Advocacy & Safety - A car fails to keep safe distance in the left turn lane and rear ends me

2 days ago, I was cycling down a boulevard, and at the end of the street, I went into the left turn lane in order to turn left onto another street. Up in front of me was a huge delivery truck, so I could not see the left turn light and when the truck moved, then I moved. As the truck was making the left turn, the light turned red, which meant I had to wait until the traffic was clear, so I stopped. BEHIND ME, a motorist failed to keep a safe distance between me and his vehicle, so when I stopped to wait for the traffic to clear, he ended up rear ending me. Good thing I have a full fender on my rear wheel, which took most of the impact, and loosening a bolt as a result. No other damage though. The thing that bugs me about this is that the motorist stopped quite close to my rear wheel while I stopped behind the truck at the red light, and in general, these motorists are such in a rush that even if I am not making a left and going straight, they still stop dangerously close to my bike at a red light. Overall, my point is, motorists, KEEP A GOOD DISTANCE BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND YOU. The lives of cyclists like me depend on your actions as a driver.

this is an issue I see all the time with cars in turn lanes they follow each otehr so close they can't stop so sometimes the whole line turns and several may go through a red light.

so what did the cager do? did he say you shouldn't be in the road?

As or keeping a safe distance, it should be done no matter what is ahead of you. And aholes that draft trailers through lights like that annoy me. they know they are going through it blind, but, they don't seem to care.

...KEEP A GOOD DISTANCE BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND YOU...

YOU'RE PREACHING TO THE CHOIR. :p

Sorry to hear you got hit, luckily it wasn't too bad.

I hope you reported the accident...make his insurance rates go up! I don't care if no damage was done, if I was in my car and someone rear ended me i'm reporting it, if I'm on my bike and someone rear ends me even if it's a tap..i'm reporting it. They were obviously in too much of a hurry to see that I'm in front of them, waiting another 10 minutes for the cops to show up and another 5 to talk to them will teach them a lesson..

Ever look at cars at an intersection? They're more or less bumper to bumper.

And not to excuse the motorist, but do you have a brake light? Did you start to move, than suddenly stop?

... but do you have a brake light? Only someone who's motoring needs to visually indicate when they're braking (because they're operating a vehicle that can deaccelerate from a high speed way faster than a human powered vehicle).


... Did you start to move, than suddenly stop? At least where I live, motorists (due to the extraordinary level of danger posed by motoring to other individuals) are required to not follow other vehicles (including bicycles) more closely than is reasonable and prudent (i.e., if a motor vehicle is driven into someone who's already established their position on the road, then the motorist was almost certainly unlawfully close).

I hope you reported the accident...make his insurance rates go up! I don't care if no damage was done, if I was in my car and someone rear ended me i'm reporting it, if I'm on my bike and someone rear ends me even if it's a tap..i'm reporting it. They were obviously in too much of a hurry to see that I'm in front of them, waiting another 10 minutes for the cops to show up and another 5 to talk to them will teach them a lesson..

Have you ever "reported" an "accident" with no damage or injury to the police? Did they laugh you out of the station, or did they wait politely for you to exit or get off the phone to start shaking their heads in disbelief at the it takes all kinds busybody who doesn't care if no damage was done? Obviously you are not in too much of a hurry; you don't mind wasting your own time as well as others'.

Insurance rates go up for the "perp" of this crime? Who the heck are you kidding?

Only someone who's motoring needs to visually indicate when they're braking (because they're operating a vehicle that can deaccelerate from a high speed way faster than a human powered vehicle).

Ah, I'm pretty sure a bike can come to a stop much faster than a car.

^ In a head on collision, maybe. Otherwise, car brakes are far more effective at stopping cars than bike brakes are at stopping bikes.

Overall, my point is, motorists, KEEP A GOOD DISTANCE BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND YOU. The lives of cyclists like me depend on your actions as a driver.

