Should Bicycles Be Allowed to Filter through Traffic?

dextr3k on 24/02/2023 - 14:17
Last edited 24/02/2023 - 14:36

Hi Guys,

My first controversial post. But something I've noticed recently on my drive into work along the Beach road.

I have no issues with motorcycles filtering through traffic, in fact I am a rider myself and filter constantly. However on the beach road, a 2 lane road with basically no side skirts, I have to change lanes in order to pass a bicycler. Normally that's fine, you are entitled to ride on the road. The issue is, during morning rush hour, there is constant stop and go at the lights. When the light goes red, the bicycle I just passed filters to the front of the line, leaving me having to change lanes in about 20 seconds in order to pass him for a second time. Worse if traffic is slow, I've had to change lanes 3 times to pass this guy.

A motorcycle is able to stay ahead of the traffic when he filters. A bicycle is basically forcing these people to pass him again, with barely any time saved.

Thoughts? Am I a big entitled asshole?

Poll Options expired

  • 178
    Yes
  • 380
    No
  • 15
    You are Entitled
Automotive

Comments

  • Jimothy Wongingtons on 24/02/2023 - 14:21
    +20

    Doesn't really bother me as long as they do it where they can not have to inconvenience the driver/ put either party in danger.

    • Some Human on 24/02/2023 - 15:28
      +32

      I think the best spot for the cyclist to ride would be on the cycling path that is literally right next to that road.

      • Jimothy Wongingtons on 24/02/2023 - 15:29
        +22

        Agreed (if there is one)

        • Some Human on 24/02/2023 - 18:45
          +2

          Oopsie, I thought OP was specifically referring to Beach road in vic. I missed the "the".

          • dextr3k on 25/02/2023 - 13:25
            +5

            @Some Human: I actually was. Specifically Beach road in Vic. I see a bike path next to there but a lot of bicyclists don't use it.

            Literally google images

            If you commute on this road you will know what I'm talking about.

            • Euphemistic on 25/02/2023 - 13:58
              +34

              @dextr3k: Can’t comment on that particular bike path, but as a cyclist sometimes you are damned if you use it and damned if you don’t. Too fast for pedestrians, too slow for cars.

              Then, the cycle paths are often not very smooth and have obstacles like poles, signs or additional intersections that mean additional stopping and starting that roads don’t have. They are often built as a leisure route and not suited for training or commuting fast.

              • Some Human on 25/02/2023 - 14:32
                +1

                @Euphemistic: At least those obstacles aren't cars. I would feel much safer cycling on the path knowing I wasn't pissing people off who are operating death machines. I will only ride on the road if there is no alternative.

                I get where you're coming from, but if you're constantly being an obstacle to everyone on the road when there is a very well maintained bike path literally right next to the road, people gonna get angry.

                • miicah on 25/02/2023 - 15:39
                  +9

                  @Some Human:

                  safer cycling on the path knowing

                  But would the pedestrians feel much safer having cyclists whizz by at 40km/h? They are built for casual cyclists' and kids pottering along, not for anyone who can keep up a decent pace.

                  • Some Human on 25/02/2023 - 16:03
                    +4

                    @miicah: I wouldn't have expected there to be many pedestrians out walking during morning peak hour, but then I haven't driven along beach road in the morning before, so can't confirm.

                    I wouldn't expect the cyclist to think they could go as fast as they want on the bike track, but if the road traffic is only moving at 25kmph, why wouldnt you just go like 30 on the bike track, get a bell and warn the peds when you're coming?

                    • Speckled Jim on 25/02/2023 - 21:32

                      @Some Human:

                      get a bell

                      And here's what grinds my gears.
                      Time was, ALL new bicycles were fitted with a bell. Not anymore! You gotta shell out ~3+ bucks for one.
                      And kickstands. I asked a 13 year old why that was, he said "more safety for jumps!".
                      I feel old.

                      • infringement payer on 26/02/2023 - 16:51

                        @Speckled Jim: As far as I know when I was working in a bike shop that it is a legal requirement for all bikes to be sold with at least the red rear reflectors and a bell.
                        Granted, most road bike users don't want these on their bikes so usually they are not installed onto the bike, nor given to the customer as they don't want them.

