Apparently Gene doesn't seem to think cyclists can safely use major arterials:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1C3qqhW6Aw

No, Gene does it all the time... even 65MPH roads... however, I do note that you are a strong cyclist riding on a relatively flat road.. Gene simply suggests that few cyclists will take that challenge... And that road speeds are one reason that many folks won't even consider cycling.

So let's see video of you riding 8MPH up a very steep hill on a 50MPH road and then make a left turn across three lanes.

Oh and I notice that the sound is turned off in your videos (music over)... what exactly is the reaction of motorists in those videos?

BTW I did see that one road was signed at 50MPH... so you are taking the challenge.

Why not try the uphill portion of Jamboree toward Santa Ana... a 65MPH road... do it at about 4PM on a Friday and carry full panniers (to simulate a typical commuting cyclist).

I also noticed that you didn't seem to have any problems leaving a bike lane... as so many here seem to suggest is "the most difficult part."

No, Gene does it all the time... even 65MPH roads... however, I do note that you are a strong cyclist riding on a relatively flat road.. Gene simply suggests that few cyclists will take that challenge... And that road speeds are one reason that many folks won't even consider cycling.

So let's see video of you riding 8MPH up a very steep hill on a 50MPH road and then make a left turn across three lanes.

Oh and I notice that the sound is turned off in your videos (music over)... what exactly is the reaction of motorists in those videos?

BTW I did see that one road was signed at 50MPH... so you are taking the challenge.

Why not try the uphill portion of Jamboree toward Santa Ana... a 65MPH road... do it at about 4PM on a Friday and carry full panniers (to simulate a typical commuting cyclist).

I also noticed that you didn't seem to have any problems leaving a bike lane... as so many here seem to suggest is "the most difficult part."
That's because when it's all easy even "the most difficult part" is not very difficult.
The point is that if motorists hesitate at yielding ROW at all, it's more likely to be at the first step, when you're trying to merge out of the bike lane.

There isn't any other immediate technique available... changing of the roads and motoring habits will take time.

But the "road the way it is today" did not spring up overnight... so why should we insist on using a technique that may not apply to "road the way it is today?" This is akin to standing in front of tanks with bows and arrows and saying... "well we have no other way... "

We can change laws, we can insist on changes to roadways... but to do so we must first acknowledge that there is a problem... and not just "go along."

Bear in mind that "the road the way it is today" is not the same road of yesteryear... it is more crowded, faster, and the motorists are more distracted... still want to use the same old techniques?"

I think that VC is the ideal... unfortunately, the world isn't and you have to adapt to what the situation is... there needs to be more motorist education, cops that enforce speed limits and laws that truly make a motorist responsible for controlling their vehicle (I am referring to an article in "Bicycling Magazine" dealing with traffic laws and cyclists)... I think that if someone is proven to drive recklessly and injure/kill someone, part of the punishment should deal with bicycle education that included a number of hours of "bike time"...

I think that VC is the ideal... unfortunately, the world isn't and you have to adapt to what the situation is... there needs to be more motorist education, cops that enforce speed limits and laws that truly make a motorist responsible for controlling their vehicle (I am referring to an article in "Bicycling Magazine" dealing with traffic laws and cyclists)... I think that if someone is proven to drive recklessly and injure/kill someone, part of the punishment should deal with bicycle education that included a number of hours of "bike time"...

:beer:

That's because when it's all easy even "the most difficult part" is not very difficult.
The point is that if motorists hesitate at yielding ROW at all, it's more likely to be at the first step, when you're trying to merge out of the bike lane.

Or is it that you are asking them to slow down from whatever speed to bike speed? For instance I have noticed that all I have to do is glance back when approaching a red light and motorists will often interpret that as my desire to change lanes... and since they are already slowing, they have no problem making room for me... but when that same light is green, and I signal to move into a gap, it make take several motorists before someone actually slows... and I have had motorists speed up to ensure that they are not "caught behind a slow cyclist." It ain't the stripe, it's the weight of the foot on the gas pedal.

Or is it that you are asking them to slow down from whatever speed to bike speed?

Why is it that in my experience the initial merge out of the bike lane usually takes the 3-4 requests until a motorist slow to cyclist speed, but a merge from outside lane to inside usually takes one or two request until a motorist slows down?

Al

Why is it that in my experience the initial merge out of the bike lane usually takes the 3-4 requests until a motorist slow to cyclist speed, but a merge from outside lane to inside usually takes one or two request until a motorist slows down?

Al

The slowing traffic of the lane you are in has alerted motorists back to some change in the flow ahead. They are prepared for you.

The slowing traffic of the lane you are in has alerted motorists back to some change in the flow ahead. They are prepared for you.

Even when there is no traffic behind me in the outside lane?

Al

Bike lanes by definition are non-vehicular, because they inhibit integrated behavior, instead encouraging or forcing separated behavior (depending on state law). See: http://www.cyclistview.com/ITC-Intro/index.htm for details on the behavior spectrum.

The 6" stripes you see in the video are shoulders, which are optional in CA. Since the shoulders were either at the road edge on intersections approaches, or in the door zone of parked cars, I don't use them. Shoulders do have one stellar advantage over bike lanes, they define the road edge, thus nullifying any negative effects ofthe FTR law by typically making the adjacent travel lane too narrow for side-by-side sharing.
I thought only bike lane stripes were typically painted 6", and shoulder stripes were 4".

I really like the riding arterials video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1C3qqhW6Aw

and the splitting lanes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs4ZqIlur0c

The slowing traffic of the lane you are in has alerted motorists back to some change in the flow ahead. They are prepared for you.

