Ride well out into the lane where the cars go?

[Pat]

x-no-archive:yes

>
> It appears what you would do is pull into each and every gap, and always wait until there is a
> space between cars big enough to get you to the next gap. We must *never* delay a motorist, at any
> time, must we?

<snip>>
> You also seem to forget that there is a whole other lane for the motorist
to
> pass in. Yep...on the other side of the line. Motorists can and do make
use
> of that.
>
> Nothing in any state law I've seen says you *must* share the lane by
riding
> such that a motorist does not have to actually make a regular passing maneuver. Pete

Something tells me I was not the only one who got a "cyclists must be apologetic and subservient to
automobile drivers" out of the original post......

Pat

 

[Robin Hubert]

"Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> >
> > It appears what you would do is pull into each and every gap, and always wait until there is a
> > space between cars big enough to get you to the
next
> > gap. We must *never* delay a motorist, at any time, must we?
>
> <snip>>
> > You also seem to forget that there is a whole other lane for the
motorist
> to
> > pass in. Yep...on the other side of the line. Motorists can and do make
> use
> > of that.
> >
> > Nothing in any state law I've seen says you *must* share the lane by
> riding
> > such that a motorist does not have to actually make a regular passing maneuver. Pete
>
> Something tells me I was not the only one who got a "cyclists must be apologetic and subservient
> to automobile drivers" out of the original post......

We all should fight the idea that bicycles are toys and should be used as such, and not on the
roadways where, we all know, children should not play.

--
Robin Hubert <[email protected]

 

[Dennis P. Harri]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:28:10 -0500 in rec.bicycles.misc, [email protected] (J. Bruce
Fields) wrote:

> A wider street would be better, other things being equal, but it'd be silly to go way out of your
> way just to avoid having to pull over every now and then.

IMHO, it would be silly to pull over every now and then just to accmodate impatient cagers who will
still have to wait in line at the next light. in most cases, they just want to drive faster than is
safe, or faster than the speed limit. no need to accomodate cagers that just want to drive too fast.

 

[J. Bruce Fields]

In article <[email protected]>, Dennis P. Harris
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:28:10 -0500 in rec.bicycles.misc, [email protected] (J. Bruce
>Fields) wrote:
>
>> A wider street would be better, other things being equal, but it'd be silly to go way out of your
>> way just to avoid having to pull over every now and then.
>
>IMHO, it would be silly to pull over every now and then just to accmodate impatient cagers who
>will still have to wait in line at the next light. in most cases, they just want to drive faster
>than is safe, or faster than the speed limit. no need to accomodate cagers that just want to drive
>too fast.

Of course. I'm only claiming that it's nice to pull over every now and then if it'll actually save
the people behind you a significant amount of time (more at least than you'd lose by making the
quick stop). If you'd just be getting them in line for the traffic light a few seconds earlier than
there's no point.

And whatever your feelings about posted speed limits, I don't think anyone should feel required to
make any particular effort to help drivers exceed them.

--Bruce Fields

 

[Scott Munro]

On 02 Jul 2003 08:41:58 GMT, [email protected] (R15757) wrote:

>Many "vehicular" cyclists are apparently afraid of being passed closely by vehicles, and they stake
>a claim to the entire lane to prevent anyone from passing at all. IMO, this behavior is rarely
>necessary, and such riders could usually move over far enough to make lane-sharing possible, or,
>failing that, choose a different street to ride on. Unnecessary lane-taking by a few "effective
>cyclists" out there poisons the atmosphere and makes urban cycling more difficult for everybody.
>Not very effective if you ask me.

If I can't have sufficient clearance from the curb (I'd say a foot and a half minimum--two feet is
better, and even more is even better, especially if you want to be seen by vehicles entering the
road from the right), avoid roadside debris and potholes, stay three or four feet from parked cars
(if any), and allow a vehicle to pass me with at least three feet clearance within the lane, then
the lane is too narrow to share.

In such a situation, a cyclist should (not just may) take the lane. Staying right in such a
situation merely encourages motorists to pass with too little clearance (believe me, I know; I was a
curb-hugger once), and encourages them to believe that their convenience is more important than a
cyclist's safety.

In my city, it is frequently necessary to take a lane, but it's almost always on a four-lane street,
so taking the lane generally involves delaying motorists only long enough for them to change lanes.
This doesn't stop them from whining, of course, since they've been trained to expect cyclists to hug
the curb or ride on the sidewalk.

Of course, if you have to take the *only* lane for a long stretch, courtesy (and sometimes the law)
would suggest finding an alternate route or being prepared to stop and move off the road if
necessary to let faster traffic pass. This isn't a bicycle thing; it's a slow-moving vehicle thing.

