Lane question

Rich said:

Wayne Pein said:

Lepers of the road are those bicyclists, in fact the great majority of
bicyclists that I see, that ride right on the edge of the pavement or
even in the gutter pan. This is what I also characterize as groveling
at the side of the road.

Perhaps it's "sharing the road".

Rich

These are the same people who complain of having been run off the road,
having bailed into a ditch, getting buzzed frequently, etc. None of
these things has happened to me except the occasional buzzing.

If that's "sharing," I think I'll stick with using more lane space.

Wayne

jj said:

I wonder if the concept of 'taking the lane' is a more recent invention. I
still see quite a few older, long time riders riding the edge on some of
the back roads around here. Heh, it actually takes some skill to ride that
white line like they do.

jj

My wife surmises that some bicyclists consider it a skill to use as
little of the road as physically possible. I can do it, but it produces
counterproductive behavior in motorists. I WANT them to move over and/or
slow down for me.

Better terminology than "take the lane" is "use full lane." "Take"
implies that you aren't entitled to it.

Wayne

Wayne Pein said:

My wife surmises that some bicyclists consider it a skill to use as
little of the road as physically possible. I can do it, but it produces
counterproductive behavior in motorists. I WANT them to move over and/or
slow down for me.

Better terminology than "take the lane" is "use full lane." "Take"
implies that you aren't entitled to it.

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35. Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

An extreme example? Perhaps! But a real one! So, my argument is that a
rational cyclist will stay as far to the right as possible. What's
yours in this case?

gds said:

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35. Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

Yes, I'd use the full lane, particularly on sections with limited sight
distance. Motorists would come up behind me and slow to my speed. Then
they'd pass me when the opportunity arose. I ride on such roads here all
the time, albeit without switchbacks. The lanes are 10 feet wide with
double center line. Motorists cross it all the time.

Remember, those double lines are intended to restrict passing of similar
speed motor vehicles which takes considerable more distance than a much
slower bicyclist.

Quoted message said:

An extreme example? Perhaps! But a real one! So, my argument is that a
rational cyclist will stay as far to the right as possible. What's
yours in this case?

Staying as far right as possible is not rational.

Wayne

jj said:

Don't get me wrong, I applaud your ideas. I just worry about you a little
bit. If you don't have problems riding right of center, using no mirror,
then good for you. I only wish you continued success. ;-)

Like I said earlier, I used to use a mirror, perhaps a decade ago. I
found it worse than simply doing a look back.

Wayne

Wayne Pein said:

Rich said:

Wayne Pein said:

Lepers of the road are those bicyclists, in fact the great majority of
bicyclists that I see, that ride right on the edge of the pavement or
even in the gutter pan. This is what I also characterize as groveling
at the side of the road.

Perhaps it's "sharing the road".

Rich

These are the same people who complain of having been run off the road,
having bailed into a ditch, getting buzzed frequently, etc. None of
these things has happened to me except the occasional buzzing.

If that's "sharing," I think I'll stick with using more lane space.

Wayne

Don't get me wrong, I applaud your ideas. I just worry about you a little
bit. If you don't have problems riding right of center, using no mirror,
then good for you. I only wish you continued success. ;-)

jj

OK, then we have a different view on what is safe and rational. Also,
different on what is simply polite.
I'll stick with my view.

gds said:

Wayne Pein said:

My wife surmises that some bicyclists consider it a skill to use as
little of the road as physically possible. I can do it, but it produces
counterproductive behavior in motorists. I WANT them to move over and/or
slow down for me.

Better terminology than "take the lane" is "use full lane." "Take"
implies that you aren't entitled to it.

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35. Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

There are two different issues here:

1) If your going at 8 or 9mph, be aware of the 10 miles of traffic
behind you, move over, dismount and let the cars by. Good time, to
checkl some adjustments, take a swig of water, make it look like you
intended to stop for some reason.....

2) When a speed limit is posted, it's a maximum, not a minimum.

W

In article <[email hidden]>,

gds said:

Wayne Pein said:

My wife surmises that some bicyclists consider it a skill to use as
little of the road as physically possible. I can do it, but it produces
counterproductive behavior in motorists. I WANT them to move over and/or
slow down for me.

Better terminology than "take the lane" is "use full lane." "Take"
implies that you aren't entitled to it.

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35.

Are there shoulders? Are there straight-ish sections with enough
visibility to determine whether it's safe to pull out to pass a bicycle?

Quoted message said:

Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

Use the full lane when it's not safe for a car to pass.
If there are cars waiting to pass, there's enough visibility to determine
whether it can be done safely, and there's no oncoming traffic (so it
can be done safely), move over to let them pass.
(Keep in mind that the double-yellow indicates that it's unsafe to
pull out completely into the other lane to pass a vehicle moving the
same speed as you. Passing a bicycle uses less of the other lane for
less time/distance.)
If there are cars waiting to pass and it isn't safe to pass a bike on
the road with the current road conditions, pick a spot to pull over and
stop on the shoulder to let them pass.

