Hogging the road

I agree with all who supported riding out in the lane. I do this pretty much on any road I am on.

• Makes me more visible because I am not blending with things along the side, like parked cars.
• I can actually see further and have a wider angle of view, because I do not have as much blind spot to right side
• It gives me a bit more safety margin should I need to move right more

On the matter of whether the cyclist should pull over, I would say no. I've been behind good and bad cyclists. I have also been behind slow farm tractors - not very many of them pull over. Right or wrong? I don't think there is a right or wrong. Each makes a choice, then we choose how to react.

I will also say that depending on where I am riding and the circumstances, I have been known to locate somewhere safe to pull-out (driveway, side street) to let cars go by. Why? I call it community building. Quite often, the first driver behind honks and waves thanks for my courtesy to them. I do it as a way of changing attitudes one person at a time about cyclists, not because I have to yield to cars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grog

The driver of the car behind me might get a little impatient, but the chances that the driver is enough of a maniac to actually run me over from behind are much lower than the chances of any of the above happening. As for honking, they should keep both hands on the steering wheel, but if they do, it will not impact my descending strategy. My safety is in my own hands and I will definitely let them go by when I feel that it is safe to do so.

---

I agree with everything you've said. And for the record, I have been descending down a long steep winding two lane road, and had an ******* behind me in an SUV lay on his horn for 5 minutes straight as he followed me. I was by myself and yes it was startling, but I didn't change my position because it's where I felt safest. And guess what? The speed limit was 25 and I was doing 30! Eventually I realized that the guy was being an ******* just to be an *******, as he had many opportunities where the road turned straight, there was great visibility, and there were no cars coming up the other lane, and he still chose to stay behind me with his horn blaring. It was only when a line of cars piled up behind him that he decided to give up his fight and go around. But certainly after that display, I wasn't about to be polite to him, even if I had felt safe doing so.

My question is, we are all using the same roads to get somewhere, what makes someone in a car think they have the right to get there faster than myself? On some roads if you slowed down or stopped every time a car needed to pass, you would never get anywhere! And I drive a car quite frequently. I never have and never would get impatient with someone on a bike. I wait for a safe place to pass and I pass. That's sharing the road.

I understand why people take the lane during a descent - and I typically stay out of the shoulder for descents for all the reasons mentioned.

However, this is not someone that's going down the hill and it takes her two minutes to do it and people should just be patient. This is someone that's repeatedly lapping a hill - so cars get to wait when she goes up the hill and cars get to wait when she goes down a hill. When you're doing this in someone's neighborhood - it'd be nice to be friendly about it and not be a major road block in one direction or another for an hour or however long she rides. If she's doing it several times in a row, she should have a good idea which pullouts are free of debris and which arent - we all know it only takes a few seconds to swing partly into a pull out and let a car pass you. These pullouts are for cars to use or trucks to let faster people pass them going up or down a hill - so we're not expecting her to do anything that a car driving that same stretch of road wouldn't do.

+1 to Grog. Cyclists have a right to use the road safely - no way would I pull in to the marbles on a descent to allow a car to pass me (possibly) too closely and destabilise me with its wash. Is my safety not worth 10 or even 30 seconds to someone in a car?

And how is a descending cyclist not sharing the road? We have drivers here who think 'sharing the road' means cyclists getting out of their way. It hasn't dawned on some that it might mean they have to respect bikes as equal road users. There is no road rule here saying I'm a second class citizen on a bike but superior in a car and thus nothing that supports driver convenience over cyclist convenience, let alone cyclist safety. I don't see them ranting that a garbage truck holds them up for 10 seconds - let alone the other 1000 cars in front of them.

Maybe you guys have really law-abiding drivers, but 88% of our offences are traffic offences, overwhelmingly committed in cars. Yet I don't hear our drivers ranting about cars running reds, not using indicators, speeding, drunk drivers ... and they kill over a thousand people a year. Why are cyclists held to a higher moral standard on such matters when cyclists are so benign? It doesn't make sense. :confused: The double standard is insidious.

First of all, I did not 'honk' her, and I followed her all the way down the road. I am certainly not going to endanger a cyclist. I was just saying that I was surprised how it made me feel. And I imagine that people who don't cycle would potentially do something dangerous.

There are areas in the road that are 15% grade. She was going slower than the speed limit - riding her brakes. This is actually a private road and she does not live on it. She does hill repeats. This road is not even 2 lanes wide. The pull outs are so that cars can pass each other when going in the opposite direction. There is no room for 2 cars to pass each other without slowing down. And there is certainly no room for 2 cars and a bike. It is not very crowded, but I have had close calls with cars. That's why I don't ride on it. Since she wasn't going very fast, I think the safest thing for her to do would be to yield and let the car pass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by featuretile

I think the safest thing for her to do would be to yield and let the car pass.

---

No, the safest thing for *her* to do was to not deviate from her line and continue to descend the hill..... it would have been more convenient for you for her to yield, but would only have made her "more safe" if you were posing a threat to her.....