                    • DeToxin on 26/02/2023 - 08:36
                      +4

                      @Some Human: I don't often ride down beach road myself but I do ride 16k from northern suburbs into the city for work and can confidently say absolutely no-one knows what to do when they hear a bell.
                      I have a very loud bell fitted to my bike which I use as much as I possibly can (multiple times when approaching so they can hear the direction I'm coming from) and most times when people are standing in a bike lane/about to cross the bike lane and they hear a bell they will jump to the right side of the bike lane at the last moment instead of standing still on the left side (allowing you to pass).
                      I have ridden down beach road on the weekend a couple of times and used the road while going south but while coming slower, used the bike rack - same thing, almost had 3 or 4 collisions and everyone on the bike track is oblivlious to what's going on.

                    • ThithLord on 26/02/2023 - 12:14
                      +3

                      @Some Human: Get a bell? Mate pedestrians don't respond about 90% of the time I ring my bell constantly. Sometimes even when they're walking towards me looking up at me!

                      • EspressoDan on 26/02/2023 - 16:38
                        +9

                        @ThithLord: I'm literally out of options and patience for pedestrians and their personal versions of 'the rules'.

                        Don't ring a bell = 'where's your bell".

                        Ring a bell = 'Don't ring your bell at me', or. Just no reaction whatsoever.

                        Personally, I don't like pinging, it feels rude, but my general conclusion is that most people have miserable lives and basically wait for anything that they can complain about.

                        • Euphemistic on 26/02/2023 - 17:25
                          +3

                          @EspressoDan: Agree. Ringing a bell gets a lottery of results so I don’t do it too much. Get everything from completely ignore (earbuds), moving a bit left, to jumping right in front of you.

                          I make a judgement call based on experience wether it’s necessary to use the bell and mostly get it right. Mostly only ring if the pedestrian is walking too wide to pass with a bit of clearance.

                  • siresteelhell on 26/02/2023 - 06:08
                    +1

                    @miicah: They have killed pedestrians on Beach road…
                    https://www.theage.com.au/national/coroner-condemns-hell-rid…

                    • BartholemewH on 26/02/2023 - 08:46
                      +1

                      @siresteelhell: On the actual road….wtf.

                    • cktftw on 26/02/2023 - 09:52

                      @siresteelhell: Typical cyclists.
                      You need to follow the rules and give me 1.5m but I'll just run a red because I'm not a car

                    • EspressoDan on 26/02/2023 - 17:27
                      +11

                      @siresteelhell: I've looked at the GIS data 2016-2021 in Bayside

                      Number of cyclists hitting pedestrians on Beach Road with Injury = 3. Fatalities = 0.
                      Number of cars hitting pedestrians with Serious Injury= 38. Fatalities = 4.
                      Number of cars hitting cyclists with Serious Injury= 72. Fatalities = 2.

                      So basically, your "they have killed pedestrians before" point is that a cyclist killed a pedestrian in 2007, but not "they have killed pedestrians before" re: drivers seriously injured 110 pedestrians and cyclists and killed 6, in a single LGA, in 5 years??

              • Mysterious Laptop on 27/02/2023 - 10:35

                @Euphemistic: So it's quicker and safer riding with cars swapping lanes etc in peak hour traffic?

                • Euphemistic on 27/02/2023 - 11:11
                  +1

                  @Mysterious Laptop: I find it generally quicker through heavy traffic by overtaking on the left. Swapping and changing lanes increases your risk.

                  I’ve often travelled for 10-15min on roads where the traffic flows freely again before cars re-pass me.

      • samyall on 24/02/2023 - 18:32
        -1

        Everyone agrees - make sure your local council and state government knows too

        • EspressoDan on 26/02/2023 - 17:59
          +5

          Yes, just what the world needs, more inconvenience for cyclists and more cars on the road.

          The thing I'm scared of is that Australian politicians will always lean whatever way the wind blows, rather than doing the right thing.

          And that extends to their absolute dedication to prioritising cars over people throughout Australia. Take a look around. Cars don't make us free, they've trapped us in a noisy, foul tempered, impatient, bitumen hell

      • skidexa on 25/02/2023 - 13:44
        +5

        Where is this paradise you live in that has extensive bike paths throughout town?

