Lane splitting/filtering: the legal and commonsense answers

**rastuscat** · 2nd July 2014, 10:58

Originally Posted by awayatc

When was the last time , or the first time for that matter legislation ever changed in our favour?s

When it became legal for motorcyclists but not cars to use bus lanes.

**haydes55** · 2nd July 2014, 11:08

Originally Posted by rastuscat

When it became legal for motorcyclists but not cars to use bus lanes.

Also LAMs scheme is definitely in our favour, new CBTA sounds better as well.

**Big Dog** · 2nd July 2014, 13:15

Originally Posted by Urano

fair reasoning.
but i still don't agree.

true, if two cars are beside each other it's unlikely they'll squeeze.
but take a look at this situation: two cars paired are often between 1 and 1,50 mt apart. a bike is large something around 60 cm, so it gives you about 20 to 40 cm per side of gap between you and each car.
now, let's say both the cagers would proceed PERFECTLY STRAIGHT (and you know it'll never happen...), do you know how quickly you'd do those average 30 cm should any perturbation occur to you at speed?
what if between the cars shows up a pothole? what if the tarmac between the two lanes is uneven, or has any junctions, and this destabilize your ride?
you have 30 cm of margin.
at low speed you can react and try to save the situation, at high speed it could be gone south well before you had even the time to realize what happened, and this is not dependent on the speed differential with the cars, but only on your speed.

and after all, why?
if the traffic is flowing at speed it means it isn't stuck. wait 20 secs more and make a safe takeover.

to be clear: never said slaloming is intrinsically "safe" (as safe as motorbiking could be...). i said that done with the brain on it will leave you more space to keep the situation under control...

By that logic I shouldn't take a dump either in case a plane crash lands on my house.
Eliminate the risks you can, minimise the risks you can't, try to get enough experience / training to spot the difference.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

**James Deuce** · 2nd July 2014, 13:26

Still bored.

**Maha** · 2nd July 2014, 16:36

Gets better as you scroll down...

'Cyclists should always check twice for motorcycles.'

They don't even check for pedestrians/red lights or trucks, so why would they comply with this?

**Urano** · 2nd July 2014, 22:54

Originally Posted by Big Dog

Eliminate the risks you can

exactly.
that maneuver on a road of cars that are movin' on quickly is a useless risk.
i'd eliminate

**Jase H** · 3rd July 2014, 07:00

Waiting at the traffic lights not that long ago I overheard a conversation between another biker and a motorcycle cop. The biker was asking about the legalities of lane splitting. The cop was saying that it was Ok to go past stationary traffic, as it could be argued you're passing parked cars. However, as soon as the traffic starts moving, you need to move in to line with the traffic.

Ignoring the extreme views/ hype such as "I don't think anyone should do this because it's not safe", or "I do what I want and I don't care", can any cop/ lawyer/ sensible authority comment on what is actually allowed here? Personally, I think the motorcycle cop's answer is actually a sensible approach.

**Berries** · 3rd July 2014, 07:08

Sensible is not legislated for and the next cop you meet might have a different view. See section 2.6 of this and then realise that it can be interpreted in several ways by the man with the hat.

**swbarnett** · 3rd July 2014, 09:32

Originally Posted by Urano

exactly.
that maneuver on a road of cars that are movin' on quickly is a useless risk.
i'd eliminate

What's useless is subjective (as is what "quickly" means). Each rider has to make up their own mind as to what is and what isn't for them.

**awayatc** · 3rd July 2014, 10:24

Originally Posted by Jase H

the motorcycle cop's answer is actually a sensible approach.

a very rare encounter.......

sensible approach by infringement notice issuers definitely not the norm.........

**Big Dog** · 3rd July 2014, 13:09

Originally Posted by Urano

exactly.
that maneuver on a road of cars that are movin' on quickly is a useless risk.
i'd eliminate

In my experience (however unscientific) it is safer to lane split than to sit in line and drivers without a a tonne of steel in their peripheral vision are a lot unpredictable.

Times "contacted" by another vehicle in the 10 years I have lived in or near Auckland:
Splitting = 0
Threading / weaving = 0
Sitting in traffic behaving = 6-10.

Times emergency braking in the last 2 years:
Splitting = 5-10
Threading = 5-10 ( much smaller sample, very rare I do this in traffic.
Sitting in traffic behaving = 20-40.

For me it is a daily judgement call based on the speed of traffic, weather and my own fitness for purpose. I don't tend to split or weave when very tired due to shorter reactions. This is because if there is a gain to be had by taking control of the situation I do. If there is not I try to have a little faith.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

**Berries** · 4th July 2014, 07:23

Originally Posted by Jase H

Ignoring the extreme views/ hype such as "I don't think anyone should do this because it's not safe", or "I do what I want and I don't care", can any cop/ lawyer/ sensible authority comment on what is actually allowed here? Personally, I think the motorcycle cop's answer is actually a sensible approach.

People shouldn't forget that the road rules were written for cars. The debate on here always revolves around those grey areas where the small size of the bike means it can be in places that were never considered in the law. This covers filtering, splitting and overtaking between a car and a solid yellow line. Legally possible yes, but the rules were not written specifically to allow motorbikes to do it.

**TheDemonLord** · 4th July 2014, 07:57

I myself tend to weave alot - Especially when people are in the overtaking lane, sitting at 95 trying to 'overtake' the traffic in the left hand lane that is doing 94...