Cyclist ettiquette

Perhaps you could be so proactive towards improper
motorists. How broad minded and considerate of you to worry
so about the minority.

"Neil_Brooks" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
| I'm grateful that the (horror) stories about car vs. bike
| tend to end with people discussing their techniques for
| safe/defensive riding.
|
| I make a mental note when I see bicyclists doing things
| that I think
| a) endanger their lives, or b) are likely to enrage
| drivers. My favorite example: I live on a street that
| has a popular (designated and delineated) bike lane.
| When I _drive_ down the street, there are _always_
| cyclists who are two, three, or four abreast, not
| paying any attention to whether cars are coming behind
| them. The street has blind curves, so a courteous
| driver is often forced into (potentially) oncoming
| traffic to avoid the thick clot of cyclists who have
| suddenly acquired sole ownership of the roadway.
|
| I use a helmet mirror (GEEK!), so--if I'm two-up on a street--
| I can move toward the curb well before I'm an imposition
| to drivers. I'm less concerned about my rights than I am
| about a 7,200lb. Ford Excursion Enema....
|
| What tips do you have for _cyclists_ to minimize their
| impact on vehicle traffic, speed their trip, and enhance
| their safety??
|
| Mine: (YMMV, of course)
|
| (1) (The motorcyclist in me): I try to make eye contact
| with _every driver_. If I'm behind them, I look at
| their rear-view mirror. If it's a parked car that I'm
| passing, I check their side-view mirror to see if
| there's a head. I want them to know I'm there, and I
| want to know what they're about to do. Watching their
| eyes can tell you where they're going even if they
| haven't discovered turn signals yet;
|
| (2) I don't run stops unless there's nobody else near the
| intersection. I don't run reds unless it's a "T"
| intersection and nobody _could_ cross in front of me.
|
| Others??

On 22 Mar 2004 07:42:09 -0800, [email hidden] (Neil_Brooks) from

url='http://groups.google.com/'http://groups.google.com/url said:

I make a mental note when I see bicyclists doing things
that I think
a) endanger their lives, or b) are likely to enrage
drivers ..

Well, here, fill your mental Big Chief:

digave.comvideosOpen ↗

--
[email hidden]
A very small object - Its center.
25

Doug Huffman <[email hidden]> wrote in message 48KdnU5Hv4IWtsLdRVn-
[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Perhaps you could be so proactive towards improper
motorists. How broad minded and considerate of you to
worry so about the minority.

Two wrongs don't make a right, top-poster.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

I have, I do, and -- where I can -- I always will,
including my simple "HANG UP!!" sign in the back window of
my car that never fails to earn a sideways look from
motorists on their phones (who, in my experience, have
endangered my two-wheeled life more times than any other
single category of driver).

As I say, I am a motorcyclist as well, and painfully (almost
fatally) aware of the indiscretions, inconsideration, and
inhumanity of which many motorists are capable. I am also
aware, however, of what many motorcycle riders do both to
endanger themselves and auto drivers and to bring frustrated
motorists to a heightened state of anger in which the more
psychotic of these motorists may lash out.

I wrote a particularly scathing letter to Clear Channel
after its DJ's incited violence against cyclists, but I
don't agree with bicyclists who choose to impede the flow of
automotive traffic rather than spread out a little bit,
lengthwise, in order to truly 'share the road.' I think
selfish cyclists who flaunt the rules and taunt the drivers
heighten the danger for all cyclists.

I think many problems can be fixed by addressing _both_
sides. I do not wish to be made a target for somebody who
just had a particularly bad experience with another cyclist
three miles back....

"Doug Huffman" wrote

Quoted message said:

Perhaps you could be so proactive towards improper
motorists. How broad minded and considerate of you to
worry so about the minority.

True enough, but...

a) If the speed limit is 45, _must_ the cars really slow
down to 15-18mph and wait for the cyclists (who are
riding four abreast) to finish the curve before passing?
I would think it's simpler and safer for all if the
cyclists, once aware of the proximity of a car, just
moved into a single-file line until the car had passed.

b) I exercise my rights as a vehicle on the road when it is
appropriate (e.g., taking up an entire lane in a turn
situation). It's a bit hypocritical for me not to also
understand that with those rights come similar
responsibilities (e.g., knowing who/what is behind me,
not impeding the flow of traffic).

