#1
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
On the route I ride most Saturday's, along highway 67, I take the lane
approaching Poway Road from the south. Cars park on the shoulder (there is a popular hiking spot at Iron Mountain), so unless you're in the center of the lane, you are in the door zone. This is for a short stretch, less than a quarter mile. Last week some yahoo in a pickup---they are invariably in pickups---passed close, straddling the lane, then immediately swerved in front as he passed me. There are two lanes in my direction, so the straddle was unnecessary. Also, there was a red light in about a few hundred yards, and the outside lanes stops just belong it. A road crew was clearing bush on the shoulder at the light, so I just stayed in the lane, then passed him at the light, passed a few more cars, then made sure I stayed in the lane well past the work crew so the guy could wait a bit longer than strictly necessary. I probably should have enquired as to whether his horn was malfunctioning, since he conspicuously failed to use it. Today was similar. This time there was only one vehicle on the road in my direction approaching the light. A large pickup, with dualies. Saw him cresting the hill a quarter mile back as I moved to take the lane. Heard his horn immediately. He kept the horn down the entire time, straddling the lane, passing me by less than 3 feet. He also immediately merged back into the outside lane, then had to slow for the light, but it turned green before I arrived. Off he went, immediately merging back to where he should have been the whole time, since, as mentioned, the outside lane ends shortly after the light. On the return trip another moron in a pickup pulled off the road onto the shoulder and stopped, about 20 yards in front of me, completely blocking the shoulder. This is on a slight downhill. Traffic was heavy at that moment, there is but a single lane each way at that location. Didn't have much choice other than to pass him in the door zone, as there wasn't time to merge into the lane. I could theoretically have taken the lane the entire way down, but am pretty sure no one would recommend that there, not with a very ridable paved eight foot wide shoulder and a single traffic lane. I suppose that is one of the drawbacks of having too wide a shoulder, it makes it possible for drivers to use it as a parking spot. -- Joe Riel |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Joe Riel writes:
On the route I ride most Saturday's, along highway 67, I take the lane approaching Poway Road from the south. Cars park on the shoulder (there is a popular hiking spot at Iron Mountain), so unless you're in the center of the lane, you are in the door zone. This is for a short stretch, less than a quarter mile. Last week some yahoo in a pickup---they are invariably in pickups---passed close, straddling the lane, then immediately swerved in front as he passed me. There are two lanes in my direction, so the straddle was unnecessary. Also, there was a red light in about a few hundred yards, and the outside lanes stops just belong it. A road crew was clearing bush on the shoulder at the light, so I just stayed in the lane, then passed him at the light, passed a few more cars, then made sure I stayed in the lane well past the work crew so the guy could wait a bit longer than strictly necessary. I probably should have enquired as to whether his horn was malfunctioning, since he conspicuously failed to use it. Today was similar. This time there was only one vehicle on the road in my direction approaching the light. A large pickup, with dualies. Saw him cresting the hill a quarter mile back as I moved to take the lane. Heard his horn immediately. He kept the horn down the entire time, straddling the lane, passing me by less than 3 feet. He also immediately merged back into the outside lane, then had to slow for the light, but it turned green before I arrived. Off he went, immediately merging back to where he should have been the whole time, since, as mentioned, the outside lane ends shortly after the light. On the return trip another moron in a pickup pulled off the road onto the shoulder and stopped, about 20 yards in front of me, completely blocking the shoulder. This is on a slight downhill. Traffic was heavy at that moment, there is but a single lane each way at that location. Didn't have much choice other than to pass him in the door zone, as there wasn't time to merge into the lane. I could theoretically have taken the lane the entire way down, but am pretty sure no one would recommend that there, not with a very ridable paved eight foot wide shoulder and a single traffic lane. I suppose that is one of the drawbacks of having too wide a shoulder, it makes it possible for drivers to use it as a parking spot. Speaking of big pickups and lane sharing: I have avoided the 4-lane highway I mentioned before (the one with really wide paved shoudlers) because of construction that narrows it to one lane and no shoulder and pylons and dirt clods and *extra* impatient cagers and all that for a long stretch. Yesterday I