pretty good demonstration...those streets even I would ride, and I'm a wimp. what was it, sunday morning?

I've noticed that in videos where cyclists communicate with motorists, make intents clear and prevent sharing narrow lanes that it can (accurately) look like a ho-hum thats easy type traffic situation. In similar traffic situations where cyclists don't do these things can results in video documentation showing a road that looks bad to cycle on.
I am not saying that traffic was heavy or fast in this particular video.

Al

I'm not sure what you think VC is, but I'm pretty sure it's not something you switch on and off depending on the road conditions. Saying you can only use VC on certain streets is as silly as saying you can only drive a car vehicularly on certain streets.

The way I see it, if you're riding a bike in public space, you are governed by rules. That includes every road, path bikeway, shoulder or other 'road-related area', and you either ride in accordance with them ie. 'vehicularly', or you don't. If you do decide to ride according to the rules, why would you only do so under certain conditions?

VC is not just riding in the middle of the lane. In fact, my reading of Effective Cycling suggested exactly the method of lane claiming that I prefer - to only do it when it's necessary. HH's legacy of over-emphasising lane-claiming as a technique is gonna take a while to dissipate, I see.

The only real failing of the VC education system I really see is a refusal to deal with the rules for paths and bikelanes, and teaching how to ride on them 'vehicularly'.

Now, whether VC can 'work for everybody in every situation' is entirely dependant on the individual. I ride on roads that not many other cyclists prefer to use. I always obey the rules, I claim the lane when necessary, and I mostly feel safe, but I'm not going to insist that they emulate me if they are more comfortable on a path. Some roads are simply too daunting for all but the most experienced cyclists, and even then in some spots, I really start thinking that I'd prefer to be elsewhere. To deny that is foolish. If you are going to ride on a path though, do it vehicularly.

There are many factor that determine the riding comfort of any road - speed of traffic is just one of them. There's lane width, traffic density, number of lanes, amount of crossing traffic etc. Added to that is the relative rarity of needing to cross lanes to make a turn. There's a variety of techniques one can employ to achieve this, depending on the situation, but I can't say I've ever encountered a situation that was 'impossible' to negotiate by one means or another.

Not to be harsh, but either you haven't noticed them, or you are very slow. Around downtown Cincinnati, and Newport, Ky. a fast biker is significantly faster than a car. From my house, to my wife's office building in downtown Cincinnati at morning rush hour, me on my bike about 7 minutes, my wife in her car, if traffic is good, 11 minutes, if not 20.

I think you guys over think this stuff.
Be seen. Take up space. Be alert. Be confident. Don't worry. Works for me. In Cincinnati, Oh., Madison, Wi., Norman, Ok., Lexington, Ky., Indianapolis, In., and all the other places I have cycled.
I love traffic, I love riding in the city. Embrace your enemy, make him yours.

Or I live in the burbs . Traffic averages between 30 and 35mph, unless it's very busy.

You are right you cannot just turn it off... but what happens on fast streets with heavy traffic is not the same as what happens on the slow streets shown.

On fast streets with heavy traffic you will find making those left turns quite difficult if not impossible, (John Forester then tells you to become a "road sneak") you will not be able to "control the lane" but will be crowded over to the far right side by honking aggressive motorists. Thus VC fails, it is not "turned off."

The very statement you make above "bolded" is what I am also saying... and for those situations where vehicular cycling "fails" (as indeed not everyone is of the same skill, nor has the same nerve) alternative paths should exist.

Consider this, some motorists are frightened of Freeways... but an alternative exists, in the form of surface streets. Such an alternative does not generally exist for cyclists... as cycling is not taken as a serious form of transportation in many countries. Sure, sidewalks may exist in some places, but are they really a safe haven? And if so, certainly one has then chosen to "not be vehicular" when using sidewalks.

The failing I see of vehicular cycling is that of not teaching it to every cyclist... and not informing the motoring public that indeed we have rights to the road. I still contend that many motorists have no clue that we have the same rights to the road as they. Yet vehicular cyclists insist that "all roads are bike lanes," when clearly there are roads that only the most skilled can handle.

Further, surface streets do not have to be designed as freeways with 50, even 60MPH posted speeds and high speed free merges, as those types of roads are decidedly not cyclist friendly.

Damn, now I feel like going for a ride, after I've already ridden home from work.

One of them could have worn a different color shirt so I wouldn't feel cross-eyed watching it.

Other than that, great clip.

It's still hard to believe you've never come across a situation where a bike was faster.
Do you have a gray beard? No you ride a Raleigh 3 speed? Do you own a wicker basket?

Hey watch that gray beard stuff... I know I have come across plenty of situations where bikes are faster than cars. What I find interesting is that so many motorists just sit there in their cars (one driver to each car) and don't consider other means of transportation.... Even when I pass them uphill at my lowly 8MPH.

I know I am home with beer in hand before some of these folks even get to a freeway.

I ride around 17mph typically (sometimes I push it and go faster, sometimes I'm lazy and go slower; and sometimes the hills decide). I ride an aluminum road bike (not a single or fixie). I'm not a speed demon.

But out in the burbs, here in the midwest, cars normally average around 30mph down city roads. You just aren't going to be faster unless you've got a better route: And in the burbs, the only straight routes are the multi-lane throughways; everything else zig-zags and dead ends.

