A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bike boxes - a failed experiment



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 18th 12, 03:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Ningi[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:









On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? (Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/ The problem is
elective right turns from a through lane that parallels a bike lane.
The California approach is to allow the turning car to enter and
remain in the bike line prior to turning. Under Oregon law, a motor
vehicle may only enter the bike lane while executing a turn -- which
is often a good thing because it keeps cars from stacking up in the
bike lane. OTOH, it invites right hooks. Taking a consistent
approach to bicycle lanes as "lanes," the California approach is the
correct one -- move over one lane and execute the turn. Whatever the
approach, we all have to be on the same page -- and there is a page.
It's in the Oregon Drivers' Handbook. It's all spelled out if anyone
cared to read it.

-- Jay Beattie.


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.

Pete

Pete
Ads
  #22  
Old October 18th 12, 03:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 17, 9:56*pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:









On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. *In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. *One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? *(Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. *If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


If the lane is marked "right turn only", bicycles would also be
required to turn right if they enter the intersection from that lane.


  #23  
Old October 19th 12, 02:32 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 18, 10:14*am, Ningi wrote:
On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:









On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. *In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. *One day they might, but now they don't..


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? *(Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. *If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/*...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. *That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.

Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman :
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."

This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.

We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.

- Frank Krygowski
  #24  
Old October 19th 12, 03:02 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 18, 6:32 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Oct 18, 10:14 am, Ningi wrote:



On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:


On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? (Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/ ...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.

Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.

Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman:
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."

This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.

We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.


I do the same thing - for the same reason and to the same observed
effect.
  #25  
Old October 19th 12, 04:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Jay Beattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,322
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 18, 7:02*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Oct 18, 6:32 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:









On Oct 18, 10:14 am, Ningi wrote:


On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:


On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. *In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. *One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? *(Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. *If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. *That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! *It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. *Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.


Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.


Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman:
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."


This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. *They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.


We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.


I do the same thing - for the same reason and to the same observed
effect.


You're both lucky you don't get pulled over for drunk driving.

-- Jay Beattie.
  #26  
Old October 19th 12, 01:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Ningi[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On 19/10/2012 02:32, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Oct 18, 10:14 am, Ningi wrote:
On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:









On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? (Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/ ...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.


Nah, this is a nasty halfway house where you are told what to do, then
abruptly the advice ends when it gets complicated. Either put proper
markings in, or don't bother at all. This is the worst of both worlds.

Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman :
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."


I agree. The example above is neither one nor the other.

This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.

We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.


Likewise.

Pete


  #27  
Old October 19th 12, 03:51 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 18, 8:23 pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02 pm, Dan O wrote:



On Oct 18, 6:32 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:


On Oct 18, 10:14 am, Ningi wrote:


On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:


On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? (Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.


Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.


Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman:
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."


This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.


We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.


I do the same thing - for the same reason and to the same observed
effect.


You're both lucky you don't get pulled over for drunk driving.


I ride miles of chip seal uphill smack dab on the white line a few
inches from the bitter crumbling edge (except for a few spots where
the white line actually ducks off the edge).

The thing about the fog line and paved shoulder seems to be that
motorists come up from behind, and see the bicyclist riding on the
paved shoulder (all well and fine so far). Most drivers go well
around (many leaving their lane completely) - all well and fine so
far. (I should note that most of my paved shoulder miles are on rural
roads with very little traffic - almost zero traffic just the very
occasional vehicle in the mornings - and usually both lanes of the 2-
lane plus shoulders road is empty.)

But a few drivers have issues that manifest. I theorize that they
have resentment. Resentment of my freedom, my fun (when it's not too
cold and wet), resentment that I won't be stopping at the gas station
to drop $50 on a partial tank of gas, resentment that I won't have to
deal with traffic in the same way they will when we get to town,
resentment that their wives and girlfriends look over at my buff ass
flexing-flexing-flexing through my lycra shorts, resentment because
they lump me in with all other bicyclists like that one who always
takes the lane in front of them or that scofflaw who occasionally
actually disrupts traffic... (I should note that these rural roads are
filled with hicks [no offense] with deep seated contexts for their
issues.)

And this resentment is compounded by an erroneous sense of superiority
- superiority that (they assume) I don't have a big, expensive,
powerful motor vehicle or a driver's license. They don't like me
simply because I'm there, and they decide (largely subconsciously but
often consciously as well) to grudgingly show me that their
benevolence extends only to granting me the paved shoulder which they
are not supposed to drive on anyway and so I am not supposed to ride
in the "car" lane and they buzz past without making any effort to move
left over or in some cases even nearer the center line (despite a
completely empty road).

I noticed this during a time of many days riding just barely left of
the fog line. And I noted that if I rode just barely (a couple
inches) *right* of the fog line, these buzzing incidents pretty much
disappeared.

I don't like doing it this way. I'd much rather ride on the paved
shoulder as they approach, indicating my cooperative stance, but as
above it often doesn't work out mutually.

Also, I think some of these people (resentful or not) see me
vacilating a few inches left and right of the fog line and think I'm
wobbly and might fall over and dont' want to have to deal with the
mess and cops and insurance and just steer clear.