        • Some Human on 25/02/2023 - 14:21
          -2

          When OP wrote the Beach road, I automatically thought they were speaking of Beach Road, because of the capital letter. I'm still not sure they're not talking about that road, but am 90% sure they are as it is notorious for having annoying cyclists.
          This road also has an extensive shared bike/foot path that runs alongside it from what I remember.

          Edit: just read another post and they are referring to this road.

      • teacherman on 25/02/2023 - 22:24

        Why don't you take Nepean Hwy instead of Beach Rd then?

      • EspressoDan on 26/02/2023 - 16:33
        +3

        The cycle path that's full of sticks, glass and roofing screws? That cycle path?

      • jrowls on 26/02/2023 - 20:49
        +3

        ha!

        there are barely any separate cycle paths in australia, so firstly it's a logistical nightmare to ride on them if you want to take a direct route or if you're riding a long route (ie sports cyclist, which most on-road cyclists in aus are). you'd be going 800m along a separate cycle path in one direction then it would disappear, and you'd have to ride a 3km detour to the next one which probably goes in a different direction. roads go everywhere.

        secondly, if you want to go any faster than 20km/h, separate cycle paths are a joke. they're not anything like flat, which means it's impossible to ride faster than jogging speed, and they're never cleaned (ie full of litter, branches) so you're liable to have a stack on a slippery spot, or get a flat tire. on top of that, half of them are 'shared' paths, which means avoiding prams, little old ladies, kids, and slower cyclists.

        i personally do not lane filter when i cycle on road, but i don't have a massive problem with those who do. i'm not going to blame someone else for me being 30 seconds late.

        p.s. before anyone tries to pigeonhole me or something, i have a large displacement car and three motorbikes.

        • Some Human on 26/02/2023 - 23:33
          -1

          OP was specifically referring to Beach road in vic, which does have a well maintained bike path running alongside it. Even at 30kmph on the bike path, the cyclist would still be faster than the road traffic.

          • jrowls on 27/02/2023 - 15:08
            +1

            @Some Human: well yes and no, they gave an example about beach road, but they also posed the question "should bicycles be allowed to lane filter".

            without any idea what the above posters were thinking when they wrote their comment, i assume that they were speaking in broad terms rather than about one specific road, therefore i replied similarly.

      • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:12
        +6

        Can’t tell if this applies more to OP or you!

      • Nedward on 27/02/2023 - 12:39
        +1

        Just like your comment XDXD

      • jerjergege on 27/02/2023 - 15:20
        +1

        Whats the point of this comment?

        It doesnt help anyone
        Its doesnt achieve anything

        Just a waste of time

    • nikey2k27 on 25/02/2023 - 19:49

      1.5m rule mean you cannot really pass them all Queensland

      • Euphemistic on 25/02/2023 - 20:09
        +1

        The rule allows you to cross double lines to pass.

    • EspressoDan on 26/02/2023 - 16:28
      +1

      "Don't have to inconvenience the driver".

      Apart from the inconvenience all the drivers have caused to the cyclist.

      I know 'othering' cyclists in convenient, but the thing causing congestion on the road is too many cars, not too many bikes.

      Maybe the fact the cyclist keeps filtering back past you at lights might give you a hint about how much time constantly overtaking between lights in an urban environment actually saves you.

      https://youtu.be/dhlwNrZ4QIk

      • Some Human on 26/02/2023 - 23:58

        All you're telling us is that a bike is smaller than a car, and can sneak back past them due to their size.

        Also everyone knows top gear is staged. Brilliant show, but staged.

  • pharkurnell on 24/02/2023 - 14:24

    Poll…..

  • GG57 on 24/02/2023 - 14:35
    +27

    When the light goes red, the bicycle I just passed filters to the front of the line…

    So you and the cyclist are both averaging the same speed. There isn't really a rush to get past them again.

    • CurlCurl on 24/02/2023 - 14:39
      +6

      So you and the cyclist are both averaging the same speed. There isn't really a rush to get past them again.

      Huh?

      • GG57 on 24/02/2023 - 14:49
        +3

        Both parties are at the next red traffic light, ready for when it turns green.

        • CurlCurl on 24/02/2023 - 15:38
          -5

          The bike riders only caught up because the vehicles were stopped at a red light. There is no way their average speed was the same.

          • Euphemistic on 24/02/2023 - 15:48
            +39

            @CurlCurl: I don’t think you recognise what average speed is. It includes the time stopped in traffic and is why in dense traffic travelling at 25km/h on a bicycle is often faster than travelling in a car.

            • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:14

              @Euphemistic: The car is being slowed down by the bike each time it passes the car

              • Euphemistic on 26/02/2023 - 12:07

                @ChatCPT: the car has to wait at the lights while the bike doesn’t.

                But my comment was directed at Curl Curl not understanding ‘average speed’ and my example was not directed at OPs particular situation.

          • iamherenow on 24/02/2023 - 15:51

            @CurlCurl: Huh?

            • CurlCurl on 24/02/2023 - 16:35
              +4

              @iamherenow: Yes you are both correct. I admit to being a goose.

          • GG57 on 24/02/2023 - 15:59
            +6

            @CurlCurl: From light turning green to the next light turning green, both have travelled the same distance in the same time.

            • fantombloo on 24/02/2023 - 23:19
              +3

              @GG57: If OP doesn't overtake the biker again then the biker's average speed will be relatively higher than OP's.

              • Vater Woods on 26/02/2023 - 07:37
                +2

                @fantombloo: If car wasn't blocked by bike, and waited for extra time needed to safely overtake, then the car might not need to stop at the next light, and the next light and the next light…

                • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:14

                  @Vater Woods: This! Geez. So many fake geniuses online

                • Euphemistic on 26/02/2023 - 12:10
                  +1

                  @Vater Woods: It’s not bicycles that cause the bulk of delays in traffic. It’s cars. You only notice bicycles delaying you because they are uncommon. You don’t notice how much cars slow your travel down because ot is so common.

                  • Vater Woods on 26/02/2023 - 12:30

                    @Euphemistic: I am just wondering how many people your Math and Physics teacher have ruined. Or maybe there was just one bad apple.

                    • Euphemistic on 26/02/2023 - 12:56
                      +3

                      @Vater Woods: When you look at one instance and forget the bigger picture! So many drivers focus on the little specific things that ‘hold me up’ they forget about the whole system of motor vehicles that create traffic.

                      “That bike made me late”. Umm, no. The 7000 other cars 4 roundabouts and 14 sets of traffic lights did.

    • Mike88 on 24/02/2023 - 17:54
      +2

      Cyclists filtering through traffic brings down the average speed of the car that has passed them as they generally have to slow down to overtake again

      • Euphemistic on 24/02/2023 - 20:55
        +32

        On the whole it’s not bicycles that slow traffic flow, it’s all the other cars. Sure, if a bike passes you and you catch it up again you might be delayed by a few more seconds waiting to pass. So many drivers forget that the reason they can’t travel at the posted limit is the sheer number of cars on the roads and the fact there are traffic lights because there are so many cars.

        • JackFrost on 27/02/2023 - 05:14
          +2

          ✅ Yes, exactly this.

    • Some Human on 24/02/2023 - 18:19
      +1

      I'm just thinking that while OP has to slow for an opening to get around the cyclist, maybe some of the cars ahead in the right lane will sneak into OPs lane, while the cyclist slows OP down. If that makes sense.
      So the cyclist could potentially be causing more cars to be in front of OP than there would have been if the cyclist had just ridden on the adjacent bike path.

      • Euphemistic on 27/02/2023 - 07:16
        +4

        Oh no! There’s two extra cars in front of OP! Along with the hundred others of cars that are there blocking intersections regardless of the number of bikes.

        “BuT WhaT iF tHeRZ 100 bIkEs to PasS!” Relax, there isn’t, but if there was there would be 99 less cars.

      • ThithLord on 27/02/2023 - 09:53
        +1

        Wow in that totally niche circumstance, the bike is about 10% responsible for some cars in front of OP now.

        I can't imagine the toll that will take on OP. Let us say a prayer together

    • Blitzfx on 26/02/2023 - 14:15

      No.
      It's going to be slower because there wont be anyone at the light to trigger the sensor, buried in the asphalt, to trigger the light to turn green, otherwise depending which direction, it will be default red light until it senses something there.

      • Architectonic on 27/02/2023 - 23:23

        Some bikes (such as mine) have never failed to trigger the inductive loop sensors.

        • Blitzfx on 28/02/2023 - 10:39

          That's not the point.

