I don't think you get what I'm saying - when someone purposely makes "f-everyone, I'm more important then all of you" move, that is douchebaggery...
Improper lane change could very well be that move, but not every improper lane change is...
|
|
|
Wish this was here...
- Thread starter clutch
- Start date
I don't think you get what I'm saying - when someone purposely makes "f-everyone, I'm more important then all of you" move, that is douchebaggery...
Improper lane change could very well be that move, but not every improper lane change is...
PLau
Well-known member
I see what you mean - a prime example would be those weaving in and out of traffic or flying down between cars at stupid speeds. With the argument presented, even having the thought of seriously injuring some random person because they're doing something illegal and openly admitting that it triggers your road rage when you see them pass is just something else.
It does not do anyone harm if people are filtering through at a slow and safe speed and I don't see how that can be labelled as "douchebaggery". If there is 1 lane that is wide enough to fit 2 cars and the car behind is turning right at an intersection, if there is enough room, the car will most likely squeeze through and make that right. If a bike on the other hand were to do that with sufficient space, god help them, they're lane filtering... Should they be punished for doing the exact same thing as the cars around them?
By parking lot traffic, I mean when your sitting there, not moving. Like sitting in a full parking lot. Gridlock is what you called it, i guess that's what it is.
I'm talking lane filtering, like when your stuck on the highway, in stop and go traffic or gridlock. Then someone comes flying down the highway, lane filtering between cars. Like between right lane and center lane, or center lane and left lane.
PLau
Well-known member
Regardless if its on the highway or not, it is still lane filtering.
Sure, if someone is "flying" down between cars, that is stupid. What if someone is going 10-15km/h filtering through cause nothing is moving?
Not everyone has a death wish and would rather spend time moving than not.
In that video, filtering was only allowed at below 30km/h
Sure, if someone is "flying" down between cars, that is stupid. What if someone is going 10-15km/h filtering through cause nothing is moving?
Not everyone has a death wish and would rather spend time moving than not.
In that video, filtering was only allowed at below 30km/h
Last edited:
Ok, finally watched the video. Lane filtering, as explained, imo, makes sense.
I personally don't agree with lane splitting (higher than 30km/hr). Biggest reason is that I don't think the majority of drivers are attentive enough for it to be safe for me as a rider.
As for Shane's comments: I hate when drivers pull db moves. Pisses me off too. I always wished I could hand out "stupid tickets" to them. But here's the thing: The only one really getting hurt is you, and your doing it yourself. I know. I used to stress over stuff like that. But while you're fuming at dinner because of the *** that drove to the end of the merge lane, then squeezed in. That guy is not giving you a thought.
I'm not gonna advocate sparking up a fatty to relax, but throw some tunes on, put on an audio book, whatever, and chill. Get upset if you want, then let it go. I believe that you wouldn't act on those impulses, but there are people that would.
I'm not gonna beat you up for saying you get upset. We all do. Or at least I do too. But then I look in the rearview, see my kids, and all is good again.
As far as BMW drivers go, Audi drivers took their crown away a long time ago. (I say this with as much tongue in cheek as I do envy, as I will never be able to afford either).
Any response to the Stephen DelDuca tweet?
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 625 Windows Phone using Tapatalk
I personally don't agree with lane splitting (higher than 30km/hr). Biggest reason is that I don't think the majority of drivers are attentive enough for it to be safe for me as a rider.
As for Shane's comments: I hate when drivers pull db moves. Pisses me off too. I always wished I could hand out "stupid tickets" to them. But here's the thing: The only one really getting hurt is you, and your doing it yourself. I know. I used to stress over stuff like that. But while you're fuming at dinner because of the *** that drove to the end of the merge lane, then squeezed in. That guy is not giving you a thought.
I'm not gonna advocate sparking up a fatty to relax, but throw some tunes on, put on an audio book, whatever, and chill. Get upset if you want, then let it go. I believe that you wouldn't act on those impulses, but there are people that would.
I'm not gonna beat you up for saying you get upset. We all do. Or at least I do too. But then I look in the rearview, see my kids, and all is good again.
As far as BMW drivers go, Audi drivers took their crown away a long time ago. (I say this with as much tongue in cheek as I do envy, as I will never be able to afford either).
Any response to the Stephen DelDuca tweet?
Sent from my Nokia Lumia 625 Windows Phone using Tapatalk
Neither myself or PLau are defending some a55hat lanesplitting at 95km/h in gridlock, that's stupid plain and simple. What we are talking about is moving past stopped cars at 30km/h or less. Belgium released information that this practice has eased their congestion by 30% iirc. So not only is there less traffic because of it, you don't get rear-ended, and your bike doesn't overheat. Bikes (600's) today put out more hp than corollas did 10 years ago, yet our radiators and fans are tiny in comparison.
