Safer to ride bike on the left side of the road in the country? (Page 4)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=why+ride+your+bike+with+traffic

Oh...the irony

So now you can see the car coming up from behind you?  When did that start happening?

On the country roads we bike on it would be just as dangerous to me personally to stop and pull over as there is often virtually no shoulder and i would end up in a ditch or just be standing the in the way of traffic - just as vulnerable to being hit.

Have you had a close encounter that makes you so concerned with this?

You're arguing very hard for this

If this were a thread where I was just stuck on doing it my way then I wouldn't be replying with reason and I would be name calling against those who disagree with me.

What's funny is people are saying I'm stupid without providing a reason, and if they do provide a reason and it is shown to be mistake, they resort again to name calling.

I am asking an honest question, acknowledging valid reasons like speed at impact. and providing a rebuttal to reasons I disagree with.  No need to get so mad.

I also said I ride on the right side of the road so no idea where this "giving people a bad name thing" is coming from.

I will try to give you a logic based response based on 1000's of miles on the road in all conditions including country roads.

2. Slower closer speed by a driver allows them to have more chance of reacting to the situation. A driver approaching at 55 while you are doing 20 is a closing speed of 35 mph they can see you for longer as well as the approaching traffic on the other side and can react etc, they could even slow down and weight for a safe time to pass. If you are going in the opposite direction they now approaching at 75 mph and have less than half the time to react to you in the road way. This reaction time they are provided is huge and probably the number one thing for accident prevention. second when you are approaching them, there is no way for them to control a situation in the faster vehicle by slowing and not passing, you are still coming and could create an unsafe situation. -- As you are going to reply, you would slow down and pull over, but based on your logic you wouldn't see the car approaching in the opposite lane and know a bad situation is immenent.

3. Blind corners are less dangerous due to closing speed and the potential you are seen prior to entering the corner. very rare that you would be right in a blind corner and a car comes up and hasn't seen you.. riding into traffic, that is the most likely outcome.

4. You worry about swerving drivers approaching from behind and taking you out. Your logic implies sight is the most important sense while riding. It is not, you hear cars before you see them many times, especially corners.

5. You often state you would pull over on the shoulder or the side of the road. If there is a shoulder, highly unlikely it is a true country road, and if you are traveling with any type of speed magically pulling over with low risk of injury/collision with unseen objects is very low.. watch the tour de france with crashes and watch the guys that try to avoid it in the grass, more than half the time they go over the handlebars. The ground is soft, you don't instantly go from 20-0, you are not going to do this behavior when every vehicle approaches, and by the time you decide you should perform this maneuver to avoid some collision, the most likely outcome is you cannot stop fast enough, it puts you in a bad position or potentially on the ground and your accident waiting to happen just got worse.

4. When riding sometimes (every ride) you have to move away from the very edge due to potholes, debris etc when a car is behind you they can see these obstacle and hopefully give you a wide berth so as the pass can happen.. you telling me it is safer to pull into the middle of the road with head on traffic to avoid an object, where drivers have a terrible time judging closing speed of a 20mph cyclist?

5. Descending you will often take the lane going close to 40 mph often with curves in the road.. you are now heading for a 100+ mile per collision, or a car catching you in the road at a rate of 10-15 mph.. or are you going to swap to the right side since it is safer?  now you increased risk by crossing two lanes of traffic, one coming at you, and one you can't "see" ..

I could go on, but basically there about 100+ reason why you should ride with traffic, and your one listed reason of going into traffic to avoid distracted drivers is completely out weighed by the risk of the 100 others things that the normal non distracted driver will have to face

I don't need to see the car coming up behind me.  If the car in front of me is driving close to the shoulder, I get off the road.

And more specifically,

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/riskfactors.htm

See table 4.

Against consistantly has a higher risk factor.

I agree with the results, riding your bike in a city or suburb against traffic is terrible and dangerous idea.  I always bike with traffic in New York City.  What I'm saying is a long, flat, straight, country road is different.

You asked for data, data has been provided.  You are a beginner, coming to a website asking for information.  Information and feedback has been provided from many who have been doing this for years, if not decades.  You continually rebutt the responses with your own rationalization.  Whether you agree with it or not, a bicycle is a vehicle on the road and is therefore subject to the rules and regulations of the road.  If you don't like it, lobby to get it changed. 

You keep insisting that no one has presented you with evidence that it is unsafe to ride on the left.

The more accurate evaluation is that you insist on NOT SEEING the evidence put in front of you.

I'll give one more try at this, and then I'm out -- do what you want, report back the results (if you're able).

