lane splitting

[hedo2002]

in traffic i've had a couple people pull up beside me because they saw the space and decided that i can ride beside them. since then, in heavy amounts of traffic, i'll filter (while traffic is stopped and the bike is starting to heat up). most people don't even have their head up. and most are distracted. once i see the brake lights turning off, i'll merge and stay near the centre of the two lanes to make sure i can squeeze between 2 cars in case someone from behind doesn't stop.
i've had a rider pass me in my lane at slower speeds. didn't bother me. i knew he was there and what he was doing. he slowly pulled up beside me and then sped up as he passed me. if he rode beside me it'd be a different story.

Unless one of those driver's isn't as confident as you, gets spooked and veers into you accidently driving you into the car or curb beside you. At which point your 100% at fault in the eyes of your insurer. You may a skilled rider, and confident enough to do this, (safely at elast in your mind). The problem is MOST riders and MOST other road users aren't. If your bike is "heating up" that quickly while stopping for red lights, (you said filtering which is done at a red light, if you are doing this on the highway then it is lane splitting not filtering), then you need to get your bike checked out as this is not normal for a bike.

You then said you stay close to the center line so you squeeze in between in case someone doesn't stop behind you. How is this even a concern in traffic which by your description is already stopped, (hence why your filtering)?

 

[hedo2002]

I totally get your stand point...but if we take example on other jurisdictions where its implemented or common practice around the world, im pretty sure that logically, that's how it works, its not really a self-entitlement kinda deal. Most cases of motorcycles splitting/filtering are in situations where the car can't do much but the rider has enough space to actually do something.
Like someone had once described it, motorcycles splitting is like those express lanes vs regular lanes at a grocery store. Cars dont fit the "12 items or under" item requirement and can't take those lanes, but the motorcycles do; so not only do they get to go faster through the lines but also are out of the other cars' way. So yes it would be up to the motorcycle to decide whether they can enter the "12 items of under lane" as they fit the requirement/size to be in it or can choose the regular lane if they want to do so.

When a moto is in between lanes, they're in a space where the car is not expected to be driving except for lane changes, therefore whether the bike is there or not, car is not in that space 98% of the time and usually will be sensibly driving in a straight line using up both tire tracks not needing to move or change their straight line as the bike passes them outside of those tires tracks.
Now when a car gets INTO the same lane as a motorcycle while the motorcycle is in one of the tire tracks, they're often times forcing the motorcycle to change their path in their own lane or restrict that other tire track and that's where i see that there's a problem.
In my eyes, it's all good until a person actually has to make an adjustment on either side (braking because of a cut off, pushing moto or bicycle into the shoulder) To a certain extent, if the moto, cyclist, scooter, etc doesn't have to make adjustments, i don't see what is wrong with a car splitting it, in a jurisdiction where splitting/filtering is accepted obviously

And yes, pedestrians have right of way in a lot of situations according to "law" and best practices taught to drivers (aka intersections, stop sign crossings, even new laws have recently been enacted to provide them safe passage etc) and cyclists...well they pretty much impose their right of way and split everywhere they can in the GTA i find and i don't see anyone being arrested.

Let me know what you think of that

I guess you fail to grasp the concept of "self entitled" I have a smaller vehicle and MY time is more important than EVERY other road user therefore, I am entitled, to break the law as it suits MY purpose, (to arrive home .3 seconds faster than I would if I merely followed the rules of the road). Get it now???

"but if we take example on other jurisdictions where its implemented or common practice"

Problem with that argument is... It is neither of those things here in Ontario. Therefore is is not expected, nor accommodated for, by other road users. Agian your 12 items or under argument doesn't hold water. In that scenario the person using the 12 item line up NEVER has to get back into one of the other line ups. A rider MUST return to one of the other lanes unless he/she is lane splitting for the entire duration of their ride. So at some point that bike is still taking up the same amount of space as it was previously, therefore net zero gain. Other than for the riders self entitled mind set.

On Ontario roads if two vehicles side by side are positioned PROPERLY within their lane and the tire tracks to use your point of reference, then there is not sufficent room for a bike to be operated SAFELY, That is why most others here have already acknowledged that the other vehicles do indeed make an "adjustment" for the rider to pass safely. For me in my cage, (I like my paint job), there is one safe place for that rider to be... either in front or behind me, not taking it upon themselves to determine what is an acceptable risk for me.

