Handlebar rotation

John B. wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:06:03 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 07:07:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-07-11 17:56, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:35:27 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-07-10 18:48, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:31:17 -0700, Joerg
wrote:


[...]

But this is not to say that I have never seen a two wheeler hit a car.
A bloke that was in my class in collage hit a car. He was riding a
Harley down a sidewalk at what he said was "about 35 mph" and a car
"pulled out in front of him". Actually the car was on a side street
and stopped at an intersection. He hit the rear door. The results was
a dented door and a broken collar bone.

I suppose that today this would be described as "an accident" although
when it happened the fellow on the motorcycle described it as "a
damned fool stunt, that I'd not have done if I hadn't had all that
beer".


That's stupid behavior.

True, and as I wrote the guy said as much. But the point was that in
the very rare cases where a bicycle hit a car it was always been
stupid behavior on the part of the cyclist.


Always? Now explain what exactly was stupid in my behavior when I came
down a street in a city and a guy in a Volkswagen Polo who had a stop
sign pulls into that street right in front of my bicycle (resulting in a
crash).

Next, explain what was stupid in my behavior when the driver of a
Mercedes decided he could floor it and do the left turn in front of my
fast approaching bicycle (resulting in an accident).

[...]

Your logic seems a bit, well "different". You hit an auto, thus it is
the auto's fault. Using your logic if an auto hits a bicycle it is the
bicycle's fault.
--
Cheers,

John B.



Not that I usually agree with Joerg but he says the first one ran a stop
sign and the second one right hooked him. I'd say both were the fault of
the car lacking other evidence.

In one case he says he is riding down the road and someone pulled out
in front of him, and he hit them. In the second case a Mercedes made a
left turn in front of him and he hit them..

What is next? A bicycle hits a lamp post and it is the post's fault?

But more seriously, I ride in Bangkok traffic and yes, people do
occasionally pull out of driveways in front of me and yes, cars
occasionally turn in front of me. But so far I haven't hit one. I
haven't even come close.

Am I superman?
(I just asked my wife that question and only laughed :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.



So you think the auto was not at fault in these two cases because you have
previously avoided similar infringements on your right of way? Sounds to
me like the car was at fault in both cases . Usually you can avoid them.
We all have. Sometime you can't. Blaming the cyclist is not correct.

--
duane

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 2:07:13 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 8:31:48 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/13/2017 6:06 AM, Duane wrote:


Not that I usually agree with Joerg but he says the first one ran a stop
sign and the second one right hooked him. I'd say both were the fault of
the car lacking other evidence.

Usually, those sorts of crashes are not legally the fault of the cyclist.

On 7/13/2017 5:07 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 8:31:48 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/13/2017 6:06 AM, Duane wrote:


Not that I usually agree with Joerg but he says the first one ran a stop
sign and the second one right hooked him. I'd say both were the fault of
the car lacking other evidence.

Usually, those sorts of crashes are not legally the fault of the cyclist.

However, those are two specific crash types that the cyclist promotes by
riding too far to the right. (The third crash type is the left cross by
an oncoming motorist.) Riding far enough left to be visible and
_relevant_ greatly reduces those instances.

A further detail: To prevent pull-outs and left crosses, I think it
helps to be pedaling instead of coasting. I think there are two reasons
for this. One is that a pedaling cyclist communicates that he is,
indeed, intent on coming through the intersection. The other is that the
left-right-left motion of pedaling is uniquely human, and humans are
hard wired to notice it.

Most of the above is taught in every cyclist education program I know
of. It won't matter to Joerg, though. Despite evidence, he'll claim it's
illegal to ride safely.

I think Joerg (who can speak for himself) would say that bikes and cars don't mix regardless of riding technique because car drivers are all drunk, stoned, distracted and generally homicidal.

Personally, I pedal through intersections because that's what propels my bike forward, but I don't expect that my pedaling is making me more conspicuous or communicating in any way with motorists.

Perhaps I should have been more specific. Of course I'm pedaling
through most intersections anyway because that's what makes the bike
move. But on some downhills I may be coasting instead. In that
situation, I do start the pedaling motion even if I'm not actually
applying thrust.

And I've ridden with others who, when they see a car rush up to a stop
sign, stop pedaling in case they may have to hit the brakes if the car
pulls out in front of them. My tactic is to keep pedaling so the driver
doesn't get the impression that I'm willing to yield.