In other words, shouldn't we, both as participants who are
subject to the rules of the road _and_ as the more vulnerable--
with the greatest likelihood of injury in the event of a collision--
be willing to take on at least 1/2 of the burden?

"David L. Johnson" wrote

Quoted message said:

While I understand the problem of cyclists unnecessarily
blocking the roadway, it is NOT a courteous driver who
pulls blindly into the opposing lane, but one endangering
many lives, including his own. You must wait until you
have a clear view of the oncoming traffic, and that there
is none, before you can pass slower vehicles.

David L. Johnson said:

Neil_Brooks said:

I make a mental note when I see bicyclists doing things
that I think
a) endanger their lives, or b) are likely to enrage
drivers. My favorite example: I live on a street that
has a popular (designated and delineated) bike lane.
When I _drive_ down the street, there are _always_
cyclists who are two, three, or four abreast, not
paying any attention to whether cars are coming behind
them. The street has blind curves, so a courteous
driver is often forced into (potentially) oncoming
traffic to avoid the thick clot of cyclists who have
suddenly acquired sole ownership of the roadway.

While I understand the problem of cyclists unnecessarily
blocking the roadway, it is NOT a courteous driver who
pulls blindly into the opposing lane, but one endangering
many lives, including his own. You must wait until you
have a clear view of the oncoming traffic, and that there
is none, before you can pass slower vehicles.

Absolutely. Would you become "enraged" the same way about a
farm tractor, mail truck, street sweeper, or garbage truck?
Wait until it's safe, then go -- and in the meantime, don't
be such a big baby.

Matt O.

Quoted message said:

The street has blind curves, so a courteous driver is
often forced into (potentially) oncoming traffic to avoid
the thick clot of cyclists who have suddenly acquired sole
ownership of the roadway.

I'm going to totally avoid the issue of whether the cyclists
are right or wrong, but I will point out that any driver who
finds themselves "forced" into the opposing lane in this
situation is not practicing good defensive driving behavior.

There are many things which driver could find upon rounding
that corner that would ruin their day if they are
unprepared.

Chris Neary [email hidden]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you
ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I loved" -
Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

Neil_Brooks said:

Quoted message said:

I make a mental note when I see bicyclists doing things
that I think
a) endanger their lives, or b) are likely to enrage
drivers. My favorite example: I live on a street that
has a popular (designated and delineated) bike lane.
When I _drive_ down the street, there are _always_
cyclists who are two, three, or four abreast, not
paying any attention to whether cars are coming behind
them.

Quoted message said:

I have, I do, and -- where I can -- I always will,
including my simple "HANG UP!!" sign in the back window of
my car that never fails to earn a sideways look from
motorists on their phones (who, in my experience, have
endangered my two-wheeled life more times than any other
single category of driver).

Quoted message said:

I am also aware, however, of what many motorcycle riders
do both to endanger themselves and auto drivers and to
bring frustrated motorists to a heightened state of
anger in which the more psychotic of these motorists may
lash out.

I wrote a particularly scathing letter to Clear Channel

Does anyone else see a pattern here?

Relax, Neil.

Matt O.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Matt O'Toole
David L. Johnson wrote:

Absolutely. Would you become "enraged" the same way about a
farm tractor, mail truck, street sweeper, or garbage truck?
Wait until it's safe, then go -- and in the meantime, don't
be such a big baby.

Matt O.

Farm tractor, street sweeper, and garbage truck: fixed width vehicle. No choice.

Mail truck: fixed width vehicle. Federal employee on the job. No choice, and the right-of-way. No practical choice.

The analogy works, however, if any of _these_ vehicles ties up traffic by driving side-by-side at 7mph, preventing your safe passage.

So what you're saying is, "No. We do _not_ have any _responsibility_ on the roadways; _only rights_. They can just wait!" ??

And, incidentally, thanks a bunch for the personal attack. It helps me to evaluate the credibility of your position, and fosters the productive exchange of ideas.

On 22 Mar 2004 16:11:52 -0800, [email hidden] (Neil_Brooks) wrote:

<True enough, but... <
< a) If the speed limit is 45, _must_ the cars really slow
down to <15-18mph and wait for the cyclists (who are
riding four abreast) to <finish the curve before
passing? I would think it's simpler and safer <for
all if the cyclists, once aware of the proximity of a
car, just <moved into a single-file line until the
car had passed.

