move left in order to execute a left turn. This is especially true if there are 1 or more lanes to cross and traffic moving at differing speeds. (The same is true for right turns in the UK etc.)

There are a couple of places on routes that I ride where this is the case. Occasionally there will be a situation where a platoon of traffic is approaching, such that it would preclude safe & easy manouvres at the usual distance from the intersection. In this case one can choose to move early, whilst you have the road to yourself. This brings the problem of riding in the leftmost lane with traffic for some distance before the left turn lane is reached. I have a tendancy to bias left in this situation, such that cars pass to my right, but there is the option of full lane occupancy. This latter choice might be vehicular, but it certainly feels exposed. Occasionally there is a honk on the horn from a motorist .

Then there is the need to move through steady traffic that is moving faster than the cyclist e.g. a 2 or 3lane (each direction) expressway with 45 mph limit. Cars often let you in, but there is no guarantee, and it can be hard to trust that each has acknowledged you as you shift lanes.

I'm not a shy cyclist, but these situations can still put the wind up me on ocasion.

Thoughts please.

Ed

Thoughts please.

If I didn't feel safe I'd stay to the right until I had an intersection with a light and then proceed with cross traffic. Anywhere in CA with a 45 speed limit and 3 lanes you are going to get some cars doing 50+.

On a matter of cycling practice in difficult circumstances.

Here's one. Driving on the right (USA) It can be difficult at times to judge the correct time to move left in order to execute a left turn. This is especially true if there are 1 or more lanes to cross and traffic moving at differing speeds. (The same is true for right turns in the UK etc.)

There are a couple of places on routes that I ride where this is the case. Occasionally there will be a situation where a platoon of traffic is approaching, such that it would preclude safe & easy manouvres at the usual distance from the intersection. In this case one can choose to move early, whilst you have the road to yourself. This brings the problem of riding in the leftmost lane with traffic for some distance before the left turn lane is reached. I have a tendancy to bias left in this situation, such that cars pass to my right, but there is the option of full lane occupancy. This latter choice might be vehicular, but it certainly feels exposed. Occasionally there is a honk on the horn from a motorist .

Then there is the need to move through steady traffic that is moving faster than the cyclist e.g. a 2 or 3lane (each direction) expressway with 45 mph limit. Cars often let you in, but there is no guarantee, and it can be hard to trust that each has acknowledged you as you shift lanes.

I'm not a shy cyclist, but these situations can still put the wind up me on ocasion.

Thoughts please.

Ed

Thoughts please.

This brings back an old saying from the Cold War. Trust but Verify. You never have to trust that a motorist has acknowledged your request to move in front of him. Just look at what he does. If he slows down for you, then he has acknowledged that he will accede to your request. If he doesn't slow down, then then he has not agreed to your request. That's all there is to that.

a vacuous witticism when applied to traffic cycling. i think bicycling sometimes does not afford the moment of verification. overly simplistic application of motorist/bicyclist interactions.

On high speed arterials, I hope I know in advance my turn is upcoming, and try to find the back of a pack, and roll up on lefts as the traffic is slowing, or be in front of a pack and reach the left side in front of a pod of traffic.

sometimes the move to the left is soon after the previous light, as the pod affect makes the early grab of the left hand lane more expeditious.

I have a tendancy to bias left in this situation, such that cars pass to my right, but there is the option of full lane occupancy. This latter choice might be vehicular, but it certainly feels exposed. Occasionally there is a honk on the horn from a motorist .

I think this is the safest option. It's clear what you're doing and unless the person behind you is inattentive (which could happen in any situation and have the same disastrous effects, but of course is so rare as to be not worth worrying about) then you will be easily spotted and avoided. It might irritate people that think you should be on the sidewalk, but they're relatively rare and unless you want to end up standing at a pedestrian crossing pushing the button and wondering if it worked then you've chosen the safest alternative. The alternative of multiple negotiations in a stimulus-rich situation seems more probable to tend to confusion to me. I know what you mean about the exposed feeling though.

On a matter of cycling practice in difficult circumstances.

Here's one. Driving on the right (USA) It can be difficult at times to judge the correct time to move left in order to execute a left turn. This is especially true if there are 1 or more lanes to cross and traffic moving at differing speeds. (The same is true for right turns in the UK etc.)

There are a couple of places on routes that I ride where this is the case. Occasionally there will be a situation where a platoon of traffic is approaching, such that it would preclude safe & easy manouvres at the usual distance from the intersection. In this case one can choose to move early, whilst you have the road to yourself. This brings the problem of riding in the leftmost lane with traffic for some distance before the left turn lane is reached. I have a tendancy to bias left in this situation, such that cars pass to my right, but there is the option of full lane occupancy. This latter choice might be vehicular, but it certainly feels exposed. Occasionally there is a honk on the horn from a motorist .

Then there is the need to move through steady traffic that is moving faster than the cyclist e.g. a 2 or 3lane (each direction) expressway with 45 mph limit. Cars often let you in, but there is no guarantee, and it can be hard to trust that each has acknowledged you as you shift lanes.

I'm not a shy cyclist, but these situations can still put the wind up me on ocasion.

Thoughts please.

Ed

Thoughts please.

