I hardly consider 25 mph 'speeding' compared to 20 mph. Of course it might help if they had shown video of someone LAWFULLY splitting lanes.

Under current 'law' 1 bike takes the same amount of space as one car in congestion. With this thats one or more 'spaces' for a car/truck.

Traffic congestion is due to too many vehicles period...not just cars/truck. Why NOT allow the riders to take some advtange of the small size and manuevreability? The only REAL problem, challenge are getting 'drivers' to start paying attention and to shed the grade school mentality of 'me first'.

Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I particularly appreciate dissenting opinions. Having said that, I simply can't agree that this is a good idea.

For me, it's a cost v. benefit argument. I just don't see many benefits of it. I can't speak for everywhere, but in Austin, I'm guessing that motorcycles account for 1 or 2 of every 1000 rush hour vehicles. Allowing them to lane split will provide virtually no relief. I suspect if there was real relief then the bill's supporters would have some traffic studies to support their assertion, but as far as I can tell, they don't.

On the other hand, it's a serious risk for all involved. Not only is it dangerous for the motorcycle driver, but it puts all the drivers on the road at risk. As I stated in the post, driving in rush hour is already dangerous and difficult. Do we really need more distractions during rush hour?

And there seem to be a lot of issues to think through. Are cars required to stay in a certain part of the lane? What's to prevent them from driving near the edge of the lane, narrowing the area for lane splitting? And who has to yield? If a car is merging into the next lane in front of a motorcycle approaching from the rear, who has the responsibility for yielding to the other? There are just too many unanswered questions at this point.

I do appreciate your point on the speed. Certainly, keeping it at a lower speed helps. But is that even enforceable? Except in obvious situations, how would law enforcement officials know that the motorcycle is going 5 miles over the rest of traffic instead of 10? I don't think there's a way to enforce it, and I'm positive that, like the regular speed limit, there will have to be leeway on enforcement so that the 5 miles per hour over the speed of traffic becomes 10 or 15 mph.

You did make a good point that the real problem is too many vehicles on the roads. But "creating" more lanes by lane splitting makes as much sense as letting people start driving on the shoulders. There's a reason lanes are designed the width they are and shoulders are included on major roadways, and that reason is safety.

This will definitely improve traffic. It will encourage more people to use motorcycles and it only takes a few percentage points change in amount of traffic to turn a traffic jam into a fast moving busy highway. Basically, you're getting another lane at no extra charge.

The landmark DOT study called the Hurt Report (really that's the name) says it's safer than sitting in traffic because most bikes are rear-ended, which is MUCH more dangerous. Also, bikes are air-cooled, damaging the engine when sitting in hot traffic.

It's also legal in most of western Europe and Asia.

Also, what the video is showing would be illegal under the law being proposed. You should read it. I've spent years sharing lanes safely in California and never once had a problem.

Brooke,

With your argument, we might as well ban motorcycles too not just lane sharing.

The way the law is written, it's actually very safe to share lanes. Not only is a helmet required, encouraging people to wear helmets which is, right there, making things safer but lane sharing as shown in the video above would be obviously, illegal.

The CHP also disagreed with you on safety. They believe, if done correctly, like the law requires, it's safer.

Ed

Thanks for your comments. I know you have a passion for this issue.

I'll admit that my original thoughts were based on my gut, and I did follow up after your suggestions.

Here are my thoughts. First, I went out and tried to find the Hurt study. I couldn't find it quickly, but did find that it was based on data from the 1970s. It was my understanding that the results were based on findings that California had lower accident rates than other states w/o lane sharing. Clearly the driving landscape has changed since then. There are a number of new distractions that pose dangers to all(cell phones, text messaging, etc). Does that change the landscape since then? I don't know. I also found statistics that the number of motorcycle wrecks in California has skyrocketed in the last decade. If the rates of accidents were compared with other states, would it be different? Again, I don't know.

Second, I looked at the California Department of Motor Vehicles handbook, and it clearly states "Lane sharing: Cars and motorcycles each need a full lane to operate safely. Lane sharing is not safe." I can't put a hyperlink in the comments, but the document is available here: More ...

I do appreciate the thoughtful discussion. For those that want more, the motorcycle advocacy group Share the Lane has compiled a good list of resources at More ...

Here's the CHP's opinion:

More ... (2nd answer)

Number of deaths is directly related to the number of riders and the number of new untrained riders. It's due to experience and influx of riders not lane sharing.

I have over 50k motorcycle miles in Los Angeles. Many of them in the most congested 101 highway corridor between downtown LA and the valley. I can tell you from personal experience that lane sharing is MUCH safer than riding in the sandwich zone. You focus, much more closely, forward. No need to check for someone rear-ending you or touching your rear tire. Or the guy trying to do a quick double lane change behind you. You learn to keep your eyes on the car's front wheels and the driver's hands. Never go faster than 15MPG over traffic speed. Never lane share between lanes going different speeds either.