decided to take it as far as the narrow bridge with concrete abutments (that one place that I do sort of take the lane). As noted before, it's almost at the bottom of a long, fast descent. This also happens to be right where the left lane ends and everybody has to merge into the right lane and the speed limit drops to 45 mph with double fines. I would take the exit just across the bridge. So I'm coming down the hill on the paved shoulder, approaching the choke point, already in the 45 mph zone. It's morning not quite rush hour. Traffic is going to pile up in the right lane and there's going to be braking and more braking and then they'll parade on into town single file. I scope out behind and move out into the lane in a good sized gap (the nearest approaching car - a big pickup - well behind). I'm tucked down probably doing a good thirty-some mph. But I will not move to the middle of the lane to "block" it on this highway, so I am still toward the right - about as far right as I deem practicable, with a little wiggle room from the abutment (it's also rough right up next to that thing). Does the big pickup slow to 35 or so and follow me across the bridge before joining the slow parade into town? No. Instead he stuff it in there between me and the pylons. And no, Frank - the lesson is not "control the lane". SR is not far wrong that that is bound to get you in the news. And even if the bikey blogs come out in outrage defending your poor deadness, the vast majority (sorry Jobst) the vast majority is never going to even think twice that it was your own fault. You either have to move from the shoulder into the lane (I think you characterize this as "swerving" when you read the motorist account of the bicyclist moving into their path, or veering, or anything that amounts to changing road postion, and you need to blame the victim somehow because of course bicycling is *not* dangerous if done properly, and they're not here anymore give their version, which you'd discount or dismiss anyway... ) you either have to change postion to take the lane - which somebody will characterize as swerving even if it wasn't - or you have to be there all along parading down the middle of the road like Aunt Bea. Understand - if you and Aunt Bea want to parade down the middle of the road I think motorists should accommodate you both; but I don't need to do that. I'd still like to reserve the right to express my feelings about less than respectful interactions. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013 12:25:26 -0700, Joe Riel wrote:
epic snip I suppose that is one of the drawbacks of having too wide a shoulder, it makes it possible for drivers to use it as a parking spot. They'll park where they want. Shoulder or not. -- davethedave |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Dan writes:
Speaking of big pickups and lane sharing: I have avoided the 4-lane highway I mentioned before (the one with really wide paved shoudlers) because of construction that narrows it to one lane and no shoulder and pylons and dirt clods and *extra* impatient cagers and all that for a long stretch. Yesterday I decided to take it as far as the narrow bridge with concrete abutments (that one place that I do sort of take the lane). As noted before, it's almost at the bottom of a long, fast descent. This also happens to be right where the left lane ends and everybody has to merge into the right lane and the speed limit drops to 45 mph with double fines. I would take the exit just across the bridge. So I'm coming down the hill on the paved shoulder, approaching the choke point, already in the 45 mph zone. It's morning not quite rush hour. Traffic is going to pile up in the right lane and there's going to be braking and more braking and then they'll parade on into town single file. I scope out behind and move out into the lane in a good sized gap (the nearest approaching car - a big pickup - well behind). I'm tucked down probably doing a good thirty-some mph. But I will not move to the middle of the lane to "block" it on this highway, so I am still toward the right - about as far right as I deem practicable, with a little wiggle room from the abutment (it's also rough right up next to that thing). Does the big pickup slow to 35 or so and follow me across the bridge before joining the slow parade into town? No. Instead he stuff it in there between me and the pylons. And no, Frank - the lesson is not "control the lane". SR is not far wrong that that is bound to get you in the news. Who is SR? I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Easy to for me to type. I'm still trying to learn. It's not as simple, nor as effective, as some suggest. Even with two lanes I don't get any more passing distance and usually get the unwelcome seranade. I suspect, maybe incorrectly, that it works better in city traffic, at slower speeds. But that's not where I ride. even if the bikey blogs come out in outrage defending your poor deadness, the vast majority (sorry Jobst) the vast majority is never going to even think twice that it was your own fault. You either have to move from the shoulder