There is no one-size-fits-all for that kind of situation. Depends entirely on the specific road in question and the specific conditions at the specific time. Possible superior options range from either of the methods you mentioned to a wide variety of different types of two-point turns. As I wrote in another thread the two-point (sometimes called 'pedestrian style') left turn could actually be a time saver on a busy street. I would shoot for maximum smooth-eration. If you can roll with the flow, roll with it. If you are causing drivers to stomp on the brakes then it seems unlikely you are using the smoothest or safest possible method. It's my opinion that putting oneself in the left lane of a busy high-speed arterial in front of approaching traffic just to make a left turn that could be made in any number of other ways is less safe than commonly portrayed on this forum, and in my experience requires more trust in other road users than I prefer to dish out. That said I still do it on occasion. But then, I do lots of things.

Robert

If I didn't feel safe I'd stay to the right until I had an intersection with a light and then proceed with cross traffic. Anywhere in CA with a 45 speed limit and 3 lanes you are going to get some cars doing 50+.

In my area, southern California, we have these same roads with 50, 55, 60 and 65MPH speed limits... I wonder how fast the motorists are going on those streets?

These are not rural hiways, nor Freeways, but heavily used arterials connecting suburbs and commercial areas.

My commute route for instance consists of nothing but these heavily used arterials signed at 45 and 50MPH. Of course, during the heaviest of rush hours traffic moves at a crawl... but otherwise it can be quite heavy and steady and fast.

yes, straddling a double yellow in the middle of opposing lanes of high speed traffic waiting for a gap to cross is just about as unsettling as holding the left hand lane waiting for traffic to clear; have done both, like neither.

sitting on a center turn lane or in a dedicated turn lane, not so bad. I've seen roads with thin, divided double yellows with a couple of feet in the middle that are not so bad to wait in with your bike to turn left, but these are typically not at major intersections.

Sometimes, too, the early cross and bit of wrong way cycle is sometimes the most expeditious way to handle traffic dynamics approaching intersections, but hardly recommended unless you know what the heck you're doing out there.

Thanks for your responses everyone - Interesting points of view from everyone.

The bit that unsettles me most is where I want to move left into faster moving traffic. It is not that cars are unyielding, but the "trust but verify" process can take longer than one might anticipate - hence the difficulty in timing one's move.
I'll admit to chosing routes that minimise the need for this type of manouvre, but am reluctant either to give up completely (fat chance :)) or end up on slow / out of the way routes.

Ed

The bit that unsettles me most is where I want to move left into faster moving traffic. It is not that cars are unyielding, but the "trust but verify" process can take longer than one might anticipate - hence the difficulty in timing one's move.

Then wait, of course. Don't be in such a hurry. If you can't get your verification in time, pull over, stop, and give yourself a chance to really figure out what's coming up behind you.

Thanks for your responses everyone - Interesting points of view from everyone.

The bit that unsettles me most is where I want to move left into faster moving traffic. It is not that cars are unyielding, but the "trust but verify" process can take longer than one might anticipate - hence the difficulty in timing one's move.
I'll admit to chosing routes that minimise the need for this type of manouvre, but am reluctant either to give up completely (fat chance :)) or end up on slow / out of the way routes.

Ed
Dealing with challenging left turn situations on my commute is what caused me to seek some advice, and the only responses that helped me were those from the kind folks on my local bike coalition email list that recommended I read Effective Cycling. That's how I learned how to negotiate for the right of way with fast/busy traffic, instead of just haplessly waiting for a gap.

It's best to err on the side of starting too early. Worst case is you end up in the leftmost lane in your direction sooner then you may have wanted, ideally, but it's never really a problem. You can ride near the center stripe or median, perhaps in the left tire track, until you get to the left turn pocket or whatever. Most cyclists start the process way too late.

One rule of thumb is to imagine you're in a car or on a motorcycle in the rightmost lane, and consider the latest you would start moving left in that case. You should start at least that early when on a bike, usually considerably earlier. One hallmark of a seasoned traffic cyclist is regularly starting to move left while still on the block before the one at the end of which you need to turn left.

Trust but verify doesn't take very long at all. Usually, all I have to do is look back over my left shoulder and the next car immediately slows/yields to let me in. Maybe half the time they don't immediately slow so I stick my arm out (it cannot be understated how much more effective a clear/straight arm signal is than a lame halfassed 45-degree angle arm signal is), and then they immediately slow/yield. Or the next car does. Rarely do I have to wait for the third car (not counting the first one or two that are too close to slow in time when I first look back), and I don't think I've ever had to wait for 4 cars.

Like with anything else, once you experience successful merge negotiation a few times you quickly develop an innate "feel" for the timing, and it comes naturally. Now I seem to end up in the leftmost lane right before the left turn pocket appears.

