Crashtest
Well-known member
For much if not all of not-north-america, filtering through traffic is half the reason to get a motorcycle, and both riders and drivers alike recognise this.
damn we need lane splitting
- Thread starter chiller
- Start date
For much if not all of not-north-america, filtering through traffic is half the reason to get a motorcycle, and both riders and drivers alike recognise this.
viper84737
Well-known member
Funny how people OPPOSE filtering, etc, when it has been demonstrated to be safe by many civilized regions of the world. Why is this even still up for debate? The proof is RIGHT THERE! It's like saying "Them fancy mathematics is bad, yEp, cuz yew ken uzem fer bad stuff, yep!". Seriously, it works, why fear it? If you don't like it, you don't have to do it. Nobody's holding a gun to your head about it.
You need to back that up.
You can't just say "It's safer". You can say "It's more convenient for me".
I've been sideswipped twice and T-boned twice at high speed in a car that is easier too see.
I've been rear-ended once at low speed. Which is safer?
In Switzerland I saw two accidents due to filtering in two days. Is that really safe?
It pisses me off when ill filter past someone and they will give me the ******** that I give motorcycle riders a bad image. I totally agree with others in this thread that filtering is one of the main reasons to get a 2 wheel vehicle for commuting in a busy city. Just because I use my vehicle the way it is ment to be used, does not make me a "bad" rider. People on bicycles filter all the time, I dont see how we are any different.
viper84737
Well-known member
If you're going to bring up specific instances where it has been not-safe, then we should just stay at home in bed all day, because being a pedestrian means we might get hit by a car, or get mugged, etc. **** happens, are you going to hide from every risk imaginable? People WANT lane splitting/filtering for a reason. They're willing to take on the risks associated with it as many people in other civilized countries already do, successfully. It isn't 100% safe. Nothing is. But it's safe enough that people are ok with the risk:reward of it all.
The million dollar question is how to get the government to allow this without some 10-year $100B study on its viability and 894589237493 units of political pandering. How can this be achieved? Does anyone know? I'd be willing to sign a petition or something if it took my signature to do this.
1WheelDrive
Active member
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/10/30/MN87097.DTL
"The study, commissioned by the U.S. Department of Transportation, concluded that lane splitting is safer than sitting in stop-and-go traffic, where bikers are far more likely to be ``sandwiched'' between two cars.
``For a motorcyclist, that's the safest place to be,'' Professor Harry Hurt said shortly after releasing his study. ``A lot of people think it's a hazard, but the cold, hard facts are that it's not.''
The report is aged and considered "outdated" simply due to lack of research since.
Google the "hurt report."
Last edited:
JFD
Well-known member
Ah, so my riding ability is not up to par, is it? That's putting a whole lot of accountablility in someone else's court. I just don't trust drivers in toronto enough to trust i'll be safe.
hell, i don't even do the speed limit in the diamond lane when the next lane is stopped. I don't think many here would.
so for all the ppl having accidents on this board alone, the filtering would eliminate that? or would it stay the same, and now turn 1 vehicle incidents into 2 vehicle incidents, and let's not even get into the insuranc implications. Cuz you know, EVERYONE makes legit and justified insurance claims.
Justifying hte splitting/filtering as being safer is really debatable for sure...but the fact remains that it's illegal. Will that change? Who knows.
Would the govt be willing to make bikers lives easier? Perhaps...just pray they don't get a 200km+ filterer blow by them and scrape their car while they'r ein traffic, before they sign the approval document.
viper84737
Well-known member
You're in danger of someone going 200 km/h at any time. Whether or not they'll do it in confined quarters while splitting lanes is irrelevant. The other week I was on the 403 in a car when out of nowhere I got buzzed by two bikes going what I can only surmise to be about 200 km/h -- the entire car shook from their shockwaves. I could swear they had a mere 30 cm between my car and their bike, and I have no idea how close the car next to us was. So making it legal to split while going < 40 km/h has nothing to do with the safety of people doing it at 200 km/h, or any other speed, at any other time, including now. There is no reason I can think of to oppose this idea. If you don't like it, don't do it.
"...Safer in many civilized regions of the world..." that have far different licensing standards than do we, you mean. Somewhat unsafe in many areas of the world too, where traffic chaos is the phrase of the day. In North America, where people treat driving as some kind of inalienable right rather than a privilege, permitting filtering and splitting would result in carnage.
