Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 231
  1. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I do ride in bike lanes between intersections when it is safe and reasonable to do so. But it's the space that allows me to do that, not the stripe. If the stripe were not there, I would ride in the same.
    I don't think we're too far apart in this opinion.

    Surely you go up and down the coast. A great way to test/experience a more assertive style is by taking the lane on coastal 101, from, say, La Costa Blvd down to Del Mar. Ride out left of the right tire mark, about where you would if you were on a motorcycle. Riding in that position keeps you out of the door zone, forces same direction faster traffic to change lanes to pass you instead of trying to squeeze into the right lane with you, improves your sight lines to/from traffic moving in and out of all those places on the right (west), and gives you more room to the right for error/escape margin. In some sections the lane widens so that you can safely and reasonably move aside to allow faster traffic to pass, but those sections are the exception, not the rule on this road.
    I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that exact stretch of road. I'm closer to the mountains than the coast these days, and do a lot more riding on mountain two-laners with bike lane than on PCH/101.

    I bet I know the kind of road you're talking about though, and again, I don't think our approaches are radically different. On the narrow coast roads -- especially with lots of parked cars -- your approach makes a lot of sense. OTOH, I personally consider that kind of road to be higher risk than average regardless of how it's ridden, and it does bother me a bit that I have to impede traffic to ride it as safely as possible. I certainly agree that I have a RIGHT to ride those roads, but I choose not to when possible -- both because I don't like pushing my luck after a long and occasionally foolish riding career, and because I don't like being in the way of other people if I can help it.

  2. #27
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    Yes. Of the half dozen friends I have lost to car-bike interractions over the years, five were hit from behind.
    I'm sorry to hear about your losses.

    There are several types of hit from behind crashes, including:

    1. Cyclist is riding along edge of road, and suddenly falls or swerves, perhaps to avoid a sudden hazard like an opening car door, in front of overtaking motorist who is coming from behind.
    2. Cyclist is riding along edge of road while approaching an intersection or junction where he plans to go straight and is not noticed by a right-turner behind him who is paying attention to his left.
    3. Cyclist is riding in bike lane or shoulder when there is no traffic, and the next motorist who comes along is inattentive, does not notice the cyclist off to the side, is distracted by something, and inadvertently drifts into the bike lane or shoulder.
    4. Cyclist is riding in the middle of the lane, and has been for a long time, and motorist from behind comes along and hits him from behind.
    5. Other ???

    Do you know which types of crashes were involved in each of the losses of your friends? In particular, do you know any of which were of type (d) and definitely not a, b or c? I ask this because, so far as I know, crashes of type (d) are extremely rare.

  3. #28
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    what a diatribe.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  4. #29
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    I bet I know the kind of road you're talking about though, and again, I don't think our approaches are radically different. On the narrow coast roads -- especially with lots of parked cars -- your approach makes a lot of sense. OTOH, I personally consider that kind of road to be higher risk than average regardless of how it's ridden, and it does bother me a bit that I have to impede traffic to ride it as safely as possible. I certainly agree that I have a RIGHT to ride those roads, but I choose not to when possible -- both because I don't like pushing my luck after a long and occasionally foolish riding career, and because I don't like being in the way of other people if I can help it.
    It may be true that one type of road is inherently of higher risk than another, but I believe the behavior of the cyclist determines the real risk much, much more than any minor differences in inherent road risk difference. That is, a safe experienced cyclist will only be slightly more at risk on the higher risk road (just as any driver is), but is still much, much safer than the unitiated cyclist riding on the supposedly much safer road.

    You say it bothers you "a bit" to have to impede traffic, and that you don't like being in the way of other people if you can help it. It's very difficult to translate attitude in and out of written English (hearing your voice, and seeing your facial and body language would be very helpful), but it's possible what you're trying to convey is what I believe to be an attitude that can hinder one's ability to comfortably, safely and effectively ride a bicycle in traffic to a surprisingly significant degree. That attitude also seems to happen to correlate with "liking bike lanes".

    I learned to drive in 1971 VW bus, and, so, I learned to be accustomed to impeding traffic and being in the way of other people from early on. I suspect that experience is why it doesn't seem to bother me as much as it does other people. But I know it's imperative to be okay with it in order to be truly comfortable riding a bike in traffic, because delaying others is an inherent part of it. It's really liberarting to realize it's okay, and, ironically, once you get past that, it becomes easier to figure out how to minimize being in the way.

