Lane splitting in California - for or against?
California residents are likely quite familiar with the act of lane splitting, when a motorcycle passes through the flow of traffic in-between slowly moving cars. Lane splitting is only allowed when lanes are divided by dotted white lines, and traffic has to be moving very slowly or stopped. While many car drivers hate it when a motorcycle passes between them, the act of lane splitting is legal in California, and was originally implemented as a safety measure. Now, though, many riders choose to commute on motorcycles because they can get around much more quickly due to their ability to avoid traffic jams. Consider how much pollution is saved too, as idling cars are still emitting exhaust despite the fact that they are not going anywhere.
Take a look at the video here for more details on lane splitting, and feel free (as always) to comment on how you feel about lane splitting - for or against.
[Source: NBC San Diego]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Tim 11:06AM (3/18/2008)
FOR. Don't like it? Get a motorcycle.
Reply
Dave S 11:27AM (3/18/2008)
Ditto comment 1. I just don't know how it is supposed to be kept safe for the cycle riders.
I'd rather see cycle riders get their own lanes, then they wouldn't have to split - how wide are lanes in CA? Is there an extra 5 feet (Cars only need around 10) in the ROW?
Any planners out there?
Reply
Fred 1:43AM (7/04/2008)
A couple of things here...
1. Lane splitting is safer for me, the motorcyclist because I don't have to worry about being rear-ended by a motorist who isn't paying attention and gives the excuse "I didn't see the motorcycle, Officer' as the motorcyclist is carted off to the morgue.
2. When I approach a stop light, I lane share to get to the front. Some drivers apparently think that I'm either trying to race them, doing something illegal, or have a need to be first. I lane share in this manner because it is easier for the drivers to see me. When the light turns green, I can get out in front of them so that they can see me easier as well. By the time I get into 3rd, most of them haven't even left the line yet. A motorcycle needs to go through the gears much faster than a car or truck. It's the way they're built.
There are so many cars out there that have no passengers in them at all and they're all traveling in the same direction. It's ridiculous. Couple this with the fact that I routinely pass drivers who are reading the newspaper, shaving, applying make-up, have a drink in one hand and a phone or sandwich in the other. I assume they're using their knees to drive.
I'm sure everyone has a story about some bad motorcyclist as well. The truth of the matter is though that I can ride between two cars (if I wanted to) before they even know I'm there, which simply proves that they don't look in their mirrors all that often.
With the way gas prices are going, I'm sure we'll be seeing more and more motorcycles on the road and people are simply going to have to get used to them. I enjoy the fact that I ride something that saves a gas, and produces less pollution.
SMASH 12:54PM (7/30/2008)
I rode for 15 years and lane split all the time while being courteous to other drivers. In recent months I have been commuting ( in a car) to SF from the North Bay and some of these riders are completely out of control. Just the other night I was hit by a rider doing 20-30 MPH faster than the flow of traffic. He broke my mirror and kept on riding. If I see him again, he is in for a BIG surprise and a lot of road rash!
Jason Jungreis 11:25AM (3/18/2008)
Riding and lane-splitting furthers my pro-environmentalist and motor-enthusiast interests.
Reply
GoodCheer 11:33AM (3/18/2008)
I'm strongly FOR motorcycle lane splitting.
I'm not sure about the net reduction in pollution though, since there are such loose regulations on the emissions from motorcycles. I'm also strongly FOR better emissions standards for motorcycles, which would make lane splitting that much more beneficial to everybody (yes, even you guys stuck in your cars, because it we weren't splitting, we'd be in that many more cars stuck on the highways with you, and everybody would be going that much slower).
Reply
Fred 1:43AM (7/04/2008)
"Loose regulations" for motorcycles? Where? The motorcycles that have to be purchased and ridden in CA are completely different than those purchased and ridden in any other state. The additional crap that the manufacturers have to put on motorcycles for CA driving is similar to what goes on automobiles. While I do not have to have my motorcycle smogged like I have to have my cars smogged, that only proves that motorcycles produce a great deal less pollution that cars and trucks.
ME 12:25PM (3/18/2008)
"I'm not sure about the net reduction in pollution though, since there are such loose regulations on the emissions from motorcycles."