Your life depends on YOU. Every time you climb aboard your saddle you are agreeing to put yourself in harms way. Everything about your safety from that moment is YOUR responsibility. Not the responsibility of motorists nor lawmakers. Y-O-U.

Want to avoid getting "squeezed" or boxed out at red lights? Maybe you should stop offering "them" a target. Either stop riding (not really), or run the offending red lights if possible. Obviously, motorists already hate you. You have nothing more to lose than your life.

Glad you made it through this one OK.

. . . .
And not to excuse the motorist, but do you have a brake light? Did you start to move, than suddenly stop?

Is there some sense to this question that completely escapes me? Or am I suddenly feeding a troll?

Is there some sense to this question that completely escapes me? Or am I suddenly feeding a troll?

If that's a troll, I'd like to feed it a toilet mint.

Even if there was a way to equip with a bright enough brake light, I wonder how many motorists would correctly interpret it on a bicycle.

If it adds fodder to the discussion I (slowly) ran into the back of a van in June under identical circumstances. I was towing a rather heavy trailer on a bike with what tuned out to be suspect brakes. Fortunately the van was in extremely poor cosmetic condition, and the driver just gave me a "WTF" look and kept going. My bad. I've since put new brakes on that bike.

The thing that bugs me about this is that the motorist stopped quite close to my rear wheel while I stopped behind the truck at the red light,...
Such drivers are red flags to me. There is no need to stop so close behind any vehicle, especially a bicycle. And the most hazardous motorists compound the issue by traveling too quickly into a stopped left turn lane before they come to a halt at your rear wheel.

Right or wrong, under those same circumstances, I would have likely drafted the truck through the light. Illegal?...okay...but the motorist already demonstrated questionable judgment, and progressing through the intersection would have seemed to be my safer choice under the circumstances as I perceive them.

Regardless, you did what should have been the safe and proper thing to do, i.e. waiting for the next green light. Fortunately, you're okay and your bike is mostly so. Hopefully, the driver realizes just how serious the consequences of his carelessness could have been and will change his behavior.

If that's a troll, I'd like to feed it a toilet mint.

You would have just run the light, right?

This happened to me -- almost exactly. Driver tried to pass on the right during our left turn from a left turn lane. Heard a car coming behind me, move to the right, quick glance, oh ****!, whack, and I didn't even fall down. All the damage was on the car, driver was found at fault, and had nothing to do with me. The best was calling the cops saying there was a hit and run between a car and a bike. Freaked 911 out. The driver returned only to say "you put a dent in my car!!". Well, no kidding. Best was we had the same insurance company, so one rep said to the other "your driver is a complete fool". Other rep agreed. The nicest thing is that 'bike insurance' goes on homeowner's insurance. Her car insurance rates went up and she got a point on her license.

The cops, on the other hand, thought it was all my fault and I was getting all Critical Mass on cars. "Didn't you willfully hit the car!?!?". Um no. I don't like getting run over.

+1 Bikers.

You would have just run the light, right?

That is my default answer - run the light. But the OP did not give me enough details about the situation to say that I would have run that light at that moment.

Sometimes I am forced to stop at red lights (heavy crossing traffic) and nearly every time the car behind me crowds me or even blows their horn before the light even turns green.

...a bike can come to a stop much faster than a car.

... car brakes are far more effective ...
Quoting from Bicycling Science (published by MIT Press):

...a deceleration of 0.5 g (4.91 m /s2) is almost the maximum that can be risked by a crouched rider on level ground before he risks going over the handlebars. ... drivers of cars ... can theoretically brake to the limit of ... 0.8 g, which is almost 40 percent greater.

Quoting from Bicycling Science (published by MIT Press):

You still need to take into account the mass you attempting to slow.

You still need to take into account the mass you attempting to slow.

And the initial velocity.

