D
dave
Guest
EuanB wrote:
> dewatf Wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 07:30:34 GMT, Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I don't agree, at best I'm travelling at slightly more than half the
>>>posted speed limit of the road. Do you think that a motorist is going
>>>to notice much difference between me and someone who's riding at a
>>
>>third
>>
>>>of the posted speed limit? To the motorist we're one thing: slower
>>
>>than
>>
>>>them.
>>
>>Not so, an experienced cyclist who rides 25+ km/h is able to merge in
>>traffic, take off quickly and cars have a lot more time to merge
>>around them etc.
>>A couple of weeks ago I carried out an experiment. I kept my speed below
>
> 20km/h for the whole commute to work.
> It's a 28km route through Center Dandenong Road, Nepean Highway, St
> Kilda Road and then a rat run through the CBD.
> Center Dandenong Road is a 60/70km/h 4 lane (2 each way) undivided road
> which mandates lane claiming for large stretches. Nepean is a 80km/h 6
> lane divided road with a wide left shoulder. St Kilda Road is a four
> lane divided 60km/h road with an on-road bike lane.
>
> I didn't notice any change in driver behaviour, nor did I have trouble
> moving to the right for my right turns etc. The key is proper position
> on the road, not the speed of travel.
>
>
>>
>>
>>It leads to drivers going all out taking risks to avoid ever being
>>trapped behind a cyclist. Including the moron who decided to try and
>>overtake me on a curved narrow railway bridge over double yellow lines
>>and almost caused a serious accident last Friday. If cars aren't
>>trapped behing cyclists for long periods of time they are much better
>>behaved.
>>You're laying the blame for the driver's selfish actions at the door of
>
> cyclists. Why? The driver's the one who made the choice to take the
> risk, not any random cyclist who's ``gotten in his way'' in the past.
> Out of interest what speed were you travelling at at the time? If it's
> 25km/h plus then I suggest that refutes what you are saying.
>
>
>>>Canterbury Road and St Kilda Road; cunningly designed so that if you
>>>cycle in the middle of the lane you're smack in the door zone. Also
>>>great place to meet bogan droppings.
>>
>>Yep. Dooring now accounts for upto 40% of injuries to cylists. Cycle
>>lanes through shopping areas with parking on the side of the road are
>>not good.
>>
>>While is why in Copenhage they built wide cycle lanes on kerbside of
>>parked cars. Which is what is being proposed for Swanson St.
>>Huh? You're saying that having passenger side opening their doors in to
>
> the path of cyclists is better than having the driver do it? I don't
> follow your logic.
>
>
>>
>>There is not much a problem with parked cars since it is a residential
>>road there aren't people getting in and out of cars all the time and
>>visibility is good. The lane provides a good place to ride while a
>>line to keeping cars over on the right, before they used to travel on
>>the left forcing you over and having to merge in and out around the
>>parked cars with them flying out wide to scoot past you.
>>How are the cars forcing you to cycle near the left? They're behind you.
>
> If they want to get past you they're going to have to go around you.
> Believe it or not drivers don't want to hit you, you might scratch
> their paintwork ;-)
>
> Ride wide. You do yourself no favors by subissively cycling to the left
> of the lane.
>
> 1) You're less visible.
>
> 2) You have nowhere to go if you are squeezed.
>
> 3) You send the message to drivers that you are afraid of them and are
> only there at their sufferance.
>
> All the above is countered by riding wide. That means riding a meter
> out from the kerb or parked cars, if the lane's too narrow for a car to
> safely occupy with you in it, ride to a width where the car has no
> choice but to use the other lane.
>
> Riding wide, you may get tooted now and again. The correct response is
> to ignore them. Smile and nod at them when they do get past, as they
> undoubtedly will. Communicate to them that you're having a great time
> getting to where you're going and not the least bit bothered by their
> impotent tooting.
>
> The slightly cheekier response, and not one I'd advise, is to ride even
> wider.
>
>
Interesting one today.. Took the motorbike (Stealth orange Kat)
becouse I had video cameras. Anyway on the way home.. moron in Rav4
twice forces his way up beside me..(I was pretty well in the centre of
the lane. Coming up on Riversdale in Aubaun about a dozen cars are
stopped for the red and I start braking slowly for it, Mr ed cuts around
me cuts in and brakes savagely to stop before plowing into the line of
stopped cars. I stopped beside him on the left and politely said..
¨Hello Mr ********¨ then tricked down the left lane to the lights and
placidly out accelerated the first car as the lights turn green.