I have to comment on that.
Emissions are typically measured in Parts Per Million. So for a given sample of exhaust, how many pollutants are in it? This isn't total output of pollutants. So, take a 600cc bike engine. Even at 14000rpm the cfm of exhaust its outputting is about 130cubic feet per minute, at a more reasonable cruising rpm, say 5000, cfm is 45. Output from a 5 liter car engine at 3000rpm is 220cfm. So even if the PPM emissions of the bike are twice that of a car engine, the actual pollution output is still much less.
Reply
Jack S. 12:33PM (3/18/2008)
FOR. This has worked in Europe for years and applies to when I ride a bicycle or a motorcyle. Fastest way around town hands down.
What does the speed buy you? Less emissions. Why? Because the motorcycle is not sitting there idling. Even if the motorcycle and the car had the same engine, the motorcycle would be more efficient because it is always moving. Not wasting in traffic.
However, there would be a serious culture problem in the US (outside of CA). People don't like motorcycles splitting the lanes. In Europe, many drivers will actually move aside to make room.
Reply
Nick 12:35PM (3/18/2008)
From a legal perspective, I see no problem with lane splitting. When I am on my bicycle I ride in and out of traffic at will, without regards to the rules.
As a motorcycle rider, however, I would never utilize lane splitting. Its so incredibly dangerous that I am not willing to risk it. In heavy traffic situations, however, I do use my shorter length and higher maneuverability to my advantage without 'lane splitting'.
Reply
robert 12:39PM (3/18/2008)
I'm totally for it. I don't ride a lot (and didn't ride in California the three years I lived there), but in California traffic, riding a motorcycle would be impossible without lane splitting. And, like it or not, CHP wants it and it ain't going anywhere.
That said, there are some really stupid people that are reckless about it (usually on crotch rockets). I also know several people who've had rearview mirrors knocked off because of lane splitters apathy (usually on cruisers). I've never heard of a lane splitter giving their info to the person who's mirror they broke, either.
I'm cool with lane splitting, but I'm not cool with careless jackasses.
Reply
RyanD 1:34PM (3/18/2008)
FOR. Even though it is illegal in AZ. I was stationed in CA for a couple of years. Ther lanes there aren't any wider than the ones for AZ. The people who are against splitting are likely the ones who get buzzed by an idiot on a motorcycle going 20+ what the rest of traffic is doing, which is illegal ANYWHERE and contributes to anti-motorcycle legislation and road-ragers opening their doors on the motorcyclist. Some bikes like my ZR7 are air cooled. Moving helps keep the engine in one piece by not onverheating. I can go on, but I'll leave with: driving anything is a privilege. Abuse it, LOSE it!
Reply
GoodCheer 1:47PM (3/18/2008)
ME (#5). You math is all correct, and your assumptions are conservative (other than the 5l "typical car" engine displacement), but the emissions reductions afforded by a catalytic converter are measured in terms of orders of magnitude, so the factor of 2 you calculated is vastly eclipsed.
I don't know where you live, but where the air is fairly clean it is easy to smell when a motorcycle (or a car built in the 60's) drives by, even among heavy traffic. Small engines notwithstanding they leave more soot and VOCs in the air than a whole street full of cat-equipped cars.
I should also say that in CA I think there are some emissions regs for motorcycles, but I don't know the details.
Reply
Rich 1:49PM (3/18/2008)
Personally, I think it's a dangerous thing to do on a motorcycle.
Reply
davewin 2:19PM (3/18/2008)
Against: All it takes is one collision and all traffic gets snarled even more, causing more idling and pollution. I think the safety benefits of not having lane splitting outweigh the modest environmental benefits that might occur with it.
Reply
Student Driver 2:37PM (3/18/2008)
AGAINST. I am a cyclist, and while I wear very bright clothing motorists still have problems "seeing" me. Considering how EVERY motorcycle rider I know complains about people not seeing them, yet wears black at the same I can't imagine this would be such a great idea.
