Lane-splitting

[Amaris]

No, I simply think you're overstating the severity of injuries someone would suffer if a bike like mine hit a car like yours in a plausible lane-splitting related incident. It would be more of a sideswipe than a t-bone anyway. In other words, you were exaggerating to make a point.

No, I'm not exaggerating, I'm being pretty damned straightforward and serious. I honestly do not think you understand the gravity of the situation. You're riding a heavy machine that is moving at speeds fast enough to cause serious injury, and yes, I'm referring to the 10 MPH. A narrow object hitting my car, particularly in a side impact, at 10 MPH would cause significant damage.

Why? Well, my car, while heavier, cannot sustain such an impact by your machine, and maintain structural integrity, at least not without putting me in severe danger of being injured. Not only that, but according to the NHTSA, this is the information on my 1993 Saturn SL2:

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the safety ratings for the 1993 Saturn SL2 are:
4x2 Rollover Safety Rating: Not Tested
4x4 Rollover Safety Rating: (unknown)
Frontal Impact Driver Safety Rating: 4
Side Impact Driver Safety Rating: Not Tested
Frontal Impact Passenger Safety Rating: 3
Side Impact Passenger Safety Rating: Not Tested

Full ratings list here: http://car-safety-ratings.findthedata.org/l/573/Saturn-SL

What you're telling me is that you're willing to risk your injury, and my injury, in order to get around me because I'm not moving fast enough for you. That is what you are saying, I just don't think you get that this is what you are saying, and the implications of that statement.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

If your car cannot protect you from being killed if hit by a 440lb motorcycle at 10mph, it's time to look for a new car. If it can't handle that, what chance do you have if another car hits you?

I don't get why you seem to think that my passing you in the middle of the lane automatically means we're going to run into each other. As long as you check the area you want to move into and as long as I make sure you can see me or am not in your path should you decide to change lanes (by looking for gaps in the lane and anticipating that you may try to occupy it) then we have no problem.

 

[Amaris]

If your car cannot protect you from being killed if hit by a 440lb motorcycle at 10mph, it's time to look for a new car. If it can't handle that, what chance do you have if another car hits you?

So what you're saying is it's my fault? Which one of us purchased a motorcycle and decided to go lane splitting? Sorry I'm too poor to buy a newer, better car, Flux. I should have known better than to share the road with you? Seriously? That's your excuse? That *I* should buy a better car just so you can do something dangerous and feel less guilt about hitting me?

I don't get why you seem to think that my passing you in the middle of the lane automatically means we're going to run into each other. As long as you check the area you want to move into and as long as I make sure you can see me or am not in your path should you decide to change lanes (by looking for gaps in the lane and anticipating that you may try to occupy it) then we have no problem.

You have a 16% chance, in California, of either me hitting you, or you hitting me. You have a 45% chance of nearly hitting me, which means I may swerve at the last second and hit someone else. Whose fault is it, Flux, if that were to happen? Still like those odds?

 

[Gov Kodos]

Damn those other vehicles looking to move through traffic and getting in your way. No surprise you can't grasp the effects of a vehicle in motion colliding with another, either. KE = 1/2mv^2, hockey puck.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

If your car cannot protect you from being killed if hit by a 440lb motorcycle at 10mph, it's time to look for a new car. If it can't handle that, what chance do you have if another car hits you?

So what you're saying is it's my fault? Which one of us purchased a motorcycle and decided to go lane splitting? Sorry I'm too poor to buy a newer, better car, Flux. I should have known better than to share the road with you? Seriously? That's your excuse? That *I* should buy a better car just so you can do something dangerous and feel less guilt about hitting me?

That's not what I am saying at all. Not even close. But I should have seen it coming that you'd take it that way. I am saying that...and I'm basically just repeating myself here but...if your car cannot withstand a bike hitting it, how would it protect you from a car hitting you? That is in no way saying that it's your fault or that you should buy a better car so that I can smash into you or however you twisted my words. It's simple. If bike + car = bad news for you then I can't imagine how bad it'd be if a car, which is more likely to hit you than a bike, were to hit you.

 

[Amaris]

That's not what I am saying at all. Not even close. But I should have seen it coming that you'd take it that way. I am saying that...and I'm basically just repeating myself here but...if your car cannot withstand a bike hitting it, how would it protect you from a car hitting you? That is in no way saying that it's your fault or that you should buy a better car so that I can smash into you or however you twisted my words. It's simple. If bike + car = bad news for you then I can't imagine how bad it'd be if a car, which is more likely to hit you than a bike, were to hit you.

