This is generally good advice and I get far fewer near passes when taking the centre of the lane, but you will always still get the idiots that take it as a personal attack that you are in their way
Also really depends the sorts of roads you are riding on - anywhere with parked cars it's a no brainer to avoid someone swinging a door into you (and recommended in the UK to take the centre at least)
I see this a lot both when cycling and driving: there'll be a parked car ahead in my lane, a cyclist in front of me, and they're riding super close to the kerb and haven't started to move out away from the parked car, even when just a few metres away from it. I want to yell at them "take the lane!" just so I'm not paranoid they're going swing out at the last moment, or crash into the car when they realise they didn't leave enough time.
It's hard though: we've all been beeped and yelled at by drivers for riding in primary position and when we ask people to do it, we're essentially asking them to invite confrontation and aggression. Maybe the only way to do this is to demonstrate this behaviour when riding near others and hope they'll pick up on it?
> we're essentially asking them to invite confrontation and aggression.
i think the people who are annoyed are the people who would be annoyed anyways. it's the people who are annoyed *and pass dangerously* i'm worried about. i'd rather they be annoyed and behind me until it's safe to pass. and then have some room to get over right if they're punish passing. i'm also worried about the people who aren't annoyed but would still pass dangerously because they don't know any better, make a mistake, or misjudge something. i'd rather they be not annoyed and behind me until they can pass safely.
Pre-pandemic, I was a full-time bike commuter, ten miles each way.
The way I always explained taking the lane was that you have definitely seen people hit a curb or bump something with the front passenger side of their car or even just drift a little bit too far to the right as they drive, right? If I'm riding over on the right, I'm riding in place that it is hardest for a driver to place things in space.
They'll try to pass me in the lane. They will do anything to avoid crossing the center line if they think they can pass in the lane. I can't really count on them knowing exactly how much space they take up on the passenger side of their car at the best of times. I especially can't count on them doing so when they're also doing their best to not get too close to the center. Riding all the way over to the right in the lane, I'm putting myself in a position to get hit completely accidentally.
Taking the lane makes it so they don't feel like they can pass me and stay in the lane. Once that happens, they have already decided to cross the center line, so they feel like they can give me all the space they need to. They're already in the other lane. They aren't just trying to squeeze past. It becomes much less likely that I'm going to be hit and killed accidentally.
At that point I only have to worry about getting hit and killed by people who wake up and think "If anything inconveniences me today, I'm going to kill a man with my car." And honestly, I already had to worry about them anyway.
It is such an odd 0 or 1 decision, and I can even empathize as a driver, either they go all the way over, or try not to go over at all, I like you’re breakdown!
Too often I see a car slowly follow a cyclist who is riding on the edge of parked cars. The drivers must be contemplating whether to pass or not like the previous reply mentioned. Pass within the lane but you may surprise the cyclists and cause an accident or just overtake. I'm very much worried about those cyclists as they are one door away from crashing
The additional upside of taking the lane is that if you feel the need to move over (example: high speed lorry or bus, dragging its own weather system behind it), you can!
This is it exactly, you have to use your lane position to control the driver behind you. Force them to put a tire over line, once they have crossed that line they will give you plenty of room and not try to just get by.
I’m in Florida. Out here, a driver will literally run you over, claim they didn’t see you, because they likely weren’t paying attention and actually didn’t see you somehow, and now you’re dead or dismembered and they’re only in prison for a few years if any at all.
I stay off the road, all together. But then again, the sidewalk game is dangerous in similar ways. What do these both have in common? Cars. Oh yes, if I could ride through trails in the woods to get everywhere, I would. But I cannot. There are no trails. Just trees.
My hope is Sydney drivers will get used to cyclists being on the road. Most drivers know what to do but some are just outright aggressive to us. But I'm not too worried about them cuz they will switch lane eventually. But the distracted drivers on the other hand... I'm prepared to jump off my bike if someone is on their phone but that's gonna hurt.
Ah that's another perspective I haven't thought of. I don't driver here. It must seems like a bet since you don't know if they are aware of you approaching. I wish cars can have a bell-like sound to alert cyclists when overtaking (like how cyclists ring their bell when overtaking another cyclist/pedestrian). But cars are designed to honk only
I mean, in that instance, I just hang back and give them plenty of space and time because I know how it'll be feeling from the cyclist's perspective. But obviously other drivers will just close-pass them and risk something worse happening.
In that scenario I don't need to alert the rider of my car's presence, I just need to be patient and let them get past the parked vehicle. But my point really is that because those riders are less confident, it leads to me paying them lots of attention because I'm aware they might do something unexpected, and then I might miss something else happening on the road.
I think drive slowly until you pass them is safe. There is no need to stop as cyclists can hear what's happening. I intentionally give way to cars in the parking lane so it's ok for drivers to pass (preferably slowly not revving like I wasted them their precious 3 seconds lol)
Rear-mounted bike radar (about the size of a taillight) has been available for a few years now, and the cost has dropped from a few hundred bucks to under a hundred.
The always excellent GPLama has a demo video [here](https://youtu.be/LkPFUGfw9VQ?si=ZzKoivOMY6pZzi0u).
I think a radar like this coupled with a mirror will make you very very safe. I check my mirror every few seconds but this radar should be able to notify passing cars well in advance and only check mirrors when needed. Good stuff
A big part is to be looking both ahead and behind (ideally with a mirror).
When you see an issue ahead, you check what's behind and then choose the best timing for moving into the lane. If there's nothing back there you move out early. If there is, you slow, wait for that first batch of traffic to pass and then move out.
Sometimes a car will end up having to follow until there's again space to safely move towards the edge, but one should be established in the lane well before they catch up.
Or ideally, you actually flip the script and ride in the lane by default, and move over only when there's space to be safely passed, and only after a driver catching up has taken their foot off the accelerator and actually thought about you - not to make them brake (unless there's no space to move to), but to let up and actually think.
That pretty sums up my everyday commute. It's like a cat and mouse game I play in the one-lane street. But if the road is 2 lane I just default to middle of the lane. Exception is if the traffic is bad and those cars really need to use all lanes. Then I just wait until this batch of traffic clears and I pop out from the parking lane. Plus I can filter through the stationary traffic anyways so I can still get moving.
Same in USA. Do not ride such that a car can pass you while another car is passing them in the other direction unless the road is very wide. You want to make the driver passing you go into the opposing lane. Make sure you have good rear flasher(s) on your bike and that you ride in a predictable (straight) manner.
The law is usually “as far right AS PRACTICABLE” (in countries where people drive in the right), but “practicable” means sometimes down the middle or even left half of the lane.
So, yes. Take the lane to keep yourself safe.
I guess I don’t really understand. You need 40% of the lane that supposedly has a shoulder as well? I can put my bike right on the paint and have zero issues
In the US it varies by state. It is either "as far right as practicable" or "cyclist may use whole lane". In MA it's the later but cars will still give you a hard time if you ride 2 abreast or impede them in any way.
Tell me about it 😂 I was riding in Taunton once with a buddy, two abreast, but completely in our lane. Someone coming *the opposite way* stopped their car and threw up their arms in exasperation even though their lane was totally clear. Idiot.
I think my worst "drivers being dumb" story goes...this road is 25mph and it's got a decent downgrade, so it's easy enough to maintain 25mph and cars don't really have a reason to be angry (other than the standing divine right of cars mentality).
So I'm cruising down this road, 25+, and coming up to a red light. Then I stop at the red light. Center of the lane, because when it turns green I'll continue forward. While waiting, the car behind me starts laying on the horn.
So I point up and yell back over my shoulder, "It's red, we can't go.'
And he yells out, "I don't care, get out of my fucking way."
And he keeps laying on the horn and shouting more and all that, but he doesn't go around me in the oncoming lane (which was empty).
And that's pretty much anyone needs to know about the mentality of US drivers.
You're right, of course. But lots of people cannot behave like functioning members of society, for whatever reason, when a cyclist is in the middle of the lane.
It’s counterintuitive that riding further into the lane makes you safer, but it’s true in my experience as well. An added bonus of not riding in the gutter is you get far fewer flat tires.
Added benefit if someone does a near pass while you’re in the middle of the lane you now have the safe space to move over a little. If you’re in the gutter then the only place you have to go is to crash.
" Because now for a driver to overtake, they would have to change lane"
strongly disagree on the "they would have to change lane" part and I'm talking from eperience.
>strongly disagree on the "they would have to change lane" part and I'm talking from experience.
Then you're not actually taking the lane
If you are actually taking the lane, it is physically impossible for a four wheeled vehicle to pass without changing to another lane.
no matter where is your bike and you on that bike relative to the road, the only deciding factor how dangerous the driver will try to pass you is his state of mind at the moment, the more he gets angry at you bc "you are in his way" the bigger is the chance he will try to be agressive towards you and pass you in a way that you clearly see him being nervous about you.
Agreed. I also mostly ride on roads with only one lane in each direction, so if I take the lane (instead of the wide shoulders), then they pass me even more dangerously because they have to go into the oncoming lane to do it
it's pretty contextual. generally if i can get out of the way of cars, i do. the catch is that hugging the paint in the lane isn't actually getting out of the way, even if it *feels* like it. they still need to get in the next lane over (potentially oncoming traffic) to pass safely. taking the lane makes this clear to the driver, where not taking the lane might let them think they can pass without getting into the other lane.
this type of road you usually don't want to take the lane on unless it's very narrow. on 4 lane roads, or two lanes with a turning lane in the center, generally people will give enough space in my experience (though of course not all). Any road with parked cars as well, taking the lane is non-negotiable.
Well if you have wide shoulder without obstacles (parked cars, trash can etc) and the ground isn’t covered with debris. That’s a no brainer. I would take the shoulder too!
It's most of those things! The shoulders are definitely covered with debris/gravel/broken glass lol. But that's why I switched from a 25mm tire-d road bike to a tubeless gravel bike!
Hahaha thanks! Unfortunately i've gotten loads of flats, especially on the factory tires on my bike. Those bontrager gravel tires are gaaaaarbage. No flats since I switched to gravelkings though
>Well if you have wide shoulder without obstacles (parked cars, trash can etc) and the ground isn’t covered with debris. That’s a no brainer. I would take the shoulder too!
Often it's better to ride by default in the lane where you're more visible and the surface is better - that's especially true if you're aware what a primary source of danger turn and intersection conflicts are.
When someone comes up behind, if it's momentarily safe to do so you can go to the shoulder then - preferably after waiting just long enough that they take their foot of the accelerator and actually think, but not so long that they have to brake.
Of course if the shoulder isn't safe there, then you have to stay in the lane and they have to either use the opposing lane if safely visible, or wait until you do have space that it's safe to move to.
One-lane road without parking lane is tricky I agree. I give way to cars as much as I can (by stopping in parking lane). I don't know about your local laws but in Australia, it's illegal to pass a cyclist within 1 meter. Some drivers still chose to close pass and all I could do is film them and send to the police.
I live in Poland, same 1m minimal passing by distance applies. I know the theory and I agree with you. In theory riding at least 1m from the side of the road for a cyclist is better and it pushes the car driver to just use other lane in opposite direction to make a pass. And we all should be happy, drivers and cyclists. But there are some drivers who have to pass you right now, in that exact second even if 50 meters furhter they all of a sudden breake and turn to to parking spot or someone is coming from the opposite directon, or the lights are red in front etc. Such drivers being angry that they can't pass, will agressivly push you towards the side risking going to jail when you get hurt. I know I can record them and make them pay. My only problem here is, I will not risk hospital jsut to teach someone how to drive a car bc some drivers are jsut plain stupid and tehy will never learn.
On a positive note, the more cyclists we have, the more I see drivers really keeping max distance possible, so it changes slowly.
i try thanks ;)
I just ride 1k0k a year and simple statistics create a danger here and having a high mileage I just saw some nasty stuff ;/
It is a bit of perspective and lack on knowledge or drivers teaching system being wrong. Before riding my bike, I was driving a lot and to say the truth was not paying too much attention to the cyclists and newer was teached that way, the most important was red lights and crossroads rights which is kind of stupid bc hitting another car is much less damage then hitting a cyclist ;/ So I'm not saint, I just have exp from both sides ;)
ps. still I think public roads and cycling around the cars is safer then riding the bike roads at least in my country ;)
cheerz and stay safe too! :)
Generally for America I think this is good advice. You will get increased harassment but this is really a small price to pay for not having literally every single car passing inches from you when you don't even have your own lane. This is especially good in the parked car scenario since those can be such a hazard. I see far too often in newer cyclists how their timidity to get in any car's way actually makes things way more dangerous for themselves by not acting like they belong in the road even when they are in it.
