Cyclists! Why do they ride in the middle of the road?

[Mike.Gayner]

That is exactly how cyclists hold cars and trucks up as it makes it harder to overtake. That's why we've got a politician trying to blank off the fast lane for trucks so cars can go a whole 5-10k faster.
It turns the urban speed limit into a defacto 30-40 zone. The problem is its not just one bike, its five to ten say over a journey to work. The time lost however small is exponentially increased by causing you to miss next traffic light phase etc.
Same as how the cops say a few km/h doesn't cost much time on a car/truck journey. People who travel often for work know the multiplier effect this has on your average speed.
Its why the bus driver is moving away as soon as he gives you your change. He should stay stopped until your seated, maybe even engage in 20-30secs of chit chat but no he doesn't as it all adds up to wreck the timetable.

The road isn't yours, you dont own it. You don't have a right to arrive at work in the time you feel is suitable.

Just share the road. Try to be a generous motorist. It's really not asking too much.

[Mike.Gayner]

So, I have a question. When passing parked cars, whose doors may open into your path, why is a driver expected to give way for a cyclist to ride in the middle of the lane?

The driver isn't expected to "give way" to a cyclist any more than they're expected to "give way" to another motorist in their lane. The cyclist has as much right to use the lane as anyone else.

[TheDemonLord]

I see a lot of reference about riding on the flat at 30-40 kph - but consider this:

Open road, uphill, 35 KPH corner - you are on your pedal bike, I am in a cage.

I am travelling at the posted speed limit round the corner - it is entirely possible that I will not see you until it is time to take evasive action in my car. - now if you are in the primary position - I have to move my cage about +- 1 Meter (assuming we are both in the middle of the lane, my car is 1.8 meters wide, plus 10 cm for some breathing room for you).

My options are go into the guard rail/hard shoulder/embankment or go into the other lane - which I may not have enough visibility to see if its clear.

Same scenario, but you are keeping left. I now only have to move my car about 10-20 cms to the which should allow me to stay (just) in my lane whilst avoiding you.

Sorry but I think the primary position is dangerous, I understand the reasoning that it only be taken to mitigate another danger, but the reality is - you are putting yourself entirely at the drivers mercy and if the driver makes an error, you have single handedly eliminated most of their options for avoiding an accident whilst also ensuring that if there is an accident - its probably going to be fatal.

And on a side but related not - if you can travel at 40 kph on the straight - why aren't you wearing protective clothing like motorcyclists?

[Big Dog]

You only need 20kmph contact with your head to be of significant risk to life or quality of life.
Sans helmet you would be lucky to have only a headache.

Even with a helmet your spine may not hold up to a contact to your head at 40.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike.Gayner]

And on a side but related not - if you can travel at 40 kph on the straight - why aren't you wearing protective clothing like motorcyclists?

Because I'm an adult capable of making my own decisions about my own safety.

[Kickaha]

I am travelling at the posted speed limit round the corner - it is entirely possible that I will not see you until it is time to take evasive action in my car. - now if you are in the primary position - I have to move my cage about +- 1 Meter (assuming we are both in the middle of the lane, my car is 1.8 meters wide, plus 10 cm for some breathing room for you).

My options are go into the guard rail/hard shoulder/embankment or go into the other lane - which I may not have enough visibility to see if its clear.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regul...html#DLM303083

5.9 Stopping and following distances

(1) A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.

(2) A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.

[TheDemonLord]

Because I'm an adult capable of making my own decisions about my own safety.

Physics doesn't care if you are an adult or not.

Neither do the hospital staff who are trying to patch you up.

[Twentypercent]

I don't believe they are in more danger on the side of the road. Hitting a car door at even 40kmh would be painful but not likely to be life threatening,

Are you serious? Painful?
I've tried it at less than 40...smashed 3 front teeth, fractured collar bone, destroyed bike.
But I should ride inside door range, so I don't inconvenience you?

If I'm travelling the same speed as the traffic, I'm going to dominate my lane, same as if I'm riding my motorbike. If I'm slower, I'll stay out of the way.

Live and let live. It's not that hard, eh?

[TheDemonLord]

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regul...html#DLM303083

5.9 Stopping and following distances

(1) A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.

(2) A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.

If I slam on the anchors in a tight corner - I am liable to understeer directly into the side of the corner or the oncoming lane - neither of which is appealing to me. Plus there are many instances in NZ roads where following that rule is impossible (without driving dangerously slowly) due to the unique geography of NZ (and thus the unique geography of NZ roading)

[TheDemonLord]

Are you serious? Painful?
I've tried it at less than 40...smashed 3 front teeth, fractured collar bone, destroyed bike.
But I should ride inside door range, so I don't inconvenience you?

If I'm travelling the same speed as the traffic, I'm going to dominate my lane, same as if I'm riding my motorbike. If I'm slower, I'll stay out of the way.

Live and let live. It's not that hard, eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcy...lmet#Full_face

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcy...tive_equipment

Problem solved - again I put it to you - I wear my full protective equipment on my bike when I am just popping down to the shops at 50 kph just in case some other idiot does something idiotic...

