1989Pre 

I was on a long ride on the 4th, and on the way home, a car driver readied himself to pull out of his driveway, his bumper pretty much flush with the side of the bike lane. I did not want to ride that close to the front of a car (whether the driver had been celebrating the holiday, or not). I stopped about 20 feet before him, got off my bike and stood there. He drove off.
Usually, a car that is at the edge of the driveway or parking lot egress will back up a few feet to give a bike rider some 'buffer zone" (to allow for mistakes or surprises from either party).
How would (do) you handle this situation? Do you feel comfortable "knocking the dust off' of someone's grille?

Ninety5rpm

First, I probably wouldn't be in the bike lane in the first place.
Second, if I was in the bike lane, I would look back to make sure it's clear, and move way out into the street.

I would not stop. That's for sure.

1989Pre 

That's probably the only alternative. If a car is even a little bit into the bike lane, I circle around it from the rear. I guess it's just a matter of trust, and sometimes we don't have much to base our assumptions on.

SylvainG

Why wouldn't you be in the bike line? Assuming here you're on a bike of course...

DrIsotope

^^^This right here.

Rollfast

When you can diagnose bad breath, definitely too close.


You probably avoided a case of road rage or something. Consider yourself fortunate.

Ninety5rpm

Edge riding - riding at the edge of the roadway whether it is demarcated as a bike lane or not - is okay where there is no chance of cross traffic. But at approaches to intersections or even driveways, it's an inconspicuous and vulnerable place to ride. I avoid it (and the law allows it, for excellent safety reasons).

Even between driveways and intersections there are good safety reasons to use the full lane, but especially so at intersections. This video shows the issue with bike lane riding at driveways in particular. I suspect the situation is similar to that of the OP.


When you're well out in the traffic lane instead of the bike lane, not only are you much more conspicuous (you're riding where they are looking), but you have more space and time to deal with avoiding collisions.

I use the bike lane pretty much only when necessary to facilitate passing, usually only after they've slowed down, and on uphill grades. Otherwise, I use the full lane. It's MUCH safer. It's amazing how many fewer conflicts you have doing that.

You have to get over the fear of getting hit from behind, however. One of the many advantages of a mirror is it helps you see in real time how well motorists react to your presence when you're using the full lane, and how they're generally oblivious if you're at the edge. It's eye opening.

gregf83 

I would just check if there were any cars coming in the right lane. If the lane was clear I take the middle of the lane. I do this for cars rolling up to stop signs as well as they are not looking in the bike lane and often won't see you. I often see a car about to roll a stop sign in front of me stop when they see me in the lane.

Chris0516

I have never done that, when I was on my bike. But when I was a pedestrian, and the driver stopped partially, or completely on the crosswalk. I have done that more times than I remember. So, I motioned for them to backup behind the white 'stop' line, and I wouldn't proceed until they did back up.

1989Pre 

I would still tend to avoid going out into the open road as much as possible: It is just not my style. I am not convinced that a driver who can (will?) not see me in the far right of the lane will notice me in the middle of it.
If he is drunk, and his foot "slips" on the brake pedal, it will just be the difference between me having the time to say, "Hail..." and "Hail Mary, full..." before the car hits.
In the still photo of the video Ninety5rpm supplied, I would slow and go around that car from behind: His bumper is in my territory and I must take defensive action. She'll get my point.

SylvainG

I don't think if that rider would have been on the road instead of the bike line would have made much difference in this case. It's obvious that even with his light on at night, that this driver didn't see him coming. The rider tried to avoid by going into the road but the car still didn't see him and by speeding up to cross gave him no chance. If it would have been me, seeing how the car keep edging forward, I would have slowed down and waved my hand in front of my light to get his attention. Failing to do so, I would have stopped. It's because of his own temerity that he hit that car.

Like many of us, I'm also a driver and I hate when a bike is hogging the line, specially when climbing at slow speed when there is a perfectly good bike line/path he can use so I don't do what I don't like being done to me. Although I ride somewhat fast when I commute (around 20 mph), I'm also careful when crossing intersection or driveways, much more than that rider that's for sure lol.

JohnX

i think you made the right decision. cars win, that's just the way it is.

i'm encouraged Florida is spending some money on doing bike crash studies and it confirms my suspicion that riding at night increases the chances of a fatality. but nothing major in the study. still, i like the fact that studies are being done.

https://www.fdot.gov/research/Complet...977-23-rpt.pdf

mr_bill

They are generally oblivious - period. (Isn't there a whole subforum?)


Assume you aren't seen.

-mr. bill

Leisesturm

The law does not allow complete avoidance of bike lanes, except as a way to filter past stopped vehicle traffic just because YOU don't like them. The law allows for a cyclist to take reasonable safety precautions, which full time use of the 'full lane' is NOT compliant with. But, hey, you do you, just don't preach it as gospel, cuz it ain't. It cannot be MUCH safer to have several 100+ horsepower vehicles strung out behind you angrily looking for a way to get around your entitled six. Did it ever occur to you that you could (since I agree you do have a greater amount of reaction time) pull into the travel lane at intersections? Not all intersections either, most are quite safe to traverse while staying in the bike lane. The exceptions are easy to identify. Seriously, I don't know where you bike lane avoiders ride. I sure don't see any bikes cruising in the travel lanes around here.

