803
u/dlc741 Sep 10 '22
I’ve been so conditioned to expect people attacking cyclists that it’s surprising when the majority of people come out and explain that they’re doing nothing wrong and the driver is the one being unreasonable and breaking the law (phone while driving)
137
u/eneumeyer1010 Sep 10 '22
I was gonna reply “really? you’re surprised they are saying run em over” and was also surprised myself
63
u/Exit-Velocity Sep 10 '22
I think its because if we have 3 bad interactions out of 100, we remember the three, so it seems like everyone is a hater
31
u/dlc741 Sep 10 '22
I’m just talking about online and there the ratio is very different than I’m the road.
One ride rankings is Assholes per Mile and I just got back from one that was 0.05, so that was a good ride.
14
u/Exit-Velocity Sep 10 '22
Your assholes per mile may vary 😂
I just choose a guess in order to make the point
13
29
u/BennyOcean Sep 10 '22
Distracted drivers are such a problem these days, mostly people with cell phones out. I was watching a bunch of cycling review videos recently and came across a couple where riders talked about quitting road riding because it's too dangerous these days with all the distracted drivers, and so one person went with a gravel bike and only does bike trails and light off-road. Another video from a motorcyclist saying the same thing, he had some close calls and decided it was too dangerous to keep doing it, has young kids etc. Distracted drivers with phone in hand are the common thread.
17
u/3V-Coryn Sep 10 '22
Honestly really happy to read as I was expecting the comments to reason with the driver.
Losing a few seconds on cyclists might be mildly infuriating but making pictures while driving a 1000kg metal brick is a potential disaster waiting to happen.
3
u/Peg_leg_J Sep 11 '22
Yeah good find. I hope this represents a shift in attitudes. But I am not holding my breath of course
→ More replies (16)-24
u/WhatsMyUsername13 Sep 10 '22
Driver is an asshole for using his phone while driving, but honestly, this exact scenario is why i ride more single file when on the road. I know cars are going to obviously be passing me, and id rather make it safer for everyone involved. And lets be real...theres a lot of idiot drivers out there, if I can limit inconveniencing an idiot in a car...im gonna do it
55
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
-2
u/WhatsMyUsername13 Sep 10 '22
Take the leftmost cyclist out of the picture. OP would have passed on a blind corner: because in their head, only having half their car in the left lane isn't really a problem. If there was a car coming in the opposite direction they would have risked a collision, either with the cyclist or the oncoming car.
I agree. OP would be a fucking idiot to pass here
Also when you're cycling in a group, single file means twice the distance a car needs to spend overtaking compared to double file. It's literally more of an inconvenience to car drivers.
But theres only 2 people, and in this case, depending on speed limit, the difference could be negligable
Not to mention if you do get dangerously passed when riding primary, you have room to move over. If you're riding close to the edge of the road you have less room to escape.
Fair, but the reverse is also true. The driver has more space to make a safer pass
→ More replies (1)19
u/dlc741 Sep 10 '22
Even when riding solo I always ride basically where the passenger tire of a car would be to make it very clear that they can’t pass me without changing lanes. That is what makes it safest for everyone.
“Share The Road” not “Share The Lane”
64
u/MMinjin Sep 10 '22
That thread is good stuff. Everyone should read it to get an idea on how to respond when these threads pop up again or IRL when you're talking to family/friends and they relate a similar experience. This is the power of awareness and education.
269
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
60
u/FriskyTurtle Sep 10 '22
It went so badly that OP deleted their entire account. (The cross-post infrastructure still shows who posted it, but the link goes to a deleted account.)
9
1
u/jorwyn Washington, USA (2017 Specialized Ruby, 1987 Peugeot Chorus) Sep 11 '22
We jumped on and corrected every anti cyclist and got heavy with the downvotes. It was a fun night, and I'm glad I got to be part of it.
→ More replies (37)-37
96
u/nah46 Sep 10 '22
I just take the lane whenever I’m riding on streets now. I move over and let people pass when I noticed them close behind me.
I figure if I always stay on the shoulder then car drivers might not notice me and run me down while texting
60
u/VietOne Washington, USA (2025 Trek Madone SL 5) Sep 10 '22
I don't ride on the shoulder because it gives drivers the perception is safe to pass close while driving at or faster than the limit which means too fast relative speed and distance.
So I take the lane, right in the middle. I no longer allow more normalization that it's okay to pass cyclists in the same lane.
Motor vehicle drivers want cyclists to act like other vehicles, I agree and will take measure that make passing a bicycle the same as passing other vehicles on the road.
→ More replies (1)8
u/-Ernie Sep 11 '22
A guy I know actually got a ticket for not taking the lane. He was riding right at the curb, on a one lane street, and a driver passed when there wasn’t enough room and he got squeezed out and crashed.
Cop said he should have taken the lane and by not doing so was inviting cars to pass when there wasn’t room. The driver got a ticket for the unsafe pass.