into the lane (I think you characterize this as "swerving" when you read the motorist account of the bicyclist moving into their path, or veering, or anything that amounts to changing road postion, and you need to blame the victim somehow because of course bicycling is *not* dangerous if done properly, and they're not here anymore give their version, which you'd discount or dismiss anyway... ) you either have to change postion to take the lane - which somebody will characterize as swerving even if it wasn't - or you have to be there all along parading down the middle of the road like Aunt Bea. Understand - if you and Aunt Bea want to parade down the middle of the road I think motorists should accommodate you both; but I don't need to do that. I'd still like to reserve the right to express my feelings about less than respectful interactions. I understand you. Same issues here. Taking the lane increases the exposure time, since you invariably have to do it well before it is strictly necessary (from a sharing perspective). I'm still trying to figure the trade-offs... -- Joe Riel |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Joe Riel writes:
I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Easy to for me to type. Guess it wasn't so easy to type 8-). -- Joe Riel |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Joe Riel writes:
Dan writes: Speaking of big pickups and lane sharing: I have avoided the 4-lane highway I mentioned before (the one with really wide paved shoudlers) because of construction that narrows it to one lane and no shoulder and pylons and dirt clods and *extra* impatient cagers and all that for a long stretch. Yesterday I decided to take it as far as the narrow bridge with concrete abutments (that one place that I do sort of take the lane). As noted before, it's almost at the bottom of a long, fast descent. This also happens to be right where the left lane ends and everybody has to merge into the right lane and the speed limit drops to 45 mph with double fines. I would take the exit just across the bridge. So I'm coming down the hill on the paved shoulder, approaching the choke point, already in the 45 mph zone. It's morning not quite rush hour. Traffic is going to pile up in the right lane and there's going to be braking and more braking and then they'll parade on into town single file. I scope out behind and move out into the lane in a good sized gap (the nearest approaching car - a big pickup - well behind). I'm tucked down probably doing a good thirty-some mph. But I will not move to the middle of the lane to "block" it on this highway, so I am still toward the right - about as far right as I deem practicable, with a little wiggle room from the abutment (it's also rough right up next to that thing). Does the big pickup slow to 35 or so and follow me across the bridge before joining the slow parade into town? No. Instead he stuff it in there between me and the pylons. And no, Frank - the lesson is not "control the lane". SR is not far wrong that that is bound to get you in the news. Who is SR? I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Well, I am no authority on how to do things properly, and heaven forbid I should serve as an example, but for me, the deicision comes down to: 1) What do I have to gain by completely blocking the lane (taking more than I need to ensure that no one else can have any)? Answer: I won't be bothered by the lack of consideration, respect, regard, concern, accommodation, etc. that is exhibited by people passing me nearer than they have to. Instead, they'll just have to wait. IOW: my annoyance; maybe some personal affront in the power game, exchanged for theirs, because dammit, I have a right to the road. 2) What do I have to lose? Well, first it really raises the odds of a hostile interaction. Second (only because it's less likely), I could get just flat creamed by somebody not paying attention. True, the not paying attention driver might hit me anyway, but I'm playing the odds (at the same time exhibiting a cooperative - which is not the same thing as "inviting" - stance. Also, there are sublte audible clues that an overtaking driver is unaware that you're there, and I suppose I might act to get all the odds I could (IOW, get as far out of the way as I could) in that instance. Easy to for me to type. I'm still trying to learn. It's not as simple, nor as effective, as some suggest. Even with two lanes I don't get any more passing distance and usually get the unwelcome seranade. I suspect, maybe incorrectly, that it works better in city traffic, at slower speeds. But that's not where I ride. It depends on the city and bunch of other things. In the city, I *still* don't take turns as much as I do using my maneuverability to go somewhere else. even if the bikey blogs come out in outrage defending your poor deadness, the vast majority (sorry Jobst) the vast majority is never going to even think twice that it was your own fault. You either have to move from the shoulder into the lane (I think you characterize this as "swerving" when you read the motorist account of the bicyclist