Until you get rear ended by some idiot lane splitting and "weaving in and out of traffic" as I have been you just won't get it. I can assure you that rider too was CONVINCED he was riding safely. Unfortunately for me my life has been very adversely affected. Thus far it has cost him a conviction, an at fault insurance claim, and whatever injuries he sustained. According to my lawyers, the lawsuits, (he is apparently being sued by many people as his bike ended up hitting several vehicles), will be substantial. Just so he could have arrived .3 seconds quicker, but obviously he arrived MUCH MUCH MUCH later after his trip to the hospital.

Think about that.

But obviously you will be doing it "safely" right... GMAFB

 

[LePhillou]

I guess you fail to grasp the concept of "self entitled" I have a smaller vehicle and MY time is more important than EVERY other road user therefore, I am entitled, to break the law as it suits MY purpose, (to arrive home .3 seconds faster than I would if I merely followed the rules of the road). Get it now???

"but if we take example on other jurisdictions where its implemented or common practice"

Problem with that argument is... It is neither of those things here in Ontario. Therefore is is not expected, nor accommodated for, by other road users. Agian your 12 items or under argument doesn't hold water. In that scenario the person using the 12 item line up NEVER has to get back into one of the other line ups. A rider MUST return to one of the other lanes unless he/she is lane splitting for the entire duration of their ride. So at some point that bike is still taking up the same amount of space as it was previously, therefore net zero gain. Other than for the riders self entitled mind set.

On Ontario roads if two vehicles side by side are positioned PROPERLY within their lane and the tire tracks to use your point of reference, then there is not sufficent room for a bike to be operated SAFELY, That is why most others here have already acknowledged that the other vehicles do indeed make an "adjustment" for the rider to pass safely. For me in my cage, (I like my paint job), there is one safe place for that rider to be... either in front or behind me, not taking it upon themselves to determine what is an acceptable risk for me.

Until you get rear ended by some idiot lane splitting and "weaving in and out of traffic" as I have been you just won't get it. I can assure you that rider too was CONVINCED he was riding safely. Unfortunately for me my life has been very adversely affected. Thus far it has cost him a conviction, an at fault insurance claim, and whatever injuries he sustained. According to my lawyers, the lawsuits, (he is apparently being sued by many people as his bike ended up hitting several vehicles), will be substantial. Just so he could have arrived .3 seconds quicker, but obviously he arrived MUCH MUCH MUCH later after his trip to the hospital.

Think about that.

But obviously you will be doing it "safely" right... GMAFB

Listen, i fully understand your point. And the grief this must have brought you (and other people affected) must've sucked big time. And yes it's illegal and i do see the safety issue in lane splitting in ontario which is why i don't practice it. Also keep in mind during our discussion that i am playing the devil's advocate when i discuss things like these as, obviously, fact of the matter is, it's illegal and will stay like that for a very long time ...i'm the first one to shake my head when i see people splitting in live traffic while im riding at 10kph. If i get a ticket when filtering, i'll take it and won't fight it as i fully acknowledge that in the eyes of Ontario's lawmakers i'm in the wrong.

If all road users were all equal, trucks and cars, and motorcycles and bicycles would all get everywhere at the same time but it isn't the case. And if it was such a self entitlement situation that would be so unfair to all other road users, why would it be considered as such a normal practice in most of the undeveloped and developed world outside of North America? Even then, in cali, the 12-item lineup user still has to go back in the regular lane but in the end he gets out of traffic sooner and often times i'm pretty sure it's not just a mere 0.3 seconds as you like to say, therefore his footprint is reduced in terms of space occupied in traffic over time. or we could keep arguing that someone driving 10 kph or someone splitting at 40 kph gets home at 0.3 seconds difference of a time but fact of the matter is, over say...30km you're saving over an hour as per this calculator: http://www.calculatoredge.com/civil engg calculator/speed Distance Time.htm
Now if those vehicles are not in traffic during that extra hour, then there are less vehicules on the road, and traffic is the alleviated, even if it's just slightly, by not having these vehicules sitting there.

We're all talking about Ontario roads, and ontario road users, and the available spaces for safety in Ontario... but seriously, go outside of canada/north america and you realize that our roads/lanes are HUGE and spacious leaving even more margin of error compared to where splitting is most commonly practiced/legislated.... but then we should wonder what makes us so different from the rest of the world that we cannot compute that kind of transportation model. Are we so oblivious to our surroundings that we can't take 1 second to pay attention to what's happening around us as we steer a ton or 2 of steel and just need to focus on what's happening on our cellphones?