So in practice I actually ride in the lane (the wheel tracks are
usually much smoother and cleaner on chip seal) a lot since the road
is empty. As a car approaches from behind I move left and ride smack
dab on top of the fog line a ways, then further right onto the paved
shoulder out of their way well before they have to pass. I don't like
to wag at them in some kind of perverse negotiation for space, though
it does work.
  #28  
Old October 19th 12, 04:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 19, 7:51 am, Dan O wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:23 pm, Jay Beattie wrote:



On Oct 18, 7:02 pm, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 18, 6:32 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:


On Oct 18, 10:14 am, Ningi wrote:


On 18/10/2012 14:52, Jay Beattie wrote:


On Oct 17, 9:56 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-18-2012 00:17, Dan O wrote:


On Oct 17, 6:32 pm, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-17-2012 15:32, Jay Beattie wrote:


Reading the article, the problem is not with bike boxes but is with
bike lanes -- riders remaining in the bike lane when approaching a
green light. In that situation, the right turning car has to yield to
the bicyclist and is, in effect, turning from the second lane over.
The problem is that car don't know that, nor do they look for traffic
approaching on the right. One day they might, but now they don't.


They don't know it because most people don't read law, and don't expect
a law that STUPID to exist.


Think about it--we are required to go straight when on the right of
someone going to the right?


They are required to turn right from the left of someone going straight?


I repeat: font size="+9"STUPID/font


Do you have a better idea? (Should be easy, if the existing solution
is so "stupid".)


Yes. If the lane is _MARKED_ right-turn only, don't put "except for
bicycles" in some law book that motorists never see


This is the usual pattern for right turn only lanes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/5339741067/...


I like the way the bike lane markings disappear during the transition
from one side of the lane to the other. That's saying 'this is really
dangerous so we'll let you figure it out on your own.


That's actually what's best! It's simply wrong to assume that a guy
sitting in an office can do a drawing that shows the best place for
merging to happen, no matter what. Yet that's what the typical dashed-
line zig-zag bike lane shift does.


Hans Monderman showed pretty conclusively that when people are made to
figure things out for themselves, traffic gets both safer and more
efficient.


Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman:
"Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety of urban
streets improved when the street and surrounding public space was
redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement
directly with others. Shared Space designs typically call for removing
regulatory traffic control features (such as kerbs, lane markings,
signs and lights) and replacing intersections with roundabouts."


This is related to another documented effect of bike lanes: closer
passing by motorists. They seem to think the stripe guarantees the
bicyclist will never leave the bike lane, even if it's filled with
broken glass, potholes, car junk.


We have very few bike lanes where I live, but on highways with fog
lines, I often make a point of riding a bit left, then a bit right of
the fog line, so motorists know that it's not an impermeable barrier.
I'm convinced they give me more room as a result.


I do the same thing - for the same reason and to the same observed
effect.


You're both lucky you don't get pulled over for drunk driving.


I ride miles of chip seal uphill smack dab on the white line a few
inches from the bitter crumbling edge (except for a few spots where
the white line actually ducks off the edge).

The thing about the fog line and paved shoulder seems to be that
motorists come up from behind, and see the bicyclist riding on the
paved shoulder (all well and fine so far). Most drivers go well
around (many leaving their lane completely) - all well and fine so
far. (I should note that most of my paved shoulder miles are on rural
roads with very little traffic - almost zero traffic just the very
occasional vehicle in the mornings - and usually both lanes of the 2-
lane plus shoulders road is empty.)

But a few drivers have issues that manifest. I theorize that they
have resentment. Resentment of my freedom, my fun (when it's not too
cold and wet), resentment that I won't be stopping at the gas station
to drop $50 on a partial tank of gas, resentment that I won't have to
deal with traffic in the same way they will when we get to town,
resentment that their wives and girlfriends look over at my buff ass
flexing-flexing-flexing through my lycra shorts, resentment because
they lump me in with all other bicyclists like that one who always
takes the lane in front of them or that scofflaw who occasionally
actually disrupts traffic... (I should note that these rural roads are
filled with hicks [no offense] with deep seated contexts for their
issues.)


I wasn't meaning to over generalize or stereotype here - besides which
city folk have their own whole set of issues and deep seated context.

snip


I noticed this during a time of many days riding just barely left of
the fog line. And I noted that if I rode just barely (a couple
inches) *right* of the fog line, these buzzing incidents pretty much
disappeared.


Er... reverse that - just barely right of the fog lane (on the
shoulder, out of the lane) gets me buzzed; just left of the fog line
(in the lane) gets me lots of space.

snip

(Also, I was once again feeling like I owed Frank a little common
ground.)
  #29  
Old October 19th 12, 05:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
(PeteCresswell)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,790
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

Per Dan O:
But a few drivers have issues that manifest.


The one that almost nailed me a few years back was a pickup truck
towing one of those trailers used by lawn service providers full
of lawn equipment.

He had not tied down the walk-behind mowers and they had rolled
to one side of the trailer so that their handles protruded out a
couple of feet wider then the 8-trailer.

I'm pretty sure I felt the handle that almost got me graze my
neck.
--
Pete Cresswell
  #30  
Old October 19th 12, 05:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Bike boxes - a failed experiment

On Oct 19, 9:28 am, "(PeteCresswell)" wrote:
Per Dan O:

But a few drivers have issues that manifest.


The one that almost nailed me a few years back was a pickup truck
towing one of those trailers used by lawn service providers full
of lawn equipment.

He had not tied down the walk-behind mowers and they had rolled
to one side of the trailer so that their handles protruded out a
couple of feet wider then the 8-trailer.

I'm pretty sure I felt the handle that almost got me graze my
neck.


I got right-hooked by a rig exactly like that - I was in the gravel
dodging the handle.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bike Transport Boxes MikeyOz Australia 7 October 28th 05 11:26 AM
Bike Boxes Robberg Rides 5 January 10th 05 07:42 PM
Failed experiment.(Glove recommendation) soup UK 7 November 22nd 04 07:48 PM
4 spokes failed on unridden bike! Robert Haston Techniques 32 November 17th 04 04:59 AM
Question about hard shell bike boxes Boyd Speerschneider Techniques 1 July 18th 04 09:24 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.