If you can roll with the flow, roll with it. If you are causing drivers to stomp on the brakes then it seems unlikely you are using the smoothest or safest possible method. It's my opinion that putting oneself in the left lane of a busy high-speed arterial in front of approaching traffic just to make a left turn that could be made in any number of other ways is less safe than commonly portrayed on this forum, and in my experience requires more trust in other road users than I prefer to dish out.
I'm very okay with requesting drivers to let off the gas and even use their brakes (:eek:) to slow down enough to yield to me and let me in. I do trust them to not stomp on the gas and run me over after slowing to my speed and letting me into the space in front of them , but I don't think that's putting too much trust in others.

yes, straddling a double yellow in the middle of opposing lanes of high speed traffic waiting for a gap to cross is just about as unsettling as holding the left hand lane waiting for traffic to clear; have done both, like neither.
If there is no left turn pocket and you have to make the left turn from the leftmost lane, I stop near the center of it to wait to turn left, probably biased a bit towards the left, just as I would if I was making a left turn there while riding a motorcycle. It feels odd at first, but remembering motorcyclists do the same thing helps, and you can get accustomed to it pretty quickly, and the feelings of discomfort dissipate... but don't allow that to make you any less vigilant!

I'm very okay with requesting drivers to let off the gas and even use their brakes (:eek:) to slow down enough to yield to me and let me in. I do trust them to not stomp on the gas and run me over after slowing to my speed and letting me into the space in front of them , but I don't think that's putting too much trust in others.

I'm not okay with doing that, partly because of the cars immediately near me, but also because of all the cars behind them that probably can't figure out what's going on up ahead and are wondering, "Why the f* do I see brake lights all of a sudden?"

Of course, if there aren't many cars behind the ones I'd cross in front of, then I can easily afford to hang on for a few seconds while they pass by.

To me, a busy street is like a semi-controlled herd of very large land animals. I feel safer and less selfish by not disrupting that flow.

I'm not okay with doing that, partly because of the cars immediately near me, but also because of all the cars behind them that probably can't figure out what's going on up ahead and are wondering, "Why the f* do I see brake lights all of a sudden?"

Of course, if there aren't many cars behind the ones I'd cross in front of, then I can easily afford to hang on for a few seconds while they pass by.

To me, a busy street is like a semi-controlled herd of very large land animals. I feel safer and less selfish by not disrupting that flow.
I call this the transference of freeway mentality to surface streets. The causes of ebb and flow in traffic are countless, and much less predictable than it is on freeways. There are traffic signals, drivers pulling off and onto the street, drivers slowing, stopping and backing up in order to park, buses and taxis stopping to load and unload passengers, and often those being slowed can't see why they are being slowed.

So what? So what if some guy back there is wondering, "Why the f* do I see brake lights all of a sudden?" Why does that even concern you? Why the f* do you care? Let him wonder - keeps him alert. It's a good thing.

Remember, you have as much right disrupting that flow as anyone else. Feeling that you don't is exactly what Forester is talking about when he talks about "cyclist inferiority complex". Getting over that is critical to being comfortable, effective and safe cycling in traffic. It is neither unsafe nor selfish to cause some disruption in traffic. And once you learn to get comfortable with causing some disruption once in a while, it's like dropping a huge load from your shoulders. Finally, remember, you're asking someone to slow down. They don't slow down unless they agree. And, so, they are the ones causing the slow down... not you! Once they slow down (and everyone behind them), you're just moving into a line of traffic that happens to be moving at your speed. :D

To me, a busy street is like a semi-controlled herd of very large land animals. I feel safer and less selfish by not disrupting that flow.

Beautfully put. Sometimes, you do need to shepherd them a bit though.

Beautfully put. Sometimes, you do need to shepherd them a bit though.
And sometimes more than just a bit. It's a very useful skill to have available to you...

So what? So what if some guy back there is wondering, "Why the f* do I see brake lights all of a sudden?" Why does that even concern you? Why the f* do you care? Let him wonder - keeps him alert. It's a good thing.

Because it's okay to engender the attitude that "bikes don't belong on the street because they're too damn slow"?

Really, I don't get it. I don't see why disrupting traffic flow can be a good thing. All it takes is one person to create a problem, and you've soon got people glancing up and stomping on their brakes -- because many drivers' reaction to the unknown is to simply stop. And, knowing how closely people follow each other, their only option is to stop VERY hard, and if there aren't any rear-end collisions as a result, they're just getting lucky.

As they say, "if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Nobody's got a "right to disrupt traffic flow". To say that they do is just being a selfish jackass.

It's not some "cyclist inferiority complex". That's bull****. That's a ****ing bull**** statement. Sorry.

Okay -- you want to know why I think it's better to not disrupt traffic?

Because we CAN. We have the option of taking a five-foot, ten-second detour to duck out of the herd, get a better position, and sneak where we need to go.

We don't have to stay stuck with motor traffic. They do. They wish they could have the same flexibility.

But they don't. They can't filter through a hundred yards of stalled bumper-to-bumper traffic. They can't take a quick dodge onto a sidewalk when the going gets really tough. They can't just park in front of the store because all the curbside spots on that block are full.

Basically, they're screwed.

That's why I can't agree with the phrase, "cyclist inferiority complex".

Surface streets are not freeways.
Steady traffic flow is not sacrosanct on surface streets.
Okay, it may not be a good thing to disrupt surface street traffic flow, but it's not necessarily bad.
People who can't cross streets at intersections without traffic controls drive me nuts too.
They feel uncomfortable asking motor traffic to stop for them so they can cross. It's ridiculous.

As they say, "if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Nobody's got a "right to disrupt traffic flow". To say that they do is just being a selfish jackass.