I have already explained this from earlier. Your machine has a narrow footprint, so that instead of the damage being taken by the frame of my car, it is localized. A car hits me in side impact, and I would be injured, yes, but the force of impact would be absorbed, at least partially, by the frame of the car. Your 440lb (or more) machine, moving at 15 feet per second, will easily go through my door in a side impact. In a rear impact, I would likely experience some kind of spinal trauma. In a front impact, your bike has pushed into my frame.

You may be moving at 10 MPH (in the slowest scenario), but you're not riding a marshmallow. You're made of aluminum and steel, and you're narrow, you have no bumpers to offset the sudden increase in force, and so the impact is localized instead of spread out. That's physics, kid.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

That still doesn't change the fact that you brutally twisted my words around. And besides, this hypothetical collision only happens if one or both of us screws up. Either you dart out in front of me with no signal or warning and I wasn't paying attention to the gap that you were aiming for or both.

My point is that by being vigilant and careful and focusing on avoiding potential threats, lane splitting can be done safely. If I choose to pass you at point where you would have no reason to change lanes into me, I will be able to pass safely. It's all about choosing the right time to go and when to hold back, not blindly rocketing down the middle of the lane as it seems the perception is.

 

[Saito S]

This is what I meant when I said things were getting ridiculous. This is bullshit. No one in this thread is talking about this. No one is getting indignant that a motorcycle would DARE to not be stuck in traffic with the rest of us.

Not true.

And, really, what makes a biker so "special" that he gets to go 10 miles an hour faster than the rest of traffic in slow conditions?

Seriously? That's it?

That's some high-quality audacity you've got there to just ignore everything else I said, pick on this one turn of phrase I used that was technically incorrect - and not even about the subject matter, just the content of people's posts - then turn around on hammer on J for "refusing to acknowledge your scenario."

It's pretty clear that all you really want is validation. Since I'm not going to provide that, I think this "discussion" has run its course, at least for me.

 

[Gov Kodos]

If I choose to pass you at point where you would have no reason to change lanes into me,

There's an idiotic assumption. How do you know what's happening two or three vehicles up and on the far side? Why would anyone two or three cars up be expecting you to be coming when they shift into what had been space till you flung the bike in between? Any number of factors can have cars shift or change lanes abruptly. People weaving up between the lanes increases the likelihood of the unexpected happening.

 

[Yoda]

I think someone was making a little joke about how shitty California traffic is. That looked more like Calcutta to me than California. The motorized rickshaws were a dead giveaway that it wasn't California, as were the wrong signs and license plates, and the really dirty old school red bus.

Not bad, but looks like wrong side of the ol' subcontinent, at least for the first pic.

 

[Trekker4747]

If "filtering" is necessary while stopped to prevent being rear-ended why not just go to the nearest point where you can go lane-splitting and be safe?

The lane-splitting video shown above just struck me as ridiculous. This wasn't a man avoiding congestion or trying to protect himself from being rear-ended in a crash he was trying to get a "best time" speed to get home so he weaved constantly in, out and through traffic getting annoyed whenever someone did something to prevent him from being able to do it. (Like be a bus.)

And, yeah, for me it is also in part a "why are bikers so special" thing because, really, I think that's a question too. We're supposed to share the road and all use it equally, if a biker is zipping through traffic, splitting lanes, squeezing in where he can going 10 miles an hour faster than everyone else that sort of is treating him as special isn't it?

The traffic in that video didn't look that bad and it was in California. I've seen worse traffic where I live. But Mr. Biker-guy was moving through the cars like they were standing still. (Well, I guess some of them were. To stop for a light, cars making turns, or to make turns themselves.)

*That's* the problem I have with lane splitting. It creates a badge of "I can do whatever I want" on the chest of the biker making him feel special and more powerful on the road to do this kind of asshattery. To try and to make a one-hour trip in twenty minutes. I can see the need for it at lights or in crawling traffic where a collision was more likely but it's not what this guy was doing. He was zipping through traffic "because he can."

 

[Amaris]

That still doesn't change the fact that you brutally twisted my words around. And besides, this hypothetical collision only happens if one or both of us screws up. Either you dart out in front of me with no signal or warning and I wasn't paying attention to the gap that you were aiming for or both.

My point is that by being vigilant and careful and focusing on avoiding potential threats, lane splitting can be done safely. If I choose to pass you at point where you would have no reason to change lanes into me, I will be able to pass safely. It's all about choosing the right time to go and when to hold back, not blindly rocketing down the middle of the lane as it seems the perception is.

In a perfect scenario, Flux. You better pray that all you ever have are perfect scenarios. As for brutally twisting your words, no. I haven't twisted anything. I'm giving you real examples of ways your life, or my life, could end by your engaging in this type of behavior. You're cocky, you're a novice rider, and you're unwilling to accept that things could go seriously wrong. That's a recipe for disaster, for either you or someone who is innocent.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Accidents, by definition, are accidental.