You see cars in the next lane over slowing well before he moves into it.

You can also see that the speed differential between the bikes and the cars that aren't slowing isn't all that large either.

Those non-shoulder-check lane changes still freak me out to watch, although I can understand the reason for it.

I think the videos are fine.

They demonstrate how two skilled fit cyclists can move under relatively ideal conditions. I say "ideal" because flat, smooth, straight roads like those in the video are rare in my neck of the woods as are those warm, sunny, clear days. The fact that the road is so straight and the lack of large truck traffic means that the cyclists are visible for a long way off before the automobile driver actually reaches the cyclist. Not as challenging as when a semi-trailer is right behind you and changes lanes with a car right on it's tail. Often when the truck moves the driver behind will accelerate to anticipate gaining speed on the right of the truck then they are stuck behind you and the beside the truck. Where I ride this more than likely would produce an occasional horn blast and/or a good yell out the window as they pass.

The lack of frost heaves and potholes on those roads is almost astounding to the New Englander. When I find myself under such ideal conditions on my road bike I ride far more assertively than when my heavy commuter bike is loaded with groceries, it's night time and raining and I'm on a curvy, hilly, bumpy stretch with high speed, high volume traffic.

I suppose if I rode exclusively for fitness and recreation and not as a means of every day transportation, which for me can mean riding at times when I just don't feel like rocking the pace as I might on a quick 50 miler, then this video would seem the panacea it may to others. But the variety of riding I do requires many other skills other than the ones so ably demonstrated in the video.

I think the videos are fine.

They demonstrate how two skilled fit cyclists can move under relatively ideal conditions. I say "ideal" because flat, smooth, straight roads like those in the video are rare in my neck of the woods as are those warm, sunny, clear days. The fact that the road is so straight and the lack of large truck traffic means that the cyclists are visible for a long way off before the automobile driver actually reaches the cyclist. Not as challenging as when a semi-trailer is right behind you and changes lanes with a car right on it's tail. Often when the truck moves the driver behind will accelerate to anticipate gaining speed on the right of the truck then they are stuck behind you and the beside the truck. Where I ride this more than likely would produce an occasional horn blast and/or a good yell out the window as they pass.

The lack of frost heaves and potholes on those roads is almost astounding to the New Englander. When I find myself under such ideal conditions on my road bike I ride far more assertively than when my heavy commuter bike is loaded with groceries, it's night time and raining and I'm on a curvy, hilly, bumpy stretch with high speed, high volume traffic.

I suppose if I rode exclusively for fitness and recreation and not as a means of every day transportation, which for me can mean riding at times when I just don't feel like rocking the pace as I might on a quick 50 miler, then this video would seem the panacea it may to others. But the variety of riding I do requires many other skills other than the ones so ably demonstrated in the video.
I'm beginning to think some of you will need to see these techniques actually demonstrated on every single road in American under every single type of circumstance before you will allow yourselves to believe they work everywhere and anywhere. Until then, you will come up with these types of objections and caveats...

These guys do ride for every day transportation, and they're only going about 15 mph. On the flats. You don't have to be very fit to do that, and you should easily be that fit if you ride every day. Besides, these techniques work just as well at slower speeds when hauling a trailer with a mountain bike.

On my commute I have three lanes of a high speed arterial to merge across on a steep uphill with a blind curve at the top, and I use the same techniques there.

And the presence of large vehicles, buses and trucks makes no significant difference. The guy behind the truck is one truck length behind you, and moving at the truck's speed (who is moving at your speed because he slowed to your speed to let you in which is how you go in front of him in the first place) until he starts passing the truck, at which point he is a full truck length behind you moving at your speed before he even begins to accelerate.

But you probably need to see video of all these scenarios to believe it.

And the presence of large vehicles, buses and trucks makes no significant difference. The guy behind the truck is one truck length behind you, and moving at the truck's speed (who is moving at your speed because he slowed to your speed to let you in which is how you go in front of him in the first place) until he starts passing the truck, at which point he is a full truck length behind you moving at your speed before he even begins to accelerate.
Typical HH Out-in-the-California-Sunshine assumption to shoehorn reality to fit his ideology.

What makes this allegedly worldly commuter think that a truck, or any other vehicle on the highway traveling at the speed limit (or higher), slows down to bicycling speed before passing a bicyclist? Or slows down at all, even when waiting until the last possible second before changing lane to pass?

Cyclists, less parochial than the California Sunshine Boys, recognize that there exists cycling environments different than So Cal suburbs and club rides on the weekend.

The Lane Control Video is a product of and for those with a limited cycling perspective like HH.

Edit:

Just noticed HH's latest doozy in his latest signature: "Forming opinions and taking positions using logic, reason and assumptions derived ultimately from premises that must be true in order for this discussion to take place." That explains where HH is coming from - His opinions are based on his assumptions and premises which must be true because he believes them to be true; and every assumption and premise he floats, no matter how silly, must be "respected" as if it were the gospel truth by respondents.

I'm beginning to think some of you will need to see these techniques actually demonstrated on every single road in American under every single type of circumstance before you will allow yourselves to believe they work everywhere and anywhere. Until then, you will come up with these types of objections and caveats...
Well could it be that many cyclists here have had different reactions from trying to do exactly what these videos show. I for one have a hard time believing that motorists don't act in some negative manner to this sort of lane control.

My experience is yes it works, in varying degrees, depending on traffic load and motorist patience...