Now, on military bases riders are required to wear bright colors or use brightly colored reflective bands. This makes them *much* easier to see. So, for me to like this, I would suggest:
1. They wear brighter colors to be seen. Yes, suck it up.
2. A speed-differential cap. If the traffic is going at 15mph, then they shouldn't be allowed to exceed their speed by 10-15mph. This would give people a chance to see them before the typical "ooh, their moving faster in *that* lane" lane change.
3. Widely publicizing that this is a LEGAL maneuver, and post signs letting those from out-of-town know that this comes up. I visit San Diego and wouldn't have known about this, nor expected it.
Reply
Fred 2:04AM (7/04/2008)
It is still safer for me to wiggle through traffic rather than take a chance on being hit from behind by some mindless driver not paying attention.
I bet most people here are NOT aware of the fact that if three lanes of traffic are stopped, but the carpool lane is moving freely, a CHP Officer can ticket someone driving in the carpool lane if they are going much faster than the traffic that is stopped. How many times has someone seen drivers in the carpool lane zip by the stopped lanes of traffic? They are driving at an unsafe speed compared to the traffic around them (even if they're going 50mph) and because of that, can be ticketed.
Student Driver, my jacket and things are "dark" certainly, however they are reflective. Beyond this, my headlight blinks from low to high beam, my brake light flashes and then goes solid.
What I don't understand though is that it seems to be okay for you to to a type of lane sharing with your bicycle, but you're against motorcyclists doing it? Do you know how many times I have been cut off by a group of bicyclists, or they have virtually blocked me by riding next to one another in a row, forcing everyone else to drive THEIR speed? We can share the road for bicyclists, but not for motorcyclists?
I had one guy riding on a ten speed who got really ticked off at me because apparently he thought I had come to close to him. When we got to the light, he read me the riot act and I noticed that even though he had all of his "gear" on that made him look like he was in a marathon race, he had no mirror. When I mentioned that to him, his excuse was "what, i should take the chance of losing my balance looking in a mirror?" Uh, wow, what a lame excuse. So apparently, everyone was supposed to watch out for him and he himself did not need to drive responsibly or defensively.
Bill 3:56PM (3/18/2008)
FOR. But then, I'm a motorcyclist living in California. As has been noted, it's common everywhere else in the world, but in most of the US, there's a sense that it's "unfair", that bikes are "cutting to the head of the line". But drivers don't realize that the bike isn't actually _taking_ a place in the line. There's also the issue of air-cooled bikes overheating without any air movement over the cooling fins.
The fuel savings are obvious. I don't know about the emissions standards, but most newer bikes have catalytic converters now. In any event, for a given trip, the engine of a lane-splitting motorcycle will be running for a shorter time than a car engine would be, which will also reduce total emissions.
In stop and go traffic, it's actually safer for motorcyclists to split lanes than to stay in line and possibly be sandwiched between a stopped car and a moving one that's about to rear-end it. Splitting impacts (which are rare) tend to be glancing blows. It's been my experience that a fair percentage of drivers will move over to make more room for splitting bikes, particularly between the #1 and #2 lanes.
I absolutely agree that the only time splitting is appropriate is when traffic is stopped or nearly so (say, less than 15 mph). Faster than that, and gaps open up between vehicles, making sudden lane changes much more likely and splitting much more hazardous.
Reply
mrbell321 5:08PM (3/18/2008)
For. Primarily because there are no good reasons to make it illegal. The safety issue comes close but I have to veto. If it comes down to safety, cars and trucks should be illegal as they cause a supreme majority of traffic incidents and congestion.
On the emissions of motorcycles, I believe all bikes sold in the last couple years have been required to be sold with catalytic converters. The problem is, they're often not have them once they're sold so people dump them. Regulations are coming into line w/ the rest of the automotive world tho.
Reply
RyanD 4:29PM (3/18/2008)
GoodCheer, motorcycles sold in CA are required to have a catalytic converter. Most other states don't have that particular requirement yet but will likely follow.
StudentDriver, I agree with you on your guidelines. I employed splitting lanes just 5 to 10 mph over stop and go San Diego traffic so I could get off the freeway as soon as possible. Soon as traffic moved back to 25 - 30 mph, I got back into "proper lanes".
I am completely against splitting the lanes at 80 mph while traffic is going 60+.
Reply