That's why I would have been claiming it rather than trying to share it.

And that motorist would not have seen you at all, any more than she did NOT see the guy on the side of the road.

I understand "claiming the road," but it is simply stupid to do if cars cannot see you... in this case, bad lighting, morning haze and a narrowing lane (4 lanes down to 2) would have put you right in front of an auto moving at 40MPH or so from some other lane to right behind you. Can you say SPLAT!

This is one of those situations that calls for separation between driver and biker.

Go take a look at the NYC video... there are situations there that call for taking the lane... and at the speed traffic is moving, it can react to you taking a lane... fast boulevards do not allow for that.

I understand "claiming the road," but it is simply stupid to do if cars cannot see you... in this case, bad lighting, morning haze and a narrowing lane (4 lanes down to 2) would have put you right in front of an auto moving at 40MPH or so from some other lane to right behind you. Can you say SPLAT!

That's funny, because it's the exact opposite of my experience when claiming the lane. I'd say the situation here is more a case of a cyclist being difficult to see by everyone due to their poor lighting.

I agree, the motorist is at fault, but as distracted and negligent as this person obviously was, there is really only one solution that would avoid the accident in all cases.
The cyclist should have had far better lighting, and should have claimed the lane.
I personally just added a xenon strobe to my bike for night riding, and I wouldn't be without it now. A couple of truck marker reflectors and LED blinkers, plus a front halogen are good too. For me, my total cost so far is about $50. I'm planning on dumping another $60 for a high-end NiMH pack but it's not necessary.

The cyclist needs to get into the road where the motorist can see them, and needs to have so much lighting that they can't ignore them.

Since getting more lighting, and staying in the road and out of the shoulder, I'm having less close drive-bys.

I agree, the motorist is at fault, but as distracted and negligent as this person obviously was, there is really only one solution that would avoid the accident in all cases.
The cyclist should have had far better lighting, and should have claimed the lane.

There are no guarantees. I think in this case, it's highly debatable whether or not such actions would have overcome driver negligence.

That's funny, because it's the exact opposite of my experience when claiming the lane. I'd say the situation here is more a case of a cyclist being difficult to see by everyone due to their poor lighting.

So if you are difficult to see, and the auto traffic is traveling at a high speed (typical of a boulevard) you are then going to "jump" in front of them by taking a lane...

I think NOT!

This will be my only post on this forum, but thank you for letting me tell you about him. And thanks for the article. It will be passed on to other friends.

Don't know if you're still following this thread Wessi, but you have my sympathy for the loss of your friend.

So if you are difficult to see, and the auto traffic is traveling at a high speed (typical of a boulevard) you are then going to "jump" in front of them by taking a lane...

I think NOT!

I'm instead going to make sure I'm not difficult to see -- and being in the centre of the lane is part of that.

I'm instead going to make sure I'm not difficult to see -- and being in the centre of the lane is part of that.

There you go again... assuming that cars even see you at all... especially in fog, at 45 MPH in the early morning light.

Good luck