These guys do ride for every day transportation, and they're only going about 15 mph. On the flats. You don't have to be very fit to do that, and you should easily be that fit if you ride every day. Besides, these techniques work just as well at slower speeds when hauling a trailer with a mountain bike.


At this I have to laugh at as I easily can hit 20MPH on flats and I don't ride every day. If they are doing it everyday... hitting 18-20 on flats is nothing.

I still contend that taking a lane as a solo cyclist, moving at say 8MPH in 50+MPH traffic will bring on the wrath of motorists.



On my commute I have three lanes of a high speed arterial to merge across on a steep uphill with a blind curve at the top, and I use the same techniques there.

And the presence of large vehicles, buses and trucks makes no significant difference. The guy behind the truck is one truck length behind you, and moving at the truck's speed (who is moving at your speed because he slowed to your speed to let you in which is how you go in front of him in the first place) until he starts passing the truck, at which point he is a full truck length behind you moving at your speed before he even begins to accelerate.

But you probably need to see video of all these scenarios to believe it.

No, probably just unedited video with real sound. :rolleyes:

Again the techniques work... in varying degrees, and with mixed responses from motorists. I am sure there are days when it works well, and there are days when one feels like tossing a water bottle through a window. And again, the higher the speed differential, the more difficult it is.

Typical HH Out-in-the-California-Sunshine assumption to shoehorn reality to fit his ideology.

What makes this allegedly worldly commuter think that a truck, or any other vehicle on the highway traveling at the speed limit (or higher), slows down to bicycling speed before passing a bicyclist? Or slows down at all, even when waiting until the last possible second before changing lane to pass?

This is important to understand. What the video demonstrates is negotiation. Negotiation is when you request the right of way and do not move into their path until they slow to your speed to let you in. Not every driver will do it, of course, but my experience is that if you clearly and assertively signal a left turn signal overtaking motorists will slow down to let you in. Maybe 2 or 3 will blow by, but I've never had to wait more than for four vehicles. That's a few seconds. Many people simply don't believe it, so never give it an honest try, and thus reinforce their belief that it won't happen.

Watch the video again and try it for yourself. You'll be surprised.

Well could it be that many cyclists here have had different reactions from trying to do exactly what these videos show. I for one have a hard time believing that motorists don't act in some negative manner to this sort of lane control.

My experience is yes it works, in varying degrees, depending on traffic load and motorist patience...

Anything is possible, but considering I get very consistent successful results doing this no matter where or when I do it, I seriously doubt that anyone who gets different results is doing the negotiation as clearly and assertively as demonstrated in the video.

This is important to understand. What the video demonstrates is negotiation. Negotiation is when you request the right of way and do not move into their path until they slow to your speed to let you in. Not every driver will do it, of course, but my experience is that if you clearly and assertively signal a left turn signal overtaking motorists will slow down to let you in. Maybe 2 or 3 will blow by, but I've never had to wait more than for four vehicles. That's a few seconds. Many people simply don't believe it, so never give it an honest try, and thus reinforce their belief that it won't happen.

Watch the video again and try it for yourself. You'll be surprised.

I think you missed the point that buzzman (and then ILTB) was trying to make. He was referring to a situation where a large truck is approaching you from behind in the same lane at full speed. A motorist following closely behind (or even another large truck driver) possibly does not know that there is a slow moving cyclist up ahead in the road. If the truck driver chooses to change lanes at the last second, somewhat suddenly revealing a slow moving cyclist in the lane, the second driver, previously unaware of the presence of the cyclist, could be put in a panic braking situation.

In the videos shown, the absence of truck traffic prevents this from possibly occurring.

ILTB has previously shared his experience of a truck driver following another truck driver who made a last second lane change (I think that was the story). The second driver apparently locked up his brakes and swerved off the road to avoid ILTB.

It's a tough spot to be put in especially when the best option is staying put in the lane and attempting to get the approaching driver to change lanes as soon as possible. I've dealt with the late lane changing trucks on my commute although it's only been an annoyance in my experience (nothing like what happened to ILTB occurred). Moving left and issung hand signals have both helped in reducing the "lateness" of the lane change.

I think you missed the point that buzzman (and then ILTB) was trying to make...
Joejack described the scenario quite well.
Perhaps HH will comprehend the point now that it has been clearly stated three times for him. But I doubt it; reality doesn't jibe with his video version of an idealized situation so it will have to be explained away in a wall of words, or sidetracked with another "misunderstanding."

I think you missed the point that buzzman (and then ILTB) was trying to make. He was referring to a situation where a large truck is approaching you from behind in the same lane at full speed. A motorist following closely behind (or even another large truck driver) possibly does not know that there is a slow moving cyclist up ahead in the road. If the truck driver chooses to change lanes at the last second, somewhat suddenly revealing a slow moving cyclist in the lane, the second driver, previously unaware of the presence of the cyclist, could be put in a panic braking situation.

In the videos shown, the absence of truck traffic prevents this from possibly occurring.

ILTB has previously shared his experience of a truck driver following another truck driver who made a last second lane change (I think that was the story). The second driver apparently locked up his brakes and swerved off the road to avoid ILTB.

It's a tough spot to be put in especially when the best option is staying put in the lane and attempting to get the approaching driver to change lanes as soon as possible. I've dealt with the late lane changing trucks on my commute although it's only been an annoyance in my experience (nothing like what happened to ILTB occurred). Moving left and issung hand signals have both helped in reducing the "lateness" of the lane change.

thank you joejack you clearly understood my post.

