mcours2006

This is by far the biggest benefit of having a mirror--seeing how drivers who are coming up behind you react. The vast, vast majority of them move over, if not to the left lane, then at least a partial lane change to pass.

When I use to ride closer to the right side, some drivers would not change lanes or even attempt to; they just hug the lane markings on the left side of the lane enough to squeeze by. Result: close pass.

So I have to ask, from my own data riding further out reduces the number of close passes, but does it increase the risk of being hit from behind? I have no data for this one, thankfully.

noimagination

In response to the first question: there is no data, therefore there is no way to measure the relative risks of a "close" pass (say, < 0.5m or 20", for the sake of argument) and a "non-close" pass (≥ 0.5m). Reason would tell us, as many others have posted, that the closer the pass the less margin for "error" (from minor wobbles to major divergences in the path of travel) and, therefore, the greater the risk.

In response to the second question: think about what you're asking. For there to be a good-quality study, someone would have to (simplifying everything significantly here): (a) determine the projected separation between the motor vehicle and the cyclist assuming both maintain a straight path; (b) count the number of times that a pass resulted in a crash; (c) assuming you could get enough data points, plot separation on the independent axis vs. crashes on the dependent axis and fit a curve to the data. There is no way to obtain such data except through controlled experimentation, which isn't going to happen.

Alternatively, I suppose, one could measure the deviations from the theoretical straight path for autos and bikes in actual use, then perform a statistical study on the likelihood of a ≤ 0 separation "event" as a function of the theoretical separation assuming a straight path. Sounds pretty complex, however, and I'm not sure how useful it would be in real life. Seems to me that, as many in this thread have already suggested, variation (i.e. the conditions for each "pass") would swamp the signal. I don't think you would get a meaningful prediction of the actual risk.


-------------

Robert C

My daughter recently had a "close pass' that turned into a complete crash sideswipe. Of course the person didn't stop. There were a lot of other people that did stop or make a complete lane change to pass her as she, and the bicycle, was lying on the roadway.

Unfortunately no one reported it and she didn't get a license number. As such, when she contacted the police there was nothing that they were able to do.

I have since added a dash cam to my car with the thought that if I ever do happen to see something like that, I will have something to email to the local police. I also think the dash cam has helped me to be a better, or at least more lawful, driver; there is the reality that those records could be subpoenaed. I don't want any evidence of any wrongdoing on my part.

Ninety5rpm

A mirror check takes a fraction of a second. Proficient mirror users, in cars and on motorcycles as well as on bikes, check mirrors every 3-4 seconds.

You know you check it that often if you are always aware of approaching traffic. That is, nobody every “suddenly” arrives behind you, without you being aware of them approaching prior to their arrival.

And if you’re using the full lane you’re automatically avoiding the edge hazards that require 100% attention like opening doors.

rachel120

Maybe this question should be sent in to Mythbusters.

Happy Feet

I would question whether forcing all traffic to slow and complete an entire lane switch to pass is safer for either the driver or rider overall, statistically speaking, as compared to just allowing traffic to flow as expected.

Unless you are riding on 20mph or less roadways you are basically a stationary object each driver is approaching in a moving vehicle. One they have to figure out how to detour around in traffic traveling both way. Over a long period of time I would expect more driver errors from that than passing while riding on the right/shoulder.

Do you have a reflective triangle as tractors and other slow moving vehicles do or do you just hope drivers notice and reduce speed. It would seem all hope of safety is pinned to them noticing a blinky light (if used). Safety for riding right/shoulder is based on the fact that most drivers don't drive in that zone and avoidance is very easy compared to someone being directly in the path of the vehicle.

noimagination

Run 1: live Adam
Run 2: live Adam
Run 3: Adam pancake
Run 4: live Tory
.
.
.

Might be amusing.


-----------

Ninety5rpm

The point is even Mythbusters couldn’t get a meaningful measurement/study done on this question.

rachel120

I have very recently started riding on a road that is a two lane road. What I do which seems to work very well is I take the lane and watch my mirror closely. When a car gets close and there's no oncoming traffic I move over as close as safe to the right painted line so they can easily pass and then I move back to the center. I define "as safe" as no debris or unsafe pavement in my path and not passing cars on the side waiting to turn onto the road. While I don't have a lot of experience on this road, doing it this way seems to work. I've been passed by maybe 15 or 20 cars and I haven't had a too close pass yet. They all straddle the line rather than trying to stay in the lane when passing me.

mr_bill

I find that I can perfectly avoid riding in the door zone. Imagine that.
Now can you explain mirrors to me again?