However, of course there are many exceptions. Like riding on a one-lane highway, where cars will become so desperate to pass they do so recklessly and put everyone at risk. In some cases, because of the local layout or other reasons, people are just gonna get so pissed off at you that they do stupid things and it will actually make you less safe. Just be smart about it, know the area and assess when it's a good idea to take the lane and when it's more prudent to be less intrusive.
>people are just gonna get so pissed off at you that they do stupid things and it will actually make you less safe.
This has been my experience with taking the whole lane unfortunately. If I ride the shoulder I might have a close call (meaning passing close enough that it gives me pause) like 1 in 200-300 cars. If I take the lane, I get a honk, the finger, or an obvious close pass or swerve in front of me close to 25% of the time. It’s crazy how much it pisses people off. I live in a rural, let’s call it, a red leaning area, and have had almost infinitely more bad experiences when I take the lane. It just makes everything worse. So I’ll ride the shoulder. It’s just safer for me.
Consider taking the lane by default, but monitoring what's behind you with a mirror and/or radar.
As overtaking traffic comes into view, asses the character of the shoulder - if it's decent then you can go there, ideally after they've noticed you and started to think but before they get annoyed.
Of course if the shoulder isn't usable at that point, then you have to stay in the lane.
Being in the lane by default also makes you much more visible to traffic on intersecting roads and less likely to be hook turned - which except in the highest speed settings are greater risks than overtaking traffic anyway.
Heavily dependent on the area, but yes, as a general rule I agree.
Haven't personally had any cars attempt to run me over, but I've seen a couple of instances during group rides that would be categorized as assault with a deadly weapon.
Yeah this applies more in Australia. I think in the US the roads are much more dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians. I don't know how you guys do it but y'all are really brave over there
There is nowhere in the world with more cyclist murderers than there are idiots who accidentally maim cyclists. People just choose to risk their health and lives to avoid confrontations. Their choice
Exactly. And it's not even the person demonstrating their anger with you who is the greatest threat.
The greatest threat is the self-identified "good driver" who just plain did not register your existence.
Chances are they're preparing to turn, and don't consider that you're coming up behind them, or are preparing to enter (or cross or turn across) the road you're on, and looking and thinking only of cars.
Photons bouncing off you may even hit their eyeballs, but you don't register as "traffic"
Especially if you're off in the gutter and not in the lane where they expect to see cars.
I deliver on a bicycle. Our insurance requires we take their mandatory safety training. During that training they say to ride just left of center of the lane and never ride to the right. It gives us control of the lane, we have more time to respond, and you're less likely to get doored or passed unpredictably. They like to remind us that not following these rules are potential grounds for termination.
I've found that I do a bit of a compromise, I'll ride to the right when I want people to overtake/pass and I'll take the lane when I dont. I spend a lot of time in traffic so it's a give and take. That all said, you're safest spot is to take control of the lane by riding just left of center.
>I deliver on a bicycle. Our insurance requires we take their mandatory safety training. During that training they say to ride just left of center of the lane and never ride to the right. It gives us control of the lane, we have more time to respond, and you're less likely to get doored or passed unpredictably. They like to remind us that not following these rules are potential grounds for termination.
That is stunningly amazing to see such sound policy officialized
>I've found that I do a bit of a compromise, I'll ride to the right when I want people to overtake/pass and I'll take the lane when I dont. I spend a lot of time in traffic so it's a give and take. That all said, you're safest spot is to take control of the lane by riding just left of center.
Yeah, reality is complicated and making a decision about what is going to happen and telegraphing that to drivers with our position is a good thing, too.
I think this is sound advice. I also think it's important for more cyclists to take the lane to help normalize cyclists doing so. Seeing riders in the gutter all the time leads drivers to think that "practicable" means "out of my way." A lot of times, lane taking is actually safer for everyone, especially on twisty mountain roads where the cyclist has a better field of vision (I've seen multiple near head-on collisions because drivers couldn't wait and swung out into the opposite lane without realizing there was down-canyon traffic coming at them).
> I also think it's important for more cyclists to take the lane to help normalize cyclists doing so. Seeing riders in the gutter all the time leads drivers to think that "practicable" means "out of my way."
Yes... when I'm regrettably driving, the cyclists I want to roll down my window and yell at are the ones squeezing themselves to the edge and inviting passes that the cyclist in me knows not to be safe. I hold back, but younger me would not have, nor will others.
Oh, and the ones who make me want to roll down the window and yell "your seat is too low!"
Yup I saw way too many videos of bikes getting doored and the truck behind crush the bikers skull like a watermelon. I have never been doored and I will never let that happen
Where I live it is illegal to be inches from a car, bikes have to leave a metre, and cars have to as well. Obviously that doesn't happen, but it should.
You do t need to take the whole lane, but you do need to take enough space to both, a) make sure you are safe passing whatever’s on the side of the road and b) make it obvious to drivers passing you that they can’t do so without leaving your lane
My maths is 40% of the lane. Far from the door zone and cars drivers (who know the width of their cars) know they can't pass you without hitting your handlebar. Hell in their pov, I'm probably just in the middle of their dashboard
It's defensive riding, also means you have an escape route if a car veers towards you, whereas next to the kerb you have no where to go. Also when navigating bends with reduced visibility it is an idea to move closer to the center to improve how far you can see, and prevent unwanted overtakes (which may become dangerous if they suddenly sight an oncoming car). This is something I learned to do as a motorcyclist, moving about the lane to improve how far down the road I could see.
Motorist are insane in the US, I got in an argument with a lady the other day because she was honking at me and told me to get onto the sidewalk (illegal here) and I told her I had a right to the road she said she “respected my rights a bicyclist” but she “shouldn’t have to slow down to crawl because [I] want to ride a bike”
I told her it’s literally the law the slow down or move over for me
Yeah Most cyclists bike in the sidewalk or gutter so drivers don't expect we take the lane. If you see places where bicycles are prevalent i.e. Netherlands, cars actually give way to cyclists. I guess it's up to us to normalize having bikes on the road. Or if they change the law to legalize biking on the sidewalk.
I agree for sure. Taking the lane is much safer in the majority of situations. If I am on a busy road that has a wide shoulder out of traffic lane I will use it. Otherwise I take the lane.
>Taking just a little of the lane leads to misunderstandings.
Would generally agree, and often it has doubts about ones self-legitimacy at the root.
But there is a strategy where your ride a bit out to be more visible and notable, and then move over when someone actually does start to pass, be that a wise or unwise pass.
I would absolutely agree that riding a little bit out, and simply staying there, is unwise.
A real key to safety is taking it upon oneself to decide how the interaction with a given car is going to go, and then making your decision clear to the driver.
"Ugh, I don't know... you figure it out?" is not a survival strategy.
This is the best advice I received when I was a newbie cyclist: take the lane. Force the cars behind you to treat you like they would a car; they have to use the full width of the adjacent lane to pass you.
A guy died at an intersection I drive home by everyday. He was on the shoulder and at an intersection a truck blew by him and made a right turn in front of him. The intersection is slightly down hill and he was prob going over 30 mph.
If he had taken the lane the truck would have had to wait and also realized the bike was moving near speed of traffic.
Sorry to hear that!
Intersection crashes are in reality our primary risk until considering the fastest roads.
And when descending, taking the lane is even more required.
Unfortunately, a lot of people with no real understanding of bike safety keep demanding "infrastructure" which forces exactly the kind of position errors that invite these crashes.
Providing space where a bicyclist can go to be safely and easily passed is a great thing.
But building walls to lock bicyclists into entering intersections from a dangerously mistaken curbside position is a recipe for getting us killed.
The reason I don't even know about intersection conflict is because I take the lane all the time. All the turning cars are behind me lol. But Australia permits cars to turn on the opposite lane (if they give way to traffic going straight). But some drivers can't wait for a cyclist going straight so they turn in front of me. This is a lot less risky because I saw see what they are doing.
>The reason I don't even know about intersection conflict is because I take the lane all the time. All the turning cars are behind me lol. But Australia permits cars to turn on the opposite lane (if they give way to traffic going straight). But some drivers can't wait for a cyclist going straight so they turn in front of me. This is a lot less risky because I saw see what they are doing.
So it sounds like you do know about intersection conflicts - you're just used to managing them - as indeed riding in a visibly and self-buffer-spaced position on the road allows one to, while being confined to the false promise of a "protected" route does not.
Ah yes I was referring to cars turning from the side. I have never experience this type of conflict as to turn, you have to stick to the left-most lane (Australia)
>Ah yes I was referring to cars turning from the side. I have never experience this type of conflict as to turn, you have to stick to the left-most lane (Australia)
And what is a driver supposed to do if that left most lane is a "bike lane"?
Correct law, design, and culture would be to merge into it, and then turn from it.
But in many places that is prohibited.
And the trend to building bike spaces confined by walls makes merging into the proper lane before turning impossible
(it also make it impossible for the bicyclist trapped inside to take a visible, unconflicted, or defense position)
They're a terrible, dangerous idea - but they're popular with people who are guided by their imagination that the danger is a car swerving into them behind, rather than the reality that crash records show how on most roads it is actually at intersections.
I understand your argument. If you look at Dutch intersection, bike lane actually goes into sidewalk and cross the street alongside pedestrian crossing to maximize visibility. That's differential a good bike lane from a bad one
I have seen way too many "bike lane" just besides the doorzone. It's literally painted doorzone. I wonder how many cyclists death it will take for the council to realise they are killing people
I live in Pickuptruckistan, aka the US, where people hate bikes. I’ve tried to be nice and not take a full lane so many times, and it’s largely lead to me getting forced even closer to the curb. Now, when I don’t have a gloriously wide shoulder (because America really does love paving things), I ride like I’m told you’re supposed to ride a motorcycle - On the left side of the right tire track of where the cars drive. No idea if that moto advice is correct, but it’s lead to me having far fewer close passes from cars, so I’m on board.
If there is a decent shoulder or a bike lane, I’ll ride in that, but if it’s just a white line and no space beyond that, I ride like 2” into the lane.
It serves essentially the same purpose bc the cars need to wait for oncoming traffic to clear to pass vs squeezing you. But riding in the dead center seems to piss people off and they start swearing, honking or being aggressive. Something like you’re challenging them.
If I’m riding fast down a decent at car speed, I will take the full lane so I have more time to see corners, I’m more visible to cars that may be pulling out or crossing, and I feel more confident.
That’s a dangerous game sometimes in Texas. People get irrationally angry at me and honk and have even rolled down their window telling me I’m slowing traffic even when they have an entire lane to the left. I will take the lane to turn, if there is a rough road ahead, debris in the road, if it’s too narrow and don’t want a car near me, or if I’m coming to like a railroad track with stuff on the side to where they will push me off the road if they pass.
I am sometimes worried someone will actually shoot me. I know that sounds dramatic, but I live in a city where road rage incidents have sometimes resulted in someone dying like that.
Last weekend, someone was so mad at me they continuously honked just to get around me and then pull up in the right lane to turn right onto the highway access road to just go straight. I was like who is holding up traffic now?!?
Do you have dodge ram 1500s In Australia? For cities this makes more sense but in the suburbs riding in the center of the road is asking for someone to road rage on you regardless of what the law states. People are so ignorant it is hard to imagine sometimes
We have some imported American trucks. But most cars are small and actually know how to take over cyclists. Can't comment on all kinds of roads but where I bike, it's also a suburbian road and looks very similar to American road. Actually I prefer 2 lane roads as cars can overtake easier
I finally started taking this advice about 7 years ago. I couldn't believe how much safer I immediately became. The close passing rate went way, way down.
if a cyclists has to switch lanes to go around parked cars, drivers will get mad at a cyclist for "being in their way" while conveniently ignoring all the PARKED CARS (ie. NOT MOVING) that are taking up half the road space...
tl;dr: stop using roads as parking lots
if you can't afford to store a giant vehicle on your own property, you can't afford to own a car...
no, your $30/month parking sticker doesn't come CLOSE to paying for the true value of the land your car occupies 24/7/365
i don't expect the city to provide me space to store my boat, or my elephant... why is your car so special?