On a recent trip to Barcelona, fully one third of the vehicles there were motorcycles. Big city, but people got around without problems. Lane sharing is not only legal, but people who don't do it will sometimes get honked at by a car, because they know they are taking up space a car should.

I can only hope someday we'll come around to doing the same here.

Ed

Thanks for the further response. I looked at the link, and I don't think it says that lane splitting is safer than regular driving, only that it is legal in California as long as the driver does it in a safe and prudent manner.

Regardless, I recognize it's not as clear cut as I thought.

The youtube clip you posted is at 2x speed. Here is the real clip at normal speed:

There's an argument against it but you might want to try to do a little more research next time.

"I have a hard enough time changing lanes during rush hour traffic"

Are you really changing lanes in bumper to bumper traffic going 20 MPH or less? If so, trust me, you're going slowly enough that a cycle rider can see you.

You're not the only ones watching traffic, you know. People on motorcycles have to be hyperaware of what's going on in traffic at ALL times.

The risk is mostly that of the cyclist, and as a cycle rider I can say, "I'll take that risk."

Heck, I accept the risk every time I get on my motorcycle.

Oh, and for fun... here's a clip on youtube (at normal speed) of lane-splitting behind a California Motorcycle Officer:

Oh, and please change the link to the video you have to the 1x speed video. The 2x speed video you have in your article is just misleading. (As Bob has already pointed out, and was nice enough to give you a link to the proper video.)

Thanks!

Thanks for the comments. I don't want to mislead anyone so I've put in the video in normal speed (though you can find numerous videos that look similar throughout youtube).

I've spent significantly more time educating myself on this today than I have time for, but I still haven't found a lot of of non-riders supporting this proposal. I certainly understand riders supporting it for the decreased commuting times.

I also haven't been able to find anything supporting the statements that the CHP supports lane splitting (I've seen references from random lane splitting supporters, but nothing from the CHP). That interests me in particular because the California Motorcycle Handbook, cited above, says it's not safe and because the Fox 7 reporter talked to a CHP spokesman that said they didn't recommend lane splitting. If anyone has a cite from the CHP talking about it, either way, please post it here.

Finally, I don't really buy the "rear end" safety argument. When traffic stops, why couldn't a motorcyclst stop in the edges of the lane? It seems that this would minimize the risk of being rear-ended while not creating the hazard of driving in the small spaces and coming up on drivers.

And I still haven't seen anyone that really answers my previously posted unanswered questions. Who has to yield, etc?

If you stop on the edge of the lane in traffic... Amazingly enough, a car will split lanes with you and encroach on your lane if you leave it wide open. Of course, the one that gets the ticket in that scenario is the bike. Not to mention that having a huge car inching behind you is not a good feeling. Constant mirror checking, which is not needed nearly as much if sharing lanes. A rear-end collision on a bike is amazingly deadly.

"I still haven't found a lot of of non-riders supporting this proposal."

That's circular logic. Drivers do not support it yet because they haven't seen the improvement in commute times when so many motorcycles are out of their lanes and when so many more people move to motorcycles. A 2-4% change in congestion WILL remove a traffic jam (check Jewish holidays in LA). There's a bit of "wait in line" selfishness that happens with some drivers. I would think you want to discourage not encourage that in society.




"Lane splitting is permissible if done in a safe and prudent manner" <-- To say it's always safe is silly.

It's safer because your bike won't stall out on you (causing your rear tire to skid) when it over heats... The DOT funded hurt report will also tell you it's safer. CHP's official position is that it can be done safely (not that it's safer, although that will depend which CHP officer you ask).

Note that motorcyclists already accept a higher level of risk than most people. To try to protect everyone from themselves is silly, but this is probably exactly the wrong board to say that on :-) But on the safety note... You WILL have more people with helmets on if they get to share lanes as a reward.

Re: "Why do we need that? Well, supporters of the bill suggest that allowing lane splitting will help improve traffic."

You seem to assume that the change will only come as a result of the current number of motorcycles vacate spots in traffic. I believe that we'll see the number of people riding motorcycles go up in areas where congestion is bad. Not to mention that the commute will certainly improve for those on the motorcycles.

Re: "this seems stupidly dangerous for all involved."

You word things like you never look even slightly backwards when changing lanes -- you just look straight to the side. Common sense would indicate that if you can't see the motorcyclist in the same spots you'd see a car in when changing lanes, the motorcyclist is going to fast. That's the whole point of allowing lane splitters to only go 5mph faster than the cars.