By all means, let's have filtering and splitting, but not until the skill level of the average driver has come up to a reasonable degree. Let's get back to enforcing things like safe following distance and signal light use first.
Here's a quote from your citation: "But of the 7,163 accidents that killed or injured California motorcyclists last year, 2,822 included factors often seen in lane splitting -- excessive speed, unsafe lane changes, improper passing and following too closely, according to the CHP."
So up to 40% of the accidents were caused by splitting. Do the regions and traffic flows of the areas where the Hurt report were done long ago, resemble modern day Toronto. Did he back up his statement with data?
C'mon convince me that you do it because it is safer and in everyone's interest. I ride. I should be easier to convince than others.
Here's a question for those who do split...Do you split with your kid or girlfriend on the back?
mototours
Member
I was first licensed to ride on the street in Southern California and I enjoyed being able to safely lane split but I did it at only 10 miles n hour quicker than the stopped, slower traffic.
Since moving back to T.O. I do not expect the bureaucrats here to be changing anything very fast. Look at the history.
How long did it take before you were allowed to ride in the diamond lanes in the city?
The MTO has eager plans for many more kms of HOV lanes in the corridor but how long will it be before the rules include motorcycles without a passenger like everywhere else in North America?
I do not expect lane splitting becoming legal here anytime soon.
Be happy we can park for free at least.
Safe riding all, bring on the sun!
Since moving back to T.O. I do not expect the bureaucrats here to be changing anything very fast. Look at the history.
How long did it take before you were allowed to ride in the diamond lanes in the city?
The MTO has eager plans for many more kms of HOV lanes in the corridor but how long will it be before the rules include motorcycles without a passenger like everywhere else in North America?
I do not expect lane splitting becoming legal here anytime soon.
Be happy we can park for free at least.
Safe riding all, bring on the sun!
JFD
Well-known member
I think you missed the point of that line entirely. Ppl don't like splitters/filterers and it does give bikers a bad image. The point was if 'bikers' want this allowance given to them legally, there's a whole lot of reasoning against it rather than any convenience or stats proving it's safe.
There's no reason to give 'bikers' anything, even if we say please.
I dislike it for the sheer image of it all. Saying it's safe or not shouldn't even be brought up. No one knows when they'll get hit or go down or for what reason. It's only a matter of when.
Having a law saying it's ok just gives another reason to make an insurance claim.
Hell, i suspect you've been riding for years..hell, even on this board, I bet you can even say, "Damn, there's a whole lot of ppl getting into accidents lately...."
JFD, I tend to agree. If we want something like lane splitting, then it behooves us to present a good image to both the public at large, and the government. I've already received responses, from MTO, stating that allowing motorcycles in the HOV lanes wasn't in the plans. That was when approaching it from an economy standpoint. The safety aspect is still possible, but only if it looks like we have SOME BASIC DESIRE, IN THE FIRST PLACE, to be safe.
It reminds me how the City of Toronto gave us the ability to park in pay-and-display street parking, free of charge, but some people screw it up by parking on the sidewalk.
It reminds me how the City of Toronto gave us the ability to park in pay-and-display street parking, free of charge, but some people screw it up by parking on the sidewalk.
To all the nay-sayers: Do you jump up and down when cyclists lane split in the city, or when pedestrian traffic walks faster than you drive?
It seems the major beef for most people is this concept of "wait your turn" just like the rest of us in our automobiles. "You have to wait in line just like me."
In my experience - speaking as someone who may or may not lane filter, 95% of the people will go out of their way to give you extra space. I do the same when I am driving a car when I see a motorbike, pedal bike, unicycle, etc. The odd person that feels wronged will try to "squeeze" you, and usually to no avail because they haven't figured out how to compute how much space is between cars.
If your going to go down and "it's only a matter of time" what difference does it make if you lane split or not? I believe it to be safer when used appropriately.
Maybe the people against lane splitting are imagining the morons that ride between cars with extreme speed differentials. Legal or not, that type of behavior is asking for trouble. I don't think anyone in this thread (on anyone with their head screwed on correctly) will defend such actions.
Bottom line is that this whole argument shouldn't exist anyways. Want to fix commute times - invest in a real transit system.