  • pegaxs on 24/02/2023 - 14:44
    +31

    Yes and no. Yes, they should be allowed to filter, but once at the front, they should be required to pull to the far left and let all the cars they just passed, pass them again when the light goes green.

    Side note, got yelled at for lane filtering on my motorcycle the other day and told to "get back to the end of the line and wait your turn!" Like I was pushing in for ice cream. Light went green and left them in my wake. Lane filtering works very well for motorcycles and helps alleviate congestion… Bicycles, not so much and may infact make bicycling more dangerous.

    • dextr3k on 24/02/2023 - 14:47
      +3

      Yeah, my thoughts exactly. When I filter on my motorcycle, I'm staying ahead of the traffic and actually reducing the amount of wait for people behind me, instead of acting like a full sized car.

      But bicycles forcing me to change lanes twice, just increases my risk I'm going to sideswipe into some old lady's mustang I didn't see in the mirror.

      • lolz112 on 24/02/2023 - 15:07
        -3

        Doing two lane changes?!?!?! OMG I feel for you. Have you ever thought about making sure you do proper lane changes so you see Mustang?

        Blaming cyclists for some minor inconvenience is not the answer. If they do not filter, then they'll probably end up with stuck behind other cars, causing the same amount of traffic behind them. At least if they filter it is in a group… Not sure why the cyclists are the problem when they take up about 1/8th of the space of a car which is the real cause of traffic. Would you prefer for them to be in a car to make your commute even longer?

    • CurlCurl on 24/02/2023 - 15:45
      +21

      I drive a 4WD. I've had riders stop when they reach me in the queue as my mirrors protrude more than a car. I do the right thing and push the mirror fold button. I always receive a thumbs up or a head nod. No I don't ride a motor bike and never have.

      • poboy on 24/02/2023 - 16:09

        Yes, if a motorcylist is haulted by your wide car, it's friggen annoying.

        But worse is being haulted by a small car who cannot position themselves safely.

        • Ocker on 24/02/2023 - 16:22
          +1

          What does "haulted" mean?

        • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:17

          I rev bomb them to convey my displeasure
          And nod those who drive to the side a bit

      • pegaxs on 24/02/2023 - 17:38
        +3

        You the real MVP. Would definitely give a nod/wave to someone helping me get through traffic.

      • Sinnerator on 25/02/2023 - 08:35
        +5

        Holy Cow, Earth thanks you for being a decent person.

    • Some Human on 24/02/2023 - 18:21
      +3

      One time I saw a motorcyclist wearing a high vis vest that said "one less car"

      Maybe you can get this printed on your jacket? I found it very informative.

      • the wiz on 25/02/2023 - 21:44
        -1

        "One more vehicle that isn't capable of doing the speed limit" would be just as accurate.

        • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:18
          -1

          Nah

          • the wiz on 26/02/2023 - 22:51

            @ChatCPT: Would it be different if rich people drove their golf buggies home from the golf course?

            Edit: On review, I realize the original comment was referring to "motorcycles" not bicycles. But "one less car" is still an antagonistic thing to say. Don't do it.

            Just live. Leave people alone.

      • ChatCPT on 26/02/2023 - 11:18

        I like that! Might help the car rethink before responding like an sss

    • ThithLord on 27/02/2023 - 09:55

      That's what I do - I pull over to the very left. I avoid using the road a lot though, only when it has plenty of space for cars to overtake me without going into on-coming traffic. But there is one traffic light on my route home that I have to sit in middle of two lanes to get through

    • peterpaoliello on 27/02/2023 - 09:56

      Safer too not being next to cars.

  • bargaino on 24/02/2023 - 14:50
    +6

    "filtering" refers to going between 2 lanes of stopped traffic.
    A cyclist will only be doing that where the 2 lanes are about to go in different directions, i.e. one turning.

    A cyclist is definitely allowed to pass stopped traffic on the left, and generally this works well. At least for well designed roads.
    You are presumably seeing some specific cases where you believe this increases congestion, or just inconveniences you?

    Worse if traffic is slow, I've had to change lanes 3 times to pass this guy.

    So why bother?

    • poboy on 24/02/2023 - 16:11
      -3

      Filtering is allowed by motorcyclists when the traffic is travelling at or below 30kph. So not when it's stationary.

    • the wiz on 25/02/2023 - 21:59
      -2

      You are presumably seeing some specific cases where you believe this increases congestion, or just inconveniences you?

