Motorcycles going between cars

[jakeroot]

Lane Splitters are absolutely riding the line.  They are not sharing a lane with another vehicle.

That's the appearance, but it's not reflective of reality. Sure, they might ride that narrow line of paint for a few hundred feet at a time, but to ride it for 10 or 15 miles at a time would require a skill that I'm sure only the most elite of motorcyclists possess.

The law in California permits lane sharing. I suppose you could make the argument that they signal their maneuvers, but in my opinion, that misleading, as they'd be turning them on and off multiple times every few yards and that is in no way helpful.

Jealous of being a jackass going 100 mph weaving in between cars and trucks and driving on the lane divider?

What the fuck are you talking about? That's not lane splitting at all. And not what anyone who promotes lane splitting is advocating for.

Furthermore, to suggest that the majority of motorcyclists weave in and out of traffic at 100 miles per hour is outrageous.

And trust me, if a motorcycle and a car come into contact, the motorcyclist is far more likely to be injured than the driver of the car, hence the whole point of lane splitting to begin with. The idea is to give motorcyclists the ability to protect themselves by riding in a place that's proven to be safer for them. 

[jeffandnicole]

Lane Splitters are absolutely riding the line.  They are not sharing a lane with another vehicle.

...Sure, they might ride that narrow line of paint for a few hundred feet at a time...

That would be like saying driving the shoulder to pass motorists going in the same direction for a few hundred feet is legal, or going the wrong way down a one way road for a few hundred feet is legal.  If the law states lane sharing is permitted, then it's sharing the lane that's permitted, not intentionally riding between cars on the line.

The law in California permits lane sharing. I suppose you could make the argument that they signal their maneuvers, but in my opinion, that misleading, as they'd be turning them on and off multiple times every few yards and that is in no way helpful.

Sorry. The law is the law.  If sharing a lane is legal, then the motorcyclist should be remaining in a single lane.  If the motorcyclist wants to switch lanes every few yards so that he/she's always "sharing" a lane, then he still needs to obey other laws, including signaling if so required in California.

[hbelkins]

It isn't "cutting ahead".

Yes it is. If you were in a four-wheel vehicle, you'd have to maintain your place in the queue if you approach a traffic light. When you lane-split, you can ride the lane divider stripe right up to the signal, then take off when the light changes ahead of the cars stopped at the stop bars.

There used to be a term that was commonly used on MTR to describe this type of behavior. MFFY.

[ET21]

Lane Splitters are absolutely riding the line.  They are not sharing a lane with another vehicle.

Jealous of being a jackass going 100 mph weaving in between cars and trucks and driving on the lane divider?

Furthermore, to suggest that the majority of motorcyclists weave in and out of traffic at 100 miles per hour is outrageous.

Well in my travels, it is the majority unfortunately

[realjd]

Here's an article from earlier this summer regarding lane splitting:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article26620264.html

Lane splitting in California isn't riding between the lanes. Technically it's allowed because California doesn't have a law against lane sharing which legalizes two vehicles passing in the same lane.

Take a look at the link I posted above.  Especially the picture. 

If that's not riding the line, then that's being in his own lane.  And he's tailgating.  And if he's moving faster than the rest of the traffic, then he's probably weaving in and out of traffic, failing to use a turn signal every time he passes another vehicle and merges "side by side" with a vehicle in his lane.

Lane Splitters are absolutely riding the line.  They are not sharing a lane with another vehicle.

I'm just explaining the legal rationale for it being legal there.

Edit: I should add that CHP will sometimes use unsafe lane changing as the charge on tickets for motorcycles lane splitting unsafely.

[roadfro]

Nevada does not allow lane splitting.

When the annual "Street Vibrations" motorcycle event is held in downtown Reno every September, NDOT usually goes out of its way to remind motorcycle drivers coming from California that lane splitting is illegal. They usually drag a portable VMS right to the state line on I-80, and use every DMS sign between the line and Reno, and display the message "Illegal to Split Lanes" (the DMSs also usually rotate in a reminder that motorcycle helmets are required).

[Rothman]

As I waited to get off of the Queensboro Bridge yesterday, two NJ motorcycles lane split their way through the traffic.

Dirty criminals.

[Walleye2013]

In Ohio, it is legal for motorcycles to travel in-between lanes during traffic, as long as it is done safely.

[AlexandriaVA]

I don't see any issue with lane-splitting, particularly when there's slow or non-moving congestion, or long queues at red lights. Plus it provide incentive to ride a scooter/motorbike/motorcycle in an urban area, which is the more efficient vehicle for single-traveler personal urban transport (when you consider size, parking etc)

[AlexandriaVA]

It isn't "cutting ahead".

Yes it is. If you were in a four-wheel vehicle, you'd have to maintain your place in the queue if you approach a traffic light. When you lane-split, you can ride the lane divider stripe right up to the signal, then take off when the light changes ahead of the cars stopped at the stop bars.