Note that no matter what's happening, it's you (the cyclist) who's
controlling when cars pass you; it's your responsibility to give
them a chance as soon as it's safe and reasonable to do so, and their
responsibility to wait for that before they do. If either party doesn't
do their part (the car passes unsafely or the cyclist doesn't allow them
to pass when it is safe), the other side will be (quite justifiably)
rather annoyed.

dave

--
Dave Vandervies [email hidden]
This seems like a pretty weird thing to do, but the LISP and Scheme
crew is known for being weird, so indulge me for a minute.
--Bear in comp.lang.scheme

The Wogster said:

There are two different issues here:

1) If your going at 8 or 9mph, be aware of the 10 miles of traffic
behind you, move over, dismount and let the cars by. Good time, to
checkl some adjustments, take a swig of water, make it look like you
intended to stop for some reason.....

Why? It is perfectly easy and safe to stay right and let the cars pass.
Hundreds of folks do it every day of the year without mishap.

Quoted message said:

2) When a speed limit is posted, it's a maximum, not a minimum.

Of course, but W mentioned not wanting to cause bad motorist behavior.
I think forcing cars to drive at 1/3 the limit for no good reason other
than some sense of entitlement will cause lots of bad behavior.

I feel sorry for all the cyclists that have such a poor sense of self
esteem that they must posture about their rights. I find that reason
and courtesy ususally helps to a better solution.

gds said:

The Wogster said:

There are two different issues here:

1) If your going at 8 or 9mph, be aware of the 10 miles of traffic
behind you, move over, dismount and let the cars by. Good time, to
checkl some adjustments, take a swig of water, make it look like you
intended to stop for some reason.....

Why? It is perfectly easy and safe to stay right and let the cars pass.
Hundreds of folks do it every day of the year without mishap.

Quoted message said:

2) When a speed limit is posted, it's a maximum, not a minimum.

Of course, but W mentioned not wanting to cause bad motorist behavior.
I think forcing cars to drive at 1/3 the limit for no good reason other
than some sense of entitlement will cause lots of bad behavior.

I feel sorry for all the cyclists that have such a poor sense of self
esteem that they must posture about their rights. I find that reason
and courtesy ususally helps to a better solution.

Mr Anonymous GDS,

Don't feel sorry for me and don't assume I have a poor sense of self
esteem. You do a lot of ASS_U_ME ing that is incorrect. In all
liklihood, I know a lot more about cycling than you.

Regards,
Wayne

Oh! BTW the situation down the mountain is different. There I do occupy
the lane as it is hard (impossible)to stay to the right throught the
switchbacks at 35 mph. And since I can maintain a speed equal to the
speed limit I find it not a problem as I do not hold up traffic in any
way.

Dave Vandervies said:

Use the full lane when it's not safe for a car to pass.
If there are cars waiting to pass, there's enough visibility to determine
whether it can be done safely, and there's no oncoming traffic (so it
can be done safely), move over to let them pass.
(Keep in mind that the double-yellow indicates that it's unsafe to
pull out completely into the other lane to pass a vehicle moving the
same speed as you. Passing a bicycle uses less of the other lane for
less time/distance.)
If there are cars waiting to pass and it isn't safe to pass a bike on
the road with the current road conditions, pick a spot to pull over and
stop on the shoulder to let them pass.

Note that no matter what's happening, it's you (the cyclist) who's
controlling when cars pass you; it's your responsibility to give
them a chance as soon as it's safe and reasonable to do so, and their
responsibility to wait for that before they do. If either party doesn't
do their part (the car passes unsafely or the cyclist doesn't allow them
to pass when it is safe), the other side will be (quite justifiably)
rather annoyed.

dave

I agree with you except for the part where the cyclist doesn't allow
them to pass when it is safe. If a motorist is slowed to bicyclist speed
(ie not allowed to pass), the bicyclist has caused this by using the
full lane (or a significant portion of it) because by definition it is
not safe. When it then becomes safe, when there is an adequate break in
oncoming traffic, then there is no need for the bicyclist to let the
motorist pass within the lane because the motorist can simply pass in
the opposing lane. If a motorist cannot pass by fully moving over, then
they shouldn't try to pass by partially moving over.

That said, I get passed all the time on narrow two-lane roads by
motorists who don't fully move over, because they don't _need_ to, and I
don't have a problem with this. What I don't want is motorists making
risky passes in the face of oncoming traffic, at their and my expense.

Wayne

"gds" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Wayne Pein said:

My wife surmises that some bicyclists consider it a skill to use as
little of the road as physically possible. I can do it, but it produces
counterproductive behavior in motorists. I WANT them to move over and/or
slow down for me.

Better terminology than "take the lane" is "use full lane." "Take"
implies that you aren't entitled to it.

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35. Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

An extreme example? Perhaps! But a real one! So, my argument is that a
rational cyclist will stay as far to the right as possible. What's
yours in this case?

I say you're wrong...riding as far to the right as possible in those
scenarios is less safe.