--
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and
patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse."
-- J.S. Mill

 

[Pat]

x-no-archive:yes

>
> In such a situation, a cyclist should (not just may) take the lane. Staying right in such a
> situation merely encourages motorists to pass with too little clearance (believe me, I know; I was
> a curb-hugger once), and encourages them to believe that their convenience is more important than
> a cyclist's safety.

Bingo!

>
> In my city, it is frequently necessary to take a lane, but it's almost always on a four-lane
> street, so taking the lane generally involves delaying motorists only long enough for them to
> change lanes. This doesn't stop them from whining, of course, since they've been trained to expect
> cyclists to hug the curb or ride on the sidewalk.

Or ride the wrong way, facing traffic.....

>
> Of course, if you have to take the *only* lane for a long stretch, courtesy (and sometimes the
> law) would suggest finding an alternate route or being prepared to stop and move off the road
> if necessary to let faster traffic pass. This isn't a bicycle thing; it's a slow-moving
> vehicle thing.

Well, if that is so, then why don't those tractors and slow-moving farm vehicles get out of my way
when I'm driving a car?

I guess the thing to think about would be how long is "long stretch"?

Pat in TX

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> >
> > In such a situation, a cyclist should (not just may) take the lane. Staying right in such a
> > situation merely encourages motorists to pass with too little clearance (believe me, I know; I
> > was a curb-hugger once), and encourages them to believe that their convenience is more important
> > than a cyclist's safety.
>
> Bingo!
>
> >
> > In my city, it is frequently necessary to take a lane, but it's almost always on a four-lane
> > street, so taking the lane generally involves delaying motorists only long enough for them to
> > change lanes. This doesn't stop them from whining, of course, since they've been trained to
> > expect cyclists to hug the curb or ride on the sidewalk.
>
> Or ride the wrong way, facing traffic.....
>
> >
> > Of course, if you have to take the *only* lane for a long stretch, courtesy (and sometimes the
> > law) would suggest finding an alternate route or being prepared to stop and move off the road if
> > necessary to let faster traffic pass. This isn't a bicycle thing; it's a slow-moving vehicle
> > thing.
>
> Well, if that is so, then why don't those tractors and slow-moving farm vehicles get out of my way
> when I'm driving a car?
>
> I guess the thing to think about would be how long is "long stretch"?

It also depends on the road. Where I grew up in the midwest, farm tractors were common on the roads,
and if it was possible (I.E. a wide- enough shoulder) they would pull over every so often to let the
line of cars pass them. However, sometimes it was several miles before the road would permit that.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Scott Munro]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 17:12:58 -0500, "Pat" <[email protected]> wrote:

>x-no-archive:yes

>> Of course, if you have to take the *only* lane for a long stretch, courtesy (and sometimes the
>> law) would suggest finding an alternate route or being prepared to stop and move off the road
>> if necessary to let faster traffic pass. This isn't a bicycle thing; it's a slow-moving
>> vehicle thing.
>
>Well, if that is so, then why don't those tractors and slow-moving farm vehicles get out of my way
>when I'm driving a car?

They should, if necessary, and if they can safely do so. Of course, farm vehicles require more room
to pull over than a bicycle does, and they probably don't travel all that far before turning off.

It's just a matter of plain, ordinary courtesy to balance other people's convenience
against your own.

>I guess the thing to think about would be how long is "long stretch"?

Depends. I was actually thinking more about urban cycling. I find that on narrow rural roads with no
rideable shoulder, motorists will give me plenty of room, even in no-passing zones (which virtually
all drivers ignore anyway when passing a cyclist), if I move right *after* I'm sure they've seen me.

>Pat in TX
>

--
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and
patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse."
-- J.S. Mill

 

[tock]

"Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > x-no-archive:yes
> >
> > >
> > > It appears what you would do is pull into each and every gap, and
always
> > > wait until there is a space between cars big enough to get you to the
> next
> > > gap. We must *never* delay a motorist, at any time, must we?
> >
> > <snip>>
> > > You also seem to forget that there is a whole other lane for the
> motorist
> > to
> > > pass in. Yep...on the other side of the line. Motorists can and do
make
> > use
> > > of that.
> > >
> > > Nothing in any state law I've seen says you *must* share the lane by
> > riding
> > > such that a motorist does not have to actually make a regular passing maneuver. Pete
> >
> > Something tells me I was not the only one who got a "cyclists must be apologetic and subservient
> > to automobile drivers" out of the original post......
>
> We all should fight the idea that bicycles are toys and should be used as such, and not on the
> roadways where, we all know, children should not
play.
>

fyi, here's the text of the applicable Texas statutes . . . check out §
551.103. Operation on Roadway . . . --Tock

[Go To Best Hit]