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

I suppose it’s natural to assume that would be the case. If you regularly edge ride and assume the treatment you get (often ignored) would be the same while using the full lane, it’s natural to think improving your sensory conspicuousness with a reflective triangle might be helpful, if not necessary. But it’s not.

It hasn’t quite been 10 years since sharrows and Bikes May Use Full Lane signs were added to the MUTCD, but in that period more and more places have been adding them. And bicyclists all over the country have been encouraged to follow their guidance. So not all are using the full lane yet on 35 mph Main Street in Joplin, MO, a road recently receiving this treatment, but many cyclists from Portland, OR to Portland, Maine, and from San Diego to Orlando certainly are. How long has noisebeam been using the full lane on his daily commutes in Phoenix, for example?

Note that curb parking is often allowed on the roads where cyclists ride, which of course requires motorists to come to a complete stop. Traffic somehow manages. Same with passing a bicyclist using the full lane, only it’s much less of an issue. On a 35 mph road a 20 mph cyclist is more like being stopped on a road with 15 mph traffic.

Ninety5rpm

Yes I can imagine that. Not sure why you’re asking me to explain mirrors again because a mirror is certainly not necessary to avoid riding in door zones.

My point was that someone who rode at the edge couldn’t afford to check a mirror as often as one using the full lane. Edge riding requires much more vigilance - 100% attention ahead, because of edge threats like doorings, kids/pets/balls suddenly appearing, sudden driveway pullouts. Using the full lane you have more space and time to notice and react (if necessary), so you can safely afford to frequently look briefly away from scanning ahead to check your mirror (or speedo or watch or gps or hr monitor for that matter).

Ninety5rpm

B I N G O

I presume by “watching your mirror closely” you mean check it frequently to keep yourself apprised of traffic approaching from behind, how fast they’re coming, how soon they’ll arrive, etc.

Good point to move over when there is no oncoming traffic. This is exactly what CyclingSavvy teaches as “control and release”.

You are leading the dance!

cyclingsavvy.org/2010/06/you-lead-the-dance/

noimagination

It takes experience and judgement, however, and sometimes you'll still get it wrong. This will work like a charm for a single car acting predictably (not necessarily a given), but what about two cars separated by 1 car length, or 5 lengths? A pass might be safe now, but what about by the time the 2nd (or 3rd, or 4th, or nth) car passes you? The control and release strategy can help to reduce risk in some circumstances, without a doubt, but nothing will reduce risk to zero. The best "strategy" is to use multiple strategies as appropriate to the circumstances - ride out of the lane of travel, or take the lane, or control and release, or pull off and let the guy who has been patiently waiting for the last 45 seconds by, or take the bus, or other.



---------

mcours2006

Your lifetime of experience riding has been obviously different than a lot of folks who ride bikes regularly around here, some of whom, I'm sure, also have a lifetime of riding experience riding who will disagree with you that riding on the edge is safer than away from it, ceteris pribus.

Parked cars move at 0 km/h and yet somehow traffic is able to move around them on the busy streets of downtown Toronto where street parking is the norm.

Fact is, drivers focus on the road ahead of them and they seen what's in front, not to the side. The closer to the edge you ride the further away you are from their zone of focus.

In Ontario, bicycles are considered slow-moving vehicles, and as such are subject to the rules for such vehicles. It states explicitly in the government's cycling handbook:

For cyclists, you must ride far enough out from the curb to maintain a straight line, clear of sewer grates, debris, potholes, and parked car doors. You may occupy any part of a lane when your safety warrants it. Never compromise your safety for the convenience of a motorist behind you.

The last part bolded for emphasis.

longbeachgary

Not saying you're stupid but It should be obvious to you and to everyone else that a 4,000+ pound vehicle driven by random and probably distracted driver at 30, 40 or 50 mph and within inches (and sometimes closer) of defenseless cyclist or pedestrian is dangerous. One because it can cause a cyclist to get scared and jump like a scared person is prone to do and two most drivers do not possess the necessary skills to drive that closely to something - especially something that's moving. And I'm not being a tough guy - it just bothers me that people don't think before they sit down at the keyboard. CLOSE PASSING IS NOT DANGEROUS - give me a break.

