Bikes in the HOV lanes

[jolomatic]

Forum Sponsor

At highway speeds, the majority of running lane space is not taken up by a vehicle's length. It is taken up by the gap needed between vehicles to ensure a safe following distance, otherwise know as the two-second rule. At 100 kmph, that distance works out to be 55.6 meters give or take a few centimeters.

That distance is the same whether for bike or for car or truck. The length of a vehicle, whether is be 2 meters for a bike or 6 meters for a truck, is only a small fraction of that. If you want to save real estate on a highway, the most effective way is to reduce the number of vehicles, which in turn reduces the number of safe following distance gaps that use up most of the space on our highways when they are free-flowing.

But you are completely overlooking the factor of throughput, or speed of the vehicles.
That two second gap is only 55m if you are doing 100kph.
By your reasoning, we should just lower the speed limit to 5kph, so that everyone could safely drive bumper to bumper.

As far as fuel consumption, there is no point comparing the mgp of any vehicle measured at a constant 100kph when it is going to be constantly moving from 10kph to 100kph to dead stop to 50kph all the way allong it's trip. I'm sure that simply by virtue of the lighter total weight (or even weight per passenger, if you prefer) that bikes burn way less fuel in the stop/go gridlock that the HOV lanes are there to alleviate.

What really matters is how many people you can move past a certain point in what amount of time.
Bikes cut through traffic faster, and burn less fuel doing so.
No manipulation of numbers is going to change that self-evident fact.

Personally I think green cars should be allowed and so should bikes.
Both reduce emmissions compared to the average commuter's cage, and I maintain that pollution control is the primary motivation behind the goal of reducing congestion.

 

[jay-d]

If I had the balls to or the money to; I would purposefully ride in the HOV to get a ticket. Take that ticket to court and use "green emissions" vehicle EPA ratings compare them to bikes as an argument to show that motorcycles are essentially green vehicles.

Would this be a valid argument?

(Sorry if this has already been said in the thread, I didn't read all 8 pages )

 

[turbodish]

But you are completely overlooking the factor of throughput, or speed of the vehicles.
That two second gap is only 55m if you are doing 100kph.
By your reasoning, we should just lower the speed limit to 5kph, so that everyone could safely drive bumper to bumper.

How am I overlooking throughput? I calculated headway between vehicles based on the speed limit. All that safe following space is required precisely because of the speed of traffic.

As far as fuel consumption, there is no point comparing the mgp of any vehicle measured at a constant 100kph when it is going to be constantly moving from 10kph to 100kph to dead stop to 50kph all the way allong it's trip. I'm sure that simply by virtue of the lighter total weight (or even weight per passenger, if you prefer) that bikes burn way less fuel in the stop/go gridlock that the HOV lanes are there to alleviate.

One goal of HOV lanes is to provide a less-congested lane for car-poolers so as to reduce slowdowns due to stop and go traffic. If stop-and-go is minimized or eliminated, then too is any supposed advantage of fuel savings in stop and go traffic.

I say supposed because many bikes out there are actually quite poor as far as stop and go fuel consumption goes, and also rather poor as far as regular fuel consumption goes too. The common advice given out here is for newbs to go skip by 125s, 250s, 500s etc because "you'll get bored with it fast". The logical progression then is to bigger-engined bikes, many of which get atrocious fuel economy when compared to the current crop of small and mid-sized cars out there.

What really matters is how many people you can move past a certain point in what amount of time.
Bikes cut through traffic faster, and burn less fuel doing so.
No manipulation of numbers is going to change that self-evident fact.

So put two people on a bike. Now you're moving twice as many people faster that point in the same space. Better yet, put the whole family on the bike east-Asian style. Then you'll be making real efficiency gains.

And "Bikes cut through traffic faster"? Excuse me, but bikes shouldn't be cutting through traffic as if the other vehicles out there were a pylon course. Need I remind you of HTA172 and weaving through traffic?

