Ride with or against traffic flow? Which is safer and why?

[Master-Yoda]

Legalities aside, I drive along garden road in midrand every day where there's lots of commuters. Most sections of the road does not include a shoulder, it becomes an interesting gauntlet when there's cyclist of both sides of the road, and 2 cars trying to pass.

 

Logically the fact that you can see what's coming at you and depending on your ability to take evasive action in time, I'd say you would be safer as it seems most accidents are as a result of being hit from behind. It would also allow you to see a car wanting to turn in front of you rather than into you. I don't ride on the road a) my skills are lacking and b) it freaks me out that I can't see behind me.

 

I've seen civilians and taxis drive so close to a cyclist I'm amazed they manage to stay on their bikes, so there's many guilty parties. But there's way too many people that don't care about road rules, and another group that don't understand them.

Agree and well said. This is exactly how I feel and I get worried for the safety of my two girls..

[Cippo]

Descending from Landudno to Camps Bay I came around the bend and nearly collided with a cyclist riding in opposite direction on wrong side of roadway. If I didnt react fast enough I would have collided with her at over 60kph. You do the maths what the result would have been.

[Master-Yoda]

Descending from Landudno to Camps Bay I came around the bend and nearly collided with a cyclist riding in opposite direction on wrong side of roadway. If I didnt react fast enough I would have collided with her at over 60kph. You do the maths what the result would have been.

Hitting a oncoming cyclist at 60Km/h is gonna be sore as hell but I'll take that any day over being hit by a car from behind even if it's doing less than 60Km/h, have you done the maths on that?

[Master-Yoda]

I don't think I am missing the point as you are trying to twist all to make the justification that it is right to do something illegal.

 

Advise how you are going to let someone by when the cyclist and oncoming traffic are both going in the legal direction and you have nowhere to go as you cannot pull into oncoming traffic. You assume you can be respectful and move over as the road is empty and there is room for you to do this and in all probability this will not be the case as you will have walkers on one side, a cyclist straight ahead who is in the right and who has the right and fast moving traffic on the other side. Let's see you be respectful then and move over head on into oncoming traffic!

 

Do a search on what you propose in the forums, it has been discussed at length as well as what has happened when people who do cycle in the wrong direction do not pull over!

 

I reiterate, if you no longer feel safe on a bike on the roads, then use another form of transport that you do feel safe in, rather than trying to justify and seek agreement here for doing it.

 

You won't get the support you are seeking...

Hun??

How am I twisting anyone's mind into doing anything that they don't want to do? I'm not asking people to join a cult and to follow my every command, I'm asking a damn question of what people think and not if people want to do what I'm saying that I think of as being the safest option. So to say that I must do a "search on what you propose on the forum" is not only a stupid suggestion but rather an irrelevant one as well as I'm not asking anyone to ride on the left, centre or on the right. You ride where ever the heck you want to ride, good for you and I wish you well (I truly do) but learn to listen to what others have to say and understand what they're trying to express even if you disagree with it.

[Master-Yoda]

 

This is a different scenario but nevertheless, I want to be the guy in orange (26 seconds onwards) that's in-front of the car, sees it coming and gets out of the way..., and lives to see another day.

[Sharkie 2]

 

Hitting a oncoming cyclist at 60Km/h is gonna be sore as hell but I'll take that any day over being hit by a car from behind even if it's doing less than 60Km/h, have you done the maths on that?

I have set cycle routes that I know are safe by either having a proper emergency lane or were I know the lane is wide enough. If you are hit by a cyclist head on you are going to get badly hurt just as much as with a car physics tell us that. I get very pissed with people riding the wrong way thinking this is better. You reckon you have more time to see what a vehicle is doing? Well I will bet your chances are probably the same with reaction times....there are reasons that society have set rules like this .

 

Anyway does not matter what anyone says seems some minds are made up and just need some reinforcement from others to make them believe they are right

[Sharkie 2]

 

This is a different scenario but nevertheless, I want to be the guy in orange (26 seconds onwards) that's in-front of the car, sees it coming and gets out of the way..., and lives to see another day.

If you look for something you will find it...to support views, yours is one of cycling the opposite way being the safest. The majority of people on here who cycle regularly will say with the flow as it has worked for years and will continue to work for many more to come. Statiscally more people should be hit by vehicles or have accidents around Gauteng this time of the year as masses are preparing for 94.7

[Skylark]

Maybe I should have explained this better, we ride mountain bikes and not road bikes so we're not always on the roads. We do occasionally need to either cross the roads or ride short distances and although I didn't include this info, I am referring to riding on the roads in these conditions. Of course if referring to road riding then it's a different story..

 

Convenient time to mention that?

Fact still remains not good air dynamics riding against the traffic.

