9 ms·
The pattern: -- A car squeezes past you at high speed -- Less than 30 seconds later I pull in front of it as we both stop at a red light. In fact, a car comin
by jimmytidey 4y ago
The pattern:
-- A car squeezes past you at high speed
-- Less than 30 seconds later I pull in front of it as we both stop at a red light.
In fact, a car coming too close and knocking you off your bike is not a common cause of injury. It certainly makes cycling unpleasant though.
40% of non-cyclists in London say the danger of cycling is a significant factor in their decision not to cycle.
- tralarpa 4y ago> In fact, a car coming too close and knocking you off your bike is not a common cause of injury Interesting question. I just googled for statistics and found some for German cities. In Berlin (2021), the majority (~50%) of accidents involving bicyclists in which the bicyclist was not at fault were caused by cars turning. But "insufficient distance" was still at 5%.
- beowulfey 4y agoBoth of my hits while riding a bike have been because of cars turning. For one, the driver was turning right and only looked left -- I was still in front of him, and he never looked ahead; T-boned! For the other, I pull up to a stoplight alongside a few cars, against the curb. There is only one lane for left/right/straight. No one had on turn signals. Light turns green, so myself and the first car go straight. Second car apparently wanted to turn right without signaling, and once again does not look to the right (looking left, maybe?). Cuts me off in their turn and I hit their right side door. So yeah, can definitely confirm that people do not look when they are turning.
- microtherion 4y agoAs a former bicyclist, I try to be extra mindful of bicyclists when driving. One of the right turns on a common route I take is on a downhill slope, and I've noticed cyclists passing me on the right even when I already had my turn signal on for several seconds. I hate to use the common refrain, but it really seems to me that a higher percentage of bicyclists drive like maniacs. What purpose, exactly, does driving without a light at night serve? Especially when combined with barreling through a red light into a multi-lane traffic circle? And, of course, sidewalks are meant to be driven on — wouldn't want to lose your bicyclist card for ever pushing your bike. Leading to the ever popular driving across a crosswalk (I'm not so sure who's at fault if I were to hit a bicyclist on a crosswalk, and I'd rather not find out). Granted, due to the lower weight of bicycles, accidents are considerably less deadly, but there is still a considerable injury risk to me as a pedestrian, and as an automobilist, I'd rather not have an accident on my conscience, whether I'd be legally at fault or not.
- usrusr 4y ago> One of the right turns on a common route I take is on a downhill slope, and I've noticed cyclists passing me on the right even when I already had my turn signal on for several seconds. So you expect to get unlawful right of way because your vehicle is big and dangerous. Allow me to not share your view about who's a maniac.
- microtherion 4y agoI don’t know what the law is in your country, but in Switzerland, it is unlawful to pass a moving car with its turn signals set on the right.
- usrusr 4y agoOn a separate lane, no matter how early the signal is set? That would seem like an invitation to power abuse considering how much time queuing cars spend in that not-quite-standing state.
- microtherion 4y agoThe situation I meant was for a bicycle passing in the gap between the right hand lane and the curb, not on a separate bicycle lane. > That would seem like an invitation to power abuse As in, cars could set their turn signals all the time? Pretty sure that would be against the law, and it would probably be easier to achieve that effect by hogging the right side of the lane (which is also against the law, except when combined with setting the signals and preceding a right turn).
- usrusr 4y agoHere in Germany filtering through the gap isn't allowed at all when the car is moving, turn indicators or not. Doesn't keep drivers from getting upset when it happens while they are standing (then it's permitted). And it's certainly allowed on a separate lane, just like pedestrians on the sidewalk aren't required to walk slower than the traffic-stricken cars to their left. (when the lane is just painted and the right turn is unobstructed otherwise, I do like to change lanes to behind a right-indicating car: so much better flow than stopping them, while almost stopping myself to be prepared for a forced turn - one of the many reasons I prefer painted lanes)
- kevin_thibedeau 4y agoThis is why you take the lane at intersections. Sensible jurisdictions permit this in their vehicle code. Always prevent careless drivers from killing you and always have an escape path.
- Tade0 4y agoA popular topic in my father's complaints during family trips was that you have to watch out for cyclists when you turn because some, well, will try to race you to the intersection. I haven't seen many do that, but I still look over my shoulder when I turn.
- School-Cotton 4y agoWhat made him think they were trying to race him?
- Tade0 4y agoI actually saw it a few times because my father would make note of it beforehand. Guy going in parallel to the road on the sidewalk, looking sideways and gunning it to make it before the car makes a turn. Or worse: also going in parallel, but making a left turn onto the road without looking.
- pastage 4y agoLooking sideways from a bicycle is not something you do for fun, it's a way to see what drivers are up to. Especially when they drive up beside you it's pretty hard to know what they will do.
