catgita

Yes, it really isn’t complicated, but a fair number of drivers can’t make that mental connection when it comes to bikes, especially with multiple bikes. I don’t think it is a disrespect thing in most cases, they literally don’t know what to do for simple lack of experience dealing with it.

I see this sort of confusion and mistakes a lot when bikes are keeping up with traffic, and quing up at stop signs. Cars try to pass when there is no space ahead of the bike, run the stop sign by going at the same time as the bike ahead of them, or even passing by running the stop sign on the left side of the road. Inexperience leads them to not see bikes as vehicles at all.

JoeyBike

IMO, motorists' brains see TWO things. Moving and non-moving objects. Moving objects are cars, trucks, buses, trains and motorcycles. Non-moving object include parked vehicles, road signs, fire hydrants, mail boxes, traffic cones/barrels, pedestrians, and......cyclists.

Once a motorist passes a cyclist we might as well be a fire hydrant. They do not conceive that we are actually MOVING. This is why right-hooks happen. Do motorists worry about hooking that mailbox they just passed? Same with cyclists. It's all part of the program. All we can change is ourselves. Right hook attempts are nearly 100% detectable in advance with judicious use of a rear view mirror. Plain and simple. Use a mirror, stop cycling in traffic, or stop crying about it. These are the options.

SHBR

I still do a head check, no mirror is 100% effective. I've had motorists come from the far left lane to make a right turn, and buses that have almost flipped over trying to deliberately right hook me. Malicious motorists do exist, contrary to what some here believe.

I find a mirror to be most effective when I am stopped at intersections.

work4bike

To be fair, he did say, "nearly 100%", but nevertheless it's true nothing is 100% -- that would be unnatural; however, I will say that it does make it easier to detect a righthook using a mirror.

I just had near-righthook about six-months ago and I could see the guy with his turn signal on and going at a speed that indicated to me that he was going to get to the turn at the same time as me; I couldn't do that without a mirror.

I decided, at the last minute, to make the right turn and sure enough we both turned on a dime and if I had gone straight I would've been hit.

mr_bill

Wait, what?

"Turn signal"?

What is that?

-mr. bill

I-Like-To-Bike

Stop crying? This is A&S, not a chance. Not with so many emotional posters with so many motorists, lawmen, and all the other miscreants (including unworthy bicyclists who Are Not A&S brand "Experienced") allegedly conspiring to do them in.

Ninety5rpm

Really? Please cite something anyone "here" said that indicates or at least suggests they believe malicious motorists do not exist.

Either I missed something or someone is exhibiting a reading comprehension problem.

Ninety5rpm

Given how often we all see such incompetent motorist behavior it's a wonder anyone still doesn't take it for granted and rides accordingly.

Once you accept it as normal expected behavior and realize it can be easily managed, it's no big deal.

Daniel4

And then there are those who see that bad driving is the acceptable norm and recommend to others to quit riding.

SHBR

This isn't about you, no need to worry.

Here is just one example.

Ninety5rpm

Just because someone applies Occam's razor in one particular instance to discount an unnecessarily complex explanation involving intent does not even hint that this person believes cyclists are never intentionally hit.

I suspected your claim was based on misreadings like this. Thank you.

Ninety5rpm

Indeed. They too need to learn how easily it can be managed.

Not to say that we shouldn't keep putting the pressure on bad drivers. It's just not an effective strategy for achieving either safer cycling nor increasing bike usage compared to other approaches.

mr_bill

I'm trying to come up with any approach to increasing bike usage that is as "effective" as your approach.

Again, great that you've found something that works somewhere for you.

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

I can't think of anything that discourages bicycling more than the hysterical promotion of the supposed "need" to separate cyclists from car-dominated roadways.

mr_bill

I know, it's just so much better to ride all alone in a car dependent world, isn't it?

-mr. bill

WNCGoater

What I have learned and take away from this thread is I should "take the lane" on a two lane road with "normal" speeds of 55-60 mph, even while there is a wide and very serviceable shoulder on which I could ride. I do this by waving my arm, or some other semaphoric-type gesticulation of the arms, torso, and head.
By doing so I control the circumstance, I control the traffic pattern/flow, and I control the motorists' driving, even controlling their intentions. Everyone understands these actions and in so doing, I improve safety to such an extent that it is no longer even a concern.

Pity the foolish neophytes on here that do not recognize the invaluable service these safety experts provide.


And I'm glad God gave me a brain that does something other than control bodily functions, such as, allow critical thinking, ability to analyze situations, and the ability to separate BS from useful information using good ole common sense.

FBinNY 

I posted some suggestions earlier, not of the formulaic "take the lane" type, but feel I need to add that IMO there are no "rules" and it's always about the situation.