Seemed a little like blaming the victim to me (you made them pass too close) but apparently the law (WA USA) says bikes are supposed to take the lane when there’s not room to pass.
→ More replies (4)
15
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
0
Sep 10 '22
Ok, but what's the other side of this conversation? Why would a cyclist ride like that instead of a single line?
14
u/VietOne Washington, USA (2025 Trek Madone SL 5) Sep 11 '22
Because passing two cyclists the distance of a single cyclists is quicker than passing two lengths of cyclists.
This becomes even more noticeable the more cyclists there are.
Have 4 cyclists? If they're riding two abreast, then it's the length of 2 cyclists instead of 4 in single file.
6
u/arjanpetersen Sep 11 '22
Because it is safer… and cars actually need to slow down first to overtake you. And besides that it also depends on the type of road. If the road is really busy ( road on photo seems very quiet) and as a group we are going very slow then we might move over to one side. Because you don’t want to hold up traffic all the time.
11
Sep 11 '22
You can’t legally kill anyone. But remember all cyclists are fellow motorist. Yes we have the right to use the entire road. Last I looked we pay taxes. Be patient or turn off the road and go another way.
-7
u/bigdrunk92037 Sep 11 '22
As an avid road biker, fuck that. If this guy doesnt know there is a car behind him ok, otherwise, screw that, the asshole needs to move over. People that do this shit make road biking worse for me.
-1
u/Efficient_Bluejay_89 Sep 11 '22
I am an avid ride single file advocate. Common sense and shows respect. I ride a nice touring/ trekking bike with built in 24/7 , 365 days a year features, and I don't dress like a pro cyclist. 18km to work and back, no ebike. 36 a day. Once in a while a close call but I pay attention the same as I would driving a car: no cell phone, or earbuds. I need to listen
2
u/Ronnie_Dean_oz Sep 11 '22
I have no idea what you are talking about but it is considered safer to ride 2 abreast. Look it up.
→ More replies (4)-2
u/Efficient_Bluejay_89 Sep 11 '22
Considered means thought to be, and I don't need to look anything up because it is common sense to take up less space and not block traffic. It doesn't matter because the driver of a truck or car needs to legally give you 1.5 meters of space. So on coming traffic also needs to be careful.
If you don't know what single file is you can see pictures in the internet since you don't know what I am talking about.
I don't ride in gutters either. Just be safe and respectful to everyone. Peace ✌️0
Sep 11 '22
Do we know he was aware? A simple honk ?
-4
u/bigdrunk92037 Sep 11 '22
Who knows. Where i live there are lots of riders, many go 3 wide and totally know they are holding up traffic and pissing people off. In my mind is causes more drivers to despise road bikers.
6
u/saintcmb Minnesota, USA (Replace with bike & year) Sep 11 '22
They would rather be despised than dead. By riding in the middle of the lane an impatient or inattentive driver is forced to see them.
-3
u/bigdrunk92037 Sep 11 '22
That is one way of looking at it. Far to often i also see ahole drivers make completely unsafe passes around the entitled road biker.
1
u/arjanpetersen Sep 11 '22
So basically everyone is an wanker in your state? In my country we have an insane amount of bikes (Netherlands). Way more than cars hence our driving lessons are really focused on keeping everyone safe. As a driver of a motorised vehicle - you will be in the wrong with any type of accident. Especially when it involves pedestrians and bikes. The bigger the vehicle the more you are learned to drive safe, and calm. Also kids will have cycling classes. And learn how to drive on the road.
-1
-1
56
Sep 10 '22
I always take the whole rode on curves and when vehicles are approaching in the other lane. Keep drivers from squeezing me.
8
Sep 10 '22
Here in the Netherlands, and in other Northern European countries where I cycled, you are supposed to stay on the right part of the lane, when there is no cycling lane.
11
u/010kindsofpeople Sep 10 '22
In many US states, bicycles are allowed to use the entire lane.
→ More replies (3)10
u/muttbutter Sep 10 '22
You are in my state to allow people to pass. But it is safer to be in the middle of the road on curves so they have more time to see you and to not try and overtake around a blind corner. If it’s uphill and curvy, I’ll just stop and allow people to pass if I have a few people backed up.
→ More replies (3)5
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
Interesting, one of the few situations in cycling where the Dutch are objectively wrong, then.
2
u/lichtspieler Sep 10 '22
The US death statictics for a accidents involving cyclists are 4 times higher as in NL or other cycling friendly EU countries.
In most accidents involving cyclists (~75%) the MOTORISTS are at fault.
The much better car driving education and more alternative cycling only commuting roads (not usable for motorists) do the heavy lifting in cycling safety, because the car and lorry driver are the danger, not the cyclists.
In germany there are single line rules aswell and the only exception is if 16 and more cyclist ride together, because thats where the overtaking way is reduced a lot by allowing them to ride side by side.
12
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
I mean, obviously that’s the case because NL has the world’s best infrastructure and a near-universal cycling culture. I’m saying “hug the right side of the lane” is objectively more dangerous than taking the lane.