  5. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In the first circumstance, the rider was in the bike lane on a straight, smooth, level road, and was struck behind by a driver who admitted to having been searching for her cell phone rather than focusing on the road.

    The second was a broad curve on a wide mountain road. No bike lane, but a wide shoulder. The driver stated that the rider swerved into the road, but the cyclist's riding partners and the CHP disagreed. The driver admitted to having been distracted, either tuning the radio or inserting a cd into the player, I disremember which.

    The third was, I suppose, a type D incident, in that the rider was rding in about the right wheel track of a one lane road and was struck by a drunk in an old pickup.

    The fourth was intentional. Some lunatic took offense to the presence of the cyclist and mowed him down. The details never came out, but the cyclist wasn't actually on the road at all by the time he was struck. I can't imagine the terror of trying to escape from a nutcase intent on running you over.

    The fifth was in a bike race in South America when another drunk in a pickup drove into the pack.

    And the sixth was struck by a dump truck piloted by a coked-up moron. This took place in an intersection. The driver blew the red without even touching the brakes.

    In retelling these incidents -- for the first time, I might add -- it strikes me that alcohol and/or drugs were involved in half of them. It also strikes me that -- this time, not for the first time -- how little the cyclists involved could have done to prevent it. I have long considered being struck from behind as the lottery of cyclists.

    BTW, I have no doubt that crashes of type D are quite rare, as I almost never see people riding in the middle of the street, which makes it kind of hard to get hit there.

  6. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You say it bothers you "a bit" to have to impede traffic, and that you don't like being in the way of other people if you can help it. It's very difficult to translate attitude in and out of written English (hearing your voice, and seeing your facial and body language would be very helpful), but it's possible what you're trying to convey is what I believe to be an attitude that can hinder one's ability to comfortably, safely and effectively ride a bicycle in traffic to a surprisingly significant degree. That attitude also seems to happen to correlate with "liking bike lanes".

    I learned to drive in 1971 VW bus, and, so, I learned to be accustomed to impeding traffic and being in the way of other people from early on. I suspect that experience is why it doesn't seem to bother me as much as it does other people. But I know it's imperative to be okay with it in order to be truly comfortable riding a bike in traffic, because delaying others is an inherent part of it. It's really liberarting to realize it's okay, and, ironically, once you get past that, it becomes easier to figure out how to minimize being in the way.
    I think I see your point here, but I disagree with it.

    FWIW, when I say that it bothers me a bit, I simply mean that I don't like to inconvenience people, just as I don't like to be inconvenienced. It's the difference between having your check filled out but for the amount, and waiting untill the total is wrung up before taking the checkbook out of the pocket.
    I prefer to disrupt other people's lives as little as possible.

    Now, if disrupting people's lives makes me materially safer, then they can deal with it. When I find myself on a road where being in the way might save my life, I choose to be in the way. But then, I can also choose not to take that road, and usually do. This occasionally offends the militant "You have just as much right as they do!" crowd, (not that I'm including anyone in particular, here) but c'est la vie.

  7. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, DE
    My Bikes
    2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1
    Posts
    8,849
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist
    i don't see any questions in your last couple of posts, joe. well, maybe one.

    certainly nothing TOUGH, dude.

    Oh, oh, the "did it sink" yet question? no, not the way you proudly claim on this forum about the lack of bike lanes where you live. get your story straight, joe. like with that 'right hook' business. Is it once a week, or only twice? big contradictory statements to postulate on an internet forum.....

    I'm starting to doubt your credibility as well. it seems like the anti-bike lane BF members have to make stuff up to try and validate their agenda.
    I asked you two questions, one about incompetent cyclists in bike lanes and one about a point sinking in. You crack me up by stating that I have made things up to support an agenda though. You obviously have an agenda to try and discredit me and thus go around twisting words and making things up. Get a life.

  8. #33
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    you discredit yourself, joe. i'm not the one doing it.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  9. #34
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    do bicyclists need competency tests before riding bikes? is that what all this jacking around is all about? getting bicyclists to test competent?

    what a pipe dream. probably discriminatory. seems to be a desire to limit bicycling for the benefit of drivers....
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  10. #35
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For reference, here are the list of from-behind crash types again:
    1. Cyclist is riding along edge of road, and suddenly falls or swerves, perhaps to avoid a sudden hazard like an opening car door, in front of overtaking motorist who is coming from behind.
    2. Cyclist is riding along edge of road while approaching an intersection or junction where he plans to go straight and is not noticed by a right-turner behind him who is paying attention to his left.
    3. Cyclist is riding in bike lane or shoulder when there is no traffic, and the next motorist who comes along is inattentive, does not notice the cyclist off to the side, is distracted by something, and inadvertently drifts into the bike lane or shoulder.
    4. Cyclist is riding in the middle of the lane, and has been for a long time, and motorist from behind comes along and hits him from behind. (EDIT: By "middle of the lane" I mean in the lane such that the driver has to notice and adjust for the cyclist in order to avoid hitting him).
    5. Other

