10 ms·
Local governments have been kind enough to paint warning marks for cyclists, advising them of the safe distance from parked cars and kerbs. Non-cyclists call th
by jdietrich 10y ago
Local governments have been kind enough to paint warning marks for cyclists, advising them of the safe distance from parked cars and kerbs. Non-cyclists call these warning marks "bike lanes".
Cyclists need at least a metre of space on the nearside at all times. It's your escape route if cars pass too closely. It's your protective buffer against being doored or against pedestrians stepping out into your path. Hugging the kerb gives you nowhere to go in an emergency.
Be brave and take the lane. If you delay other road users, let them honk and shout - that metre of space is literally a matter of life and death.
- jacquesm 10y ago> Be brave and take the lane. If you delay other road users, let them honk and shout - that metre of space is literally a matter of life and death. In a country that already respects cyclists this may work. In a country that does not it will likely get you to wake up in the infirmary (assuming you wake up at all) after being hit by someone in a hurry that assumed you were going to give their 2 ton vehicle the room it needs to pass you. Taking a militant stance as a cyclist by using your fragile body as an obstacle for large steel objects moving at two to three times your speed is not a winning strategy. If all they did is 'honk and shout' you'd be fine but some percentage will try to pass you anyway.
- mabcat 10y agoIn my experience taking the lane stops people from assuming that they have space to pass except by changing lanes. Car drivers mostly take their cues from the cyclist. If you're cycling in the gutter it signals for car drivers to try to overtake you in the same lane. Why would you be in the gutter, except to yield the rest of your lane to cars? There's not space for a car and a bicycle in the same lane. A car will always have to at least partially change lanes to overtake safely. You're better off being 2/3 of a lane over, so your head is in the same position as every other driver, and car drivers change lanes completely to pass as they would for any other vehicle.
- jacquesm 10y agoSure, that's the theory. But in practice some drivers will see it as an aggressive move to take 'their' lane. They are wrong, no doubt, but it doesn't pay off to go head-to-head with a bunch of bricks when you're an egg. Better to play it safe. Keep in mind that you're entirely unprotected. The best way to stay safe in traffic with vehicles is to assume that (1) you're invisible (2) made of eggshells and (3) everybody behind you is out to get you. If you're a young burly male you might get away with this but keep in mind that advocating this strategy for all cyclists (little old ladies, kids, etc) would definitely not work. In a car centric society the last thing you want to do is to occupy a full lane sized for vehicles but going 1/3rd their speed. It is an open invitation for aggression against your person, plenty of people see you riding a bike already as such an invitation it certainly isn't going to get better by occupying 'their' lane.
- foobarian 10y agoI commuted by bike for 10 years following these rules and never had an accident involving moving cars. I feel I always had good situational awareness and control of the situation even in complicated intersections. But I've been doored 3 times in that period, the last time being a very close call where a passenger in a car standing at a red light decided to get out, and so I decided to give up the bike. It feels ironic that out of all the cycling scenarios I could be in, I feel I have the least control/awareness with doors opening. In retrospect I should have applied your 3 rules to car doors as well, and move at a leisurely walking speed when in door range.
- jacquesm 10y agoThe problem with the doors is that unlike all the other traffic scenarios you could be involved in they contain some surprise elements. For one it is stopped traffic (something that is normally safe) that suddenly becomes dangerous, also it can happen very suddenly. One moment a car is an immobile object, the next it throws a 3' obstacle directly into your path, and if you're close enough there simply isn't time to react. It's next to impossible to safely avoid a door if you are less than your stopping distance away from the door when it is thrown. After all, taking into account that hitting a door is bad it is arguably less bad than trying to avoid it by swerving around it and getting clipped by a car behind you that doesn't respond in time (assuming it even has room and time enough to respond). Ironically, electric vehicles are more dangerous in this sense than combustion powered ones because they are extremely quiet. Every time someone in my car is about to open any doors I automatically say 'careful for bikes and pedestrians'. Some people are annoyed by this but I still do it and it has already saved the situation more than once. I'm currently recovering from a one-sided cycling accident so you can take that as proof that cycling is a dangerous activity, no matter what (right leg broken in 6 places, 2 chunks of steel and 13 screws later and I can re-learn how to walk, the accident happened Aug 7th, I'm already back on the bike and driving but it was a tough battle to get to this point this quick).
- jdietrich 10y agoTaking the lane is precisely what allows you to make room for motorists. If a motorist makes a close pass when you've taken the lane, you just steer away from them and create some space. If a motorist makes a close pass when you're already hugging the kerb, you have nowhere to go. The best case scenario is that you'll crash into something without too many sharp edges. Taking the lane doesn't mean acting as an immovable roadblock, it means using the full width of the lane to your advantage. You take the primary position in the centre of the lane by default. When you need to make space, you retreat to a secondary position closer to the kerb. As soon as it is safe to do so, you return to the primary position. Unless you create the space you need, your safety is in the lap of the gods. A pothole, a piece of debris, a stray dog, an inattentive driver - if you're wedged in between the kerb and passing traffic, all you can do is slam on the brakes and pray. If you've created your own space, you have options.
- jacquesm 10y agoThere are more cyclists than young agile males. And your advice only applies to those. I'm trying to imagine a 60 year old lady on a bike applying this advice and fail to see any happy endings. And where I live old ladies on bikes are extremely common. Cycling advice should apply to all cyclists, not just to those giving the advice.
- jdietrich 10y agoIt's not about youth or agility, it's about skills and confidence. Young men innately have the confidence to ride assertively, but all cyclists should feel empowered to protect themselves. The obvious example is fatal accidents involving large goods vehicles and cyclists in London. Women are vastly disproportionately likely to be involved in this class of accident, despite being under-represented in overall accident statistics. The leading theory is that women ride less assertively, putting them in dangerous situations at junctions. They're more likely to undertake and less likely to take the lane, jump red lights or bang on a window to make their presence known. They vanish into the large blind spots that surround large goods vehicles. In all likelihood, these cyclists are dying of politeness.