Have you ever "reported" an "accident" with no damage or injury to the police? Did they laugh you out of the station, or did they wait politely for you to exit or get off the phone to start shaking their heads in disbelief at the it takes all kinds busybody who doesn't care if no damage was done? Obviously you are not in too much of a hurry; you don't mind wasting your own time as well as others'.

Insurance rates go up for the "perp" of this crime? Who the heck are you kidding?

I'd report it no matter what because there's no guarantee that I won't get home and realize that there's a crack in my frame that I didn't see when the accident happened and my adrenaline was pumping. If I make a report, I'm covered, if not I'm on the hook for hundreds of dollars in repairs that weren't my fault, that I didn't see at the time

You still need to take into account the mass you attempting to slow.


No, you don't. Regardless of the mass of you and your vehicle there is a limit to how fast you can slow down on a bike. Ever slam on your brakes in a car going 20 mph and have your body hit the seatbelt hard? Imagine a bicycle stopping at that same speed. You'd be ass-over-teakettle. You just plain can't stop that fast. My car can go from 60mph to zero in about 120 feet. Try seeing how fast you can stop from a "measly" 30mph on a bike.

No, you don't. Regardless of the mass of you and your vehicle there is a limit to how fast you can slow down on a bike. Ever slam on your brakes in a car going 20 mph and have your body hit the seatbelt hard? Imagine a bicycle stopping at that same speed. You'd be ass-over-teakettle. You just plain can't stop that fast. My car can go from 60mph to zero in about 120 feet. Try seeing how fast you can stop from a "measly" 30mph on a bike.

Wow, that must be an amazing car you have... most charts say you will take about 240-300 feet to stop from 60MPH. Maybe you are underestimating your stopping distance... as the driver in the OP did.

Wow, that must be an amazing car you have... most charts say you will take about 240-300 feet to stop from 60MPH. Maybe you are underestimating your stopping distance... as the driver in the OP did.

I think you need to do a little more research.

Here's a quote from the Edmunds.com road test of the 2008 Scion xB, which is what I drive:

"We brought the xB to a halt from 60 mph in 126 feet, only 3 feet longer than the old, lightweight xB."

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=120979

Oh, and nice jab attempt by comparing me to the driver that the op got hit by. Unlike him I practice safe following distances when driving, just like I tell my students in the driver's safety course I teach at my company.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/toyota/112_9712_1998_toyota_corolla_le/data_cont.html

'98 Corolla,132ft.

I'd report it no matter what because there's no guarantee that I won't get home and realize that there's a crack in my frame that I didn't see when the accident happened and my adrenaline was pumping. If I make a report, I'm covered, if not I'm on the hook for hundreds of dollars in repairs that weren't my fault, that I didn't see at the time

You are giving advice to report no injury, no damage reports to the police, and expecting results.
BTW, Covered for/from what exactly?
If you discover significant "damage" later to your bike, the obvious retort is that the "damage" was either pre-existing or happened after the accident. Good luck with your "coverage".
As I guessed you have never put your own advice into practice to see the results.

Keep in mind that real-world braking distances are much longer, due to reaction time and lack of skill on the part of many drivers (especially those who do not know how to threshold brake, for non-ABS cars, or properly use ABS, for ABS-equipped cars). Although your car can stop from 60 in 120 feet, most drivers on the road would not be able to come close to that figure in a real-world panic situation.

Keep in mind that real-world braking distances are much longer, due to reaction time and lack of skill on the part of many drivers (especially those who do not know how to threshold brake, for non-ABS cars, or properly use ABS, for ABS-equipped cars). Although your car can stop from 60 in 120 feet, most drivers on the road would not be able to come close to that figure in a real-world panic situation.

I realize what you're saying, but reaction time between a bike rider and a driver is going to be pretty much the same and therefore irrelevant to the argument here.

As far as skill, I would wager a guess that 95% of the cars on the road now have ABS and it is stupid simple to operate. No skill required. Just stomp on the pedal. Hard.

I think you need to do a little more research.