There used to be a term that was commonly used on MTR to describe this type of behavior. MFFY.

I think that's a feature, not a bug. It's simply using all of the available carriageway.

[hbelkins]

I don't see any issue with lane-splitting, particularly when there's slow or non-moving congestion, or long queues at red lights. Plus it provide incentive to ride a scooter/motorbike/motorcycle in an urban area, which is the more efficient vehicle for single-traveler personal urban transport (when you consider size, parking etc)

I think that's a feature, not a bug. It's simply using all of the available carriageway.

Why should one type of vehicle be given an advantage over another?

[AlexandriaVA]

I don't see any issue with lane-splitting, particularly when there's slow or non-moving congestion, or long queues at red lights. Plus it provide incentive to ride a scooter/motorbike/motorcycle in an urban area, which is the more efficient vehicle for single-traveler personal urban transport (when you consider size, parking etc)

I think that's a feature, not a bug. It's simply using all of the available carriageway.

Why should one type of vehicle be given an advantage over another?

Because it can, basically. I don't see what fairness has to do with it at all. It's traffic flow, not social justice.

If you're against lane-splitting, you should also be against passing at-speed on a freeway. After all, you're "cutting" them, or "taking" their slot.
Let me ask you this - do you oppose people taking an acceleration lane all the way to the end, and then cutting over, versus getting in line immediately? Bear in mind that traffic engineers recommend using the entire acceleration lane.

Lane splitting adds capacity by adding invisible lanes. Rather than a motorcycle "taking" a car-equivalent position on a lane, it merely adds a temporary lane, allowing more throughput (the ultimate goal).

update With regards to giving advantage to bikes, I think it's obvious that in congested situations, smaller is better than bigger because you can clearly move more small vehicles (i.e. motorbikes) than large vehicles (cars) on the same roadway space. If you assume that most people are solo drivers, on the balance, there's no reason not to favor the vehicle which allow for a more efficient use of road space.

Think about ferries. I'll use Washington State Ferry as an example: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferries/fares/FaresDetail.aspx?tripdate=20150910&departingterm=7&arrivingterm=3

Their rates clearly favor smaller vehicles, but it's more efficient for them to load up with many smaller vehicles than fewer larger vehicles. Their cargo hold has limited space (like roads), and they can move more people (and make more money), by charging less and taking on more small vehicles, bikes, and motorbikes, than they would just filling up with sedans.

[empirestate]

Lane splitting adds capacity by adding invisible lanes.

Hmm, that's an interesting way to look at it, and perhaps even gets at the root of the disagreement. Myself, I don't get bent out of shape over lane-splitting, so long as it isn't combined with recklessness, and so long as cyclists don't expect me to make special accommodations for them. If lane splitting is legal, fine; but if we begin to think about a group of vehicles using a special space of their own, superimposed onto the established order of traffic, it becomes too many layers of regulation for me to apply. So, if they can somehow fit in between the rules, both figuratively and literally, and it's considered acceptable, I have no problem with it. I simply won't be engaging in it, as I'm committed to the established space and rules that we expect everyone to abide by.

[AlexandriaVA]

It's no different than if you had a two-lane road, and then made it a two-lane road with a bike lane aside you. You just raised capacity, and all you had to do was tighten the margins a bit. I view lane-splitting as the constant creation of ad-hoc motorbike/cycle lanes as opportunity arises.

Plus it's not like the bikes are going to just stop at the front of the line. In fact, given their mass, they'll likely be the first ones out of the gate.

If you've ever been to Rome, you'll know what I'm talking about with motorbikes simply filling in the gaps in the road and making their way to the front of the queue.

[Brandon]

It's no different than if you had a two-lane road, and then made it a two-lane road with a bike lane aside you. You just raised capacity, and all you had to do was tighten the margins a bit. I view lane-splitting as the constant creation of ad-hoc motorbike/cycle lanes as opportunity arises.

A bicycle lane is typically separated as a separate lane on its own though, not "lane splitting".

[AlexandriaVA]

It's no different than if you had a two-lane road, and then made it a two-lane road with a bike lane aside you. You just raised capacity, and all you had to do was tighten the margins a bit. I view lane-splitting as the constant creation of ad-hoc motorbike/cycle lanes as opportunity arises.

A bicycle lane is typically separated as a separate lane on its own though, not "lane splitting".

Didn't mean to convey that comparison (bad on my end). My point was that a motorcycle/motorbike doesn't need a lane the width of a full-sized auto. So why consign them to wait in a queue full of full-sized autos in full-sized lanes, when there's plenty of extra room on the roadway in the form of what I call the "invisible lanes", which is the space taken up by bikes when they engage in lane splitting.

All you're doing is getting more use out of your roadway. Rather than two lanes for autos, you have two lanes for autos plus whatever motorcycles/bikes can fill in the gaps between them.