Ninety5rpm

Of course nothing can reduce risk to zero - traffic safety (regardless of mode) is all about risk mitigation. That should go without saying.

Control and release, properly understood, IS using multiple strategies... Controlling the lane and releasing the lane, as is safe when it's safe, even pulling off the road if releasing at the edge is not possible or does not facilitate safe passing for some reason.

If you have to take the bus to be safe, you might have more to learn...

rachel120

I actually have had more than one car behind me, due to oncoming traffic. It still worked out. The biggest count was either three or four (poor memory, not poor visual skills) and the last car didn't have enough time to pass but still was acting patient, though I'm certain I was being sworn at, until the oncoming traffic cleared again. The cars came up almost all at once, it wasn't me hogging the road. That road alternates between virtually no cars in sight and bunches of traffic all at once.

mr_bill

Given that I was one of those studied during sharrow studies, can I ask you a few questions?

Is there a “just paint” sharrow anywhere in the land that is placed at your recomended position of between the left tire track and and the midpoint between the left and right tire tracks?

Are they recomended on 40 mph roads? 45 mph roads? 50 mph roads? 55, 60, 65, 70...?
I wonder why not. (I don’t.)

And just wondering if you’ll explain, again, mirrors?

-mr. bill

noimagination

You're right, in 25+ years of riding as an adult, I have by no means learned it all (I've never raced, for example, nor, quite possibly, ridden under the circumstances you ride under). IMHO, there exist routes that are not safe to ride on a bicycle. In which case, it might be wise to use multi-modal transportation and take a bus to skip the dangerous part. You are certainly free to disagree.


----------

Ninety5rpm

Well of course there are some routes to be avoided (mostly those involving freeway riding), but if there are some destinations which you feel can't be reached safely by bicycle such that you would rather take the bus to get there, not because of distance but because of perceived traffic dangers, with 25+ years of experience... that's just sad.

Ninety5rpm

Sharrows are supposed to be centered in the lane, so if there are any placed left of center, they're placed incorrectly. But of course you understand that sharrows are simply there to remind everyone that cyclists may use the full lane, not to designate where exactly cyclists are supposed to ride. Not sure why you would expect them ever to be found left of lane-center.

While sharrows are generally recommended for roads with speed limits at 35 mph or below, they are recommended for faster roads in some circumstances. The CA MUTCD, for example, spells this out in Section 9C.07:

02a The Shared Lane Marking may be placed on roadways that have a speed limit above 35 mph, where there is bicycle travel and there is no marked bicycle lane and the right-hand traffic lane is too narrow to allow motor vehicles to safely pass
bicyclists.

www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/camutcd/docs/CAMUTCD2014-Chap9C.pdf

Happy Feet

The thing is, people keep referring to "edge riding" as the only option to taking the lane when, in my experience at least, it is very seldom that I ride an "edge". Oddly, I don't ride in ditches or plow through debris on a regular basis but I do have the ability to negotiate minor obstructions with little drama or need to default to taking up a whole lane of traffic. If experience gives me anything it is the ability to judge with some accuracy just how much space my bike needs without an unreasonable buffer zone by default. Thus, I don't worry unduly about "close passes".

Control and release is such an arrogant term for a cyclist to use. Imagine if every motorist held and released you as a cyclist instead, making you do a little dance just to prove you "noticed" them. I guess I don't see myself as being so special that I need the attention.

mr_bill

In *some* circumstances they are, but in general, no, they are not. NONE of them are left of center. Zero.

And they are NOT “generally” placed on roads 35 MPH or less, they “SHOULD NOT BE placed on roadways that have a speed limit above 35 mph.” Would *I* prefer the word must? Yes, I would. But pointing to California is like pointing to Nixon.

-mr. bill

rachel120

Three feet is hardly an unreasonable buffer zone, but it is the law. Don't pass me within inches because you failed science class when it came to measurements and think you can squeeze both you and me in a 10 foot lane and still give me my three feet. Plus, if I am close to the right, not only am I dealing with the people who failed science, I'm scaring the heck out of right turn traffic who have no choice but to pass within inches.

Control and release is actually being very nice to other traffic. The state department of transportation says the best place for a cyclist, with extremely rare exceptions, is center of the lane. Me staying in the center but going right when it's safe to pass is the equivalent of a car veering partially off the side of the road to give extra room for the cars behind to pass. I could do both the legal right and state recommended position of staying in the center but I don't feel like being a d***.