Not a valid argument. I know it sucks, there's nothing worse than sitting on top of a running engine, in full gear and sweating buckets in 40 degrees, but other drivers didn't force you to make that choice. This logic would allow anyone driving a beater car to go around gridlocked traffic so his car doesn't overheat.
Easing congestion, keeping the traffic moving and taking up less parking space are all valid arguments, and that should be the focus here...
This post is absolute BS and you know it. You're telling me you ALWAYS stop at a stop sign (ie. Rolling stops do not count), rush a yellow but miscalculated and turns red in the intersection, ALWAYS go 60 in a 60 zone, not 65?
Not everyone gets road rage and most definitely do not have the urge to injure or kill someone else.
Nobody said they were flawless but being mad at someone else filtering is pointless.
I said i do not always do the speed limit. I admit to that, but I DO, stop for every stop sign and red light, I do actually come to full and complete stop before moving. No Rolling stops. I have never run a red light. I've gone through a light while it was yellow, then it turned red when i was half way through, Yes.
I still have the ideas in my head from driver training all those years ago, always in the mindset that if i break the rules, is when i get caught and ticketed. I don't want to that to happen, that's why the 5 years of a perfect driving record, no tickets, nothing.
Shane
It is a valid argument, I'm comparing a fully functioning motorcycle to a fully functioning car. You compared a fully functioning bike to a broken car. For some people their motorcycle is their only means of transportation, and if any driver has a problem with a person preventing $x,000's worth of damage by simply maintaining a slow but constant speed, then the problem lies with the driver not the biker. Furthermore, no one forced the driver to sit in traffic, they have every right to buy a bike, (violate legislation) and lane split also.
You just don't get it at all, sorry - If your "performance" vehicle doesn't have adequate cooling system, your option are:
1 - Sell it and buy vehicle that works for your driving requirements
2 - Modify it (slap some after-market parts) to make the under-performing system actually do the work
3 - If you are a complainer type, write a letter to manufacturer of you vehicle and ask them to fix the problem and go on about and how you are going to report them to government as it almost killed you, there should be recall, millions of $ in lawsuits, blah blah blah.
4 - Lane-split and if you get caught, pay the price.
In terms of engine cooling - you chose crappy vehicle for your commute, and you expect others to make concessions for you? - and "others" in their wisdom choose to drive vehicle that won't overheat in a slow moving traffic. They should take a bit of time to make room for you? Sorry - I have to repeat it - you don't get it at all.
Now, forget your under-performing vehicle that cannot keep its cool, and focus on the fact that smaller vehicle such as a motorcycle takes up way less room on the road, and it is appropriately sized for single occupant vehicle. If more commuters switched to motorcycles, it would benefit everyone by easing congestion, and with added benefit of requiring only a fraction of parking space, it is a win-win combination - and with that logic, it is a positive thing, and everyone stands to benefit from more bikes on the road. With that logic, government could look into ways of encouraging more people to switch to motorcycles, perhaps allowing lane-splitting...
If you think you should be allowed to lane-split or jump the line because you didn't chose your vehicle wisely, opt for number 4 and don't expect any sympathy from anyone.
If you make a case that motorcycles benefit everyone, you will get sympathy and respect, and perhaps more.
1 - Sell it and buy vehicle that works for your driving requirements
2 - Modify it (slap some after-market parts) to make the under-performing system actually do the work
3 - If you are a complainer type, write a letter to manufacturer of you vehicle and ask them to fix the problem and go on about and how you are going to report them to government as it almost killed you, there should be recall, millions of $ in lawsuits, blah blah blah.
4 - Lane-split and if you get caught, pay the price.
In terms of engine cooling - you chose crappy vehicle for your commute, and you expect others to make concessions for you? - and "others" in their wisdom choose to drive vehicle that won't overheat in a slow moving traffic. They should take a bit of time to make room for you? Sorry - I have to repeat it - you don't get it at all.
Now, forget your under-performing vehicle that cannot keep its cool, and focus on the fact that smaller vehicle such as a motorcycle takes up way less room on the road, and it is appropriately sized for single occupant vehicle. If more commuters switched to motorcycles, it would benefit everyone by easing congestion, and with added benefit of requiring only a fraction of parking space, it is a win-win combination - and with that logic, it is a positive thing, and everyone stands to benefit from more bikes on the road. With that logic, government could look into ways of encouraging more people to switch to motorcycles, perhaps allowing lane-splitting...
