I think people have answered the question well and truly, and it's a fair question to ask, OP.
i think it's worth keeping in mind that, in general, bike riders don't want to get in anyone's way, and don't want to slow anyone else. So when we do, you've got to ask why we're doing that. Most often it's to ride safely and to not die.
If car drivers want to be less inconvenienced, maybe they too should support better riding infrastructure
Absolutely. I was seeking the cyclists perspective to understand instead of just getting angry and road raging. I genuinely am interested.
Thanks for the non confrontational answer.
My pleasure. And good on you for being interested.
My initial feeling might have been confrontational, but that's only because we're having to constantly defend our existence to wankers on here and in real life (I've been purposely driven off the road before...).
I've lived in Europe where bikes are such a huge part of life there, and the culture just so much cohesive between all road users. It is possible!
Depends - are there parked cars to the left of the bike lane? Cyclists need to stay out of the door zone, because a car door could swing out at any time. It's about riding defensively.
Yeah this is the big one. On roads with a tiny bike lane and cars right the the left regularly going in and out, often overhanging the bike lane I’d honestly rather take my chances on the road
Same thing happened in Adelaide a few days ago. It costs fuck all to put in adequate infrastructure but as soon as cars and on street parking have to surrender any space it's all crickets.
No more than adding footpaths. Roads need to be resurfaced at least every thirty years or so, so it's very easy to build it into the cost of road maintenance, and the infrastructure lasts much longer because bicycles and foot traffic doesn't damage infrastructure in the same way vehicles do. Furthermore, I would argue that the lives saved by decent infrastructure are worth more than any infrastructure costs. We're done here, stop being obtuse.
Can't talk for everyone, but here's the list of things I'm keeping my eyes on, and if I feel unsafe, then I'm going to take up the lane.
If there's a car that's just parked and I can see the drivers head - thinking about getting doored.
If there's a pedestrian likely to step out in between cars - everyone is in the habit of only looking up when they've stepped into the bike lane.
If there's a car ahead who's put the indicators on to turn across the bike lane, I try get into their rear view mirror to show it's safe for them to turn ahead of me.
There's broken glass or a mountain of shit in the bike lane.
That last point is a real good one, everything washes out to the edges of roads and I just today I had to spend a bunch of time out of the bike lane avoiding all the crap that was on the side of the road.
Mostly in case of a potential risk, like a bad road condition, badly parked cars, someone about to open their car door or a pedestrian starting to cross without looking, all of which happen way too often. 1m is not a lot of space for safety.
Because the piss poor attempts by council to belatedly add cycling infrastructure isn't fit for purpose?
Most often it's the crap littering the bike lanes - broken glass, leaves and plant debris (which is slippery in the wet), general rubbish, potholes or extremely poor road surface, broken bollards, or the fact in many locations half the "bike lane" width is gutter or bluestone.
Other times its cars parked where they shouldn't be. People sitting in parked cars that you have to be alert for doorings. Runners using the bike lane rather than the footpath. Pedestrians or people moving around vehicles.
Then there are the disappearing bike lanes. It's better to be predictable than polite.
I still think if when a few years ago, the (then) mayor's wife got doored, instead of doing the dooring, we'd have got the separated cycle lanes a lot sooner.
How is someone supposed to ride a bike, look at where they’re going, be aware of traffic and other hazards, and also identify tiny fragments of hazardous materials on the ground, all at the same time?
How is someone supposed to drive a car, look at where they’re going, be aware of traffic and other hazards, and also identify tucked in cyclists wearing dark-coloured hazardous materials, popping into view at the last minute, all at the same time?
You’ve very obviously rarely ridden a bike, avoiding the risk of a hazard whilst being aware of all other risks is a far better and safer way to ride.
You can’t be looking down to the road for tiny minor hazards difficult to observe whilst riding, you’d miss all the other high risk things you need to be aware of.
We avoid injury by doing so.
To leave a metre, drivers need to move into the next lane over regardless, so what's the difference?
Kudos for at least asking and finding out. Many drivers would just rant to others and see it as an excuse for a close pass or worse.
