I’m coming home from work last night on a two lane (each way with a barrier – grass, trees, etc between the oncoming lanes) and came to a very abrupt stop. Traffic on this semi-residential road (no bike lane or significant shoulder to speak of) is somewhat slow at this hour but not this slow.
As I make my way through the traffic, I discover two roadies traveling double-wide along at about 8-10 mph, chatting it up and completely oblivious (or just didn’t give a damn) to the traffic condition they were causing behind them. The first rider was over to the right as far as he could go (which would allow enough room for cars to pass), but his buddy was next to him about 5 feet to his left in the middle of the second lane effectively blocking traffic and causing everybody to switch lanes to pass. I saw several cars come dangerously close as they approached these guys (not expecting to see a cyclist in the middle of the road) and several close-call fender-bender type of accidents were narrowly avoided as motorists merged to the roadie-free lane.
Needless to say, there were some very upset motorists trying to get home only to find their usually traffic-free road clogged by two roadies. While I won’t condone the behavior (honking, yelling, etc) from some of the motorists, these roadies certainly weren’t doing anything to promote the whole “Be Kind to Cyclists” movement here in Austin (I even saw one of the roadies veer off into a grocery store parking lot to chase down a motorist who honked his horn – but I digress as this is probably a topic for a separate post).
So, I need a ruling from the ST brain trust here. Were these guys inconsiderate a-hole roadies actually adding fuel to the fire of the cyclist vs. motorist debate or were they following the “rules of the road” and had every right to occupy an entire lane of traffic?
Were these guys inconsiderate a-hole roadies actually adding fuel to the fire of the cyclist vs. motorist debate or were they following the “rules of the road” and had every right to occupy an entire lane of traffic?
They were making life tougher for all of us who ride. And they don’t have any right to occupy and entire lane of traffic in the circumstance you described.
These guys make us all look like a bunch of self centered pricks (a phrase I once heard in a conversation with a fellow motorist). As cyclists, we should call out these jerks.
Regardless of what they had the right to do, it wasn’t very smart. I don’t push my rights to the road to that extent. It would be no consolation to me at all to know that they were going to put “He had the right to do that!” on my headstone. Road rage can be bad enough when you’re in your car, I don’t want to intentionally push the buttons of some disgruntled bad-day-at-the-office person or frazzled soccer mom trying to hurry home while I’m on my bike. Very brave (pronounced “dumb”) to go chasing someone down like that too, people have been shot by road rage fueled people that they chased down to make their point.
I might be wrong, but I thought in Texas a cyclist is entitled to the entire lane if it is 12 feet or less in width. That said, it doesn’t help cyclo-driver relations to take full advantage of law, particularly when so few motorists understand the rules for bikes to begin with.
Often, if traffic is heavy, I’ll ride 2-3 feet out into the lane to prevent cars from trying to meet next to me. A narrow, shoulderless road isn’t meant to accommodate a cyclist and two cars all at once.
I don’t really see “taking the lane” as a really jerky thing.
I’m sure different states have different statutes, but in Arizona it is legal to be two abreast with spacing that is as close to the right as safely possible.
Part of me says that if the law is the same in Texas, they are just legally doing what shared roads allow and the motorists must tolerate and adapt…but the smarter part of me knows how hurried everyone in cars can be and thinks it may be legal but highly risky.
****** *Where in the lane to ride. (Sec. 551.103) You have to ride as far to the right as is “practicable”. Of course, many of us feel that cars whizzing by us in the same lane is dangerous and thus it’s more “practicable” to take the whole lane in such cases, but that’s for the court to decide if you use that defense. There are exceptions when you don’t have to ride to the right: * *when the outside lane is too small to fit a car and bike side by side, or is less than 14 feet wide * *when there are hazards in your way (dead animals, potholes, etc.) * *when you’re passing a slower-moving vehicle * *when you’re going at least as fast as surrounding traffic * *when you’re preparing to make a left-hand turn * *when you’re on a one-way street (in that case, you can ride to the far left instead of the far right) *
Two-abreast OK if on a multi-lane road. On any road with more than one lane of traffic going in the same direction, cyclists may ride two-abreast, as long as they don’t “impede the normal and reasonable flow of traffic”. Otherwise, they’re expected to ride single-file. (Sec. 551.103)
**
So these clowns were riding illegal, as well as stupid and inconsiderate.
They should have been single file. about 12 inches from the shoulder
Under the Uniform Vehicle Code, they should have been single file, but it is up to them to decide how close to the shoulder they should ride.
no way was this illegal. If it was a semi-residential road (that most likely has a 25-35mph speed limit) then riding at 8-10mph should be fine.
Just because cars may have to slow, make a safe lane change and pass doesn’t mean they were impedeing traffic. It is very normal and reasonable for a car to have to slow, be patient, pass etc. even though most drivers don’t like to do it.
Sounds like they were triathletes on road bikes, not roadies.
There are times when riding two abreast or when taking up the lane is safer. If I don’t think it’s safe for a motorist to try to squeeze by we when riding close to the edge, depending on the circumstances (how fast traffic is moving, the number of lanes, etc.), I’ll move further into the lane to remove that temptation. Doesn’t sound like that was the situation here, but then again, i really don’t care.
What part of the snippets are you having a hard time understanding?
The rider out five feet in the lane was not riding as far to the right as “practicable.” That’s illegal. They *were *impeding the flow of traffic, as you can tell by the fact that the OP had to slow “abruptly.” *That’s *illegal.
Something to consider- When I ride i tend to ride about 3 feet from the right side of the road. I find that when I hug the edge I am more likely to get buzzed by a fast moving car. From what i have seen drivers are more likely to try to force their way through, even with oncoming trafiic if you are all the way to the right. But when you are about 3 feet from the edge you force them to slow down and move over to pass. When a car is coming from the opposite direction they can not force their way through. the other advantage is that if you need to move over you have left yourself room to move right and not go off the road.
It sounds like these guys were just being jerks- but who knows maybe they were riding single file tight to the right and kept getting buzzed so they moved out to slow traffic down.
What part of the snippets are you having a hard time understanding?
The rider out five feet in the lane was not riding as far to the right as “practicable.” That’s illegal. They *were *impeding the flow of traffic, as you can tell by the fact that the OP had to slow “abruptly.” *That’s *illegal.
I was riding to work this morning on a road that could be described in a very similar way to what the original poster wrote. In my case, I had to ride 5’ from the curb because there are very wide storm sewer drains with grates wider than my slick MTB tires. Some of the other roads I ride require me to be about that distance because the city is VERY late clearing the winter gravel from the roads. If I rode next to the curb, I would sink in and risk falling.
I’ll agree that what the riders were probably riding further into the lane than they needed to be, but I’m not sure that you have all the information in order to determine if what they were doing was illegal or not.
You mean since the OP used his break pedal the cyclists were illegal? The only time I ever stop “abruptly” is when something runs out in front of my car or I wasn’t paying attention and anticipating traffic.
You said “Of course, many of us feel that cars whizzing by us in the same lane is dangerous and thus it’s more “practicable” to take the whole lane in such cases”
I agree with you here, and I’d dare to say most judges would too. Who really would rule against cyclists using a SHARED, double lane, semi-residential road?
I agree with others that it may be risky, stupid, even inconsiderate…but not illegal.