Personally I think green cars should be allowed and so should bikes.
Both reduce emmissions compared to the average commuter's cage, and I maintain that pollution control is the primary motivation behind the goal of reducing congestion.

The average light car or truck has to comply with much stricter emissions standards than motorcycles. Emissions controls for bikes, even for bikes that haven't been tampered with by cat removal or other mods, are virtually non-existent on many bikes on the road and with no E-test requirement there is no way to ensure that any minimal emissions that might have once been installed remain installed and in working order. If pollution control is a motivator for HOV lane eligibility, motorcycles fall even further down the list of the HOV-deserving.

 

[Jayv]

And "Bikes cut through traffic faster"? Excuse me, but bikes shouldn't be cutting through traffic as if the other vehicles out there were a pylon course. Need I remind you of HTA172 and weaving through traffic?

Please stop with the 172 banter.

Most slow lanes in the Downtown core are used for cars parking between 9pm and 4pm, a bike/bicycle/scooter still have ample room to use this lane. Congestion Downtown doesn't happen with two wheels, it's not lane splitting/filtering or any of that nonsense.

This is where the advantage lies for two wheels, i really don't understand why you and Caboose can't see this point.

I know Caboose lives in the sticks, perhaps you do as well.

 

[turbodish]

Please stop with the 172 banter.

Most slow lanes in the Downtown core are used for cars parking between 9pm and 4pm, a bike/bicycle/scooter still have ample room to use this lane. Congestion Downtown doesn't happen with two wheels, it's not lane splitting/filtering or any of that nonsense.

This is where the advantage lies for two wheels, i really don't understand why you and Caboose can't see this point.

I know Caboose lives in the sticks, perhaps you do as well.

This discussion is about the HOV lanes on some 400-series highways, not about city streets. The environment is much different than city surface streets.

 

[fastar1]

Come down to what?

Piktchurz!

 

[Jayv]

This discussion is about the HOV lanes on some 400-series highways, not about city streets. The environment is much different than city surface streets.

Where do those HOV lanes head to and from ? Where are the bottlenecks for traffic? My god man, seriously use some common sense.

They head towards Downtown not Port Perry.

 

[caboose56]

Please stop with the 172 banter.

Most slow lanes in the Downtown core are used for cars parking between 9pm and 4pm, a bike/bicycle/scooter still have ample room to use this lane. Congestion Downtown doesn't happen with two wheels, it's not lane splitting/filtering or any of that nonsense.

This is where the advantage lies for two wheels, i really don't understand why you and Caboose can't see this point.

I know Caboose lives in the sticks, perhaps you do as well.

I'm mostly thinking about the HOV lanes on the 400 series highways. I can see how two wheels on surface streets would help reduce congestion. No argument there.

I used to live in the sticks, don't anymore.

 

[james12lucy]

I was passed by six OPP Motorcycle Officers in the HOV, while they were riding leisurely back to Aurora from Toronto. For a moment I thought it was alright for them even though they were all riding solo, then I remembered THEY WERE BREAKING THE LAW, right Turbo? Anyway, since police are looked toward to set an example, I thought nothing of getting behind them and following during rush-hour traffic. I became part of their parade route until we all exited on Aurora Road and none of them even flinched. I guess it's legal if you're following "The Man's" lead?

I'm grateful they saved me about 45 minutes of my commute!

 

[turbodish]

I was passed by six OPP Motorcycle Officers in the HOV, while they were riding leisurely back to Aurora from Toronto. For a moment I thought it was alright for them even though they were all riding solo, then I remembered THEY WERE BREAKING THE LAW, right Turbo? Anyway, since police are looked toward to set an example, I thought nothing of getting behind them and following during rush-hour traffic. I became part of their parade route until we all exited on Aurora Road and none of them even flinched. I guess it's legal if you're following "The Man's" lead?

I'm grateful they saved me about 45 minutes of my commute!

Were they breaking the law?

3. Who can use HOV lanes?

HOV lanes on provincial highways are reserved for vehicles carrying at least two people (i.e. a driver plus at least one passenger) in any of the following passenger vehicles: Cars, minivans, motorcycles, pickup trucks, taxis, and limousines.