    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    In the first circumstance, the rider was in the bike lane on a straight, smooth, level road, and was struck behind by a driver who admitted to having been searching for her cell phone rather than focusing on the road.
    C

    The second was a broad curve on a wide mountain road. No bike lane, but a wide shoulder. The driver stated that the rider swerved into the road, but the cyclist's riding partners and the CHP disagreed. The driver admitted to having been distracted, either tuning the radio or inserting a cd into the player, I disremember which.
    A or C, but not D, right?

    The third was, I suppose, a type D incident, in that the rider was rding in about the right wheel track of a one lane road and was struck by a drunk in an old pickup.
    Yes, that is a D, but I should have differentiated D/sober and D/drunk, since when the rare D types do occur, it does seem to involve a drunk driver.

    The fourth was intentional. Some lunatic took offense to the presence of the cyclist and mowed him down. The details never came out, but the cyclist wasn't actually on the road at all by the time he was struck. I can't imagine the terror of trying to escape from a nutcase intent on running you over.
    Clearly E (Other)

    The fifth was in a bike race in South America when another drunk in a pickup drove into the pack.
    E

    And the sixth was struck by a dump truck piloted by a coked-up moron. This took place in an intersection. The driver blew the red without even touching the brakes.
    And hit a same-direction cyclist from behind? Was the cyclist running the red too? Or was this not actually a from-behind crash?

    In retelling these incidents -- for the first time, I might add -- it strikes me that alcohol and/or drugs were involved in half of them. It also strikes me that -- this time, not for the first time -- how little the cyclists involved could have done to prevent it. I have long considered being struck from behind as the lottery of cyclists.

    BTW, I have no doubt that crashes of type D are quite rare, as I almost never see people riding in the middle of the street, which makes it kind of hard to get hit there.
    On any road that is too narrow for the cyclist to be passed without the motorist noticing and adjusting for the cyclist the cyclist is vulnerable to a type D. These types of roads are found all over the country, in urban, suburban and rural areas, including most of the shoulderless highways with 11' lanes in eastern SD county (Ramona to Julian anyone?). It is often impossible to get somewhere without riding on roads like this, and cyclists use them all the time. There are probably thousands of cyclists riding on roads like that right this second, yet Type D remains extremely rare. This is particularly extraordinary considering the number of drunk/drugged drivers out there, but I beleve this is because the last thing to go is the driver's ability to notice what's directly in front of him in his path. After all, the vast majority of drunk drivers do manage to get to their destination without incident (like the bastard who drifted into and killed the woman in the Solana Beach bike lane a couple of months ago; he drove home to Escondido after that); if they were unable to notice hazards in their path up ahead, including cyclists vulnerable to Type D crashes, to some reasonable degree, they could not make it home. I can't prove it, but I strongly suspect Type C is significantly more likely.

  11. #36
    Senior Member rando's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    2,967
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Apologies, Six jours, this is a typical helmethead tactic, to use tragedies as evidence for his wacky riding theories.He's got little to no emotional intelligence, and less tact.
    Last edited by rando; 05-25-07 at 01:05 PM.

  12. #37
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    I think I see your point here, but I disagree with it.

    FWIW, when I say that it bothers me a bit, I simply mean that I don't like to inconvenience people, just as I don't like to be inconvenienced. It's the difference between having your check filled out but for the amount, and waiting untill the total is wrung up before taking the checkbook out of the pocket.
    I prefer to disrupt other people's lives as little as possible.

    Now, if disrupting people's lives makes me materially safer, then they can deal with it. When I find myself on a road where being in the way might save my life, I choose to be in the way. But then, I can also choose not to take that road, and usually do. This occasionally offends the militant "You have just as much right as they do!" crowd, (not that I'm including anyone in particular, here) but c'est la vie.
    Ugh. This is the kind of stuff that gets me in trouble, and causes people to dislike me. Please don't take offense and do take the following with a grain of salt. It's only the opinion of some guy on the internet, and if it makes no sense to you, by all means ignore it! Anyway, here it goes...