Regarding the speed of 15 mph that HH claims the cyclists are traveling at in these videos:

and they're only going about 15 mph. On the flats

HH, I counted their cadence at a respectable 88-93 rpm's in two of the videos. Unless they are riding in something like a 42 x 20, which I seriously doubt, their speed has to be 18 mph +. And I disagree with you -the 3-5 mph makes a substantial difference on a road like they are on. My wife rides about 11-13 mph on her way to work- she would loathe riding a road like that. No amount of my pleading or VC training would convince her otherwise- she would rather drive in that case. BTW, If I wanted to waste my time proving you wrong there would be a myriad of ways to get a more exact speed but I'd put my money on 18+. Your insistence on an inaccurate estimated speed would be forgivable if it were not yet another example of how you manufacture reality to fit your point of view or in a desperate attempt to prove a point.

Not to disparage the riders in the video- they are obviously accomplished, fit, skilled riders and if they do ride everyday and ride road bikes like that to do everything then more power to them. For most of my transportation purposes I use a bike that weighs in at about 2 x's what those bikes weigh, am often carrying a substantial load on the back and dressed in street clothes (even then I'd still clock around 17-18 on roads like those pictured) But it's not only a matter of the bike weight but maneuverability and handling. What's being demonstrated is the kind of road technique club cyclists, recreational riders and racers have used for years and yes, it works in specific situations like the ones pictured. I use similar techniques primarily when I am on my road bike and every so often on the commuting bike (or even my folder) when conditions permit.

The videos serve a limited purpose but they do serve a purpose and I think they could be very useful to a lot of recreational riders and some commuting cyclists. But it would be disingenuous to imagine that every cyclist in America is going to go out and ride this way- I do hope the makers of the video are not quite so naive and narrow in their thinking to believe that to be the case.

Once again, I will make the point that my issues are not with "VC" per se but with the false belief that it is a panacea that resolves all issues for all cyclists all the time in all places- it simply is not so.

I stayed in south beach,rode mostly around south beach, but daily rides to UM bio. And quite a bit just around, the farthest I got to was to surfside/bay harbor. Wonderful city, nice people, some even speak English.

I agree that Surfside and Bay Harbor are wonderful cities with mostly nice people.
You can ride without being killed through most of South Beach, as traffic tends to move slowly there due to congestion. Surfside and Bay Harbor are small municipalities which have private police who strictly enforce a 30 MPH speed limit. Local drivers are aware of this, and don't dare try their luck. However, this is not the case in most of South Florida, which is home to the worst drivers in America. I live in North Miami Beach, where most people drive in excess of 65 MPH in 30-45 mph zones. If I were to attempt "lane control" in my city, it would quickly transform into an excercise in population control.

ILTB has previously shared his experience of a truck driver following another truck driver who made a last second lane change...

A local VC's only accident after 2+ decades of riding was something just like that.

I think you missed the point that buzzman (and then ILTB) was trying to make. He was referring to a situation where a large truck is approaching you from behind in the same lane at full speed. A motorist following closely behind (or even another large truck driver) possibly does not know that there is a slow moving cyclist up ahead in the road. If the truck driver chooses to change lanes at the last second, somewhat suddenly revealing a slow moving cyclist in the lane, the second driver, previously unaware of the presence of the cyclist, could be put in a panic braking situation.

I can think of few situations that concern me more than the above. As a cyclist you have to do everything you can to not allow the last second lane change to happen. Be highly visible, move farther left in the lane and issue the slow/stop signal when necessary, so motorists know they have to switch lanes early. Usually it works, but the bottom line is we can't always control every driver as much as we'd like no matter what we do.

It doesn't have to be the driver in the same lane putting us at risk. If a driver is tailgating a vehicle in the left lane, he can swap into what he figures is an open right lane, not being able to see that a slow moving cyclist is there.

I can think of few situations that concern me more than the above. As a cyclist you have to do everything you can to not allow the last second lane change to happen. Be highly visible, move farther left in the lane and issue the slow/stop signal when necessary, so motorists know they have to switch lanes early. Usually it works, but the bottom line is we can't always control every driver as much as we'd like no matter what we do.
What's that again about "controlling drivers" approaching from behind at a speed differential of at least 40+ miles an hour with cryptic hand signals, especially in hours of darkness or when their view is obstructed by other traffic? Or "controlling drivers" who see the bicyclist quite well and, for whatever reason, wait until the last second to change lanes to pass; and "controlling drivers" of the following cars?

Traveling amongst real traffic on highways at high speeds requires bicyclists to be realistic, and not count on the Lane Control Power of the equivalent of Vulcan/Jedi Mind Control Tricks to "control drivers." Nor assume that Lane Control Tricks that may work on sunny suburban wide streets with relatively light slow traffic on the weekend are applicable to all cycling scenarios.

I counted their cadence at a respectable 88-93 rpm's in two of the videos. Unless they are riding in something like a 42 x 20, which I seriously doubt, their speed has to be 18 mph +.

I think this is right -- I just got two 10 second estimates and multiplied by 6. They might be going 15 mph including stops, however.

ILTB- I never kid myself that I can control all drivers all the time.

Usually it works, but the bottom line is we can't always control every driver as much as we'd like no matter what we do.

But when I see vehicle after vehicle switching lanes early, (in my mirror) or safely slowing to my speed, I know my hi vis gear, lane position and actions (yep, even hand signals) do have control over the actions of other drivers.

Surely you don't feel that you have no control at all over other drivers when you are out there.

Bike lanes by definition are non-vehicular, because they inhibit integrated behavior, instead encouraging or forcing separated behavior (depending on state law). See: http://www.cyclistview.com/ITC-Intro/index.htm for details on the behavior spectrum.

