Lane-splitting

[Tiberius Jim]

This topic came up in another thread as a bit of an off-topic tangent, and I thought it was an interesting topic for anyone who drives their own vehicle, whether it be two, three, four or more wheels.

For those unfamiliar with the term, lane-splitting (a.k.a. filtering) is described as "a two-wheeled vehicle moving between roadway lanes of vehicles that are proceeding in the same direction. More narrowly, it refers to overtaking slow or stopped vehicles by traveling between lanes. It is also sometimes called lane sharing, whitelining, filtering, or stripe-riding. Alternatively, lane splitting has been used to describe moving through traffic that is in motion while filtering is used to describe moving through traffic that is stopped."

While this practice is legal just about everywhere in the world, the only place you can do it legally in the US is here in California. That said, it is only legal to do so if you abide by the CHP guidelines. and do so in a safe and prudent manner. In other words, flying in between cars at 80 when traffic is doing 65 is not okay. Doing 65 while traffic is stopped, also not cool.

I split lanes just about every time I go out on my bike, which is 5 days a week when I ride 22 miles each way to work. The beginning of my commute takes place on a 4 lane freeway that is *always* packed with cars crawling at a snail's pace, if that. If I am in my car, it'll take me 45-60 minutes to traverse that 22 miles. On my by, it's more like 30 minutes. I have the benefit of using the high occupancy vehicle lane, as well, but being able to filter through slow and stopped traffic is a huge time saver. It also allows me to remain mobile and reduce the chance of some inattentive driver rear-ending me. Yes, there's still the threat that cars can suddenly change lanes in front of me, but if the rider is being cautious and riding slowly enough, they should be able to react to such an event without a collision occurring.

This video is makes a lot of great points in support of the practice. I for one, obviously, am very pro-lane-splitting. I can't imagine having to sit in traffic on my bike, adding to the congestion when I could help to relieve it by using that space between cars that only a bike can fit into. At least here, people seem to know that it's legal and folks will often move over to make way for riders. I also try to make sure I am in a low gear so they can hear me coming, and am looking into getting some hazard flashers on the front to make me that much more visible.

So the question is of course, what is your opinion on lane-splitting? For those in areas where it is legal, do you think it should be? In areas where it isn't, should it be or do you agree with the laws that forbid it? This is actually something of a point of contention on the motorcycle forum I frequent with opinions being very split, usually between those from California or other parts of the world and people in those states where it is illegal.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

 

[Amaris]

It is not legal in my area (though not enforced), and I do not want it to be legal. I consider it to be very dangerous behavior.

 

[Trekker4747]

It strikes me as potentially dangerous as I think it adds to much of an element of unpredictability for both driver and cyclist. When you change lanes it's enough to keep an eye on traffic in the lane you're entering, manage your speed with the cars you're sharing a lane with, match your speed with the cars in the lane you're entering and NOW you have to also watch for motorcycles cruising up the lane?

I also am suspect that there's a enough room between cars to allow the motorcycle to go through without clipping off someone's wing mirror or something.

The California laws also allow cycles to split at 10-over the traffic speed which is just... what?! They can just decide things aren't moving fast enough for them and cruise through everyone? That strikes me as kind-of dickish, really.

I can see some "reason" to it if cyclists are really in danger of getting crushed between cars due to inattentive drivers but it seems to me an aware cyclist would be able to avoid that or maybe being allowed to "lane split" while stopped or something.

But to just cruise through slow traffic? Yeah.... Can't say I agree with that.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Wow. I had no idea it was legal anywhere.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

It would all come down to why the rider was taken out. Was he riding too fast for the conditions? or did the other vehicle dart out in front of him without looking? It has been said that even in CA, if you're following the guidelines while splitting and are still involved in an accident, you're be lucky to be cleared of all responsibility, even if the other driver was in the wrong.

It is not legal in my area (though not enforced), and I do not want it to be legal. I consider it to be very dangerous behavior.

What exactly about it do you feel is dangerous? I ask because I know a lot of people think of lane splitting and their first thought is the guys who are flying through traffic at high speeds. If done at, say, only 10 mph faster than the surrounding traffic, per California guidelines, would that seem less dangerous?

It strikes me as potentially dangerous as I think it adds to much of an element of unpredictability for both driver and cyclist. When you change lanes it's enough to keep an eye on traffic in the lane you're entering, manage your speed with the cars you're sharing a lane with, match your speed with the cars in the lane you're entering and NOW you have to also watch for motorcycles cruising up the lane?

