In my commute I encounter this type of traffic light intersection a couple of times. See attached image. When the light turns green, it is simultaneous with the left turn. My question is where do I best position myself and the bike in order to make a safe left turn. Other facts, there is no bike lane; the road is a designated bike route/share-the-road-with-bicyclists.

3 or 3.5

3 or 3.5. I would personally do 3.5 and make the car behind you wait.

If you try 4 you have to worry about turning left in front of some idiot going straight.

2 also works but after you turn you're going to be trapped between lanes.

1 is probably the safest but it leaves you stuck on the left side of the road.

3.5

You don't want anyone squeezing next to you, which could happen with either 3 or 4. About 4, what Laggard said. About 3, you may have to cross in front of cars turning from 3.5 to get to the right side of the lane into which you're turning. Taking 3.5 says "just like a car, you can either get behind me, or use the next lane to the left".

As you execute the turn, you arc out toward the right side of the lane into which you're turning. By taking 3.5, you have that lane, for at least the duration of the turn.

3.5 take the lane until you have safely made the turn.

3.5 is no safer than 4 if someone is going to run into you from behind

I vote for 4... I assume that is the right-wheel track for that lane?

4 still "takes the lane"

3.5 puts you on top of the damn oil slick, and you're cornering on it? NAH !

the problem with 4 is it gives a car who will not yeild the right of way to move in if you are turning left take the lane it keeps the car behind you.

4 is no good because the car following might be going straight. When I suggested 3 or 3.5, I thought both would be effectively blocking the whole middle lane, but the others are correct, if you are in 3 or 4, some nut will probably try to pass. If youre ok with splitting lanes and like to pass cars stopped at intersections, 2.5. But I can't advocate that, it's illegal and slightly more dangerous than 3.

3.5 is no safer than 4 if someone is going to run into you from behind Likewise, 4 is no safer than 3.5. 'Course, 3.5 might be considered safer in that you're more likely to be seen, and therefore less likely to get rear-ended in the first place.


I vote for 4... I assume that is the right-wheel track for that lane?

4 still "takes the lane" Not any place I've ridden. City road lanes are 12 feet wide. If you're not pretty close to the center of the lane, a car will assume that the space next to you is for them to occupy. The only way to "take the lane" is to take it physically. If you're in line with the right wheels of a car centered in the lane, there's too much room to your left to be considered "taking the lane".


3.5 puts you on top of the damn oil slick, and you're cornering on it? NAH ! It's been at least 10 years since I've seen any significantly greater amount of oil in the center of a city road lane. Cars are much cleaner wrt leaks than in the past, and with 12-foot-wide lanes, the whole concept of "wheel track" and "oil center" is pretty-much gone. This may not be as true in more tropical parts of the country or the world, where cars last longer and are, therefore, older on average. Most anywhere north of, oh, St. Louis, car engines outlast the bodies, and most of the cr@p Detroit shipped in the '80s is off the road.

It's been at least 10 years since I've seen any significantly greater amount of oil in the center of a city road lane. Cars are much cleaner wrt leaks than in the past, and with 12-foot-wide lanes, the whole concept of "wheel track" and "oil center" is pretty-much gone. This may not be as true in more tropical parts of the country or the world, where cars last longer and are, therefore, older on average. Most anywhere north of, oh, St. Louis, car engines outlast the bodies, and most of the cr@p Detroit shipped in the '80s is off the road.

While that may be true in Madison, it isn't here in the Bay Area. My foot slips all the time at intersections when I'm in the center of the lane.

3.5 to 3.75. You need to be far enough in the lane to prevent a car behind you from passing you on the left as you start to make your turn. I would also look back before the turn and make a strong signal to the left so the car knows what you are planning to do.

The designated bike route is of no consequence.

I think we are arguing about the diagram and what it means, rather than what to actually do. I also agree that the cyclist should take the lane, but I don't think taking the lane means being exactly in the middle of the lane on the oil slick, 6 ft from the left in a 12 ft lane. I would be 7 - 8 ft over from the left in a 12 ft lane. That's just artistic license. No way any vehicle is going to think they're going to get around me. I'm still blocking their way.

Lots of old cars here in Houston, no winters here, no salt on roads, lots of oil. Non-registered, non-inspected vehicles driven by illegal immigrants are the worst offenders, as you'd imagine.


Likewise, 4 is no safer than 3.5. 'Course, 3.5 might be considered safer in that you're more likely to be seen, and therefore less likely to get rear-ended in the first place.


Not any place I've ridden. City road lanes are 12 feet wide. If you're not pretty close to the center of the lane, a car will assume that the space next to you is for them to occupy. The only way to "take the lane" is to take it physically. If you're in line with the right wheels of a car centered in the lane, there's too much room to your left to be considered "taking the lane".


It's been at least 10 years since I've seen any significantly greater amount of oil in the center of a city road lane. Cars are much cleaner wrt leaks than in the past, and with 12-foot-wide lanes, the whole concept of "wheel track" and "oil center" is pretty-much gone. This may not be as true in more tropical parts of the country or the world, where cars last longer and are, therefore, older on average. Most anywhere north of, oh, St. Louis, car engines outlast the bodies, and most of the cr@p Detroit shipped in the '80s is off the road.

Very interesting responses. Thanks!

I never really paid much attention to oil slicks. I've been lucky, so far. Now, I will also be on the look out for those.

Another vote for 3.5. Take up that lane and make them run over the top of you if they are going to do anything. With 3.5 you have both turning traffic and straight through traffic having to yield to you. (or run over you.

3.25, because your lane goes left OR straight. The key principle in cycling is to be visible and predictable. To be visible, you need to be in the middle of the lane, between 3.2 and 3.8. To be predictable, you need to choose a position that indicates your position to other users of the road. 3.70+ (including 4) is consistent with going straight, which you're not. 3.30-3.70 is basically the center, and your intent is ambiguous. You want to pick a position that indicates you are turning left, which means to the left of the lane, yet not so far to the left as to invite some knumbskull to squeeze in on your right.

Note that if this was a right-turn-only lane the best position would be around 3.75.

Also, I prefer the terminology "use the full lane" to "take the lane". Taking implies that you don't have it in the first place, or that you are lacking some kind of rights. Do motorists "take the lane"? Or do they "use the full lane"? So do you, unless you choose to allow someone to share it with you.

Buy and read "Effective Cycling" by John Forester on amazon.com.

Serge

I would personally take position 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706 798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038 :D

Ah, nuts, khuon! You just beat me to it!

Ah, nuts, khuon! You just beat me to it!

Well... of course, that's just an approximation. :D

I would personally take position 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706 798214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110555964462294895493038 :D

Don't be silly. He needs to ba at least at 3.142

Which I suppose means he's square rooted irrespective of what he does.

Now just where is Adam Spencer when this thread is calling for him?