TTAC contributor Robstar sent us the heads-up on this New York Times Freakonomics post. The blurbette was plenty prescient; it was posted a few days before the death of a Toronto cyclist in an altercation with a zealously anti-street-racing former Ontario Attorney General. After revealing the startling fact that 52,000 bicyclists have been killed in U.S. traffic over the last 80 years, “the hidden side of everything” offers some non-startling analysis, based on a bicycle-biased source (projectfreeride.org) and an undated DOT report. Apparently, it’s all our fault. Well, mostly . . .
When it comes to sharing the road with cars, many people seem to assume that such accidents are usually the cyclist’s fault — a result of reckless or aggressive riding. But an analysis of police reports on 2,752 bike-car accidents in Toronto found that clumsy or inattentive driving by motorists was the cause of 90 percent of these crashes. Among the leading causes: running a stop sign or traffic light, turning into a cyclist’s path, or opening a door on a biker. This shouldn’t come as too big a surprise: motorists cause roughly 75 percent of motorcycle crashes too.
Yes, well, let’s get really freaky, shall we? The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) did some deep data diving on bike accident stats. According to the IIHS, 95 percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 weren’t wearing helmets and “twenty-four percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 had blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) at or above 0.08 percent.”
As for the lethality of the car-bike mix, there’s no doubt accident rates are highest in urban areas (71 percent) where such encounters are (obviously) far more likely. But one wonders what would have happened to the stats if all these cyclists had worn helmets, or ridden defensively (whatever that means).
[TTAC apologizes for getting the timeline wrong on the NYT post. Text amended.]
We live near the headquarters of Specialized Bikes. At lunchtime and on the weekends their employees are out en mass. The way many of them ride I’m surprised there aren’t more killed in collisions.
As I mentioned in a post earlier, car drivers don’t seem to be competent any more (if they ever were, I suppose…) but likewise, I also see that virtually none of the bike riders around my town seem to obey ANY road rules at all.
In other words, a pretty good approximation of the car drivers, who don’t appear to obey many of the rules much any more (and yes, once upon a time, most did)*.
Hence, mayhem and sometimes death.
* I read a very interesting road-test from 1956, of a new Continental Mk II coupe, where the editor of the particular car magazine told the testers to drive from Chicago to New York on the then-new interstate and somewhat older toll road system (i.e. pretty much the first time small towns could be bypassed for the entire trip).
The article was very illuminating in that they kept track of how many people passed their car, which they kept at the speed limit (which varied from 35 in a construction zone, to 65 mph).
Only a handful of cars passed them until they were within 15 miles of New York City, at which time probably twice as many people passed them as had for the rest of the trip combined.
So you could read into this that except for the NYC area, a good number of American drivers once upon a time actually tried to obey the rules of the road.
And my memory (as well as my father’s memory; he’s 78) also confirm this situation.
Of course, back in the day when you got a ticket for $50, it would be the current day equivalent of $500 – and you were often jailed in some small podunk town jail until you paid up, too.
That scenario is not missed (though you can revisit it in much of small-town Ohio, if you want….)
It’s bad enough to deal with bicyclists in town, what with their failure to obey stop lights, riding down the divider lines, and other two- wheeled jackassery, but it’s even worse in rural areas. There are a lot of two lane roads in my area of KY with no shoulders, blind curves, and hills that hide traffic until you crest them. Without fail, especially during the weekend, there will be some moron or (worse) group of morons in spandex huffing and puffing to break 15 mph just out of sight as you approach a curve at speeds up to 55 mph. Of course, you’re the asshole for swerving around him into the oncoming lane and then cutting back too close to his precious $1,500+ toy and spandex encased ass to avoid the farm truck coming the other way. Lot’s of one fingered salutes from those douchebags, that I am more than happy to return.
I think that it should be illegal to operate a bicycle on a two lane road with a speed limit greater than 40 mph unless there is either a dedicated bike lane or a paved shoulder/ breakdown lane.
As a bicycle hobbyist, I can attest at the inattentive and sometimes purposely rude behavior of motorists while I ride my bike.
The guy who screamed “WHAT ARE YOU DOING?” at me when I used the turning lane, as required by law, is a perfect case in point. The finger he gave me was icing on the cake. And I don’t live in a large town, by any means. Our last population count showed about 3,000 people. So needless to say, it wasn’t like I was holding up traffic. In fact, traffic was incredibly light that afternoon.
Another recent happening: The two semis that passed me on a divided four-lane highway. The highway has a broad (probably six feet wide) shoulder, plenty of room for me to be out of the way of traffic. The drivers of the semis laid down on their air horns and crowded me by actually easing their right tires over the white line a little.
Countless others have absentmindedly opened car doors right in front of me, passed me only to turn directly in front of me at the next intersection, or pulled out into the roadway as I was within dangerously close proximity to them.
I agree bicyclists have to do their part. I try to stay off the more busy streets when I can (especially during heavy traffic periods,) and I will not under any circumstances ride on rural roads around my home where blind turns and hills are abundant and paved shoulders are not.
But how much effort does it take to check your rearview before you open your door in that parallel space? Will waiting an extra five seconds for me to get past the pull-out apron at the local bank cause you to be late for something?
At the end of a ride, I often feel like a lot of the behavior I’ve experienced from motorists is just laziness or greed. Many have the attitude that I’m the hazard– nevermind the fact that they pull out in front of me or attempt to crowd me off the road. And let’s not get into the road manners they display for other motorists– no signals, speeding up when they realize someone’s trying to pass in the left lane, etc.
People are incredibly self-absorbed out there, and that attitude is magnified whenever you’re observing it from la bicicleta.
I’ve been in three serious car/bike accidents and two minor ones. One of these was my fault (disclaimer: I was eight years old). All the rest were indeed the caused by inattentive motorists. Usually it’s someone turning right and clipping my rear tire, though I’ve been doored once, memorably, by a doctor driving an S-Class.
That said, I wear a helmet and a really tacky, crossing-guard-style neon yellow/orange vest. I replace my helmet every three years and/or after a major blow, whichever comes first. I also ride exactly a meter from the curb (in traffic, not on the sidewalk). I use hand signals, too, though I don’t think anyone knows what they mean I suspect they at least clue drivers into the fact that I’m about to do something.
If I have a fault, it’s that I roll to stop signs instead of stopping completely; this is because pedal clips are a real bitch to get out of. Most cyclists do this, and it’s probably reasonable to slow to 2-3km/h or less and—this is important—look around you.
The cyclists I know who have been hurt badly were, by a large majority, idiots. They don’t stop for lights, run straight past stopped streetcars**, weave through traffic and, this is the big peeve, use sidewalks and streets interchangeably.
The trick to safe cycling is to be consistent and calm. If you ride on the sidewalk, ride like a pedestrian (eg, very slowly). If you ride on the street, be like a car (eg, obey the laws). Don’t treat public thoroughfares like an MTB course. And don’t try to be physical in your dealings with anyone. If you hit a pedestrian, you’re looking at a busted nose when you hit the pavement; if you hit (or are hit by) a car, it’s worse. Make yourself blindingly, painfully obvious.
I’m all for better or dedicated lanes, but until that happens I think we need to all swallow the self-righteousness a little and work on sharing the road.
And for god’s sake, wear a helmet. I’ll never understand cyclists who don’t do this. Unless the wind in your hair gives you orgasms, is it really that important?
According to the IIHS, 95 percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 weren’t wearing helmets and “twenty-four percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 had blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) at or above 0.08 percent
I wonder, did you test the cyclists for THC concentration? Because I can tell you BAC is the least of your concern with some of these people.
** in Toronto, this is illegal. It’s because passengers are disembarking
The guy who screamed “WHAT ARE YOU DOING?” at me when I used the turning lane, as required by law, is a perfect case in point.
I used to carry around an abridged copy of the highway act to show to people who told me I couldn’t make a left turn out of an intersection (or couldn’t ride on the road). This was in Toronto, by the way.
In retropect, I’m sure I pissed some people off by being pretty uppity. I did, and still do, think that both sides need to understand what the rules of the road actually are, as opposed to what they think they might be.
I think that it should be illegal to operate a bicycle on a two lane road with a speed limit greater than 40 mph unless there is either a dedicated bike lane or a paved shoulder/ breakdown lane.
The problem is that, in rural areas, those don’t exist and probably never will. Cyclists are (or should be) perfectly safe to ride a meter or so from the road edge on any road in single-file. You, as the driver, should always have enough room this way as your best-practice is to hug the median, not the shoulder. You should also be prepared for anything coming round the corner (animal, a passing car, debris).
The problem is that they (cyclists) so often don’t ride safely. Road-bike riders have a nasty habit of trying to live their own personal Tour de France (or, as far as I can tell, road biking in peloton is this decade’s social networking for alpha-dogs who’re too young for golf and too hip for raquetball) and ride in a cluster in the middle of the road.
Again, the rules go both ways.
Respect all road users, or is that just too hard???