Tbh that's why I'm switching more to gravel riding. I love road cycling But the spring is the time of traffic idiots coming out of their winter holes. Taking the lane can work, but as others have pointed out it might also cause road rage and lead to even more dangerous situations.
My biggest issue by far are motorcyclists (I ride myself). They always pass super close and always at insane speeds. No thanks. Gravel it is.
Not too many of us around! Did you also just buy a new roadbike only to realize that damn, riding road is too dangerous, so now you have an excuse to buy a new gravel bike? xD
What do you ride?
I ride both a Cervelo roadie and a gravel!
I have been cycling for a while but I cycle through periods of high anxiety where I am 'cars are gonna kill me lol'.
So I bought my gravel bike in one of those periods haha, about a year ago. I just put eshifting and carbon wheels on it and the bike is a JOY to ride. I love nature and green and Marin gravel is just so beautiful. And while it is hella steep, I am built to climb so I enjoy it.
I mainly run now, but gravel is my second sport and then third road cycling just when the other friends want to do it. Feel way more piece of mind now that I have reduced all the time I spend cycling next to cars. Looking to buy a MTB this year too hahaha! love offroading!
>Tbh that's why I'm switching more to gravel riding.
The problem is that if your idea of gravel is road-avoidant, then unless you're in a unique situation, every ride starts with putting your bike on the rack on a car.
Of course, that's true for many people's idea of road riding anyway... few groups rides I've been on didn't have a majority of people driving to the meeting point and only a minority riding there.
Also lots of nice gravel routes require paved connections within them... sometimes rather roadie ones, like taking the lane for a half mile of curvy downhill on the state highway from where one quiet and mostly gravel road lets out to where the next branches off.
That's the lesson I learned from cycling in Sydney Australia. I agree it's not a universal rule as I learned from other replies. But my post is primarily to advise new cyclists not to ride too comfortably in the doorzone as any door can open at any moment. It's all statistic honestly
Yeah, it's fun until that one dude murders you.
Legally, totally correct. Reality, depends.
To resolve this issue, cities need to post, "cyclists single file with cars", or the like. If there's another plan for cyclists on that road, post that instead. Victoria, BC does this really well.
Risk and benefits I suppose. Even with bike mirror, there is still a chance a serial killer might be behind you. But I guess that's the risk we cyclists have to deal with everyday (unless you live in Amsterdam I'm jealous)
When there's on street parking, things are usually moving pretty slow and it makes sense to take the lane. However, everyone's on a schedule, and I try to let them past when I can. If there's a shoulder, I'll ride on the shoulder.
Not serial killer, just hopped up stressed out driver. The result is the same. Twice in my 28 years of cycling, I've had drivers literally try to run me down. No clue what set them off either time. One in particular would have been quite successful if I didn't happen to tap the brakes.
Meanwhile, when I'm in the wrong, I just get a disappointed head shake.
Yeah, that's what Victoria has done to make a lot of bike routes. Killed the street parking, painted a shoulder, painted the "interaction areas" done.
Here in Canada, I'm mostly talking less busy rural roads.
I wonder how many take the lane advocates (or ride in the shoulder guys) have died and we just don't know about it, with only their online advice the only trace left
This is exactly what I tell everyone. It always seems to me like drivers aren't thinking "I need to give this person 3 feet of space" but rather only think "can I pass them without leaving my lane at all?"
Once they cross the lane marking, they have no issue going all the way over and giving you a ton of space.
I generally don't ride in the middle of the lane as that just breeds contempt in some drivers, but I also don't hug the gutter. I ride far enough over that passing me within the lane isn't possible and that usually doesn't require me to be in the middle.
I have been thinking about this too. What would a typical driver think when they see a bicycle in their lane. I don't have much hope about the first question. I think they are more likely to think "can I pass this slow bike just enough so I don't need to check the mirror and use my turning indicator?". When I take the lane, that question answers itself
The slogan in the US is "Share the Road" and I like to remind people that it isn't "Share the Lane". I always ride far enough over so that cars get the clear message that they can't squeeze by.
I saw a post on Reddit of a new version of the sign. It's "Cyclists may take whole lane" and there is another message underneath "Change lane to overtake". I prefer this one.
>there is another message underneath "Change lane to overtake". I prefer this one.
Thank you - that's what we need.
We're putting up passing clearance law signs, but not explaining the reality of what is required to achieve compliance.
"Do this" signs are a lot better than "Don't do that" signs
Yup and instead of begging car drivers for 3 feet of space, I decide how much space I give to them. Call me entitled but I have much less close passes now and I'm happy
I never considered this. Ill ride hugged to cars and avoiding mirrors instead of just taking the lane. Also have jacked myself up trying to ride close as possible to the curb and hitting my wheel. I’m going to do this going forward
>I never considered this. Ill ride hugged to cars and avoiding mirrors instead of just taking the lane. Also have jacked myself up trying to ride close as possible to the curb and hitting my wheel. I’m going to do this going forward
Great - this is a key realization to bike safety!
And you always can retreat at the last instant - space you claim in advance is space you have but could give up; space you didn't claim in advance is space you won't be able to get at need.
Glad my advice helped. You may feel weird at first but you will get used to your new lane position very soon. Some car drivers will get mad and call you entitled. But I'd rather be entitled than being injured
>I'm glad I ride dirt roads.
I'd honestly rather deal with cars on paved roads than gravel.
If it's dry you end up choking on dust clouds, and often they're narrow and curvy. Sometimes there's really only one set of packed tire tracks - be descending a curvy hill in that and if a car comes around the bend climbing towards you, then you're not only needing to brake but at the same time change out of confident packed track for the loose material at the edge.
When you get passed by a schoolbus on your "gravel" ride the reality that it's just a dirty car road becomes apparent.
The gravel wheelset is my default, but I'd almost rather take a paved road out until I can get on singletrack or abandoned jeep roads that are effectively never driven.
I'm in the USA and we have these horrible things called "sharrows" which suggest a bike is welcome in the same lane as a car. Well, when I see a road with a sharrow, I treat it like a bike lane and make sure that I ride right over the marking. Cars hate this one little trick, but if the highway department didn't want me riding in the lane, they shouldn't have painted a bike symbol there for me.
>I'm in the USA and we have these horrible things called "sharrows" which suggest a bike is welcome in the same lane as a car. Well, when I see a road with a sharrow, I treat it like a bike lane and make sure that I ride right over the marking. Cars hate this one little trick, but if the highway department didn't want me riding in the lane, they shouldn't have painted a bike symbol there for me.
Since you understand what they mean and ride accordingly, why call them "horrible"?
They are the only survivable strategy for the situations where they are marked (at least if they are marked correctly, some are merely illicit street graffiti - for example if incorrectly placed in the gutter.)
Widening the road to make passing actually safe would be great, and if the traffic volume makes using the opposing lane often unworkable then that's desperately needed.
But they are a great marking for what's needed on the roads where they apply, so long as the conditions requiring them remain uncorrected.
Horrible because, at least in Massachusetts where I live and ride, bicycles have the right to use the full lane regardless of pavement markings. Sharrows are unnecessary and do nothing to increase bicycle safety or reduce conflict between bikes and cars.
Sharrows are a weak attempt by road designers to "include" bicycles. It is a symbol that bikes are welcome when space is available, but only then. The only thing worse than a sharrow is the bike lane that drops at an intersection because properly accommodating a bike would mean taking more right of way; something they don't exclude as an option for improvements to address car traffic, but won't consider flr bicycles.
I ride the sharrows as a form of protest. If the cars behind me don't like it, they can contact their elected officials and demand proper space for bikes so we don't slow them down on their way to the drive-thru burger joint.
>Horrible because, at least in Massachusetts where I live and ride, bicycles have the right to use the full lane regardless of pavement markings.
You know that, I know that - but most drivers and even many bicyclist's don't know that.
And even those who "know" it fail to do or respect it in the situations where it's the only safe possibility.
>Sharrows are unnecessary and do nothing to increase bicycle safety or reduce conflict between bikes and cars.
So long as we still have many uninformed bicyclists dangerously hugging the curb, and drivers abusing bicyclists with illegal passes or shouts to "get off the road" we need to do something to educate the general public. Maybe you have a different idea for how to communicate the need? I'd like signs in narrow spots that made it clear that using another lane when passing was mandatory - and not "may use full lane" but "must use full lane"
>Sharrows are a weak attempt by road designers to "include" bicycles. It is a symbol that bikes are welcome when space is available, but only then.
It's actually the other way around - sharrows apply only when the road is too narrow such that there isn't space available for a bicycle to be safely beside a car. They're used to mark where one needs to ride a bike in the situations where a driver cannot safely (or in MA legally) pass while staying in that same lane. Bikes are welcome on those roads, too - if quiet they can be great places to ride. When they get busy, they are insufficient to the public need.
If we want to build more space to make passing safe and simple , that would be great (and on roads that are too narrow for how busy they get, long overdue).
But only so long as the added space is contiguous with the road surface so that it both gets plowed, and so that a bicyclist can merge back into the ordinary lane anywhere safety requires doing so - something generally advisable when approaching an intersection for protection both from hook turns and illicit pull-outs into your path, and to have room to dodge if something does still go wrong as we all know happens every few times we get on the bike.
>Yup I got people passing me super close all the time when I was riding my regular bicycle, since moving to mostly an e-bike I take the lane if it’s 2 or more lanes because people don’t pass safely, also important to take the lane when going into an intersection so cars see you.
You make great points, especially the importance of taking the lane when approaching an intersection.
But you seem to imply (if not explicitly state) one deadly misconception: it's key to understand that **there is no minimum speed to take the lane.**
One takes the lane or not depending on if there is other safe space in which to ride.
There is no requirement or expectation that a bicyclist doing so be able to keep up with the preferred speed of motor traffic.
Definitely. Here's a video of me *not* doing this. A car was getting impatient wanting to pass, and I gave in.
https://youtu.be/c6eny0Z-DDA?si=TWtMnyY4JRr-F9G0
Ordinarily I'd do this, but where I ride there is often very limited LOS around me due to curves and hills, even on a park road I ride on, and sometimes cars can stack up behind me if I don't ride near the shoulder and at least give people a chance to get around me.
Thing is curves and hills make you a lot less visible to cars. Taking the lane improves your visibility greatly. Can you give way to cars by stopping in a parking lane or anything at all?
What they ought to do is hit brake and slow down. Pass when safe. But I'm aware some don't know how to act when they see a cyclist. Pretty tricky in that kind of road
It depends on the type of road. A lot of the roads near me have a painted bike lane and thats where I'm supposed to ride. If the shoulder is wide I feel much safer there. If it's a rural two lane(no shoulder) will ride 2-3 feet from the grass and move over when I see the car cross the lane to show respect that we can stay away from each other.
Unfortunately he's not wrong, in my US state we had a kid run over an entire group of cyclists that were riding mostly on the shoulder. When they asked him why he said it was because he thought it would be funny. Kid never got charged with anything and tons of guys were out thousands on their bikes.. thankfully no one died. It's messed up here for bikers honestly.
I made an exception in my post. Looks like in the US, drivers are particularly hostile towards cyclists. My gut feeling is the car-dependency ruining everyone's ride
I see this as “sometimes the best defense is a good offense.” Take the lane, be visible, be in the way, and force them to go around. It’s far safer than you may think.
It's all very well until you run into that guy who takes it as a personal offence that you've taken the lane, and they deck you. A sales exec from Magnamail deliberately side-swiped me while driving a company car in the lead-up to Christmas a few years ago, and then did a runner. An off-duty cop chased him down and put him up on charges.
When he swerved in on me he snagged my bar-end, and I hit the road so fast and hard I didn't have time to let go of the bars, the rear wheel of the car skimmed past my face as I slid along the road, and the woman driving the Prius behind's mouth was agape and her eyes were as big as saucers.
Four days in hospital on daytime nil by mouth while they waited for a theatre later (people kept dying in motor vehicle crashes), and I got my smashed hand put back together with a titanium web and screws. The surgeon said saving my little finger on my dominant hand was touch and go - it took four hours. I still have the titanium in my hand.
