Op, it would be interesting if you can put a poll at the top of this thread. Just see the census of this community to see how many want lane sharing legalized and how many do not.
damn we need lane splitting
- Thread starter chiller
- Start date
First, unless your location information is incorrect, you live in Stouffville. What kind of traffic do you have there? A tractor and a pair of oxen clogging the roads? Unless you have to battle downtown Toronto traffic every day, every time you step out of your house like I do, it's unfair to try and impose your opinion on me.
The bottom line, as others have said, filtering is absolutely safe. I did it for years before s.172 came into effect. The ONLY time I had a close call was when a fat old guy in an old American land yacht INTENTIONALLY pulled out in front of me to block my path. I can not stress enough that he acted to purposefuly hurt me, as he admitted it himself when I pulled along his car.
So besides homicidal maniacs, when the traffic is completely stopped as far ahead as you can see, and there is nowhere to change lanes, nowhere to make turns, nothing to do but just sit and wait, what's the harm? How is it any differently than riding on a narrow stretch of road?
I argue that if filtering becomes legal, and there is a publicity campaign to educate drivers about it, it will elliminate all the risks. I am NOT advocating filtering at 100km/h between stopped cars. But even crawling ahead at 20km/h is enough to prevent engines overheating, sunstroke, or rear-ends. And it may just make scooters or motorcycles a bit more attractive to the general population.
JFD
Well-known member
I work downtown, so i commute at least twice a week in car/bike...othertimes, GO.
I think the best statement the advocates need to say is that THEY'RE good at it, and it's safe for THEM.
My position was and is that the skill level of riders today are not ready for it considering the amount of incidents being posted on GTAM alone, and taking into account the already high number of single vehicle incidents involving bikes. That just tells me riders have a diffcult time enough keeping themselves safe when they're just riding along without traffic to contend with. Stick them with things around them to mind, and it's just more input for them to deal with. I don't believe there is a low enough percentage of riders that won't hurt themselves doing it. Legalizing just will end up with much higher insurance rates in the end.
If cops had a verified attitude that it's ok, and I wouldn't get fined for doing so, then perhaps I would do it. But since they do ticket, and I'm not one to give cops and excuse to further look down on bikers, I'll stick to waiting it out patiently.
Last edited:
I don't see any reason for people to vote against it. The ones who don't want to do it can just choose not to lane split (but still be in favour of legalizing it). It would eventually lead to more motorcycle awareness in general, so it would still be in their best interest to want to legalize it - even if they'll never do it, themselves.
Last edited:
I ask because when I encounter people on the street, they usually give me the bull crap about this type of behaviour making motorcyclists appear as "bad". I wanted to see if this opinion also exists here. This thread is an excellent discussion on the safety aspect of lane filtering. In practice though the real issue is not safety but rather the me first attitude which was mentioned earlier in the thread. People in their cars believe that it is not ethical for us to pass by them if they are ahead of us in a traffic jam. Of course on the road this is not gonna be an ethical discussion but rather adrenalin fuelled road rage.
The real danger to careful filtering now, is a ****** of cager who will get out of his car and pick a fight with you. This almost happened to me last summer but I quickly drove up to the light and was out of there as soon as it was green.
Its the same case when it comes to police. Last year, admiringly I used to filter all the time on my now sold Drz 400, I would occasionally filter by an unmarked or ghost police car. As always I would very slowly creep by watching very carefully for every move of the traffic around me, and when ever I would pass a cop they would simply yell at me to get behind them. They dont give a crap about our safety or the risks involved in filtering. They simply dont think that its fair that you can get up to the traffic light and ultimately to your destination faster then them.
So even if we legalize filtering, we are still going to be dealing with road rage and aggression.
The real danger to careful filtering now, is a ****** of cager who will get out of his car and pick a fight with you. This almost happened to me last summer but I quickly drove up to the light and was out of there as soon as it was green.