@ Dukeboy01
…roads … with no shoulders, blind curves, and hills that hide traffic until you crest them … just out of sight as you approach a curve at speeds up to 55 mph…
So you’re effectively saying anything could surprise you and you wouldn’t be prepared? What difference a cyclist or an obstruction or a breakdown or an animal or….
You got it right there banger…don’t get me started on how bad the Swiss drivers are and my close calls so far!!!! Added to that, you should try zipping around at 40kmh on an ebike, (which according to wolfram alpha is 25mph or unbelievably MP like it is also the speed of an unladen European swallow. Seriously!! haha)
Mine looks just like a normal bike and so when I am head on to someone they do not get an impression of my speed and presume they have an age as per a normal bike to pull out. Errr no. I have arrived already!! I have a strobe light on the front now that makes SO much difference as people look twice and it and it also initially catches their eye better as well. Having driven a car for 20 years and a bike for 30, I am ultra aware(touch wood)of what is going on around me when I am charging around in town and really try to plan for the worst decisions I can guess they will make…. But an opening door is at the end of the day an opening door….
Still, it keeps you awake! Tally Ho !!
@Dukeboy01
Your comment indicates you to be astonishingly self-absorbed. Bicyclists do indeed need to obey traffic laws whether in town or in rural areas. So do motor vehicle drivers, even including you.
Both could use a strong dose of common sense and civility.
As a motorhead (I own 4 cars) and avid cyclist rider/racer I see both sides. The idea that cyclists are slowing traffic of any real measure or a nusence only confirms that many drivers are of the mindset that they have more rights than they actually do and drive poorly as a result. Bottomline is that you need to be careful, aware and patient, anything less and your the nusence and endangering cyclist, children, animals other motorists, flora and anything else out there. As a cyclists I have the same responsibilities just a different vehicle.
I wonder how these stats differ in areas with dedicate bicycle lanes. Obviously, the physical seperation helps, but I also would think that they would help the mental state. Driver’s recognize that the bicycalist belongs on the road (there’s a picture on the pavement, hard to argue with). It also seems like bicycalists tend to follow the rules of the road more often in that case.
Of course nothing really accounts for base levels of stupidity in either group.
Dukeboy01 : *Lots of insults to bikers here*
I think that it should be illegal to operate a bicycle on a two lane road with a speed limit greater than 40 mph unless there is either a dedicated bike lane or a paved shoulder/ breakdown lane.
Where do you expect road bikers to ride, then? Being in WV, the only roads that have bike lanes are ones through towns which require you to constantly stop and start in order to obey traffic lights and stop signs. The good riding is on the rural 2 lane roads due to lower amounts of traffic and a variety of terrain.
You complain about coming around a country road corner at 55mph and almost hitting someone on a bike. How, pray tell, do you not hit a car that is broken down mostly off the road around that bend? How do you avoid deer standing on the edge of the road around the bend? The only turns that you really cannot see around are usually marked at 25mph. Do you really have to go 55mph around those turns? Maybe you should take your amazing driving skills to the track instead of doing your own little rally stage on the backroads.
BTW, cyclists ride in groups because it improves their ability to be visible to YOU and it helps them maintain a higher speed. There are bad cyclists out there, I agree. You ultimately win, though. You either a) eventually run the cyclist over or b) have enough close calls that the cyclist gives it up. I selected b. After so many times of people not paying attention or attempting to scare me off the road (and after seeing friends get hit), I knew it was a matter of time before it happened to me. You won. I gave it up. I rarely get on the road any more. I do ~20hrs of mt biking for every hr of road biking. That road biking is basically limited to hill climbs in a local neighborhood to train for mt biking.
I’m sure there’s a correlation among bicyclists with wearing helmets and riding carefully. Plus, my recollection, from writing an article on bicycle safety 30 years ago, is that wearing a helmet makes you several times more likely to survive if you ARE in an accident, and it makes perfect sense that 95% of cyclists killed weren’t wearing helmets.
I would have at least had my brains scrambled, and might have been killed had I not been wearing a helmet the morning of sept 6, 1991.
Dukeboy, you need to deal with that anger. It puts you at risk for an early coronary.
Mutual courtesy and less self-righteousness on both sides goes a long way. The world of bicycle couriers may be different, but I reguarly encounter recreational bikers.
I live in a rural area surrounded by state recreation areas, so during nice weekends my local state 2-lanes are crowded with recreational bicyclers from the nearby urban areas enjoying some country air. I’ve learned over the years that it’s best to just slow down behind them and keep a respectful distance back. If it’s only a few of them in a “pack”, they almost always move over into single file to the right and help me pass as soon as it is safe to do so. Courtesy begats courtesy.
If it’s a large pack they will not break into single-file and they really shouldn’t. The resulting single-file line would be too long to pass safely in my opinion. I’d rather they stay in a pack which would be a much shorter entity to pass when the opportunity arises.
I’ve found my tolerance and blood pressure when behind big packs is much improved if I just consider them to be the equivalent to slow-moving pieces of farm equipment. The same people who complain about the bike packs seldom mind being stuck behind farm equipment on the same roads. And really, the few minutes stuck behind some bikes doesn’t materially alter how long it takes me to get anywhere.
My biggest fear when interacting with bikes on the rural roads is getting struck head-on by some impatient dipshit driver who’s unsafely passing bikes going the other way.
Dukeboy01: “I think that it should be illegal to operate a bicycle on a two lane road with a speed limit greater than 40 mph unless there is either a dedicated bike lane or a paved shoulder/ breakdown lane.”
You’re OK with denying them use of what their tax dollars helped to provide? Just because you don’t like to take the precaution of slowing down before a blind curve?
—
HalfMast: “I wonder how these stats differ in areas with dedicate bicycle lanes. Obviously, the physical seperation helps, but I also would think that they would help the mental state.”
Not as much as you might think. What really seems to make a difference is numbers. Lots and lots of cyclists helps raise awareness more than anything else.
—
I’m lucky to have access to some great trails. But they don’t go everywhere and I use regular streets quite a bit. Route planning is really important to survival.
There’s also a few streets I use that are just bad for cycling; high traffic volume, barrier curbs and narrow lane width. Motorists are only too happy to crowd you or otherwise try to claim your turf. There are many places where MN DOTS projects are 100% optimized for cars and trucks. Cyclists and pedestrians are simply SOL.
Then there’s the cyclists who will be pedalling along on the road, ignoring the perfectly good bike path on the other side of the curb. As a motorist, that drives me crazy.
cyclists ride in groups because it improves their ability to be visible to YOU and it helps them maintain a higher speed
Generally that’s true, but it’s illegal for cyclists to ride in anything other than single-file on a public road. The road-bike peloton formation is, in most jurisdictions, against the law unless the road has been cordoned off for use in a bike race. There’s enough space for cars and bikes (in single-file) on just about every North American road.
If you’re riding in a cluster so as to benefit from the slipstream created by guys in front of you, maybe you ought to consider doing it at an oval or dedicated course? Otherwise, you’re a hazard to other road users.
If you want to be visible, wear a construction vest and buy a couple of LED blinkie-lights.
If you want to ride your bike and conduct business meetings with your fellow riders, go to a gym.
I live only a few miles from downtown Chicago and for the most part cyclists and motorists stay out of each others way (from what I have seen atleast), having dedicated bikes lanes seems to make the difference.
That being said, the bike couriers/messengers are the ones you have to watch out for, half the time they don’t even have brakes on their bikes.
Count me in the camp that says there’s an equal mix of stupid drivers as there are bike riders. I see bike riders running stop signs and signals (because they don’t want to have to build up speed again) and riding on the wrong side of the road all the time. I’ve come close a couple of times to having a bicyclist run into the side of my car because I “only” looked to my left when making a right hand turn. Silly me, I didn’t expect someone to be coming from the right, as I wasn’t driving in England. I’ve also come close to being hit several times while riding a bike. There are two typical scenarios, the car that forces me into the curb by moving further to the right and leaving me without any room, and the car that simply turns right in front of me as though I’m not there.
There are idiots on both sides, and an us vs. them attitude isn’t going to change that.
Downtown where I live, there are still horse-drawn carriages that give tourists rides. I see about the same percentage of car drivers that get super-annoyed and dangerous around them as the percentage of car drivers that do the same around bikers (which is, in all honesty, a nearly infinitesimal percentage of car drivers).
Car drivers like to argue that roads are for cars, but the roads in my city were built for the horse-drawn carriages; the cars came later. I think it is just selfish behavior. What is so hard about giving them a little extra room and not cutting them off? It’s an inconsequential event that last all of a few seconds. How some people get so angry about it is astounding. Really, there must be something else that is wrong in their life and this is a trigger for the rage.
I’m an avid cyclist as well as a automotive enthusiast. I’m heartened that reason prevailed in most of the posts here. I almost thought that on a car site that there would be a lot of bike bashing. To the contrary! Seems like a good lot here.
Jason
Next time you see an article on your local paper’s website about a car-bike crash, check out the sound-off/reader’s comment sections, if there is one. I’m always amazed at the sheer amount of venom against bicycles. And Seattle is supposed to be a bike-friendly city. Of course, part of that is the bike activist’s human chains blocking I-5, and the flagrant disregard for traffic laws.
jbyrne:
“I’m heartened that reason prevailed in most of the posts here.”