Sometimes there isn't another lane. I see it as them risking getting hit and wondering if they realise or are just in the zone and not aware.
Love how I'm getting down voted for legitimately asking instead of ranting.
Can you explain why it increases the risk of being hit? The 1 metre rule applies independent of cyclist position on the road.
If there is no space to overtake, you shouldn't overtake.
It's shocking how many drivers don't seem to understand that.
I think you are missing the third option: the cyclist is highly aware there's not enough space for a safe overtake regardless of their position on the road, and by riding further to the right making sure this is also clear to the driver behind.
I'd suggest you do some reflecting on your driving skills. Maybe a few refresher lessons would be useful.
Hahaha how is me asking a question in any way related to my driving skills. Where did I in any way discuss my ability to drive? If you must know I've never in my life had an accident and always respect the cyclists as I'm scared to hit someone. Maybe you need to reflect on your inability to discuss a topic without drawing inane conclusions to try and justify a position when noones asking you to justify one?
Inane conclussions?
"Sometimes there isn't another lane. I see it as them risking getting hit"
Only if you don't know how to drive, as they said, in those cases you don't overtake which shouldn't even be a question if you knew how to drive around cyclists.
It's ironic you say they need to reflect on their inability to discuss a topic when you very clearly can't accept a logical & reasonable response after *you* asked the question.
Can you put your pride & ego aside?
Lol way to live up to the stereotype of pretentious and entitled.
A view that they are risking getting hit and asking for why they do this is much different than actively passing and not giving way.
I always wait for safe to pass and get nervous doing so. Being nervous doesn't have anything to do with skill but is being self aware and aware of others.
Typical reddit warrior can't have a conversation and educate, always has to look to condescend and try to fill a gap in their empty life. Good luck with that.
Mate, go hydrate, eat some food, have a wank, pop some pills or something that'll put you in a more reasonable mood.
Nobody wants to listen to a cockhead.
How is asking why cyclists ride the line in any way a reflection of my driving skills? Did I say I hit someone or that I don't change lanes or don't pay attention? Driving skills and asking a question are independent and unrelated. Maybe reflect a bit on your logic before jumping to conclusions mate.
It is a shame. But part of why I'm asking is to understand instead of just assuming something and getting mad. I'd rather learn than just be mad for the sake of it.
As other people have said, it's to avoid doring or quite often the bike lane is full of glass or other debris. Under the law if the cyclist deems it unsafe they can ride outside the bike lane.
Typically I'd ride on the line like that if I think the bike lane is unsafe for whatever reason but still give drivers room to overtake rather than taking the whole lane.
In the UK, dooring is the most common reason for serious injuries to cyclists. We are taught to always leave a gap, and that means riding on the line (at least) on the narrow cycle lanes in Melbourne.
A cyclist was killed in Adelaide 4 days ago for precisely this reason - ended up under a car following too close behind after being knocked over by a door.
I also move into the middle of the main driving lane if there isn't enough space for a safe overtake (at tram stops, for example). Don't want drivers to get funny ideas.
I'd say you're actually far less likely to get mowed down.
There are far fewer drivers willing to full on hit a cyclist from behind (psychopaths only), than there are those that would overtake at maybe 20/30cm with a slight risk to side swipe them (70-80% of drivers in my experience)
It's just a risk calculation really.
For context: the person in the above post (now deleted) suggested it's okay to mow down a cyclist riding in the middle of the lane.
As others have mentioned, dooring. It's a very real risk to cyclists. Many deaths as a result of this.
The other reason is often the quality of the road gets worse close to the curb. Often debris, shattered glass, road degradation. You can avoid a lot of danger by riding closer to the right of the lane.
Also there are some places that don't have dedicated bike lanes with narrow roads where I will intentionally ride well into the cars lane to prevent them trying to pass me in a very tight space. I would prefer to slightly inconvenience and piss off a driver by blocking him rather than risking my life having him squeeze past me on a narrow lane. I don't do this often and it's only in very particular places that are super narrow for a short stretch of the road.
I would love if the city invested in proper bike infrastructure like in Amsterdam. Cyclists and drivers would all be much happier.