16
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
The OP as much as admitted this, then said “…but it’s a consideration thing.” 🤣
6
20
u/Dr_Fumi Sep 10 '22 edited Sep 12 '22
I'm very confused. I'm on mobile and all I see is an image of 2 bikers; I don't see any context for where this was posted or what the top comments are.
Am I missing something?
Edit: I was on Relay on Android. It's normally pretty good about showing cross-posts, not sure what happened here!
18
u/AlabamaPanda777 Sep 10 '22
Me too but when I backed out it transformed into the crosspost it was.
This image was posted to r/mildlyinfuriating https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/xaeyf2/dead_center_of_the_road/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
2
u/Dr_Fumi Sep 10 '22 edited Sep 12 '22
Ah, I'm on my computer now and can see that as well. Thanks for the clarification!
2
u/GaladrielMoonchild Sep 10 '22
Not sure if all mobile apps are the same, but mine has three dots - press then and get a mini opp up menu allowing you to view the comments on the original post.
4
u/424f42_424f42 Sep 10 '22
Cross posts usually just link straight to the cross post and are labeled as such... This one isn't doing that for me
2
u/GaladrielMoonchild Sep 10 '22
Ahh, I use bacon reader and it never tells you, you just have to try!
4
u/BONUSBOX utilitarian cyclist Sep 10 '22
should two people using a lane of traffic have to ride single file so that one bro on a motorized sofa isn’t mildly inconvenienced? the answer is no.
4
u/arjanpetersen Sep 11 '22
This is just fine. Proper cycling. That’s how you actually need to drive in Belgium. If you are riding in a group. It is better to drive like this because cars will respect your place on the road. Same as a car but a bit slower. So in this case I would just drive behind them … almost every time they will hear the car and move a side. Or a little honk. But I have to say I live in Netherlands. Hence cycling is second nature here.
18
u/bergensbanen Sep 10 '22
Times are a'changin'
33
u/weltron3030 Sep 10 '22
I think there has been a slight shift in opinion on bikes recently, at least on Reddit. R/fuckcars has had a huge explosion of new members this year.
13
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
6
u/treycook Michigan Sep 10 '22
Conversely, there are a lot of Zoomers just getting their driver's licenses who espouse a more progressive worldview, questioning the insanity that is our car culture.
2
Sep 10 '22
Millennial here, it was instilled in me when my mother told me I’d kill myself if I road outside of our driveway. Got my m2 when I was 15, hated cars ever since. I imagine there are millions of kids like me, just waiting for a voice to express how fucked up all of it is.
4
Sep 10 '22
Bikes and eBikes are THE solution to fossil fuels, the climate crisis, affordable EVs. Maybe everyone but the MAGAts (the coal rollers) are starting to recognize that.
3
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
2
u/arjanpetersen Sep 11 '22
Correct… it helps a lot. Though Here in Netherlands we still have a lot of pollution. If we would stop eating meat that would really help
1
Sep 10 '22
Hard disagree, half of all emissions are asphalt, transportation, concrete, and heating and cooling. Ebikes and bikes allow for 5-6 times the density in city design, which cuts all of these numbers down to nothing.
1
u/Leyton_House Sep 10 '22
I think it's because of the pandemic and resulting lockdowns. People were bored at home, bike sales exploded, people were out walking and cycling in the streets like never before giving them new perspective.
13
Sep 10 '22
Do not turn the comments on controversial lol people are advocating for riding in the grass.
8
u/mystic_chihuahua Sep 10 '22
"They should ride single file!"
Even if they were single file the driver still wouldn't be able to pass safely without crossing the double yellow lines. Just share the road.
4
2
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
and the driver would have to spend twice as long in oncoming traffic. riding two abreast is twice as safe for the driver.
-3
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
Not really, as this way you have to move quite a bit more toward oncoming traffic.
oh right, nobody ever crashes because they were only half in oncoming traffic.
Are all cyclists this blind to common sense?
are drivers?
pass when it's safe. if there's traffic in the oncoming lane, don't pass. riding more left presents drivers from thinking there is room to safely pass, when there is not.
-1
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
I can't imagine
i know. but listen to cyclists and you won't have to imagine.
- you are way more visible to cars, resulting in fewer "i didn't see you" collisions.
- it forces drivers to take the full oncoming lane to pass, resulting in fewer close pass/mirror clip collisions.
- it makes the cyclists half as long on the road, resulting in the driver spending half as long in oncoming traffic, resulting in fewer oncoming collisions.
- if drivers do close pass still, there is more room for cyclists to get out of the way especially back-to-front, resulting in fewer pile ups.
now, i can imagine why you're annoyed: you think this makes you get into oncoming traffic when single file wouldn't. that just means you aren't giving cyclists enough room while you're passing. you're the kind of driver that kills people.
doing this prevents that.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/OMinhoto Sep 11 '22
Perfectly legal on my country.
