wneumann

Great. Now construct a logical argument that staying to the right wherever "possible" is the bast way to avoid these encounters so you can link the two propositions, and I'll side with you there (well, I'd agree that riding to the right wherever possible is the best way to lose in an accident with a car).

By the way, does your "at all costs" include not riding a bike on the roads anymore?

big john

You know what he meant. You're just trying to be pedantic and arguementative.

wneumann

Yes, I think I do know what he means. And what I believe he meant has no support either, that's what I'm trying to highlight.

exRunner

Actually, I have no idea what he means (or meant) and I have my doubts whether he knows either.

You are safest when you have the best control of your surroundings. That does not always mean riding as close to the curb as you can. Sometime it means taking the lane.

BTW, NYS law allows exactly that.

Raiden

But 'practicable' only applies to standard roads. Once you get to a narrow or winding road, you hit the clause that exempts the cyclist from the 'ride as practicably right as possible' portion (especially in Texas- 551.103 is a generous law to cyclists, IMO), and that's where I think opinions diverge the most. I'm not disagreeing with you; I simply don't think law has anything to do with P'cad's position.

I see it the other way around- cars are choking us with exhaust, slowly destroying the roads with their weight, splashing us with water from puddles, and running us over, for no better reason than the fact they can get somewhere faster that way, while carrying a huge stereo, and not get sweaty- they just happen to be the 500-lb gorilla in the room. We don't owe them anything, but staying out from in front of them is the only way to keep from getting smashed.

Edit: Just a side thought- it's not just collision we need to avoid- it's also negative public opinion. The two top cyclist peeves for most drivers are probably 'hogging the road' and running stop signs....

BarracksSi

I've said it before -- I'm not going to depend on some piece of paper stored in the basement of some government building to save my ass out on the road.

I can be legally right if I get hit, but would I rather be spending the next eighteen months undergoing rehab and chasing someone in court, or, instead, just get home safely?

It sure seems simpler to me to do whatever's safe.

BillyD

Will you two pseudo-Einsteins let it go? Trying to discredit common sense is just making you look sillier and sillier. Your professor would be embarrassed by such lame arguments. If you want to go out and play Russian roulette with traffic, please, do the gene pool a favor and go right ahead. Please.

wneumann

What clause are you talking about? The "ride as fare right as practicable" law is in effect for all roads a bicycle has access to (pretty much everything but limited-access highways). The exemptions to that law enumerate the situations under which you are allowed to ride further to the left than usual. At least thats how it is in Texas (and IIRC New Mexico). There are no provisions that force someone to ride farther to the right than normal on narrow or winding roads.

The only place "narrow" shows up in the Texas transportation codes for operating a vehicle is in 545.351, which says you may need to legally slow down on narrow or winding roads, and in 551.103 which gives a bicyclist the right to take the lane if the lane is "too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side."

And again, that's not what I'm saying there. I'm saying that the law states "practicable" and not "possible" for a very good reason, and that he should consider what that reason is. It's what the law says, but rather why the law says what it does.

itsnevertoolate

ok, ok... how about the two idiots riding abreast on a city street. They're suited up and are obviously experienced cyclists. They're chatting away with no intention of riding single file when traffic comes up behind them... I also see this with 'pro' cyclists when they come to the area to train... how about these prima donnas...? Law says riding two abreast is legal... what do you think these idiots are doing for the cycling cause?

wneumann

Common sense tells us that something as heavy as an airplane cannot fly. Common sense tells us Simpson's paradox and the Monty Hall Problem can't be right. Thought and investigation show us that they can.

But beyond all of that, I'm not even arguing against common sense, at least not in the large. My main point is that people should stop making overly broad generalizations. Qualifying statements are often good things...

patentcad

I will only run if Brandy agrees to be my running mate.

patentcad

This is exactly the profound depth and scope of intellect that brought you S. Palin and the 'I can see Russia from here' foreign policy resume. Allow me to illustrate how far this thinking will get you on the open road.

