genec

Yup, but hardly "stress free."

daredevil

I understand. Just put some music on. It will help you relax.

genec

Nothing quite like the Pastoral Symphony when you are cranking out the miles... Although "Ain't no Mountain High Enough" is pretty good incentive for that next hill.

Mort Canard

Sounds like the most common sense post in the whole thread!

Mobile 155

At first I thought I had clicked on the wrong forum. This almost always turns out badly because there are VC cyclists and segregated cyclists living side by side. I should add that where I live there seem to be a large group of anarchists or Critical Masochists, wrong way and sidewalk riders. But that is another subject. My first preference is a segregated bike lane or bike path. The fall back position is VC riding and at times that will include taking the lane. But that is most often a last resort. Where I live taking the lane is necessary maybe 2 percent of my rides, mostly getting ready for a left turn. Yes I have been right hooked and short stopped by drivers not paying attention but for the most part the drivers in my area and I are at peace. The only problem I have when most people post about taking the lane is they seem to need a whole lot more lane than the average cyclist. Not always but three feet seems like plenty to me, IMHO.

However once in rural areas we tend t be talking uncharted territory. Just as a story to think about. Last summer some friends and I were heading up a long mountain road to a resort town over looking Palm Springs. The locals are used to seeing cyclist on the road and tend to give us as much room as we need. One of our group members is a firm believer in VC cycling and holds take the lane as a personal mantra. About 2000 feet into the climb a rather large F-350 pulled up behind us and three of us moved as far right as we could without crossing over the fog line or getting in the road gravel. The truck moved left as gave us about 4 feet of space as he passed. About 50 yards up the road was our VC rider who when he saw the truck coming moved left to take the lane. The truck passed him anyway but this time he was close enough that his Detroit Mirrors passed only inches over or to the side of the riders head and helmet.
No the driver should not have gotten his knickers in a twist. But what caused him to show some of us such respect and has so little regard for the other rider? Did the rider have the right to take the lane? Most likely he did. Was it worth challenging someone with more than 8600 pounds gross? That I am not so sure about. I believe we should have bike lanes even on these roads but when we don’t I follow the same rules I did when sailing; we called it the big boat rules. If you are at sea even under sail the big boat rules because if you hold to those under sail have the right of way you may be right and then again you may be at the bottom of the ocean.
Check out an example of the debate in Boston.
https://bostonbiker.org/2011/12/29/relevant-repost-why-vehicular-cycling-failed-or-how-i-learned-to-love-the-bike-lane/

BluesDawg

Right. Because unlike the hundreds, if not thousands of other threads on this subject, this is going to be the one where everyone finally sees the light and comes to an agreement about the best way to ride.It will be forever known as the great kumbaya thread on lane sharing.

daredevil

been pretty sensible and reasonable so far wouldn't you say?

TheHen

Since the vast majority of the folks on this forum are motorists, this thread is telling the motorists. When a motorist risks my life and either I or my husband discuss it with him/her, quite often the first words they utter in their defense are, "I'm a cyclist too." They somehow think that because they ride a bike on occasion their driving habits are unassailable.
Thanks for clearing that up. I was getting worried that this thread wasn't going to do any good. By the way, the gist of the article/animation/video is how to share the road, not the lane. It was an unsharable lane in the demonstrations. Your small misstatement is why I don't like the "share the road" signs. They are generally misunderstood.

Mobile 155

That may be bacause we have seen this topic beat to death several times. What some feel is too close and calls for take the lane is anything but too close.
The decission becomes the perview of the lane taker saying they had to do it because they were afraid of the distracted drivers that, Might, cut them off.

The math hardly ever works out. Cars can pass within 3 feet of each other and often do it every day at 65 miles an hour. Do we need a space more than 3 feet between us and a passing car at 45 MPH? There are times when take the lane seems practical but most of the serious lane takers seem to feel it is a first line defense. The question becomes would it still be safe for a car to pass a cyclist if they gave them 3 feet? And if they have three feet plus the 3 feet between them and a car is it necessary to take the lane?

That is why I like marked bike lanes, it takes the quess work out of it.

TheHen

I think the video below the animation does a pretty good job of answering your concerns.

Mobile 155

I have no concerns. I believe this is a A and S subject as well as some others. It is the OPs concern not mine take the lane is not my first line of defense. I agree with the blogger I posted, the VC advocates have had years to prove their point and it hasn't worked nor increased cyclists. Time to give it up and try something else. In heavy traffic they should change the name to take your chances. Just in my opinion. When you are outnumbered 99 to 1 I believe you have to learn to go-exist rather than get in their face.

On second thought I will be out of this conversation before it gets ugly. Minds will not be changed and our differences will be exposed rather than our likenesses.

Condorita

If they can fail to see that 60'-long, 8'-wide, 10'-high tanker truck I drive, they can fail to see you. Don't kid yourself into believing that "hi-vis clothing and a daytime visible tail light" will be enough.

daredevil

Hence the second sentence in my post. You could comment on that too.

chasm54

You should ride in a way that maximises your visibility to other road users and gives you adequate room to manoeuvre safely, but no more room than you need. That usually means taking the lane, in town or out of it. Hugging the side of the road often encourages drivers to try to squeeze past you in the presence of oncoming traffic, which is rarely a good idea. And of course, a modicum of situational awareness should allow you to move over and give someone some more room where it is safe to do so.

And really, this discussion should be in A&S. There's a heap of threads on the subject and there is nothing age-specific about safe cycling.

byte_speed

This.

Around here, there are many motorists that will NOT ride behind a bicycle for more than a few seconds. I don't think they are all morons or have evil intents, they are just impatient. Whatever, the outcome is the same, they will try to pass, even if they are on a blind hill or curve. On a narrow road, the only defense is to pull over and let them go, hopefully before they kill themselves, an oncoming motorist, & you.

chasm54

Sure. I've done this myself, many times, not usually because I was concerned for my safety but simply because it isn't courteous to keep a long line of traffic behind me for minutes at a time when there is no opportunity for them to overtake.
But this isn't an argument against taking the lane. Quite the reverse, in fact. The worst thing to do in this situation would be to squeeze oneself against the edge of the road and offer them an opportunity to think they might squeeze past.

zonatandem

There is 'right' and 'dead right' . . .
After 300 thousand+ miles of bicycling, am still alive and well. Yes, been hit several times and each time driver was cited.
There is no blanket rule for everybody.
When I deem it necessary, will take the full lane; otherwise I believe in "SHARE the road.'
Pedal on!
Rudy/zonatandem

rdtompki

I live in a somewhat rural area. I would be happy to have a contingent of TTL advocates come down and ride around for a week or so to educate the drivers. I'm sure I can take out short term life insurance on the brave souls naming myself as beneficiary. I can see situations where TTL makes sense, but on very high speed country roads the primary advantage would be injury avoidance since the cyclist will most likely be killed in the collision.

Barrettscv 

Wow. I thought the animation was a great illustration that explained the benefits of taking the lane when hazards exists along the shoulder or when traffic along a narrow road without a shoulder could force a fall or collision.

I'm under the impression that the content of the first post was passed over and that old arguments were rekindled. I did not intend that.

Does anyone really take the lane 100% of the time? Does anyone actually hug the shoulder 100% of the time?

This thread was never meant to be a purity test.

unterhausen

this one has pretty much covered both sides of the argument. Closing before bad things happen.