Me too! Yet another reason TTAC’s comments are just as worthy as its articles, in 99% of cases.
Well-reasoned responses, all. Except you, Dukeboy01. Get out and ride a bike for 30 minutes or so every single day for a month. Not only will you probably improve your physical and cardio conditioning, but after all is said and done, you will probably have eyes wide open to the difficulties bicyclists face. Who knows? Maybe it would even make you think twice next time you were about to take a blind curve at Colin McRae speeds.
If only everyone would respect the rules of the road, stop signs, lights, and use turn signals, there would be far fewer accidents in general. I for one, take the bus everywhere I go in the city so I don’t have to worry about either side.
I’m always amazed at the sheer amount of venom against bicycles.
Toronto is similar and you’re right that it’s amazing.
Part of the problem is that agencies like ARC and TCU are really, really bad at public relations. The problem is that both organizations have trouble with the idea that road usage is (forgive the pun) a two-way street. They don’t do a good job of acknowledging their members’ role in being safe; instead, they come of at best as morally superior and at worst as self-serving and unwilling to be responsible.
The other problem is the more activist cyclists in general. When asked about unsafe cycling behaviours, the response is really a non-response that makes note of how bad drivers are. No effort is made at inclusion. That the cyclists who are bad are spectacularly so doesn’t help
In either case, the default position of cyclists is to assume an us-versus-them posture, which drivers will very quickly adopt. This culture gets perpetuated, and it’s at it’s worst when tempers are flared and adrenalin is flowing (eg, after an accident).
One of the first rules of PR is to get people on your side. Use inclusive language, empathize, be balanced. It’s a very hard thing for activists to do because they’re often wired for confrontation by the nature of their cause. Were ARC to run a public campaign as a result of the Bryant incident tasking cyclists with being calm, nonthreatening and non-confrontational I think it would be a good thing for both cyclists and motorists. That the first action they did take was a street-blocking protest did not sit well.
I’m probably one of those bike riders you complain about. When I was living in NYC I rode my bike a lot. Commuted to work from Brooklyn to Midtown every day for about 6 years. Never wore a helmet, wore all black at times, rarely obeyed any traffic laws, rode in the middle of traffic when it was moving slower than me. Basically like those critical mass guys except I can’t stand them and love to drive as well. Why am I not dead yet? Well I always rode as if everybody was trying to hit me, so there’s that. And yet in all my years of driving, in NYC and all over the country I have never once ever been bothered by something somebody on a bicycle was doing. Of course my attitude has always been that pedestrians and cyclists (motorcycles too) have the right of way and it is my responsibility to watch out for them.
Cyclists deserve to be on the road as much as you and are really not a problem if you bother to pay attention. Maybe I take driving more seriously than guys like Dukeboy01, but I guarantee I drive faster than you and still don’t have a problem with bikes.
Well, isn’t that special? Cyclists who think they own the road and it’s motorists who need to be yielding the them by osmosis.
WRONG!!! I’m a cyclist and a motorist. When I ride my bike I try to stick to less-busy streets, or if possible, dedicated bike trails. If I’m riding on a busy street, though, I keep my head on a swivel and ASSUME that cars can’t see me and WILL try to kill me. This is simple Darwinian self-preservation and the desire to NOT GET INJURED OR KILLED. Hello…!!!
For you self-righteous cyclists out there who think you’re the center of the transportation universe, you need to understand that physics and the “Law of Gross Tonnage” ain’t in your favor when some car and your bike converge on the same space. Pay-the-hell attention and assume that motorists WILL NOT automatically see you and be able to yield to you or avoid hitting you.
In other words, get ur head out of ur arse and take responsibility for YOURSELF!
In San Diego, there appears to be some loosely organized “critical mass” type event that happens on Friday evening. How this hasn’t resulted in mass bloodshed, I have no idea.
The first time I encountered it was around 9PM, well after it was completely dark. I’m coming off a freeway exit that crests a hill as it feeds on to the surface street, and the street itself is usually pretty fast, as most people don’t slow down from freeway speeds right away.
Luckily, I’m not one of those people. As I crest the hill, there is a huge stream of cycles feeding directly onto what is basically a freeway exit ramp, and filling the whole street – in the dark. There is no reason for anyone to ever expect that section of road to be filled completely with non-reflective, slow moving cyclists in total darkness. I’m amazed none of them were killed.
The next encounter was even worse, as the group just started to materialize on 30th street coming from the opposite direction. This wouldn’t be so bad if they weren’t taking up BOTH lanes completely. They were seriously riding directly into oncoming traffic lanes, in the dark, as a huge group.
My driving behavior hasn’t changed. I still give cyclists plenty of room, and I make sure to do everything possible NOT to menace or intimidate anyone. However, I now have zero respect for our local cyclists as a group. If they value whatever point they’re trying to make more than a reasonable regard for their own safety, then I have no sympathy whatsoever. These people seem to be going out of their way to create situations where cars are going to hit them.
These are the people ruining it for the rest of you.
For the record, every time I see a cyclist come to a stop at an intersection, it warms my heart.
psarhjinian – it’s perfectly legal to ride 2 abreast, just not on busy roads. In my bike club we usually ride in single line on busy roads and 2 on the country roads.
Ohio’s law is pretty clear on that:
Sec. 4511.55. (A) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles and exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(B) Persons riding bicycles or motorcycles upon a roadway shall ride not more than two abreast in a single lane, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles or motorcycles.
(C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
Rolling through the stop sign is legal in few states and proven to be just as safe – called “Idaho rolling stop”
But yeah, I had few close calls while driving from cyclist riding on the wrong side, or riding right across the road, not wearing helmets. There’s need to be a mutual respect and realization that we all use and share the road. Waiting few second to pass a cyclist is not going to kill anyone ..
I used to ride from my urban home a few miles to get to some rural roads. I always wore a helmet and that spandex that somebody grumbled about – because it was loud and visible. The girl who hit me by coming through a stop sign was probably going 20mph or so, based on simple physics. No traffic control device for my direction, BTW. I landed 20 feet or so from where she hit me. What saved me was no cars in either lane that I flew through. That and her bumper hit my 7076T6 Campy crank instead of my leg. Said crank was bent about 1 inch. I was lucky, sort of, but the balloon payment on hip joint deterioration has now come due.
When I did get back on a bike, did I have some anger issues? You bet. I still have no tolerance for sloppy driving or a sense of entitlement by either motorists or cyclists.
Quentin: How do you avoid deer standing on the edge of the road around the bend?
The deer’s survivors won’t sue you for damages, and you won’t be charged with a serious offense for killing a deer.
KixStart: You’re OK with denying them use of what their tax dollars helped to provide?
Whether cyclists’ tax dollars helped build the road depends on the state, and how this particular state pays for its portion of road and bridge construction.
In Pennsylvania, the state portion is paid for with the tax on motor fuels, along with driver’s license fees (licenses are renewed every four years) and annual vehicle registration fees. Cyclists in Pennsylvania therefore aren’t paying for much of anything when they ride a bike. Don’t know about Minnesota or Kentucky.
At the federal level, motor fuel taxes have been diverted from road and bridge construction to “non-road” projects such as bike paths for at least the last 15 years.
@ psarhjinian –
I think you’re spot on with your observations. Bikers do NOT make it easier for motorists to live with them.
I think the other side of the coin that nobody’s talking about is that many motorists (me included) are deadly afraid of hurting some guy on a bike. My commuting route is a road with a 50 mph speed limit, and a bike lane. There’s no problem with visibility, and I’ve never seen bikers ride in anything other than a respectful manner. But I’ll be but damned if I’m not afraid that one of these guys will screw up, or hit a rock, or somehow lose control right as I’m passing him. If I hit a biker doing 50, he’s dead meat. That scares me to death every time I see one of these guys.
It’s like Yoda said…fear leads to anger. And whenever some biker decides to go outlaw and disregard traffic laws, it just scares people more.
I commute by car, by bicycle, by motorcycle, and sometimes even by bus.
Oh, how I wish I could pick a side and muster up some righteous indignation.
But, alas, the situation with the bicycle-rider and the politician in Canada is a tragedy, nothing more, nothing less.
Yet another cyclist and driver here.
As a cyclist it bothers me when other cyclists take liberties with the rules of the road. Unclipping at a stop sign and putting a foot down is not difficult. Track stands, though “hipster cool”, give the (often correct) impression to nearby drivers that you are not in control of your bike and cause them angst. Riding the wrong way down a street simply makes a mockery of the “bikes are traffic” argument.
Drivers need to control their rage. I’ve had a semi truck barrel straight at me, *in my lane* in the middle of the night in Canada. I’ve had logging trucks give me about a foot of space, when there was no traffic oncoming, and no reason they couldn’t give me the space to which I’m legally entitled. I’ve had teenagers hit me in the back of the head with a waterbottle from a car driving 60mph.