Here's a quote from the Edmunds.com road test of the 2008 Scion xB, which is what I drive:

"We brought the xB to a halt from 60 mph in 126 feet, only 3 feet longer than the old, lightweight xB."

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=120979

Oh, and nice jab attempt by comparing me to the driver that the op got hit by. Unlike him I practice safe following distances when driving, just like I tell my students in the driver's safety course I teach at my company.

Well if you estimated 120 feet, and left room for 120 feet, then like the driver that hit the OP, you too would have crashed 3 feet into him. :p

Yeah it was a bit of a jab... I see far too many motorists out there that have no idea of the 2 second rule or keeping a safe following distance. Perhaps they too are "hyper aware" of their stopping distance... + 3 feet. :rolleyes:

Oh and that stopping distance is no doubt based on dry clean pavement, near new tires and brakes...

I realize what you're saying, but reaction time between a bike rider and a driver is going to be pretty much the same and therefore irrelevant to the argument here.

As far as skill, I would wager a guess that 95% of the cars on the road now have ABS and it is stupid simple to operate. No skill required. Just stomp on the pedal. Hard.

And sadly that is about how ~80% of motorists drive... stomp the gas hard, drive right up to the red light, stomp the brake hard...

"Gee, I don't get anywhere near that mileage... and my brakes wear out soooo fast... " :twitchy:

Wow, that must be an amazing car you have... most charts say you will take about 240-300 feet to stop from 60MPH. Maybe you are underestimating your stopping distance... as the driver in the OP did.Assuming constant acceleration, a 60 mph initial speed and stopping in 120 feet, that works out to 9.83 m/s^2 -- almost exactly the acceleration due to gravity. (The formula is acceleration= 1/2 * speed^2 / distance. You can let google do the heavy lifting for you like this (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=0.5+*+(60+mph)^2+%2F+120+feet+in+g), if you wish.

It's possible, but not likely for a real-world car under real-world conditions. But it's not too far from more likely values. (And of course we're ignoring reaction times, but a bicycle would have a similar reaction time, unless your hands aren't already on the brakes, in which case your reaction time is slower ...)

And yes, a car can stop faster than a bike, and the biggest reason is that a bike will flip if stopped too quickly. (Though I think a standard bike can do better a little better than 0.5 g if the rider stops crouching and instead shifts his weight back as far as he can, and LWB recumbents are harder to flip as well.)

But while the difference is significant (with cars perhaps panic-stopping something around 40% faster), it's not really *that* big, and it really isn't the reason that bicycles don't usually have brake lights. Bicycles don't have brake lights (or turn lights, for that matter) because they're supposed to be simple, and they don't usually go that fast anyways. And besides, hand signals are usually adequate. (Counter example: when you're braking hard, most of the braking comes from your front brake, usually controlled by your left hand, the one you're supposed to be signaling with. Well, to me, any need for hard braking (and staying in control during it) trumps signaling, and I doubt I'm alone there.)

This is a lot different from my experience. Most cars stop a full car length or more behind me at a red light, especially in left turn lanes. I almost want to tell them to squeeze up behind me to make sure they trip the trigger for the light.

This is a lot different from my experience. Most cars stop a full car length or more behind me at a red light, especially in left turn lanes. I almost want to tell them to squeeze up behind me to make sure they trip the trigger for the light.

I experience the same thing.
Most of the time I motion for them to move up. Some of them will.

No, you don't. Regardless of the mass of you and your vehicle there is a limit to how fast you can slow down on a bike. Ever slam on your brakes in a car going 20 mph and have your body hit the seatbelt hard? Imagine a bicycle stopping at that same speed. You'd be ass-over-teakettle. You just plain can't stop that fast. My car can go from 60mph to zero in about 120 feet. Try seeing how fast you can stop from a "measly" 30mph on a bike.

Force = Mass x Acceleration

Simple physics chum. If you want to (de)accelerate a body, the force applied is in direct proportion to the mass.