Are you trying to make one of those "this disrespectful
group is reflecting badly on the whole" arguments? Don't
believe it. Every situation is new no matter how much
baggage you're carrying from prior events. Better to pay
attention to the moment.

Last year was my first year of club rides. The vast majority
of my miles being solo, I was adjusting to the group
dynamic, and occasionally I would "work" the rear, watching
and listening for cars and yelling car back when I thought
it was necessary. As there were some long straightways, I
was trying to yell at a point when I knew the car would
definetly pass our group and not turn onto a side street but
in time for the 2 and 3 abreasters to merge. That's what I
thought the back marker ought to do. In conversation I asked
another rider about this and they kinda shot back with a
quizzical "as soon as you see it". I also noted that certain
riders were never gonna get over. Riding in a group
generally sucks but I'll do some of this year nonetheless so
it doesn't suck so bad. Some the people that really ride
well and i like are total a.... It's complicated ;-)

< b) I exercise my rights as a vehicle on the road when it
is <appropriate (e.g., taking up an entire lane in a
turn situation). <It's a bit hypocritical for me not
to also understand that with those <rights come
similar responsibilities (e.g., knowing who/what is
behind <me, not impeding the flow of traffic). < <In
other words, shouldn't we, both as participants who
are subject to <the rules of the road _and_ as the
more vulnerable--with the greatest <likelihood of
injury in the event of a collision--be willing to take
<on at least 1/2 of the burden?

I gladly take on more than 50% and never complete a ride
without thinking how much faith is involved in the activity.

<"David L. Johnson" wrote <> <> While I understand the
problem of cyclists unnecessarily blocking the <> roadway,
it is NOT a courteous driver who pulls blindly into the
opposing <> lane, but one endangering many lives, including
his own. You must wait <> until you have a clear view of the
oncoming traffic, and that there is <> none, before you can
pass slower vehicles.

neil0502 said:

Matt O'Toole said:

David L. Johnson wrote: Absolutely. Would you become
"enraged" the same way about a farm tractor, mail
truck, street sweeper, or garbage truck? Wait until
it's safe, then go -- and in the meantime, don't be
such a big baby. Matt O.

Farm tractor, street sweeper, and garbage truck: fixed
width vehicle. No choice.

Mail truck: fixed width vehicle. Federal employee on the
job. No choice, and the right-of-way. No practical choice.

The analogy works, however, if any of _these_ vehicles ties
up traffic by driving side-by-side at 7mph, preventing your
safe passage.

So what you're saying is, "No. We do _not_ have any
_responsibility_ on the roadways; _only rights_. They can
just wait!" ??

The responsibility is to respect the rights of the other
road-users.

A bicycle is not as thin as you think. Being passed with
inches to spare is extremely dangerous. But you wouldn't
know about that, encased in steeel. I have a long ugly scar
on my elbow from being thrown over the handlebars after I'd
been nicked by a car that was edging very close to me.

Your original complaint i think has more to do with the
number of riders abreast, which is valid; good sense (and
the law, in many places) dictate that cyclists ride single-
file if riding two-up blocks the roadway. Three-up and four-
up is just dumb.

But also practice some simple traffic yoga. Take a deep
breath, and reflect: ten seconds is nothing compared to
eternity, and certainly not worth anybody's life except in
the most extreme circumstances.

Roll down your windows; there's a world out there
outside the car.

-Luigi

Quoted message said:

And, incidentally, thanks a bunch for the personal attack.
It helps me to evaluate the credibility of your position,
and fosters the productive exchange of ideas.

I appreciate your post, Luigi. Keep in mind, however, I
first: ride my bicycle
second: ride my motorcycle
third: drive my hybrid car (rarely)

I see the world from two wheels _far_ more often than I see it from four. Therefore, my comments _about_ cyclists riding three and four abreast are made _as a cyclist_.

I'll quote a journalist who, after 9/11, was asked why these terrorists hate us so intensely.

His response? "They hate us because we don't even know why they hate us."