- banannaise 4y agoThat's probably a severity thing. Turning collisions will almost always destroy the bike, injure the rider, and result in a police report. Sideswipe accidents will cause a minor bike crash, maybe a bit of damage and some cuts and scrapes, and the cyclist goes about his day, pissed off, but with no official report.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago> car squeezes past you at high speed many cyclist don't understand this because they are bad drivers the point of passing a bike on the road is to avoid the danger you as a driver pose for the bike in the case of an unexpected event. like if the biker falls. clearing up the way as fast as possible is safer for both. Doesn't matter who's faster in the end, if that was the purpose, it would suffice for drivers to not respect traffic laws, like many bikers do, for the exact purpose of arriving to the destination sooner. Of course you are faster if your parking technique involves blocking the road for pedestrian, especially hadicapped people, like this https://blog.urbanfile.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-02-18_Milano_Motorini_Biciclette_Marciapidei_Incivilt%C3%A0_42-1024x768.jpg https://blog.urbanfile.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-0... or this https://blog.urbanfile.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-02-18_Milano_Motorini_Biciclette_Marciapidei_Incivilt%C3%A0_6-1024x768.jpg https://blog.urbanfile.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-0... (real pictures in Milan one of the cities where bikes are more popular in Italy and they have become a problem for everyone else) the point is also that bikers should be in charge of their own safety, if a road is very narrow they are voluntarily endangering themselves for no reason, no other road user should be responsible for your safety more than you! that also apply to motorbikes, mopeds, scooters etc which are harder to drive because they rely on the gyroscope effect and only.have two wheels, they do not stand in case of sudden stop, the user can only fall or be shoot forward with grave consequences. so they should care for their life more than a driver that is protected by the car case. I wish I could show you the suicidal moves tourists make in my city (Rome) while riding electric scooters, two people, while the regulation says only one person can ride them, in the middle of high speed roads, with no knowledge of how the traffic works in a city they do not know, like it's OK to be idiots trying to die (and possibly ruin the life of someone else who happens to cross their path on a motor vehicle) Not saying people shouldn't use alternatives means of transport, I do.not drive often anymore, I walk As a pedestrian bikes are much more disruptive than cars for me, even though I'd like to ban cars from every city center in Italy. > 40% of non-cyclists in London say the danger of cycling is a significant factor in their decision not to cycle. people make a lot of excuses when confronted with something that they do not want to do. if they asked them why they do not exercise they would say that they have no time due to work or that the water of the pool is too cold, but the real reason is that they prefer the couch with Netflix. we should never take those polls too seriously.
- pojzon 4y ago
- ruivil7 4y agoAnd if a pedestrian has no sidewalk?
- yetihehe 4y agoPedestrians use much less space than cyclists and move slower, they typically also move away when they hear a car and most of them on such roads go in direction opposite to traffic flow so they see when a car approaches. Bicycles go in the same direction as traffic, sometimes swerve and go in small zigzag pattern, they don't have mirrors, don't look back and bicyclists are many times already tired from bicycling, they are also in more hurry than pedestrians (hurrying pedestrians also more often have accidents). In places where there are no sidewalks typically there are almost no pedestrians.
- matthewmacleod 4y agoThe vast majority of roads do not have separate cycle lanes - this is obviously not a good-faith argument.
- adrianN 4y agoAlmost all cyclists would cycle in bicycle lanes if they existed.
- 4y ago
- glandium 4y agoLet's be honest: given the opportunity (multiple lanes, etc.), the car would likely overtake a slow car as well, and stop at a red light right after that. I see that all the time (albeit I'm in Japan, not in the US) Edit: point being, for some reason, some drivers really like to reach red light as quickly as they can, and that's not necessarily related to bikes.
- tommoor 4y agoThe longer you're at the red light, the more time you have to scroll on your phone
- sokoloff 4y agoI think safely overtaking a slow car before a red light makes sense, if you make the reasonable assumption that 3 minutes in the future they will also be traveling slower than you intend to go.
- acdha 4y agoVery few of the people who do this are thinking that far ahead, though. Most of them are clearly only thinking about the gap between them and the next car – you can tell from how often they make high risk passes only to immediately brake hard for a turn or off-ramp.
- matheusmoreira 4y agoExactly. It's always better to pass slow vehicles as soon as it is safe to do so, red light or not. That they managed to catch up because of a red light is irrelevant. They're still behind me and no longer blocking my advance. I just want as much distance as possible between other drivers. Less stuff to deal with.
- sjostrom7 4y agoI would imagine it happens a lot more than hospital visits would let on. Being nudged into the curb - or getting spooked by a too-close car and hitting it yourself - would likely result in just scrapes and bruises, especially if you're wearing a helmet. But it's terrifying.