Which is worse:

1. Requesting that same direction faster traffic slows temporarily to your speed to allow you to change lanes to turn?

or

2. Triggering a stop light for the main road to allow you to cross that road on an intersecting road, causing all traffic in both directions on the main road to come to a complete stop?

Keep in mind that all drivers have done #2 at some point in time while driving.

Surface streets are not freeways.
Steady traffic flow is not sacrosanct on surface streets.
Okay, it may not be a good thing to disrupt surface street traffic flow, but it's not necessarily bad.
People who can't cross streets at intersections without traffic controls drive me nuts too.
They feel uncomfortable asking motor traffic to stop for them so they can cross. It's ridiculous.

"It may not be a good thing... but it's not necessarily bad." How is something that is "not a good thing" also not bad?

Coming to a sudden stop with no stoplights in sight IS traffic disruption, and should NOT be something that drivers have to deal with.

Get over yourself. Someday you'll realize that your version of advocacy is exactly what makes motorists hate bikers even more.

Which is worse:

1. Requesting that same direction faster traffic slows temporarily to your speed to allow you to change lanes to turn?

or

2. Triggering a stop light for the main road to allow you to cross that road on an intersecting road, causing all traffic in both directions on the main road to come to a complete stop?

Keep in mind that all drivers have done #2 at some point in time while driving.

#1 is worse.

You are not a traffic control. You cannot be seen clearly by anyone more than two or three vehicles deep.

Stoplights can be seen better by more drivers, creating less of a surprise and fewer "WTF?" moments.

Think beyond your own little bubble of a universe and how your actions affect people around you.

#3 would be even better -- pull off and wait for the clump of traffic next to you to pass by, then cross. They don't stop, and you likely wouldn't even have to wait as long as if you tried to trigger a light.

"It may not be a good thing... but it's not necessarily bad." How is something that is "not a good thing" also not bad?
It's not a dichotomy.
That is, something may be morally neutral as well as good or bad. I think disrupting traffic is a morally neutral thing to do, particularly if you have a legitimate reason to do it. It may not be good, but it's not bad either (claiming that something that is not good is necessarily bad is arguing a false dichotomy).


Coming to a sudden stop with no stoplights in sight IS traffic disruption, and should NOT be something that drivers have to deal with.

How does anyone parallel park (which requires stopping in a traffic lane and backing up) in your world?
How do drivers deal with such disruption :eek: in your world?


Get over yourself. Someday you'll realize that your version of advocacy is exactly what makes motorists hate bikers even more.
Believe me, I can tell by how well I'm treated how much the type of riding I advocate is appreciated by drivers. The secret is that as long as you are obeying their rules and they can tell what you're doing and why, by and large they are very cool with it. I get way more smiles, waves and nods than honks of impatience or other expressions of anger or dissatisfaction.

The real irony is that if you make it a priority to not be disruptive, you're more likely to be overlooked (or not noticed as soon) and less predictable and more likely to end up being a source of frustration and anger. From that experience it's easy to imagine that if you got more assertive with lane positioning and negotiation it would only get worse, but if have found that the opposite is true, and I've confirmed this with every cyclist I've met who rides similarly.

But it sounds like you're convinced I'm the one missing something and you probably can't accept any of this.

#1 is worse.

You are not a traffic control. You cannot be seen clearly by anyone more than two or three vehicles deep.

Stoplights can be seen better by more drivers, creating less of a surprise and fewer "WTF?" moments.

Think beyond your own little bubble of a universe and how your actions affect people around you.

#3 would be even better -- pull off and wait for the clump of traffic next to you to pass by, then cross. They don't stop, and you likely wouldn't even have to wait as long as if you tried to trigger a light.
On my commute home I have a left turn at an uncontrolled intersection (well, stop signs from the side streets - but no controls for the direction I'm traveling prior to turning left). I use to use #3 - I would literally pull over to the curb or even get on the sidewalk and wait for there to be a gap in traffic before I would cut across the road to the left turn pocket. But I got sick of it, because sometimes it would be cold and dark and I would be in a hurry to get home and I'd feel like a schmuck sitting off to the side waiting sometimes for several minutes before there was a break in traffic. Once I learned to "create" my own gaps with negotiation (from reading Effective Cycling) there was no going back. Yes, cars have to slow, but as soon as I get out of the way, they can accelerate and are often caught up with the car in front of them again while I'm still waiting for a break in oncoming traffic to make my left turn from the left turn pocket. In practical terms of actual time lost it's usually not disruptive at all.

That's why I can't agree with the phrase, "cyclist inferiority complex".

They're still throwing that term around? You're serious?

I thought we debunked that crap last February...as in 2007.

But it sounds like you're convinced I'm the one missing something and you probably can't accept any of this.

I can "accept" that you'[removed] love to spin arguments so that they sound like the other guy is a bad person, that's what.

I finally see why so many other forum members call you [edit] foolish. I really shouldn't be surprised.

On a matter of cycling practice in difficult circumstances.

Here's one. Driving on the right (USA) It can be difficult at times to judge the correct time to move left in order to execute a left turn. This is especially true if there are 1 or more lanes to cross and traffic moving at differing speeds. (The same is true for right turns in the UK etc.)