By the way, as someone who successfully split lanes during 7 years of commuting in Los Angeles, I can say that I honestly don't remember seeing a single instance of a motorcyclist who was splittling lanes saying that they owned the right of way. More often than not, I would come up behind other cyclists who were patiently waiting for cars whose turn signals were on to go ahead and change lanes. Shouldn't you be using a turn signal when changing lanes anyway?

Re: "If you're interested in more, Fox 7 had a nice story last night, and I suggest you watch it."

I personally found their story sensationalist rather than informative.

Mr. Schuelke,

I'll apologize for the tone of my original post and thank you for the time you've taken in attempting to research this. It's a far cry more than most have done or are willing to do...
Finding any HARD data/research that timely will be difficult.
With that, honestly I doubt you'll find any official 'office', Ie: Police Department etc will officiailyl claim support... If one were to perhaps speak with the CHP officers, or perhaps ask the official why it has not been...outlawed etc in CA.

One would think, however that riders and drivers from california would carry some weight as compared to that of drivers here in the state. Experience should trump lack of it...
For a start of trying to track/verify data though... try More ...

Counsel:

Thanks for having an open mind on this issue. I think that when you look at the evidence (such as it is) you will find that, at the least, lane splitting is NO MORE dangerous than being stuck in traffic with cell-phone-using-coffee-drinking soccer moms and dads in 'ginormous' SUVs.

I mean, if you just go with "your gut," then trial lawyers are obviously over compensated by receiving 40 percent of their client's recovery in a contingency case, right? :-)

Lee

I lane split in Texas whenever possible. It is safer to lane split than sitting in traffic. Not just because of the dangers of being rear-ended. But also from drivers saying "Oh there's an empty spot, I need to change lanes!!!". Well guess who is there????? Us motorcycle riders. I can tell you on more than one occasion this has happened to me, where at the last moment the drivers realized I was there, or I have actually been hit by a car!!!! If I am lane splitting I KNOW the cars will not change lanes as there is another car on the otherside!!!! So basically I am protected on both left and right side and protected from being rear-ended.

You are viewing the dangers of lane splitting as a car driver and therefore will have a hard time understanding the benefits of lane splitting.

As other riders have already commented, riding in traffic is already dangerous. Lane splitting at the very least does not increase danger. At best, lane splitting can save a motorcyclist from becoming the lettuce in a car sandwich.

You wanted to know 'who has to yield to whom?' That question is painfully obvious to motorcyclists: we yield with our bodies. Who has to yield is not a question we ask, because it's not as important as 'who would walk away from this accident'. Cars already merge on us and change lanes onto us. Lane splitting won't make it happen more, but it can put us in control of our own destiny, instead of just praying to god every time some crazy soccer mom who just spilled her coffee on her cellphone comes rushing up behind us in her H2.

Who will this help? Honestly, I don't foresee this having an impact on your commute. There aren't enough motorcyclists currently to improve traffic. But it will improve my commute vastly. I'll get there faster and safer, and you probably won't even notice. If you want to say 'hey you get back in line', I would just hope that you have a change of heart. It's not your place to tell me what I should and shouldn't be allowed to do, as long as I'm not hurting anyone.

As other riders have already commented, riding in traffic is already dangerous. Lane splitting at the very least does not increase danger. At best, lane splitting can save a motorcyclist from becoming the lettuce in a car sandwich.

You wanted to know 'who has to yield to whom?' That question is painfully obvious to motorcyclists: we yield with our bodies. Who has to yield is not a question we ask, because it's not as important as 'who would walk away from this accident'. Cars already merge on us and change lanes onto us. Lane splitting won't make it happen more, but it can put us in control of our own destiny, instead of just praying to god every time some crazy soccer mom who just spilled her coffee on her cellphone comes rushing up behind us in her H2.

Who will this help? Honestly, I don't foresee this having an impact on your commute. There aren't enough motorcyclists currently to improve traffic. But it will improve my commute vastly. I'll get there faster and safer, and you probably won't even notice. If you want to say 'hey you get back in line', I would just hope that you have a change of heart. It's not your place to tell me what I should and shouldn't be allowed to do, as long as I'm not hurting anyone.

First and foremost: bikes that are air-cooled? Can stop in traffic for prolonged periods. Roadkill is just either making things up or applying an outmoded argument from the 70s to today's technology (like the Hurt Report).

Second: lane-splitting is just stupid. I'm a rider, and I'm pretty liberal about things; I don't think we need a LAW to make people wear helmets. If they don't, they die and that's Darwin at work.

Third: This isn't going to improve traffic flow. Between Austin drivers, either accidentally or through irritation, smacking into motorcyclists or through stupid children on motorcycles plowing into the backs of cars, it will reduce traffic flow slightly, but it will also cause accidents that will create more delays.

Fourth: Rick "Giant Penis With Lips" Perry did nothing to stop this bill... but is willing to exercise VETO POWER on HB 222... because having people play poker (in a state that already has legalized gambling with lottery and bingo) is somehow worse than having dead riders.