moving into their path, or veering, or anything that amounts to changing road postion, and you need to blame the victim somehow because of course bicycling is *not* dangerous if done properly, and they're not here anymore give their version, which you'd discount or dismiss anyway... ) you either have to change postion to take the lane - which somebody will characterize as swerving even if it wasn't - or you have to be there all along parading down the middle of the road like Aunt Bea. Understand - if you and Aunt Bea want to parade down the middle of the road I think motorists should accommodate you both; but I don't need to do that. I'd still like to reserve the right to express my feelings about less than respectful interactions. I understand you. Same issues here. Taking the lane increases the exposure time, since you invariably have to do it well before it is strictly necessary (from a sharing perspective). I'm still trying to figure the trade-offs... Hey, don't let my "purple pants" reference to Aunt Bea dissuade anyone taking the lane. Sometimes it *is* necessary. Heck, it *is* in the Bicyclist Manual pretty much just as Frank states it. I'm a weirdo. Nothing wrong with that. But you're right. It's not at all clear cut, and the car culture definitely rules where the rubber hits the road. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
On Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:10:48 PM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:
Dan writes: snip I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Easy to for me to type. I'm still trying to learn. It's not as simple, nor as effective, as some suggest. Even with two lanes I don't get any more passing distance and usually get the unwelcome seranade. I suspect, maybe incorrectly, that it works better in city traffic, at slower speeds. But that's not where I ride. In the city, I'm riding at the speed of traffic and simply occupying space in the lane -- not "controlling" it. I control the lane when passing -- any passing -- would be dangerous. If passing safely is possible, then I ride as far right as is practicable. Sometimes, I will block traffic briefly for strategic advantage, before a twisting downhill -- which I tried today and got passed with about three inches to spare by some ass in a truck who then proceeded to creep down a great twisty (but not terribly steep)speed descent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErxuywzHyDA I could see that he was some old dude who probably didn't know better rather than the usual in-your=face wanna be cowboy. Nice ride today, but too many cars on the Scenic Highway -- and a whole line of smoke belching antique cars, which like to promenade in the Gorge for some reason. http://tinyurl.com/oyz4o63 -- Jay Beattie. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Dan writes:
Joe Riel writes: Dan writes: Speaking of big pickups and lane sharing: I have avoided the 4-lane highway I mentioned before (the one with really wide paved shoudlers) because of construction that narrows it to one lane and no shoulder and pylons and dirt clods and *extra* impatient cagers and all that for a long stretch. Yesterday I decided to take it as far as the narrow bridge with concrete abutments (that one place that I do sort of take the lane). As noted before, it's almost at the bottom of a long, fast descent. This also happens to be right where the left lane ends and everybody has to merge into the right lane and the speed limit drops to 45 mph with double fines. I would take the exit just across the bridge. So I'm coming down the hill on the paved shoulder, approaching the choke point, already in the 45 mph zone. It's morning not quite rush hour. Traffic is going to pile up in the right lane and there's going to be braking and more braking and then they'll parade on into town single file. I scope out behind and move out into the lane in a good sized gap (the nearest approaching car - a big pickup - well behind). I'm tucked down probably doing a good thirty-some mph. But I will not move to the middle of the lane to "block" it on this highway, so I am still toward the right - about as far right as I deem practicable, with a little wiggle room from the abutment (it's also rough right up next to that thing). Does the big pickup slow to 35 or so and follow me across the bridge before joining the slow parade into town? No. Instead he stuff it in there between me and the pylons. And no, Frank - the lesson is not "control the lane". SR is not far wrong that that is bound to get you in the news. Who is SR? I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Well, I am no authority on how to do things properly, and heaven forbid I should serve as an example, but for me, the deicision comes down to: 1) What do I have to gain by completely blocking the lane (taking more than I need to ensure that no one else can have any)? Answer: I won't be bothered by the lack of consideration, respect, regard, concern, accommodation, etc. that is exhibited by people passing me nearer than they have to. Instead, they'll just have to wait. IOW: my