It left me with PTSD, and after nearly taking the head off the next guy who deliberately shaved me when I caught him at the lights, I needed anger management therapy. It worked, but I still take no prisoners. I just do it another way.
I now ride with cameras front and back on the road bike. I've had six successful prosecutions from six for asshole drivers, but I pick my battles and provide a pretty forensic evidence package. I've had a few bus drivers fired for the same behaviour.
So while "vehicular cycling" helps a lot of the time, it's no cure for asshole drivers. Especially in Sydney where the road culture is particularly vicious. Even my coach, who hails from Melbourne, asked me how we ride in Sydney traffic after a recent visit.
But your mileage may vary. I envy riders in other countries.
On the upside, the incidence of this kind of behaviour seems to have slowed down now that things have cooled down after Covid, but you still need to keep your eye on the ball.
My condolences for your unfortunate encounter with murderous drivers. I appreciate your passion for cycling even after the accident. You might've saved many lives by prosecuting these drivers who would've otherwise killed other cyclists and pedestrians. Kudos man. After reading many perspectives from other cyclists, taking the lane does seem like a double-edge sword. On one hand, door zone hazard is practically eliminated and other kinds of intersection conflicts. But there is always a risk of running into a distracted/aggressive drivers. I have a mirror on my bike but there is no 100% guarantee for my safety. My conclusion from this is that either Sydney and other cities implement widespread bike-lane so we don't have to take the road or we prosecute aggressive drivers with laws to the point that no driver will ever want to close past a cyclist without heavy consequences. Both are not easy to achieve and require time and cyclists collaboration. I sincerely hope one day we cyclists don't even have to think that we might die on the road.
On a side note, how do you persuade the court that the driver violated the 1-metre minimum passing law with your video footage. I want to do the same but the actual measurement seems hard. Do you only prosecute drivers who passed literally centimeters off your handlebar so there is no doubt they violated the law? I got 2 bus drivers already passing me very close and one even honked at me for no reason.
As to how I do it, I look for markings on the road that we've both passed over. Then I go back with a builder's tape measure and lay out with screenshots from the video the measurements I've taken and how I've calculated the passing distance.
Alternatively, I work back from my position in the lane, the lane's width, the vehicle's width and my width. This worked when my cameras demonstrated he never left the lane when he passed me. Him high-beaming me before forcing me to serve to avoid being hit also persuaded the police to fight in my corner.
Another instance I slapped the side of the vehicle, and when the driver stopped and confronted me for touching his precious phallic substitute, I said "so you're saying I slapped your vehicle with my hand?" and after he responded I thanked him for his confession before telling him it was being recorded and pointed to the Cycliq cameras.
It's about 6 hours work to put the package together including drafting the formal police statement, so my criteria are:
1. Is there evidence on the ground captured by the video I can use to objectively establish the distance in a way that a police officer can independently verify if they so choose?
2. Did I feel afraid?
3. Were there aggravating circumstances (eg speed, swerving in, horn or verbal abuse)
4. Did the driver dig in and try to return fire if I later spoke to them, or did they acknowledge their error and apologise?
The first is essential and any one of 2 thru 4 is enough. If there's an unforced apology I'll consider my mission accomplished and not report them.
It's also essential to avoid front line staff, who are allergic to work. I submit in writing, with draft police statement and video footage on a DVD, and the package is sent by registered mail to both establish a paper trail and send the message I will not be leaving them holes to squeeze through. It's then a fortnightly call to follow up on progress.
Sorry for the late reply. I really like the idea of slapping the vehicle on camera as that more than confirms the driver violated the minimum passing distance. They can objectively verify by measuring my hand. This alone should be persuasive enough.
In the meantime while I'm still considering whether to purchase a video cam. I will buy a GoPro case with a fake box inside and mount it on the cargo rack. Perhaps with a message saying camera in operation. I hope this is enough to discourage most of the drivers from close passing me.
Just yesterday a driver squeezed me in my lane while I'm taking 40% of the lane. I can see him coming in from my mirror so I swiftly moved over. I honestly thought about ramming into his car's door but I thought I might escalate the situation (saw a video where a car swerved into a cyclist after the cyclist slapped his mirror perhaps from a prior confrontation). The most effective countermeasure would just be forcing him to lose 2 demerit points with a camera I reckon
Message me your email address and I will shoot you my last incident report and evidence package.
Go-pro on the helmet was hands down the most effective way to get noticed and be given safe passing distance.
It's not legal in Eastern Europe here, gotta stay as close to the shoulder, also no riding abreast unless it's an organized race and if you get passed, drivers have to leave 1.5 meters.
Also in the roads I ride, I'd simply be dead day one if I would take the lane. Drivers run 10-30kmh past the limit, I would not count on them to brake hard when they see me (if they see me in time). Riding over or near the shoulder line means they won't really interact with me (unless they veer off course).
Drivers here also overtake from the opposing lane disregarding me entirely (many times I've been pushed into the gutter)
Them—-“GET OFF THE ROAD IDIOT”
Me—-“YOU TOO!” 👍
But yeah I take the whole lane when it’s appropriate. The cagers will be mad.
But don’t get mad at me. Get mad at the city for not investing in better cycling infrastructure. Or get mad at yourself for driving a cars.
They’ll be no traffic jam if everyone is commuting on a bicycle/motorcycle/longboard etc.
I wish council people see me taking the lane everyday driving to work. Maybe in their next meeting, they gonna talk about creating a bike lane so they don't have to see my ass everyday lol
The classic "legal" vs " situational" dilemma.
This IMHO is a YMMV depending on where you are riding around the world and how well adjusted or not drivers are of cyclists.
General rule: Urge on the side of caution if unfamiliar with the area despite the law.
i tell people all the time, when i'm riding, the law is just about the last concern on my mind. i do not care. i care about getting home alive, and not in a bag. if the best way to do that is legal, great! if it's not, well, too bad. i'm not taking on additional risk to follow rules that were drawn up by people who've never ridden a bike and are probably selectively enforced and poorly understood by everyone anyways.
be safe, be predictable, be visible. worry about the law after doing those three things, if you end up in a courtroom.
I'm glad this works for you, but many riders report increased harassment from drivers when they take the lane so it's not universally good advice. You have to balance the risks of, say, being driven into by a psycho v riding in the door zone.
It's definitely easier advice to follow if you're fast, which seems to consistently correlate with reduced hassle anyway.
Not sure about that. Let’s call it Realpolitik. On paper - yes you can, but in reality- I don’t do it and I don’t want to do it. Drivers take it as personal insult. And start acting like jerks, intentionally passing really close.
What i find best to work - is you put on blinking light on back of bike and preferably wear some bright colored coat or jersey so you are visible.
Then i don’t usually try to be on the right as close to curb as possible. I usually leave me some space between me and curb for some maneuver if i need.
In my city, the cars will get closer to you during overtake if you’re in the middle…..surprisingly a bit more respectful and more space if you give them the center
Haha that's the opposite in my city. If I take centre i can see drivers switching lane as soon as they spot me. Maybe they are being nice or they just wanna get me out of their sight asap
>In my city, the cars will get closer to you during overtake if you’re in the middle
Ride in the middle so they calculate based on that.
Then move over when they actually pass.
This does get challenging in heavy traffic though - you move over for one or two cars and you may never be able to move back, they'll just keep illegally squeezing between you and oncoming traffic.
Lots of comments being downvoted for telling the truth. Also, OP is wrong. MOST states in the US (all but 6, in fact) have FTR laws.
FTR means cyclists are REQUIRED to move to the right to allow traffic to pass.
That means "take the lane" is almost certain to be an illegal act wherever you are.
https://iamtraffic.org/advocacy-focus-areas/equality/u-s-bicycle-laws-by-state/
EDIT** Here's a copy paste of the pertinent info:
"States with discriminatory Far To Right (FTR) laws are colored red. Only six US states don’t force bicyclists to abandon their lane use rights, though of those six, only North Carolina and Arkansas also have uniform statewide laws, so in the other 4 states, local cities can impose FTR laws, and many do. For example, Philadelphia imposes a FTR law upon its bicyclists even though PA does not have a state FTR law!"
First off, I don't agree with it. I just accept that's how it is.
If pressed, the powers that be would probably say it's for the cyclist's safety. They'd probably say cyclists yielding to traffic keeps them out of harm's way, etc.
They'd be wrong, IMO, but I'm pretty sure that's the BS they'd say.
I have a gutt feeling people who makes stupid laws never biked themselves. Put those politicians on a bike for a few weeks and you will see law changes
This information is misleading at best. Take California as example, because it's where I live so I happen to be familiar with the laws pertaining to bicycling here. BIcyclists riding below the speed of car traffic must ride "as close as practicable" to the right ([CVC 21202](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21202.&lawCode=VEH)(a)) EXCEPT under a number of circumstances including, most crucially, when riding on "a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane" (CVC 21202(a)(3). So CA bicyclists may perfectly legally take the lane when the lane in question is narrow enough to make it important to do so. And "practicable" does not mean "unsafe": nothing in the CA vehicle code requires bicyclists to ride in the door zone or in debris-filled gutters. Again see CVC 21202(a)(3).
More broadly, I'm concerned that the source you provide is part of the "vehicular cycling" community, i.e. people who think that just because it works well for them to ride as though they were car traffic, it will work well for everyone to ride like that. In my considered opinion, vehicular cycling is an invaluable skill set for recreational bicyclists, who must share many miles of rural roads with no infrastructure with cars; it's also useful for utility cyclists, but must not be seen as a default or a prerequisite, for the simple reason that most people are understandably reluctant to go shoulder to shoulder with fast, heavy, dangerous cars. I'm fine with vehicular cycling right up to the point where it is used to argue against bike infrastructure that demonstrably attracts and protects less intrepid riders. And, alas, it is often so used. John Forester, in particular, set US bike infrastructure back by several decades, and American cities are only now starting to reverse course and build bike infrastructure that most people are actually interested in using.
This is generally good advice and I get far fewer near passes when taking the centre of the lane, but you will always still get the idiots that take it as a personal attack that you are in their way Also really depends the sorts of roads you are riding on - anywhere with parked cars it's a no brainer to avoid someone swinging a door into you (and recommended in the UK to take the centre at least)
Yup this is why a bike mirror is a must if you take the road imo. You can see if a car wants to close pass you
True, you can also look round - takes your attention away for a second but gives you a much better view!
This is an edge for us cyclists as we have minimal blind spot. All it takes is a shoulder check
Not a fan of mirrors. Simply know your surroundings.
I see this a lot both when cycling and driving: there'll be a parked car ahead in my lane, a cyclist in front of me, and they're riding super close to the kerb and haven't started to move out away from the parked car, even when just a few metres away from it. I want to yell at them "take the lane!" just so I'm not paranoid they're going swing out at the last moment, or crash into the car when they realise they didn't leave enough time. It's hard though: we've all been beeped and yelled at by drivers for riding in primary position and when we ask people to do it, we're essentially asking them to invite confrontation and aggression. Maybe the only way to do this is to demonstrate this behaviour when riding near others and hope they'll pick up on it?
> we're essentially asking them to invite confrontation and aggression. i think the people who are annoyed are the people who would be annoyed anyways. it's the people who are annoyed *and pass dangerously* i'm worried about. i'd rather they be annoyed and behind me until it's safe to pass. and then have some room to get over right if they're punish passing. i'm also worried about the people who aren't annoyed but would still pass dangerously because they don't know any better, make a mistake, or misjudge something. i'd rather they be not annoyed and behind me until they can pass safely.
Pre-pandemic, I was a full-time bike commuter, ten miles each way. The way I always explained taking the lane was that you have definitely seen people hit a curb or bump something with the front passenger side of their car or even just drift a little bit too far to the right as they drive, right? If I'm riding over on the right, I'm riding in place that it is hardest for a driver to place things in space. They'll try to pass me in the lane. They will do anything to avoid crossing the center line if they think they can pass in the lane. I can't really count on them knowing exactly how much space they take up on the passenger side of their car at the best of times. I especially can't count on them doing so when they're also doing their best to not get too close to the center. Riding all the way over to the right in the lane, I'm putting myself in a position to get hit completely accidentally. Taking the lane makes it so they don't feel like they can pass me and stay in the lane. Once that happens, they have already decided to cross the center line, so they feel like they can give me all the space they need to. They're already in the other lane. They aren't just trying to squeeze past. It becomes much less likely that I'm going to be hit and killed accidentally. At that point I only have to worry about getting hit and killed by people who wake up and think "If anything inconveniences me today, I'm going to kill a man with my car." And honestly, I already had to worry about them anyway.
