noimagination

Occasionally, as others have said, given no peds, if necessary for short distances due to safety reasons.
Also, occasionally, given no peds, in order to let cars behind me get by if the lane is too narrow for cars/bikes to share the lane.
I also occasionally pull off the road into driveways for this purpose. Usually traffic is low enough that neither maneuver is needed, but if it's been a half a minute or so and the cars are having trouble passing, I'll look for opportunities to let them by (happens maybe 3-4 times per year). Sidewalks can provide that opportunity.

livedarklions

Local laws, local customs, local conditions, local question.

I almost never ride on sidewalks, only one place I can think of and it goes across a bridge where road traffic is one way the other way. Avoiding it takes me a couple blocks out of my way and involves a nasty intersection and a difficult lane split. The sidewalk there has virtually no pedestrian traffic, and I can see what little there is from very far away. If it were JUST a matter of distance, I probably wouldn't take the sidewalk shortcut, but I just can't justify in my head riding out of my way to take a route that's objectively much more dangerous. That sidewalk has no crossings of any kind, and is suitably paved for a slow two block distance (roughly) ride--too bumpy for speed.

Basically, sidewalk riding is illegal in my state, so riding there is generally not a good idea as no one is actually watching for me.

homeless in ca.

I ride on the sidewalk when necessary.

WhyFi

There are situations in which I'll carefully and briefly jump up on to a sidewalk. Using the sidewalk as a passing lane to get around other cyclists on a perfectly suitable roadway is not one of them.

Reflector Guy

Same here. Occasionally I'll need to get somewhere where the roads are just as described above but the adjacent sidewalks almost completely absent of pedestrians. I'll ride on the sidewalks there every time.

Reflector Guy

+2

Nothing throws gas on the "us vs. them" fire like the word cagers.

indyfabz

I feel you. When I ride to work I either have to ride a bit of sidewalk here and there when I first leave the house, ride against traffic (many streets in my area and other areas of Philly are one-way) or ride a couple of blocks out of my way. One of those blocks can have cars that drive too fast for the conditions and is a bus route. Another one has two bus routes that use it. But I will always yield to pedestrians, especially because I walk a lot and hate reckless cyclists on sidewalks.

Mojo31

This

And that

A fair amount of the new road improvements in our area have sidewalks that are 10 to 12 feet wide. In some areas it is far safer to be on them rather than the street with cars going 45 mph or more. On one stretch that I frequently ride (sometimes on the street and others on the sidewalk), I've seen only one couple walking once, and that was for their morning workout.

People don't walk from place to place much around here, and sidewalks are typically used by people walking/running for exercise, kids on bikes or walking home from school, and adults on bikes. Other than one gas station and one bank branch, there is not a single store within walking distance of my house.

Have to laugh at the use of the stupid word "cager." I'd bet that easily 99% of bike riders/cyclists own cars.

livedarklions

Well, close to 99% of adult cyclists in the U.S., anyway.

One of the funniest things I see in A&S is when someone suddenly announces how they're able to look at it like a driver and we cyclists just don't get it. I once got accused of being a "biased cyclist" because I said that as a driver, I couldn't imagine caring about whether I had to pass the same cyclist twice as long as I could see him/her both times. My response was that as a driver, I am biased against hitting cyclists and as a cyclist, I'm biased against getting hit. I really don't see the conflict.

.

Mojo31

I certainly agree with this. As a driver, there are two things that I absolutely do not want to do: (a) injure another person whether on a bike, in a car, walking or otherwise, and (b) damage my car from someone or something hitting it or hurt myself.

There is one thing that I absolutely cannot stand - a group ride blocking an entire lane when there is no place for cars to pass for extended distances. When they do that, they are just asking for someone backed up behind them to do something stupid.

As a cyclist, I try to be considerate of those driving around me because I want the same in return.

Flip Flop Rider

use them very little but will if I have too

WhyFi

Depends. This is sometimes the correct move.