There’s no doubt that the offenses by both cyclists and drivers are numerous. The main difference IMO is that offenses by cyclists *usually* don’t put anybody at risk of death. When drivers go crazy, the cyclist is in imminent danger.
The arguments regarding payment for use of the road have been thoroughly debunked. There are no states in which road taxes are paid for exclusively by fuel taxes and licensing fees.
There are, however, myriad externalities caused by car use that are not paid for by drivers. Bike use has few such externalities.
srh: The arguments regarding payment for use of the road have been thoroughly debunked.
Actually, no, it hasn’t. Such studies could charitably be described as “biased” at best and junk science at worst.
srh: There are, however, myriad externalities caused by car use that are not paid for by drivers. Bike use has few such externalities.
Such studies ignore the myriad benefits of automobile use, too.
The same people who complain about the bike packs seldom mind being stuck behind farm equipment on the same roads.
That’s because they can’t do much about something often as big as a house! We have both riders and equipment in abundance in our area, and I’ll add in motorcycle riders too, at least they move along at a good clip. A little courtesy to all of them goes a long way.
Awesome. Your hate gives me strength.
Everyone seems to want the right to do something (in this case, the “right” to ride a bike in a place where it is ridiculously dangerous to do so) without any attendant responsibilities or consequences.
I can only speak for the area in which I live, but we are covered up with bike trails and bike lanes where cyclists can get out pedal around to their hearts content without endangering themselves. Almost every repaving or road widening project that I can think of in the last few years has included the addition of a bike lane. We’re big into the “rails to trails” thing and have dumped millions of dollars into creating even more dedicated bike paths.
Yet it will never be enough. Bicyclists are still going to insist on riding in ways and places where they create a hazard. Suggest that maybe we should prohibit the use of bicycles on roads where it is inherently dangerous for them to be and the bike community goes ape.
Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t make it any less stupid to do so. The comparisons to other road hazards such as animals and farm equipment are apples and oranges. We accept the risk of slow moving tractors and other mechanical devices in the roadway because the people who are operating them in that manner are trying to accomplish a task. They aren’t out there for “fun” and they are still capable of greater speeds than your average cyclist.
As for animals, they aren’t expected to exercise any responsibilities and if one of them gets creamed after darting into the road it’s not considered a tragedy by any stretch of the imagination.
I wouldn’t prohibit the use of bicycles on city streets, in residential neighborhoods, on roadways where the speed limit is greater than 40 mph but there is a dedicated bike lane or paved shoulder, or on rural roads with no bike lanes/ shoulders but where the speed limit is less than 40. Basically I say that we should extend the ban on bicycles using limited access roadways, which we already do, to roadways in which the legal speed of vehicular traffic makes the riding of a bicycle dangerous due to the disparity in the bike’s speed compared to the average speed of the cars using the road and where there is no “escape” path for either the car or the cyclist due to the lack of a shoulder.
I said nothing about the speed of the motorist contributing to this problem, but to be clear and since so many seem to think that I want cars to be flying along on rural roads, I think that the presence of a slow moving bike in the path of a car doing the legal speed limit is more than enough of a hazard to warrant a ban on bikes. Sure, if the driver is speeding it makes it worse. But coming around a curve at a legal 50 mph to find yourself closing in on a gaggle of bicyclists riding in a V formation in your lane is bad enough. If I run out of time, space, and good ideas in that situation, the cyclist is the one who suffers.
You will not convince me that I am holding an unreasonable position, especially given all of the safe(r) places that people could still ride. Hell, over time, it might result in even more bike paths and dedicated bike lanes as those rural roads are repaved. If the demand is there, then we’ll add a bike lane the next time we have to replace the asphalt.
One really hasn’t ridden a bike until one has pedaled in Iowa’s yearly “RAGBRAI”.
The same people who complain about the bike packs seldom mind being stuck behind farm equipment on the same roads.
That’s because a tractor can’t take any less road space than it already is, while four or five cyclists can damn well ride single-file.
Glad everyone likes my contribution to ttac! I try to send a story every once in a while that I think you guys will find interesting.
A couple of my own thoughts:
* I find it pretty funny that some car drivers get angry because bicyclists slow them up. I feel the same way when I’m on my (100% stock) 10 second 1/4 mile motorcycle when I have to wait for cars (who have v6/v68 250+ hp) who refuse to merge at > 40mph. I still don’t tailgate, honk, or anything else as that can just incite road rage (people don’t typically hear motorcycles anyhow).
* I also find it funny that alot of people who ride bicycles tell me motorcycles are “too dangerous”. I’d MUCH rater take my chances on something that can keep up with traffic and be able to wear 22 pounds of body armor (that is what my overclothes weigh — I measured them)
comfortably/cool than ride something that hits 15mph max, can’t keep up with traffic, and doesn’t have the safety accessories available to motorcyclists.
* I think a lot of bicyclists could SERIOUSLY use an MSF-equivalent class. I have been down TWICE on my motorcycle (single vehicle accidents) and at BOTH times less than 20mph. I learned one thing — When you go down at 20mph (or just under) you slide farther than you think!
Due to NEVER riding without an assortment of armored clothes (helmet, gloves, jacket, boots, and leather pants ~ 70% of the time), I have never had more than a bruise in both “crash” incidents.
I find it amazing that bicyclists can ride (at the top end) up to 25mph (or more if downhill) and are in shorts & a t-shirt listening to their ipod, usually w/ no helmet (or perhaps a tiny/top only, non-full-face helmet)
* I am usually SCARED to death of hurting a bicyclist, no matter if I’m on a car or motorcycle. No matter how rude, inconsiderate or law breaking they are, I couldn’t live with myself if I killed one when it was avoidable.
Now if it comes down to me hitting a bicyclist or a car, I’d easily choose crashing into the bicyclist.
* Re: Chicago dude. For those of you who read his post about the horses & carriages downtown — they have license plates just like cars. I still haven’t figure out why bicyclists don’t! I’d imagine they have insurance/registration as well but I’m not entirely sure.
I have never seen a bicycle rider come to a full stop at a rural intersection.
@geeber:
I’d encourage you to read
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2003/04transportation_wachs/wachstransportation.pdf
It’s unlikely that the Brookings Institute would be considered “pro-bike” or “anti-car” by anybody.
I won’t comment on the relative attitudes of bikers vs. drivers as there are bad apples on both sides of that equation.
I will, however, comment on something that has been alluded to but not directly discussed. That is the relative speed difference between cars and cyclists.
As has been discussed here many times before, the speed differential between 2 vehicles on a road often creates a greater hazard than “speeding” in general. If you apply this logic to the bike vs. car debate, it becomes clear that the bikes pose quite a hazard to vehicles, especially on roads with higher speed limits (or high prevailing traffic speed).
Given this obvious logic, IMO, cyclists should be limited to certain roads with speed limits more appropriate to their capability. Personally, I think 40mph and under speed limit roads are the most appropriate, but 35 is better (since that probably covers the majority of urban roads). Obviously, multi-lane roads are safer due to the ability to change lanes so it may make sense to relax that standard for those roads.
I will also say this, in regards to traffic laws. In Indiana, if you have more than 3 vehicles bunched up behind you, you are supposed to pull off and let them go by if they cannot otherwise pass you in a safe manner. This applies to cyclists as well. You should be pulling over to let the cars by when you create a large traffic jam and the cars cannot otherwise pass. If more people obeyed this law (cars and bicycles) tempers would be greatly reduced.
In regards to farm equipment, I have a really big problem with farmers who like to drive their combines on state highways with 55mph speed limits. I think this creates an unnecessary hazard to drivers. It is also completely unnecessary as (at least in Indiana) county roads are laid in grid-like fashion, so there is almost always a county road alternate route. As traffic is undoubtedly lighter, this is obviously the safer route.
Dukeboy is right, despite the tone. It’s simply not smart to intentionally combine traffic with substantial speed variances, particularly when the slower vehicle has zero crush space, can be difficult to spot and is often controlled by a sanctimonious jerk with a chip on his shoulder about the rules of the road and the faster traffic.
Just as we have minimum speed limits and don’t allow bikes and pedestrians on interstates, so we should apply the same common sense provisions to other roadways where bikes and cars can’t mix well, and that would include narrow roads with high traffic speeds.
It sounds nice to talk about sharing the road, but there are times when it isn’t really possible. When I’m a pedestrian, it wouldn’t even occur to me to try to share the fast lane with a semi traveling 50 mph. As crazy as it may seem to some, there are times when you simply need to break out your map and find a different route.
This shouldn’t come as too big a surprise: motorists cause roughly 75 percent of motorcycle crashes too.
I find that to be a suspicious figure, given that half of motorcycle fatalities were the result of one-vehicle accidents, and that riders killed in accidents were more likely to be speeding, to be drunk and/or not have a valid license than car drivers.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic%20Injury%20Control/Articles/Associated%20Files/810990.pdf
Dukeboy: You’re traveling so fast that you don’t have time to stop for an obstacle after it becomes visible, bike or otherwise, but everyone else is being the douchebag, eh? Enlightening.