I'd say the average is closer to 45 in mixed residential/retail roads in the burbs I'm used to. 35 feels like crawling in the burbs, especially in todays huge overpowered cars. (even Japanese cars are huge these days...) I dread the thought of riding on more heavily trafficed suburban roads - they're a disaster. Funny how the "suburbs" are often more urban and congested than the city centers these days.

Saying that 'VC fails' is like saying that the rules of the road fail. Perhaps some do, but as far as merging across lanes and making turns, they are all clearly spelled out in the rules. The only failng is in the part of other road users that attempt to deny cyclists the ability to do so with bullying tactics. A point, I believe, you've repeatedly made.

It's the unfettered aggression, no matter how overstated it is sometimes, of motorists that creates the perception of danger.

The only way you could ever say 'VC fails' is if the configuration of the road or path makes it impossible to follow the rules of the road, and in that case it's the road that fails, and it fails equally for every road user. Thankfully, those places are rare.

They don't require any more skill. The same skills apply irrespective of the traffic. If you can hold a line, and ride one handed for signalling, you're golden. Some just require a bit more bravado, and that usually comes with experience.

To be fair, I do believe educating all cyclists and informing the motoring public is the VCists stated aim. They haven't been very effective at it to date, but they get points for trying.

Well, no. I ride plenty of non-cyclist freindly roads. Not necesserily by choice, but I refuse to be cowed off riding any road I need to. If that's what they're building, that's what I ride on. Until the cycling utopia we all dream off eventuates, I'm making do. Some make do by riding on the footpath, or seeking out off road bikepaths or quieter routes, and that's fine too.

The same exercise under heavy traffic conditions with higher speeds would be dangerous. The conditions on U-Tube presentation were ideal and should not be followed under all conditions.

I was thinking about making a U-Tube presentation about riding on sidewalks. Seriously. There are millions doing it badly so someone should show people how to do it correctly. ;-) I think I'm an expert on this and it would be a first.

Here are some problems on the presentation.

The cyclist was taking the lane all the time -- I have problem with this because it's just inviting trouble. I wondered how many times he was honked during that ride because motorist go into a rage if you take the lane like in the video. Even when there was plenty of room on the shoulder, he still remained in the middle of the road taking the entire traffic lane blocking traffic.

The cyclist did not lane split --- I guess he doesn't mind breathing in exhaust but it gets hot and toxic at a stop light surrounded by cars, trucks and buses.

Alrighty, I finally got to watch the vid last night (:em

I reckon it's a pretty good demonstration of lane claiming. The rear rider took a slightly more kerbward position than the front one, and that's where I'd normally favour, but the difference is negligible.

One question: Is that the most boring place to ride on the planet, or what?

I reckon it should be edited into several shorter clips showing normal lane travel, and left and right turns.

It's a good basic demonstration of the techniques, and I think the light traffic suits that intent. It might be an interesting addendum to show the same techniques in conditions where it isn't so easy for cars to move into the next lane to pass, to show how they work in less ideal conditions, but for showing the techniques, they are pretty sufficient.

One way you could solve the camera problem with showing proper shoulder checking, would be to take the camera off the front cyclist, and mount it rearward on the following bike, just to show a 'rear view mirror' view of how motorists behave. You don't really need to see the rear cyclist - the front one shows the techniques well enough.

Haha. You must live in a large downtown city center. Even if I shave and dump the flower basket there's nowhere near my suburb where a bike would ever be faster than a car, unless you can hold at least 40 mph. On the main arterials try 55. At least ten over the limit is the norm.

I watched the same video and I can't say there was any point where I thought he was taking the lane inappropriately. At what time mark in the video did you see this?

I concur. I didn't see any traffic getting 'blocked' either. They all seemed to pass safely within an acceptable time to me.

I agree with DC, especially since no motorists were ever "stuck" behind them for even a few seconds. I have cars waiting behind me for much longer than that every day. Occasionally they even honk, (oh my!) but almost never put me in any real danger. All of my close calls were from motorists who showed no signs of road rage.

The average includes stops at traffic lights.

this is true here too. except on neighborhood streets. arterials 45-60 when they can get away with it.

I noticed the no lane split thing. They'd have been ahaed of the chrysler if they'd have ridden like bikes, and not like cars.

What is "an acceptable amount of time"?

My answer is simple- driving is about waiting, they can wait, forever if needed.
Example- here in town there is a 25mph 2 lane road that runs through town, about 4 miles with on street parking on both sides. I drive my car no faster than 19 mph on it. No exceptions. People sit back there and stack up, somtimes several deep. Too bad. 25 mph is the speed limit, not the required speed.
I ride my bike on the same road in the 24-25 mph range.
Example- when stopped waiting for trafic to clear to turn left, I feel no guilt whatsoever, they wait, that's the way it is.

Driving is about waiting, that's why cars have comfy chairs, radio, tv, internet, and so forth.

Any time less than it takes a particular driver to get p!ssed off?

No argument there.

In the case of the video though, there's no such need. I'm just saying there was no 'blocking' going on. Even on a road where they can't get around and have to wait, I don't consider that 'blocking' traffic any more than I consider being stuck in traffic in my car as 'blocking' the people behind me.