      Many cases. Especially when going uphill. The bike effectively reduces two lanes to one. It might a clearway. But bikes are welcome.

      So why bother?

      Probably because he doesn't want to do 50kph under the speed limit and knows that eventually he'll leave the bike far enough behind that it can't annoy him anymore. Pretty logical.

      Bicycles and cars don't mix. I'm happy for my taxes to pay for more bike paths. But if a commuter is going to leave his car at home so he can ride a bike in a way that makes other cars slower, all he's doing is increasing traffic congestion and fuel use. That's very selfish. It's not even good for the environment.

      • Subada on 25/02/2023 - 22:38
        +5

        all he's doing is increasing traffic congestion and fuel use

        So exactly what OP is doing?

        In urban roads especially during peak times, your travel time will primarily be limited by intersections. How fast you go between traffic lights isn't really that relevant since you'll be spending most of the time waiting at lights or travelling slowly in rolling queues of other cars approaching the lights. The number one cause of congestion at traffic lights is cars.

        If you ask anyone whose actual job it is to evaluate congestion they'll tell you riding a bike is the best thing you can do to alleviate it short of walking or transit. Traffic is often measured in "passenger car equivalent" volumes, so a truck may be worth 3 passenger cars for example. See what this article has to say about bicycles.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_car_equivalent

        It may be appropriate to use different values for the same vehicle type according to circumstances. For example, in the UK in the 1960s and 1970s, bicycles were evaluated thus:
        on rural roads 0.5
        on urban roads 0.33
        on roundabouts 0.5
        at traffic lights 0.2.

        So worst case scenario on a rural road, if a cyclist is in front of you they'll cause half the delay that a car would. So if 10 cyclists are in front of you at a traffic light, they will slow you down on average about as much as one soccer mum in her landrover.

        • the wiz on 25/02/2023 - 22:59
          -2

          You know this is Australia and the Beatles broke up, right?

          If 1 bike is in front of me and I'm in 2nd gear doing 15kph I am delayed. If the "soccer mum in her landrover" is in front doing 60kph I am not delayed.

          I don't need a study to verify that.

          • Subada on 25/02/2023 - 23:08
            +4

            @the wiz: You'd think someone called "the wiz" would appreciate a bit of road network modelling information but I guess not. The concept of PCE or PCU is familiar to all traffic engineers, modellers and (most) planners in Australia and is used in many popular transport models that directly influence road policy and development. If a new highway or road is 2 lanes or 3 lanes, PCU was probably used to decide that number. You don't just get to pretend that science doesn't matter. Facts don't care about how mad cyclists make you.

            When 1 bike is in front of you at 25km/h, you drive slowly and overtake them when safe. Then you get to the next red light and stop. Even if 15 seconds you lost would've got you through that red light you would've stopped at the next one. If a landrover is in front of you, they'll be in your way the whole trip. Maybe they get through on a yellow but you hit the red. By your logic they've delayed you the 60 seconds it'll take for the lights to cycle.

            I'll try to spell this out for you, a set of traffic lights has a "saturation flow rate" or theoretical maximum capacity of vehicles per hour. This flow rate can be measured in passenger car equivalents. Let's say you can get 1000 cars through in an hour or 333 medium sized buses / trucks. In that same hour you could get 5000 bicycles (based on the UK numbers). So yes while overtaking a cyclist is annoying, overall they're helping you as a car driver.

            • the wiz on 25/02/2023 - 23:20

              @Subada: I'm not a "wiz". It's just a play on words with this being "Oz"bargain.

              Regardless, I do actually have a basic understanding of traffic modelling. I had a friend who worked in this area. Things that don't make sense actually do make sense. Like the timing of traffic lights and variable speed limits so the traffic doesn't crunch in one place. I get it.

              But when I'm doing 15kph (not 25kph, 15kph) and I have to watch 30 cars go past me in the right lane because I am stuck at a speed that doesn't even allow me to safely merge (and also means those cars get through the green while I can't) I am being delayed by more than I would be if there was a car in front.

              That's just a fact.

              Edit: I forgot about the "try to spell this out for you" bit. I'm not stupid. But you have completely departed from the original topic and actual experience. I am not an "average".