I also am suspect that there's a enough room between cars to allow the motorcycle to go through without clipping off someone's wing mirror or something.

The California laws also allow cycles to split at 10-over the traffic speed which is just... what?! They can just decide things aren't moving fast enough for them and cruise through everyone? That strikes me as kind-of dickish, really.

I can see some "reason" to it if cyclists are really in danger of getting crushed between cars due to inattentive drivers but it seems to me an aware cyclist would be able to avoid that or maybe being allowed to "lane split" while stopped or something.

But to just cruise through slow traffic? Yeah.... Can't say I agree with that.

The only way I can see if being seen as "dickish" if you're looking at it with the mentality of, "Hey, why does he get to get up ahead of me?!" that a lot of people seem to have. They forget that by leaving the main pool of vehicles that make up the traffic congestion, the rider is freeing up space for more cars. So really, by splitting the rider is doing you a favor.

I have yet to come close to clipping anybody's mirror. It's all about planning your approach and timing when you pass each vehicle.

Is it really that hard to look for a bike when you're changing lanes, though? For me it's just all a part of looking to see if the lane I'm heading into is clear.

 

[Trekker4747]

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

It would all come down to why the rider was taken out. Was he riding too fast for the conditions? or did the other vehicle dart out in front of him without looking? It has been said that even in CA, if you're following the guidelines while splitting and are still involved in an accident, you're be lucky to be cleared of all responsibility, even if the other driver was in the wrong.

It is not legal in my area (though not enforced), and I do not want it to be legal. I consider it to be very dangerous behavior.

What exactly about it do you feel is dangerous? I ask because I know a lot of people think of lane splitting and their first thought is the guys who are flying through traffic at high speeds. If done at, say, only 10 mph faster than the surrounding traffic, per California guidelines, would that seem less dangerous?

10mph faster is still a pretty good clip and could do damage to a car in an impact and injure the rider. And, really, what makes a biker so "special" that he gets to go 10 miles an hour faster than the rest of traffic in slow conditions?

 

[Amaris]

What exactly about it do you feel is dangerous? I ask because I know a lot of people think of lane splitting and their first thought is the guys who are flying through traffic at high speeds. If done at, say, only 10 mph faster than the surrounding traffic, per California guidelines, would that seem less dangerous?

Lanes are designated a certain way for a reason, as to allow distance between two vehicles from colliding when traveling at moderate to high speeds. A motorcycle is not constrained by size, but at the same time, it is still a large, heavy object, one that is subject to the same physics as other vehicles on the road. As for the 10 MPH rule, that only makes me less likely to endorse allowing lane splitting, as it means the same motorcycle carrying a human being can do 45 in a 35, 60 in a 50, 75 in a 65, and 80 in a 70. "Only 10 more mph" sounds safe, until you add it to the allowable limit already being maintained.

Suppose you have a large pickup truck in the left lane, and my car in the right lane, and we're traveling at 65 MPH, the posted speed limit. You're telling me I shouldn't be concerned that you're about to come up between the two of us, and pass us at 75 MPH? Where does safe play into that? It doesn't. The practice is a dangerous one.

 

[Gov Kodos]

What exactly about it do you feel is dangerous? I ask because I know a lot of people think of lane splitting and their first thought is the guys who are flying through traffic at high speeds. If done at, say, only 10 mph faster than the surrounding traffic, per California guidelines, would that seem less dangerous?

Lanes are designated a certain way for a reason, as to allow distance between two vehicles from colliding when traveling at moderate to high speeds. A motorcycle is not constrained by size, but at the same time, it is still a large, heavy object, one that is subject to the same physics as other vehicles on the road. As for the 10 MPH rule, that only makes me less likely to endorse allowing lane splitting, as it means the same motorcycle carrying a human being can do 45 in a 35, 60 in a 50, 75 in a 65, and 80 in a 70. "Only 10 more mph" sounds safe, until you add it to the allowable limit already being maintained.

Suppose you have a large pickup truck in the left lane, and my car in the right lane, and we're traveling at 65 MPH, the posted speed limit. You're telling me I shouldn't be concerned that you're about to come up between the two of us, and pass us at 75 MPH? Where does safe play into that? It doesn't. The practice is a dangerous one.

Exactly. It's an irresponsible driving behavior that should not be encouraged.