    With all due respect, whether you realize it or not, your language evokes a strong aversion to asserting your rights while cycling in traffic. In real-time, it's often impossible to know whether doing this or that makes you "materially safer". I believe in doing what's safest, period, regardless of how it may or may not affect others. Having to rise to the level of "might save my life" is putting that hurdle way up there. I'm not offended by it - you gotta do what you gotta do. I'm just saying I think I know exactly what you're talking about, because I've been there, and I'm here to tell you, freedom from all that self-imposed stress is way better. When you drop the "obligation to not disrupt" load from your back, it's like that first day on your brand new 3-lbs.-lighter-than-the-old-one bike. Dropping that obligation load frees you to ride more visibly and predicatably, and, ironically, causes motorists to overlook you much less often, and to treat you much better.

    When you ride in a deferential fashion, they are prone to treat you accordingly.
    What you ride in an assertive fashion (but not rude!), they are prone to treat you accordingly too.

    Having said all that, I am not at all advocating riding out in the middle of the lane all the time! Far from it! When it is safe and reasonable to ride off to the side... by all mean! But the key difference is recognizing when it is not safe and reasonable to do it, and to not do it at those times, and not feel burdened to do it just because it will delay others. In particular, it means paying attention to all the reasons that make it unsafe or unreasonable to ride "as far right as practicable", and move left when any apply. In fact, I favor actually keeping left unless faster same direction traffic is present or I notice in my mirror it is approaching, in which case I consider moving right, and do so IF it is safe and reasonable to do so. And again, I'm telling you, I get MUCH better treatment from motorists when I ride like this. It's not even close.

    Anyway, I could go on and on, but I won't. Perhaps Joe could add to this.

  13. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There are probably thousands of cyclists riding on roads like that right this second, yet Type D remains extremely rare.
    That'd be an interesting statistic, but I'd need to see the numbers, the controls, and the methodology. Personal enecdote is almost always colored by perception, mine included.

  14. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Apologies, Six jours, this is a typical helmethead tactic, to use tragedies as evidence for his wacky riding theories.He's got little to no emotional intelligence, and less tact.
    I debated with myself whether to mention my personal experiences/losses here, knowing they'd be discussed dispassionately. They all happened a long time ago, though, and the pain has faded into the sad/nostalgic type. Also, I believe the victims, along with their friends and families, would approve of using their tragedies to further our own safety in this game.

  15. #40
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    That'd be an interesting statistic, but I'd need to see the numbers, the controls, and the methodology. Personal enecdote is almost always colored by perception, mine included.
    Indeed, despite not seeing the numbers, controls and the methodology, you never-the-less asserted: "I have no doubt that crashes of type D are quite rare, as I almost never see people riding in the middle of the street, which makes it kind of hard to get hit there."

    But my point is made on common sense:
    1. There are thousands and thousands of miles of urban, suburban and rural roads with 11-12' lanes in which it is virtually impossible to pass a cyclist safely without noticing him and adjusting for him. Surely you do not doubt this?
    2. These roads are regularly used by cyclists. Sure, it would be nice to get a hard number, but it would be very difficult to do. Never-the-less, do you doubt this to be true?
    3. Type D crashes are very rare. From-behind crashes are relatively rare to begin with, and all the crash data supports this. If you filter out the drifts and right hooks and inadvertent drifts from that, there isn't much left.

  16. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    With all due respect, whether you realize it or not, your language evokes a strong aversion to asserting your rights while cycling in traffic. In real-time, it's often impossible to know whether doing this or that makes you "materially safer". I believe in doing what's safest, period, regardless of how it may or may not affect others. Having to rise to the level of "might save my life" is putting that hurdle way up there. I'm not offended by it - you gotta do what you gotta do. I'm just saying I think I know exactly what you're talking about, because I've been there, and I'm here to tell you, freedom from all that self-imposed stress is way better. When you drop the "obligation to not disrupt" load from your back, it's like that first day on your brand new 3-lbs.-lighter-than-the-old-one bike. Dropping that obligation load frees you to ride more visibly and predicatably, and, ironically, causes motorists to overlook you much less often, and to treat you much better.
    Well, I think I see where you're coming from, but I also think that it doesn't quite apply here. Or perhaps we're merely zooming by each other's points. Simply put, I stay out of the way when I can, and only interfere with other traffic when I feel it neccesary and appropriate. We may only disagree on the point of what constitutes "necessary and appropriate". My concern is that there are folks who are so militant about exercising their rights that they make an obnoxious point out of it at every opportunity. "I spend all my time in the middle of the road because it might make me safer" is the ideological flipside of "I never get in the way of traffic because I don't want to upset anybody". I don't think either of us is saying any of those things -- but "freedom from all that self-imposed stress is way better" strikes me as analogous to "Responding to every disagreement with '**** YOU!!!' is SO liberating!". I think a little self-imposed stress about interfering with other peoples' lives is appropriate.

