CTX 700 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Call me uninformed. Just today I noticed last year Utah passed a bill that went into effect May, 2019 allowing limited areas where motorcycles can "filter" between stopped cars at intersections.

Please read the rules, then tell us what you think:
» The main reason is to prevent being rear-ended at red lights, i.e. it's safer between cars than behind them.
» Traffic must be stopped, no provision for any lane splitting between any moving vehicles at any speed.
» Must be between two lanes headed in the same direction.
» Maximum speed while filtering: 15 MPH
» The road must have a 45 MPH or lower speed limit. (Several sights say "under 45 MPH", the news site that seemed to be checking their facts said 45 or lower)

So what do you think, would this be good for other states as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #2 (Edited)
I'll chime in with a few of my personal thoughts:

1) There's mountains of mole-hills to argue both ways about the problems in CA caused by splitting way outside the allowed CA law.
I'm interested more in IF we could follow any law in general and be courteous to cagers while doing it, what would make us the most safe?

2) I'm thinking the bikers between lanes should merge about even with the cagers to show them respect and gain their trust. Sure, if there's room in front of the stop line without blocking the walk-way, all MC in front will be gone before a car crossed the intersection. If MC's are lined up between two lanes, merging every other one shows more respect. Maybe more than they deserve, but a little can go a long way.

3) (In PA where splitting is not recognized as legal,) I usually line up behind the last car, aimed at and ready to jump into that space or the shoulder. I'm more nervous than I should be watching for the first car behind me to not be on the phone. I'd be more than willing to stay beside the car I was behind, and let that car go first if I could just be in more protected space, especially right after a hill or curve.

4) 45 MPH why? The danger when stopped in front of higher speed traffic is worse. This makes no sense at all to me.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,228 Posts
First off, there aren't many over 45mph intersections. Those roads traveling that fast anyway are considered highways. Highways are designed to move mass flow quickly and orderly. Lane sifting is considered a small form of disorderly. I see two reasons to enact this rule. One, to keep the flow uniform - orderly. As for highways, you can always easily pass so there is no real need anyway. On the contrary, passing in slow speed area's are nearly impossible in traffic, so sifting becomes a plus at a red light to take advantage. Sifting in slow speed is beneficial for slower speed orderly cause slower speed is far less orderly, we have all seen how these crazies drive. Bikes ahead of the line usually disperse well ahead of traffic naturally, so this helps get them out of the equation.

So as to where you think the primary reason for sifting is rear end collision's is not the case. The real argument is traffic/logistics. The small safety factor here is just a bonus. A car behind a bike driving down the road isn't much different than one coming to a red light.

As for general lane spitting, it is total disorderly - chaos. Safety goes down for all!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,745 Posts
Lane filtering and lane splitting are two completely different animals. Filtering allows a motorcycle to move slowly to the front at traffic lights while traffic is stopped. Lane splitting forces another vehicle at great risk to share the lane with a motorcycle while traffic is moving. Filtering is considered much safer over splitting in actual practice since it minimally interferes with the flow of traffic if done correctly. It normally poses only a small risk to rider and other surrounding vehicles compared to lane splitting. Its still a compromise and risk still does exist but not nearly as much. The biggest problem with filtering is overcrowding. Too many motorcycles and cars packed together at a controlled intersection can create logjams thereby interfering with traffic movement. Left and right turns can become a serious problem adding to the confusion. Another major problem deals with vehicles pulling out of parking lots. Filtering forward between stopped cars can easily result in T-bone type collisions.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
I "filter" at intersections and "lane share" (that's the legal term in CA) at slow speeds. We have many times, on freeways with 65 mph speed limits, and sometimes on the ones with 70 mph limits, that traffic is dead stopped for long periods. I "filter" through the stopped traffic, and "Lane share" when it's just crawling. My personal limit is around 20mph. CA Guidelines (not laws) suggest that the rider should not be going more than 5mph faster than the cars or truck they are passing between, so If traffic is moving at 15, I'm doing 20 and that's enough for me. Many times, I have to pull into a lane to let other, faster, riders go by me. My feeling is if they want to piss-off every cager, I'm not going to get in their way, but I won't participate in high speed lane splitting.