There are a couple of places on routes that I ride where this is the case. Occasionally there will be a situation where a platoon of traffic is approaching, such that it would preclude safe & easy manouvres at the usual distance from the intersection. In this case one can choose to move early, whilst you have the road to yourself. This brings the problem of riding in the leftmost lane with traffic for some distance before the left turn lane is reached. I have a tendancy to bias left in this situation, such that cars pass to my right, but there is the option of full lane occupancy. This latter choice might be vehicular, but it certainly feels exposed. Occasionally there is a honk on the horn from a motorist .

Then there is the need to move through steady traffic that is moving faster than the cyclist e.g. a 2 or 3lane (each direction) expressway with 45 mph limit. Cars often let you in, but there is no guarantee, and it can be hard to trust that each has acknowledged you as you shift lanes.

I'm not a shy cyclist, but these situations can still put the wind up me on ocasion.

Thoughts please.

Ed

Thoughts please.
I have found what you describe to be the quickest and safest method of negotiating a left turn. The heavier the traffic, the early the left merge must be commenced.

If following traffic will have to slow, then they just have to slow. No big deal. Nobody can get on the road in or on any kind of vehicle without expecting to slow for other vehicles.

I would be more leery of positioning myself in the left lane to invite passing on my right, than taking the center of the lane for the relatively short amount of time I'll be in it.

The other option is a two step left, but that isn't as efficient in time for me nor the motorists, and seems to be the less safe option by increasing exposure to red light runners and motorists in the far on coming lane turning right.

I cleaned up the above post, no matter how much you agree or disagree with
someone lets keep the personal insults/attacks out of these threads

lotek

I can "accept" that you'[removed] love to spin arguments so that they sound like the other guy is a bad person, that's what.

I finally see why so many other forum members call you [edit] foolish. I really shouldn't be surprised.
None of my arguments were about you, BarracksSi, much less about making it sound like you are a bad person. I would appreciate it if you would point out to me what it is that I wrote that made you take this traffic cycling discussion so personally, for apparently I am too foolish to see what it is.

How does anyone parallel park (which requires stopping in a traffic lane and backing up) in your world?
How do drivers deal with such disruption :eek: in your world?


But it sounds like you're convinced I'm the one missing something and you probably can't accept any of this.

No one parallel parks from the left lane... motorists have an expectation that the left lane is going to flow smoothly... "the fast lane."

No they should not have that expectation, but for too long they have heard and been "fed" the same old BS and have taken it to heart.

Because it's okay to engender the attitude that "bikes don't belong on the streets because they are too damn slow"?

Really, I don't get it. I don't see why disrupting traffic flow can be a good thing. All it takes is one person to create a problem, and you've soon got people glancing up and stomping on their brakes -- because many drivers' reaction to the unknown is to simply stop. And, knowing how closely people follow each other, their only option is to stop VERY hard, and if there aren't any rear-end collisions as a result, they're just getting lucky.

All vehicles on the road are traffic. Traffic gets in the way of traffic. Vehicles who are on the road first have the ROW. Safe operation of any vehicle demands that it yield to ROW traffic.

There is no expectation that one should never be delayed by any other road user- where do you get that notion from?

If you, as a legitimate user of the public road, while following the rules of the road, slow other traffic- where is the harm? YOU ARE TRAFFIC!

If a motorist slows to allow you to safely merge, and then some motorist rear-ends another, explain to me how you are at fault? It is the poor decision of that motorist to follow at an unsafe distance that caused the collision, not you.

As they say, "if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Nobody's got a "right to disrupt traffic flow". To say that they do is just being a selfish jackass.

It's not some "cyclist inferiority complex". That's bull****. That's a ****ing bull**** statement. Sorry.

Ha! :p Everyone has the right to interrupt traffic flow, and it is exercised all the time! As joejack951 points out, isn't that precisely what happens when one pulls up to a stoplight and trips the light sequence?

To follow the logic of your statement, the fastest motorist determines the speed of traffic, or everyone else is a selfish jackass?

Does not the law and conscience demand that we avoid striking obstacles in our path? (First use has ROW) Road users delay one another continually. Next time you take a car trip, notice how constrained by other cars you are during your trip. You don't even notice it because motor vehicles are legitimate users of the road. But, apparently, cyclists don't belong. It is outrageous that a cyclist would disrupt traffic! Why, to think that a cyclist would demand to make a left turn! What a jackass!

The implication of your post is that bicycles are not "traffic" and are not legitimate public road users. It implies that cycling is an inferior method of travel, and it obstructs traffic rather than being traffic. From where I ride, it looks a lot like cyclist inferiority complex to me, and this post makes it seem even more so. (This is not meant to insult, rather, it is a description of my perception of your attitude. If it is in error, please set me straight.)

I am not distressed if I cause a delay to a motorist while lawfully using the public streets. If he doesn't like cyclists on the road, he is free to choose a different route, perhaps a freeway where cyclists are not allowed.

Some road users have the right not to be delayed by other traffic. They are generally easy to spot because of their flashing red lights and sirens. Other than that exception, all road users have equal priority on the road, whether they are trucks, automobiles, farm equipment, cyclists or livestock.

Okay -- you want to know why I think it's better to not disrupt traffic?