Now filtering, when traffic is ridiculous, i've actually timed. And the difference between waiting 5-6 light changes to get on the highway and filtering through makes quite the difference. ie. sitting at 0-5kph for 10m to get through 400m vs riding 100kph during that same 10m will be already 1/4 of the average ontarian's commute time saved... and me not being there in line at a light means one of these people at that light will get to go maybe one light sooner rather than wait behind me. Once again personally, i'm not a huge practitioner of it... it'll only happen when it's raining or when traffic is just ridiculous (and i'm known to be a very patient man lol) but there is definitely a difference in the time it takes to get from point A to point B.

I'm liking this discussion

 

[Rob MacLennan]

That link is merely to an MTO driver advisory page it is not meant to point out if the riders actions are legal or illegal. Yes I agree there is no specific charge for lane splitting, there is however a law which clearly states two vehicles can not occupy the same lane at the same time, which yes one is doing while lane splitting. s172 also covers driving too close to another vehicle, simple case to prove for an officer in court.

Again, if getting home .3 seconds faster by filtering or splitting is worth the potential consequences then feel free to do so, but i highly doubt any of the proponents of lane splittign or filtering would come on here and post... Guess what I got pulled over for splitting which I was doing therefore, I am not even contesting the charge, as I knew it was illegal to do so, and I will gladly pay the ticket, and accept the increased insurance premiums...

Exactly. Someone saying that lane splitting isn't against the law is like someone saying that it isn't against the law to stab someone in the eye, because there's no anti-eye stabbing law on the books.

 

[hedo2002]

Listen, i fully understand your point. And the grief this must have brought you (and other people affected) must've sucked big time. And yes it's illegal and i do see the safety issue in lane splitting in ontario which is why i don't practice it. Also keep in mind during our discussion that i am playing the devil's advocate when i discuss things like these as, obviously, fact of the matter is, it's illegal and will stay like that for a very long time ...i'm the first one to shake my head when i see people splitting in live traffic while im riding at 10kph. If i get a ticket when filtering, i'll take it and won't fight it as i fully acknowledge that in the eyes of Ontario's lawmakers i'm in the wrong.

If all road users were all equal, trucks and cars, and motorcycles and bicycles would all get everywhere at the same time but it isn't the case. And if it was such a self entitlement situation that would be so unfair to all other road users, why would it be considered as such a normal practice in most of the undeveloped and developed world outside of North America? Even then, in cali, the 12-item lineup user still has to go back in the regular lane but in the end he gets out of traffic sooner and often times i'm pretty sure it's not just a mere 0.3 seconds as you like to say, therefore his footprint is reduced in terms of space occupied in traffic over time. or we could keep arguing that someone driving 10 kph or someone splitting at 40 kph gets home at 0.3 seconds difference of a time but fact of the matter is, over say...30km you're saving over an hour as per this calculator: http://www.calculatoredge.com/civil engg calculator/speed Distance Time.htm
Now if those vehicles are not in traffic during that extra hour, then there are less vehicules on the road, and traffic is the alleviated, even if it's just slightly, by not having these vehicules sitting there.

We're all talking about Ontario roads, and ontario road users, and the available spaces for safety in Ontario... but seriously, go outside of canada/north america and you realize that our roads/lanes are HUGE and spacious leaving even more margin of error compared to where splitting is most commonly practiced/legislated.... but then we should wonder what makes us so different from the rest of the world that we cannot compute that kind of transportation model. Are we so oblivious to our surroundings that we can't take 1 second to pay attention to what's happening around us as we steer a ton or 2 of steel and just need to focus on what's happening on our cellphones?

Now filtering, when traffic is ridiculous, i've actually timed. And the difference between waiting 5-6 light changes to get on the highway and filtering through makes quite the difference. ie. sitting at 0-5kph for 10m to get through 400m vs riding 100kph during that same 10m will be already 1/4 of the average ontarian's commute time saved... and me not being there in line at a light means one of these people at that light will get to go maybe one light sooner rather than wait behind me. Once again personally, i'm not a huge practitioner of it... it'll only happen when it's raining or when traffic is just ridiculous (and i'm known to be a very patient man lol) but there is definitely a difference in the time it takes to get from point A to point B.

I'm liking this discussion

Well not sure where you ride that you can lane split successfully at 40 km/h for a 30 km straight stretch to save that 30 minutes. To accomplish this you would need to be on the 401, during the entire commute.