As I've said on other threads, I won't be sitting, stopped, behind a black smoke belching diesel pickup, unless I'm in a cage with a HEPA cabin air filter, on the A/C system.

This is just my opinion on what I see as "right" for me. I recognize all other riders' and cagers' opinion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
668 Posts
Saw lane filtering occur in Florida one day and immediately a cop chases the guy down into a Lowes parking lot....I followed and could hear the cop giving the guy "The Briefing" from a long ways away...


"I don't care how they do it in California, this is Florida and If I see you do that again"
Whew...


Shaking his finger at him and holding a ticket book in other hand...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
So for those in the state that don't know the law exists, will see the bike coming up the side of his car and stop at the line, making the car guy mad.
NOT a good thing.
They had better make this WELL KNOWN.

And why only at a stop?
DO you have a lot of problems with bikes/cars getting rear ended in Utah??
Haven't heard of any here.
I just see this as a bit weird.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
So as to where you think the primary reason for sifting is rear end collision's is not the case. The real argument is traffic/logistics. The small safety factor here is just a bonus. A car behind a bike driving down the road isn't much different than one coming to a red light.
I agree with you, and the true hidden reason might be as you say. Most of the news articles on the new Utah bill state directly they used rear end collisions as the "stated" main reason, some including the statistic that 102 people were rear ended in 100 days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
The biggest problem with filtering is overcrowding. Too many motorcycles and cars packed together at a controlled intersection can create logjams thereby interfering with traffic movement. ...

Another major problem deals with vehicles pulling out of parking lots. Filtering forward between stopped cars can easily result in T-bone type collisions.
Agreed, if we could take off and merge well as part of accelerating that might help. CSA coverage on this won't be easy.

Vehicles pulling out is why I think 15 MPH is too high a speed for some riders. At that speed I would slow to 5 before every break in the lines, I already do on a two lane when only one lane is stopped. I can't expect everyone to do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
So for those in the state that don't know the law exists, will see the bike coming up the side of his car and stop at the line, making the car guy mad.
NOT a good thing.
They had better make this WELL KNOWN.

And why only at a stop?
DO you have a lot of problems with bikes/cars getting rear ended in Utah??
Haven't heard of any here.
I just see this as a bit weird.
I'm nowhere near Utah, but I heard nothing until after it took effect. "They" in the news about it claim the waiting period after it was passed was to be used educating the people of Utah about the coming change. Maybe on local Utah stations? And none of our friends in Utah mentioned it? LOL.

Even worse, the same rule has a much lesser advertised automatic sunset date. They intend to force the law makers to study results and modify it for more safety. The affect, if nothing permanent gets backed, is the whole thing dissolves leaving riders possibly unaware when it becomes illegal again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
I hope anyone who against lane splitting has a huge experience of it to know all the pros and cons.

Nope. I don’t need to stick my bare hand into boiling water to know that it is a very bad idea.

First of all – for those who actually bother to look up NTSB and NHTSA studies when there is a rear end accident between a motorcycle and car, 2/3 of the time the motorcycle is the second vehicle and is at fault. Go watch some motorcycle crash compilations on YouTube for the anecdotal confirmations.

Second – If you don’t want to get rear ended, learn to use those things on your bike called mirrors. Every time someone is behind I watch the person. Are they middle aged with hands at 10-2 or are they young and I can’t see any hands (likely because there is a cell phone in one)? Are the weaving in the lane because they aren’t paying attention? Are they maintaining a proper following distance and slowing down when I slow down. When I’ve had someone behind me who keeps looking down below the dashboard line, I change lanes or let them pass me. Even to the point of entering the center turn lane, letting them go by and then pulling back in behind them. When I come to a stop I watch the person behind me until I’m sure they are stopping. If I don’t see eyeballs and am not sure they are going to stop I hold down the horn button until I get the “deer in the headlights” look and they hit the brakes.

Third – For those who haven’t spent much time overseas, this country has a very deeply ingrained tradition of “You get in line and wait your turn”. Letting bikes filter just will make people think “What in the heck makes you so special you can jump the line” and will piss people off. Maybe enough to have one of them have a nice road rage incident with you.