Its the same case when it comes to police. Last year, admiringly I used to filter all the time on my now sold Drz 400, I would occasionally filter by an unmarked or ghost police car. As always I would very slowly creep by watching very carefully for every move of the traffic around me, and when ever I would pass a cop they would simply yell at me to get behind them. They dont give a crap about our safety or the risks involved in filtering. They simply dont think that its fair that you can get up to the traffic light and ultimately to your destination faster then them.
So even if we legalize filtering, we are still going to be dealing with road rage and aggression.
But that's exactly the point. People are going to do it regardless of whether or not it is legal. And because it's illegal, all it does is make bikers (in general) look bad. This wouldn't even be an argument if splitting was bad all across the board. But there's an argument for it being safe (the weaker one being that it stops us from getting rear-ended and the stronger one being that the legalization + the difference in driver education coupled with it would lead to more motorcycle awareness), and there's an argument for it being more efficient (done properly, it doesn't impede the flow of traffic and actually helps to improve it).
Like I said earlier, if you want to filter to the front at red light, all you have to do is thank the drivers when you get there and see how big of a difference it makes. When you take off at the green light, they'll realize that there was nothing to be angry about.
I've also found that splitting in a group vs. splitting individually makes a big difference. And the angry drivers are the odd case here, with most drivers actually giving you more space (either because they're afraid or because they understand. You can tell the difference because they nod at you).
I've argued with a bunch of friends over this, and eventually, I've convinced them. But I guess it's a pretty good indicator of what the general public thinks of splitting. On a side note, it's pretty cool that all the ghost cops did were yell at you.
And this sums up the why lane filtering is opposed by the general public.
Now get back in the line!
So ultimately you're tying your entire argument against flitering to rider skill.
I really tried picturing how flitering would require any special skill on the side of the rider. You need to look out for cars, cyclists and pedestrians, you need to ride in a straight line and keep within a somewhat narrow but clear path. It is in absolutely no way different from riding in traffic while maintaining a blocking position. If anything it's easier since the cars are stopped and speeds are low (as I said before, flitering should be done at 20-30km/h, not faster). If you believe riders do not posess such a limited skill set then either they do not belong on the road or you're wrong in your assumption.
I do agree that too many riders have been involved in accidents recently, but it's a general trend that happens every spring. New riders, new bikes, skills that rusted over the winter, unpredictable road and weather conditions lead to more accidents early in the season. Another factor leading to accidents is that a FEW (I do stress few) riders really do not have the ability to ride. But they will get themselves in trouble regardless, and no amount of legislation will improve their skills.
so if one car driver fails to signal does that make all car drivers look bad?
If it's an SUV, then it makes SUV drivers look bad. If it's a BMW, then suddenly all BMW drivers are arrogant pricks. There are more, of either of those, than there are motorcyclists in Ontario. It's how the brain works; you see the threat that stands out, not those in the background.
JFD
Well-known member
I think you're referring to splitting in your arguement.
yes, I'm referring to riders not having skills these days....forcing them to ride between 'walls' is just asking too much if they can't stay out of incidents without them.
Crashtest
Well-known member
It does take some practice. It's a bit more dangerous when it's wet since now you're on the painted lines and you'll lose some traction there. Other than that, you'll quickly start picking up the subtle movements of cars that telegraph their actions long before they become a danger. The earlier video of the guy hitting the van is a perfect example of biker not paying attention.
I've found that 40-50kph in traffic that's used to this sort of behaviour (europe) is about the max. Here, I wouldn't do more than 20 or 30, but then the lanes are SO much wider.
Another consequence of more lane splitting is the fact that cars will also take advantage. Now even though you're in the lane, they'll be able to squeeze by you and get into a turn lane, or simply come up beside you for a right turn. Get used to that, because the privilege is no different.
Ultimately it's about making traffic less congested. If you're splitting, you're not taking up space that another car could use. If you lanesplit up to the light, you're not in the way of other cars, because you'll be across the intersection before their rear wheels cross the line. Above all else, that's the whole point. Get a bike to go through traffic faster without impeding anybody else. I don't get why more drivers here don't realise that.