Nah. They're asking the drivers the to weigh their impatience and sense of self-importance vs the actual lives of others for a literal minute.

genejockey 

Sidewalks are for pedestrians, which means when you ride there you should ride as walking speed. Certainly no faster than jogging speed. Kids are allowed to ride on sidewalks because they're safer there and they aren't going that fast. There is ONE place that I ride on the sidewalk - I live on a busy street, near an intersection with another busy street, so when I'm approaching my house on the opposite side of the street, I'll swing over to the other side for the last 20-40 yards, and if the sidewalk is empty, I'll take it, at fast walking speed, to get to my house.

Drivers look for hazards in the customary places, moving in the customary direction, at the customary speed. On sidewalks, we expect people moving in either direction at walking speed. On the road, whether in the traffic lane or bike lane, we expect other vehicles moving only in one direction, at a greater speed. If you ride on the sidewalk at greater than walking speed, you're moving at an unexpected speed in an unexpected place, possibly in an unexpected direction.

And stop calling us "cagers".

genejockey 

Looked at another way - here, the law requires cyclists "moving at less than the speed of traffic" to ride as close to the right edge of the road as practicable. If there's one car and 20 cyclists, the cyclists ARE the traffic.

LarrySellerz

once a group hits a critical size its safer to just be a swarm and take over the road. A car passing 50+ cyclists riding single or double file is not going to have a good time

livedarklions

Once a group becomes too large to ride together within the legally mandated rules (assuming no properly obtained permit), then it's a group constituted primarily to piss off drivers. There's really no other practical advantage to having such large groups.

Having 50+ any type of vehicle operating together is not a routine activity for which roads were designed. This is the point where bicyclists start to assert that their rights are superior to those of everyone else. If you're concerned with not promoting hostility to cyclists, don't do this.

Mojo31

I agree it is sometimes the right move. I disagree that it is the right move when it goes on for miles.

WhyFi

Can't say that I've ever seen an scenario IRL in which there was no room to pass for literally miles. But, let's say that there's an extreme of 1 mile and a sizable group, that shouldn't have a problem with cruising at 20mph. In a 35mph zone, that a whole 1min 17sec of delay. Sorry - even Mr Sellerz life is more valuable than that.
​

livedarklions

Have you seen much of this? I can't recall ever being help up like this as a driver.

jackb

I sometimes ride on sidewalks for short distances to avoid busy sections of road or to avoid broken pavement. Fortunately in my community sidewalks except in the downtown area are rarely used. On residential streets I rarely see anyone walking but these are the streets where I have no need to avoid the road. I'm always careful to ride slowly when detouring onto a sidewalk, and If I encounter a pedestrian I get as far out of the way as I can.

Mojo31

Yep. Last summer I found myself behind a group ride on a winding two-lane road in an area with a fair amount of traffic. Was behind a group of about 20 to 30 that not only took the lane, but also had riders riding in the oncoming traffic lane when there was oncoming traffic, at times riding 5 abreast and requiring oncoming traffic to move onto the shoulder. I was behind them for at least 15 minutes until I reached my turn off. Passing was not possible. They were not riding 20-25 mph either, more like 10-12 mph.

I was patient, but it was ridiculous.

genejockey 

Having ridden in such a swarm a number of times, I disagree. It's invigorating, fun, companionable, etc. You can go faster than you'd thought possible.

And it depends on the road and the time of day. Drivers think nothing of taking up an entire lane, all the time. Cyclists' rights are not superior to those of everyone else, but they're also not inferior. As I say - 30 cyclists, one driver. They're not impeding traffic. They ARE the traffic.

LarrySellerz

they used to occasionally ride single file up one of the starting roads as a sort of bicycle advocacy event, show the cars what it’s like to pass a group of 50-100 cyclists single file. There is nothing illegal about riding in large groups, and frankly the laws don’t really matter as long as the police don’t care. Slavery was legal once etc etc

Rolla

15 whole minutes?? You should demand to speak to the manager -- as a driver, you're entitled to never be delayed at all by anyone.

prj71

My state prohibits riding bikes on sidewalks. With that said...it's never enforced.