> dewatf Wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 07:30:34 GMT, Euan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I don't agree, at best I'm travelling at slightly more than half the
>>>posted speed limit of the road. Do you think that a motorist is going
>>>to notice much difference between me and someone who's riding at a
>>
>>third
>>
>>>of the posted speed limit? To the motorist we're one thing: slower
>>
>>than
>>
>>>them.
>>
>>Not so, an experienced cyclist who rides 25+ km/h is able to merge in
>>traffic, take off quickly and cars have a lot more time to merge
>>around them etc.
>>A couple of weeks ago I carried out an experiment. I kept my speed below
>
> 20km/h for the whole commute to work.
> It's a 28km route through Center Dandenong Road, Nepean Highway, St
> Kilda Road and then a rat run through the CBD.
> Center Dandenong Road is a 60/70km/h 4 lane (2 each way) undivided road
> which mandates lane claiming for large stretches. Nepean is a 80km/h 6
> lane divided road with a wide left shoulder. St Kilda Road is a four
> lane divided 60km/h road with an on-road bike lane.
>
> I didn't notice any change in driver behaviour, nor did I have trouble
> moving to the right for my right turns etc. The key is proper position
> on the road, not the speed of travel.
>
>
>>
>>
>>It leads to drivers going all out taking risks to avoid ever being
>>trapped behind a cyclist. Including the moron who decided to try and
>>overtake me on a curved narrow railway bridge over double yellow lines
>>and almost caused a serious accident last Friday. If cars aren't
>>trapped behing cyclists for long periods of time they are much better
>>behaved.
>>You're laying the blame for the driver's selfish actions at the door of
>
> cyclists. Why? The driver's the one who made the choice to take the
> risk, not any random cyclist who's ``gotten in his way'' in the past.
> Out of interest what speed were you travelling at at the time? If it's
> 25km/h plus then I suggest that refutes what you are saying.
>
>
>>>Canterbury Road and St Kilda Road; cunningly designed so that if you
>>>cycle in the middle of the lane you're smack in the door zone. Also
>>>great place to meet bogan droppings.
>>
>>Yep. Dooring now accounts for upto 40% of injuries to cylists. Cycle
>>lanes through shopping areas with parking on the side of the road are
>>not good.
>>
>>While is why in Copenhage they built wide cycle lanes on kerbside of
>>parked cars. Which is what is being proposed for Swanson St.
>>Huh? You're saying that having passenger side opening their doors in to
>
> the path of cyclists is better than having the driver do it? I don't
> follow your logic.
>
>
>>
>>There is not much a problem with parked cars since it is a residential
>>road there aren't people getting in and out of cars all the time and
>>visibility is good. The lane provides a good place to ride while a
>>line to keeping cars over on the right, before they used to travel on
>>the left forcing you over and having to merge in and out around the
>>parked cars with them flying out wide to scoot past you.
>>How are the cars forcing you to cycle near the left? They're behind you.
>
> If they want to get past you they're going to have to go around you.
> Believe it or not drivers don't want to hit you, you might scratch
> their paintwork ;-)
>
> Ride wide. You do yourself no favors by subissively cycling to the left
> of the lane.
>
> 1) You're less visible.
>
> 2) You have nowhere to go if you are squeezed.
>
> 3) You send the message to drivers that you are afraid of them and are
> only there at their sufferance.
>
> All the above is countered by riding wide. That means riding a meter
> out from the kerb or parked cars, if the lane's too narrow for a car to
> safely occupy with you in it, ride to a width where the car has no
> choice but to use the other lane.
>
> Riding wide, you may get tooted now and again. The correct response is
> to ignore them. Smile and nod at them when they do get past, as they
> undoubtedly will. Communicate to them that you're having a great time
> getting to where you're going and not the least bit bothered by their
> impotent tooting.
>
> The slightly cheekier response, and not one I'd advise, is to ride even
> wider.
>
>
Interesting one today.. Took the motorbike (Stealth orange Kat)
becouse I had video cameras. Anyway on the way home.. moron in Rav4
twice forces his way up beside me..(I was pretty well in the centre of
the lane. Coming up on Riversdale in Aubaun about a dozen cars are
stopped for the red and I start braking slowly for it, Mr ed cuts around
me cuts in and brakes savagely to stop before plowing into the line of
stopped cars. I stopped beside him on the left and politely said..
¨Hello Mr ********¨ then tricked down the left lane to the lights and
placidly out accelerated the first car as the lights turn green.