 

But if as you say you are doing a few hundred meters scrabbling around in the road median on your MTB or just crossing over to get to the trails on the other side then go whichever way you want to go, what's the point of even having this discussion. Trolling along lalalalala...

 

Ok wait sorry , I see you only have 14 posts - you new to this game!!

Take it easy buddy, the whole internet will never always be on your side or agree with you

Good luck winning though!

Edited November 14, 2013 by Skylark

[Maniax]

Its illegal to ride against traffic. Opinions dont matter and cannot change the fact, that you HAVE to ride on the left.

[GaryvdM]

When it comes to matters of this nature, I always look for scientific studies. The only one on this matter that I have found is "Risk Factors for Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections" WACHTEL, LEWISTON - Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal - September 1994, pages 30-35 http://www.bicycling...riskfactors.htm

 

For those to lazy to read it, my summary:

This US study used numbers from police accident reports and number of riders observed for a given time period to calculate risk factors for various variables: gender, age, direction (with traffic/against traffic), and position (on road/on pavement.)

 

For all categories of bicy­clists travelling against the direction of traffic flow are at greatly increased risk for accidents—on average 3.6 times the risk of those travelling with traffic, and as high as 6.6 times for those aged 17 and under.

 

 

(If anyone knows of other studies on this mater, I would highly value that.)

Edited November 14, 2013 by garyvdm

[Butterbean]

Plus let's not forget the various studies which have proven that cars are less likely to give you space should you be riding towards them.

 

When you ride with the flow you become part of traffic. Against it and you're an obstacle.

 

But hey. You can ride how you like I guess I will I can't stop you.

 

Try it without a helmet too? I hear they really don't offer all that much protection anyway... Then everyone can wonder why the red stain on the tar was the wrong side of the road..

[Uni]

Its illegal to ride against traffic. Opinions dont matter and cannot change the fact, that you HAVE to ride on the left.

 

The OP is asking IF it is safer, not suggesting that all cyclists on the road should change directions. Air dynamics aside,and another cyclist coming at you (assume everyone going in the same direction) aside - if you're riding along and you see a distracted driver drifting /veering towards you, at 40km/hr or 140km/hr - would you not be better off seeing it and at least having a slightest chance of evasive action rather than being mowed down from the back?

[SomeBloke]

riding against the traffic is not going to save you either. car speed + bike speed = speed of impact so 100km+40km = 140km against 100km-40km=60km

 

Safer would be to take the ipod out of your ears, stop cycling abreast and avoid single carriage ways in rush hour traffic. Obviously, this will reduce your risk, but there will always be an idiot in a car on your unlucky day. But then they may also be lightening as well.

 

I get your maths but there are still a few flaws in that. Being hit from behind at 100kph when you're doing 40kph may reduce the impact to 60kph but you're still going to strike the tar at 100kph. And having the foresight to dodge a taxi whose driver is looking out his window signalling for passengers beats cushioning a 100kph impact with your own momentum every time.

 

Personally I think go with the flow if you're going flat or downhill where you can maintain a speed. I've got a steep climb back up the hill when I ride home, probably around 10kph. It's a relatively busy road edged by grass verge, which doesn't discourage drivers from using all the space on the road. I've dodged a few taxis and tired commuters by riding against traffic on that hill. (Pavement isn't an option because most Joburg residents don't realise the verge is supposed to be common property and turn it into a giant flower bed.)

[GaryvdM]

Something not yet mentioned that I believe is very important: There are 2 situations where other vehicles are highly unlikely to see you if you are riding against traffic, as they don't expect you to be there.

 

1 vehicles travelling in the same direction as you and turning right.

 

(I've had many close calls turning right into Centenary St from Modderfontein Rd. Many commuters ride against the traffic here.)

 

2 vehicles turning left in to the road your are in.

Edited November 14, 2013 by garyvdm

[GaryvdM]

Personally I think go with the flow if you're going flat or downhill where you can maintain a speed. I've got a steep climb back up the hill when I ride home, probably around 10kph. It's a relatively busy road edged by grass verge, which doesn't discourage drivers from using all the space on the road.

 

It always amazes me how if I ride as close to the verge as possible, motor vehicles pass with as little space as possible, but if ride more to the center of the lane, they pass with far more space.

[Skylark]

Something not yet mentioned that I believe is very important: There are 2 situations where other vehicle are highly unlikely to see you if you are riding against traffic, as they don't expect you to be there.

 

1 vehicles travelling in the same direction as you and turning right.

 

(I've had many close calls turning right into Centenary St from Modderfontein Rd. Many commuters ride against the traffic here.)

 

2 vehicles turning left in to the road your are in.

 

I think that point just about seals the deal for not going against the traffic.

I have had that same experience the few times I tried riding against the traffic where it was almost the only option , the most disconcerting is the guy turning across your lane from behind your shoulder - he doesn't notice you at all and you can't see him - recipe for disaster.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Skylark