Originally Posted by
achoo
No.
Because you take the lane when there's no room to safely pass no matter where you are, so you'd be slowing such a driver up anyway. If you take the lane when there's nowhere else to safely go, only real jackasses get enraged - and they're going to get enraged anyway by your mere presence on their road.
And sorry, it sounds like your wife isn't really "one of the nicest people/drivers you could possibly meet". Nice people don't go into angry venting over 20 seconds. Being nice when things are good isn't a true test of niceness, I'd say a better test of niceness is when you're inconvenienced, for say, maybe 20 seconds.
I'll still disagree with you.
The first instinct for a motorist when they are on a no-shoulder road and a cyclist is blocking their route for more than 30seconds is "Whyt the F is a cyclist even on this road?!"
Even if there are clear signs indicating right of way to cyclists on such narrow roads. (I've been on these roads, marked, and even marked 'bike' on google maps, which is why I ended up on them in the first place when scouting commutes.
I guarantee you stick 100 normal drivers into a situation in non-rush hour where there's a narrow one-lane road, no shoulder, and a cyclist blocks them by taking the lane (no other option) and thus slows them from 35-40mph speed to 12-15mph speed for 30-45 seconds, and 98 of those 100's instinctive reaction will NOT be a relaxed, oh, let's protect this rider and yield the right of way, but significant frustration, and comments of "why the F is a bike on this road in the first place? What a stupid rider. Etc." I don't like it but that's the hard reality.