 

[Trekker4747]

Watched that video again, yeah I doubt that was about filtering or rider safety or any of that it was about him wanting to get a "best time" for driving home. Interesting comments from the rider regarding traffic doing normal things (including someone having the audacity to make a turn 500 feet in front of him.) Also noticed that the posted speed limit was 35 and he was revving up his engine and passing cars that seemed to be moving along pretty nicely with not much congestion. I really doubt they were moving at 25 miles an hour.

If that's "heavy traffic" and "congestion" in LA then I guess the Kansas City suburbs really have worse traffic than L.A.

 

[Pingfah]

I voted yes it is legal in my area, and yes I think it should be. Although that is with caveats because I don't think moving between vehicles going at speed is safe or should be legal. But if there is a traffic jam and things are just crawling along, then yeah, I am going to just make my way through the traffic. Sorry if that offends people or they think that is cutting in, but I am not going sit in a traffic jam twiddling my thumbs if I don't have to.

Of course things are a bit different here, because it is is illegal to undertake somebody. i.e you cannot travel faster than the person to the right of you (remember we drive on the left), and the furthest right lane is for overtaking, so there is no need to lane split in moving traffic as you can just move to the designated lane and overtake instead.

As a general rule I would say if traffic is moving faster than 10mph you should just go with the flow and not be impatient, if it is moving slower than that then you are OK to cautiously make your way through.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Accidents, by definition, are accidental.

You just blew my mind.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

I voted yes it is legal in my area, and yes I think it should be. Although that is with caveats because I don't think moving between vehicles going at speed is safe or should be legal. But if there is a traffic jam and things are just crawling along, then yeah, I am going to just make my way through the traffic. Sorry if that offends people or they think that is cutting in, but I am not going sit in a traffic jam twiddling my thumbs if I don't have to.

Of course things are a bit different here, because it is is illegal to undertake somebody. i.e you cannot travel faster than the person to the right of you (remember we drive on the left), and the furthest right lane is for overtaking, so there is no need to lane split in moving traffic as you can just move to the designated lane and overtake instead.

As a general rule I would say if traffic is moving faster than 10mph you should just go with the flow and not be impatient, if it is moving slower than that then you are OK to cautiously make your way through.

I agree completely. I will only split when cars are moving on the freeway, not on surface streets. I guess that LA video was a bad example all around...although if anyone watched the first video I posted a link to with half as much scrutiny as that one I bet my point might be getting through more clearly. I never "zip" around moving cars and on the freeway I only pass those that are creeping along. Once they get back up to speed I can fall in line. I think certain people have this idea that I'm just flying around with a reckless abandon when that couldn't be further from the truth. I hope to have my own helmet can soon and can start recording some of my own rides.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Say I stop lane splitting all together and I sit on I-680 in rush hour traffic and just go with the flow. And then here comes Mr. Hummer H2 on his cell phone, too busy Tweeting about how horrible his gas mileage is to see that traffic has stopped, and ends up crushing me between himself and the car in front of me. Yes, that situation is much less dangerous! Being a sitting duck on the freeway with minimal chance of escape from a rear end collision is much better than having some control over my destiny by staying mobile and out of the path of the vehicles behind me.

Congratulations. You've now given a perfectly reasonable example of why moving with the flow of traffic while SITTING between lanes where you won't be rear-ended is a safer option for a motorcycle rider. I have absolutely no problem with that as long as you don't pass anyone.

I also have no problem with you slowly and gently moving up to the front of a pack of cars stopped at an intersection where there is no danger of a car changing lanes.

What I do have a problem with is a biker moving 10mph above the flow of traffic and threading the needle through cars that are moving on the freeway or street and possibly changing lanes or reacting to emergencies. Or worse then that even, weaving in an out between cars.

So, if lane-splitting simply involved a motorcycle inhabiting the gap between stopped or slow-moving cars without trying to move up between them unless it's done very slowly at an intersection, then I would have no problem with it. But that's not really what you're talking about here, is it? You want to get home a little faster, so you're going to be zooming through the gap between moving cars at faster than the speed of traffic, which is what I and everyone else has a problem with.

Good thing I don't "zip between cars" then, right? There's a difference between riding down the middle of the lane and "zipping" between vehicles.

Yeah, there is, but both are still very dangerous.

And if you didn't want to be accused of weaving between cars and changing lanes, the video of the douchebag doing exactly that multiple times was a really bad example to pick. A bad example which you described as "safe and prudent lane-splitting" of the type that you said you do.

Ya know what could kill me? Being rear ended and crushed between two cars. But you refuse to acknowledge that that's a worse alternative than splitting so...

Being tossed into the Death Star trash compactor and crushed between two cars or trucks because you're speeding between them as one tries to change lanes or moves over to avoid an obstacle or another car doesn't sound that appealing either.