I think we can all agree there are plenty of idiot operators of all manner of vehicles. As an avid motorcyclist, I can tell you that nearly every ride is punctuated by some driver who makes a move that demonstrates they are not paying attention to what they are doing. I take it as my personal responsibility to make sure I’m safe out there, understanding the risk that there may be an occasion in the future where I’ll be unable to avoid catastrophe. It doesn’t make it right, but it is what it is. You can’t legislate common sense.
Dukeboy01:
“I can only speak for the area in which I live, but we are covered up with bike trails and bike lanes where cyclists can get out pedal around to their hearts content without endangering themselves.”
Your handle suggests that you live near Durham, NC.
If that is true, your statement above is a fabrication.
I practically live in my car, but given the types of behaviors other motorists I’ve witnessed, I’m going to have to side with the bicyclists on this issue. Everyone has a right to get to their destination in one piece.
For pete’s sake, last night I was walking my dog across my street (speed limit 25) IN FRONT OF MY DRIVEWAY, when a motorist came careening around the curve, holding ~50+ mph, laid down his horn, and gave me the one-fingered salute out the window after he regained control of his auto.
Curiously, the young gentleman did not want to get out the car to discuss our situation when my gesticulations beckoned him.
Applying your logic, Dukeboy, pedestrians should not be allowed to use my neighborhood street, as we cannot keep pace with the automobile traffic. After all, my dog and I were just crossing my street out of ‘fun’ and not ‘necessity.’ Apples and oranges, no?
“You will not convince me that I am holding an unreasonable position”
You must be a Duke grad.
srh: It’s unlikely that the Brookings Institute would be considered “pro-bike” or “anti-car” by anybody.
The report admits in the beginning that motor fuel taxes were used for non-road projects (in this case, mass transit). On Section III, page 4, the report states this:
As public policy gradually came to favor a “balanced” transportation system, highway user fees also contributed increasingly to the construction and operation of public transit systems.
It could also add that those fees and taxes have been diverted to bike paths and bike lanes, too.
Now, I have no problem with this. Mass transit systems are needed in urban areas, and bikers should be provided with a safe option, too. (I enjoy riding a bike, too, although not to work.)
But let’s stop the fiction that car drivers are getting some sort of unfair subsidy.
Bike riders benefit, for example, from paved roads, which cost a lot of money to build and maintain. Those paved roads would not be possible without the taxes paid by drivers.
Do you think that most people want to ride a bike on a dirt road (and even a dirt road has to be graded and maintained), especially to work?
What about when it rains, and the dirt road remains a muddy mess after the rain has ceased? Do you think bike riders will like riding through the mud? Do you think that will encourage bicycle use, even for recreational purposes?
I would think that most if not all cyclists (in more rural areas) also have a car or motor vehicle of sorts that’s registered and taxes are paid for. So I’m pretty sure that the cyclist ARE paying their share of the road use tax.
Dukeboy is not right despite the tone. To use the logic of incompatibility of mixed speeds then means everyone other than cars and trucks should be off roads and streets. To be “safe”.
A road is a way for any purpose. Even pedestrians on roads have a right to be there. How’s that for speed differential? Ma and Pa going to the neighbours at two and a half miles per hour when the General Lee, all gassed up for a night on the rural routes, comes over their side of the hill at 110. Or maybe Ma and Pa should cower in their home because the “cars” are out.
The only road that is, like an airport runway, i.e. a specialised place for specialised vehicles, is the freeway. Everything else, no matter how well paved is for everyone. If it seems unsafe then that is because the ones who drive on it are using it in an unsafe manner. The speed limit is just that, a maximum to be attained if nothing else is a factor compromising safety. If every cyclist in town decided to use that road at that time then the safe speed would be about 15 mph whatever the signs say.
Getting from A to B is supposed to be, in a civilised country, a co-operative venture, not a fuck you kinda sport. The prime virtue in co-operation is patience.
If you see moving from A to B as some sort of contest of wills then the bike rider in your way is imposing his will on you and your will feel humiliated and so resentful. Then I would guess that the cyclist is acting in an unsafe manner since being in front of you is indeed a dangerous place to be.
Just as we have minimum speed limits and don’t allow bikes and pedestrians on interstates, so we should apply the same common sense provisions to other roadways where bikes and cars can’t mix well, and that would include narrow roads with high traffic speeds.
Those roads exist, but they’re not as common as Dukeboy is alluding to. All but the most compromised roads are wide enough for a car to allow a cyclist a reasonable safety margin, and speed limits are such that the wake of the vehicle should not be a safety issue. Those roads that are are so narrow are usually signed at a speed that a cyclist can achieve without blocking traffic.
On any given rural road, a cyclist riding safely (three feet from the edge) and a car driving safely (at a rational speed, hugging the median edge) can coexist. I don’t think we need a law banning one or the other when obeying existing laws would be sufficient.
The problem is that, on one hand, you have motorists who aren’t paying attention and/or are outright sociopathic, and cyclists who seem to have an over-exaggerated sense of entitlement and an undeveloped sense of personal safety. Banning them from roads that are otherwise safe will just result in them either breaking that law, or replaying the drama in a different place. Short of building bike paths well away from the road, I can’t see how we would avoid that.
It sounds nice to talk about sharing the road, but there are times when it isn’t really possible.
And generally that’s already done. Restricting matters further won’t help because the problem is a social one, not one of traffic engineering.
Do you think bike riders will like riding through the mud?
Oh, hell yeah!
After revealing the startling fact that 52,000 bicyclists have been killed in U.S. traffic over the last 80 years,
So what. About 40,000 motorists die in the US every year.
I just wanted to point out that the Freakonomics blog wasn’t adding fuel to the fire, they posted about the stats on bicycle deaths a few days before the cyclist in Toronto got killed.
And as someone who reads both blogs daily, I’d be careful about taking cheap shots like that, they have a pretty informed and intelligent group of authors and commentators (much like this site).
Everyone knows when someone commits a traffic violation in a motor vehicle, but most people in the U.S. seem confused about rules governing bicyclists. For instance, I’ve been harassed for riding my road bike on the road (with helmet, hand signals and all). In Mississippi, cyclists are not supposed to ride their bicycles on sidewalks because sidewalks are reserved for pedestrians, yet most motorists and cyclists don’t seem to know this.
Recent studies in traffic calming show that separating pedestrians, automobiles, and bicycles actually makes interactions worse. People pay more attention when clear distinctions between roadways and sidewalks are removed.
Drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians need to remain aware of their surroundings and learn traffic rules and etiquette. Sometimes I think it is too easy to get a drivers license in the U.S.
I ride 150 miles a week. Like I’ve said before, people will say and do things behind the wheel of a car they would never do to your face. Lots of road rage out there. I had some guy in a Saab convetable tell me to “Get the fuck off the road” with his two young children in the car. If he caught the next light they would have seen daddy get doused with gatoraid, accidentally of course. Must be something about the Luxury Saab convertible that brings Mr Hyde out.
I know plenty of people who were involved with accidents between cars and bicycles. No one I knew ever broke a law in the process, each time it was the motorists fault. But the cop on the scene hears how “he came out of nowhere riding like a maniac” or something to that effect. I lost a friend to a drunk driver, another was the victim of an inexperienced truck driver who had no idea how to make a turn without running up on the curb and crushing a guy waiting for the light to change. If he ran the light he’d be alive today.
As motorists it’s not a fair match up and since your in the 3000 lb car try and go the extra inch to avoid accidents if at all possible. And put down the cell phone, I lost count of how many cell heads I saw the other day.
The first time I encountered it was around 9PM, well after it was completely dark. I’m coming off a freeway exit that crests a hill as it feeds on to the surface street, and the street itself is usually pretty fast, as most people don’t slow down from freeway speeds right away.
This sounds like the Front Street exit off of I-5. You are supposed to be doing 25 mph right as you crest that hill. This is not a lecture as I am one of those people that are usually doing 40 by that time and slowing down to turn right onto Cedar.
I own:
* 2 Cars
* 1 Motorcycle
* 1 Mountain Bike
* 2 Road Bikes
I’ve seen it from all sides. My conclusions: The average road going American is a JERK, irrespective of what type of vehicle he happens to be operating.
I have a three-pronged solution for fixing this problem.
1. Everybody who applies for a driver license has to have been riding a bicycle for at least two years.
2. Bad drivers should have their licenses removed and should be made to go back to riding a bike.
3. Bad bike riders should be made to walk.
The attention span thing goes both ways, however. I once saw a bike rider tooling along…chatting on the cell phone. Grrrrr!
Pch101
It sounds nice to talk about sharing the road, but there are times when it isn’t really possible. When I’m a pedestrian, it wouldn’t even occur to me to try to share the fast lane with a semi traveling 50 mph. As crazy as it may seem to some, there are times when you simply need to break out your map and find a different route.
Well, yeah, very occasionally. I wouldn’t cycle on Cambridge’s Memorial drive. Nonetheless, I did ride from Seattle to Boston 34 years ago, mostly on two lane highways. In North Dakota, what seemed like all the semis in the world passed me, without incident. It did help my sanity that I was wearing a rear view mirror, so that I could see exactly where they were.
