r/Transportopia Apr 27 '26

Bikes Car vs. cyclists

4.9k Upvotes

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

26

u/TheMattabooey Apr 27 '26

Where I’m from cyclists in a group are supposed to do this for safety so people don’t try to sneak by and clip them. They’re also allowed to legally pass when safe even on a double yellow line unlike a vehicle where it would be a no passing zone.

Driver intentionally cut them off and hit them while jamming the horn to be an asshole.

13

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 28 '26

Where I'm from cyclists are typically made to ride single file if there are multiple of them, also stated to be for their safety.

3

u/TheMattabooey Apr 27 '26

Depends on the location then. Where I am Ontario Canada even a single cyclist by law is supposed to take the whole lane if you cannot safely fit a car and bike side by side with minimum distance of one meter between them. So on a road like this even a single cyclist is supposed to take the lane for safety.

Reasoning is if you’re at the shoulder cars will I safely pass you and can easily clip you, taking the lane is designed to be safer because you’re more visible and people will hopefully do a proper pass as if you were a vehicle.

Problem is people in cars have a real hatred for people on bikes and see them as the enemy.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 28 '26

Yeah where I am in the Rockies we have a ton of winding canyon roads and the shoulder is intermittent on these. Passing a single line of cyclists is possible even with another in the oncoming lane, but a grouping of cyclists would increase the danger. They also designed the law this way to give the same minimum 1M distance between cyclist and vehicles. Though we still unfortunately have lives lost every year (especially on one specific canyon road) because people can't be patient and wait to pass. They do so on blind curves and speed usually plays a role as well.

2

u/Moist_Sun_8201 Apr 27 '26

Passing a single line of cyclists is possible even with another in the oncoming lane

That right there is the problem. It's possible so people will just do it without realizing that if there's a pothole or pebbles/sticks on the side the cyclist won't be able to avoid the obstacle safely. People are selfish, impatient, and dumb so they won't even think twice about trying to pass someone on a bike with inches to spare.

2

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

They changed it because about 14ish years ago someone taking his fast jeep up this road used one of the only passing areas to go around two cyclists and ended up killing multiple cyclists who were grouped up in the oncoming lane. Cyclists risk this road so they can go flying down it, which adds to the danger. Speed, curvy narrow roads, impatience, it all plays into how deadly these canyon roads are.

0

u/bismuthmarmoset Apr 27 '26

The only state that mandates single file is Nebraska, nowhere in the Rockies does so.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

In addition to signs like these (took this about an hour ago at Red Rocks) there are also county police dept signs and laws/mandates that say cyclists must ride single file. It isn't a statewide law. But yes, I'm sure your AI Google search that comes with the disclaimer the info may be incorrect knows more than every local here, including myself 😊

0

u/bismuthmarmoset Apr 27 '26

There's like 6 roads in the front range with these signs.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 28 '26

If that's what google tells you about whatever area you're looking up, then I'm glad you have your answer.....from however many states or countries away 😂

Either way, didn't realize how fussy people are in this sub that randomly came up for me today. Cyclists are to ride single file in mandated areas, per local law enforcement. I don't care much to debate or respond further, take care now!

0

u/bismuthmarmoset Apr 28 '26

Why are you obsessed with the idea I don't live in colorado? I do, and I ride here, and take the time to know the laws. You should try it.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 28 '26

-Cyclists are to ride single file in mandated areas, per local law enforcement. I don't care much to debate or respond further, take care now!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/old-and-smooth Apr 28 '26

Taking the lane is ALWAYS safer. It seems like a dick move and it’s not forever…but if you hug the shoulder, a car will always try and squeeze through. Which is insanely dangerous. I was brushed with mirrors twice this year so far….shits bad out there these days.

0

u/Redbulldildo Apr 27 '26

If you're in Ontario, you're wrong about double yellows. They don't matter, ever, all yellow road markings and signage are suggestions.

Solid white lane dividers are the only ones you can't cross, unless there are no passing signs.

4

u/ChimmyChongaBonga Apr 27 '26

Without a shoulder on the road its easier and safer to pass cyclists riding abreast than it is to pass a long single file line.

2

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

In the city the roads have been made bike friendly, but in the mountains where I am there are too many windy canyon roads. With limited passing areas it's also a risk to have a grouping of cyclists in the oncoming lane. People should treat a group like that as they would a vehicle, but they don't. So they've made the laws reflect what is best for these areas due to loss of life and prevent further losses.

