Printable View
At least that is a low speed scenario. Rider probably lives.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamal
Most of the serious bike/car accidents I've heard about were from the rear. Every close call I've had was from behind.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamal
A riding buddy spent a month in the hospital and six more on crutches after getting hit from behind last year. He was very very lucky.
Guess what side of the road he rides on now.
A bike path or a gravel road? I can't imagine the heebie jeebies of getting back out on roads after getting hit!Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
Simply put (and this is my opinion) the best way to survive a vehicle collision is to avoid it.
You can't avoid what you can't see.
Again, only my opinion but I think the ride with the traffic thing is foolish and gets riders killed. It's based on the whole, "better to be hit going the same direction than head-on."
That concept is only true when describing two vehicles where a same direction crash is far more survivable than a head-on one. In a car/bike scenario the impact kills the rider regardless of direction. The speeds are too diverse and the protection too limited for the directions to matter much.
I firmly believe we'd see fewer cycling deaths if we changed that rule to "ride facing traffic".
One of the main problems with the facing traffic thing is on 2-lane roads that really have no feasible "shoulder" for cyclists ride on - then the driver has no "slow down and wait for a safe opportunity to pass" option. To give the cyclist sufficient space, it would almost certainly require the driver to encroach on the oncoming lane... and if there's another vehicle there... we all know how that's going to turn out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
Yeah, that is a problem. Although my opinion is that bikes don't belong on roads without shoulders.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
That's saying, "Not only am I going to trust that you'll stay in your lane. Now I'm going to get in your lane in front of you and trust you to avoid me."
That's just tempting fate far more than I ever want to.
Yeah... that's going to be a problem. In a lot of ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
There would be maybe 10-20% of legal roads to ride in most of the eastern US if you only stuck to roads w/a big enough shoulder. I don't ride road all that much anymore after nearly getting hit from behind a few years ago, but still do gravel rides that involve plenty of road connections. We have so many windy old roads with low traffic that are phenomenal for cycling, almost all of which are 35mph or less. After my close call I bought a Garmin Varia and won't ride road w/o it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
This. And the time the driver has to make that decision is drastically reduced as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
Speed differential matters. If I’m riding 15mph and a driver is going 35, that’s a 20mph impact. If I’m riding into traffic at 15 and the car is going 35, that’s a 50mph impact.
That also translates to a 30mph difference in the passing reference as well.
Cars turning right onto the road you’re riding on aren’t looking for ya. Is it lower speed impact, yep. Is it a great way to lose teeth? Yep.
Intersections also seem dicey if heading the wrong way.
Roxtar always has the hot takes. But I also acknowledge he lives in NM, I’d be really spooked riding roads there as well.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Disagree. It seems most of the recent cyclist-enthusiast deaths here in Colorado have been caused by getting hit from behind. It is common, not rare. And by cyclist-enthusiast I mean not the folks/kids/carless ppl who are riding on the wrong side of the road or on opposing sidewalks because they don't know any better, but also get killed.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamal
A good friend of mine was hit from behind and barely survived. His best friend was killed a few months back, a bike shop owner back in VA. He was also hit from behind.
On 119...this is enraging.
And there was another bike collision on same day in Boulder, motorcyclist hit a tandem up left hand from behind, they survived but with injuries. Motorcyclist kept going for a bit but crashed and died anyway.
Bicyclists ARE traffic. We are treated as such by laws in every state I've looked into, and thus we have the same rights and responsibilites as drivers of cars.
Riding against the direction of travel is illegal and stupid. Full stop.
The safest way to ride on the road, IMO, is to TAKE THE FULL LANE. In Nevada, and many other states, the law explicitly says that we are entitled to do so whenever the lane is not wide enough to safely share with a car. In reality, basically no lanes are wide enough (Assuming you+bike is 3', car gives you 3' of space as legally required, and the car is 6'. Most lanes are not wider than 10'.) I also like blinky rear lights.