Feds put local roads at 9-12 feet in width-
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/geometric/pubs/mitigationstrategies/chapter3/3_lanewidth.cfm - let's average it out at 10.5 feet.

A Honda Accord sedan is about 6 feet wide- http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx - I'll even round up to 6.1

That leaves 4.4 feet (10.5 - 6.1) excess in each average lane, using a Honda Accord as a placeholder example. (What's crazy is that if the maximum lane width, 12 feet, is applied, you would have 5.9 feet, almost as wide as another Honda Accord!)

A Vespa scooter is 2.28 feet wide - http://www.vespamaintenance.com/specs.html - well within the 4.4 excess feet per lane. Why waste that space by preventing lane-splitting?

****

The bottom line is that it's foolish to waste scarce road space, particularly when the lanes are too wide to begin with (excess lane width is a pretty common design flaw in the US on new roads). In times of heavy congestion or while waiting at a red light, I don't see any downside to a small motorcycle/motorbike using this extra space in the roadway.

Obviously at high speeds the stakes are different, but I don't associated lane-splitting with high-speed situations.

[vdeane]

The bottom line is that it's foolish to waste scarce road space, particularly when the lanes are too wide to begin with (excess lane width is a pretty common design flaw in the US on new roads). In times of heavy congestion or while waiting at a red light, I don't see any downside to a small motorcycle/motorbike using this extra space in the roadway.

Lets say you're on a two lane road, driving along, and you come across a motorcyclist going 5-10 mph slower than the speed you want to go at (not unusual).  After puttering around for 5 miles, you FINALLY get to a spot where it is both safe and legal to pass (which on many NY roads is optimistic).  A mile or two later, you come across a light, say in a small village, and there's a car in front of you at the light.  Let's say the light is red long enough for the motorcyclist to catch up (not unusual).  Instead of staying behind you, he lane splits, and when the light turns green, pulls in front of you (since the lane splitting allowed him to jump the queue).  I'd be pretty pissed, wouldn't you?

[AlexandriaVA]

Fair enough - I was basically referring to urban areas, which is my experience driving. I'm sure rural roads would require different rules and customs.

[jakeroot]

Lets say you're on a two lane road, driving along, and you come across a motorcyclist going 5-10 mph slower than the speed you want to go at (not unusual).  After puttering around for 5 miles, you FINALLY get to a spot where it is both safe and legal to pass (which on many NY roads is optimistic).  A mile or two later, you come across a light, say in a small village, and there's a car in front of you at the light.  Let's say the light is red long enough for the motorcyclist to catch up (not unusual).  Instead of staying behind you, he lane splits, and when the light turns green, pulls in front of you (since the lane splitting allowed him to jump the queue).  I'd be pretty pissed, wouldn't you?

Most motorcyclists who drive that slow (usually scooters) tend not to lane split anyways, so I don't think it's something you'd have to worry about happening a lot. If they do decide to filter to the front, just overtake again. The opportunity may never materialize, granted, but if he's knowingly travelling slower than the speed of traffic, at least around here, scooters will ride as close to the edge of the pavement to allow traffic to pass without using the oncoming lane. They certainly have no legal obligation to (unless there's more than X-number of cars behind them, per many state statutes), but a good motorcyclist/scooter-rider would move over.

It's traffic flow, not social justice.

This basically sums up my opinion.

[vdeane]

Most motorcyclists who drive that slow (usually scooters) tend not to lane split anyways, so I don't think it's something you'd have to worry about happening a lot. If they do decide to filter to the front, just overtake again. The opportunity may never materialize, granted, but if he's knowingly travelling slower than the speed of traffic, at least around here, scooters will ride as close to the edge of the pavement to allow traffic to pass without using the oncoming lane. They certainly have no legal obligation to (unless there's more than X-number of cars behind them, per many state statutes), but a good motorcyclist/scooter-rider would move over.

Not usually scooters in these parts, at least not on roads with speed limits of 55.

[hbelkins]

Lane splitters = MFFY. End of discussion as far as I'm concerned. It's a selfish, dangerous and jerkoff-ish behavior.

[jakeroot]

Lane splitters = MFFY. End of discussion as far as I'm concerned. It's a selfish, dangerous and jerkoff-ish behavior.

No offence HB, but if your own ego is more important than the safety of other road users, you are the problem here.

[AlexandriaVA]

This thread comes down to something I have observed many of the of the discussions on this thread boil down to, which is basically that driving in urban areas/the Northeast and West costs can often be a very different experience than driving in the heartland.

[ET21]

Lane splitters = MFFY. End of discussion as far as I'm concerned. It's a selfish, dangerous and jerkoff-ish behavior.

No offence HB, but if your own ego is more important than the safety of other road users, you are the problem here.

[jakeroot]