As to the other time saving calcualation, this makes no sense to me your talking about filtering at a light at 0 - 5 km/h for 10 minutes, then suddenly your riding at 100 Km/h for those same 10 minutes?? If your sitting through 5 - 6 lights, (that require you to filter), to get on the highway that would likely mean your riding in rush hour traffic. Again not sure where your riding but the 401 certainly isn't tottling along at 100 km/h during rush hour. So say your splitting at 5 km/h for say 5 lights, now in that time you may have "passed" 3 - 4 cars per light so a total of 20 cars, which would be a grand total of about 400', (giving an average of 20 feet per car). So how much time have you saved 400' X 5 km/h. That of course isn't taking into account that most lights are synchronized, so by racing ahead of the cars you just passed it is likley your stopping for a slightly increased period of time as opposed to arriving when the light has changed and traffic is flowing. So certainly not 1/4 of the commute time is saved, (unless the commute is about 3 mins long)... lol

So one of the times you choose to "safely" lane split is during a time of reduced visibility??? (Raining). Not to mention increased braking times etc...

I too am playing devil's advocate your choice to lane split and filter ONLY affects me when you mess up and hit me or end up using valuable OHIP resources during your recovery. i now spend a good chunk of my time fighting insurers for ongoing needed therapies to recover from my collision, something I wouldn't wish upon anyone, (well except maybe for the guy that hit me)..haha

 

[FLSTC]

Folks are watching too much Royal Jordanian... I love his channel, but he's going to end up under the bus one day. Cheat if you want to but if you do get bit (physically or legally), take it like a man. I was laughing at the rider crying like a baby after he broke his ankle after running from the cops (a couple of weeks ago, west end?)

 

[LePhillou]

Well not sure where you ride that you can lane split successfully at 40 km/h for a 30 km straight stretch to save that 30 minutes. To accomplish this you would need to be on the 401, during the entire commute.

As to the other time saving calcualation, this makes no sense to me your talking about filtering at a light at 0 - 5 km/h for 10 minutes, then suddenly your riding at 100 Km/h for those same 10 minutes?? If your sitting through 5 - 6 lights, (that require you to filter), to get on the highway that would likely mean your riding in rush hour traffic. Again not sure where your riding but the 401 certainly isn't tottling along at 100 km/h during rush hour. So say your splitting at 5 km/h for say 5 lights, now in that time you may have "passed" 3 - 4 cars per light so a total of 20 cars, which would be a grand total of about 400', (giving an average of 20 feet per car). So how much time have you saved 400' X 5 km/h. That of course isn't taking into account that most lights are synchronized, so by racing ahead of the cars you just passed it is likley your stopping for a slightly increased period of time as opposed to arriving when the light has changed and traffic is flowing. So certainly not 1/4 of the commute time is saved, (unless the commute is about 3 mins long)... lol

So one of the times you choose to "safely" lane split is during a time of reduced visibility??? (Raining). Not to mention increased braking times etc...

I too am playing devil's advocate your choice to lane split and filter ONLY affects me when you mess up and hit me or end up using valuable OHIP resources during your recovery. i now spend a good chunk of my time fighting insurers for ongoing needed therapies to recover from my collision, something I wouldn't wish upon anyone, (well except maybe for the guy that hit me)..haha

Well if we use my commute as an example, it's from mississauga to downtown core. It's 20km each way... 1 to 2 km off highway, the rest (for me at least) is all highway. Now i can imagine that other torontonians can easily have a 30km commute on an average as i live in pretty ideal-ish conditions. QEW/gardiner rolls pretty decently so i can't really complain myself about highway speeds but you could easily imagine someone not being in my situation with the thousands of vehicles using the 401 every single day and that's where i might be more optimal for them to look into splitting.

When i say 5-6 lights changes i mean me waiting at the exact same intersection for the light to go through the green-to-red cycle 6 times before i can make it through that one single intersection, not 5-6 different intersections. On the other hand 10 minutes for 5-6 intersections in high traffic to me is making really good time lol.

As for the rain comment? In real life, no i don't lane split in the rain (or lane split period). But i'll filter at that exact intersection im referring too in the paragraph above. Otherwise on any given non-rainy day, i sit through it.

So say that for the sake of the argument, Ontario law-makers were to be on drugs for a few months and pass a law allowing filtering/splitting and would have campaigns for awareness. Would you be for or against it?

 

[hedo2002]

Folks are watching too much Royal Jordanian... I love his channel, but he's going to end up under the bus one day. Cheat if you want to but if you do get bit (physically or legally), take it like a man. I was laughing at the rider crying like a baby after he broke his ankle after running from the cops (a couple of weeks ago, west end?)