That said, staying on the shoulder in a situation like yours has a specific risk that it puts you to the right of likely right turning traffic. This is the same whether you're on the shoulder or the right side of the right lane. It also leaves you vulnerable to drivers who look at the situation and assume you'll continue on the shoulder and follow it to the right, rather than leave the shoulder and go straight.

So, that's the situation and the risks for you to be aware of and manage. There are various options and the best depends on the details. If main road traffic is heavy and fast moving, you might continue on the shoulder making the turn, than once in the lighter flow, cross that road, and take the opposite shoulder back to the main road. Or you might wait for a decent opportunity, move into the traffic lane and continue straight.

There's a road near me with a similar situation except that the main road is 4 lanes. As I approach the ramp, I move to the center of the right lane (take the lane) then as the lane widens forming the ramp, move left so that right turning traffic can move over and pass me on the right. Then I steer for the right side of the lane past the split. This allows maximum flow of traffic wishing to pass, and the occasional right lane non-exiting car is only affected for a few seconds.

My point is that there's no single answer. Your job is to be aware of the implications of every situation, recognize the potential risks, and figure out the right approach based on the SPECIFIC conditions at the moment. What works once, may not be right the next time, so you can't fall into the trap of a single right approach.

Also, keep in mind what your lane position and conduct may mean to drivers approaching. Put yourself in behind their wheel and imagine what they may assume and do based on that.

mr_bill

You haven’t ridden in Upstate either? (And no, any county north of the Bronx doesn’t count, LOL signs on highways should be derided. Westchester, Rockland, etc are not Upstate.)

In New York State you must use the shoulder on such roads. Paranoids (and graduates of certain cycling classes) can shout edge riding is dangerous all they want.

But the line they took through the intersection says they were going to continue straight. People driving cars in Upstate are used to people riding bikes on shoulders. What’s the term of art, normalizing?

And the line the person in the car says they were going straight, or someone from Massachusetts in a rental car.

The myth that you can control others is the bizarre one. Always have a plan B and plan C and execute when needed. (Braking and not crashing is not a fail.)

No amount of lane position and/or flappy bird signals changes that.

-mr. bill

WNCGoater

FWIW, I wasn't making my sarcastic comments at you. There were Ninety5 other reasons I posted that. Go back and read posts #21, #25, #37, #46. Of what you've written above, I have no disagreement. Also for clarity, I wasn't the OP and that wasn't my situation.

mr_bill

BTW, people on bikes going around Seneca go straight for a metric century. (Vast majority.) One way to turn it into a century is to take the spur and go around the west bank of Keuka.

-mr. bill

FBinNY 

No problem.

I didn't suspect that the post was directed at me in any way. In fact, I sort of agreed with you, but opted not focus on either your post or what inspired it, and instead posted what I felt might be useful to anyone facing a similar road situation.

You're right. Based on the tone of your post, I mistakenly mixed thought you were the OP. But that barely matters since it's about the information offered, not who it might have been directed at.

FBinNY 

Actually, I've ridden "Upstate" extensively over the years, both on the eastern side between NYC and Canada, and across the southern tier as far as Buffalo, back across the Northern tier to and across. Adirondacks, and in the Finger Leaks region. I probably rode on that same stretch of road at one time.

1 - NYS is basically a FRAP state, and though bicyclists may use the shoulder on a road of that type, they are not required to do so. However "taking the lane" as many advocate isn't legal either, except when the situation warrants it. (ie. preparing for a left, bad pavement or shoulder). No one is likely to be cited for taking the lane as they approach that junction, and until clear of it, though being cited is the very least of the possible consequences.

2- I agree that cyclists cannot control traffic behind them and (IMO) trying to do is an "at your own peril" proposition. But there are times and situations where it one may use the road in a way that drivers must either slow and follow, or swing around. (doesn't guaranty they will)

3- a fair reading of my post would imply that I was more focused on recognition of the hazards of the situation than any specific formula for lane position or conduct.

elocs

What could you have done differently? Probably not ride on a 55 mph road in heavy traffic on a Friday afternoon would be an intelligent choice unless you have a death wish or just like to flirt with disaster. No ride is worth risking your life in such a situation.

mr_bill

How many over the years ago?

I found the law oppresive, but it’s not my say anymore.

-mr. bill

FBinNY 

I would have thought selective editing to alter the meaning was beneath you.

Here's the relevant passage for those who care.

S 1234. Riding on roadways, shoulders, bicycle or in-line skate lanes and bicycle or in-line skate paths. (a) Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skate shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except......

Note that the final or is at the end implying it's an option rather than a requirement, like the bikeways if they exist.

While I'm not a big fan of the law, especially the must use bikeways clause, it's not unreasonable. I'd rather that it said "as far right as practicable rather than referencing not impeding traffic.

But the reality of the law is that how it's enforced in the field is more important than the actual language, and IME police officers in the state (outside of NYC) are pretty good about limiting enforcement to extreme cases.