 

[Trekker4747]

IIRC the 10mph rules tops out at 35mph and doesn't allow the cyclist to go faster than the speed limit.

 

[doubleohfive]

This topic came up in another thread as a bit of an off-topic tangent, and I thought it was an interesting topic for anyone who drives their own vehicle, whether it be two, three, four or more wheels.

For those unfamiliar with the term, lane-splitting (a.k.a. filtering) is described as "a two-wheeled vehicle moving between roadway lanes of vehicles that are proceeding in the same direction. More narrowly, it refers to overtaking slow or stopped vehicles by traveling between lanes. It is also sometimes called lane sharing, whitelining, filtering, or stripe-riding. Alternatively, lane splitting has been used to describe moving through traffic that is in motion while filtering is used to describe moving through traffic that is stopped."

While this practice is legal just about everywhere in the world, the only place you can do it legally in the US is here in California. That said, it is only legal to do so if you abide by the DMV guidelines. and do so in a safe and prudent manner. In other words, flying in between cars at 80 when traffic is doing 65 is not okay. Doing 65 while traffic is stopped, also not cool.

I split lanes just about every time I go out on my bike, which is 5 days a week when I ride 22 miles each way to work. The beginning of my commute takes place on a 4 lane freeway that is *always* packed with cars crawling at a snail's pace, if that. If I am in my car, it'll take me 45-60 minutes to traverse that 22 miles. On my by, it's more like 30 minutes. I have the benefit of using the high occupancy vehicle lane, as well, but being able to filter through slow and stopped traffic is a huge time saver. It also allows me to remain mobile and reduce the chance of some inattentive driver rear-ending me. Yes, there's still the threat that cars can suddenly change lanes in front of me, but if the rider is being cautious and riding slowly enough, they should be able to react to such an event without a collision occurring.

This video is makes a lot of great points in support of the practice. I for one, obviously, am very pro-lane-splitting. I can't imagine having to sit in traffic on my bike, adding to the congestion when I could help to relieve it by using that space between cars that only a bike can fit into. At least here, people seem to know that it's legal and folks will often move over to make way for riders. I also try to make sure I am in a low gear so they can hear me coming, and am looking into getting some hazard flashers on the front to make me that much more visible.

So the question is of course, what is your opinion on lane-splitting? For those in areas where it is legal, do you think it should be? In areas where it isn't, should it be or do you agree with the laws that forbid it? This is actually something of a point of contention on the motorcycle forum I frequent with opinions being very split, usually between those from California or other parts of the world and people in those states where it is illegal.

Lane splitting is dangerous and a nuisance to the rest of us not on motorcycles, adds to the tension of drivers already trying to navigate the choppy waters of California driving without being surprised by bikers whizzing by at the last moment, and strikes me as being incredibly prone to more accidents, not less.

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

 

[Amaris]

IIRC the 10mph rules tops out at 35mph and doesn't allow the cyclist to go faster than the speed limit.

That's still dangerous, as 35 mph is usually the speed associated with city driving. So now, at 45 mph, we have the added element of being in a populated area, where there are street lights, stop signs, yields, crosswalks, bus stops, and other elements.

 

[doubleohfive]

The only way I can see if being seen as "dickish" if you're looking at it with the mentality of, "Hey, why does he get to get up ahead of me?!" that a lot of people seem to have. They forget that by leaving the main pool of vehicles that make up the traffic congestion, the rider is freeing up space for more cars. So really, by splitting the rider is doing you a favor.

I think we've pretty well established, Flux, if not over the course of your career here in Misc than certainly this week alone that you aren't exactly the leading expert on perception of attitude, behavior or cultural or social norms.

 

[Trekker4747]

IIRC the 10mph rules tops out at 35mph and doesn't allow the cyclist to go faster than the speed limit.

That's still dangerous, as 35 mph is usually the speed associated with city driving. So now, at 45 mph, we have the added element of being in a populated area, where there are street lights, stop signs, yields, crosswalks, bus stops, and other elements.

Oh I don't disagree that it's dangerous just that it doesn't allow for going 70 when everyone else is going 60. If traffic is crawling at 25 miles an hour and a cyclist is going 35 and there's a crash then people are going to be hurt.

It just adds too much of an extra layer of unpredictability which already exists pretty heavily when driving. Giving motorcyclists the ability to pass everyone in the narrow space between cars when traffic is moving slow just strikes me as rather dangerous and asking for trouble. I'm surprised, actually, California has had so much "luck" with it. But I may need to look into how well it's really working.