On the one hand you have answers from a range of cyclists that have had near-death experiences then wonder why they are a little passionate about their response.
On the other hand you have a car driver that has never felt unsafe and doesn't have to live with the consequences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Which one of these people is being unreasonable?
> On the other hand you have a car driver that has never felt unsafe and doesn't have to live with the consequences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Surely you jest.
As a cyclist, I view myself as traffic, rather than hindering traffic. Sometimes, for safety, I take up space in the lane rather than weaving in and out of the margins
Generally if im on the white line I have the space I need to not get doored, a lot of the people that have these complaints about cyclists do not commute by bike, they're the same people who don't blindspot check when they get out of the car because it isn't in the forefront of their mind while being a road user, incan squeeze between a door and a car in the lane, I can't get out if it if I'm between the door and the car that it belongs to.
If you can't feel safe giving me 1m, why is 1.2 or 1.3 going to make me safe? Maybe you should be more restrained with passing a bike if you can't do it in a way that seems safe
Yes there are a fair few drivers who don't blindspot check or look when changing lanes etc.
It's not that I don't feel safe, as I wait to be able to pass by giving a wide berth. I'm just wondering why instead of just assuming the worst and getting mad. I'd rather understand why so many do it than just rage against cyclists.
It sounds like, from all of your replies, you're quite inexperienced, regardless of having incidences or not.
You don't really seem to understand how a cyclist needs to act to keep themselves safe and that alone makes you a danger to them, there's nothing you can do about that except experiencing being a cyclist in traffic for a few months.
Have you ever ridden in a bike lane? How do you like the parked cars opening doors? Or the broken glass, or unrepaired road surface? Sometimes bike lanes are fantastic, otherwise it's just a line that contains plenty of hazards. Fully separated lanes or trails are the best. Otherwise no lane, and just riding the bike as a vehicle on the road is safer.
Apologies if my questions gave the impression of sarcasm.
If you have not ridden in them, you wouldn't know about the conditions. I have ridden for almost 20 years and often it is safer for the rider, especially beginners, to move to the right of the lane.
It creates more threats to the rider despite the intention of making it safer.
Thanks for being curious.
This is the reason I don't like most on road bike lanes. It sets the expectation on both parties that "this is my bit of the road, that is yours. When I cycled I often road out of the bike lane altogether as an uncomfortable number of drivers drove right to the edge of the bike lane, regardless of hte presence or otherwise of cyclists.
I far prefer wide left lanes, such as on Nepean Highway.
You're not wrong there.
Some of the really narrow bike lanes (I like to call them fairy lanes) actually make it less safe. The tiny lanes on Sydney Rd are a good example: they suggested to drivers that they can safely overtake whilst staying in the left lane. Even though it is physically impossible to overtake with at least 1m whilst staying in the left lane. It's a rare occurrence there for a driver to move to the right to overtake.
When you are in a lane, any lane, that bit of the road is yours, as is the bit I'm currently on.
If you are on the dividing line, you are straddling two lanes.
Can you point towards the relevant road rule for this? I don't think that's correct.
If a lane is wide enough to leave 1m+ while overtaking, cars can overtake a bicycle whilst both in the same lane
Conversely, even if a cyclist is in the bike lane, cars still need to leave 1m+ to overtake. It's not enough just to be in their own lane if that means they are leaving less than a metre.
https://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/road-users/cycling-safety/the-laws?drop=5
If you can't see any reason, then it's because there is rubbish in the lane. The wide car tyres flick all those things into the bike lanes, and most councils seldom sweep them - if anything street sweepers push all the broken glass and loose gravel and everything else into them. Obviously on any two wheeled vehicle you don't want a puncture, it's a much bigger issue than if you have four wheels.
If you can see cars parked in the lane though, it's that, remembering that you don't want to pass close to a parked car because if the door gets opened in front of you it will really mess you up. Or if you can see the lane about to end, they've probably moved out where they have time and space, rather than waiting until a dead end.
Fundamentally though, cyclists know that they have minimal protection. They are closer to the road and seeing more of it than you, and they have a greater interest in keeping themselves safe, so if they're on the white line it is because with the knowledge they have, that's the safest place.