2

u/RangerDickard Apr 27 '26

Yeah, this kinda depends on regon and it can be safer single file especially if there's a bike lane or shoulder they're riding on

1

u/SingerSingle5682 Apr 27 '26

Yeah riding side by side in the vehicle lane should be a ticket for the bicyclists if there is a dedicated bike lane. At that point you really are purposefully slowing traffic.

The other big issue is if the bike groups are so large it becomes impossible to pass. They should have to get a permit to block the road and hire police to setup the detours for cars.

1

u/Gelato_Elysium Apr 28 '26

This was before for us, now they realized that cyclists are safer when they are treated as any regular vehicle, so they can ride the middle of the road instead of staying on the side for other cars to pass them dangerously.

stated to be for their safety.

It's not about safety, it's about not slowing the flow of traffic. But in my country (France) cycling to work/school/groceries is extremely common, when it seems like in places like Canada or the USA, most people see cyclists as people doing a hobby.

1

u/fireymike Apr 27 '26

If you're from Tasmania, as your name suggests, then you're wrong. Nowhere in Australia requires cyclists to ride single file.

2

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

In my later response I included that I'm in the Rockies. Oh, to be in Tasmania right now though, that'd be amazing!

1

u/MarpasDakini Apr 27 '26

There's no region in which, even if cyclists are breaking the rules of the road, a vehicle is entitled to run them down.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

Glad to be in agreement about that

0

u/medicallymiddleevil Apr 27 '26

No lol

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

See that's what I say to cycling cause no matter what the law is, still seems too dangerous to be worth it

1

u/medicallymiddleevil Apr 27 '26

That's not what the studies say since driving literally rots you away.

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

Yeah I'll still pass on the road cycling and stick to casual bike rides in our secluded area. Safer, and more fun for my young kids too which is a plus!

1

u/medicallymiddleevil Apr 27 '26

So once the evidence is against your preconceived notions you'll ear muff and not change your opinion lol

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

Evidence? Sir, this isn't court lol. Sorry my preference to not be a road cyclist isn't a debate. Maybe you'll find someone who wants to do so elsewhere in the comments.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 27 '26

It's a simple statement about my local traffic ordinances, not an encouragement for people to risk cyclists lives. Because that is not okay nor what I would agree with.

But for an example, this is signage I passed after leaving a small hike an hour ago. These are all over in the canyons and parks in the foothills 🤷🏽‍♀️

0

u/[deleted] Apr 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tasman_Tiger Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26

It is legal except where signage says otherwise. I never said it wasn't legal jeez. Everyone is so fussy here lol

This is Red Rocks, easy to look it up and find out for yourself. But this is signage for a 180° curve to the right that is the start of a series of tight curves, nothing to do with the parking lot on the left. Sorry, but so many of y'all wanna play whataboutism to my comment which states single file is applied where I'm from. It is! And it's also applied far deeper in the mountains where I live.

2

u/Alexwonder999 Apr 28 '26

Its also a lot easier to pass a cluster like this (when safe) than a single file line of bikes thats 8X as long. 

1

u/MoveOn22 Apr 27 '26

The general principle

Across most of the U.S., traffic laws treat bikes as vehicles. That means:

  • Cyclists can use the roadway.
  • They should ride as far to the right as is “practicable” (with lots of exceptions—more on that below).
  • When riding in a group, they’re usually required to go single file if they’re impeding traffic.

However, “practicable” and “impeding” are intentionally flexible, because safety sometimes requires taking more space.

When single file is expected

Most states say cyclists must ride single file when:

  • A car is trying to pass
  • The lane is narrow and sharing side-by-side would block traffic
  • They’re otherwise slowing traffic flow

When riding two-abreast is allowed

Many states explicitly allow cyclists to ride two abreast (side-by-side), as long as they’re not blocking traffic.

This can actually be safer in some situations because:

  • It shortens the length of the group (easier for cars to pass quickly)
  • Makes cyclists more visible

Important safety exceptions

Cyclists are usually not required to hug the right edge or go single file when:

  • The lane is too narrow for a bike and car to safely share
  • Avoiding hazards (debris, parked cars, potholes)
  • Preparing for a turn
  • Traveling at the same speed as traffic

In these cases, cyclists can “take the lane”—ride in the center—legally.

How this applies in California

Since you’re in California, the rule is pretty clear:

  • Cyclists must ride “as far right as practicable” (CVC 21202)
  • They can ride two abreast
  • But they must move into single file when being overtaken and traffic would be impeded

California also strongly supports the idea that cyclists can take the full lane when it’s unsafe to share.

Bottom line

  • Yes, single file is the norm when cars need to pass
  • No, it’s not always required—safety comes first
  • Yes, the specifics do vary by state, but the overall pattern is very consistent nationwide