Have you ever seen the "Limited Sight Distance" signs on the road? Yeah, the ones that are near hills and turns, and usually accompanied by a dramatically reduced speed zone. Why would they do that? Because reaction time is decreased. By riding on the left, you are decreasing the reaction time of both YOU and the driver of that car. Do you have a sign that you can continuously project 100 yds in front of you for that decreased speed zone due to reduced reaction time? I thought not.

If concern of traffic approaching from behind is that much of a concern to you, get a mirror. And yes, CHECK IT. Don't dismiss the use of the mirror just because you might not check it -- that's YOUR fault.

Your actions, whether you like it or not, DO reflect upon the entire cycling community. Check the details of those 44,000 bike/car accidents and see how many of them were your typical DUI with no lights or reflectors riding at night with no helmet, running a stop sign, etc. The public at large makes no distinction between them and you with the helmet riding within the law and in an appropriate and predictable manner when they see you on the street -- we're all on 2 wheels and are therefore all the same. So that motorist that just got the pants surprised off them with you approaching on the left side of the street is now going to be ticked off at ME because I'm on a bike too.

You are lowering reaction time for the driver, when given a choice you want the larger faster object to have longer reaction times, it is safer due to the extra time needed by the larger object. You can hear a car from behind for longer than 10-15 seconds, so you will still know it is approaching behind you

How often are you pulling off the road? are you riding 5 mph? it takes me a lot longer than a few second to go from 20 to 0 and safely stop and pull over. If two vehicles are approaching each other, the responsibility is on the large vehicles to control their speed and pass in a safe manner. It is easier for a car to slow to your speed and wait to pass, than it is for you to continue approaching a vehicle which then becomes somewhat powerless to stop when the situation could be escalating. You tend to shift the responsibility away from the 3000 lb object when in fact that should be the object most in control of the situation due to its handling characteristics, safety controls etc. 

And the most important person in every day passing, which occurs 100-1 over the distracted driver scenario has reduced reaction time. That is basically the trade off you are making, for every 1 distracted driver where you feel you can control the situation by anticipating the behavior of the driver due to your increased reaction time, you are trading off for 100s-1000s of drivers passing with reduced reaction times, in an unfamiliar situation which can easily result in erratic behavior by a driver who is in fact paying attention

Okay to flip it: Why is it not safe to be on the right hand side on that country road?

Presuming its quiet you can hear a car coming for some time and can look over your shoulder (or mirror if you had one) and assess what's going on.  And again, that car can see you for a long time and will do what it needs to do to pass you safely

I have regularly ridden in the country and i've had absolutely no issue with keeping to the right.  It's nice actually with lower volume of traffic - perhaps you're sensing more danger than there is ...

Good post

1.  I agree

2.  A bad situation seems to be imminent only if the driver moves his car into the shoulder which he shouldn't have to do  if there is a car going the other way and if he does have to come into the shoulder I will see.

3.  I agree, but there are no blind corners on my 12.4 mile loop.  When I start adding distance I could repeat the loop.

5.  I;m lucky enough that there is a shoulder, if I absolutely had to hit the grass in a worst case scenario I would probably crash but better than the alternative

4.  The only thing I have to worry about would be glass or rocks on the side of the road and a driver wouldn't really be able to see that far in advance.  At least if I see it last second on my bike and I am on the left I can see if there are no cars and I can pull into the road.

Holy cow, don't even know where to start...  Rational basis is used to determine whether a law is CONSTITUTIONAL.   A municipal traffic./superior court judge does not have the power to strike down a law.  Just what is your legal pedigree anyway?  Because I find the logic...  fascinating

But please...  continue.   This is very interesting in a bizaare way

I don't have a mirror, maybe I should get one.  I can usually here cars coming, but sometimes I get int he zone when I ride on the right and I get passed by cars and never knew they were coming.  Sometimes it is windy/raining.

He doesn't need to solve your question because he said he's going to slow down an pull on the grass and avoid all collisions.

You yourself stated earlier that for your plan (of blatantly breaking the law and being unpredictable to motorists) to work, you had to be very aware and paying attention at all times.

You've just admitted that you don't. But you still want to proceed with your plan?

Buy a cross bike and stay in the grass.

if you legitimately are asking this question and not simply justifying your own behavior, the answer is no, it's not safer.  You're assuming said "swerver" will be swerving the entire time you see him. What if he's driving perfectly normal, swerves as soon as he's on top of you..you're dead.  Like others have said, your impact has become twice as hard.  

1.  I acknowledged that the force of impact would be greater.

2.  You have to way severity of an accident vs odds of occurence to determine safety

3.  If both accidents would result in death, it doesn't matter which would kill you worse.

Think I'm done with this thread, and again, I apologize if anyone was offended.