- 19,698
- Alabamamania
@liampage123 - You must have missed the "I really don't want to be killed" part.
Why do bikers use car lane.
- Thread starter iseeu1001
- 128 comments
- 4,518 views
- 4,209
- Wasilla, AK
He was probably going just a bit under the limit. The nature of trying to enjoy that road means I could have been going a little over or a little under the limit at any point in time, I was was pretty much determined to take that hairpin as fast as I thought I could without leaving my lane, whereas I didn't know what he was going to do. Bottom line, I just didin't want a cyclist right in front of me for the entire descent. Too many things could go wrong for either one of us.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,506
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
What's there to get over? I'm saying that bikes don't own the road. I agree, even in the post you quoted, that they share the road, which is why they need to follow the same rules as everyone else.
I get annoyed and irritated with them when their riders don't follow the rules which based on my experience, tends to be the norm for bikers in this area.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
- 3,321
- United States
- GTP_Sam48
As an avid cyclist, I've experienced a wide range of circumstances that pertain to this topic. First, let me start by saying that cyclists are indeed safer on the road than on the sidewalk. It's what we do in the road that makes some cyclists a hazard. If anything, a good cyclist is a minor inconvenience to motorists for a very short period of time. A bad cyclist is a greater inconvenience because they're unpredictable. However, as annoying as this may be, they just exponentially increased their chance of being injured or killed, whereas the motorists have not. So really then they are bestowing a greater inconvenience upon themselves then they are to motorists.
- 13,907
- Adelaide
- Neomone
I rarely find individual cyclists to be a problem. They either keep up to speed, or they veer to the side and I nip past. No worries.
What I do find to be a problem is the large groups of Tour de France wannabes riding in big packs. They take up a whole lane and the hell with everyone else, even if they're going 20 or 30kmh under the speed limit. And that's in the city along the waterfront. Out in the country they'll be 50 to 70kmh under the speed limit, depending on how steep the road is. That's about as safe as parking a car in the middle of the road.
I understand why they do it, it's safer for them to be in a pack because they're far less likely to be sideswiped or whatever. But it seems like a bit of a chicken and egg thing to me. They're asses because motorists are annoyed at them, so motorists are aggressive, so cyclists are asses to protect themselves, etc. etc.
It only happens in certain areas and I've learned to avoid those areas if possible on nice days when cyclists would be out for a ride. Unfortunately, the roads that cyclists seem to like (scenic and lots of corners) are the same roads that drivers like me want to use to go for a spirited drive on a nice weekend.
I will point out as well that it's somewhat legal in Japan to ride on the sidewalk (ie. it's not really legal but everyone does it and the police really don't care). It works just fine, for a few reasons. Everyone's riding granny bikes with baskets on the front and one gear, so you've gotta make a serious effort to get over about 20kmh. And everyone knows, so you just watch out for bikes. It's really not hard.
I kind of like it in a way. In a bike/pedestrian accident, both parties are likely to get messed up, so they both have incentive to make it work. In a bike/car accident, the car is seriously unlikely to get more than a scratch, hence why cars tend to expect bikes just to get out of the way.
I'll admit that it doesn't work on really crowded streets or with bikes that are doing 40kmh+, but it's a product of a particular cycling population that makes it possible.
What I do find to be a problem is the large groups of Tour de France wannabes riding in big packs. They take up a whole lane and the hell with everyone else, even if they're going 20 or 30kmh under the speed limit. And that's in the city along the waterfront. Out in the country they'll be 50 to 70kmh under the speed limit, depending on how steep the road is. That's about as safe as parking a car in the middle of the road.
I understand why they do it, it's safer for them to be in a pack because they're far less likely to be sideswiped or whatever. But it seems like a bit of a chicken and egg thing to me. They're asses because motorists are annoyed at them, so motorists are aggressive, so cyclists are asses to protect themselves, etc. etc.
It only happens in certain areas and I've learned to avoid those areas if possible on nice days when cyclists would be out for a ride. Unfortunately, the roads that cyclists seem to like (scenic and lots of corners) are the same roads that drivers like me want to use to go for a spirited drive on a nice weekend.
I will point out as well that it's somewhat legal in Japan to ride on the sidewalk (ie. it's not really legal but everyone does it and the police really don't care). It works just fine, for a few reasons. Everyone's riding granny bikes with baskets on the front and one gear, so you've gotta make a serious effort to get over about 20kmh. And everyone knows, so you just watch out for bikes. It's really not hard.
