Bekologist

in a recent thread, the man who 'coined the term' vehicular bicycling stated that he wouldn't take the lane on a narrow laned, high speed rural road.

Interesting.

Some -john himself- would even call riding far right in a narrow lane a "childish" or "incompetent" way of riding.

However, for the guy that coined the term 'vc', it IS VC to ride far right in narrow lanes, because the onus of safe passing is on the motorists.

so, even in high speed lanes too narrow to be safely shared johns' endorsing 'not taking the lane' is not in conflict with vc so 'not taking a narrow lane' IS vc.

I'm not going to get into the speed question, which will be another thread...if its okay to hug the edge at high speeds of passing traffic, surely it must be SAFER to hug the edge of slower speed ones......



So, a question arose: if indeed it IS 'vc' to ride far right in narrow lanes, is it also 'vc' to ride far right thru intersections? I think for john it probably is, because the responsibility of safe passing and turning is on the motorists overtaking or turning in the path of the bicyclist.

So, logic leads to the conclusion that if hugging the edge of narrow lanes is VC because safe passing is on the motorists, so is riding far right past intersections.

the responsibility for safe lane sharing is on the motorists, so riding far right is not in conflict with VC.

even if it's positioned to the right of a right turner, the responsibility for a safe, 'vehicular' interaction with a bicyclist is on the motorists...... so riding far far right at intersections is vc.

AlmostTrick

John also said this in your other curbhugging thread.

Why do you persist with this curb hugging topic?

Bekologist

um, almost trick... get over it. this is meritable criticism. John thinks riding near the edge of a high speed road in a narrow lane is 'vehicular' because the responsibility of passing safely is on the motorist.

As john described it in the thread you reference, he's stated he would 'not take the lane' along a highspeed rural road with lanes too narrow to be safely shared. he thinks the issue of passing traffic is so minor he will damn well 'not take a narrow lane' and wonders what all the concern is about..... curious POV for a bicyclist, but I digress....

'not taking a (narrow) lane' is most definety 'riding near the edge'
regardless if you're using the metric system or imperial.(it's even called 'curbhugging' in the bicycling vernacular. you're a bicyclist, right?)

Therefore, I postulate if it's 'vc' to ride far right in a narrow lane because safe passing is on the motorist, then logic reasons it is also 'vc' to ride far right past intersections because the safe interactions with cars is also on the motorists.

all the bicyclist has to do is avoid riding up on a car turning right and they can 'vehicularily' hug the curb and ride far right in intersections.

if it's 'vc' to hug the edges of narrow lanes because the safe interaction is dependant on the motorists, it's also 'vc' to ride far right in intersections.

Bekologist

without much rebuttal from the forestoritex and the vc,

riding far right past intersections is vehicular.

nun

Position on the road is often dictated by road conditions, road geometry and the flow of other vehicles. I try to stay to the right so faster vehicles can pass easily, however, when in I approach junctions on the right of the road in heavy traffic, and I am going straight on, I signal left and move towards the center of the lane to prevent other vehicles coming over the top of me and cutting me off.

Bekologist

however, according to john, that responsibility relies on the overtaker. you would still be riding vehicularly whether you pull away from the edge approaching the intersection or not.

nun

Sure, vehicles should never overtake at a junction, as its dangerous, but there is a tendency for faster vehicles to "come over the top", so a clear left signal and move out to claim the lane works to keep folks honest. Then just move back to the right once you've passed the junction.

Bekologist

i understand 'defensive' road positioning for bicyclists at intersections, nun - i do it so myself.

I'm pointing out that according to johns intrepretation of how traffic interacts- the responsibility of safe overtaking is on the motorist so riding far right in a narrow, unshareable lane doesn't conflict with 'vc', so would not taking the lane at intersections.

Riding far right past an intersection (without a RTO lane) is not in conflict with the rules of the road or vehicular cycling, because the responsibility of safe interactions at the intersection is also on the motorists.

nun

That may be so, but if you stay to the right other vehicles are left in doubt as to whether you are turning or going straight on. It may be VC, but it isn't the safest way to ride or the most considerate of other road users.

FYI here's an interesting article on what London, where I rode for many years, is doing to promote cycling

https://www.independent.co.uk/environ...ty-784805.html

Bekologist

knew about london-

again ,defensive bicycling, and not necessary for vehicular cycling past intersections.