3 ms·
> Cyclists behind will then simply either have to adjust their speed, or decide whether to cross into the car lane and overtake on the left. Here's a third opt
by Kirth 9y ago
> Cyclists behind will then simply either have to adjust their speed, or decide whether to cross into the car lane and overtake on the left.
Here's a third option to consider: the cyclist does not notice your merging in to the lane or otherwise fails to react and smashes into the back of your car. At higher speeds this can be lethal.
- godelski 9y ago> At higher speeds this can be lethal. Good thing this is done at low speeds. The car is basically going 0mph, because they are going to turn 90 degrees. And when I'm biking, I am BY FAR more cautious when approaching intersections. As you should be in a car, bike, motorcycle, or whatever.
- mstade 9y agoThe merge – or crossing if you will – is going to happen at some point anyway. The point of driving in the cycle lane would be to do the merge first, well in advance of the turn, and once you reach the turn you can safely proceed with the knowledge that you won’t miss a cyclist coming in from behind. (Probably.) If you don’t merge first, you have to not only consider cyclists in the lane but also whatever may be involved with the turn itself, such as people crossing the street you’re turning into, or other obstacles. Basically you spread the risk over time and space instead of concentrating it all into this one maneuver at the end.
- tehlike 9y agoWell said, sir. You said it better than I could.