The 6" stripes you see in the video are shoulders, which are optional in CA. Since the shoulders were either at the road edge on intersections approaches, or in the door zone of parked cars, I don't use them. Shoulders do have one stellar advantage over bike lanes, they define the road edge, thus nullifying any negative effects ofthe FTR law by typically making the adjacent travel lane too narrow for side-by-side sharing.


:roflmao: Ah, the spin of the forestorite VC!

NO, dude, bike lanes ARE vehicular for thru travel on roads- no purported 'inhibiting' integrated behavior causes a lane of travel to become unvehicular- what a crock! Even in Calirfornia the law allows 'integrated' behavior from a bike lane...

and you can't lie- in that video you edited out you riding in a bike lane vehicularily preparatory to making a left turn. Lots of roads in Socal have bike lanes and heavy traffic- do you have any videos of you two VC tools riding VC on roads with buffered bike lanes and heavy traffic?

I think this is right -- I just got two 10 second estimates and multiplied by 6. They might be going 15 mph including stops, however.

I was not addressing the average speed of the cyclists but their speed while in the lane. Their speed, which appears to be without question above 18 mph in at least two of the videos I watched, is almost twice that of many cyclists I pass on my commute daily. All cyclists are equal in terms of speed when we are stopped. ;)

and with stops that cyclist traveling at 10 mph is suddenly averaging about 8 mph.

All cyclists are equal in terms of speed when we are stopped. ;)

Not only that, but stopped cyclists are just as fast as stopped cars! Even stopped race cars!!

ILTB- I never kid myself that I can control all drivers all the time.



But when I see vehicle after vehicle switching lanes early, (in my mirror) or safely slowing to my speed, I know my hi vis gear, lane position and actions (yep, even hand signals) do have control over the actions of other drivers.

Surely you don't feel that you have no control at all over other drivers when you are out there.

I see the same early effect on passingthat you do from use of good lights and lane position; I am very skeptical about reliance on cryptic "slow/stop" hand signals, especially in hours of darkness, to control drivers at high speed coming from the rear. The early passing effect was most noticeable after I mounted several lights high enough to be seen by most drivers from way off, even those closely following another vehicle. But there are at least a few every week who cannot be "controlled" to pass in a safe manner.

I almost never see any vehicle slow down at all prior to passing unless it is a dud driver unwilling to plan ahead to merge into the left lane with the other traffic and suddenly realizes that I am not going to disappear. There aren't that many though.

You and I agree that "controlling drivers" is hardly a sure thing as touted by HH et al.

I don't think you can 'control' anyone but yourself, and even that poses a challenge for some people. The best you can do is offer 'suggestions', eg. by riding in a position that suggests they should change lanes to pass. It provides no guarantees though. I don't think anyone on the roads around here would even know what a slow down hand signal was trying to communticate.

I had a guy honking at me this morning actually. I did use a hand signal then. No, not that one. I just made a stabbing geture at the next lane over (it's 3 lanes in that section), intending to convey the idea of 'there's plenty of room over there, dopey'. I'm not sure if he got the full subtlety of the communication, but he did pass in the next lane soon afterwards. He then swung back into the left lane, and 20m later moved across all the lanes to turn right, at a red light where I caught up to him again. My only response to that kind of idiocy is :baffled:

In fact, the proportion of honkers that I catch up to again in traffic is pretty high. Not a lot of deep thinkers driving around out there.

yep, lots of impatient honking drivers around these parts too. funny how a bicyclist in the lane invokes all sorts of reactions in 10 percent of the drivers or whatever the % is.

I got the "polite right hook" tonight on my way home tonight, fully controlling the outside lane of a 4 lane 30mph arterial. motorist couldn't wait 50 feet behind me to make a right, so gunned it past me to make a right in one fell swoop from the inside lane- nice.

The dishonesty of the filmographers is evident in this thread- even HELMET HEAD recognized that as a bike lane stripe, lorax :rolleyes:

yep, lots of impatient honking drivers around these parts too. funny how a bicyclist in the lane invokes all sorts of reactions in 10 percent of the drivers or whatever the % is.


My observation has been that it's considerably less than 10% of drivers, but YMMV; I don't have to share the road with American drivers.

oh, i predict 10 percent are mildly miffed or irritated at bikes in the lane ahead of them, but less than 1 percent actually honk.

I see the same early effect on passingthat you do from use of good lights and lane position; I am very skeptical about reliance on cryptic "slow/stop" hand signals, especially in hours of darkness, to control drivers at high speed coming from the rear. The early passing effect was most noticeable after I mounted several lights high enough to be seen by most drivers from way off, even those closely following another vehicle. But there are at least a few every week who cannot be "controlled" to pass in a safe manner.

I almost never see any vehicle slow down at all prior to passing unless it is a dud driver unwilling to plan ahead to merge into the left lane with the other traffic and suddenly realizes that I am not going to disappear. There aren't that many though.

When I commute at night, I actually move my blinky anklebands to my wrists. Given that there is a considerable amount of ambient light here, my hypothesis is that the blinkies help emphasize my arm signals. Of course my only evidence is my continued survival and the comments from a few buds.

You and I agree that "controlling drivers" is hardly a sure thing as touted by HH et al.

In all fairness, I never understood his argument as a deterministic one. In a nutshell, I recall that he says that the strategy minimizes risk which is different than your description of his argument.

oh, i predict 10 percent are mildly miffed or irritated at bikes in the lane ahead of them, but less than 1 percent actually honk.