Anecdotally, when I started riding right in the middle of the lane by default a few years ago, the number of negative encounters with drivers decreased dramatically. Only occasionally do they even honk. My thinking is that the danger is they think there is enough space to squeeze by and get it wrong and either hit me from behind or sideswipe me, or at least pass really closely. But no driver thinks they can pass if I'm in the middle of the lane, so they are forced to change lanes. I decide when or if I move over to make that easier for them.
If they are honking and shaking their fists at you, they have seen you and aren't going to accidentally sideswipe you.
I'd like to rant about people posting shit like this, thinking it's "funny" while cyclists are getting hit by cars fairly regularly:
Attachment 466285
Further exacerbated by defending this shit when they are called out on it... :mad:
Just bought a pair from REI for $64. Think they’re still on sale FWIW.Quote:
Originally Posted by simple
Edit: Eluder already linked to them.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I got buzzed *and* coal-rolled the other day as I was out of the saddle going uphill. White dodge with smoke stacks. Totally intentional, no opposing traffic he chose to get closer to me, not move away, my varia didn't matter as I could hear him coming as he floored the gas. It was on a less-traveled road on the way to a good gravel road, and I suspected I would eventually pass his home, which I did.
I know now which mailbox is his, as well as his last name. Thinking of signing him up for a bunch of gay porn mags, maybe make a donation in his name to the democratic party. Or maybe just fill his mailbox completely full of cow manure, of which there is plenty of around here. Any better ideas?
To get back to my house, there is a very narrow, winding section and a bridge that most cars don't bother staying on their side until it's too late, it's a narrow two lane to begin with. I always take the lane there and have gotten comfortable taking it on uphills on paved sections where otherwise folks would try to squirm over in other lane on a blind spot.
Why not both? Also definitely donate to a bunch of hippy environmentalist stuff in his name, "Iva Smallcock."Quote:
Originally Posted by Jax
Sugar in the fuel tank. :mad:
yeah on 2 lane roads i pretty much take at least half the lane which requires the car to do a proper passQuote:
Originally Posted by climberevan
This thread is a great reminder as to why I don't ride road bikes.
Some of my scariest encounters this year are e-bikes going against traffic in bike lanes. It’s a mounting issue… it also supports the narrative that ‘bikes are crazy and are the problem’ that make effective legislation difficult at best.
Its an opinion… but I think if cyclists behave predictably and act like vehicles we’d had a better shot at saying “hey how about some better bike lanes”.
People who ride fast on sidewalks, against traffic, meander over center medians, and any other litany of DUI bike behavior really hack me off because they’re adding fuel to the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by climberevan
I’ve always felt like there’s a parallel between road bikers and backcountry skiers in avalanche terrain. Everyone’s either telling me why they’re smart and won’t get hit, or they’re telling me about a recent close call, or they’re telling me about someone they know who recently got clocked.
It’s different in Italy. Why?
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Attachment 466307
On a lighter note, this is fucked. A pair of Shimano shoes with safety warning. In dozens of languages.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I get all these concerns. And I don't disagree with a lot of them. But there's one overlaying factor that, at least to me, trumps all arguments.
What will get me the best chance of getting through the next two miles of road home alive?
I'll do all I can to be unobtrusive; stay far off on the shoulder, ever farther when cars come, but I WILL NOT turn my back on approaching vehicles.
I refuse to put my life in the hands of angry rednecks, drunks, texting teens, self medicating idiots, lipstick applying soccer moms, or anyone else driving down this section of 2-lane.
There is simply too much history of people who did so, and didn't live to regret it.
Maybe if New Mexico actually raised the gas tax they could actually build some shoulders on their roads.
I gave up road biking because it wasn't safe. I'd rather miss trees than worry about some kid on a cell phone seeing me. I drive a Prius. I get "Coal Rolled" about once a week on my commute. I'm not a tree hugger, but the mentality of the guys doing this also playing games with cyclist is scarry. The death of this kid in boulder is tragic. No 16 year old should die. I bet it will be a cell phone distraction. It doesn't matter what lane you are in, the car will always win.
Welcome to 20 years ago. When's the last time you bought anything? 1963?Quote:
Originally Posted by jm2e