I kind of like it in a way. In a bike/pedestrian accident, both parties are likely to get messed up, so they both have incentive to make it work. In a bike/car accident, the car is seriously unlikely to get more than a scratch, hence why cars tend to expect bikes just to get out of the way.
I'll admit that it doesn't work on really crowded streets or with bikes that are doing 40kmh+, but it's a product of a particular cycling population that makes it possible.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
True, when I am riding my bike, I am much more observant to my surrounding than in a car, its kind of an inconvenience because I am always looking around. I also try not to slow down motorists by getting in their way, and if I am, I'll sprint so I don't test their patience.
I try to be predictable as possible, by using hand signals, shoulder checking etc.
- 87,564
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
That's because he is just like a car.
- 87,564
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Not for the bicycle, no.
But it is a road vehicle. It uses the road network. It has a specific set of regulations covering it - like buses, trucks and vans do, separate to cars - and is required to adhere to the universal set too. And when you are on the road with it you must treat it as if it is a vehicle, since it is one.
But it is a road vehicle. It uses the road network. It has a specific set of regulations covering it - like buses, trucks and vans do, separate to cars - and is required to adhere to the universal set too. And when you are on the road with it you must treat it as if it is a vehicle, since it is one.
- 11,985
- Australia
- I_Grayson_Fox_I
If it uses the road,
They should have a license at least in my view.
Why would cyclists complain?
If you want to cycle just carry it on you.
The bad cyclists will not longer be able to cycle while the ones that follow the rules of the road can.
It makes the road safer.
They should have a license at least in my view.
Why would cyclists complain?
If you want to cycle just carry it on you.
The bad cyclists will not longer be able to cycle while the ones that follow the rules of the road can.
It makes the road safer.
- 87,564
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I can't wait to see your proposal for a walking licence. Also good luck doing an eyesight test on a horse.
Certainly a cyclist test would help the standards of cycling - but then apparently there's some folk on here with a driving licence who don't realise they have to give cyclists the same room they'd give any other vehicle, so it's not as if it's a guarantee of better behaviour.
- 36,697
- Scotland
- GTP_daan
So you're perfectly happy to follow a car doing the speed limit, but because it's a bicycle, also doing the speed limit, you have an overwhelming urge to get past?
I wonder if the forum software can support a dislike button certain users posts. There's no way I'm ever going to press like on any of yours.
- 11,985
- Australia
- I_Grayson_Fox_I
You walk on the footpath.
But one thing that should be done is to prevent people from crossing the road at night with out bright colors or a hi-vis jacket.
People around here wear dark clothes and at night during winter it is very dark even with the street lamps,
I nearly hit a few idiots.
- 27,219
- United Kingdom
If there's one thing to be said for Milton Keynes - and there is only one thing to be said for Milton Keynes - it's that their network of bike paths is excellent. Wide, well signposted, conveniently placed, safe distances from both roads and pavements etc. And because the place is mostly flat it wouldn't be too over-exerting either.
It's just a pity that most other British cities are so ill-equipped for safe cycling. Or councils do daft things like wrap up bus lanes with cycle lanes. It's bad enough there being half the lanes available because they've been set aside for buses, without making buses pull out to overtake cyclists and having cyclists dart into the road whenever a bus stops to let passengers on and off. It's like they're purpose-designed to disrupt traffic and put everyone in danger.
As a very occasional cyclist I can understand the frustration of cyclists, but equally, many seem to put themselves in needless danger because of the way they ride. My least favourite recent example was that of a whole bunch of riders on a blind B-road. Ordinarily, irritating and dangerous enough when visibility is low. But they had half a dozen kids with them too - which borders on criminally irresponsible.
It's just a pity that most other British cities are so ill-equipped for safe cycling. Or councils do daft things like wrap up bus lanes with cycle lanes. It's bad enough there being half the lanes available because they've been set aside for buses, without making buses pull out to overtake cyclists and having cyclists dart into the road whenever a bus stops to let passengers on and off. It's like they're purpose-designed to disrupt traffic and put everyone in danger.
As a very occasional cyclist I can understand the frustration of cyclists, but equally, many seem to put themselves in needless danger because of the way they ride. My least favourite recent example was that of a whole bunch of riders on a blind B-road. Ordinarily, irritating and dangerous enough when visibility is low. But they had half a dozen kids with them too - which borders on criminally irresponsible.