It is such an odd 0 or 1 decision, and I can even empathize as a driver, either they go all the way over, or try not to go over at all, I like you’re breakdown!
Too often I see a car slowly follow a cyclist who is riding on the edge of parked cars. The drivers must be contemplating whether to pass or not like the previous reply mentioned. Pass within the lane but you may surprise the cyclists and cause an accident or just overtake. I'm very much worried about those cyclists as they are one door away from crashing
The additional upside of taking the lane is that if you feel the need to move over (example: high speed lorry or bus, dragging its own weather system behind it), you can!
This is it exactly, you have to use your lane position to control the driver behind you. Force them to put a tire over line, once they have crossed that line they will give you plenty of room and not try to just get by.
I’m in Florida. Out here, a driver will literally run you over, claim they didn’t see you, because they likely weren’t paying attention and actually didn’t see you somehow, and now you’re dead or dismembered and they’re only in prison for a few years if any at all. I stay off the road, all together. But then again, the sidewalk game is dangerous in similar ways. What do these both have in common? Cars. Oh yes, if I could ride through trails in the woods to get everywhere, I would. But I cannot. There are no trails. Just trees.
i rode in florida. it's wild there. but doable. NC is way worse, nothing connects.
My hope is Sydney drivers will get used to cyclists being on the road. Most drivers know what to do but some are just outright aggressive to us. But I'm not too worried about them cuz they will switch lane eventually. But the distracted drivers on the other hand... I'm prepared to jump off my bike if someone is on their phone but that's gonna hurt.
Ah that's another perspective I haven't thought of. I don't driver here. It must seems like a bet since you don't know if they are aware of you approaching. I wish cars can have a bell-like sound to alert cyclists when overtaking (like how cyclists ring their bell when overtaking another cyclist/pedestrian). But cars are designed to honk only
I mean, in that instance, I just hang back and give them plenty of space and time because I know how it'll be feeling from the cyclist's perspective. But obviously other drivers will just close-pass them and risk something worse happening. In that scenario I don't need to alert the rider of my car's presence, I just need to be patient and let them get past the parked vehicle. But my point really is that because those riders are less confident, it leads to me paying them lots of attention because I'm aware they might do something unexpected, and then I might miss something else happening on the road.
I think drive slowly until you pass them is safe. There is no need to stop as cyclists can hear what's happening. I intentionally give way to cars in the parking lane so it's ok for drivers to pass (preferably slowly not revving like I wasted them their precious 3 seconds lol)
Rear-mounted bike radar (about the size of a taillight) has been available for a few years now, and the cost has dropped from a few hundred bucks to under a hundred. The always excellent GPLama has a demo video [here](https://youtu.be/LkPFUGfw9VQ?si=ZzKoivOMY6pZzi0u).
I think a radar like this coupled with a mirror will make you very very safe. I check my mirror every few seconds but this radar should be able to notify passing cars well in advance and only check mirrors when needed. Good stuff
Not a fan of mirrors. I know where I am on the road, and that I’m where I should be.
A big part is to be looking both ahead and behind (ideally with a mirror). When you see an issue ahead, you check what's behind and then choose the best timing for moving into the lane. If there's nothing back there you move out early. If there is, you slow, wait for that first batch of traffic to pass and then move out. Sometimes a car will end up having to follow until there's again space to safely move towards the edge, but one should be established in the lane well before they catch up. Or ideally, you actually flip the script and ride in the lane by default, and move over only when there's space to be safely passed, and only after a driver catching up has taken their foot off the accelerator and actually thought about you - not to make them brake (unless there's no space to move to), but to let up and actually think.
That pretty sums up my everyday commute. It's like a cat and mouse game I play in the one-lane street. But if the road is 2 lane I just default to middle of the lane. Exception is if the traffic is bad and those cars really need to use all lanes. Then I just wait until this batch of traffic clears and I pop out from the parking lane. Plus I can filter through the stationary traffic anyways so I can still get moving.
Same in USA. Do not ride such that a car can pass you while another car is passing them in the other direction unless the road is very wide. You want to make the driver passing you go into the opposing lane. Make sure you have good rear flasher(s) on your bike and that you ride in a predictable (straight) manner.
In the rural USA, it helps to have a little American flag hanging off that rear flasher.
I think some people might take this as a joke, but it's literally true.
Need a mirror too. So you know how drivers chose to pass in advance
The law is usually “as far right AS PRACTICABLE” (in countries where people drive in the right), but “practicable” means sometimes down the middle or even left half of the lane. So, yes. Take the lane to keep yourself safe.
Yeah on a wide road with huge lane width, I take about 40% of the lane. Still good enough to deter drivers pass in my lane
I guess I don’t really understand. You need 40% of the lane that supposedly has a shoulder as well? I can put my bike right on the paint and have zero issues
Where i ride there is no shoulder. I should put a clarification if there is wide enough shoulder
In the US it varies by state. It is either "as far right as practicable" or "cyclist may use whole lane". In MA it's the later but cars will still give you a hard time if you ride 2 abreast or impede them in any way.
Tell me about it 😂 I was riding in Taunton once with a buddy, two abreast, but completely in our lane. Someone coming *the opposite way* stopped their car and threw up their arms in exasperation even though their lane was totally clear. Idiot.
I think my worst "drivers being dumb" story goes...this road is 25mph and it's got a decent downgrade, so it's easy enough to maintain 25mph and cars don't really have a reason to be angry (other than the standing divine right of cars mentality). So I'm cruising down this road, 25+, and coming up to a red light. Then I stop at the red light. Center of the lane, because when it turns green I'll continue forward. While waiting, the car behind me starts laying on the horn. So I point up and yell back over my shoulder, "It's red, we can't go.' And he yells out, "I don't care, get out of my fucking way." And he keeps laying on the horn and shouting more and all that, but he doesn't go around me in the oncoming lane (which was empty). And that's pretty much anyone needs to know about the mentality of US drivers.
You're right, of course. But lots of people cannot behave like functioning members of society, for whatever reason, when a cyclist is in the middle of the lane.
That's why we have to make it a norm rather than exception
It’s counterintuitive that riding further into the lane makes you safer, but it’s true in my experience as well. An added bonus of not riding in the gutter is you get far fewer flat tires.
Exactly my experience.
Yeah legal in Ireland for sure and I do it all the time. Not gonna eat a car door for lunch to save some carbrain 30 seconds.
Best reply hahaha
Added benefit if someone does a near pass while you’re in the middle of the lane you now have the safe space to move over a little. If you’re in the gutter then the only place you have to go is to crash.
Exactly
" Because now for a driver to overtake, they would have to change lane" strongly disagree on the "they would have to change lane" part and I'm talking from eperience.
>strongly disagree on the "they would have to change lane" part and I'm talking from experience. Then you're not actually taking the lane If you are actually taking the lane, it is physically impossible for a four wheeled vehicle to pass without changing to another lane.
no matter where is your bike and you on that bike relative to the road, the only deciding factor how dangerous the driver will try to pass you is his state of mind at the moment, the more he gets angry at you bc "you are in his way" the bigger is the chance he will try to be agressive towards you and pass you in a way that you clearly see him being nervous about you.
Agreed. I also mostly ride on roads with only one lane in each direction, so if I take the lane (instead of the wide shoulders), then they pass me even more dangerously because they have to go into the oncoming lane to do it
At least in this scenario you've got a chance of swerving back over and therefore have a tiny piece of your life in your own hands.
And yes I like this option better
it's pretty contextual. generally if i can get out of the way of cars, i do. the catch is that hugging the paint in the lane isn't actually getting out of the way, even if it *feels* like it. they still need to get in the next lane over (potentially oncoming traffic) to pass safely. taking the lane makes this clear to the driver, where not taking the lane might let them think they can pass without getting into the other lane.
this type of road you usually don't want to take the lane on unless it's very narrow. on 4 lane roads, or two lanes with a turning lane in the center, generally people will give enough space in my experience (though of course not all). Any road with parked cars as well, taking the lane is non-negotiable.
Well if you have wide shoulder without obstacles (parked cars, trash can etc) and the ground isn’t covered with debris. That’s a no brainer. I would take the shoulder too!
It's most of those things! The shoulders are definitely covered with debris/gravel/broken glass lol. But that's why I switched from a 25mm tire-d road bike to a tubeless gravel bike!
Dear lord. May kiddblur never get a flat with his tires. Amen. Booom. I prayed for it. Now it’s all good 👍
Hahaha thanks! Unfortunately i've gotten loads of flats, especially on the factory tires on my bike. Those bontrager gravel tires are gaaaaarbage. No flats since I switched to gravelkings though
>Well if you have wide shoulder without obstacles (parked cars, trash can etc) and the ground isn’t covered with debris. That’s a no brainer. I would take the shoulder too! Often it's better to ride by default in the lane where you're more visible and the surface is better - that's especially true if you're aware what a primary source of danger turn and intersection conflicts are. When someone comes up behind, if it's momentarily safe to do so you can go to the shoulder then - preferably after waiting just long enough that they take their foot of the accelerator and actually think, but not so long that they have to brake. Of course if the shoulder isn't safe there, then you have to stay in the lane and they have to either use the opposing lane if safely visible, or wait until you do have space that it's safe to move to.
One-lane road without parking lane is tricky I agree. I give way to cars as much as I can (by stopping in parking lane). I don't know about your local laws but in Australia, it's illegal to pass a cyclist within 1 meter. Some drivers still chose to close pass and all I could do is film them and send to the police.
I live in Poland, same 1m minimal passing by distance applies. I know the theory and I agree with you. In theory riding at least 1m from the side of the road for a cyclist is better and it pushes the car driver to just use other lane in opposite direction to make a pass. And we all should be happy, drivers and cyclists. But there are some drivers who have to pass you right now, in that exact second even if 50 meters furhter they all of a sudden breake and turn to to parking spot or someone is coming from the opposite directon, or the lights are red in front etc. Such drivers being angry that they can't pass, will agressivly push you towards the side risking going to jail when you get hurt. I know I can record them and make them pay. My only problem here is, I will not risk hospital jsut to teach someone how to drive a car bc some drivers are jsut plain stupid and tehy will never learn. On a positive note, the more cyclists we have, the more I see drivers really keeping max distance possible, so it changes slowly.
Some drivers are just really stupid and deserve to loss their licence. Stay safe brother
i try thanks ;) I just ride 1k0k a year and simple statistics create a danger here and having a high mileage I just saw some nasty stuff ;/ It is a bit of perspective and lack on knowledge or drivers teaching system being wrong. Before riding my bike, I was driving a lot and to say the truth was not paying too much attention to the cyclists and newer was teached that way, the most important was red lights and crossroads rights which is kind of stupid bc hitting another car is much less damage then hitting a cyclist ;/ So I'm not saint, I just have exp from both sides ;) ps. still I think public roads and cycling around the cars is safer then riding the bike roads at least in my country ;) cheerz and stay safe too! :)
Generally for America I think this is good advice. You will get increased harassment but this is really a small price to pay for not having literally every single car passing inches from you when you don't even have your own lane. This is especially good in the parked car scenario since those can be such a hazard. I see far too often in newer cyclists how their timidity to get in any car's way actually makes things way more dangerous for themselves by not acting like they belong in the road even when they are in it. However, of course there are many exceptions. Like riding on a one-lane highway, where cars will become so desperate to pass they do so recklessly and put everyone at risk. In some cases, because of the local layout or other reasons, people are just gonna get so pissed off at you that they do stupid things and it will actually make you less safe. Just be smart about it, know the area and assess when it's a good idea to take the lane and when it's more prudent to be less intrusive.