I don't get why you seem to think that my passing you in the middle of the lane automatically means we're going to run into each other. As long as you check the area you want to move into and as long as I make sure you can see me or am not in your path should you decide to change lanes (by looking for gaps in the lane and anticipating that you may try to occupy it) then we have no problem.

What part of if you are moving 10mph above the flow of traffic and approaching on my passenger side in dense, rearward vision-obstructing traffic you're going to cover enough ground to be next to me before you are ever visible did you not understand? I will not be able to see you, and there's no reason to expect someone flying their X-wing down the Death Star trench at that moment. The only way to make this safe is if cars never switch lanes on the off chance that some unseen biker might try and squeeze past them, which is an unreasonable demand.

That still doesn't change the fact that you brutally twisted my words around.

You complaining about J. doing this is hilarious given your track record of constantly twisting people's words around and strawmanning more than a Peyton Manning scarecrow.

 

[Rincewiend]

My point is that by being vigilant and careful and focusing on avoiding potential threats, lane splitting can be done safely.

We are talking about people here, right?!?
Being vigilant? Because some impatiant idiot like the one in the video you posted wants to get home sooner, just like almost everybody else?!?
People who are pre-uccupied with what they should do for dinner, or they have to pick up the kids from scholl, or thinking about workrelated stuff...
Riiiight....

 

[doubleohfive]

I would actually be fine with limiting splitting to lower speeds, as I never do it if traffic is at or above 35mph. If overall traffic speed is fast enough for a surface street, there is no need to split. The only time I will split on surface streets is when there is a short line stopped at a red light, and at that point I'm "filtering" toward the front so that I can get out of the middle of the pack, which is always a bad spot for a rider. You have to think about all the things that a rider has to pay attention to on the road...many more than the driver of a car does. By filtering through, getting to the front of the queue and then being able to take off and get in front of everyone, the rider is in a more comfortable position than if he had sat in between everyone and remained there. Nothing is more disconcerting to a rider than being followed closely or being surrounded by other cars like that. Filtering allows them to get up and away from all of that.

But I agree, splitting at speeds higher than 35 is stupid and is not legal, and I wouldn't be against some tighter restrictions on the laws.

This is actually a really good example of safe and prudent lane splitting on a surface street. Well, up until the end, but for the majority he does things very similarly to how I would.
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oM_ayYy8Ok[/yt]

That is absolutely NOT a "really good example of safe and prudent lane splitting."

I watched the video and the first thing I noticed is that this asshole's u-turn came at the expense of breaking the double yellow lines on the road. Last I knew, that was illegal to do.

And I know the road he's cruising down is Beverly Blvd from WeHo through Hollywood. I lived in that area for years (spotted my old laundromat!) and that road gets congested daily like what is shown in the video, and as stupid as it is, people cross over the road the way the old lady does ALL THE TIME. Beyond all the points Locutus has made about why that video is just plain demonstrably dumb, knowing that people cross main roads like that instead of doing so on crosswalks would be a huge factor to consider.

I don't know what the DMV teaches first time drivers or motorcyce drivers but I do know that back in Virginia, the first lesson they taught us was about defensive driving - always operating your vehicle assuming everyone else is going to be at risk of causing an accident and doing everything you can to avoid a causing or worsening a potential accident or crash yourself.

By this logic alone, lane-splitting strikes me as incredibly dangerous, reckless, and just about the stupidest thing any driver coudld do, let alone a novice like yourself, Flux.

I may not agree with you on things but I also absolutely don't want to see you spread over the pavement like marinara sauce because you have an off-day. The very fact that the California DMV's note on lane-splitting specifically says "Discourage other drivers from lane-splitting" tells me everything I need to know. If the governing body of the land on operating motor vehicles has determined it to be unsafe and discourages it and expects/suggests we discourage it to others, then why the fuck would anyone think it's a good idea to begin with?

That old lady was jaywalking...which is illegal pretty much everywhere.

A sterling defense in court, if you ever hit a jaywalker whilst lane-splitting, I'm sure.

Having a differing opinion does not equal ignoring people. Do you expect everyone with an opinion on a subject from you to just cave and change their mind simply because yours differs from yours? That would sure make for some stimulating debate and discussion, everyone agreeing all the time.

No of course not. But when (and again, this always, ALWAYS happens with you here) multiple people have commented at length about why they disagree/think lane-splitting is dangerous or stupid and you are (again, as always) stubbornly refusing to consider that we may have valid points.

Some of the most exciting as well as relaxing moments I've experienced in life come on the back of one.

I am going to attribute this to your just being young and not knowing what life really has to offer because this really strikes me as being just plain sad, more than anything else.

Sure, shitty things happen too but that's all a part of life.

Yep. That's all part of life.