But your not considering the obvious. It wasn't the riders fault for breaking his ankle, but it certainly was the fault of the cops for chasing him. How dare they put him at risk like that.

 

[hedo2002]

Well if we use my commute as an example, it's from mississauga to downtown core. It's 20km each way... 1 to 2 km off highway, the rest (for me at least) is all highway. Now i can imagine that other torontonians can easily have a 30km commute on an average as i live in pretty ideal-ish conditions. QEW/gardiner rolls pretty decently so i can't really complain myself about highway speeds but you could easily imagine someone not being in my situation with the thousands of vehicles using the 401 every single day and that's where i might be more optimal for them to look into splitting.

When i say 5-6 lights changes i mean me waiting at the exact same intersection for the light to go through the green-to-red cycle 6 times before i can make it through that one single intersection, not 5-6 different intersections. On the other hand 10 minutes for 5-6 intersections in high traffic to me is making really good time lol.

As for the rain comment? In real life, no i don't lane split in the rain (or lane split period). But i'll filter at that exact intersection im referring too in the paragraph above. Otherwise on any given non-rainy day, i sit through it.

So say that for the sake of the argument, Ontario law-makers were to be on drugs for a few months and pass a law allowing filtering/splitting and would have campaigns for awareness. Would you be for or against it?[/

If a law was passed then my opinion would be moot. But if I looked at it I would love, (although would never happen), to have it approved with a provision. That provision would be you have to declare to your insurer if you do it and they can assess your premium based upon the increased risk. If you don't declare it in advance and your involved in a crash then the insurer and OHIP are permitted to recover ALL costs for your treatment from you. But then I also believe that if you go skiing outside the "approved" areas, or go on the lake ice, or decide to climb the Scarborough Bluffs, and need to be rescued then you should be billed for all costs associated with that.

 

[LePhillou]

If a law was passed then my opinion would be moot. But if I looked at it I would love, (although would never happen), to have it approved with a provision. That provision would be you have to declare to your insurer if you do it and they can assess your premium based upon the increased risk. If you don't declare it in advance and your involved in a crash then the insurer and OHIP are permitted to recover ALL costs for your treatment from you. But then I also believe that if you go skiing outside the "approved" areas, or go on the lake ice, or decide to climb the Scarborough Bluffs, and need to be rescued then you should be billed for all costs associated with that.

That's the problem, what risk threshold do we go with. Some people would say riding a motorcycle is too dangerous, we shouldn't cover people who get hurt doing that activity as its a dangerous method of transport.

People making bad eating decisions shouldn't be covered by OHIP because of the bad habits they kept for so long...etc etc...

It's a whole other can of worms right?

 

[hedo2002]

That's the problem, what risk threshold do we go with. Some people would say riding a motorcycle is too dangerous, we shouldn't cover people who get hurt doing that activity as its a dangerous method of transport.

People making bad eating decisions shouldn't be covered by OHIP because of the bad habits they kept for so long...etc etc...


It's a whole other can of worms right?

IMHO not that difficult, if your riding the bike within current "accepted practices" IE staying in your lane.

But with lane splitting I doubt you could find any expert who would say lane splitting isn't inherently more risky than staying in a lane. Therefore, increased risk = increased premiums. We as riders already pay a higher rates due to the increased inherent risk of riding as compared to driving a cage. So this would really be no different. It is our choice as a rider to accept the increased risk, and pay the higher premiums for doing so. So if a rider wants to extend that risk to an even higher level by lane splitting, then they should also be prepared to pay for it.

If we don't ask those who "choose" to lane split to pay a higher premium for the increased risk, then the insurer will simply place the cost of that increased risk upon the backs of every rider, and increase everyones premium. Why should I pay more because of an inherently more risky riding behaviour that I will never do? Just as I don't pay higher if a rider decideds to speed and run red lights etc and gets tickets. Once convicted that risder pays a higher premium based upon the increased risk he exposes the insurer to, through the choices he makes.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

IMHO not that difficult, if your riding the bike within current "accepted practices" IE staying in your lane.

But with lane splitting I doubt you could find any expert who would say lane splitting isn't inherently more risky than staying in a lane. Therefore, increased risk = increased premiums. We as riders already pay a higher rates due to the increased inherent risk of riding as compared to driving a cage. So this would really be no different. It is our choice as a rider to accept the increased risk, and pay the higher premiums for doing so. So if a rider wants to extend that risk to an even higher level by lane splitting, then they should also be prepared to pay for it.