I'm interested in understanding the position of the car-people. If all I have to do as a cyclist is to inconvenience myself slightly to reduce their intolerance for bicycles and the likelihood that I'll get hit...I'm willing to do it, but that's me.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Luigi De Guzman
[B]On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 03:20:17 GMT, neil0502

Quoted message said:

Matt O'Toole said:

David L. Johnson wrote: Absolutely. Would you become
"enraged" the same way about a farm tractor, mail
truck, street sweeper, or garbage truck? Wait until
it's safe, then go -- and in the meantime, don't be
such a big baby. Matt O.

Farm tractor, street sweeper, and garbage truck: fixed
width vehicle. No choice.

Mail truck: fixed width vehicle. Federal employee on the
job. No choice, and the right-of-way. No practical choice.

The analogy works, however, if any of _these_ vehicles ties
up traffic by driving side-by-side at 7mph, preventing your
safe passage.

So what you're saying is, "No. We do _not_ have any
_responsibility_ on the roadways; _only rights_. They can
just wait!" ??

Quoted message said:

And, incidentally, thanks a bunch for the personal attack.
It helps me to evaluate the credibility of your position,
and fosters the productive exchange of ideas. [/B]

Quoted message said:

I appreciate your post, Luigi. Keep in mind, however, I
first: ride my bicycle
second: ride my motorcycle
third: drive my hybrid car (rarely)

I see the world from two wheels _far_ more often than I see
it from four. Therefore, my comments _about_ cyclists
riding three and four abreast are made _as a cyclist_.

I'll quote a journalist who, after 9/11, was asked why
these terrorists hate us so intensely.

His response? "They hate us because we don't even know why
they hate us."

I'm interested in understanding the position of the car-
people. If all I have to do as a cyclist is to
inconvenience myself slightly to reduce their intolerance
for bicycles and the likelihood that I'll get hit...I'm
willing to do it, but that's me.

A motorist can be annoyed for any number of reasons.
Take speed.

As cyclists, we are far more concerned with average speed
over the whole distance travelled; keeping a steady pace is
naturally much easier on us than constant changes in pace.

Motorists in general are obsessed with instantaneous
speed readings. They must be at or above the legal posted
limit at all times, regardless of conditions, lest they
be delayed--their sense of their own speed is rather
different from ours.

It always amuses me, whether when I am driving or cycling,
to watch people zoom from one light to the next, one
intersection to the next, and fume as they are caught by
lights at awkward moments. Moving steadily, I cover the
same distance as they do in the same time, catching a good
flow of traffic. Neat stuff. But it bugs the living hell
out of everybody behind me, who seems hellbent on gaining a
few seconds.

From a car, a bicycle is a non-entity; if seen at all, it
can be swept aside with little more thought than one might
squash an errant squirrel. It is therefore irksome when a
single cyclist takes the lane for whatever reason, and
demands to be treated like normal traffic. "You can't be
serious," thinks the motorist. "He's only a bicycle!" The
motorist sees only space where he can put his car and
displace the obstacle; he does not see pavement
irregularities, line-of-sight issues, right-turn-only
markings. He decides to share the road by sharing the lane,
with mere inches to spare.

Accomodating cars is a tricky thing. I don't like caving in
to bullies, and I refuse to give anyone the impression that
I will be driven off the road merely becasue someone menaces
me with a revving engine, a honked horn, or a shouted
epithet. But I do try to ride as responsibly as I can to
keep things moving for everyone. I'll ride single file. If
I'm really slow or tired or moving uphill, I'm happy to let
cars pass safely, and motion them on with a wave or a nod. I
make clear hand-signals. I behave well.

I can only speak for myself though. I disown cyclists
riding in packs. I notice that cyclists who are strangers
to each other, but happen to be going the same way, ride
single file; groups of friends bunch up and look bad to
other traffic. I ride alone (more so that I don't get
dropped by anybody).

But I'm not going to cave in.

Motorcyclists get more respect, but then, since they're
faster, they can take more of the lane, and people just have
to deal with that. And the motorcycle in the USA is ridden
by fairly respectable people, who have money. Bicycles, on
the other hand, are ridden by all sorts.