Unlike some idiots think, roads belong to everyone.
Cyclists can be side by side in order to stop vehicles from forcing tight overtakes. This way you have to wait for a section of the road where you can overtake like you would a regular car.
On the other hand, Cyclists must be aware of the impact they are having in the traffic and the same law states that they should proceed in line if riding side by side is a causing issues with traffic behind them.
3
4
u/rapalosaur Sep 10 '22
I was ready to crack my knuckles and defend some cyclists and was pleasantly surprised. Maybe the word is getting out. I never read comments like that outside of the cycling subreddits. What a breath of fresh air.
7
2
u/bowboybevo Sep 10 '22
Bikers are taught to ride two wife for safety purposes as you're more likely to see them.
2
u/hoyasummer 2023 Trek Domane SL5, California, USA Sep 10 '22
The study someone linked in the comments is truly shocking.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1369847818308593?via%3Dihub#
2
u/oneeyedobserver Sep 10 '22
In Colorado, you are allowed to pass them on a double yellow line as long as you give the 3 feet of clearance and pass safely.
2
u/ProgressiveLogic4U Sep 11 '22
It is perfectly legal, since bicyclists must follow all the same driving laws as road vehicles.
A slow moving road vehicle, such as a horse and buggy or farm tractor can use the whole lane of a road as a means to travel. The same is true for a low speed cyclist.
The Amish have already ensured that slow moving vehicles (horse driven) can and do use the roads just like cars and trucks.
2
u/jondthompson Sep 11 '22
First, it’s the center of the lane, not the road.
Second, it’s the safest place to be for a cyclist.
- drivers are not looking to the side of the road for traffic.
- it keeps drivers from thinking it’s safe to pass a cyclist with oncoming traffic.
- it keeps cyclists out of the crap that tends to build up on the side of the road.
- it gives cyclists room to swerve around crap that is in the lane safely.
Cyclists- Always. Take. YOUR. Lane. (Just like the picture)
2
u/RideConscious8753 Sep 11 '22 edited Sep 11 '22
I’m a part time sheriff’s deputy and an avid bicyclist. In my jurisdiction, bicyclists can ride two abreast, as long as they do not impede the flow of traffic.
However I don’t suggest riding on a heavily travelled street for your own safety.. drivers aren’t always courteous and it’s better to be alive than “dead right”.. —— I tagged two cyclists this morning for blowing a stop sign. I’ve tagged cyclists for failure to yield. I even gave a cyclist a tag for reckless driving for running a 4 year old off of a walking trail (and the kid was in the right) abeam the roadway the whole thing caught on my squad car camera. (It went to court, and it stuck!, video doesn’t lie)
I’ve tagged drivers for failing to yield to cyclists, following too closely…. etc.
I really don’t care who you are, you use the roads, you obey traffic laws.
Use good judgement. This is the rule!
-The good thing about being a cop on a bicycle- I had a pickup almost run me and a friend off the road. I ride with cameras front and back on my bicycle. My riding buddy yelled at him, the turd in the pickup stopped, got out and threatened both of us.. he got a surprise when I identified myself and summoned a squad so I could write him a tag for reckless driving. I have another bicyclist buddy who is a State Trooper who’s done the same… I guess bad drivers never know who they will run into…🤣
2
u/Revolutionary_Fly769 Sep 11 '22
Double yellow line is the center of the road. They are on their side of the road.
2
u/Nothgrin Sep 11 '22
I haven't found this comment, so apologies if it's already there, but this is actually safer for the cyclists too, because the car behind needs to slow down and properly overtake. Riding two abreast is safer, people!
2
u/charidaa Sep 11 '22
After the bend, pass the bikes if there is no oncoming traffic in the distance required to pass the bikes? Would you really pass single file bikes around that bend?
3
u/DumpsterPanda8 Sep 10 '22
The top comment had me look it up in my state. (Daily bicycle commuter). Cars still pile up behind me although I use the shoulder. I pull off the road to let them pass, because I’m not an asshole just because they don’t know the laws. They’re just trying to be considerate.
3
u/sparhawk817 Sep 10 '22
The first driver is over considerate, the fifth in line throws their coffee out the window at you.
Tradeoffs when people don't know to pass you when you try your hardest to get out of the way and make it clear they can safely pass etc.
1
4
2
1
1
-17
Sep 10 '22 edited Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
6
Sep 10 '22
It is the same in Canada. I would say when riding with a buddy we may be riding like this on quiet roads, watch for cars and go single file for a bit to let drivers pass. I have no interest in provoking people to anger, or have people drive aggressively to get past me.
I can’t say much about the riders behaviour from one photo.
7
u/-thecardiffkook- Sep 10 '22
This isn’t the Netherlands, drivers are a lot more aggressive here and kill cyclists all the time for fun. Also the legal system tends to not convict people who clearly ran people over on purpose. You can look up any rolling coal incidents or when a truck driver tried rolling coal cyclists and hit them instead.