Because we CAN. We have the option of taking a five-foot, ten-second detour to duck out of the herd, get a better position, and sneak where we need to go.

We don't have to stay stuck with motor traffic. They do. They wish they could have the same flexibility.

But they don't. They can't filter through a hundred yards of stalled bumper-to-bumper traffic. They can't take a quick dodge onto a sidewalk when the going gets really tough. They can't just park in front of the store because all the curbside spots on that block are full.

Basically, they're screwed.

That's why I can't agree with the phrase, "cyclist inferiority complex".
So, are you saying that although cyclists might be inferior in some ways we are also superior in other ways so that "cyclist inferiority" isn't the right term?

Let's try this... Have you ever been in a social or cultural context in which you felt out of place? Perhaps your wife or mom was having a Tupperware party, or you went to a party where everyone was doing drugs, or you were on a vacation in a foreign country where the language, food and customs were all unfamiliar. In other words, some place where you didn't see yourself as being inferior or superior to others, just, well, "out of place". I don't know what name to give to that, but it seems to me that most cyclists feel this way when cycling on roads with respect to motor traffic, and you don't seem to be an exception. That's not meant as a criticism.

On the back cover of the 1st edition of Robert Hurst's book, The Art of Urban Cycling, there are some words that liken cyclists to rats in sewers. The intended analogy is that although cities are created for humans, rats can still thrive there; similarly, although roadway systems are created for motorists, cyclists can still thrive there, by "lurking" at the edges, and taking advantage of certain aspects of it that motorists cannot (much like rats can take advantage of using the insides of walls, and sewers, to get around).

Given the rats in sewers paradigm, discomfort in causing disruption in traffic flow in order to make a left turn is understandable. In order to get past that, I think you have to drop the rats in sewers paradigm, and adopt the vehicular cycling paradigm.

No one parallel parks from the left lane... motorists have an expectation that the left lane is going to flow smoothly... "the fast lane."

No they should not have that expectation, but for too long they have heard and been "fed" the same old BS and have taken it to heart.
You have a point with respect to parallel parking on two-way streets, but not on one way streets with curb parking on both sides. And all lanes stop in order to yield right of way to a pedestrian crossing at an uncontrolled intersection.

More importantly, as any cyclist who regularly makes vehicular left turns on high speed busy multi-lane roads knows (hi Al), the most difficult merge step is from the bike lane or margin into the center of the rightmost lane. Once you have slowed traffic in the rightmost lane and established right of way there, negotiating for right of way in the adjacent lanes is even easier.

not always.

not always.
Perhaps not always, but I've made thousands of vehicular left turns on multilane roads, and I can't recall a single time having any difficulty quickly and easily obtaining right-of-way in any lane left of the outside/rightmost lane.

redacted
Nice. Very nice. I'm sure my wife and daughter will appreciate it too. You're a piece of work, but thanks for revealing your true colors.

Hey, you're not my fault. I tried to warn ya.

Good grief! I thought we were finished here.... it seems there were a few drops left at the bottom of the bottle.

To me, a busy street is like a semi-controlled herd of very large land animals. I feel safer and less selfish by not disrupting that flow.

I do like that analogy. You have to work with the flow, perhaps influence it, even avoid it if possible.

The "position early during a trafic lull" approach works well and I'm getting a bit more experienced with it now. It never seems to bring a conflict, as there is clearly a good reason, obvious to other road users for being in that road position. Lane changes in traffic are usually OK - it's a matter clear signalling and of timing. Bear in mind, however that I mostly do this during daylight hours. At night, even with excellent lighting and visbility enhancement it is much harder to confirm that drivers have seen you in anticipation of a safe move.

Formerly, on UK roads I'd had little cause to cross multiple lanes in order to make turns such as these, so I'd tip my hat again to the value of experience and its reward, confidence.

Ed

I do like that analogy. You have to work with the flow, perhaps influence it, even avoid it if possible.

It's an okay analogy, but it implies you are separate from the traffic flow, when what you need to do is become one wih it.


The "position early during a trafic lull" approach works well and I'm getting a bit more experienced with it now.

Well, that's fine if there is a traffic lull, but often you have no such luxury, or the lull is really too far back before your turn. In any case, I think the approach is more basic: "position early, period". If there is a lull, great. If not, use negotiation.


I actually prefer moving left with negotiation over moving left during a lull, because with negotiation you're only moving in front of someone who has explicitly given you the right of way. If you move left during a lull, then you're causing someone (the first one to appear after the lull) to slow for you who you didn't ask. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just prefer getting in front of someone who has explicitly invited me to do so.


Lane changes in traffic are usually OK - it's a matter clear signaling and of timing.
What do you mean it's a matter of timing?

At night, even with excellent lighting and visbility enhancement it is much harder to confirm that drivers have seen you in anticipation of a safe move.

I'd say it's a bit harder, not much harder. And remember, you're not merely confirming that they see you; you're confirming that they are yielding right of way to you. It's harder at night, but only because it's not as easy to recognize relative slowing down in a vehicle when all you can see is the headlights. But you get better at that too, with practice.


Formerly, on UK roads I'd had little cause to cross multiple lanes in order to make turns such as these, so I'd tip my hat again to the value of experience and its reward, confidence.