Leisesturm

I'm glad I don't live in Florida. I'd be peeved if my tax dollars were being spent to tell me that riding at night increases the chances of a fatality. Duh... I take it you don't drive at night either. I don't need a sponsored study to determine that driving at night is more dangerous than driving in daylight!! But there is this: at night there are fewer cars (and bikes) on the road. IF you are well rested, have adequate lighting and visibility and your (driving) bike handling skills are above average you might actually be safer on the road at night under certain conditions. My brother is a commercial long haul trucker and he actually arranges his mileage so the bulk of them are done in the wee hours. Works for him. I don't drive that much but I am a full time cycle commuter. I ride at all hours and any hour that I need to. If it is dark I have lights. Works for me.

FBinNY 

I think you were over sensitive. Unless there was more than what you said, you still had the same amount of lane available to you as before he stopped there. After all, what if the road went under a viaduct, would you expect that the lane need be widened or moved left to make "buffer room" at the wall?

As I read this forum, I get the impression that for some, there will never be enough room. First we need lanes to make a buffer against traffic, then we need a buffer between the traffic and the lanes, then we need a buffer to compensate for traffic encroaching on the buffer, then.......

So, IMO if the \lane was already wide enough there was no issue at all. And if there were some encroachment, you always had the option to move toward the left within the lane, or (God forbid) move left out of the lane momentarily.

Of course, my response would have been different if you wrote about you worrying that the driver was about to pull out the first moment he saw a break in traffic, regardless of his effect on you.

Ninety5rpm

He might have had good reason to choose an edge line to avoid bad surface conditions, but that line greatly reduces conspicuousness, and he really should have slowed down accordingly. Prior to the crash watching him ride at that speed near the edge with those short sight lines (curves) gave me the heebie jeebies. I don't do that.

Ninety5rpm

What I wrote: "I use the bike lane pretty much only when necessary to facilitate passing, usually only after they've slowed down, and on uphill grades. Otherwise, I use the full lane. "

Your interpretation: "full time use of the 'full lane'"

See any differences? Hint: they are there, and they are critical to legal compliance and preventing road rage. Defaulting to full lane use is a far cry from "full time use of the full lane".

Regarding legal compliance: the bike lane laws usually explicitly apply only to cyclists moving slower than other traffic, which means they don't apply when other traffic is not present. The presence of faster traffic makes bike lane use (legally) necessary; that's when I use it. Exactly like I said.

Regarding road rage prevention: in my experience motorists are delighted when a cyclist in their lane that they are approaching moves aside into the bike lane, obviously to accommodate them (never mind it's also to comply with the law). Their delight is expressed in waves, nods, smiles and thumb's up.

Moe Zhoost

My simple non-analytical answer is that I tend to be wary and, unless there is some clear, unambiguous sign of the driver's intent, either back off and let them proceed or I alter my route to allow flexible escape if needed.

1989Pre 

Sounds right to me, Moe. the way I think about it is this: When I see a car jockeying up close like that, I figure the driver is not top-notch. Maybe he's just tired after working long hours. Maybe she just wants to "scare the rider a little bit". Who knows.
If I am a little over-defensive about this, I can handle that assessment, because it's not like I'm trying for a 75% success rate, here: All it takes is once and riding a bike may be over for a guy my age.
A practical and considerate driver leaves a bit of space.., and that is the only kind of driver you want pointing their car at you at point-blank range.

Super_Sport

I'm a wary rider too and have to agree with the OP and Moe Zhoost. If you are uncertain of the driver or just have "feeling" about the situation, back off and let the car go. Not worth getting injured or worse for what could be a thirty second stop. Maybe this reasoning is because I started started bike commuting in a small town in Missouri where no one looked out for cyclists. Maybe it's an age/maturity thing or personality or combination of all these but I always say safety is number one when I'm riding.

I think you made a good call. Keep riding safe!

mr_bill

Yeah, funny how you can't see what he saw, huh? Of course, on final approach to the crash, not accident, he was dead center in the lane, where YOU say he would be seen. Yet, he seems to have been using a cloaking device. How else to explain why the oblivious driver didn't see?

-mr. bill

europa

I'm not sure which incident you're talking about, but in the last video, the one Mr Bill showed, I am interested to know how fast the cyclist was traveling. He regularly rides over 30 speed markers (and I assume they are 30 mph, not km/hr) yet appears to be traveling much faster. This could, of course, just be a misperception caused by the camera. With such a long run without side entries, you can also imagine the rider becoming complacent and just powering on, overlooking the side road coming up. Nor was the emerging car all that hard to see though again, the foreshortening of the camera makes it hard to judge just how much time the rider had.

All of which describes how the rider could have reduced the force of the impact. NONE of it excuses the driver who didn't take the trouble to look properly and just pulled out in front of the bike - the rider probably wasn't going to avoid that crash.

My personal approach is to treat every other road user as a homicidal maniac intent on killing me. This is, of course, unfair to the vast majority of road uses, but considering even the best drivers and riders can make mistakes, it's not unreasonable. So far, I've been lucky. That luck could run out on my next ride because with even the best tactics and mind set, sometimes it's all about luck.

mr_bill

Less than 30 mph. Any other blame the victim questions?

-mr. bill

Rollfast

Please leave the assessment of blame to the proper authorities. You were not the person involved and I don't see them being angry.


Posting a bunch of You Tube videos also doesn't tend to help, you can find one for anything like quoting the Bible.