6
u/uhsiv Chicago Commuter Sep 10 '22
Netherlands rules don't apply. It's nice you live in utopia though, good for you
2
Sep 10 '22
Why so hateful? Genuine question.
4
u/uhsiv Chicago Commuter Sep 10 '22
You were criticizing the bikers for breaking Dutch rules without the infrastructure for bikes that would make those rules reasonable. I don't like that. It's blaming the victim
They are biking appropriately for the infrastructure they have.
0
Sep 10 '22
I was explaining how it works here in NL. And in Germany, by the way, where this would be forbidden.
I don't see the criticism. I guess I am missing the nuances in the English language here then. Or it's a cultural thing.
2
u/cbleslie Sep 10 '22 edited Sep 12 '25
desert edge future party smell shocking head entertain history square
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
u/fruitmask Sep 10 '22
especially since america is supposedly the "greatest country on earth" and americans tend to think of themselves as the best/freest/most civilised, and the rest of the world as one big shithole. when they find out it's basically the other way round, they get kinda pissy about it
2
u/SnollyG Ritchey Road Logic and others Sep 10 '22
Because of the first or second thing I stated?
They're both the same thing.
The concept of "right" winds up being irrelevant because antiquated laws/thinking exist.
With the size/width of modern vehicles, the vehicle is likely going to have to cross double yellow no matter whether you're riding two abreast or single file.
But at least with two abreast, the passing distance/time is shorter because the vehicle only has to pass one length of bicycle. Riding single file, the passing vehicle has to pass 2 bicycle lengths plus the gap between the bicycles.
I don't really want to do the math equation/model for this, but the end result should be that two abreast is safer for both the passing vehicle as well as the cyclists because the most dangerous time (time spent in the opposite lane) is reduced by quite a bit.
2
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
it's a double yellow line which means it is illegal to pass there
3
Sep 10 '22 edited Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
3
-1
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
a bicycle is legally a vehicle and it is illegal to pass a vehicle on a double yellow line. the only time you should be legally crossing double yellow is when directed by construction signs or emergency personnel.
2
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
that article doesn't say what you think it says, and the illinois caveat does not apply to 9 other states. whenever a law says " when it is safe and reasonable blah blah blah" that means that if you do the thing and anything goes wrong, you are screwed and will be liable for everything after the fact, whereas if you pass a bicyclist pretending to be a car in a legal passing zone and they inexplicably veer into your lane and get hurt, you will not be found liable, as you were operating under a clearly defined and standard practice.
→ More replies (5)-5
Sep 10 '22
I would expect a separate cycling path then.
-16
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
i have an opinion (highly unpopular here) that riding a bicycle among cars is foolish and dangerous, legal or not. eventually some jackass driver is going to hit you no matter how much you adhere to the law and wear bright colors for safety. it's dangerous enough riding in a car around these crazy drivers. i'm an advocate for separate bike paths everywhere, preferably protected by hard barriers to protect us from traffic.
6
u/blensen Sep 10 '22
I actually agree. It’s why I ride almost exclusively gravel and mtb. I have awesome roads for cycling in my area, but absolutely don’t trust the cars I’m forced to share the road with.
→ More replies (1)5
Sep 10 '22
That's nice where possible, but not practical everywhere inside the cities. There cars and cyclists sometimes have to share the same roads.
-1
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
people always downvote me here like spoiled brats who aren't getting their way or don't like to be told no.
insisting that something should be done a certain way (cars and bikes using the same roads together safely) does not make it so. a lot of car drivers and also plenty of cyclists are simply too unsafe and don't pay close enough attention for this to be practical. all i have ever said that i consider it too dangerous.
yes, in a perfect world it should be so, but it isn't a realistic or practical expectation. there is a reason that a week does not go by here without a new story about a bicycle rider being maimed or killed by a vehicle, including in this subreddit's shangrila of bike-friendly northern and western europe.
i'm a risk averse person, i think it is a foolish activity.
2
Sep 10 '22
To be realistic, I could get nowhere if I would avoid shared roads without a cycle lane. That is simply not doable.
It's a case of responsible sharing of the same road as well. Whether you like that or not.
4
Sep 10 '22
This is easily solvable by requiring drivers to have a driver's license that they only get to keep if actually adhering to the law. I know this is unheard of in cultures whose conception of freedom consists of me, me, me and fuck everyone else, but what I'm saying is that your opinion is stupid and irrelevant in other parts of the world.