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
It's been mentioned in this thread already, but what really annoys me (I commute by bike almost every day) is that most drivers don't know that the law states that I must ride on the road. That should really be the end of the discussion right there.
I do agree that cyclists riding wherever, however they please, and breaking traffic laws is something that needs to stop. I personally have only run red lights a couple of times, and only then because there were some aggressive drivers behind me, yelling and honking at me, and I just wanted to get some distance from them. I truly felt like it was a matter of personal safety, and had no interest in seeing if I could survive getting hit from behind by a car.
Other than that, I obey all traffic laws, and hate it when I see other cyclists break them.
I do agree that cyclists riding wherever, however they please, and breaking traffic laws is something that needs to stop. I personally have only run red lights a couple of times, and only then because there were some aggressive drivers behind me, yelling and honking at me, and I just wanted to get some distance from them. I truly felt like it was a matter of personal safety, and had no interest in seeing if I could survive getting hit from behind by a car.
Other than that, I obey all traffic laws, and hate it when I see other cyclists break them.
dr_slump
Premium
- 7,425
- Switzerland
- the_dr_slump / GTP_dr_slump
In Switzerland you're not allowed to use the sidewalk with bikes, unless they're marked for bikes or you walk and push it.
Theoretically of course, I've never seen or heard of anybody getting a bill or similar. Sometimes a reminder by the police, but that's it. Happened to me once in the last 10 years if I remember right.
Although we often have separate lanes for bikes on the streets. They're separated by a, ususally, yellow line (like the one in the middle of the road, but yellow), but they're really narrow. I'd say about 1 meter at maximum, probably less.
Theoretically of course, I've never seen or heard of anybody getting a bill or similar. Sometimes a reminder by the police, but that's it. Happened to me once in the last 10 years if I remember right.
Although we often have separate lanes for bikes on the streets. They're separated by a, ususally, yellow line (like the one in the middle of the road, but yellow), but they're really narrow. I'd say about 1 meter at maximum, probably less.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Here is a controversial video, kinda. As @Famine said, cyclists are technically a vehicle, since we adhere to the same laws as cars. The problem is that other motorists don't view cyclists like vehicles, so there judgement changes causing accidents, as this video demonstrates. *Profanity warning*
- 87,564
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
"other motorists don't view cyclists like vehicles" in the same sense that "cyclists don't obey the rules of the road".
Sure, some of them don't, but they don't really represent the majority. I'm aware of every one of my obligations regarding how I drive around cyclists and I act accordingly as a motorist.
Of course I'm also aware of all of the obligations of cyclists too - as the guy who arrogantly tried to cycle across a pedestrian crossing thinking I was going to stop for him would attest.
Sure, some of them don't, but they don't really represent the majority. I'm aware of every one of my obligations regarding how I drive around cyclists and I act accordingly as a motorist.
Of course I'm also aware of all of the obligations of cyclists too - as the guy who arrogantly tried to cycle across a pedestrian crossing thinking I was going to stop for him would attest.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
Danoff
Premium
- 34,039
- Mile High City
Pretty sure he's talking about a personal incident and not the video. I base this on his use of the word "I" in
Famine
AOS-
Premium
- 28,801
- 'Sauga, ON
I generally stick to the sidewalk for the most part even though I believe it is actually illegal.
But for the most part, I am biking slowly, there's little to no pedestrians here, and I take extra caution to not be a surprise to drivers entering/exiting driveways and vice versa.
But for the most part, I am biking slowly, there's little to no pedestrians here, and I take extra caution to not be a surprise to drivers entering/exiting driveways and vice versa.
- 2,790
- Vancouver, BC
- liampage123
- 87,564
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I reckon if you really watched, you'd see it a lot less than you think.
Fun story - I recently had cause to go to a local town centre and photograph cyclists for a bad-behaviour piece I was writing. I needed to snap a cyclist doing something illegal.
I was there 45 minutes and in that time I managed to see just one of the twelve or so I saw doing anything illegal. That's pretty much the same rate as you'd see with motorists.
No, this was several years ago when I was driving through a town centre. In the UK this specific kind of pedestrian crossing - a zebra crossing - is for use by pedestrians only and in fact cedes priority to pedestrians - you must stop if a pedestrian is using it or about to use it.
Cyclists are road traffic and not pedestrians - they are required to dismount to cross a zebra - which means that not only did I not have to cede priority, he was using the crossing illegally. I treated him as if he were a hazard (because I am both a child and a butthole), by dropping through the gearbox and taking evasive action. He was not happy.