              • Subada on 25/02/2023 - 23:28
                +3

                @the wiz: Do you know how long it took those 30 cars to travel the same road as you? Did you measure their travel times and compare them to your own? What was the average difference in time caused by that delay? A minute? 30 seconds? 0.1 seconds? You don't know. It's not a fact.

                You saw other cars get ahead of you and that inherently feels bad psychologically. You blame the cyclist in front of you for causing you to feel this way. Most people feel this way, it's natural.

                I had a car stop in front of me today to turn right without indicating. Everyone else passed me in the left lane and I felt mad at the car in front who delayed me. But then I saw most of those cars again at the next set of traffic lights. That idiot who can't use his indicators didn't delay me at all. He just made me stop and start before getting to the next red light.

                If there's a cyclist on the road in front of you count out slowly in seconds how long you spend waiting to overtake safely. I guarantee you it'll be less than a minute. Probably less than 30 seconds. To put that in perspective on average every traffic light you pass will cost you 20-30 seconds on a good day. To me any delay to me personally that's less than a minute isn't even worth my time thinking about for the next 10 minutes of my life or longer.

                Also I'm bad at not being condescending so sorry about that.

                • the wiz on 25/02/2023 - 23:43
                  -1

                  @Subada: I just said they went past me so now I've got 30 cars in front that used to be behind so I am delayed by at least a bit and that is actually a fact.

                  Maybe you're enjoying this but I'm done with UK bicycle statistics from the 1960s.

                  • Subada on 25/02/2023 - 23:46
                    +1

                    @the wiz:

                    now I've got 30 cars in front that used to be behind so I am delayed by at least a bit

                    So you're saying that it's actually the cars in front of you that are delaying you, not the cyclist? :P

                    Yes I am enjoying this and sorry I couldn't explain this in a less dickish manner.

                  • Papa Huggies on 27/02/2023 - 09:35
                    +2

                    @the wiz: Traffic Engineer/ Modeller here. You are only looking at your own particular delay as an individual. We don't care. We care about network delay i.e. did people as a whole get delayed.

                    Tough luck if you in particular got delayed. Tomorrow someone else will. If in the end we saved the network 10s per commuter, and you didn't end up getting delayed by like 5 minutes, our models get passed by TfNSW.

      • DeToxin on 26/02/2023 - 08:51

        Doesn't make much sense when there's a cyclist every 50-100m though, which if I'm not mistaken is what beach Rd is like in the morning.

  • skyva on 24/02/2023 - 14:52
    +8

    yeah as someone who has all three forms of transport, I think yes for motorbikes and no for bikes.

    Bikes should have their own lane wherever possible. Otherwise they need to share the road. Part of being another slower road user means they can't just filter when traffic slows. Bikes are traffic too.
    Motorcycles are different in that they do not hold up traffic so filtering is safer for them and reduces traffic slowdown.
    I would prefer to see special lanes for bikes and e-scooters everywhere so filtering for bikes etc is not an issue.

    • DashCam AKA Rolts on 24/02/2023 - 16:04
      +5

      +1 for I would prefer to see special lanes for bikes and e-scooters everywhere so filtering for bikes etc is not an issue.

      I've had to filter on a bike, when cars turning left, have stopped, at lights, in the bike lane.

  • dtc on 24/02/2023 - 15:00
    +17

    Sometimes cyclists should filter to the front and sometimes its not the ideal result.

    However, the benefit as a cyclist of going to the front is that at most traffic lights cars are able to turn left (not all, but many). If you are sitting half way down the line of traffic, riding straight ahead, someone will turn left into you regularly. Often they will accelerate 2m past you and then do a sudden left without putting on the indicators, probably swearing at you as they do. The only way to prevent this is to pull more into the lane of traffic so people cannot zoom around you and take you out with their sudden turn, which then creates even more issues for everyone behind you.

    Whereas if you go to the front, then no one will turn in front of you (or, at least, you will/should get warning because the blinker is on and you can adjust accordingly)

    So, as a cyclist, I'm going to say that i filter not to get to the front (who cares, its a minor difference) but for safety. Blame your lunatic fellow drivers, not the cyclist. Or move to Canberra where they provide cyclist priority lanes where there are left hand turns

    But agree that when you are at the front, ride way over to the left as much as possible, but if that isnt particularly far to the left then it isnt.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join