The best way of staying safe is moving through the intersection with the cars. I use the metal cows as cover -- but you have to watch them closely, just like riding through a herd of real cows.

I do that as well. I am careful, though, that an oncoming motorist
turning left isn't going to miss seeing me and think my place in the
queue is an empty slot. Proper lane position prevents that problem.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 7/13/2017 5:26 PM, Duane wrote:
John B. wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:06:03 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 07:07:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-07-11 17:56, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:35:27 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-07-10 18:48, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:31:17 -0700, Joerg
wrote:


[...]

But this is not to say that I have never seen a two wheeler hit a car.
A bloke that was in my class in collage hit a car. He was riding a
Harley down a sidewalk at what he said was "about 35 mph" and a car
"pulled out in front of him". Actually the car was on a side street
and stopped at an intersection. He hit the rear door. The results was
a dented door and a broken collar bone.

I suppose that today this would be described as "an accident" although
when it happened the fellow on the motorcycle described it as "a
damned fool stunt, that I'd not have done if I hadn't had all that
beer".


That's stupid behavior.

True, and as I wrote the guy said as much. But the point was that in
the very rare cases where a bicycle hit a car it was always been
stupid behavior on the part of the cyclist.


Always? Now explain what exactly was stupid in my behavior when I came
down a street in a city and a guy in a Volkswagen Polo who had a stop
sign pulls into that street right in front of my bicycle (resulting in a
crash).

Next, explain what was stupid in my behavior when the driver of a
Mercedes decided he could floor it and do the left turn in front of my
fast approaching bicycle (resulting in an accident).

[...]

Your logic seems a bit, well "different". You hit an auto, thus it is
the auto's fault. Using your logic if an auto hits a bicycle it is the
bicycle's fault.
--
Cheers,

John B.



Not that I usually agree with Joerg but he says the first one ran a stop
sign and the second one right hooked him. I'd say both were the fault of
the car lacking other evidence.

In one case he says he is riding down the road and someone pulled out
in front of him, and he hit them. In the second case a Mercedes made a
left turn in front of him and he hit them..

What is next? A bicycle hits a lamp post and it is the post's fault?

But more seriously, I ride in Bangkok traffic and yes, people do
occasionally pull out of driveways in front of me and yes, cars
occasionally turn in front of me. But so far I haven't hit one. I
haven't even come close.

Am I superman?
(I just asked my wife that question and only laughed :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.



So you think the auto was not at fault in these two cases because you have
previously avoided similar infringements on your right of way? Sounds to
me like the car was at fault in both cases . Usually you can avoid them.
We all have. Sometime you can't. Blaming the cyclist is not correct.

But advising other cyclists of a move that could have prevented the
problem should not be objectionable.

Also, I've noticed many, many instances of blaming a cyclist by saying
"He should have worn a ..." um, particular style of plastic hat; one
that isn't justified by the frequency of injuries it's purported to
prevent, and confers only very minimal protection.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 6:51:44 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Big snip
I do that as well. I am careful, though, that an oncoming motorist
turning left isn't going to miss seeing me and think my place in the
queue is an empty slot. Proper lane position prevents that problem.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Not always Frank. Case in point. I was riding at 50 kph downhill and I was in the CENTER of the lane but an oncoming pickup truck misjuded MY speed even though he'd seen me and he turned left directly in front of me and I spilled to avoid running into the side of his truck. He ADMITTED THAT HE'D SEEN ME BUT DID NOT THINK I WAS GOING THAT FAST. Sometimes no matter how careful a bicyclist are **** happens that is NOT the fault of the bicyclist.

Cheers

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 6:55:46 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Snipped
Also, I've noticed many, many instances of blaming a cyclist by saying
"He should have worn a ..." um, particular style of plastic hat; one
that isn't justified by the frequency of injuries it's purported to
prevent, and confers only very minimal protection.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why the hell do you have to introduce the platic hat spiel when no one else has even remotely hinted at helmets?

Cheers

On 7/13/2017 10:11 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 6:51:44 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Big snip
I do that as well. I am careful, though, that an oncoming motorist
turning left isn't going to miss seeing me and think my place in the
queue is an empty slot. Proper lane position prevents that problem.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Not always Frank. Case in point. I was riding at 50 kph downhill and I was in the CENTER of the lane but an oncoming pickup truck misjuded MY speed even though he'd seen me and he turned left directly in front of me and I spilled to avoid running into the side of his truck. He ADMITTED THAT HE'D SEEN ME BUT DID NOT THINK I WAS GOING THAT FAST. Sometimes no matter how careful a bicyclist are **** happens that is NOT the fault of the bicyclist.