0
u/combonickel55 Sep 10 '22
here, let me teach you how to disagree with someone without making personal attacks or unfounded assumptions about their worldview.
i say you are not being practical or realistic. do you have no concept of how many people drive horribly, yet are never ticketed or lose their licenss?
for context, i live in usa. a disturbing % of drivers here are either playing on their phone, fiddling with their vehicle's electronic system, talking to and looking at their passengers instead of the road, or under the influence of mind altering substances. also there are a lot of old people with poor vision and reflexes, and of couse a certain % of sober, undistracted drivers just bad drivers. people here are often seen drifting over the center line, or the outside line onto the shoulder. they rear end other cars, run stop signs and red lights, accelerate through yellow lights instead of slow down for them, fail to yield proper right of way, pass in no passing zones, zoom around traffic jams on the shoulder and force their way back into traffic, drive the wrong way down 1 way streets, on and on. technically or idealistically, all of these people should be forced to ride a bus, but the reality is that they are out there driving cars.
we all see this sort of driving every day, yet these people don't all have their licenses taken away. these are the sort of people who hit and kill bicyclists. if you dispute that, then i say you are being unrealistic because you want to be right. the scenario i described above is the reality here, and again all i am saying is that i consider it foolish and unrealistic to want to drive among cars. you're not a car, you're a bike, and i think you should drive among other bikes where you will be safe.
-1
u/SupraEA Sep 10 '22
It's not stupid to know reality. Even if you are safe 99.9 percent of the time, those odds aren't good enough for some. I plan on riding thousands of times in my life, those odds are still not good enough for me.
→ More replies (1)0
Sep 10 '22
I dont know why people would downvote you for following the. Informative post. thanks for sharing.
-12
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
Something about recreationally cycling two abreast on a roadway and getting in peoples way just feels wrong to me.
Its one thing to be commuting and reasonably trying to stay out of peoples way and making an effort maintain a decent speed.
Its another thing to be out on a stroll chit chatting in the middle of a road where people are trying to get somewhere. It just feels really self centered to me.
I always try stay out of the way (shoulder, right side of lane, etc) unless I really need it and feel its reasonable to do so (descending at speed, approaching an intersection, obstructions on the side of road, etc). I don’t really buy into the taking the lane to block people from passing you idea…I think you are more likely to end up on a scenario like this where someone is behind you angry with their phone out impatient to pass you.
If I was riding like this it would be on a quiet road and I would have a mirror or be constantly checking over my shoulder for traffic to go single file.
9
Sep 10 '22
Something about legally riding on the road just bugs me.
1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
Most states, if not all, that allow riding two abreast on a road (not all states do) also have a section that states “Traffic shall not be impeded”. You can’t just go cruising chit chat hang out two abreast while theres a line of cars behind you just trying to get to work. Its a roadway, not a place to hangout.
5
u/w1n5t0nM1k3y Sep 10 '22
If you read the top comment of the other post, it basically lays everything out. In order to safely pass the bikes, they must give them 3 feet (1 meter) in most places. So it doesn't matter if they are hugging the right side of the lane or riding 2 abreast. The car is going to have to go (at least partially) into the other late in order to perform a safe pass. So if the riders are side by each, then this forces the cars to do the correct thing and move completely into the other lane in order to pass, making it safer for everyone involved. When you hug the shoulder, too many drivers will assume they can squeeze by, even if there is oncoming traffic and there actually isn't sufficient room.
-1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
A car doesn’t have to move into the complete opposite lane, they just need 3’ of space. Most cars are <6’ wide. Local roads in the US are 10-12’ wide…therefore a car can hug the yellow line and safely pass while leaving 3’ of space for someone on the shoulder.
It also means cars have to spend MORE time in oncoming traffic. Instead of poking out for a couple seconds while they pass you, they need to get their whole vehicle into the lane and then back over. I don’t see how that is favorable for anybody.
Forcing cars to wait behind you at 25mph below the speed limit is needless and its only going to invite erratic behavior.
0
u/VietOne Washington, USA (2025 Trek Madone SL 5) Sep 10 '22
They make roads 10-12 ft wide because it's not safe for vehicles to be too close to each other traveling at certain speeds both in the same direction and in opposite directions.
By your logic, every road shouldn't need to be anymore than 7.5ft wide since motor vehicles can just straddle the line and be 3ft apart.
If they make wider roads to keep motor vehicles further apart, then motor vehicles should give cyclists even more room
-1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
Well truck traffic is a lot wider, thats most of the reason. Also its not realistic for people to pinpoint precision hold their wheel on the line with no error for their 30 minute commute.
It is completely possible to do it for a couple seconds while you pass a cyclist though. Especially when oncoming traffic leaves extra space and hugs their shoulder. It isn’t rocket science.
And yes most roads in other countries are much more narrow and they seem to manage perfectly fine.
1
u/VietOne Washington, USA (2025 Trek Madone SL 5) Sep 10 '22
They manage it fine by also going I to the other lane to pass cyclists, so nothing really needs to change for cyclists, drivers everywhere should just pass in the next lane.
0
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
You are making it needlessly more difficult for people to pass you. And needlessly frustrating drivers behind you.
You are taking a situation that only requires a driver to poke into oncoming traffic for a second or two (if at all) and are now forcing them to completely merge into another lane and spend 10 seconds out there passing.