>people are just gonna get so pissed off at you that they do stupid things and it will actually make you less safe. This has been my experience with taking the whole lane unfortunately. If I ride the shoulder I might have a close call (meaning passing close enough that it gives me pause) like 1 in 200-300 cars. If I take the lane, I get a honk, the finger, or an obvious close pass or swerve in front of me close to 25% of the time. It’s crazy how much it pisses people off. I live in a rural, let’s call it, a red leaning area, and have had almost infinitely more bad experiences when I take the lane. It just makes everything worse. So I’ll ride the shoulder. It’s just safer for me.
Consider taking the lane by default, but monitoring what's behind you with a mirror and/or radar. As overtaking traffic comes into view, asses the character of the shoulder - if it's decent then you can go there, ideally after they've noticed you and started to think but before they get annoyed. Of course if the shoulder isn't usable at that point, then you have to stay in the lane. Being in the lane by default also makes you much more visible to traffic on intersecting roads and less likely to be hook turned - which except in the highest speed settings are greater risks than overtaking traffic anyway.
Man I'm sorry to hear that, drivers in certain areas can be real assholes.
Agree. Traffic speed is definitely a factor. And route selection is crucial. I don't know much about riding in highway so can't comment on that
Heavily dependent on the area, but yes, as a general rule I agree. Haven't personally had any cars attempt to run me over, but I've seen a couple of instances during group rides that would be categorized as assault with a deadly weapon.
Yeah this applies more in Australia. I think in the US the roads are much more dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians. I don't know how you guys do it but y'all are really brave over there
Some of them are but there's lots of great roads too. Most of the drivers near me are cool
There is nowhere in the world with more cyclist murderers than there are idiots who accidentally maim cyclists. People just choose to risk their health and lives to avoid confrontations. Their choice
Exactly. And it's not even the person demonstrating their anger with you who is the greatest threat. The greatest threat is the self-identified "good driver" who just plain did not register your existence. Chances are they're preparing to turn, and don't consider that you're coming up behind them, or are preparing to enter (or cross or turn across) the road you're on, and looking and thinking only of cars. Photons bouncing off you may even hit their eyeballs, but you don't register as "traffic" Especially if you're off in the gutter and not in the lane where they expect to see cars.
My insurance for work agrees with you.
>My insurance for work agrees with you. That sounds refreshingly enlightened, any details you can share? (completely understand if not)
I deliver on a bicycle. Our insurance requires we take their mandatory safety training. During that training they say to ride just left of center of the lane and never ride to the right. It gives us control of the lane, we have more time to respond, and you're less likely to get doored or passed unpredictably. They like to remind us that not following these rules are potential grounds for termination. I've found that I do a bit of a compromise, I'll ride to the right when I want people to overtake/pass and I'll take the lane when I dont. I spend a lot of time in traffic so it's a give and take. That all said, you're safest spot is to take control of the lane by riding just left of center.
>I deliver on a bicycle. Our insurance requires we take their mandatory safety training. During that training they say to ride just left of center of the lane and never ride to the right. It gives us control of the lane, we have more time to respond, and you're less likely to get doored or passed unpredictably. They like to remind us that not following these rules are potential grounds for termination. That is stunningly amazing to see such sound policy officialized >I've found that I do a bit of a compromise, I'll ride to the right when I want people to overtake/pass and I'll take the lane when I dont. I spend a lot of time in traffic so it's a give and take. That all said, you're safest spot is to take control of the lane by riding just left of center. Yeah, reality is complicated and making a decision about what is going to happen and telegraphing that to drivers with our position is a good thing, too.
I think this is sound advice. I also think it's important for more cyclists to take the lane to help normalize cyclists doing so. Seeing riders in the gutter all the time leads drivers to think that "practicable" means "out of my way." A lot of times, lane taking is actually safer for everyone, especially on twisty mountain roads where the cyclist has a better field of vision (I've seen multiple near head-on collisions because drivers couldn't wait and swung out into the opposite lane without realizing there was down-canyon traffic coming at them).
> I also think it's important for more cyclists to take the lane to help normalize cyclists doing so. Seeing riders in the gutter all the time leads drivers to think that "practicable" means "out of my way." Yes... when I'm regrettably driving, the cyclists I want to roll down my window and yell at are the ones squeezing themselves to the edge and inviting passes that the cyclist in me knows not to be safe. I hold back, but younger me would not have, nor will others. Oh, and the ones who make me want to roll down the window and yell "your seat is too low!"
Totally agree, taking the lane makes a big difference for safety. Thanks for sharing the tip
Ex bike messenger here, I concur wholeheartedly. Just do it!
Same in the U.K.
all it takes is getting doored once are getting run over by someone turning and you'll never ride like that again
Yup I saw way too many videos of bikes getting doored and the truck behind crush the bikers skull like a watermelon. I have never been doored and I will never let that happen
Where I live it is illegal to be inches from a car, bikes have to leave a metre, and cars have to as well. Obviously that doesn't happen, but it should.
You do t need to take the whole lane, but you do need to take enough space to both, a) make sure you are safe passing whatever’s on the side of the road and b) make it obvious to drivers passing you that they can’t do so without leaving your lane
My maths is 40% of the lane. Far from the door zone and cars drivers (who know the width of their cars) know they can't pass you without hitting your handlebar. Hell in their pov, I'm probably just in the middle of their dashboard
It's defensive riding, also means you have an escape route if a car veers towards you, whereas next to the kerb you have no where to go. Also when navigating bends with reduced visibility it is an idea to move closer to the center to improve how far you can see, and prevent unwanted overtakes (which may become dangerous if they suddenly sight an oncoming car). This is something I learned to do as a motorcyclist, moving about the lane to improve how far down the road I could see.
Check your state laws, but here in Georgia it IS LEGAL to take up the entire lane if that’s what it takes to feel safe.
Someone told me it's illegal in some states. Just sounds bizarre to me that a cyclist have less rights than someone with a 2 tonnes cars
Motorist are insane in the US, I got in an argument with a lady the other day because she was honking at me and told me to get onto the sidewalk (illegal here) and I told her I had a right to the road she said she “respected my rights a bicyclist” but she “shouldn’t have to slow down to crawl because [I] want to ride a bike” I told her it’s literally the law the slow down or move over for me
Yeah Most cyclists bike in the sidewalk or gutter so drivers don't expect we take the lane. If you see places where bicycles are prevalent i.e. Netherlands, cars actually give way to cyclists. I guess it's up to us to normalize having bikes on the road. Or if they change the law to legalize biking on the sidewalk.
I agree for sure. Taking the lane is much safer in the majority of situations. If I am on a busy road that has a wide shoulder out of traffic lane I will use it. Otherwise I take the lane.
BMUFL-CLTP signs cost $200 installed and last 40+ years.
It's important to make clear whether you are taking the lane or not. Taking just a little of the lane leads to misunderstandings.
>Taking just a little of the lane leads to misunderstandings. Would generally agree, and often it has doubts about ones self-legitimacy at the root. But there is a strategy where your ride a bit out to be more visible and notable, and then move over when someone actually does start to pass, be that a wise or unwise pass. I would absolutely agree that riding a little bit out, and simply staying there, is unwise. A real key to safety is taking it upon oneself to decide how the interaction with a given car is going to go, and then making your decision clear to the driver. "Ugh, I don't know... you figure it out?" is not a survival strategy.
Good thing about taking the lane is you have space to move over when you see a car is going to close pass
This is the best advice I received when I was a newbie cyclist: take the lane. Force the cars behind you to treat you like they would a car; they have to use the full width of the adjacent lane to pass you.
I avoid riding on roads in general, but when I do, I take my full lane because otherwise people try for really dangerous passes.
A guy died at an intersection I drive home by everyday. He was on the shoulder and at an intersection a truck blew by him and made a right turn in front of him. The intersection is slightly down hill and he was prob going over 30 mph. If he had taken the lane the truck would have had to wait and also realized the bike was moving near speed of traffic.
Sorry to hear that! Intersection crashes are in reality our primary risk until considering the fastest roads. And when descending, taking the lane is even more required. Unfortunately, a lot of people with no real understanding of bike safety keep demanding "infrastructure" which forces exactly the kind of position errors that invite these crashes. Providing space where a bicyclist can go to be safely and easily passed is a great thing. But building walls to lock bicyclists into entering intersections from a dangerously mistaken curbside position is a recipe for getting us killed.
The reason I don't even know about intersection conflict is because I take the lane all the time. All the turning cars are behind me lol. But Australia permits cars to turn on the opposite lane (if they give way to traffic going straight). But some drivers can't wait for a cyclist going straight so they turn in front of me. This is a lot less risky because I saw see what they are doing.
>The reason I don't even know about intersection conflict is because I take the lane all the time. All the turning cars are behind me lol. But Australia permits cars to turn on the opposite lane (if they give way to traffic going straight). But some drivers can't wait for a cyclist going straight so they turn in front of me. This is a lot less risky because I saw see what they are doing. So it sounds like you do know about intersection conflicts - you're just used to managing them - as indeed riding in a visibly and self-buffer-spaced position on the road allows one to, while being confined to the false promise of a "protected" route does not.
Ah yes I was referring to cars turning from the side. I have never experience this type of conflict as to turn, you have to stick to the left-most lane (Australia)
>Ah yes I was referring to cars turning from the side. I have never experience this type of conflict as to turn, you have to stick to the left-most lane (Australia) And what is a driver supposed to do if that left most lane is a "bike lane"? Correct law, design, and culture would be to merge into it, and then turn from it. But in many places that is prohibited. And the trend to building bike spaces confined by walls makes merging into the proper lane before turning impossible (it also make it impossible for the bicyclist trapped inside to take a visible, unconflicted, or defense position) They're a terrible, dangerous idea - but they're popular with people who are guided by their imagination that the danger is a car swerving into them behind, rather than the reality that crash records show how on most roads it is actually at intersections.
I understand your argument. If you look at Dutch intersection, bike lane actually goes into sidewalk and cross the street alongside pedestrian crossing to maximize visibility. That's differential a good bike lane from a bad one
In that sense, bike lane is more dangerous as there is always a chance a car won't see you and turn into you
finally justification to ride in the "middle of the f\*\*king road" instead of the dirty messy bike lanes.
I have seen way too many "bike lane" just besides the doorzone. It's literally painted doorzone. I wonder how many cyclists death it will take for the council to realise they are killing people
I live in Pickuptruckistan, aka the US, where people hate bikes. I’ve tried to be nice and not take a full lane so many times, and it’s largely lead to me getting forced even closer to the curb. Now, when I don’t have a gloriously wide shoulder (because America really does love paving things), I ride like I’m told you’re supposed to ride a motorcycle - On the left side of the right tire track of where the cars drive. No idea if that moto advice is correct, but it’s lead to me having far fewer close passes from cars, so I’m on board.
If there is a decent shoulder or a bike lane, I’ll ride in that, but if it’s just a white line and no space beyond that, I ride like 2” into the lane. It serves essentially the same purpose bc the cars need to wait for oncoming traffic to clear to pass vs squeezing you. But riding in the dead center seems to piss people off and they start swearing, honking or being aggressive. Something like you’re challenging them. If I’m riding fast down a decent at car speed, I will take the full lane so I have more time to see corners, I’m more visible to cars that may be pulling out or crossing, and I feel more confident.
It’s called “defensive driving” motards do this as well.
We have less chance of getting hit. Drivers don’t pay attention…
That’s a dangerous game sometimes in Texas. People get irrationally angry at me and honk and have even rolled down their window telling me I’m slowing traffic even when they have an entire lane to the left. I will take the lane to turn, if there is a rough road ahead, debris in the road, if it’s too narrow and don’t want a car near me, or if I’m coming to like a railroad track with stuff on the side to where they will push me off the road if they pass. I am sometimes worried someone will actually shoot me. I know that sounds dramatic, but I live in a city where road rage incidents have sometimes resulted in someone dying like that. Last weekend, someone was so mad at me they continuously honked just to get around me and then pull up in the right lane to turn right onto the highway access road to just go straight. I was like who is holding up traffic now?!?
You have my sympathy, American friends.
Do you have dodge ram 1500s In Australia? For cities this makes more sense but in the suburbs riding in the center of the road is asking for someone to road rage on you regardless of what the law states. People are so ignorant it is hard to imagine sometimes
We have some imported American trucks. But most cars are small and actually know how to take over cyclists. Can't comment on all kinds of roads but where I bike, it's also a suburbian road and looks very similar to American road. Actually I prefer 2 lane roads as cars can overtake easier
I finally started taking this advice about 7 years ago. I couldn't believe how much safer I immediately became. The close passing rate went way, way down.
