Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I don't, but 99% of the cyclists that I see do. And like Mr. Beck likes to point out, accomodations affect cyclists even on streets without accomodations. So even on streets without bike lanes, "bike lane lubbers" (for lack of a better term) ride on the edge where the bike lane would be if there was one there, even when same direction traffic is absent.
Okay.
Do you agree with all of the following?
- position affects conspicuity
- conspicuity is particularly bad when the cyclist is positioned on a sidepath
- conspicutity is better but still relatively compromised when he's positioned in an on-the-edge bike lane,
- and conspicuity (as affected by positioning) is best when the cyclist is positioned "centerish" between left and right tire tracks of a vehicular traffic lane.
I'm not there to be conspicuous. I just don't want to get hit. My conspicuity is markedly diminished when my bike is in the garage too, and so far, neither it nor I have been hit while there.
One's conspicuity is indeed at it's best when riding right down the center of the lane,
if the driver expects the cyclist to be there. One's conspicuity is only slightly reduced however when a fast-moving vehicle splatters one's bike and body all over the lane.
I see a lot of comment regarding inadvertent drift as a cause of cyclists being hit in bike lanes. Thus far, though skid marks say cars do occasionally enter the bike lane, I have been the beneficiary of thousands and thousands of inadvertent misses by vehicles
not in the bike lanes.