jon c. 

Riding in the traffic lane is a safer place to be. Being thrown into the traffic lane after being doored is not a safe thing. Doesn't seem that hard to understand the distinction.

Of course you always have to ride according to conditions and nothing is absolute. But in general, the lane is a safer place to ride than the door zone. Do you really believe otherwise?

I-Like-To-Bike

As long as the streets "in general" consist only of low density/ slow speed traffic which is atypical of many if not most city center streets during business hours that may be needed to travel on to or through in many if not most urban centers.

Do you really "take the lane" and sit still when stuck in stalled rush hour traffic no matter how long it takes to inch forward rather than carefully filter forward to the right even if it is a door zone?

Do you really take the lane for any significant distance rather than an available door zone when all the traffic in every parallel lane is traveling at least 35+MPH in dense formations ? Do feel safer that way?

vol

Not only that, but also be watchful and slow down when near the cyclist, just in case they get doored. But granted that kind of considerate driver may not exist.

jon c. 

In my small city on the side of town where I commute, I'm fortunate not to have to deal with that. But in any case that's a question of what is most expedient. I've certainly done that in other places at other points in my life. That I might well well filter forward in the door zone under some conditions doesn't mean that's the safest thing to do. I would never suggest I always take the safest option in any facet of life. That would be an untenably restrictive regimen.

SylvainG

If you're thrown in the middle of a car lane because you got doored, like at 3m40s, could very well be fatal.

bikingbill

I still won't ever bike in the door zone.

mr_bill

SylvainG

Highlighted the relevant part of the discussion regarding why being in the middle of the lane is bad. Point is, you're NOT riding but falling there, big difference.

PS. I know who Kavanaugh is but what is a "Kavanaugh-like" answer?

Leisesturm

I think the feature that sets American road culture apart from every other First World traffic environment is its variability. The result of American's doing everything their own way results in the absolutely piss-poor metrics we have for overall cyclist safety. When it comes to urban congestion, large cities in The Netherlands are much more like NYC than like Sioux City, IA. But Dutch drivers are FAR more uniform in their response to the sight of a cyclist nearby than in the U.S. If five drivers pull away from you as they pass, but the sixth does not, and you are clipped by the ultra-wide wing mirror he added to admire the deluxe 5th Wheel being pulled behind the F350 ... ... game over. As I understand it, the onus of dooring prevention is on the person exiting the vehicle. As cyclists we tend to think only about ourselves. In reality a person who exits a vehicle without checking properly to make sure it is safe could be hit and killed by a CAR.

How many fatal or even near fatal doorings occur in a year? Not enough to have a thread about. Seriously. I've been alongside or near a car and heard the 'click' of the door latch and even seen the door pop open a few inches. Except for the one time the door literally exploded open in my face because it had been kicked open, most doors open relatively slowly. You have scant seconds to react and even if there is a crash it is rarely fatal. The "door zone" is just so much hyperbole and hysterical overreaction. Why it matters. Because "door zone" avoiders encroach on the traffic lane and this has more lasting impact on their survival metrics than the "door zone" does. The lowest urban speed limit I know of is 20mph and this is not sustainable by the average cyclist for more than a brief sprint. Get out in the real world and you see cyclists in the door zone. In A&S and the Commuting Forum you see the outspoken "door zone" avoiders who never get around to saying exactly where they ride instead but vehemently state how assiduously they avoid the deadly "door zone" I call BS. I think the reality is much more nuanced.

mr_bill

Beer. I liked beer. Boys liked beer. Girls liked beer. I still like beer. Beer! BEER!

(The question still is left ignored.)

-mr. bil

JoeyBike

No joke.

MikeyMK

Never, ever ride in a door zone.

I have seen a clip of a cyclist who was cycling along merrily, and was dead just two seconds later. Two!

He was passing a parked car, as a truck was passing him. The car door swung open straight into him, and pushed him in front of the truck's rear wheels.

Happy to dead in two seconds.

Always take a lane past a parked vehicle, if you absolutely have to use the road.

Leisesturm

I don't know. Parked vehicles usually line up. Taking the lane past 'a parked vehicle' is not realistic. So our happy cyclist would have had that truck on his six at 20mph (32kph) for at least a city block. If it's all the same to you I'll ride in the safe (to me) pocket between the line of parked cars and the line of motor traffic next to it. Your alarmism doesn't impress me. I've been doing it my way safely for way too many decades to be convinced otherwise.

Hondo Gravel

MikeyMK

Crack on. You know what the laws of averages are, right? Its only a matter of time, by simple mathematics.

JW Fas

The Dutch reach is a decent solution, but teaching it isn't everything. Ultimately, we would depend on people voluntarily following this method, and we all know how stupid humans can be. A low-tech way to mistake proof this is to design doors such that two latches must be pulled to open them. To open the front driver or passenger door the occupant would have to hold open a latch on the car's B-pillar and then open the door latch with the other arm. This would force them to twist their body whether they want to or not. The rear doors would be opened by first holding open a latch on the C-pillar followed by the door latch, and it would double as a secondary childproofing measure.

jon c. 

If the street in question had sharrows to indicate that riders should take the lane, would that influence your choice of lane position?

Leisesturm

It would. However, it is amazing the number of drivers that didn't get the memo, and if one of the mouth breathers behind me is doing stupid things to try and get around me on a sharrow I will usually make it easy for them and move over right.

Leisesturm

Car companies would immediately lobby such innovation to a standstill! It is more likely that towards the end of the lifetime of a current Millenial that car doors will still open the way they do now. By the time any further R&D might take place in car chassis design, the parallel developments in LRTT (Limited Range Transporter Technology) would simply allow a car's occupants to beam directly from the car interior to the transporter pads in their home or destination address.

Paul Barnard

In another thread on filtering to the front, I said that one of the reasons I wouldn't filter is the possibility of getting doored. One poster suggested I was overstating the danger. IIRC he gloated over never having seen a door opened curbside in all his many miles and years of riding.

63rickert

Back in post #30 claims were made about the relative braking ability of cars versus bicycles. I checked my usual reference for such things, Bicycling Science by David Gordon Wilson. DGW is an extraordinary cyclist and emeritus professor of engineering, MIT and others. The text of the first edition is available online for free. Please refer to Chapter 8, 'Braking'. Stopping distance for a bicycle at normal speeds is excellent. Bikes do belong on public roads. Bicycles are competent to operate on public roads. If you erroneously believe your bike is some kind of second or third class road user maybe just stay off the road. And don't tell me how to ride.

Leisesturm

Seriously? What year was BS published? Just how well do those data sets hold up in light of the advent of four wheel disc brakes on cars and trucks? Anti-lock brakes? What about so-so cyclists that do not possess the exemplary skills of DGW? I don't know, mind you, but I know that I never said bicycles didn't belong on the roads. Of course they do. Well ... I do. Haven't rear ended any trucks lately. Or ever come to think of it.

63rickert

I cite the pre-eminent reference work in the field and it is just not good enough for this forum. Because red herrings and non sequiturs. All your questions are readily answered online for free. If you want the newest edition you can pay MIT Press. Bicycling Science is about bicycles, it is not about exemplars or racing or the spandex set.

If you think or suggest that bicycles are inherently unsafe, do not stop well, you could reasonably anticipate some pushback. And if you just take it as an article of faith that bicycles have excessively long stopping distances or need perfect operators to get good performance you should be behind the wheel of a car.