We can debate all you want about what is polite or not polite, whether she should be doing hill repeats on a private road, but that is a *totally* different issue from the safety of the rider. She was perfectly *safe* being left alone to descend the hill without disturbance. I see in no way how it would have been more safe for her to be passed by a vehicle, unless the motorist in the vehicle was actively threatening her, driving in an unsafe manner or was experiencing a malfunction in their car, which I am nicely assuming you were not.

I live less than 2 miles from a road very similiar to the one you describe except that it's twice as steep (1000' in 1 mile) and it does have two lanes. I drive the road at least twice daily (sometimes more on those annoying weekends!) and I rarely see cyclists even though every local cyclist I've ever met knows of it. Occasionally I see someone trying to ascend the road and usually they are pulled off to the side and standing next to their bikes. It's > 18% grade in some spots! Until a few weeks ago, I'd never seen anyone descending it.

I was on my way home (it was daylight) and there was a cyclist turning down this road directly in front of me. I noted that he was dressed like he knew what he was doing and I had my fingers crossed that he wasn't a poser. He wasn't. He knew what he was doing. He took the lane the entire way down the hill and I found myself glad for him and cyclist/car relations that I was the person directly behind him. I was happy to follow at a safe distance and I had no intention of ever attempting to pass him. Of course, it helped that he was doing about the same speed that is safe for a car, so I did not feel like I was hindered anyway. Another driver might have wanted to pass him though, purely based on the fact that he was on a bike and not in a car. As soon as we got to the valley, he pulled right and let me pass and I gave him a little wave.

Anyway, my point is that I totally get being surprised by your own feeling of annoyance at another cyclist, but like others are trying to point out...your annoyance might have been misplaced in this situation. It does sound like she was doing the right thing for her own safety. I'm sure it didn't help already knowing that she wasn't the friendliest of sorts from your previous engagement. That probably would have colored my view of the situation had I been in your shoes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oz rider

+1 to Grog. Cyclists have a right to use the road safely - no way would I pull in to the marbles on a descent to allow a car to pass me (possibly) too closely and destabilise me with its wash. Is my safety not worth 10 or even 30 seconds to someone in a car?

And how is a descending cyclist not sharing the road? We have drivers here who think 'sharing the road' means cyclists getting out of their way. It hasn't dawned on some that it might mean they have to respect bikes as equal road users. There is no road rule here saying I'm a second class citizen on a bike but superior in a car and thus nothing that supports driver convenience over cyclist convenience, let alone cyclist safety. I don't see them ranting that a garbage truck holds them up for 10 seconds - let alone the other 1000 cars in front of them.

Maybe you guys have really law-abiding drivers, but 88% of our offences are traffic offences, overwhelmingly committed in cars. Yet I don't hear our drivers ranting about cars running reds, not using indicators, speeding, drunk drivers ... and they kill over a thousand people a year. Why are cyclists held to a higher moral standard on such matters when cyclists are so benign? It doesn't make sense. :confused: The double standard is insidious.

---

Agree 100%.

And as for her not being very "nice"... I hesitate to judge. Because #1 at that particular point she didn't know you were a cyclist (you were getting your mail), she didn't know your motives, and as it turns out you were an irritated resident wondering what the hell she was doing on "your" road when you didn't think she should be riding there (although I would hope your tone didn't come off that way). She could have been tired from doing her hill repeats, focused on what she was doing, or having a bad day and using exercise to blow off steam, and lastly, she was riding her bike. Whether she was turning around or not, did you expect she would stop and have a full on conversation with a stranger? Some people aren't comfortable talking with people they don't know, and aren't social butterflies, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm guessing that might be why she prefers to ride alone, rather than with a club.

But, you know, your feelings are your own. We know you're not going to act out against her because of your feelings, and that's the most important thing. I just think it would probably be more productive to not get worked up about something that isn't likely to change, since she legally has a right to ride on that road.

I'm sorry but just didn't have the stomach to read through all the good posts.

I will say this:

If the cyclist was going down the hill near or above the speed limit, don't complain.
If you had to exceed the speed limit to pass her don't complain.
It seems that the grade you are talking about and the sharp turns, I think she was going over 25MPH, and I would guess that 25MPH was the speed limit.

I have had cars who DEMANDED THAT THEY BE IN FRONT OF ME REGARDLESS OF HOW FAST I WAS COMING DOWN THE HILL. THIS INCLUDES NUMEROUS TIMES WHEN THE CAR ALMOST WENT OVER THE EMBANKMENT DOWN A 100 FOOT CLIFF. OR FISHED TAILED SO HARD THAT I THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO CRASH INTO A GUARD RAIL AND HEARD THEM SKIDDING AROUND A HAIRPIN TURN!! I WATCH THEM SKIDDING AROUND THE TURN.

JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE IN A CAR DOESN'T GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO BE IN FRONT OF A FAST BICYCLE!!

and +1 to all who thought this through carefully!
THANK YOU!! FOR LETTING ME VENT!!

When I saw her at my mailbox, I was stopped and so was she. It was a different time, many weeks before the downhill drive behind her. I told her I was a cyclist and introduced myself. I thought she might be a neighbor and might like to ride together.

I won't belabor this anymore. If she is there and takes the road, there is nothing I can do but follow at a safe distance. I would not personally choose to do what she does. I'm surprised at how many people think that taking the road and making cars crawl down behind them is the better way to go. It doesn't help to make enemies of people in cars. I have taken the lane in situations that required it, but have pulled over as soon as I could find a safe place. I would not want to hit a rock or a crack in the road (or meet an oncoming car in this case) with a car right behind me, especially if the car was tailgating. I thought that what I was saying would promote people being more courteous to each other (both car and bike). I did not expect that so many people would think that what she does is correct.

we were really hoping you'd understand just how seriously difficult it is for cyclists to "pull over to the side" on a steep and winding hill. It's a life or death thing... or at least serious injury. All of us know someone who DID get too far over into the shoulder and crashed and burned..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by featuretile

I'm surprised at how many people think that taking the road and making cars crawl down behind them is the better way to go. It doesn't help to make enemies of people in cars.

---

It's safe and legal as well. Braking hard enough to stop on turnouts at the inclines you describe could well get you run over by some drivers who wouldn't notice the braking.

But more than that, I think some drivers take this sort of thing as a personal affront from a cyclist but not from a truck (self preservation?) We don't do it to make life difficult for cars; we're just trying to get down the hill safely and cars should learn to take their turn. What's unfair about that? They don't have some divine right to unimpeded progress. That said, I think I'm polite on the bike and sometimes even offer them training treats like a little wave or a nod or a smile if they are obviously polite or careful too. ;)

I think you guys are all being pretty unfair to op - I don't think she thinks that she has a divine right to unimpeded progress and the various other things that have been said throughout here. She's admitted she was surprised to find herself so irritated.

And it's pretty clear that there are extenuating circumstances beyond how to safely descend down a hill in this case - if you're riding laps on a 1 lane private hill there really isn't a way to do it safely and not to annoy all the people that live in that neighborhood. Any car going up or down that hill would be giving way and going into the pullouts as is safe. And I doubt op would have a problem with the cyclist taking the lane if it was a larger road in general.

So if she's descending down this 1 lane road and there is a car going up this one lane road... Should the cyclist just stick in the middle of the road because that's her right and the car doesnt have a divine right to unimpeded progress?

So we can all agree that taking the lane is often the safest way to descend, but can we all agree that perhaps the cyclist in this case would be a lot safer in general if she were riding laps on a different hill?

In general when I'm riding, I'm very aware that cars are 80 times bigger than me and quite capable of killing me. I often wave cars that are hovering behind me to pass me, because I don't want them behind me. If I see any cars coming behind me when I am about to descend down a hill that I know I need to take the lane for, I generally stop at the top, wait for them to pass me and then descend. That's because I don't want a car behind me if for some reason I wipe out and I'm splat across the road, because being splat + run over is worse than just being splat. I do take the lane when it's necessary for my safety, however, I don't take the lane just to teach cars a lesson that it's not just their road or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eden

No, the safest thing for *her* to do was to not deviate from her line and continue to descend the hill.....

---

Yep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biciclista

we were really hoping you'd understand just how seriously difficult it is for cyclists to "pull over to the side" on a steep and winding hill. It's a life or death thing... or at least serious injury. All of us know someone who DID get too far over into the shoulder and crashed and burned..

---

Yep.

I used to tend to be too far over to the right on downhills.

You would have liked me back then, featuretile.

I'd worry sooooo much about inconveniencing drivers, even though more often than not I was faster than them on downhills, or, if not faster, then going at a comparable speed. But I'd still move way too far over to the right, even though (in case you haven't noticed) that's where most of the debris in the road collects, and the ruts in the road seem to be the worst.

Yep, you would have really liked me back then.

Then, over a year & a half ago, some folks (including a few TE-ers and my DH) helped scrape me off the pavement when I hit a rut near the edge of the road on a steep downhill.

Little 'ol courteous me, trying not to get in anyone's way. That misplaced courtesy nearly got me killed (and, I'm told, messed up traffic for a good long time while they brought in the emergency crews and the helicopter to transport me to the trauma center. Whoopsie. My bad.).

You would not like me now.

Or, at least, you would not like to follow me now.

Nowadays I will not put my life at risk for the sake of saving someone a few moments. If the situation warrants it, I'll take the lane. A few moments of someone's day is not worth jeopardizing my entire life anymore.

Funny what a few days in a trauma center, four weeks with double vision and over three months in a back brace will do to one's definition of "inconvenience". :cool:

There's no freakin way i'm getting close to the sides of some of our roads!! There's NOTHING on the side..except for honkey nuts & pea gravel.

I'll hog the road thanks.