Don't look for logic here. Just shake your head, double-check your turn indicators and emotionally brace yourself for killing someone.

as a daily rider( havent owned a car in years) there are many benefits, more so to me then cagers.
i think its a great idea when exersized logically. i ride air cooled 2 stroke vintage scooters, air cooled 2 stroke vintage street bikes and 4 stroke vintage street bikes and i will tell you sitting at a light 20 cars back in 100 degree heat isnt good for me or my bike. i wear gear as well so add that into the over heating equation. if at a red light i have at certain times split up the middle to either the front or a couple back but only sparingly. like i said used in a logical way there are lots of benfits.
the problems i see coming from this is the newer riders, and the meat head sport bike/harley riders (not saying all are meat heads, but you know theyre out there) abusing this and speeding through at speed recklessly.
i just hope people are smart about this and cagers will get wise,
its a great priveledge. i dont think the OP rides.

so when can i start?

I agree with Austinslacker. I ride a vintage four-stroke motorcycle (1982 Honda CB650SC) and I wear all the gear all the time (boots, armored pants and jacket, gloves and helmet). Sitting in backed up traffic during the summer, when I could be filtering to the front under SB506, is very hard on me and on my bike.

It is much easier sitting in congested traffic in my car because I have air conditioning. The only AC on my bike is from the wind when I am moving.

If lane splitting/sharing works in California, the United Kingdom and elsewhere, why not here? If you don't want to do it, then don't, but don't make the ones of us who would like to lane split criminals.

Lee

Kendrick,
I'm going to first recommend working your reading comprehension. I've made no mentioned in regards to 'air cooled' bikes. However take even a modern, oil & water cooled 'bike' and try checking the temps coming off the block after a couple hours on the road and consider the proximity of flesh to it.
The HURT report is the most current formal collection of data, hence why it is used. Try finding and providing something more accurate and up to date yourself.

I'm sorry but the rest of your post/commentary is nothing more than conjecture and speculation. while you wish to attempt to devalue any actual data, you also fail to provide any either.
What data that DOES exist seems to counter all of your commentary/claims.

I live in California. We have MILLIONS more cars than you do in Texas. We also have drivers from all over the world that really shouldn't be driving under any circumstances, can't read the signs, and stay drunk incredibly often. We also are allowed to lane share. The CHP actually went in to give a statement in DEFENSE of lane sharing when the proposal to outlaw it was being discussed by the powers-that-be. If it was that unsafe, especially in this driving environment, don't you think that they would be the first ones to make sure the practice was stopped? As other riders have pointed out, studies have also shown that inattentive drivers rear-ending motorcycles are the single most dangerous aspect of motorcycles commuting in heavy traffic. Don't believe the Hurt report? Check the CHP accident statistics. in 2007, the following were noted in the LA, Orange and Riverside county areas. Note these do NOT account for which vehicle was at fault, but they do indicate what IS and what IS NOT a primary accident cause:


Unsafe speeds (3,565 incidents)

Improper turning (1,550)

Improper passing (300)

Unsafe lane changes (287)

Right-of-way issues (284)

if we assume ALL of the accidents were the fault of the motorcyclist (which is ludicrous, but proves my point) we see that

Right-of-way issues = 4.8% of total

Unsafe lane change = 4.8% of total

Improper passing = 5% of total

These are the most common types of accident associated with a lane share. Considering the sheer volume of traffic here, that actually shows how much safer that activity is than one would expect. The entire amount is less than 15% of all the accidents. When a rider uses good judgment and observation, the results are staggering. I commuted for 2 years through some of the roughest ares for traffic on Los Angeles daily. I was involved in an accident once. The reason? A driver speeding with his lights off hit me at a light-controlled turn when I had right of way and left the scene. That had nothing to do with lane sharing, which was overwhelmingly the greatest portion of my travel in terms of both time and distance.

As a rider, it is MY responsibility to make sure the road is clear and the space is adequate. By not taking up a car length we alleviate traffic congestion, we use less fuel to get from point A to point B, and we also alleviate parking congestion. I appreciate your concern of the safety aspects of it, but I would highly recommend talking to people who deal with this day in and day out here in California. Believe me, it's even a point of discussion among riders here.

As far as your "why cant riders just stop on the edge of the lane?" comment, that's exactly what lane sharing is, just while cars are moving.

As far as "technology" improvements making being rear ended safer? How exactly is a distracted unsafe driver less likely to kill me because he has an airbag?

I suggest that everyone who supports lane sharing should join the Facebook group at:

More ...

Send this link to your friends as well. We're trying to get critical mass together to have a rally at state capitols nationwide.

If we can encourage people to get into smaller half lane vehicles and motorcycles it will help the environments and improve commute times for everyone.