Raiden

'Wine country'- Napa/Sonoma? Yeah, the roads are all one lane each way, but the towns are tiny and the speed limits are pretty low through them. I've driven quite a bit through there, and seen riders do just what you're saying, but it only lasts a couple minutes each time.

I think you've missed the parts where I explained the differences between my opinions on cars and bikes on the road, and how I actually ride on the road.

patentcad

Picking your spots on the road is key. Today on a 50 mile ride, I make a turn onto a road that takes me down a route I rarely ride. After I completed that stretch of road I remembered why - lousy cycling road. Cars going too fast, crappy shoulder, bonehead drivers, etc. Some roads are just like that (even in rural areas on a Sunday morning).

It is odd that some roads seem to get more idiot drivers, but they do, and if you figure that out, avoid those roads. I usually do.

Kai Winters

What strikes me, though we have 6 pages of pontificating, is we are not going to change the "morons", either on the bike or in the car...they are what they are.

patentcad

Observing that it's pretty friggin stupid to ride in the middle of a public road lane is hardly pontificating.

I should know, I'm the expert.

Raiden

I think this could be said about any discussion on the internet ever- personally, I'd rather see long-winded rounds of internet pontificating on any given subject, over no discussion at all.

Hot Potato

I only continue to follow this lane position thread because I don't see any ipod or lycra threads active near the top.

patentcad

We did a 'Triples are not enough, I need a Quad' thread.

HorsCO

All I have to add to this thread is that I very often have the desire to carry a 9mm or something of the nature strapped to my torso while on my bike.

Sure, the weight penalty would offset that carbon frame, but I ride in a style that I believe is very conscientious and careful. I am very aware of traffic at all times and do everything in my power to "share the road". It isn't always enough. I believe deep down in my heart that there are drivers out there who would absolutley love to run me over with their F-150 and **** my lycra bound ass. A point of my piece in their face would help ensure they don't needlessly **** with a cyclist ever again.

RichinPeoria

+1

akansaskid

Jerks ride bikes and drive cars (or at least pickups).

Today's exemplars:

Six cyclists on a two-lane road riding in two 3-person echelons (strong crosswinds), spanning the whole lane. Cars backed up behind them because there's enough traffic the other way, they can't get past the whole caravan. There's 12-18" available right of the white line (where I am, headed the other way), but they aren't using it. I return a tepid wave, shaking my head in disgust.

Later I'm on the white line of a shoulderless two-laner observing a pickup approaching from the rear with my Freddly mirror. No other traffic either direction. He gets right up behind me with no movement to the left, gives a long blast of his add-on airhorns, and lets me feel the wind of his side mirror as he accelerates past, pointing to Heaven with his middle digit. I say Heaven because I was out in God's country where, ironically, during this encounter we pass a sign in a farmer's field: "Welcome life. Stop contraception." My counterargument to this sentiment was barrelling on down the road.

The only difference is there are more drivers than cyclists, and they vote. Your "right" to the road is only a legal entitlement and can be rescinded in the bat of an eye by angry motorists. People vote their perceptions, and you're a fool if you insist on creating bad ones.

logdrum

Yeah Ford upped the ante with the flame thrower exhaust on the new 2008 diesels. Will burn your calf even from 4 feet away, badly.

I also go to the right as much as possible. I really do not understand this take the whole lane thing and you can't even maintain 17mph.

mzeffex 

It was really annoying a couple weeks back. On the way home from a good day of mountain biking we decided to go down the main drag in one part of town. Woman on a cruiser, no helmet, carrying a bag full of whatever, going down the middle of the road. We were in a ford f TRE' FIDDY and it's hard enough to squeeze through there with someone in the way. She wouldn't friggen move. So my friend (driver) honked. I felt bad, but hey, she was right in the middle of the road. She didn't move. Honk again (not long, just a beep) and she moves to the yellow line. What the hell is this? Theres cars over there, and there is no way we are gonna fit between her and the parked cars. Ended up being stuck behind her at 8 mph for 4.5 blocks.

joejack951

Cry me a river. What would you have done if that had been a school bus or garbage truck making multiple stops in front of you?