-Luigi

(Neil_Brooks) said:

What tips do you have for _cyclists_ to minimize their
impact on vehicle traffic, speed their trip, and enhance
their safety??

hop the curb and take the sidewalk <G

On 22 Mar 2004 07:42:09 -0800 in rec.bicycles.misc,

(Neil_Brooks) said:

The street has blind curves, so a courteous driver is
often forced into (potentially) oncoming traffic to avoid
the thick clot of cyclists who have suddenly acquired sole
ownership of the roadway.

No, a courteous and LEGAL driver is forced to wait until
it's safe to pass. That's not saying that the POBs (People
On Bikes, not cyclists) shouldn't be riding single file.

There are many good and legal reasons to NOT ride in a
designated bike lane, including hazards such as broken glass
and other debris, but even then cyclists should ride single
file except when passing.

That said, overtaking drivers are required by law to
excercise due caution, and are almost always found to be at
fault in a rear-end collision. On roads with curves,
drivers have a duty to drive so that they have a safe
stopping distance.

On 22 Mar 2004 16:11:52 -0800 in rec.bicycles.misc,

(Neil_Brooks) said:

a) If the speed limit is 45, _must_ the cars really slow
down to 15-18mph and wait for the cyclists (who are
riding four abreast) to finish the curve before
passing?

that's what the law requires. what part of MUST do you not
understand?

"neil0502" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

His response? "They hate us because we don't even know why
they hate us."

That's about the way I feel towards car drivers. Their
behavior is just unconscious/reflexive. You flatter yourself
to think they'd actually notice your behavior or
discriminate between yours and other cyclists. Blaming other
cyclists for motorist behavior is particularly absurd.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Dennis P. Harri
On 22 Mar 2004 16:11:52 -0800 in rec.bicycles.misc,

(Neil_Brooks) said:

a) If the speed limit is 45, _must_ the cars really slow
down to 15-18mph and wait for the cyclists (who are
riding four abreast) to finish the curve before
passing?

that's what the law requires. what part of MUST do you not
understand?

Well...I sure got a lot of flames from this posting (which was absolutely _not_ my intention).

Most people who have responded seem to agree that cyclists who--for no apparent reason--are riding three, four, or more abreast, and are taking up 50% of the vehicle lane for no reason are _not_ in the right. In California, incidentally, that's the law (http://www.sdcbc.org/BikeLaws.html).

So, at least where I come from, the law says the cyclists _MUST_ (see? I understand _all_ of that word) ride single file under normal circumstances. That being the case, it's really a moot point what the cars _must_ do (flaming poster above notwithstanding).

Back to the point of my post....and let me try again with another courtesy that I try to extend, and that car-people seem to appreciate (and which may generate less stoning on this NG):

When I stop at a traffic light, I am conscious of cars coming up behind me that wish to turn right. If necessary, I move my bike one way or the other to ensure that they have room to get by me, rather than forcing them to wait until the light changes (right turn on red is legal here).

Car-people seem very grateful.

And...like before...I'd welcome other people's advice and tips.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 05:01:57 GMT, neil0502 <[email hidden]>
wrote:

<I'm interested in understanding the position of the car-
people. If all I <have to do as a cyclist is to
inconvenience myself slightly to reduce <their intolerance
for bicycles and the likelihood that I'll get <hit...I'm
willing to do it, but that's me.

I've noted that when cycling solo, the car people are
much more apt to exhibit intolerance. Even two cyclists
will sense that many more drivers will slow down, pass
more cautiously, wait at intersections and the like. Most
of my group rides are on weekends and in more bike
suitable routes so they're not like my weekday rides in
commuter traffic but I'd swear that human beings have a
sixth sense toward witnesses and adjust their behavior
accordingly. As a cyclist, you're in a minority and
you're treated as such by some.

I believe the likelihood of getting hit is tiny even if you
don't emphasize safety and just use uncommon sense. So my
emphasis wouldn't be only on cars but also on conditions and
my equipment. As your miles and ability increase, you'll go
to new locations and you'll travel faster, thereby
increasing the probability of a negative occurrence while
limiting the reaction time. Thankfully, the process of
becoming a better cyclist is an evolutionary one, we gain
experience even as we face more challenging situations. e.g.
in CT sand is dumped on the road all winter long and you
have to assume it's going to be in the worst possible places
not to mention things like potholes at speed 8-(

As you suggest, I bend to the will of the cars, most often
by changing my routes (they tend not to like hills 8-), but
cars are not the only hazard on the road.