Why don't Cyclists?

and before you start the arguement that there isn't appropriate safety gear for cyclists let us think on the following statements:

There hasn't been any invented, because there isn't any demand for it.

There isn't any demand for it, Because Cyclists don't think they need it.

[haydes55]

The driver isn't expected to "give way" to a cyclist any more than they're expected to "give way" to another motorist in their lane. The cyclist has as much right to use the lane as anyone else.

Yes that's true, but my point is, why can't a cyclist give way? I ride and drive in a manner that I don't want a single vehicle to be held up behind me, I travel at or above the speed limit 98% of the time. Regardless of what speed I'm doing, I always pull over to let the vehicle behind me past (if they caught up, they are faster than me).

It's common courtesy. Like shopping, you are in a line with a bottle of milk and a choc bar, the guy in front has a trolley full of shit. The courteous thing would be to let the guy with the milk and choc bar through first.

Deliberately slowing down other people when you don't have to is the dick move. Whether walking down a foot path, shopping or driving

[Mike.Gayner]

If I slam on the anchors in a tight corner - I am liable to understeer directly into the side of the corner or the oncoming lane - neither of which is appealing to me. Plus there are many instances in NZ roads where following that rule is impossible (without driving dangerously slowly) due to the unique geography of NZ (and thus the unique geography of NZ roading)

If you cant handle your car you should think about not driving on our roads.

[TheDemonLord]

If you cant handle your car you should think about not driving on our roads.

I am perfectly capable of handling a car, the reality of what you are suggesting however is creating an artificial hazard for any law abiding car driver.

And that assumes that the car driver is driving legally and as we know from experiance - Kiwi's are shit drivers with little more than a passing regard for road rules.

That combined with no safety protection makes riding a pedal bike in a manner where you have reduced other road users options and ability to avoid hitting you a dumb fuck idea. Also combine that fact that unlike a motorbike which has the option of accelerating away from a hazard, your safety is fully reliant on the car driver being both skillfull, vigilant and driving in a law abiding manner, this makes it a doubley dumb fuck idea.....

because remember, whether the cyclist hits the car, or the car hits the cyclist- it ain't gonna hurt the car....

[R650R]

The road isn't yours, you dont own it.

Just share the road. Try to be a generous. It's really not asking too much.

Funny but that's what car drivers ask of cyclists riding two abreast using public infrastructure for social chit chat.
I'm all for giving normal commuter cycles some room and patience but the issue people are pissed about is these boy racer ones with their chin on the tarmac who can't/wont look behind them to assist with letting traffic flow.
There has been a big shift in the number of cyclists using our roads, but they are still a very small percentage of road users even in the city. Your days are numbered though, with the aging population soon the elderly with mobility scooters will become the dominant political road user group with big money, they will probably paint cycle lanes purple and make them for mobility scooters only

Why don't Cyclists?

and before you start the arguement that there isn't appropriate safety gear for cyclists let us think on the following statements:

There hasn't been any invented, because there isn't any demand for it.

There isn't any demand for it, Because Cyclists don't think they need it.

There has been gear invented, just look at what downhill and enduro mountain bikers wear, there's even neck protectors and lightweight (compared to mc) full face helmets.
Its expensive and yes you will get more hot tired and sweaty wearing it. But whats better, trying to look cool or being safe.
The truth is the boy racer cycle community cares more about looks than staying safe and mitigating injuries.
Soon ACC will see the mounting bills and make regular commuters wear this stuff.

Seriously there needs to be a govt survey of cyclist speeds, they are reaching speeds obtainable by 50cc scooters who have to wear proper helmets.
Why should a car driver face a manslaughter charge because boy racer cyclists want to look cool instead of protecting themselves properly?

[swbarnett]

I see a lot of reference about riding on the flat at 30-40 kph - but consider this:...

Sorry but I think the primary position is dangerous,

If done in the way you describe then I agree. However, you must also consider that there is a legal onus on the driver to be able to stop in their clear visibility. If you hit a cyclist blocking your lane it's not the cyclist that is legally at fault. Also, if you are courteous and sit behind the cyclist waiting patiently then it's up to the cyclist to pull over ASAP and let you pass. After all, on the type of corner you describe there aren't likely to be many parked cars.

I understand the reasoning that it only be taken to mitigate another danger, but the reality is - you are putting yourself entirely at the drivers mercy and if the driver makes an error, you have single handedly eliminated most of their options for avoiding an accident whilst also ensuring that if there is an accident - its probably going to be fatal.

Have you ever cycled in traffic? If you haven't done it then it's going to be nigh on impossible to explain it to you. Just like trying to explain to a an anti-motorcycle car nut why we ride.

Essentially a car door opening is something that can't be predicted and can leave you with no time to react. And more than likely you'll end up in front of fast moving traffic if you can. If you've got traffic behind you already travelling at your speed you are a LOT safer.

And on a side but related not - if you can travel at 40 kph on the straight - why aren't you wearing protective clothing like motorcyclists?

Becuse if you wore that sort of gear at that speed on the flat you'd overheat and seriously increase the chances of an accident. I have passed out once while riding in hot summer weather. Thankfully I had just stopped so not a bad fall. Rode the rest of the way to work sans helmet with no problems.