CHAPTER 551. OPERATION OF BICYCLES, MOPEDS, AND PLAY VEHICLES

SUBCHAPTER A. APPLICATION OF CHAPTER

§ 551.001. Persons Affected

This chapter applies only to a person operating a bicycle on:

(552) a highway; or

(553) a path set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

§ 551.002. Moped and Electric Bicycle Included

A provision of this subtitle applicable to a bicycle also applies to:

(554) a moped, other than a provision that by its nature cannot apply to a moped; and

(555) an electric bicycle, other than a provision that by its nature cannot apply to an
electric bicycle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1085, § 9, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

SUBCHAPTER B. REGULATION OF OPERATION

§ 551.101. Rights and Duties

(a) A person operating a bicycle has the rights and duties applicable to a driver operating a
vehicle under this subtitle, unless:

(1) a provision of this chapter alters a right or duty; or

(2) a right or duty applicable to a driver operating a vehicle cannot by its nature apply to a
person operating a bicycle.

(b) A parent of a child or a guardian of a ward may not knowingly permit the child or ward to
violate this subtitle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

§ 551.102. General Operation

(c) A person operating a bicycle shall ride only on or astride a permanent and regular seat attached
to the bicycle.

(d) A person may not use a bicycle to carry more persons than the bicycle is designed or
equipped to carry.

(e) A person operating a bicycle may not use the bicycle to carry an object that prevents the person
from operating the bicycle with at least one hand on the handlebars of the bicycle.

(f) A person operating a bicycle, coaster, sled, or toy vehicle or using roller skates may not
attach either the person or the bicycle, coaster, sled, toy vehicle, or roller skates to a
streetcar or vehicle on a roadway.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

§ 551.103. Operation on Roadway

(g) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving
slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb
or edge of the roadway, unless:

(1) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction;

(2) the person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway;

(3) a condition on or of the roadway, including a fixed or moving object, parked or moving
vehicle, pedestrian, animal, or surface hazard prevents the person from safely riding next to
the right curb or edge of the roadway; or

(4) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is:

(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane; or

(B) too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side.

(C) A person operating a bicycle on a one-way roadway with two or more marked traffic lanes may ride
as near as practicable to the left curb or edge of the roadway.

(D) Persons operating bicycles on a roadway may ride two abreast. Persons riding two abreast on a
laned roadway shall ride in a single lane. Persons riding two abreast may not impede the normal
and reasonable flow of traffic on the roadway. Persons may not ride more than two abreast unless
they are riding on a part of a roadway set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles.

(E) Repealed by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1085, § 13, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1085, §§ 10, 13, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

§ 551.104. Safety Equipment

(F) A person may not operate a bicycle unless the bicycle is equipped with a brake capable of making
a braked wheel skid on dry, level, clean pavement.

(G) A person may not operate a bicycle at nighttime unless the bicycle is equipped with:

(1) a lamp on the front of the bicycle that emits a white light visible from a distance of at
least 500 feet in front of the bicycle; and

(2) on the rear of the bicycle:

(A) a red reflector that is:

(B) of a type approved by the department; and

(C) visible when directly in front of lawful upper beams of motor vehicle headlamps from all
distances from 50 to 300 feet to the rear of the bicycle; or

(D) a lamp that emits a red light visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear of the bicycle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1085, § 11, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

§ 551.105. Competitive Racing

(E) In this section, "bicycle" means a nonmotorized vehicle propelled by human power.

(F) A sponsoring organization may hold a competitive bicycle race on a public road only with the
approval of the appropriate local law enforcement agencies.

(G) The local law enforcement agencies and the sponsoring organization may agree on safety
regulations governing the movement of bicycles during a competitive race or during training for
a competitive race, including the permission for bicycle operators to ride abreast.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

§ 551.106. Regulation of Electric Bicycles

(H) The department or a local authority may not prohibit the use of an electric bicycle on a highway
that is used primarily by motor vehicles. The department or a local authority may prohibit the
use of an electric bicycle on a highway used primarily by pedestrians.

(I) The department shall establish rules for the administration of this section.

Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1085, § 12, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

 

[Pete]

<[email protected]> wrote

>
> fyi, here's the text of the applicable Texas statutes . . . check out §
> 551.103. Operation on Roadway . . . --Tock

551.103

"...shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:" Too narrow
for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side The lane is < 14 feet wide You are
passing another vehicle Making a left turn Avoiding parked cars, animals, hazards, etc

Seems to be pretty much the same as everywhere else. Ride near the right, unless...

Pete

 

[Pat]

x-no-archive:yes

Thanks for taking the time to post all of that.

Pat in TX

 

[tock]

"Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> x-no-archive:yes
>
>
> Thanks for taking the time to post all of that.
>
> Pat in TX

As they say in Antarcticia, "No sweat." --Tock