If you think you should be allowed to lane-split or jump the line because you didn't chose your vehicle wisely, opt for number 4 and don't expect any sympathy from anyone.
If you make a case that motorcycles benefit everyone, you will get sympathy and respect, and perhaps more.
PLau
Well-known member
How did the subject go from lane filtering to lane splitting (unless you classify them as the same thing)?
Basically what you're saying is "If you get caught, pay the price". It still does not justify other drivers intentionally blocking you off or trying to door prize you because they see you coming.
The exact same thing can be said for people parking in a no parking zone or texting and driving - you don't see people going up to them and punching out their windows/mirrors because they're breaking the law.
Does it add to congestion? Yes.
Is it dangerous? Yes.
Does it piss people off? Yes.
Will drivers put in the effort to harm the driver of that car? Probably not.
People are ****** and are willing to harm motorcyclists filtering because they are being passed, not because its dangerous and not cause it adds to congestion. Those excuses have the same value has "my bike will over heat".
Using the overheating excuse is BS - I agree with you on that. Throw out all the BS excuses and you basically have motorcyclists saying "I just want to keep moving cause I can" and people in cars saying "Hey, I was here first - traffic is for everyone".
1. At no point was I looking for sympathy, or bit**ing.
2. Overheating is one of the reasons California allows filtering.
3. I was making the point that if it became more prevalent, there would be a shift from cars to bikes. I went so far as to say that Belgium has brought up the fact that bikes relieve up to 30% of it's congestion.
4. Count the ratio of cars/suvs/pickups during rush hour and you'll see that single occupant vehicles are much more suited for commuting than just about anything else.
It's you that's hell bent on being fair (only to drivers). I have yet to see a driver open their window when it's pissing rain outside, you know, to be fair to the biker beside them. I also wonder how many turn on the heat in the summer so that they feel the same as the biker in leathers. Trying to even the field and make everything 'fair' for everyone is for stupid people. Bikes have their advantages, cars have different advantages, legislation that accommodates only one form needs to change.
You make no sense... at all.
You sound like that guy who was stopped in his car for not wearing a seat-belt - and he said he doesn't have to wear a seat-belt because bikers don't wear it.
Sorry, it is not a valid argument. I gave you plenty to go on in terms of valid arguments.
I'm not here to argue against filtering, to contrary, just pointing out the obvious - you cannot bend the rules on the account of lousy cooling. On top of that, if you decide to break the rules in a way that will aggravate everyone in sight, chances are someone will act on it... it takes two fools...
I'm getting a feeling you will never get it...
No, what I was doing was pointing out the fact that each vehicle has it's dis/advantages and that trying to make rules for one vehicle apply to another is inefficient. What you're saying is I should get a seat belt ticket while on my bike. Or that transport trucks should be allowed in the left lane without question. Who's not making sense here?
I do get it now though. You think that because my bike overheats when sitting in hot traffic that it's a poor choice for commuting. Never mind the fact that it's fuel efficient (which makes gas cheaper for everyone else as a result of supply/demand), takes up little room allowing more vehicles on the highway, can be parked anywhere, thus freeing up spots for drivers and is both cheap to insure and maintain. In the best interest of the public, rather than keep moving slowly while everyone else is stopped, I should get a big a** truck with a huge radiator, that takes 24L/100kms of fuel, can't be parked anywhere,
and blocks the view of vehicles behind me while stopped with everyone else. Yup, there's a public service right there.
Out of curiosity, have you ever heard the expression 'penny wise, pound foolish'?
I do get it now though. You think that because my bike overheats when sitting in hot traffic that it's a poor choice for commuting. Never mind the fact that it's fuel efficient (which makes gas cheaper for everyone else as a result of supply/demand), takes up little room allowing more vehicles on the highway, can be parked anywhere, thus freeing up spots for drivers and is both cheap to insure and maintain. In the best interest of the public, rather than keep moving slowly while everyone else is stopped, I should get a big a** truck with a huge radiator, that takes 24L/100kms of fuel, can't be parked anywhere,
and blocks the view of vehicles behind me while stopped with everyone else. Yup, there's a public service right there.
Out of curiosity, have you ever heard the expression 'penny wise, pound foolish'?
I was wrong - you are (almost) starting to get it (taking quote out of context, yes, but there is a hint of you getting it)...
As for rest of your post - still not making sense, sorry.
Are you a politician? Lots of words, some subtle insults, but no substance.
|
|
|
|
|