“I’ve seen it from all sides. My conclusions: The average road going American is a JERK, irrespective of what type of vehicle he happens to be operating.”
Sadly enough you’re right man. As an avid car enthusiast, and road cyclist/ex-racer, I’m no longer appalled at the sad, low levels to which the American driver has fallen to. The worst thing is these losers breed, and pass their filthy hate ridden DNA to kids.
I’ve noticed as more of the suburban dwellers move to the country or near country they bring their bad driving habits with them. First they buy a huge SUV because it snows and the streets might not get plowed. While piloting the 3 ton monster they come across a cyclist going 20 mph in a 35 that they were doing 60 in. Last minute panic stop when they realize they can’t just zoom around at full speed. On comes the horn and the inevitable GTF OTW from the driver. The pass comes with wide open throttle and a cutoff. I watched a Blazer with two teenage boys pass us, lose it on a curve at high speed and smack a tree. One of them pissed his pants while the other phoned mommy to cry.
Honestly I question riding any more but I love it so and it keeps the weight off. I have a will and health insurance and wear a good helmet.
Had a lady narrowly avoid a head on trying to pass us up hill on a curve. Both cars locked up and were inches from each other. It’s the cyclist fault of course, they were both yelling at us to
you guessed it Get The kcuF Off The Road.
Who made them in charge of the roads anyway? With driving like that they are the ones who should stay home.
I always find it amusing that the exact same clowns who can’t manage to make a safe pass around something as short and slow moving as a bicycle, instead expecting slower moving bikers to cede the road; tend to be the exact same yahoos least likely to cede the lane when said bikers gets on a motorbike or in a car, and comes up behind them at some reasonable clip. In their compromised little brain, I guess whatever speed they happen to be travelling at this exact moment, must be the one true speed or something. Anyone going either faster or slower, truly must be weird, and should be banned.
In most cities, during rush hour, cars go slower than bikes. So, as a result, bikes pass cars. No need to yell “get off the road” to the poor saps stuck in traffic. Similarly, on some roads some of the time, cars go faster than bikes. So, the competent ones pass. Big deal. It’s not that complicated.
I mean, of all reasons I have been held up in traffic in my life, being stuck behind bicycles has got to be about the least consequential. Minivans, ape tractors, numbskulls parked for half an hour with their blinker on because they think someone just might be pulling out of a parking spot nearby, stereotypical Volvo moms, and countless other slow moving half competents wallowing around, must have kept me tied up for at least 50 times more of my life that bicyclists ever will. Even here in “bike culture” SF, with the lone exception being Critical Mass, where the bikers literally “go out of their way to be in the way” (tm?).
And bikes should not ride like they were cars. They should specifically not come to a complete stop at intersections and stand there like road cones fiddling with their pedals. What they should do, law be damned, and at least some of them in SF has figured this out, is to time their speed and arrival so that they can ride alongside an accelerating car through the intersection, and then slip in behind it just as the road constricts. That way, they add nothing to traffic. There is not one reason in the world why vehicles as narrow as bicycles should not parallelize passage through a bottleneck like an intersection. Those not competent enough to do so should, for their own safety and everyone else’s comfort, practice in a parking lot. It can’t be that hard. Riding up to a stop sign, one after the other, each coming to a complete stop and doing their pedal thing as slow as possible, may be cool for a protest like Critical Mass, but for minimizing one’s effect on other trafficants, it is simply silly. Grow up. My suggestion would be for groups of riders to pass 6 at a time, two lines of three abreast, if there are so many that simply riding alongside cars as outlined above is not possible.
Instead of riding around pretending to be cars, bikes should try to ride where cars aren’t, and if that isn’t possible, focus on being visible. I bet 95% of bike / car accidents are not due to drivers intentionally hitting bikes, but rather to not seeing them. I know motorcyclists have been hit by riding close behind trucks and other tall vehicles, only to have cars turn left into them at intersections, as their driver thought there was an “opening” after the truck. So, move left to be visible, buy the most tricked out lighting rig you can afford (Can’t imagine anyone getting fined for excessive high beam use on a bicycle, and I’ve seen several riders who ride with actual strobes on their bikes, which would be completely illegal on a car or motorbike), and be as visible as possible. Also, bikes should stay far enough out in the lane to force passing cars to breach the yellow to pass, unless the lane is wide enough to allow plenty of simultaneous space. It never ceases to amaze me how some drivers are so paranoid of touching the yellow that they’d rather squeeze themselves within an inch of a bicycle if they can. Anyone who drives like that, is obviously so dangerously incompetent that the last thing you, as a biker, would want, is to be close to him / her. Instead, force him to either cross the yellow and make a decisive pass, or stay back. Then, to be polite, when you hear the two cog downshift and revup, momentarily, if safe, give a bit of extra space by moving right.
The most dangerous thing for a bicyclist to do is go through an intersection with a green light.
What’s that you say?
It’s true. More cyclists are killed by motorists turning right at a light than any other traffic situation. It’s safer for me to blow a red light when there’s no traffic than to wait for a green and risk getting hit.
I’ve been hit three times by cars. Two of the collisions were by drivers (elderly in both cases) either not seeing or ignoring me and turning right, crossing my path. The last time, my hand and thigh made some noticeable dents on the C pillar and rear quarter panel of the geezer’s Buick.
As for Dukeboy’s ridiculous suggestion that my rights to freely travel be restricted because cars might be traveling more than 20 mph faster than me, I generally avoid high traffic roads, but if the only way I can get there is ride on the edge of a 45mph or 50mph road, I’ll do it, but carefully. In rural areas it’s almost impossible to travel on a bike without riding on roads with a 50 or 55 mph speed limit.
I live in the Detroit area and there are almost no bike lanes.
My right to freely travel in this country shouldn’t be compromised by dolts who can’t be bothered to share the road with other vehicles that are there legally.
I wonder if guys like Dukeboy give the metaphoric finger to Amish buggies as well. Unlike bikes, the Amish ride right in the middle of the road.
Oh and about spandex. Do you criticize baseball players who wear batting gloves? Track runners who wear running shoes? Bicycle clothes are not for fashion but rather they’re a necessary part of serious riding. Puttering around your neighborhood at 10mph is one thing, but try to put some speed on for any length of time and without bike shorts you’ll end up chafing yourself in places that normally don’t get chafed. Saddle sores on your ass are uncomfortable. Saddle sores on your private parts are downright painful.
Jerseys are often made of high tech fabrics that wick moisture and help cool you.
As for the wild colors, they have a purpose too, so inattentive drivers like Dukeboy will see you.
Bike clothes are technical clothing, specific for the sport. I’m fat and I know they make me look like a stuffed sausage. So what?
Besides the “get off my road” contingent of drivers, the only folks who have a problem with lycra bike clothes are the Critical Masshole poseurs who think bikies with proper gear and nice bikes are elitists. Strange bedfellows indeed.
I’ve seen some asshole bikies, but I’ve never been called a nigger by a bikie, and that’s been screamed at me by two different motorists. I’ve never started anything aggressive with a motorist while on my bike, but I’ve had a semi truck driver run me off the road and a guy in a beat up Toyota pickup deliberately tried to hit me.
There’s two kind of honking motorists. One kind is a polite beep that’s their way of letting you know they are there. It’s lame and annoying, but they mean well. The other kind is much more aggressive.
The Toyota driving piece of waste honked and screamed at me to get off the road as he passed. I was on an exurban road, right at the edge of the road, and not hindering traffic at all. After he passed me and turned into a subdivision, I gave him an Italian salute as I rode by. Maybe I even gave him a double. Out of the corner of my eye, I noticed he was pulling back out of the sub. It was a hot day, and I had just refilled my water bottles, so when he pulled up next to me in his beater Tacoma or HiLux with the passenger window rolled down and started to scream at me, I gave him a good squirt.
That’s when he deliberately tried to hit me. Came close enough that I had to push off with my hand from his fender and ride on the gravel shoulder. Fortunately there was a red light and he was more concerned with getting a ticket than with hitting a cyclist, so he stopped. I blew the red and continued about as fast as I could spin.
On the adrenalin scale, I’d say that in terms of encouraging speed, crazy motorists are between chasing dogs and charging bulls (true story and it had real longhorns).
It did help my sanity that I was wearing a rear view mirror, so that I could see exactly where they were.
True story.
Q. What’s that?
A. A rear view mirror.
Q. What does it do?
Ever since I lost the mount to my helmet mirror I feel naked when I ride.
IMHO there is no excuse for bicyclists running reds because it is “safer”. IMHO it does bring road rage to motorists when they see bicyclists “above the law” so running that red, even if it appears safe, is probably more dangerous for you.
One of my 2 accidents on a motorcycle was at night when I was in a two lane urban road, one lane each direction. Next to the lane were emptying meter spots. I was in the left part of my lane, closest to th center divider so that when people came out of alleys, side streets, etc they could see me easier due to the visibility angle. In illinois (my state) it is 100% legal to ride in any of the three lane positions. I signaled a right turn (while in the left side of my lane) and as I turned, the car behind me sped up & cut to my inside (through the now-empty parking spots — it was 11:45 at night).