Ed
I think the value is skill and knowledge for which the reward is confidence, though of course a key source of skill and knowledge is experience. But experience alone is usually not enough.

What do you mean it's a matter of timing?

You time it so that you don't DIE.

God dammit, some days I feel like a relative GENIUS.

It's an okay analogy, but it implies you are separate from the traffic flow, when what you need to do is become one wih it.

Perhaps I am separate from the flow of traffic at some times, but not at others.


Well, that's fine if there is a traffic lull, but often you have no such luxury, or the lull is really too far back before your turn. In any case, I think the approach is more basic: "position early, period". If there is a lull, great. If not, use negotiation.


Certainly, but with respect, this is the crux of my timing issue... see later.


I actually prefer moving left with negotiation over moving left during a lull, because with negotiation you're only moving in front of someone who has explicitly given you the right of way. If you move left during a lull, then you're causing someone (the first one to appear after the lull) to slow for you who you didn't ask. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just prefer getting in front of someone who has explicitly invited me to do so.


Each to their own. Every rider has a different perception of traffic. This is why the topic of riding method is so well discussed. We all operate within our perceived level of comfort. This is modified by experience and practice.


What do you mean it's a matter of timing?


This is the reason I posted originally i.e. when to begin one's move to the center of the road and the issues in judging this move appropriately. The "right time" can vary substantially depending on traffic density, average speed, and the speed of the cyclist.


I'd say it's a bit harder, not much harder. And remember, you're not merely confirming that they see you; you're confirming that they are yielding right of way to you. It's harder at night, but only because it's not as easy to recognize relative slowing down in a vehicle when all you can see is the headlights. But you get better at that too, with practice.


Also, drivers find it harder to recognize cyclists present on the road at night. Even with good lights, it is IMHO harder to judge speed, distance etc. of a rider.


I think the value is skill and knowledge for which the reward is confidence, though of course a key source of skill and knowledge is experience. But experience alone is usually not enough.


OK, so I skipped a step. But anyone is able to ride out across 3 lanes of traffic, not everyone has the confidence to do it, let alone skills or judgement. This is not a dig at you, but I do think this is a point missed by many advocates who themselves are well seasoned cyclists that would not bat an eylid in situations that make others blanch.

Ed

You time it so that you don't DIE.

Its a fair point... I win by arriving in one piece :)

Its a fair point... I win by arriving in one piece :)

Same here, and I have a hell of a lot more fun doing it on a bike than in a car.

Perhaps I am separate from the flow of traffic at some times, but not at others.
Certainly, but in order to make a vehicular left turn, you have to become one with the traffic flow, unless you're lucky enough to have a gap when you need it, in which case you alone are the traffic flow.


This is the reason I posted originally i.e. when to begin one's move to the center of the road and the issues in judging this move appropriately. The "right time" can vary substantially depending on traffic density, average speed, and the speed of the cyclist.

In my experience the single biggest factor by far, arguably the sole factor, in determining when to start is cyclist speed. Now, sure, if the road is empty you can argue that it really doesn't matter, that you can wait until you're almost at the intersection and cut across, and, so, traffic density is very important, but that's assuming you're accepting of that kind of maneuver. In general, it takes a certain time/distance (for a given cyclist's speed) to properly get across all of the lanes, and that time/distance does not vary much ( a few seconds one way or the other) based on whether there is other traffic present or not.

I start each of my left turns on my commute at approximately the same point each day. It's analogous to when you start merging out of the fast lane to get to the rightmost lane prior to the exit you take to get home, except that traffic density matters more in freeway driving than it does to traffic cycling. This is because when you start merging left on a bike, there is what I shall call the Instant Moses effect - the traffic flow seems to magically part open for you, as the Red Sea allegedly did for Moses. I find motorists to be much less cooperative with me when I'm trying to merge in a car across freeway lanes than when I'm on a bike trying to merge across multiple urban or suburban street lanes.



Also, drivers find it harder to recognize cyclists present on the road at night. Even with good lights, it is IMHO harder to judge speed, distance etc. of a rider.

The only difficulties I've had at night is when wearing a black jacket and black gloves - they definitely had a harder time noticing my arm signal then. So now I always wear my bright yellow wind/rain jacket and have no issues having my signal noticed during negotiation. If they have any trouble judging speed/distance, they seem to err on the side of caution and give me more room sooner at night than during the day.


OK, so I skipped a step. But anyone is able to ride out across 3 lanes of traffic, not everyone has the confidence to do it, let alone skills or judgement. This is not a dig at you, but I do think this is a point missed by many advocates who themselves are well seasoned cyclists that would not bat an eylid in situations that make others blanch.

Ed
Right. Which is why we teach classes and recommend certain books.

Same here, and I have a hell of a lot more fun doing it on a bike than in a car.

Couldn't agree more :beer:

ut anyone is able to ride out across 3 lanes of traffic, not everyone has the confidence to do it, let alone skills or judgement. This is not a dig at you, but I do think this is a point missed by many advocates who themselves are well seasoned cyclists that would not bat an eylid in situations that make others blanch.