Filtering is a bad idea. So is lane splitting.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,745 Posts
I agree with you, and the true hidden reason might be as you say. Most of the news articles on the new Utah bill state directly they used rear end collisions as the "stated" main reason, some including the statistic that 102 people were rear ended in 100 days.
Rear end collisions of motorcycles are extremely rare. Statistically speaking, they are irrelevant (0.02). Unfortunately most statistics being used by the media and persons with their own agendas will misquote the statistics actually keeping track of motorcyclist who rear ended other vehicles which are far more frequent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
This water is surprisely cold.

First and Second - I'm not only about safety or rear end collisions. Lane splitting is better for everyone including motorists. If there are:
1 - good safety rules
2 - police officers will be watching for people following these rules the same way they are watching for non-lane splitting now.

Third - educate people. Time is going on. Not so far some white people was pissed off and it was enough for them to fall into "rage" if they see black people in the same bus or room with them... lots of examples like this (including California). It is "safe" to drive motorcycle without helmet, but no lane splitting. 100 years ago speed limit was 12-15 mph. etc...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
This water is surprisely cold.

First and Second - I'm not only about safety or rear end collisions. Lane splitting is better for everyone including motorists. If there are:
1 - good safety rules
2 - police officers will be watching for people following these rules the same way they are watching for non-lane splitting now.

...
We can't expect police to correct main beams not striking the ground, or "off road use only" lights as a fog light on even when it's not foggy, or cell phone use when it's in plain sight, and, well the list just goes on. Now we want to add more the list they can be blamed for? Filtering only around stopped traffic, only at low speeds, etc, etc, may be easily watched but the police should have better things to do. Splitting at near posted safe limits within MPH difference allotted requires two locked in radar/laser readings and math in short periods of time, documented clear enough to pass a judgement test.

I think your education idea is more likely to be a better start. Policing is education by example, one at a time in front of very small audiences. IPV6 is up and running because there's more need for connections than 256 raised to 4th power could support. Surely we can do better than impromptu roadside lectures? Otherwise the good safety rules are pointless, and we may as well scrap the whole idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
I agree with you, and the true hidden reason might be as you say. Most of the news articles on the new Utah bill state directly they used rear end collisions as the "stated" main reason, some including the statistic that 102 people were rear ended in 100 days.
If that is the case I suggest that Utah motorcyclists need to pay attention. Just because you are stopped doesn't mean you put your eyes and brain on hold; anytime you are on the road, you need to be vigilant and be prepared to take evasive action due to imminent threat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
If that is the case I suggest that Utah motorcyclists need to pay attention. Just because you are stopped doesn't mean you put your eyes and brain on hold; anytime you are on the road, you need to be vigilant and be prepared to take evasive action due to imminent threat.
True, a good suggestion for all of us.

1 per day in all Utah traffic sounds like a small number and a poor statistic for any useful reason other than a scare tactic to get a law like this through. As others said above, true statistics show more accidents of several other types and more importantly, more damage and deaths in other types of crashes.

Would you rather your bike be totaled under you while you end up sitting on a hood? Or get t-boned with a broken leg while filtering past someone letting a car pull out of a parking lot? Both can be avoided by proper riding in most cases, but some riders aren't in most cases 100% of the time.

Are they just trading one accident for another?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
I would think that filtering on the Highway would make more sense as at the Intersections often times you can use the right turn only lane to quickly pass the slow poke in front of you. Heck, I've been doing that in my car too. On the highway, however, once you are stuck, you are stuck. You can't use emergency lane for passing and exits are few and far between. It gets so bad that when I ride the bike, I just take side roads, it's the same time, but at least I am moving.


Here in Maryland, they briefly considered lane filtering, but quickly nixed the idea at the root. Here is the biggest issue and why I only "right lane pass" at rural intersections, the red light running has been so blatant in my area that the going rule when the right turns green is to look at both directions for runners before crossing the intersection. Filtering motorcycle, assuming the try to beat the traffic and get ahead, would be killed on the spot by that runner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
Steve and igeorge -
Very good points.

I have never lane split, and do not want to.
It just seems like an accident waiting to happen.
And maybe in Cali where it has been in effect for a while people are used to it.

I went to San Fran two years ago and saw lane splitting, and just watched for the biker to get taken down by a car switching lanes.
It didnt happen but that was my take on it since it was so foreign to me.
If they did that here they'd need a ton of money to make a special lane just for that purpose, and tax the crap out of us for it!
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top