    When you ride in a deferential fashion, they are prone to treat you accordingly.
    What you ride in an assertive fashion (but not rude!), they are prone to treat you accordingly too.
    Ah, but the line between "assertive" and "rude" can be vanishing thin, and it's been my customer service experience that most rude people think they're just being assertive -- even when they're yelling **** YOU!!!

    Having said all that, I am not at all advocating riding out in the middle of the lane all the time! Far from it! When it is safe and reasonable to ride off to the side... by all mean! But the key difference is recognizing when it is not safe and reasonable to do it, and to not do it at those times, and not feel burdened to do it just because it will delay others. In particular, it means paying attention to all the reasons that make it unsafe or unreasonable to ride "as far right as practicable", and move left when any apply. In fact, I favor actually keeping left unless faster same direction traffic is present or I notice in my mirror it is approaching, in which case I consider moving right, and do so IF it is safe and reasonable to do so. And again, I'm telling you, I get MUCH better treatment from motorists when I ride like this. It's not even close.
    Our disagreement is so slight, when it comes right down to it. You and I ride almost exactly the same. If anything, I'd say that when they're really isn't any traffic around, I ride wherever in the lane I feel like! The essential difficulty, then, is teaching folks when and where to ride in any given scenario, and AFAIK, the only way to that is to show them. This requires a much higher "old guard to new blood" ratio than we have now, and thus becomes an unsolveable dillema.

    And where bike lanes fall in it I have no idea.

  17. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    But my point is made on common sense:
    1. There are thousands and thousands of miles of urban, suburban and rural roads with 11-12' lanes in which it is virtually impossible to pass a cyclist safely without noticing him and adjusting for him. Surely you do not doubt this?
    2. These roads are regularly used by cyclists. Sure, it would be nice to get a hard number, but it would be very difficult to do. Never-the-less, do you doubt this to be true?
    3. Type D crashes are very rare. From-behind crashes are relatively rare to begin with, and all the crash data supports this. If you filter out the drifts and right hooks and inadvertent drifts from that, there isn't much left.

    Ah, but these are two different scenarios. I do not doubt for a moment that many cyclists travel many miles on these types of roads. I have done so myself and will doubtless do so again. I rarely, however, see cyclists travelling in the middle of these roads, which is an important part of "D" incidents as you define them. When I or any of the cyclists I know travel these roads, we travel them "as far to the right as practicable". And I believe it is relatively common for riders to get their tickets punched on these roads. Would riding in the middle of them as opposed to the right of them make any appreciable difference? Well, I personally doubt it, but in the absence of hard numbers we have to depend upon personal anecdotes. Which are incredibly unreliable.

  18. #43
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    Well, I think I see where you're coming from, but I also think that it doesn't quite apply here. Or perhaps we're merely zooming by each other's points. Simply put, I stay out of the way when I can, and only interfere with other traffic when I feel it neccesary and appropriate. We may only disagree on the point of what constitutes "necessary and appropriate". My concern is that there are folks who are so militant about exercising their rights that they make an obnoxious point out of it at every opportunity. "I spend all my time in the middle of the road because it might make me safer" is the ideological flipside of "I never get in the way of traffic because I don't want to upset anybody". I don't think either of us is saying any of those things -- but "freedom from all that self-imposed stress is way better" strikes me as analogous to "Responding to every disagreement with '**** YOU!!!' is SO liberating!". I think a little self-imposed stress about interfering with other peoples' lives is appropriate.


    Ah, but the line between "assertive" and "rude" can be vanishing thin, and it's been my customer service experience that most rude people think they're just being assertive -- even when they're yelling **** YOU!!!


    Our disagreement is so slight, when it comes right down to it. You and I ride almost exactly the same. If anything, I'd say that when they're really isn't any traffic around, I ride wherever in the lane I feel like! The essential difficulty, then, is teaching folks when and where to ride in any given scenario, and AFAIK, the only way to that is to show them. This requires a much higher "old guard to new blood" ratio than we have now, and thus becomes an unsolveable dillema.