I “stoppied” the bike about 1′ from his door, the rear came up & I went down. The guy didn’t even stop! (Most likely no insurance….car was a beater and the guy was headed toward a poor area).
I also think it’s stupid to wear spandex when biking. How well does it work when you are sliding across asphalt? I can tell you I’d put my leather pants, even at 20mph up against your spandex for leg protection.
Also: Most dangerous for a motorcyclist is also a green light — people tend to turn left in front of them. I’d thinking taking a right, NOT to the inside of a car, would a lot safer on a bicycle than trying to avoid a turn-left collision on a motorcycle.
With that said, I never honk at bicyclists on bike or car — I think it’s rude.
Stuki> The laws (I think in most areas) say the exact opposite of what you believe. All bikes SHOULD follow traffic signals. Doing whatever you want leads to accidents. If you don’t like the laws, petition to have them changed. In the meanwhile, running reds/stopsigns simply pisses off motorists who think that you think you are above the law. On top of that you said they should ride alongside cars through an intersection. Most cars I see don’t run reds — what do you mean exactly?
I also think it’s stupid to wear spandex when biking. How well does it work when you are sliding across asphalt? I can tell you I’d put my leather pants, even at 20mph up against your spandex for leg protection.
Obviously thin material doesn’t protect against asphalt. It’s not supposed to. If you had to push your motorcycle along at 10 miles per hour you’d rather not be wearing all your gear. Believe it or not you can actually get pretty warm riding a bike, it’s a bit physical.
Cycling attire is a lot lighter and cooler.
Going up a 6% grade for 2 miles on a hot day I’d put the “spandex” up against your Joe Rocket gear gear anytime.
If that sounds like too much work then you’re not a cyclist.
Going up a 6% grade for 2 miles on a hot day I’d put the “spandex” up against your Joe Rocket gear gear anytime.
If that sounds like too much work then you’re not a cyclist.
Which makes me think of the Tour de France. IMHO, hands down the most amazing physical sporting event yet devised. Quite incomprehensible and tiring even thinking about it.
I’d much rather be “hot” (I have sat on a bike w/ 200 deg engine right below me) and have skin in an accident than “cool” and be skinless in an accident.
Besides, I see cyclists here riding on roads with NO grade (chicago is pretty flat) still using (non-protective) spandex.
Even if people just wore jeans, it would protect better than spandex!
Robstar – I don’t think you realize how much of an exercise biking is. You will basically black out if you not breathing/cooling well.
Besides I had few crashes on my road bike and still have all of my skin. Just couple weeks ago friend of mine skidded in the rain and slid across the road, ground the pedals and the handle bars, but except few (albeit nasty looking scratches he was fine) Also that happened at well above 20mph. This is the risk you take, and short of wearing a full body armour, you protect yourself too much. Just need to be careful and understand the risks.
Bet when you crash into the parked car/pole/tree doing only 70mph none of that protective will save your LIVE, unless you really lucky.
The key word is “sat”on a bike. So have I. And when the light goes green a breeze awaits.
One trick is to wear a t shirt under a cycling jersey. It allows the jersey to move in a crash and actually reduces road rash. Worked for me on a few occasions.
But this article is about the battles between cars and bicycles, not apparel.
Most states have laws giving bikes a lot of leeway and in some cases more rights to travel than cars. You don’t want to find out the hard way you were in the wrong after an accident.
@CuoreSprtv> I think if you ride until you black out, you have other problems. There is no reason you can’t take a rest or wear protection with adequate ventillation.
Just because YOU’VE crashed @ 20mph and not had skin come off doesn’t mean it is not a quite distinct possibility. Seeing people ride “carefree” through traffic with no regard for their own safety (no matter if it’s a bicyclist or motorcyclist or person without a seatbelt driving a cage), makes me respect them less and have even less pitty on them if they are hurt.
I’m all in favor of reducing risk when doing something dangerous as much as possible. Anything else is foolhardy. IMHO, riding without at LEAST jeans (on a public roadway) vs spandex is foolhardy and that along with the common attitude “I’ll do whatever I want with no regard for the road rules or anyone else” makes me respect them less (even though I do avoid them as much as possible while driving, riding, or walking).
@GS650G> That is a good tip that i wish more people would use.
I know what the article here is about, as I sent it in. I think most states “leeway” is in lack of enforcement. I’m pretty sure that legally (at least here in IL) bikes are required to follow all the rules of the road and if they are not, it just isn’t enforced. I know on even non-highway, riding a bicycle on a roadway is illegal (example: lake street in wilmette il).
I will do everything possible to avoid an accident no matter which way I’m transporting myself, even if it means always yielding to bicylists when I have the right of way (I do — as I consider them unpredictable).
However, if an accident IS unavoidable and I end up hitting a bicyclist due to the bicyclists fault, you better believe I will seek legal remedy for any damages I incur no matter what happens to the bicyclist.
Robstar – I was talking about my friend, who had a crash (if you did not cared to read my whole post). Besides I will wear whatever is comfortable and damn want to either you like it or not. I think all that leather looks ridiculous and should not be wore. And you should wear full motoX protection gear. Speaking of which – most of the motorcycle riders I see around here wear a t shirt, sunglasses and a trucker hat backwards as a helmet for protection. I can see a crush going well for them. Why no outrage here? I don’t care if they kill themselves. It’s legal. So why not? Those riders think they are too cool for a helmet, or helmets are too expensive, or some other excuse. I don’t care, as long as they don’t break the law and I don’t break the law and we all ride safely on the same road.
Well — if it’s cyclist’s fault you have your right, if it’s biker’s fault, I shall do the same.
Cuoresptrv>
You are absolutely right.
I refuse to ride (motorcycle) with ANYONE who does not wear minimum of a helmet/jacket/gloves/jeans/boots. That means the people I ride with (out of maybe the 10-15 I know who ride) is 2-3. The rest are IDIOTS riding, and I refuse to ride with them. Most motorcyclists are and that is almost irregardless of type of bike. Sporbikers act like complete a*holes most of the time, while cruisers with their loud pipes annoy the S**t out of me. I ride a sportbike and I rented a cruiser for the weekend. BOth are in my garage at the moment.
There was a large organization of motorcyclists a friend asked me to join. I can’t remember the name of the organization offhand, but they are national with a lot of members. They are “for bikers rights”. On of these rights is to ride w/o a helmet. For this reason alone, I refuse to join them.
Robstar,
I would not at all be surprised to learn the laws says the opposite of what I did above. But complying with silly laws only makes sense if the risk of getting caught and meaningfully punished are high enough. And, outside of bikers vs. cops showdowns like Critical Mass, I honestly doubt many cops would bother a bicyclist for making a bit of effort to not be any more in the way than he has to. And I meant bikers should ride alongside cars when the light is green, not red. I was not advocating blasting into intersections on a red light without first having made pretty damn sure there are no cars crossing. But any biker that does this won’t really be much of a problem for very long anyway, so it’s not something I worry much about.
Perhaps Chicago is different, but here in SF, there is enough bicyclists so that if every single one of them came to a complete stop at a stop sign, and clipped out of and back into their pedals, one after the other, cars would be stuck behind them forever (Pretty much what happens when they do their Critical Mass thingy. By far the most annoying part of Critical Mass is the 95% of riders who doggedly follow the law to the letter. The 5% or so who start riots are just an irrelevant sideshow.) And there is no reason for them to do this at all. They can perfectly well slow down so that they enter the intersection just as a car going either the same or the opposite direction of them crosses. That way they get across using the same time slot as a car, not slowing down traffic at all. Some riders here do this, and others don’t. And it’s those others that are a pain to share the road with.
Similarly, some riders will start moving and clip into their pedals as crossing traffic slows down from getting a red, even if this means starting across the road before they themselves have a green. That way they’re gone by the time I get a green. Those guys are infinitely preferable to those that wait for a green, then start fiddling with their pedals as cars sit behind them waiting while their 20 seconds of green ticks away. And, if some biker screws up and goes too early? Heck, he’s the ones facing the consequences. Which is why holding them to the same legal standard as a car running reds are just stupid. Like having a death penalty for suicide, or something.
My main point is that cars and bikes are so obviously different, both in speed, acceleration, width of lane they take up, and most important, in their ability to hurt others without hurting themselves, that holding them to the same laws make no sense, and only serve to make things worse for both parties. Most likely, the only reason laws are written that way in the first place, is because cyclists are few enough not to warrant someone spending the time to create an entirely different set of standards just for them; especially as that standard, to promote even remotely efficient coexistence between bikes, cars and pedestrians, would end up having to leave an awful lot up to the situational judgment of the bikers anyway.
Stuki>
First off, cars should never be stuck behind bicycles as they should be in single file, no? Are the laws in SF different where they can ride 2/3/4 abreast & block traffic? If they are in a left turn lane or eat the lane for a right turn, IMHO that is perfectly legal/right. I am more than happy to wait for them (so should motorists)
Bikers should be able to go through reds just like cars do under two conditions:
1) They accept the $100 ticket cars get here for doing the same thing.