I don't know about the 10%; some days I get the sense that it could be much larger ... strangely it seems to be correlated with the angle of inclination. :D

However, I agree that it is considerably larger than the % of people that honk.

I think you missed the point that buzzman (and then ILTB) was trying to make. He was referring to a situation where a large truck is approaching you from behind in the same lane at full speed. A motorist following closely behind (or even another large truck driver) possibly does not know that there is a slow moving cyclist up ahead in the road. If the truck driver chooses to change lanes at the last second, somewhat suddenly revealing a slow moving cyclist in the lane, the second driver, previously unaware of the presence of the cyclist, could be put in a panic braking situation.

In the videos shown, the absence of truck traffic prevents this from possibly occurring.

ILTB has previously shared his experience of a truck driver following another truck driver who made a last second lane change (I think that was the story). The second driver apparently locked up his brakes and swerved off the road to avoid ILTB.

It's a tough spot to be put in especially when the best option is staying put in the lane and attempting to get the approaching driver to change lanes as soon as possible. I've dealt with the late lane changing trucks on my commute although it's only been an annoyance in my experience (nothing like what happened to ILTB occurred). Moving left and issung hand signals have both helped in reducing the "lateness" of the lane change.

I understand that point. But consider the context. Here is what ILTB wrote in response to what I wrote:



And the presence of large vehicles, buses and trucks makes no significant difference. The guy behind the truck is one truck length behind you, and moving at the truck's speed (who is moving at your speed because he slowed to your speed to let you in which is how you go in front of him in the first place) until he starts passing the truck, at which point he is a full truck length behind you moving at your speed before he even begins to accelerate.

Typical HH Out-in-the-California-Sunshine assumption to shoehorn reality to fit his ideology.

What makes this allegedly worldly commuter think that a truck, or any other vehicle on the highway traveling at the speed limit (or higher), slows down to bicycling speed before passing a bicyclist? Or slows down at all, even when waiting until the last possible second before changing lane to pass?

I'm writing about the situation where you need to make a left turn/merge in fast/busy gapless traffic: signaling and waiting for someone to slow down/yield for me before moving in front of them, thus having someone moving at my speed behind me when I'm out in the lane, while ILTB is writing about riding in a lane controlling position with a significantly long gap behind him - long enough for the next vehicle, a truck, to be approaching at full speed, and changing lanes at the last second.

In other words, yes, I'm making the assumption that ILTB is ridiculing me for making (a driver will slow down to my speed before I move in front of him), but I'm making it in a specific type of situation (busy/gapless traffic - where I'm negotiating for someone to slow down for me before I move in front of him), and he is applying it in a situation that I was not writing about (taking the lane in traffic with significantly long gaps).

For the record, in the situation where I'm taking the lane and there is a significantly long gap behind me, I do not assume that a driver of a truck, or the driver of any vehicle for that matter, approaching me from behind at normal speed will slow down to my speed before overtaking me. Nor have I ever written anything that indicated I did assume that. That's one of the reasons I use a mirror - to establish and maintain rearward situational awareness, something I have written countless times.

Buzzman, as to the alleged significant difference between 15 and 18 mph difference, please. Again, the same techniques work for me whether I'm riding 18+ mph on my 17 lbs road bike or 8-12 mph on my 23 (?) lbs cyclocross bike pulling 60 lbs of daughter+trailer.

ILTB- I never kid myself that I can control all drivers all the time.



But when I see vehicle after vehicle switching lanes early, (in my mirror) or safely slowing to my speed, I know my hi vis gear, lane position and actions (yep, even hand signals) do have control over the actions of other drivers.

Surely you don't feel that you have no control at all over other drivers when you are out there.
Exactly.

And yeah, if you see a large truck barreling at you at full speed, it's time to pay attention, to say the least. Can you see if anyone is behind him? Can you do something to coax him to slow down? Can you move aside in case you changes lanes at the last second leaving very little time for the motorist behind him to notice you and react?

That's the whole point of using a mirror to establish and maintain rearward situational awareness.

I see the same early effect on passingthat you do from use of good lights and lane position; I am very skeptical about reliance on cryptic "slow/stop" hand signals, especially in hours of darkness, to control drivers at high speed coming from the rear. The early passing effect was most noticeable after I mounted several lights high enough to be seen by most drivers from way off, even those closely following another vehicle. But there are at least a few every week who cannot be "controlled" to pass in a safe manner.

I almost never see any vehicle slow down at all prior to passing unless it is a dud driver unwilling to plan ahead to merge into the left lane with the other traffic and suddenly realizes that I am not going to disappear. There aren't that many though.

You and I agree that "controlling drivers" is hardly a sure thing as touted by HH et al.
Huh? Where have I ever said or even implied that "controlling drivers" is a sure thing?
You're looking for disagreement where there is none.

I don't think you can 'control' anyone but yourself, and even that poses a challenge for some people. The best you can do is offer 'suggestions', eg. by riding in a position that suggests they should change lanes to pass. It provides no guarantees though.
This much is consistent with what I've been posting here for years.

This is from 2005:



But on the flip side, YOU do fail to recognize that there are other users on the road that can also be responsible for their own actions.... IE motorists.

Excuse me?
What I recognize is who cyclists have the ability to control in terms of being responsible - themselves - and who they can only at best influence - others, including motorists.

For the record, in the situation where I'm taking the lane and there is a significantly long gap behind me, I do not assume that a driver of a truck, or the driver of any vehicle for that matter, approaching me from behind at normal speed will slow down to my speed before overtaking me. Nor have I ever written anything that indicated I did assume that. That's one of the reasons I use a mirror - to establish and maintain rearward situational awareness, something I have written countless times.



And what would you do if someone did not appear to slow down to your speed while you were in the middle lane and surrounded by other vehicles and had no where to "escape?"

I wondered the same thing over a year ago when I was going uphill on El Camino Real and had to take the lane for a bit as there were phone service trucks in the BL. As I looked in my mirror, the traffic that was well back was getting closer and the lead car peeled off to my left... but the group as a whole got closer and closer before each following driver peeled off. Yeah I had a mirror.... I could see them, but where was I going to go? Fortunately there were only 4-5 cars in that group, and the last one peeled off with plenty of clearance... before I was clear. The faster the road (or the motorists' speed) the less time there is to react in such a situation. What if the group was longer or one of the motorists was on a cell phone...

At best I might have been able to flatten myself against the phone trucks...

This IS exactly why speed DOES matter.

And what would you do if someone did not appear to slow down to your speed while you were in the middle lane and surrounded by other vehicles and had no where to "escape?"
If I'm in the middle lane surrounded by faster vehicles I would be signaling left and riding biased left. It's hard to imagine that someone in that lane behind me would keep coming at top speed, but even a 12 foot lane is shareable if you're willing to ride the stripe.


I wondered the same thing over a year ago when I was going uphill on El Camino Real and had to take the lane for a bit as there were phone service trucks in the BL. As I looked in my mirror, the traffic that was well back was getting closer and the lead car peeled off to my left... but the group as a whole got closer and closer before each following driver peeled off. Yeah I had a mirror.... I could see them, but where was I going to go? Fortunately there were only 4-5 cars in that group, and the last one peeled off with plenty of clearance... before I was clear. The faster the road (or the motorists' speed) the less time there is to react in such a situation. What if the group was longer or one of the motorists was on a cell phone...

At best I might have been able to flatten myself against the phone trucks...

This IS exactly why speed DOES matter.
It's important to discern between all the types of situations and not mix everything up in a muddled fashion.

Are you in a middle lane among faster traffic and thus in the process of merging left, or are you just maintaining your line in order to keep going straight and thus in the outside/slow lane? Is the lane wide enough to be safely shared side-by-side, or not? Is it ultra narrow (sub 11') or just not wide enough to be ideally shared (11-13'?), but could be shared briefly if required?

In the latter situation you seem to be talking about maintaining your route (not merging left) in a narrow outside lane situation with faster traffic, but gaps in that traffic. Yes, there the key is visibility and conspicuousness. I've ridden in uphill construction zones like that too, where there is no shoulder and just a k-rail concrete wall. But even there I've imagined that smashing up against the wall, if it ever comes to that, should be possible.

If I'm in the middle lane surrounded by faster vehicles I would be signaling left and riding biased left. It's hard to imagine that someone in that lane behind me would keep coming at top speed, but even a 12 foot lane is shareable if you're willing to ride the stripe.


It's important to discern between all the types of situations and not mix everything up in a muddled fashion.

Are you in a middle lane among faster traffic and thus in the process of merging left, or are you just maintaining your line in order to keep going straight and thus in the outside/slow lane? Is the lane wide enough to be safely shared side-by-side, or not? Is it ultra narrow (sub 11') or just not wide enough to be ideally shared (11-13'?), but could be shared briefly if required?

In the latter situation you seem to be talking about maintaining your route (not merging left) in a narrow outside lane situation with faster traffic, but gaps in that traffic. Yes, there the key is visibility and conspicuousness. I've ridden in uphill construction zones like that too, where there is no shoulder and just a k-rail concrete wall. But even there I've imagined that smashing up against the wall, if it ever comes to that, should be possible.

No it is not important to discern between all the types of situations... especially when one easily mimics the other and the basic issue is being in a position that seconds ago was quite safe, but due to speed, is changing rapidly. In my case, unlike yours (up against a k rail) I also had the potential of opening doors to contend with...

Speed is the factor that makes all these situations more difficult. Take speed out of the picture, and time is on your side... which is why motorcyclists don't have issues with this... they can move at the same speed as the other traffic.

No it is not important to discern between all the types of situations... especially when one easily mimics the other and the basic issue is being in a position that seconds ago was quite safe, but due to speed, is changing rapidly. In my case, unlike yours (up against a k rail) I also had the potential of opening doors to contend with...

Speed is the factor that makes all these situations more difficult. Take speed out of the picture, and time is on your side... which is why motorcyclists don't have issues with this... they can move at the same speed as the other traffic.
You're funny. You contend that it's not important to discern between all the types of situations, and then immediately provide an example of why we do have to discern all the types of situations. In your first post on this you asked, "where was I going to go?". Now that you've provided more details of the situation, I can answer: into the door zone.

If there are parked cars (door zone), then it's not a narrow outside lane situation - the outside lane is wide ;it's just the you want to be left of the door zone. But in the highly unlikely scenario - that someone from behind is approaching and not slowing or changing lanes soon enough - the door zone is there for you to use for escape space, should it come to that.

What's not safe about door zones is to ride in them regularly. But there is nothing wrong with reserving door zone space as an emergency buffer escape space. In practice you'll probably never use it, just as you will probably never have to hug up against a k-rail on the outside of a NOL in a construction zone, or ride into a soft shoulder to avoid getting hit from behind. But it's good to be aware of these options as you're riding, options that you'll probably never have to execute.

Well, it seems that we need are more videos to demonstrate all of the points in the forum.

You're funny. You contend that it's not important to discern between all the types of situations, and then immediately provide an example of why we do have to discern all the types of situations. In your first post on this you asked, "where was I going to go?". Now that you've provided more details of the situation, I can answer: into the door zone.

If there are parked cars (door zone), then it's not a narrow outside lane situation - the outside lane is wide ;it's just the you want to be left of the door zone. But in the highly unlikely scenario - that someone from behind is approaching and not slowing or changing lanes soon enough - the door zone is there for you to use for escape space, should it come to that.

What's not safe about door zones is to ride in them regularly. But there is nothing wrong with reserving door zone space as an emergency buffer escape space. In practice you'll probably never use it, just as you will probably never have to hug up against a k-rail on the outside of a NOL in a construction zone, or ride into a soft shoulder to avoid getting hit from behind. But it's good to be aware of these options as you're riding, options that you'll probably never have to execute.

Riiiiiiggggt and you are so hung up on the exact particulars you are missing the big picture... you are staring at the trees and you forgot you were in the forest.

It all started with being in the center lane of fast moving traffic... and I gave a similar situation, which you responded to with another similar situation... but meanwhile you have failed account for the similarity in all of this... the speed at which it happens.

BTW I provided absolutely no more information... I mentioned earlier that there were phone trucks in the BL... as I was passing them, of course I was also passing their door zone... That you failed to realize that is because you were not looking at the big picture.

When traffic is approaching you at 50+ MPH how much time do you have to determine that they are not moving over, and that you should bail out?

Riiiiiiggggt and you are so hung up on the exact particulars you are missing the big picture... you are staring at the trees and you forgot you were in the forest.

It all started with being in the center lane of fast moving traffic... and I gave a similar situation, which you responded to with another similar situation... but meanwhile you have failed account for the similarity in all of this... the speed at which it happens.

BTW I provided absolutely no more information... I mentioned earlier that there were phone trucks in the BL... as I was passing them, of course I was also passing their door zone... That you failed to realize that is because you were not looking at the big picture.

When traffic is approaching you at 50+ MPH how much time do you have to determine that they are not moving over, and that you should bail out?
You have it backwards. You're so hung up on what you think is the big picture - speed differential - that you can't see the wide and varied solutions that depend on the details in each situation.

How many phone trucks were in the BL? Other traffic in that outside lane had the right of way while you were in the bike lane. In order to merge out of the bike lane in order to go around the phone trucks parked in the bike lane, you had to negotiate with traffic in that lane. Now, if they were so far back that you didn't require them to yield, fine, then move in. Now you have the right of way and when they finally reach you, they are supposed to yield to you. If they don't, well, if you're paying attention you should have enough time to get to the front of the truck you're currently passing and cut in to ditch them. How long were these trucks, anyway, 25'? Even at 6 mph you're clearing 25' in less than 3 seconds. If they're going to reach you in less than 3 seconds when you pull into their path out of the BL, then you are violating their right of way. And that's true whether they're going 25, 55 or 75 mph.

Well, it seems that we need are more videos to demonstrate all of the points in the forum.
It's very interesting how resistant so many cyclists are to the idea that it is safe and reasonable to ride a bike in traffic in accordance with the vehicular rules of the road, and, it just works. It really, truly does.

You have it backwards. You're so hung up on what you think is the big picture - speed differential - that you can't see the wide and varied solutions that depend on the details in each situation.

How many phone trucks were in the BL? Other traffic in that outside lane had the right of way while you were in the bike lane. In order to merge out of the bike lane in order to go around the phone trucks parked in the bike lane, you had to negotiate with traffic in that lane. Now, if they were so far back that you didn't require them to yield, fine, then move in. Now you have the right of way and when they finally reach you, they are supposed to yield to you. If they don't, well, if you're paying attention you should have enough time to get to the front of the truck you're currently passing and cut in to ditch them. How long were these trucks, anyway, 25'? Even at 6 mph you're clearing 25' in less than 3 seconds. If they're going to reach you in less than 3 seconds when you pull into their path out of the BL, then you are violating their right of way. And that's true whether they're going 25, 55 or 75 mph.

Three... two large vans a trailer with a large spool of wire, and a large truck with a lift boom... there were several workers working around large green boxes on the side of the road, and there were orange cones before the trucks which were clustered in one area. How many K rails did you pass?

How do you know how fast the motorists were actually driving? More importantly this whole issue is not about the motorists that saw me, but about the ones that did not see me... as in the descriptions that ILTB and joejack both alluded to. The reaction time of the motorists that were behind the forward motorists are the issue... Just like the motorist that pulls around the van that is just to your left... and thought the space you were occupying was empty.

It's very interesting how resistant so many cyclists are to the idea that it is safe and reasonable to ride a bike in traffic in accordance with the vehicular rules of the road, and, it just works. It really, truly does.

Having been hit in much more simpler, lower speed scenarios... yeah I can easily see why other experienced cyclists can be resistant to the idea that is is "so" reasonable... we see examples of larger vehicles being hit daily... why is that, if "it just works...?"

Having been hit in much more simpler, lower speed scenarios... yeah I can easily see why other experienced cyclists can be resistant to the idea that is is "so" reasonable... we see examples of larger vehicles being hit daily... why is that, if "it just works...?"
We see examples, but relative to the number of miles driven they are extremely rare.

And in each example, almost without exception, at least one is violating the basic rules, and neither is obeying the defensive driving rules.

So as long as you are following the defensive rules, the odds of being involved in a crash should approach the odds of being hit by a meteor.

The key is to develop the skills and habits to be operating defensively by default, and to have the confidence in yourself that you will do so consistently.