Well, I agree nothing works 100% of the time. But I think the tactics I
mention here greatly increase the odds in one's favor.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/13/2017 10:11 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 6:51:44 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Big snip
I do that as well. I am careful, though, that an oncoming motorist
turning left isn't going to miss seeing me and think my place in the
queue is an empty slot. Proper lane position prevents that problem.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Not always Frank. Case in point. I was riding at 50 kph downhill and I was in the CENTER of the lane but an oncoming pickup truck misjuded MY speed even though he'd seen me and he turned left directly in front of me and I spilled to avoid running into the side of his truck. He ADMITTED THAT HE'D SEEN ME BUT DID NOT THINK I WAS GOING THAT FAST. Sometimes no matter how careful a bicyclist are **** happens that is NOT the fault of the bicyclist.

Well, I agree nothing works 100% of the time. But I think the tactics I
mention here greatly increase the odds in one's favor.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Ah, but your post said it "prevents that problem" not that is usually prevents that problem. ;) LOL VBEG

Cheers

On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 11:37:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 7/13/2017 10:12 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-07-13 04:53, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:06:03 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 07:07:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-07-11 17:56, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:35:27 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2017-07-10 18:48, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:31:17 -0700, Joerg

wrote:


[...]

But this is not to say that I have never seen a two wheeler hit
a car.
A bloke that was in my class in collage hit a car. He was riding a
Harley down a sidewalk at what he said was "about 35 mph" and a car
"pulled out in front of him". Actually the car was on a side street
and stopped at an intersection. He hit the rear door. The
results was
a dented door and a broken collar bone.

I suppose that today this would be described as "an accident"
although
when it happened the fellow on the motorcycle described it as "a
damned fool stunt, that I'd not have done if I hadn't had all that
beer".


That's stupid behavior.

True, and as I wrote the guy said as much. But the point was that in
the very rare cases where a bicycle hit a car it was always been
stupid behavior on the part of the cyclist.


Always? Now explain what exactly was stupid in my behavior when I came
down a street in a city and a guy in a Volkswagen Polo who had a stop
sign pulls into that street right in front of my bicycle (resulting
in a
crash).

Next, explain what was stupid in my behavior when the driver of a
Mercedes decided he could floor it and do the left turn in front of my
fast approaching bicycle (resulting in an accident).

[...]

Your logic seems a bit, well "different". You hit an auto, thus it is
the auto's fault. Using your logic if an auto hits a bicycle it is the
bicycle's fault.
--
Cheers,

John B.



Not that I usually agree with Joerg but he says the first one ran a
stop
sign and the second one right hooked him. I'd say both were the
fault of
the car lacking other evidence.

In one case he says he is riding down the road and someone pulled out
in front of him, and he hit them. In the second case a Mercedes made a
left turn in front of him and he hit them..


Both clearly the drivers' faults. The stop sign runner fully admitted
that. The left-turn offender hightailed it, flooring the pedal, which is
a rather clear admission of guilt (and a crime in most countries).


What is next? A bicycle hits a lamp post and it is the post's fault?

But more seriously, I ride in Bangkok traffic and yes, people do
occasionally pull out of driveways in front of me and yes, cars
occasionally turn in front of me. But so far I haven't hit one. I
haven't even come close.

Am I superman?
(I just asked my wife that question and only laughed :-)


Sometimes it is simply too late and there is nothing you can do other
than brace for impact.

There are other things you can do before it's too late. That's how some
riders avoid these crashes their entire riding career.

I have always thought that the primary responsibility for anyone's
safety was him/her/itself and have acted accordingly.

In fact isn't that, at least partially, the basis for the "survival of
the fittest" theory? Those who run away the fastest and hide behind
the trees gets to father the next generation :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 7:13:30 PM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 6:55:46 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Snipped
Also, I've noticed many, many instances of blaming a cyclist by saying
"He should have worn a ..." um, particular style of plastic hat; one
that isn't justified by the frequency of injuries it's purported to
prevent, and confers only very minimal protection.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why the hell do you have to introduce the platic hat spiel when no one else has even remotely hinted at helmets?

Cheers

The red zone has always been for unloading