If we don't ask those who "choose" to lane split to pay a higher premium for the increased risk, then the insurer will simply place the cost of that increased risk upon the backs of every rider, and increase everyones premium. Why should I pay more because of an inherently more risky riding behaviour that I will never do? Just as I don't pay higher if a rider decideds to speed and run red lights etc and gets tickets. Once convicted that risder pays a higher premium based upon the increased risk he exposes the insurer to, through the choices he makes.

People quote 'experts' on lane splitting all the time, who say that it's safer than just riding in your own lane. The only problem is that those 'experts' are referring to the practise used where it has been the norm for decades. Not places like Ontario, where it might have just been instituted.

As far as self reporting for lane splitting, that's a non starter. It's all or nothing. We already have people who are effectively driving with invalid insurance because they aren't declare das a user of the vehicle, for example. It would be the same.

 

[hedo2002]

People quote 'experts' on lane splitting all the time, who say that it's safer than just riding in your own lane. The only problem is that those 'experts' are referring to the practise used where it has been the norm for decades. Not places like Ontario, where it might have just been instituted.

As far as self reporting for lane splitting, that's a non starter. It's all or nothing. We already have people who are effectively driving with invalid insurance because they aren't declare das a user of the vehicle, for example. It would be the same.

Oh i agree there will always be those that don't follow the rules. Of course the way the gov't has "rewarded" their friends in the insurance industry in Ontario , I am sure the gov't could permit an insurer to deny coverage if the rider didn't delare and then is in a collision while splitting.

 

[Baggsy]

Oh i agree there will always be those that don't follow the rules. Of course the way the gov't has "rewarded" their friends in the insurance industry in Ontario , I am sure the gov't could permit an insurer to deny coverage if the rider didn't delare and then is in a collision while splitting.

You'd have to be careful with that, as any driver in a collision with a bike, would then feel that the motorcycle was splitting, in order to shift liability.

 

[hedo2002]

You'd have to be careful with that, as any driver in a collision with a bike, would then feel that the motorcycle was splitting, in order to shift liability.

That is what the fool that hit me in Jun tried. That is why you get cameras on your bike..lol

 

[Rob MacLennan]

You'd have to be careful with that, as any driver in a collision with a bike, would then feel that the motorcycle was splitting, in order to shift liability.

Yup. You can't have something like this be a Schrodinger's Cat. It either is legal and covered, or illegal and not covered. It's not like signing a waiver that a particular person in your household is not covered by your insurance.

 

[~TheCult]

have a similar question since this topic is up, i was once riding down bathurst (sb) and traffic was pretty heavy because there was a bunch of parked cars in the right lane with the only moving lane being the left lane. So i would ride in the left side of the right lane (just the outside of the parked cars) and a slow pace just incase someone opens their door. But is this also considered splitting? it def saved me a **** ton of time as things started to clear out anyway once i hit college

 

[Baggsy]

have a similar question since this topic is up, i was once riding down bathurst (sb) and traffic was pretty heavy because there was a bunch of parked cars in the right lane with the only moving lane being the left lane. So i would ride in the left side of the right lane (just the outside of the parked cars) and a slow pace just incase someone opens their door. But is this also considered splitting? it def saved me a **** ton of time as things started to clear out anyway once i hit college

Most of those roads used to have two lanes with parking allowed in sections between lights. I had a coach that used to fly along Eglinton Ave in the way you describe in his beat up VW Beetle. In some cases, they seem to have narrowed the road to the point where a car can't fit, so I'm not sure where that leaves motorcycles. It's possible that they've done this to make a quasi lane for bicycles.

 

[~TheCult]

ye i know what youre talking about, they made the right lane wider to fit flowing traffic and parked cars. they still do this on yonge street around lawrence and eglinton etc.. just not sure if what im doing is illegal or not since the space is only a few feet wide but i can fit so i went for it.

 

[Delboy]

Just so he could have arrived .3 seconds quicker

Well. Lets be realistic. I now live in Cole Valley and need to go to Mountainview once a week. Lane Splitting takes 30 mins of a 90 min commute for me. That's a significant saving.

Legalize it or turn a blind eye like every other forward thinking country in the world. I don't see huge piles of bodies in the US, UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, etc., from lane splitting

Seems more of an anti vehicle, Kathleen Whine nanny state rule to me.