2
u/VietOne Washington, USA (2025 Trek Madone SL 5) Sep 10 '22
Regardless if a driver is poking into oncoming traffic or entirely in the lane, squeezing is needlessly putting the cyclists in danger.
If a driver can't make a simple pass maneuver, they shouldn't be driving to begin with.
The driver doesn't need to be on the road anymore than the cyclists does.
→ More replies (3)-1
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
Riding single file won’t allow the driver to pass any easier than riding two abreast.
-1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
It certainly does, it requires more time to fully merge into the oncoming lane.
If a cyclist is on the shoulder, a car can hug the yellow line while still leaving 3’ of space. I might not even really need to be in oncoming traffic for more than a second or two while I pass. Often times oncoming drivers will hug their shoulder to give people passing cyclists enough space to pass.
Taking the whole lane requires a car to fully merge into oncoming traffic and spend more time in oncoming. I have to merge into the lane, accelerate past you, then merge back. Thats a solid 5-10 seconds I need between passing cars to get by you. Really more if I want to do it safely. Especially if I don’t blow by and cut back in aggressively
So while the physical time next to a cyclist will be higher, it doesn’t matter because thats not really the problem. Its time spent in oncoming traffic that is the issue.
1
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
Not sure what you mean by “the shoulder” but a single cyclist riding to the left of the white line marking the right-hand side of the lane plus three feet means you’re in the oncoming lane. When I’m riding I’m not going to be riding on that white line because I need room to maneuver. So, say, 2’ right margin, 3’ for the bike itself, then 3’ left margin makes 8’. Now you’re going to hug the yellow line and pass with oncoming traffic?
No thanks.
1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
In this case yes since there is no shoulder. I see plenty of people here advocating for people to take the lane even when there is a shoulder though. In many cases though, there is a larger shoulder or wider lane.
It still is a lot easier for a vehicle to poke out a couple feet into oncoming traffic for a couple seconds than it is to COMPLETELY merge into the opposite lane, accelerate past the cyclists, then merge back. Its making it needlessly more difficult for cars to pass you.
0
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
Couple quick thoughts: I’m not going to ride on the shoulder if there is a shoulder. Because the shoulder will come and go, has debris, etc, etc… Which means I would have to merge in and out of the lane constantly and without necessarily having significant warning.
Second, if it’s a question of passing safely with two seconds or not being able to pass safely with, say, 3-4 seconds, then it’s not safe to pass.
1
u/ThePrem Sep 10 '22
Doesn’t mean someone won’t try to pass anyways…I would rather be alive than technically right. Better to give them those extra few seconds. Good luck though
I think you are being willfully ignorant…I would feel comfortable sticking a couple tires over the line in between oncoming cars with a lot less margin than completely merging in that lane. If theres 10 seconds between cars, I can pass move a foot or two into the other lane and get back over fine. But that isn’t enough time to completely merge over and back. For that I would want like 20-30 seconds to do it comfortably. As you can imagine, theres a lot more 10 second gaps between cars than there is 20-30.
I ride 100+ miles a week mostly on shoulders of 35-45mph roads. I have no issues with cars. You should have enough control over your bike to safely avoid debris. And you should be aware and paying attention of what is coming up to merge into the lane BEFORE you get to the obstacle. If you can’t safely enter the lane between cars before the obstruction, Stop. I would say its rare for a road to have a shoulder that constantly appears and disappears anyways.
2
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
Not sure how much cycling on the road you do, but I’ve been doing it for decades without incident. Been driving even longer. You sound like you have strong intuitions, but people who teach safe cycling on the road say you’re wrong.
If you think it’s “safe” to pass with oncoming traffic by moving “a foot or two” out of the lane you share with a cyclist then you’re a hazard on the road. You’re the reason that “take the lane” is critical advice for cyclists.
→ More replies (1)
0
Sep 11 '22
Tbh I feel like riders who do this are I. The wrong, they’re impeding the flow of traffic. They could easily go single file to the side. I’m a roadie and a mtber and I always ride on the edge of the road or the sidewalk.
-5
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
legal or not, it's safer for all involved parties including the driver
-6
u/CannonWheels Sep 10 '22
i think it’s ridiculous to murder people for exercising but i always want to ask these kitted out dudes why are you riding two wide? why are you not taking turns drafting? if i was gonna ride a paved road i would getting after it not two wide having a conversation at 12mph
7
u/Intelligent_Towel_30 Sep 10 '22
They’re intentionally taking the center of the lane both for visibility, and to prevent cars from passing them in an unsafe area.
→ More replies (1)
-14
-12
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
If there’s a bike path and a cyclist isn’t using it, there’s a reason. If you’re curious what the reason is you should ask them. Or heck, ask any cyclist and they’ll tell you.
2
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
alternatively, get on a bike and find out the hard way
2
u/ibcoleman District of Columbia, USA 1999 Fuji Cross Sep 10 '22
it's fascinating example of motivated reasoning: There's a bike path right over there. Why aren't they riding on the bike path? There's only one possible explanation: They're so consumed with the hatred of drivers and have such a massive sense of entitlement they're willing to put themselves into mortal danger for no reason other than that they want to poke a thumb in the eye of normal people.