It seems the major beef for most people is this concept of "wait your turn" just like the rest of us in our automobiles. "You have to wait in line just like me."
In my experience - speaking as someone who may or may not lane filter, 95% of the people will go out of their way to give you extra space. I do the same when I am driving a car when I see a motorbike, pedal bike, unicycle, etc. The odd person that feels wronged will try to "squeeze" you, and usually to no avail because they haven't figured out how to compute how much space is between cars.
If your going to go down and "it's only a matter of time" what difference does it make if you lane split or not? I believe it to be safer when used appropriately.
Maybe the people against lane splitting are imagining the morons that ride between cars with extreme speed differentials. Legal or not, that type of behavior is asking for trouble. I don't think anyone in this thread (on anyone with their head screwed on correctly) will defend such actions.
Bottom line is that this whole argument shouldn't exist anyways. Want to fix commute times - invest in a real transit system.
1WheelDrive
Active member
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. You asked for data, I obliged... with a report of 900 accidents worth of it, along with shortcomings (age). I'm sure you could find a similar study to prove the exact opposite if you looked hard enough for it.
"But of the 7,163 accidents that killed or injured California motorcyclists last year, 2,822 included factors often seen in lane splitting -- excessive speed, unsafe lane changes, improper passing and following too closely, according to the CHP."
I know that I can't reason with someone who equates the above statment to "40% of accidents were caused by splitting." Futility doesn't sit well with me.
Last edited:
JFD
Well-known member
The difference, which i've mentioned before, is the fact that if it's now legal, it's yet another way to make an insurance claim, which we don't need. The inference is that riders are having issues simply controlling their motorcycles and getting into accidents without having to contend with a 4 foot lane or so.
Skillsets to do this are more than we are addressing.
Persian-Rice
Active member
Its perfectly safe for a good rider. The problem and the reason it's illegal here is because Toronto drivers drive by the book, and are apparently unable to produce thoughts/reactions outside of what the Drivers Training book has printed in it. Our drivers can BARELY handle cookie cutter driving, even the slightest shift from the norms leads to chaos, which most quick thinking cities of the world have no problem with, unfortunately Toronto sheep are especially sheepish.
bobjohnson
Well-known member
Youre right, I dont obey laws that make no sense. But youre wrong about not caring whats safe. Again, im not lane splitting down the white line on the DVP doing 100kmh during rush hour. Im filtering during rush hour downtown doing <20kmh. Honestly, with how many times my cars been tapped from behind, and how many times ive seen some idiot let their car idle into the car infront of them, I feel much safer filtering than i do sitting between two of those morons.
And again, as far as the legality of it, I have never had an issue with this in the downtown core (which doesnt mean its legal). I filter by cops all the time and never had one question me about it. But again its most likely because im not drawing attention to myself by darting in and out of lanes and doing 60kmh an hour or generally acting like a jackass looking for a ticket. I slowly creep through the stopped traffic, and merge back into the lane when the traffic starts flowing again. Im sure if i was riding the white line between a moving van and a cop for 3 blocks he would probably have some words for me, but thats not what im talking about here at all.
And as someone else mentioned, bicycles are allowed to do this, so why are motorcycles not? Bicycles are treated as vehicles under the HTA. I think its less safe on a bicycle even, because your brakes arent as great and you dont have the ability to quickly accelerate out of a situation like you would on a motorcycle. Plus your helmet is ********, if youre even wearing a helmet.
You guys can all do what you want, ill keep filtering because it saves time, saves wear and tear on the bike, and it makes sense to do it when you live and ride downtown. And if i get a ticket for it some day, thats fine, I will deserve it because technically it is illegal. But im not going to agree that its more dangerous that sitting in bumper to bumper traffic if youre paying attention. If you are one of those guys who every day almost gets smoked by a car, or has trouble driving downtown even in a car, then yeah, maybe filtering isnt for you.
Crashtest
Well-known member
European countries typically get around this by *not legalising it*.
Instead, it's tolerated, but it's clear that it is the motorcyclist taking the extra risk, so in the event of an accident, the motorcyclist is clearly at fault.
That said, after years of lanesplitting through dutch traffic to get to work every day, I can tell you that there's lots more space than you might think, and you'll be able to see a car that's going to go into your lane long before it actually happens.
Every time I've done it in Toronto, I've been yelled at. Every. Single. Time.