    And where bike lanes fall in it I have no idea.
    First, it's very difficult to judge how others ride from reading their words on the internet. So, certainly, it's possible that we ride almost exactly the same. But I doubt it, and I'll tell you why, and it has nothing to do with what you've written, it's just pure probabilities: I see very, very few cyclists, including experienced racers and commuters, who ride the way I do. So if you ride almost exactly the same as me, you are one rare bird, guaranteed.

    Anyway, be safe out there, and let 'em know who's boss!

  19. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fair enough. Thanks for the pleasant chat!

  20. #45
    Non-Custom Member zeytoun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    My Bikes
    1975-1980 SR road bike
    Posts
    1,613
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Helmie, maybe now would be a good time to describe that wiggle wag you do, for visibility? I'm sure some of us could use a refresher (like me, who can't remember the real name for it)...
    I am a mutated sig Virus. Please put me in your sig so that I can continue to replicate and mutate, blah!.

  21. #46
    genec genec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    san diego
    My Bikes
    custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
    Posts
    22,566
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by zeytoun
    Helmie, maybe now would be a good time to describe that wiggle wag you do, for visibility? I'm sure some of us could use a refresher (like me, who can't remember the real name for it)...
    It comes down to this. Ride more left or centerish when and where you can without impeding the flow of traffic... as traffic approaches, move right, into a BL or along the side of the road.

    That really is the basis for the whole thing. HH may go into some long timing thing about how long it takes to do this or that... but really the basic idea is ride as far left as you can, but watch for and give way to faster same direction traffic, unless there is some strong reason to remain leftish.

    Default center, scoot right.

  22. #47
    Non-Custom Member zeytoun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    My Bikes
    1975-1980 SR road bike
    Posts
    1,613
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Default center, scoot right.
    OK got it.

    Would you do this repeatedly for a string of cars?
    I am a mutated sig Virus. Please put me in your sig so that I can continue to replicate and mutate, blah!.

  23. #48
    -=Barry=- The Human Car's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
    Posts
    4,077
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmet Head
    I mean, "at least hint", "seem to indicate" and "lead me to speculate" are not very definitive about anything.
    FWIW I would use the same terminology about the studies that support VC (we are still waiting for a decent study from both ends of the debate.) If I have the time I will try and find the link of CDC (or was NIH) review of bike safety studies. Basically the report gave the pro-bike lane studies more credence then the pro-VC studies but they added that there is strong evidence that riding with traffic also increases safety.
    Cycling Advocate
    http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
    . . . o
    . . /L
    =()>()

  24. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, DE
    My Bikes
    2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1
    Posts
    8,849
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by zeytoun
    OK got it.

    Would you do this repeatedly for a string of cars?
    Do you mean:

    a. Would you move left into between each and every vehicle in a pack of cars?

    or

    b. Would you move left in between packs of cars that are far enough apart that you safely move left, assert your position in the lane, then move right as they finally approach?

    If (a), no. That would be impossible and incredibly annoying for both the cyclist and the faster traffic. If (b) then yes.

  25. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, DE
    My Bikes
    2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1
    Posts
    8,849
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Six jours
    Ah, but these are two different scenarios. I do not doubt for a moment that many cyclists travel many miles on these types of roads. I have done so myself and will doubtless do so again. I rarely, however, see cyclists travelling in the middle of these roads, which is an important part of "D" incidents as you define them. When I or any of the cyclists I know travel these roads, we travel them "as far to the right as practicable". And I believe it is relatively common for riders to get their tickets punched on these roads. Would riding in the middle of them as opposed to the right of them make any appreciable difference? Well, I personally doubt it, but in the absence of hard numbers we have to depend upon personal anecdotes. Which are incredibly unreliable.
    How is riding in the middle of these roads an important point? Where motorists commonly drive in an 11 foot lane and where cyclists commonly ride (at least a foot or so from the edge) would have the motorist at least clipping the side of the cyclist as they drove past if the motorist did not adjust at all. If the motorist adjusted, they obviously saw the cyclist. If there was oncoming traffic and the motorist couldn't fit by (such as would be the case for either the cyclist in the middle of the lane or on the outside edge of the lane) they would need to stop and wait for a good time to pass. Do you agree?

    Now cyclists getting clipped often (if it were true which I'm not really sure but I don't think it's UNcommon) on these roads would not surprise me at all due to the fact that a far right position encourages motorists to try and pass even when it is not safe, such as around blind corners or over hills. When opposite direction traffic appears, they take the easy way out and avoid the head-on collision by side swiping the cyclist. This is one more reason to ride centerish.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •