Quote Originally Posted by sara View Post
I take the lane a lot, and I totally agree with you that many times it is much safer to do so. But in this particular case, the speed limit is 45 and I know the cyclist was probably going 25-30 mph max (cuz that's about how fast I roll down that hill). (...) Most drivers around here seem to despise cyclists as it is, so I don't want to do anything extra to make them mad.
Thanks Sara for the explanations... I see things a little differently. (Actually I don't see at all because I have little knowledge of the road you describe, but you know what I mean!! )

First, let's state that the guys who passed Lisa do seem like a bunch of confrontational morons who do no good to cyclists, no doubt about that.

But, regarding your example, as someone who has to descend on many of my rides, and who doesn't mind descending fast, it's easy for me to imagine the cyclist's point of view in the situation you describe. I am assuming that the cyclist was going faster than drivers would think (although I agree with you that it's unlikely that the cyclist was going at 45 mph, but I often descend at speeds WAY over 30 mph). I also assume that the cyclist would have made the decision to take the lane (by no means a decision lone cyclists are usually prompt to make) because s/he did not feel safe staying on extreme right of the road: Maybe the shoulder was too narrow or littered with glass (try a front-wheel flat on a fast downhill), the road too windy, there were intersections along the way where incoming drivers might pull out on the shoulder to see whether they can enter traffic, etc.

If I am in that situation, and hear the engine brakes of a heavy vehicle behind me, I'll definitely do everything I can to move out of the way faster, for the reasons you mention (not trusting the brakes etc.). But the lane might be much safer for me than the shoulder in most fast-downhill situations.

Unfortunately, vehicles coming from behind (including the big logging truck and vehicles with trailers behind) tend to believe they can squeeze by if the rider is holding on to the right-side of the road, whereas they actually might not have the space at all, especially if there is traffic coming in the other lane. Another problem, on a windy road, is that many drivers will not follow the lines painted on the road and have their right wheels overlap the white line. Coming out of a right-bound curve, the driver will see the cyclist on the shoulder at the very last second, or perhaps too late. Or the trailer behind the car/tractor will clip the cyclist. After hitting the cyclist, the driver will say "I had not seen the bike!!!" and it will be true. If the cyclist is actually in the lane, it's less likely that s/he will be hidden by the curve...

It's great to avoid creating useless conflicts with the drivers and the guys that passed Lisa seem like dangerous freaks. But the long-term strategy of conflict-avoidance should not in my opinion obscure a reasonable evaluation of short-term risks.

It might be helpful, however, to educate your city planners to the importance of better cycling infrastructures, to avoid dangerous situations like the one you describe...

Peace!