Just from a cager observing from the outside it strikes me as an accident waiting to happen.

 

[CorporalClegg]

What I'd like to know is, why do those who do it think it's okay for them to cut in line just because they're riding a smaller vehicle?

That's essentially what they're doing.

 

[Trekker4747]

What I'd like to know is, why do those who do it think it's okay for them to cut in line just because they're riding a smaller vehicle?

That's essentially what they're doing.

Pretty much.

 

[Amaris]

IIRC the 10mph rules tops out at 35mph and doesn't allow the cyclist to go faster than the speed limit.

That's still dangerous, as 35 mph is usually the speed associated with city driving. So now, at 45 mph, we have the added element of being in a populated area, where there are street lights, stop signs, yields, crosswalks, bus stops, and other elements.

Oh I don't disagree that it's dangerous just that it doesn't allow for going 70 when everyone else is going 60. If traffic is crawling at 25 miles an hour and a cyclist is going 35 and there's a crash then people are going to be hurt.

It just adds too much of an extra layer of unpredictability which already exists pretty heavily when driving. Giving motorcyclists the ability to pass everyone in the narrow space between cars when traffic is moving slow just strikes me as rather dangerous and asking for trouble. I'm surprised, actually, California has had so much "luck" with it. But I may need to look into how well it's really working.

Just from a cager observing from the outside it strikes me as an accident waiting to happen.

Good points, and yes, that's how I feel about it, too. I mean, this MUST be safe, right?

 

[Trekker4747]

That's still dangerous, as 35 mph is usually the speed associated with city driving. So now, at 45 mph, we have the added element of being in a populated area, where there are street lights, stop signs, yields, crosswalks, bus stops, and other elements.

Oh I don't disagree that it's dangerous just that it doesn't allow for going 70 when everyone else is going 60. If traffic is crawling at 25 miles an hour and a cyclist is going 35 and there's a crash then people are going to be hurt.

It just adds too much of an extra layer of unpredictability which already exists pretty heavily when driving. Giving motorcyclists the ability to pass everyone in the narrow space between cars when traffic is moving slow just strikes me as rather dangerous and asking for trouble. I'm surprised, actually, California has had so much "luck" with it. But I may need to look into how well it's really working.

Just from a cager observing from the outside it strikes me as an accident waiting to happen.

Good points, and yes, that's how I feel about it, too. I mean, this MUST be safe, right?

Yeah, I mean there's a REASON why lanes are so wide to allow for such a gap between cars. Why stuff another vehicle in there?

 

[Tiberius Jim]

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

It would all come down to why the rider was taken out. Was he riding too fast for the conditions? or did the other vehicle dart out in front of him without looking? It has been said that even in CA, if you're following the guidelines while splitting and are still involved in an accident, you're be lucky to be cleared of all responsibility, even if the other driver was in the wrong.

It is not legal in my area (though not enforced), and I do not want it to be legal. I consider it to be very dangerous behavior.

What exactly about it do you feel is dangerous? I ask because I know a lot of people think of lane splitting and their first thought is the guys who are flying through traffic at high speeds. If done at, say, only 10 mph faster than the surrounding traffic, per California guidelines, would that seem less dangerous?

10mph faster is still a pretty good clip and could do damage to a car in an impact and injure the rider. And, really, what makes a biker so "special" that he gets to go 10 miles an hour faster than the rest of traffic in slow conditions?

What's "special" is that the bike can fit in that space in between the cars. Like I said, a rider is clearing up a spot for another car. Why take up that spot and make traffic worse when the bike can fit?

This topic came up in another thread as a bit of an off-topic tangent, and I thought it was an interesting topic for anyone who drives their own vehicle, whether it be two, three, four or more wheels.

For those unfamiliar with the term, lane-splitting (a.k.a. filtering) is described as "a two-wheeled vehicle moving between roadway lanes of vehicles that are proceeding in the same direction. More narrowly, it refers to overtaking slow or stopped vehicles by traveling between lanes. It is also sometimes called lane sharing, whitelining, filtering, or stripe-riding. Alternatively, lane splitting has been used to describe moving through traffic that is in motion while filtering is used to describe moving through traffic that is stopped."