When I got into cycle transport in the area I live in I first started cycling on low volume low speed roads, before I even needed to get anywhere real. I had no interest in recreational cycling, my rides were just to re-learn cycling and learn cycling in traffic. This was only four years ago. After a couple months of further increasing the reach of my travels I decided it was time to cycle to work. I picked the route that had the fewest left turns from multi lane roads. That was the uncomfortable situation for me. My routes did include left turns on residential street some with multiple lanes and moderate traffic and some left merges on arterials where lanes ended. In a matter of a few weeks these became comfortable.
My point is that I am really not well seasoned and recently enough learned and gained experience that I can still recall how intimidating it was, but also look back and know it took much less than a year to be confident and comfortable. I also know that unless one trys and builds up from easier to more difficult conditions that one will never be comfortable.

It really is no different than learning to drive a motor vehicle in more difficult situations. No one would suggest taking a new driver out in the streets of NY or on an freeway in high speed rush hour.

Al

OK, so I skipped a step. But anyone is able to ride out across 3 lanes of traffic, not everyone has the confidence to do it, let alone skills or judgment. This is not a dig at you, but I do think this is a point missed by many advocates who themselves are well seasoned cyclists that would not bat an eyelid in situations that make others blanch.

Ed

Right... this is exactly the sort of thing that long seasoned cyclists writing on A&S or even giving classes need to keep in mind. And in some places, where the roads from A to B are only 6 laned arterials... it may be difficult for newer riders to even want to attempt such a move as they are "chased back" to the side by rude motorists who have no patience for feeble attempts.

When I got into cycle transport in the area I live in I first started cycling on low volume low speed roads, before I even needed to get anywhere real. I had no interest in recreational cycling, my rides were just to re-learn cycling and learn cycling in traffic. This was only four years ago. After a couple months of further increasing the reach of my travels I decided it was time to cycle to work. I picked the route that had the fewest left turns from multi lane roads. That was the uncomfortable situation for me. My routes did include left turns on residential street some with multiple lanes and moderate traffic and some left merges on arterials where lanes ended. In a matter of a few weeks these became comfortable.
My point is that I am really not well seasoned and recently enough learned and gained experience that I can still recall how intimidating it was, but also look back and know it took much less than a year to be confident and comfortable. I also know that unless one trys and builds up from easier to more difficult conditions that one will never be comfortable.

It really is no different than learning to drive a motor vehicle in more difficult situations. No one would suggest taking a new driver out in the streets of NY or on an freeway in high speed rush hour.

Al

No, but the intimidation factor can be a lot higher on a bike when facing fast moving auto traffic...

in the case of the freeway examples for instance, one really can quite easily keep up with traffic by simply pressing down on the accelerator... since that option doesn't exist for cyclists, the intimidation can be quite "heady." Glad you can recall those instances... it can be somewhat difficult to look back on such things sometimes.

I know of several cyclists that refuse to commute even though they are quite strong riders and should not have any problems with it... but mentally, they cannot overcome that hurdle. It can be far more intimidating then we recall.

Just something to keep in mind.

No, but the intimidation factor can be a lot higher on a bike when facing fast moving auto traffic...

in the case of the freeway examples for instance, one really can quite easily keep up with traffic by simply pressing down on the accelerator... since that option doesn't exist for cyclists, the intimidation can be quite "heady." Glad you can recall those instances... it can be somewhat difficult to look back on such things sometimes.

I know of several cyclists that refuse to commute even though they are quite strong riders and should not have any problems with it... but mentally, they cannot overcome that hurdle. It can be far more intimidating then we recall.

Just something to keep in mind.

If, like me, you learned to drive in a manual transmission car, heavy traffic situations were really intimidating mostly when you were stopped. No amount of pressing an accelerator would help if you couldn't get that clutch release timed right. Granted, most people nowadays seem to learn on automatics which take most of that fear factor away but it wasn't too long ago (though before I learned to drive 14 years ago) that many more autos on the road were manual transmissions. Didn't stop anyone from driving as far as I know.

No, but the intimidation factor can be a lot higher on a bike when facing fast moving auto traffic...

in the case of the freeway examples for instance, one really can quite easily keep up with traffic by simply pressing down on the accelerator... since that option doesn't exist for cyclists, the intimidation can be quite "heady." Glad you can recall those instances... it can be somewhat difficult to look back on such things sometimes.

I know of several cyclists that refuse to commute even though they are quite strong riders and should not have any problems with it... but mentally, they cannot overcome that hurdle. It can be far more intimidating then we recall.

Just something to keep in mind.
Which brings us to my most fundamental point: the single biggest factor in traffic cycling safety and cycling advocacy is cyclist attitude and behavior. It's mostly about the perceptions each cyclist has in his own mind, which is closely connected to his knowledge and skills. Facilities and motorist behavior are almost entirely extraneous to that.

If, like me, you learned to drive in a manual transmission car, heavy traffic situations were really intimidating mostly when you were stopped. No amount of pressing an accelerator would help if you couldn't get that clutch release timed right. Granted, most people nowadays seem to learn on automatics which take most of that fear factor away but it wasn't too long ago (though before I learned to drive 14 years ago) that many more autos on the road were manual transmissions. Didn't stop anyone from driving as far as I know.
:beer:

I learned to drive in '71 VW bus with manual transmission and 60 hp. Maybe that's why disrupting traffic flow does not seem like a big deal to me.