annoyance; maybe some personal affront in the power game, exchanged for theirs, because dammit, I have a right to the road. 2) What do I have to lose? Well, first it really raises the odds of a hostile interaction. Second (only because it's less likely), I could get just flat creamed by somebody not paying attention. True, the not paying attention driver might hit me anyway, but I'm playing the odds (at the same time exhibiting a cooperative - which is not the same thing as "inviting" - stance. Also, there are sublte audible clues that an overtaking driver is unaware that you're there, and I suppose I might act to get all the odds I could (IOW, get as far out of the way as I could) in that instance. Yeah, that sums it up pretty nicely. It definitely raises the odds of ---practically guarantees---a hostile interaction. Particularly when you consider that, in order to properly take the lane, you really have to do so for considerably longer than required to ensure that you can do so safely. At the place where the pickup passed me today, I hadn't quite reached the line of parked cars. At that place there was a rideable shoulder. But given that it becomes a door zone shortly afterwards, taking the lane when I did is reasonable. However, given how few cyclists take the lane at that point, and how few people are cyclists, I don't expect many drivers, probably no drivers, to understand. They just see a cyclist in the way and get annoyed. I understand their annoyance. I occasionally drive---and generally hate it. Get annoyed when morons (i.e. other drivers) block my path. So I don't always assert my rights when I could. Still working on when and where it is reasonable to. -- Joe Riel |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Jay Beattie writes:
On Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:10:48 PM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote: Dan writes: snip I'm not sure, though, whether the lesson, isn't in fact, control the lane at that point. Easy to for me to type. I'm still trying to learn. It's not as simple, nor as effective, as some suggest. Even with two lanes I don't get any more passing distance and usually get the unwelcome seranade. I suspect, maybe incorrectly, that it works better in city traffic, at slower speeds. But that's not where I ride. In the city, I'm riding at the speed of traffic and simply occupying space in the lane -- not "controlling" it. I control the lane when passing -- any passing -- would be dangerous. If passing safely is possible, then I ride as far right as is practicable. Sometimes, I will block traffic briefly for strategic advantage, before a twisting downhill -- which I tried today and got passed with about three inches to spare by some ass in a truck who then proceeded to creep down a great twisty (but not terribly steep)speed descent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErxuywzHyDA I recall trying, and failing, to block cars from passing at the top of a nearby downhill. Old Pomerado Rd. Only a mile long, with an average grade of 8%, but it had a couple of hairpins and I could easily, if foolishly, pass most cars descending. Progress and bulldozers, alas, have straightened its curves. Now it's a boring hill, one I rarely descend but like to climb at the end of a ride. -- Joe Riel |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Taking the lane
Dan writes:
Well, I am no authority on how to do things properly, and heaven forbid I should serve as an example, but for me, the deicision comes down to: 1) What do I have to gain by completely blocking the lane (taking more than I need to ensure that no one else can have any)? Answer: I won't be bothered by the lack of consideration, respect, regard, concern, accommodation, etc. that is exhibited by people passing me nearer than they have to. Instead, they'll just have to wait. IOW: my annoyance; maybe some personal affront in the power game, exchanged for theirs, because dammit, I have a right to the road. 2) What do I have to lose? Well, first it really raises the odds of a hostile interaction. Second (only because it's less likely), I could get just flat creamed by somebody not paying attention. True, the not paying attention driver might hit me anyway, but I'm playing the odds (at the same time exhibiting a cooperative - which is not the same thing as "inviting" - stance. Also, there are sublte audible clues that an overtaking driver is unaware that you're there, and I suppose I might act to get all the odds I could (IOW, get as far out of the way as I could) in that instance. I found this interesting: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2013...-hate-cyclists -- Joe Riel |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Taking the Lane Trifecta! | Jay Beattie | Techniques | 26 | July 5th 13 05:22 PM |
taking the lane | nik.morgan[_2_] | UK | 3 | August 19th 12 01:50 PM |
Taking the lane in London | Simon Mason | UK | 19 | August 4th 11 08:15 AM |
Taking The Lane | Steve Walker[_2_] | UK | 6 | March 3rd 11 09:21 AM |
taking the lane 60's style | recycled-one | General | 8 | September 6th 06 08:10 PM |