Buses of all types can use an HOV lane at any time, regardless of the number of occupants.

Emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance) are exempt from the restrictions.

Just be happy you didn't get dinged by someone assigned to patrol duty on that stretch.

 

[james12lucy]

Thanks for pointing that out. I thought service vehicles were only exempt while responding. This SHOULD be the case (even if it isn't), in any other circumstance they need to follow the same set of laws created to keep us proles in-line.

 

[Salos Dafee]

I know this topic is about local HOV lanes, but here is some info that matters to me.

I-77 through Charlotte NC has an HOV lane in both directions.

I-75 through Atlanta GA has an HOV lane in both directions.

Motorcycles, with or without a second person aboard, are welcome in these lanes.

I ride through these cities once in a while, and I find the HOV lanes to be safest for me.
If they seem safest for you, then by all means use them with a clear conscience.
The signs that permit motorcycles are not near the start of any of these lanes.

 

[mototours]

It is unlawfull in the U.S.A. to build an H.O.V. lane that does not welcome all motorcycles. IT IS THE LAW!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occupancy_vehicle_lane

When will the MTO people get it straight. Don't you think that motorcyclists in Ontario desire the same rights as everywhere else in North America!

I wrote to the Honourable Kathleen Wynne at the MTO and did get a response but it defended their stance but isn't there an election coming up!

Patricia Boeckner (Director)responded to my email and told me that the Ministry recently met with Bob Purcell, President of the Ontario Confederation of Clubs. to discuss this matter but didn't say anything about any changes.

Signed

 

[turbodish]

When will the MTO people get it straight. Don't you think that motorcyclists in Ontario desire the same rights as everywhere else in North America!

We don't have a Second Amendment right or the right to concealed carry either. As per the immortal words of David Bowie, "this is not America".

 

[caboose56]

Piktchurz!

So at highway speed the difference is almost nothing and at very low speeds the difference is still the least. If you really wanted to reduce traffic congestion you'd be in support of letting subcompacts into the HOV lane. The road space per vehicle difference is less than that of a bike but there are orders of magnitude more of them on the road than there are bikes.

It is unlawfull in the U.S.A. to build an H.O.V. lane that does not welcome all motorcycles. IT IS THE LAW!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occupancy_vehicle_lane

When will the MTO people get it straight. Don't you think that motorcyclists in Ontario desire the same rights as everywhere else in North America!

I wrote to the Honourable Kathleen Wynne at the MTO and did get a response but it defended their stance but isn't there an election coming up!

Patricia Boeckner (Director)responded to my email and told me that the Ministry recently met with Bob Purcell, President of the Ontario Confederation of Clubs. to discuss this matter but didn't say anything about any changes.

Signed

Rights or privileges?

 

[fastar1]

So at highway speed the difference is almost nothing and at very low speeds the difference is still the least. If you really wanted to reduce traffic congestion you'd be in support of letting subcompacts into the HOV lane. The road space per vehicle difference is less than that of a bike but there are orders of magnitude more of them on the road than there are bikes.

Actually I haven't said I'm in favour of letting single rider MC in the HOV lanes, I am just trying to offer a good reason why such a rule could be considered as a viable option.

To me it's just a matter of defining a standard rather than arbitrarily designating which vehicles can and can't use the HOV lanes. If they do that and bikes end up with the short end of the stick then fine, so be it.

However I wouldn't support letting single-occupant subcompacts into the HOV lane for a couple of reasons. For one it would be an administrative nightmare to enforce, but most importantly I think it wouldn't help acheive the goal of "helping to move more people through congested areas" simply because there are already enough subcompacts on the road at present to completely saturate the HOV lane, turning it into just one more congested lane like all the others. I think the theory of the HOV system only works if there is a strong element of exclusivity to it's access.

 

[ZX600]

my bike with two people (my self and another) .

Lisa did you have to make a point on breaking that down? lol

Forum Sponsor