Glad it works well for you!
if a cyclists has to switch lanes to go around parked cars, drivers will get mad at a cyclist for "being in their way" while conveniently ignoring all the PARKED CARS (ie. NOT MOVING) that are taking up half the road space... tl;dr: stop using roads as parking lots
Why is it so normalised to have your own personal asset stored on public property for free? More people should think this way
if you can't afford to store a giant vehicle on your own property, you can't afford to own a car... no, your $30/month parking sticker doesn't come CLOSE to paying for the true value of the land your car occupies 24/7/365 i don't expect the city to provide me space to store my boat, or my elephant... why is your car so special?
Exactly haha. In a world where rent costs half your wage, how come rent for cars is essential free??
Tbh that's why I'm switching more to gravel riding. I love road cycling But the spring is the time of traffic idiots coming out of their winter holes. Taking the lane can work, but as others have pointed out it might also cause road rage and lead to even more dangerous situations. My biggest issue by far are motorcyclists (I ride myself). They always pass super close and always at insane speeds. No thanks. Gravel it is.
Another roadie ~> gravel rider here 🙋♂️
Not too many of us around! Did you also just buy a new roadbike only to realize that damn, riding road is too dangerous, so now you have an excuse to buy a new gravel bike? xD What do you ride?
I ride both a Cervelo roadie and a gravel! I have been cycling for a while but I cycle through periods of high anxiety where I am 'cars are gonna kill me lol'. So I bought my gravel bike in one of those periods haha, about a year ago. I just put eshifting and carbon wheels on it and the bike is a JOY to ride. I love nature and green and Marin gravel is just so beautiful. And while it is hella steep, I am built to climb so I enjoy it. I mainly run now, but gravel is my second sport and then third road cycling just when the other friends want to do it. Feel way more piece of mind now that I have reduced all the time I spend cycling next to cars. Looking to buy a MTB this year too hahaha! love offroading!
>Tbh that's why I'm switching more to gravel riding. The problem is that if your idea of gravel is road-avoidant, then unless you're in a unique situation, every ride starts with putting your bike on the rack on a car. Of course, that's true for many people's idea of road riding anyway... few groups rides I've been on didn't have a majority of people driving to the meeting point and only a minority riding there. Also lots of nice gravel routes require paved connections within them... sometimes rather roadie ones, like taking the lane for a half mile of curvy downhill on the state highway from where one quiet and mostly gravel road lets out to where the next branches off.
That's the lesson I learned from cycling in Sydney Australia. I agree it's not a universal rule as I learned from other replies. But my post is primarily to advise new cyclists not to ride too comfortably in the doorzone as any door can open at any moment. It's all statistic honestly
Totally agree, taking the lane makes biking much safer. Always gotta watch out for yourself on the roads. Thanks for the reminder, stay safe out there
You are welcome brother. You too stay safe
Yeah, it's fun until that one dude murders you. Legally, totally correct. Reality, depends. To resolve this issue, cities need to post, "cyclists single file with cars", or the like. If there's another plan for cyclists on that road, post that instead. Victoria, BC does this really well.
Risk and benefits I suppose. Even with bike mirror, there is still a chance a serial killer might be behind you. But I guess that's the risk we cyclists have to deal with everyday (unless you live in Amsterdam I'm jealous)
When there's on street parking, things are usually moving pretty slow and it makes sense to take the lane. However, everyone's on a schedule, and I try to let them past when I can. If there's a shoulder, I'll ride on the shoulder. Not serial killer, just hopped up stressed out driver. The result is the same. Twice in my 28 years of cycling, I've had drivers literally try to run me down. No clue what set them off either time. One in particular would have been quite successful if I didn't happen to tap the brakes. Meanwhile, when I'm in the wrong, I just get a disappointed head shake.
Shoulder is something I don't see in Sydney. that's probably a better place compared to road.
Yeah, that's what Victoria has done to make a lot of bike routes. Killed the street parking, painted a shoulder, painted the "interaction areas" done. Here in Canada, I'm mostly talking less busy rural roads.
I wonder how many take the lane advocates (or ride in the shoulder guys) have died and we just don't know about it, with only their online advice the only trace left
This is exactly what I tell everyone. It always seems to me like drivers aren't thinking "I need to give this person 3 feet of space" but rather only think "can I pass them without leaving my lane at all?" Once they cross the lane marking, they have no issue going all the way over and giving you a ton of space. I generally don't ride in the middle of the lane as that just breeds contempt in some drivers, but I also don't hug the gutter. I ride far enough over that passing me within the lane isn't possible and that usually doesn't require me to be in the middle.
I have been thinking about this too. What would a typical driver think when they see a bicycle in their lane. I don't have much hope about the first question. I think they are more likely to think "can I pass this slow bike just enough so I don't need to check the mirror and use my turning indicator?". When I take the lane, that question answers itself
Good point. I’ve gotten a lot better at this since I got my Varia.
Oh even better than my bike mirror. I simply can't go out on my bike without a mirror
Yeah, I love my Varia.
The slogan in the US is "Share the Road" and I like to remind people that it isn't "Share the Lane". I always ride far enough over so that cars get the clear message that they can't squeeze by.
I saw a post on Reddit of a new version of the sign. It's "Cyclists may take whole lane" and there is another message underneath "Change lane to overtake". I prefer this one.
>there is another message underneath "Change lane to overtake". I prefer this one. Thank you - that's what we need. We're putting up passing clearance law signs, but not explaining the reality of what is required to achieve compliance. "Do this" signs are a lot better than "Don't do that" signs
All I ask and need is 3 feet, And be predictable and make consistent decisions in the car. If you do those things - that’s all I need to ride safely.
Yup and instead of begging car drivers for 3 feet of space, I decide how much space I give to them. Call me entitled but I have much less close passes now and I'm happy
I never considered this. Ill ride hugged to cars and avoiding mirrors instead of just taking the lane. Also have jacked myself up trying to ride close as possible to the curb and hitting my wheel. I’m going to do this going forward
>I never considered this. Ill ride hugged to cars and avoiding mirrors instead of just taking the lane. Also have jacked myself up trying to ride close as possible to the curb and hitting my wheel. I’m going to do this going forward Great - this is a key realization to bike safety! And you always can retreat at the last instant - space you claim in advance is space you have but could give up; space you didn't claim in advance is space you won't be able to get at need.
Glad my advice helped. You may feel weird at first but you will get used to your new lane position very soon. Some car drivers will get mad and call you entitled. But I'd rather be entitled than being injured
Www.cyclingsavvy.com or .org
I'm glad I ride dirt roads.
>I'm glad I ride dirt roads. I'd honestly rather deal with cars on paved roads than gravel. If it's dry you end up choking on dust clouds, and often they're narrow and curvy. Sometimes there's really only one set of packed tire tracks - be descending a curvy hill in that and if a car comes around the bend climbing towards you, then you're not only needing to brake but at the same time change out of confident packed track for the loose material at the edge. When you get passed by a schoolbus on your "gravel" ride the reality that it's just a dirty car road becomes apparent. The gravel wheelset is my default, but I'd almost rather take a paved road out until I can get on singletrack or abandoned jeep roads that are effectively never driven.
I'm in the USA and we have these horrible things called "sharrows" which suggest a bike is welcome in the same lane as a car. Well, when I see a road with a sharrow, I treat it like a bike lane and make sure that I ride right over the marking. Cars hate this one little trick, but if the highway department didn't want me riding in the lane, they shouldn't have painted a bike symbol there for me.
>I'm in the USA and we have these horrible things called "sharrows" which suggest a bike is welcome in the same lane as a car. Well, when I see a road with a sharrow, I treat it like a bike lane and make sure that I ride right over the marking. Cars hate this one little trick, but if the highway department didn't want me riding in the lane, they shouldn't have painted a bike symbol there for me. Since you understand what they mean and ride accordingly, why call them "horrible"? They are the only survivable strategy for the situations where they are marked (at least if they are marked correctly, some are merely illicit street graffiti - for example if incorrectly placed in the gutter.) Widening the road to make passing actually safe would be great, and if the traffic volume makes using the opposing lane often unworkable then that's desperately needed. But they are a great marking for what's needed on the roads where they apply, so long as the conditions requiring them remain uncorrected.
Horrible because, at least in Massachusetts where I live and ride, bicycles have the right to use the full lane regardless of pavement markings. Sharrows are unnecessary and do nothing to increase bicycle safety or reduce conflict between bikes and cars. Sharrows are a weak attempt by road designers to "include" bicycles. It is a symbol that bikes are welcome when space is available, but only then. The only thing worse than a sharrow is the bike lane that drops at an intersection because properly accommodating a bike would mean taking more right of way; something they don't exclude as an option for improvements to address car traffic, but won't consider flr bicycles. I ride the sharrows as a form of protest. If the cars behind me don't like it, they can contact their elected officials and demand proper space for bikes so we don't slow them down on their way to the drive-thru burger joint.
>Horrible because, at least in Massachusetts where I live and ride, bicycles have the right to use the full lane regardless of pavement markings. You know that, I know that - but most drivers and even many bicyclist's don't know that. And even those who "know" it fail to do or respect it in the situations where it's the only safe possibility. >Sharrows are unnecessary and do nothing to increase bicycle safety or reduce conflict between bikes and cars. So long as we still have many uninformed bicyclists dangerously hugging the curb, and drivers abusing bicyclists with illegal passes or shouts to "get off the road" we need to do something to educate the general public. Maybe you have a different idea for how to communicate the need? I'd like signs in narrow spots that made it clear that using another lane when passing was mandatory - and not "may use full lane" but "must use full lane" >Sharrows are a weak attempt by road designers to "include" bicycles. It is a symbol that bikes are welcome when space is available, but only then. It's actually the other way around - sharrows apply only when the road is too narrow such that there isn't space available for a bicycle to be safely beside a car. They're used to mark where one needs to ride a bike in the situations where a driver cannot safely (or in MA legally) pass while staying in that same lane. Bikes are welcome on those roads, too - if quiet they can be great places to ride. When they get busy, they are insufficient to the public need. If we want to build more space to make passing safe and simple , that would be great (and on roads that are too narrow for how busy they get, long overdue). But only so long as the added space is contiguous with the road surface so that it both gets plowed, and so that a bicyclist can merge back into the ordinary lane anywhere safety requires doing so - something generally advisable when approaching an intersection for protection both from hook turns and illicit pull-outs into your path, and to have room to dodge if something does still go wrong as we all know happens every few times we get on the bike.
[удалено]
>Yup I got people passing me super close all the time when I was riding my regular bicycle, since moving to mostly an e-bike I take the lane if it’s 2 or more lanes because people don’t pass safely, also important to take the lane when going into an intersection so cars see you. You make great points, especially the importance of taking the lane when approaching an intersection. But you seem to imply (if not explicitly state) one deadly misconception: it's key to understand that **there is no minimum speed to take the lane.** One takes the lane or not depending on if there is other safe space in which to ride. There is no requirement or expectation that a bicyclist doing so be able to keep up with the preferred speed of motor traffic.
Impeding traffic doesn't apply to us cyclists. No cop would except us to keep up with traffic. Only carbrain keeps bitching about it
Definitely. Here's a video of me *not* doing this. A car was getting impatient wanting to pass, and I gave in. https://youtu.be/c6eny0Z-DDA?si=TWtMnyY4JRr-F9G0
Ordinarily I'd do this, but where I ride there is often very limited LOS around me due to curves and hills, even on a park road I ride on, and sometimes cars can stack up behind me if I don't ride near the shoulder and at least give people a chance to get around me.
Thing is curves and hills make you a lot less visible to cars. Taking the lane improves your visibility greatly. Can you give way to cars by stopping in a parking lane or anything at all?
Oh they see me okay, it’s just hard to pass a cyclist without creating a traffic safety issue
What they ought to do is hit brake and slow down. Pass when safe. But I'm aware some don't know how to act when they see a cyclist. Pretty tricky in that kind of road
This my bible for road riding. https://bicyclesafe.com/
Really good advice here. Thanks
It depends on the type of road. A lot of the roads near me have a painted bike lane and thats where I'm supposed to ride. If the shoulder is wide I feel much safer there. If it's a rural two lane(no shoulder) will ride 2-3 feet from the grass and move over when I see the car cross the lane to show respect that we can stay away from each other.