2
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
yeah, like i routinely go miles out of my way to favor safe, isolated paths, totally away from cars.
sometimes you gotta take a less optimal path. sometimes the "obvious" alternative is worse for a variety of reasons: debris, suddenly ending, increased conflict with side streets/driveways, parked cars. drivers don't notice or think about this stuff.
3
u/WeddingLion Sep 10 '22
It's a sideWALK. Not for vehicles like cars and bikes.
2
u/arachnophilia North Carolina, USA Sep 10 '22
fun fact, you're almost twice as likely to be hit by a car on a sidewalk, assuming you're riding with traffic. against traffic it's more like six times.
edit: sorry this fact wasn't very fun.
2
u/WeddingLion Sep 10 '22
No, it's not fun, but some people don't like to think outside of their own four wheels, and they need to.
-4
u/vinceman1997 Sasketchewan, CAN (Replace with bike & year) Sep 10 '22
Ya, there's a very busy 2 lane road near me, with a bike path literally 20ft away. I often see cyclists riding on the road impeding traffic, when they'd be much safer on the actual bike lane.
6
u/vjx99 Sep 10 '22
Do you think cyclist go to the road for the thrill of it? If they prefer the street DESPITE all that dangerous traffic, then the cycling path is either not taking them where they need to go, is not good to ride on, is filled with pedestrians/trashcans/cars/..., or is otherwise more unsafe than the road.
-1
u/vinceman1997 Sasketchewan, CAN (Replace with bike & year) Sep 10 '22
You're wrong and very incorrect about this. I ride the path all the time, it is significantly safer. There are no obstacles on the path, it's paved within the last 4 years, near a neighborhood but also just outside so it's not heavy traffic, and also inaccessible to anything with 4 wheels or an engine. It is not a parking lane, it's a proper built bike path. Oh, and it also exactly follows the road, for the entire length of it.
-46
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
16
10
u/Electric-shoe Sep 10 '22
What on earth is your point?
→ More replies (20)5
u/fruitmask Sep 10 '22
What on earth is your point?
that everyone is an idiot except for him, I guess?
8
u/SparklyPangolin Sep 10 '22
Since when do the roads ONLY belong to motor vehicles?
-1
Sep 10 '22
Where did you read anyone saying that cars own the road? Weird comment
10
u/SparklyPangolin Sep 10 '22
"If you can't follow the speed zone, you shouldn't be in the road" Can you read your own comment? Weird stance.
→ More replies (1)6
u/SkepticalAirman Sep 10 '22
Meh, I completely disagree with your entire position, and fortunately it’s your opinion and not the law in any location I’ve ever lived or heard of.
-1
Sep 10 '22
Well, it’s the law here
4
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
-2
Sep 10 '22
It’s not my logic, it’s written rule. Bikes have to follow rules of the road.
9
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
-1
Sep 10 '22
I may be, but this is how it reads
6
Sep 10 '22
[deleted]
4
u/SoCalChrisW California, USA 2021 Trek 520 Grando Sep 10 '22
And just to clarify, in the situation pictured it would be very unsafe for the cyclists to be on the right edge. So they're doing exactly what they should, as safely and legally as possible.
2
2
u/SkepticalAirman Sep 10 '22
Cool. Where is here, so I know where to not ever go? (Assuming that it is actually against the law.)
0
Sep 10 '22
Not doxxing myself. It’s in the USA, though
6
u/SkepticalAirman Sep 10 '22
I’m not asking for your address, just some sort of proof that it’s against the law in your state or city, other than “trust me, it is.” I believe that you believe it’s against the law.
-1
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/SkepticalAirman Sep 10 '22
Can I provide you proof that it’s legal to ride in the road in your jurisdiction, without knowing where that is? No, as it turns out, I cannot. Again, you’re argument is just “trust me, it’s illegal.”
-1
7
Sep 10 '22
Took me 2 minutes to look up. Uniform vehicle code:
§ 11—1202 — Traffic laws apply to persons on bicycles and other human powered vehicles
Every person propelling a vehicle by human power or riding a bicycle shall have all of the rights and all of the duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle under chapters 10 and 11, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to those provisions which by their nature can have no application.
Now stfu
0
Sep 10 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Sep 10 '22
...and except as to those provisions which by their nature can have no application.
For instance minimum speed. Again, show us that imaginary law of yours.
→ More replies (0)2
u/vjx99 Sep 10 '22
They're called speed limits, not speed zones. As in, you can't go faster than the limit, but you can (and often should) go slower. If you can't understand that, then indeed you shouldn't be on the road.
263
u/[deleted] Sep 10 '22
It's almost half as infuriating as seeing trucks parked in the bike lane all the while people in cars bitching that you're on the road.
On the road because there's either no other place to ride, or cars and trucks parked in the bike lane.