Originally Posted by
Bekologist
does John mean because bicyclists sometimes go fast in america, bicyclists don't have to follow the law and use legal hand signals?
oh, that's right, the furtive Forester fear of crashing, keep both hands on the bars at all times! advice.
What? the published method in your book differs.Your book instructs cyclists to not use hand signals when changing lanes in traffic. page 308. Fear of losing control of the bike is part of your reasoning. page 309. And its written in the context of slow speed traffic, when traffic is moving at the same speed as the bicyclist.
that bears repeating.
Now, john may think he wrote something different, but advice to notice a cyclist isn't using a hand signal is an explicit recommendation to not use hand signals. Fear of crashing is one of two reasons the Forester Method gives for not signalling turns.
fear of losing control at slow speeds, Forester method, page 309.
anyone who's long published instructions are for cyclists to not use hand signals at low speeds out of fear of suddenly requiring two hands on the bars - the alternate would be losing control or crashing- maintains no credibility as a spokesman about either American OR Dutch cycling.
It's quite common to require both hands on the bars to maintain control. Certainly while riding in traffic, particularly at speed. Potholes, cracks, sudden braking, etc. No one who has ridden a bike further than around the block is unaware of this...while randonneuring I have performed many tasks 'hands-free' at speed - eating, putting on and taking off clothing, reading maps, etc. This competency doesn't change the essential fact that there are many times at which I do prefer to have both hands on the bars.
To pretend otherwise just harms whatever argument you're trying to make, and brings your own cycling experience into question.