Takes a ****load more energy to stop a 20 ton truck than a 20 lb bike, assuming both are moving at the same speed and the stopping distance is equal.

Force = Mass x Acceleration

Simple physics chum. If you want to (de)accelerate a body, the force applied is in direct proportion to the mass.

Takes a ****load more energy to stop a 20 ton truck than a 20 lb bike, assuming both are moving at the same speed and the stopping distance is equal.

The argument really revolves around how well the brakes can apply that force to negatively accelerate either vehicle. I think the posters who claim that bikes have longer stopping distances are making those statements with respect to the quality of brakes found on a car vs a bicycle; that is, the car's brakes work much better than the bicycle's secondary to their inherent design.

Force = Mass x Acceleration.Yes, Newton was a wise man. But that formula is only a part of the picture when you're trying to stop.

Ultimately, both the brakes on a car and those on a bike are usually good enough that the brakes are no longer what keeps you from stopping more quickly. Instead, what limits your braking ability is the traction of your wheels (in a car) or how hard you can apply the brakes before you flip (in a bike.) Putting better brakes on usually won't help, because they're usually not the limiting factor. (Now, if they are the limiting factor, then by all means, replace them.)

If the weight of your vehicle doubles, then the force required to give you a given deacceleration doubles as well -- we get this from the formula you so thoughtfully provided. However, doubling the weight also doubles the force exerted by gravity, and so it doubles the force between your tires and the road. So, assuming that you brakes can handle it (and in general, in a car, they are capable of locking the wheels even while carrying the maximum load the car is designed to carry), your stopping distance is still approximately the same. Do you remember the coefficient of friction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_friction) from physics class? (Note that I'm ignoring things like aerodynamic effects -- at maximum braking, their effects are usually much smaller than the other factors, at least for non-race cars.)

Now, I did say approximately. The coefficient of friction isn't really a constant in the real world -- it's fairly constant for metal on metal, but for rubber on concrete it's not quite so neat. Wide rubber tires on a car will often help it stop faster than narrow rubber tires. But the difference is far smaller than the difference between the widths of the tire.

As for a bike, if you put the extra weight on the back where it helps the bike not flip over, adding that extra weight may actually help it stop faster. If you put enough weight on the back, or made the bike longer (like a 'bent or a tandem) or kept the center of gravity low enough, you may actually find that the traction of the front wheel could become the limiting factor -- and once you reach that point, you'll probably find that the bicycle can stop almost as quickly as a car. (Though the higher tire pressure probably means that the bike still has more weight per square inch of rubber on the road, so the car will probably still stop slightly faster than that bicycle. And of course, you can safely bring a car closer to the point of skidding, because it won't fall over if it skids.)

I got hit a couple of years ago while riding home in the dark. I was lit up like Las Vegas! Luckily my paniers were stuffed which took the brunt of the hit. I was in utter shock but there was no damage other than a scrape on the paniers and I think my leg hurt for awhile... The driver was an old man who took off in a hurry before I could do anything. In Canada if you ride a bike it is considered a vehicle so you have to follow the rules of the road. However I'd say most drivers are completely unaware of this. I ride on the shoulder as much as possible, in fact that is all that one can do where I live because it is all highway and rural unlit roads. I occasionally see cyclists trying to take the lane and pray for their safety.
But can you really get brake lights for a bike?!

The argument really revolves around how well the brakes can apply that force to negatively accelerate either vehicle. I think the posters who claim that bikes have longer stopping distances are making those statements with respect to the quality of brakes found on a car vs a bicycle; that is, the car's brakes work much better than the bicycle's secondary to their inherent design.

Yes, that is precisely the point I was making.

But can you really get brake lights for a bike?!Yes (http://www.amazon.com/Acclaim-Signal-Directional-Brake-Bicycle/dp/B000SMCY0E), you (http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.3631) can (http://www.bicwarehouse.com/safety-flasher-brake-light-109469.html). And even if you couldn't, they wouldn't be hard to make yourself.

Now, I'm not sure how useful they'd be, but you can certainly buy them easily enough.

What doug and wickedcold said. If you're in the average car, braking is limited by tires. Bike with decent brakes and tires, limited by wheelbase.

You are giving advice to report no injury, no damage reports to the police, and expecting results.
BTW, Covered for/from what exactly?
If you discover significant "damage" later to your bike, the obvious retort is that the "damage" was either pre-existing or happened after the accident. Good luck with your "coverage".
As I guessed you have never put your own advice into practice to see the results.

I am not giving advice, I'm simply stating what I would do in that situation. Also, I was not "expecting" anything, I just said I would report any accident so there is a record if something would come up later. I'm not quite sure what you mean by my "coverage" but as far as never putting my advice into practice, I've thankfully never been hit in such a way that could result in any damage to me or my bike.

I am not giving advice, I'm simply stating what I would do in that situation. Also, I was not "expecting" anything, I just said I would report any accident so there is a record if something would come up later. I'm not quite sure what you mean by my "coverage" but as far as never putting my advice into practice, I've thankfully never been hit in such a way that could result in any damage to me or my bike.

Fair enuff. My advice/comment is that if you don't mind wasting your time, do what you want if you end up in that situation. What you expect to be "covered," by reporting no-harm-events as accidents to the police, is still a mystery.

Did you happen to get the tag number from the offenders' car. If so go to the State insurance
commissioners office and report him through there. By the way did you happen to exchange
info as required in any accident?
dogbitteneear

I have had problems with being at a stop light and the sensors not working.
Anyone have any suggestions?
dogbitteneear

I have had problems with being at a stop light and the sensors not working.
Anyone have any suggestions?

the basic idea (http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/port/2945/Traffic/TrafficSensors.htm)

Get a couple magnets and zip tie them to the bottom of your pedals.

2 days ago, I was cycling down a boulevard, and at the end of the street, I went into the left turn lane in order to turn left onto another street. Up in front of me was a huge delivery truck, so I could not see the left turn light and when the truck moved, then I moved. As the truck was making the left turn, the light turned red, which meant I had to wait until the traffic was clear, so I stopped. BEHIND ME, a motorist failed to keep a safe distance between me and his vehicle, so when I stopped to wait for the traffic to clear, he ended up rear ending me. Good thing I have a full fender on my rear wheel, which took most of the impact, and loosening a bolt as a result. No other damage though. The thing that bugs me about this is that the motorist stopped quite close to my rear wheel while I stopped behind the truck at the red light, and in general, these motorists are such in a rush that even if I am not making a left and going straight, they still stop dangerously close to my bike at a red light. Overall, my point is, motorists, KEEP A GOOD DISTANCE BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND YOU. The lives of cyclists like me depend on your actions as a driver.

I am 50/50 on how close a motorist stops behind me. Last night(around 6pm EST), it wasn't quite pitch black. But, It definitely was dark. I had two back lights flashing red. Yet, There was a motorist, less than 5ft. from my back wheel.:mad: I was extremely glad I didn't have to hit the brakes.:mad: Because, Almost assuredly, I would have ended up in the hospital. :mad: It almost felt like the guy was after me.:mad: Since I was going 20-25mph. The faster I went, never widened the distance between the motorist n' I.

It's more fun to get rear-ended while in motion. By a couple of former bike messengers cruising in a car. Yeah. Tacoed wheel but I was otherwise OK. This was more than 10 years ago, getting off the Brooklyn Bridge (Manhattan side).

Ahem. As for the whole turn signal and brake light business, I use hand signals with great success all the time.

There are three ways to make a left turn. You can cross at the crosswalk(s), stay to the right and cross one street and then the other, or use the left turn lane (as you were attempting to do).

I would not use the left turn lane unless it was open, free of motor vehicles.

And if I was stuck in a predicament like you describe, I would have finished the turn, despite the light being red.