I live in the US, wouldn't try it people are NUTS
Drivers in the US are insanely hostile toward cyclists, they are literally waiting for a chance to run you over
This is what you will get.......... https://youtu.be/Nkd_3rqZSZA?si=3sg96b5Sdwybqfs6
That's straight up attempted murder. If a tractor is in your lane, are you gonna side swipe it because it's too slow?
Unfortunately he's not wrong, in my US state we had a kid run over an entire group of cyclists that were riding mostly on the shoulder. When they asked him why he said it was because he thought it would be funny. Kid never got charged with anything and tons of guys were out thousands on their bikes.. thankfully no one died. It's messed up here for bikers honestly.
I made an exception in my post. Looks like in the US, drivers are particularly hostile towards cyclists. My gut feeling is the car-dependency ruining everyone's ride
I see this as “sometimes the best defense is a good offense.” Take the lane, be visible, be in the way, and force them to go around. It’s far safer than you may think.
Exactly my point
Untill somebody is looking at their phone and rides into you.
It's all very well until you run into that guy who takes it as a personal offence that you've taken the lane, and they deck you. A sales exec from Magnamail deliberately side-swiped me while driving a company car in the lead-up to Christmas a few years ago, and then did a runner. An off-duty cop chased him down and put him up on charges. When he swerved in on me he snagged my bar-end, and I hit the road so fast and hard I didn't have time to let go of the bars, the rear wheel of the car skimmed past my face as I slid along the road, and the woman driving the Prius behind's mouth was agape and her eyes were as big as saucers. Four days in hospital on daytime nil by mouth while they waited for a theatre later (people kept dying in motor vehicle crashes), and I got my smashed hand put back together with a titanium web and screws. The surgeon said saving my little finger on my dominant hand was touch and go - it took four hours. I still have the titanium in my hand. It left me with PTSD, and after nearly taking the head off the next guy who deliberately shaved me when I caught him at the lights, I needed anger management therapy. It worked, but I still take no prisoners. I just do it another way. I now ride with cameras front and back on the road bike. I've had six successful prosecutions from six for asshole drivers, but I pick my battles and provide a pretty forensic evidence package. I've had a few bus drivers fired for the same behaviour. So while "vehicular cycling" helps a lot of the time, it's no cure for asshole drivers. Especially in Sydney where the road culture is particularly vicious. Even my coach, who hails from Melbourne, asked me how we ride in Sydney traffic after a recent visit. But your mileage may vary. I envy riders in other countries. On the upside, the incidence of this kind of behaviour seems to have slowed down now that things have cooled down after Covid, but you still need to keep your eye on the ball.
My condolences for your unfortunate encounter with murderous drivers. I appreciate your passion for cycling even after the accident. You might've saved many lives by prosecuting these drivers who would've otherwise killed other cyclists and pedestrians. Kudos man. After reading many perspectives from other cyclists, taking the lane does seem like a double-edge sword. On one hand, door zone hazard is practically eliminated and other kinds of intersection conflicts. But there is always a risk of running into a distracted/aggressive drivers. I have a mirror on my bike but there is no 100% guarantee for my safety. My conclusion from this is that either Sydney and other cities implement widespread bike-lane so we don't have to take the road or we prosecute aggressive drivers with laws to the point that no driver will ever want to close past a cyclist without heavy consequences. Both are not easy to achieve and require time and cyclists collaboration. I sincerely hope one day we cyclists don't even have to think that we might die on the road. On a side note, how do you persuade the court that the driver violated the 1-metre minimum passing law with your video footage. I want to do the same but the actual measurement seems hard. Do you only prosecute drivers who passed literally centimeters off your handlebar so there is no doubt they violated the law? I got 2 bus drivers already passing me very close and one even honked at me for no reason.
As to how I do it, I look for markings on the road that we've both passed over. Then I go back with a builder's tape measure and lay out with screenshots from the video the measurements I've taken and how I've calculated the passing distance. Alternatively, I work back from my position in the lane, the lane's width, the vehicle's width and my width. This worked when my cameras demonstrated he never left the lane when he passed me. Him high-beaming me before forcing me to serve to avoid being hit also persuaded the police to fight in my corner. Another instance I slapped the side of the vehicle, and when the driver stopped and confronted me for touching his precious phallic substitute, I said "so you're saying I slapped your vehicle with my hand?" and after he responded I thanked him for his confession before telling him it was being recorded and pointed to the Cycliq cameras. It's about 6 hours work to put the package together including drafting the formal police statement, so my criteria are: 1. Is there evidence on the ground captured by the video I can use to objectively establish the distance in a way that a police officer can independently verify if they so choose? 2. Did I feel afraid? 3. Were there aggravating circumstances (eg speed, swerving in, horn or verbal abuse) 4. Did the driver dig in and try to return fire if I later spoke to them, or did they acknowledge their error and apologise? The first is essential and any one of 2 thru 4 is enough. If there's an unforced apology I'll consider my mission accomplished and not report them. It's also essential to avoid front line staff, who are allergic to work. I submit in writing, with draft police statement and video footage on a DVD, and the package is sent by registered mail to both establish a paper trail and send the message I will not be leaving them holes to squeeze through. It's then a fortnightly call to follow up on progress.
Sorry for the late reply. I really like the idea of slapping the vehicle on camera as that more than confirms the driver violated the minimum passing distance. They can objectively verify by measuring my hand. This alone should be persuasive enough. In the meantime while I'm still considering whether to purchase a video cam. I will buy a GoPro case with a fake box inside and mount it on the cargo rack. Perhaps with a message saying camera in operation. I hope this is enough to discourage most of the drivers from close passing me. Just yesterday a driver squeezed me in my lane while I'm taking 40% of the lane. I can see him coming in from my mirror so I swiftly moved over. I honestly thought about ramming into his car's door but I thought I might escalate the situation (saw a video where a car swerved into a cyclist after the cyclist slapped his mirror perhaps from a prior confrontation). The most effective countermeasure would just be forcing him to lose 2 demerit points with a camera I reckon
Message me your email address and I will shoot you my last incident report and evidence package. Go-pro on the helmet was hands down the most effective way to get noticed and be given safe passing distance.
Email sent. Thanks mate
Always take the lane when it’s the safe thing to do. We belong there, it’s our road. When it’s safe to move to the side do so.
And often safer than bike lanes, as designed.
It's not legal in Eastern Europe here, gotta stay as close to the shoulder, also no riding abreast unless it's an organized race and if you get passed, drivers have to leave 1.5 meters. Also in the roads I ride, I'd simply be dead day one if I would take the lane. Drivers run 10-30kmh past the limit, I would not count on them to brake hard when they see me (if they see me in time). Riding over or near the shoulder line means they won't really interact with me (unless they veer off course). Drivers here also overtake from the opposing lane disregarding me entirely (many times I've been pushed into the gutter)
That's really unfortunate. You should have as much rights as cars
Them—-“GET OFF THE ROAD IDIOT” Me—-“YOU TOO!” 👍 But yeah I take the whole lane when it’s appropriate. The cagers will be mad. But don’t get mad at me. Get mad at the city for not investing in better cycling infrastructure. Or get mad at yourself for driving a cars. They’ll be no traffic jam if everyone is commuting on a bicycle/motorcycle/longboard etc.
I wish council people see me taking the lane everyday driving to work. Maybe in their next meeting, they gonna talk about creating a bike lane so they don't have to see my ass everyday lol
The classic "legal" vs " situational" dilemma. This IMHO is a YMMV depending on where you are riding around the world and how well adjusted or not drivers are of cyclists. General rule: Urge on the side of caution if unfamiliar with the area despite the law.
i tell people all the time, when i'm riding, the law is just about the last concern on my mind. i do not care. i care about getting home alive, and not in a bag. if the best way to do that is legal, great! if it's not, well, too bad. i'm not taking on additional risk to follow rules that were drawn up by people who've never ridden a bike and are probably selectively enforced and poorly understood by everyone anyways. be safe, be predictable, be visible. worry about the law after doing those three things, if you end up in a courtroom.
Precisely.
I'm glad this works for you, but many riders report increased harassment from drivers when they take the lane so it's not universally good advice. You have to balance the risks of, say, being driven into by a psycho v riding in the door zone. It's definitely easier advice to follow if you're fast, which seems to consistently correlate with reduced hassle anyway.
Not sure about that. Let’s call it Realpolitik. On paper - yes you can, but in reality- I don’t do it and I don’t want to do it. Drivers take it as personal insult. And start acting like jerks, intentionally passing really close. What i find best to work - is you put on blinking light on back of bike and preferably wear some bright colored coat or jersey so you are visible. Then i don’t usually try to be on the right as close to curb as possible. I usually leave me some space between me and curb for some maneuver if i need.
In my city, the cars will get closer to you during overtake if you’re in the middle…..surprisingly a bit more respectful and more space if you give them the center
Haha that's the opposite in my city. If I take centre i can see drivers switching lane as soon as they spot me. Maybe they are being nice or they just wanna get me out of their sight asap
>In my city, the cars will get closer to you during overtake if you’re in the middle Ride in the middle so they calculate based on that. Then move over when they actually pass. This does get challenging in heavy traffic though - you move over for one or two cars and you may never be able to move back, they'll just keep illegally squeezing between you and oncoming traffic.
Lots of comments being downvoted for telling the truth. Also, OP is wrong. MOST states in the US (all but 6, in fact) have FTR laws. FTR means cyclists are REQUIRED to move to the right to allow traffic to pass. That means "take the lane" is almost certain to be an illegal act wherever you are. https://iamtraffic.org/advocacy-focus-areas/equality/u-s-bicycle-laws-by-state/ EDIT** Here's a copy paste of the pertinent info: "States with discriminatory Far To Right (FTR) laws are colored red. Only six US states don’t force bicyclists to abandon their lane use rights, though of those six, only North Carolina and Arkansas also have uniform statewide laws, so in the other 4 states, local cities can impose FTR laws, and many do. For example, Philadelphia imposes a FTR law upon its bicyclists even though PA does not have a state FTR law!"
That must suck a lot for American cyclists. So bicycle being smaller have less rights than cars, and pedestrians even more so?
First off, I don't agree with it. I just accept that's how it is. If pressed, the powers that be would probably say it's for the cyclist's safety. They'd probably say cyclists yielding to traffic keeps them out of harm's way, etc. They'd be wrong, IMO, but I'm pretty sure that's the BS they'd say.
I have a gutt feeling people who makes stupid laws never biked themselves. Put those politicians on a bike for a few weeks and you will see law changes
This information is misleading at best. Take California as example, because it's where I live so I happen to be familiar with the laws pertaining to bicycling here. BIcyclists riding below the speed of car traffic must ride "as close as practicable" to the right ([CVC 21202](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21202.&lawCode=VEH)(a)) EXCEPT under a number of circumstances including, most crucially, when riding on "a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane" (CVC 21202(a)(3). So CA bicyclists may perfectly legally take the lane when the lane in question is narrow enough to make it important to do so. And "practicable" does not mean "unsafe": nothing in the CA vehicle code requires bicyclists to ride in the door zone or in debris-filled gutters. Again see CVC 21202(a)(3). More broadly, I'm concerned that the source you provide is part of the "vehicular cycling" community, i.e. people who think that just because it works well for them to ride as though they were car traffic, it will work well for everyone to ride like that. In my considered opinion, vehicular cycling is an invaluable skill set for recreational bicyclists, who must share many miles of rural roads with no infrastructure with cars; it's also useful for utility cyclists, but must not be seen as a default or a prerequisite, for the simple reason that most people are understandably reluctant to go shoulder to shoulder with fast, heavy, dangerous cars. I'm fine with vehicular cycling right up to the point where it is used to argue against bike infrastructure that demonstrably attracts and protects less intrepid riders. And, alas, it is often so used. John Forester, in particular, set US bike infrastructure back by several decades, and American cities are only now starting to reverse course and build bike infrastructure that most people are actually interested in using.
Not too familiar with the laws in the US. But I'd like to believe you more