2) They accept legal responsibility if they get in an accident.
When I was in SF for vacation this year (maybe I just went to the touristy parts), I rented a car and saw/noticed VERY few bicyclists. I was only in the SF area 3 days and was actually staying outside of SF and was in sonoma. My time in a car in SF was very early in the morning (pre 7am one day, and until 9:30am the next day).
I’m more than happy to wait behind & respect a bicycle, just like I respect (much slower) cars on my motorcycle. IMHO, you should follow the law or repeal it. Having a whole bunch of non-enforced laws makes us a banana republic and leads to chaos IMHO.
Also: Aren’t 95% of CM riders illegally running reds, “corking” streets, etc?
I haven’t seen a CM, but if I saw what I’ve seen described on the ‘net, I’d be calling the police non-emergency # as well as writing a letter to my local paper.
We already have several days here where different roads in different surrounding cities have car bans for bicyclist events & leisure. The last thing I need is one friday/month borked again on top of this.
Re> Taking your feet out of your clips: May be annoying but so is putting your feet down on a motorcycle at a stop. On top of this I see a lot of bicyclists just balance completely stopped by turning their front wheel perpendicular to the bike (making a “T” shape). No reason to put your feet down if you can do that, right?
Robstar,
SF city streets are generally not wide enough to fit the 3ft from curb – 1ft wide biker – 3 feet to cars “rule” generally bandied about as how bikes and cars should interact. Next time you drive around a right bend, check to see if you leave 7ft to the shoulder in case there is a biker there, the way the safety nazis seem to think all cars should do. In cities like LA, this is less of a problem, as most roads have are wide enough for at least two lanes. But here, a law like that is both dumb and dangerous. Were it followed to the letter, along with the never cross double yellows etc., cars would have no way of passing slow moving cyclists most of the time, and bikes would have no way of passing cars when cars are stuck in traffic. Besides, on most SF city streets, and I suspect in other cities as well, the first seven feet, plus 3 more for swinging doors, are taken by a parked car, pushing the wannabe law abiding biker 13 feet into the road in practice.
As for red lights, given that you cannot legally pass bikes anywhere in the above scenario, the last thing you need is for them to initiate their pedal clipping routines only after you have gotten a green. And the reason to have strong enforcement of red light laws wrt cars, is because they harm others. Bikers only hurt themselves, hence need no further encouragement to be cautious. So, if a biker can get home a minute earlier by getting out of the way so I can start driving 5 seconds earlier at every green, that is a win-win. Not that I want to force bikers to run reds for my sake, but discouraging them from doing so serves no one at all. I do recognize there are bikers that are just out of control, seemingly too stoned and concerned about their iPod to even notice there is an intersection with a red, but those will take themselves out of circulation anyway, and are not the ones I’m talking about. Many riders up here actually stop, or slow down to an almost complete stop, and wait until there are no cars coming, then cross, in complete safety, ensuring they are not plugging up a bottlenecked intersection by accelerating at snail’s pace once the light turns green.
The only time I have been stuck in Critical Mass, the problem was specifically that the bikers did not run reds, and they didn’t much run greens either. Supposedly, they are legally entitled to 10 seconds or so of pedal fiddling before having to move once the light turns. And they are supposed to ride single file, one after the other, with a “safe” following distance. Also, they, just like cars, would get themselves “stuck” in the box when the light turned, blocking crossing traffic. Instead of getting out of there by riding two to three abreast. All supposedly legal, but utterly annoying and pointless for anything other than “making a statement” (as if San Franciscans need any encouragement to do that…). Coming to a stop sign, they would take their time slowing down. Come to a complete stop. Clip out of their pedals. Look left and right for their maximally allotted number of seconds. Slowly clip into their pedals. And accelerate like a snail across the intersection. One at a time, of course, each probably taking 15 seconds total. With about 2 miles of cars backed up behind them, and enough police escort to scare drivers away from doing anything about it.
I hope I’m not coming across as some sort of apologist for any kind of behavior by bicyclists. It’s just blatantly obvious that rigid rules like single file, complete stop etc, that makes sense to regulate 4000lbs cars, don’t always make sense for bikes. I used to ride motorbikes in LA, and when coming up to a stop sign in traffic, would always line up next to cars and cross alongside them, not single file behind them. That way, two vehicles would get across in no more time than one, shortening the wait for everyone behind me, as well as for me. Win win, but not strictly legal. A bicyclist can’t do this, as he won’t be able to accelerate quick enough to keep next to the car. So, he needs to time a rolling stop. If he can do this, that is to be encouraged, as it lessens total time in traffic for both him and everyone else.
stuki> I’d appreciate a pointer in illinois code to this 3+1+3 rule. I have never seen nor heard about it, even reading bicycle web sites. Is it a convention or a law? I know for sure that when I lived in the city WITH bike lanes in quite a few places, they were not 3′ from parked cars, so I find that kind of hard to believe. If the law exists, why not use the printed bike lines as a reminder/enforcement?
Btw, whenever I make a right turn, I always double check my right mirror & my blind spot more than once, prior to stopping at a red and prior to starting to make sure no bikes are to the right of me before turning.
Also: When was this critical mass where bikers did not run reds? Every single event report I’ve read is the opposite. Please point me to an article. Perhaps I’ll stick around the city one Friday it’s happening to see it with my own eyes.
I encourage you to come visit Chicago on your next vacation (esp evanston — a college town) and I encourage you to take a ratio of bikers who are aware of their surroundings (no ipod, no cellphone, helmet, and who slow down at stopsigns or reds) vs those who don’t and you’ll find the ratio of aware vs non-aware is something like 1:10 or worse.
No matter if it seems “safer” to run reds when nobody is there, a bicyclist should realize in the short term that is is NOT safer, especially if they piss people off who then act more aggressively towards them (not me, but other people aren’t as nice/patient as me).
Again, if you don’t think the rigid rules of cars should apply to bicyclists, feel free to petition to get the law(s) you don’t like changed. For example, if it would be better to have the first 10 seconds of a green for bicyclists only to get across prior to cars moving or turning, I’m all for that. I’m sure you can think of others.
Until the time the law is changed, I will in no way condone any illegal/stupid behavior by bicyclists just like I don’t with motorcyclists, cars, pedestrians, etc.
I found a good blog recently by a chicago bicyclists/lawyer that you may find interesting. It is at http://thechicagobicycleadvocate.blogspot.com/
Robstar,
I don’t know if 3+1+3 is a rule, but riding three feet from the curb seems to be what I hear bikers are supposed to do to “stay out of traffic”. And cars are supposed to not pass closer than 3 feet. And I’m assuming a biker is about 1 foot wide.
I also check mirrors and blind spots for bikes before turning, but we’re (presumably) lane splitting motorcyclists. Lots of cars don’t even think about it. But even if they did, it makes a lot more sense if the bikers, upon seeing a car blinking right, or even just approaching a road where a right turn is possible, move far enough left to not impede right turns, just like motorcyclists do.
I’m sure you’re right that some riders at Critical Mass events run reds. Some of them are out of control, and on that day, they have police escort. But the real annoyance, at least to me who were just trying to get home as quickly as possible while keeping the number of bikers I bumped into at least somewhat reasonable, was specifically that they did follow the law to the letter, and took all the time they were allowed to at every intersection, making no effort to help drivers piled up behind them get ahead. And I know very well that this is not how many of those guys usually ride (a courier riding that slow, would likely starve to death for lack of work.) As such, I much prefer their everyday, red light running, break less kamikaze riding, to the supposedly perfectly legal crawling around they do during Critical Mass. I also assume most of the couriers still alive and not in a body cast, have a much better sense of what is, and is not, a safe way to get around town on a bike, than someone whose only involvement with bicycling laws are to mindlessly declare bikers should ride like as if they were a 6 foot wide, 4000lb steel box with 200 horsepower.
It’s that latter mentality that means I can get ticketed for jaywalking across an empty intersection, and that, back when I rode a motorbike, I was supposed not to lane split on surface streets, but rather just sit there sucking smog, despite having plenty of room to move. In some states, You can’t even lane split on the freeway legally. That just means the law is stupid. Period. If you can break it without getting busted, please do so. And I feel the same way about most needlessly restrictive bike laws.
How come, if those Evanston students ride so dangerously, wouldn’t they be taking themselves off the roads in fairly large numbers?
As I’ve said before, I don’t dispute that some, even many, bicyclists, ride like complete a-holes. The ones that really bother me are those who think it’s ok to blast down sidewalks at full speed, their knees coming within inches of children’s heads. But as long as they stay on the road, they, just like lane splitting motorcyclists, are the ones risking major injury if they get too far out of hand, so I simply can’t see why a riding style that helps both them and cars get from A to B faster should bother me as a driver.
stuki> I have never ever lane split (illegal here, and dangerous anyway) on any motorcycle I’ve driven (4 years).
Lane splitting is illegal and dangerous.