FWIW, I ride roads like that all the time where I live. I typically ride
about 2 feet left of the white line (there's no usable shoulder). If I'm
being overtaken and approaching a blind corner or I see oncoming traffic,
I'll move to the center of the lane and indicate to overtaking traffic that
they should not try to pass me (a mirror makes it pretty easy to monitor
what's coming up from behind). When it's safe, I move back to the right and
wave them around. 99 times out of 100, the drivers around here respect my
actions, and many wave as they pass (with all 5 fingers :-) ). Especially
for elderly drivers, I think riding more assertively like this helps them to
do the right thing (i.e., wait until it's safe to pass).

Also, motorists will NOT be held up for 20 miles as you assert...they'll
just have to slow down for a few moments until the situation allows for a
safe pass. I've spoken with police officers, and none of them would ever
issue a ticket for passing a bike on a double-yellow.

And if I do find myself in a situation where there's a group of cars being
impeded by my bike, I'll look for the next safe place to pull over and let
them by...same as I would do if I were driving an RV or other slow-moving
vehicle.

--
~_-*
....G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com
CycliStats - Software for Cyclists

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

jj said:

Don't get me wrong, I applaud your ideas. I just worry about you a

little

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

bit. If you don't have problems riding right of center, using no mirror,
then good for you. I only wish you continued success. ;-)

Like I said earlier, I used to use a mirror, perhaps a decade ago. I
found it worse than simply doing a look back.

Wayne

What brand/model? Most cycling mirrors are not very good (I've tried most
of them), but I rarely go out anymore without my Take-a-Look mirror. If you
haven't tried this model, you really should. It's far and away the best
cycling mirror made today...clips onto your glasses, and provides a steady
view, with sufficient width of field. Much, much easier to monitor
overtaking traffic than the alternatives.

GG

GaryG said:

I say you're wrong...riding as far to the right as possible in those
scenarios is less safe.

FWIW, I ride roads like that all the time where I live. I typically ride
about 2 feet left of the white line (there's no usable shoulder). If I'm
being overtaken and approaching a blind corner or I see oncoming traffic,
I'll move to the center of the lane and indicate to overtaking traffic that
they should not try to pass me (a mirror makes it pretty easy to monitor
what's coming up from behind). When it's safe, I move back to the right and
wave them around. 99 times out of 100, the drivers around here respect my
actions, and many wave as they pass (with all 5 fingers :-) ). Especially
for elderly drivers, I think riding more assertively like this helps them to
do the right thing (i.e., wait until it's safe to pass).

You are describing courteous, rational action. You are not insisting on
occupying the entire lane the entire time. You are cooperating with the
motorists not antagonizing them. Just what I suggested.

Quoted message said:

Also, motorists will NOT be held up for 20 miles as you assert...they'll
just have to slow down for a few moments until the situation allows for a
safe pass. I've spoken with police officers, and none of them would ever
issue a ticket for passing a bike on a double-yellow.

Well, in my example they will be held up for many miles. With
swtchbacks there are literally miles of road where there is always a
blind corner coming up. as to which PO would issue a ticket and which
would not. I don' think the issue is a ticket. If the double lines are
placed properly it should mean that the sight distance is such that
going into the oncoming lane isn't safe. The safety is my concern.

Quoted message said:

And if I do find myself in a situation where there's a group of cars being
impeded by my bike, I'll look for the next safe place to pull over and let
them by...same as I would do if I were driving an RV or other slow-moving
vehicle.

Again,perfectly reasonable.

Wayne Pein wrote:
In all

Quoted message said:

liklihood, I know a lot more about cycling than you.

Regards,
Wayne

Well, regardless of how much you know,or think you know, we will never
get to compete. From the way in which you describe your riding I feel
you are patently unsafe and would never ride anwhere near you.

Regards,
anonymous GDS
or Gary Sax if you prefer.

Wayne, you are wonderfull!
I'm always so impressed by folks that need to resort to clever (or not
so clever) cursing. Shows not only your sense of self but your level of
maturity.
Keep it up!

Wayne Pein said:

In all
liklihood, I know a lot more about cycling than you.

If only you knew a little about courtesy and sharing.

Rich

On 10/6/05 12:46 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Wayne Pein"

Quoted message said:

gds said:

OK so let me understand how you would react to a common situation out
here. We have a two lane mountain road. It is over 20 miles long has
many turns and switchbacks and thus is double yellow line (no passing)
almost it entire length. Cyclists and motorists both use the road, the
former at about 8 or 9 mph and the latter at the posted speed limit of
35. Do you think cyclists should "use the full lane"? Remmeber if they
do motorists can not legally pass for 20 miles and find their speed
restricted to less than one third the posted limit. What sort of
motorist behavior does this produce?

Yes, I'd use the full lane, particularly on sections with limited sight
distance. Motorists would come up behind me and slow to my speed. Then
they'd pass me when the opportunity arose. I ride on such roads here all
the time, albeit without switchbacks. The lanes are 10 feet wide with
double center line. Motorists cross it all the time.

Remember, those double lines are intended to restrict passing of similar
speed motor vehicles which takes considerable more distance than a much
slower bicyclist.

Quoted message said:

An extreme example? Perhaps! But a real one! So, my argument is that a
rational cyclist will stay as far to the right as possible. What's
yours in this case?

Staying as far right as possible is not rational.

Wayne

If you have any money at all would you please name me in your will! 🙂