While this practice is legal just about everywhere in the world, the only place you can do it legally in the US is here in California. That said, it is only legal to do so if you abide by the DMV guidelines. and do so in a safe and prudent manner. In other words, flying in between cars at 80 when traffic is doing 65 is not okay. Doing 65 while traffic is stopped, also not cool.

I split lanes just about every time I go out on my bike, which is 5 days a week when I ride 22 miles each way to work. The beginning of my commute takes place on a 4 lane freeway that is *always* packed with cars crawling at a snail's pace, if that. If I am in my car, it'll take me 45-60 minutes to traverse that 22 miles. On my by, it's more like 30 minutes. I have the benefit of using the high occupancy vehicle lane, as well, but being able to filter through slow and stopped traffic is a huge time saver. It also allows me to remain mobile and reduce the chance of some inattentive driver rear-ending me. Yes, there's still the threat that cars can suddenly change lanes in front of me, but if the rider is being cautious and riding slowly enough, they should be able to react to such an event without a collision occurring.

This video is makes a lot of great points in support of the practice. I for one, obviously, am very pro-lane-splitting. I can't imagine having to sit in traffic on my bike, adding to the congestion when I could help to relieve it by using that space between cars that only a bike can fit into. At least here, people seem to know that it's legal and folks will often move over to make way for riders. I also try to make sure I am in a low gear so they can hear me coming, and am looking into getting some hazard flashers on the front to make me that much more visible.

So the question is of course, what is your opinion on lane-splitting? For those in areas where it is legal, do you think it should be? In areas where it isn't, should it be or do you agree with the laws that forbid it? This is actually something of a point of contention on the motorcycle forum I frequent with opinions being very split, usually between those from California or other parts of the world and people in those states where it is illegal.

Lane splitting is dangerous and a nuisance to the rest of us not on motorcycles, adds to the tension of drivers already trying to navigate the choppy waters of California driving without being surprised by bikers whizzing by at the last moment, and strikes me as being incredibly prone to more accidents, not less.

Where's the option for 'If you get taken out while lane splitting, it's your own fault.' Living in Seoul, I have no sympathy for the troubles of folks on bikes.

The rider in that .gif was clearly going too fast for the conditions. So that's not a problem with lane-splitting itself, but that particular rider himself.

I say again though...if more riders are lane splitting that means they have just freed up a spot for another car on the road. Is that not a good thing?

The only way I can see if being seen as "dickish" if you're looking at it with the mentality of, "Hey, why does he get to get up ahead of me?!" that a lot of people seem to have. They forget that by leaving the main pool of vehicles that make up the traffic congestion, the rider is freeing up space for more cars. So really, by splitting the rider is doing you a favor.

I think we've pretty well established, Flux, if not over the course of your career here in Misc than certainly this week alone that you aren't exactly the leading expert on perception of attitude, behavior or cultural or social norms.

I don't see why the personal jab is necessary here.

 

[Tiberius Jim]

What I'd like to know is, why do those who do it think it's okay for them to cut in line just because they're riding a smaller vehicle?

That's essentially what they're doing.

It's okay because 1. We can fit, while other vehicles can't. 2. Because it helps relieve congestion in traffic 3. A rider is safer when ahead of a pack of cars
than within it. Getting upset that a smaller vehicle can get up ahead and you can't seems a bit illogical, especially when the fact that they are where they are means another driver got to take their spot. You could have gotten home just a bit faster because traffic wasn't full of people who were on bikes.

That's still dangerous, as 35 mph is usually the speed associated with city driving. So now, at 45 mph, we have the added element of being in a populated area, where there are street lights, stop signs, yields, crosswalks, bus stops, and other elements.

Oh I don't disagree that it's dangerous just that it doesn't allow for going 70 when everyone else is going 60. If traffic is crawling at 25 miles an hour and a cyclist is going 35 and there's a crash then people are going to be hurt.

It just adds too much of an extra layer of unpredictability which already exists pretty heavily when driving. Giving motorcyclists the ability to pass everyone in the narrow space between cars when traffic is moving slow just strikes me as rather dangerous and asking for trouble. I'm surprised, actually, California has had so much "luck" with it. But I may need to look into how well it's really working.

Just from a cager observing from the outside it strikes me as an accident waiting to happen.

Good points, and yes, that's how I feel about it, too. I mean, this MUST be safe, right?

I've been in a similar situation. If I were the rider, I would fall back and take my position in the traffic queue. Just because someone starts to lane split doesn't mean they can't stop. I would then wait until those trucks were no longer side by side and continue ahead.