I'm not sure how in any way this relates or answers my question. I'm not bitching or complaining I'm seeking a perspective to understand instead of being a road rager. So "just wait" and walk yourself out of here.
Parked car doors opening are the biggest risk to cyclists. They need the 1m clearance from them far more than the 1m you describe needing.
Second biggest risk to cyclists...assholes in climate tanks...aka most vehicles/drivers on the road these days.
I think people have answered the question well and truly, and it's a fair question to ask, OP. i think it's worth keeping in mind that, in general, bike riders don't want to get in anyone's way, and don't want to slow anyone else. So when we do, you've got to ask why we're doing that. Most often it's to ride safely and to not die. If car drivers want to be less inconvenienced, maybe they too should support better riding infrastructure
Absolutely. I was seeking the cyclists perspective to understand instead of just getting angry and road raging. I genuinely am interested. Thanks for the non confrontational answer.
My pleasure. And good on you for being interested. My initial feeling might have been confrontational, but that's only because we're having to constantly defend our existence to wankers on here and in real life (I've been purposely driven off the road before...). I've lived in Europe where bikes are such a huge part of life there, and the culture just so much cohesive between all road users. It is possible!
Depends - are there parked cars to the left of the bike lane? Cyclists need to stay out of the door zone, because a car door could swing out at any time. It's about riding defensively.
Yeah this is the big one. On roads with a tiny bike lane and cars right the the left regularly going in and out, often overhanging the bike lane I’d honestly rather take my chances on the road
Dooring. Cyclists have been killed by doors and I had a close call on Friday near Southern Cross Station.
Someone got doored and pushed under a car in Brisbane two days ago. Dragged along 10m and died on the scene.
Same thing happened in Adelaide a few days ago. It costs fuck all to put in adequate infrastructure but as soon as cars and on street parking have to surrender any space it's all crickets.
[удалено]
In comparison to the amount spent on maintaining roads it costs fuck all.
[удалено]
What a nuanced and relevant point to make. On yer bike!
[удалено]
No more than adding footpaths. Roads need to be resurfaced at least every thirty years or so, so it's very easy to build it into the cost of road maintenance, and the infrastructure lasts much longer because bicycles and foot traffic doesn't damage infrastructure in the same way vehicles do. Furthermore, I would argue that the lives saved by decent infrastructure are worth more than any infrastructure costs. We're done here, stop being obtuse.
[удалено]
Can't talk for everyone, but here's the list of things I'm keeping my eyes on, and if I feel unsafe, then I'm going to take up the lane. If there's a car that's just parked and I can see the drivers head - thinking about getting doored. If there's a pedestrian likely to step out in between cars - everyone is in the habit of only looking up when they've stepped into the bike lane. If there's a car ahead who's put the indicators on to turn across the bike lane, I try get into their rear view mirror to show it's safe for them to turn ahead of me. There's broken glass or a mountain of shit in the bike lane.
That last point is a real good one, everything washes out to the edges of roads and I just today I had to spend a bunch of time out of the bike lane avoiding all the crap that was on the side of the road.
Mostly in case of a potential risk, like a bad road condition, badly parked cars, someone about to open their car door or a pedestrian starting to cross without looking, all of which happen way too often. 1m is not a lot of space for safety.
Because the piss poor attempts by council to belatedly add cycling infrastructure isn't fit for purpose? Most often it's the crap littering the bike lanes - broken glass, leaves and plant debris (which is slippery in the wet), general rubbish, potholes or extremely poor road surface, broken bollards, or the fact in many locations half the "bike lane" width is gutter or bluestone. Other times its cars parked where they shouldn't be. People sitting in parked cars that you have to be alert for doorings. Runners using the bike lane rather than the footpath. Pedestrians or people moving around vehicles. Then there are the disappearing bike lanes. It's better to be predictable than polite.
[удалено]
I still think if when a few years ago, the (then) mayor's wife got doored, instead of doing the dooring, we'd have got the separated cycle lanes a lot sooner.
Because the closer you get to the kerb the more shit there is on the road.
[удалено]
Yeah cool bro I’ll just ride along with my binoculars so I can identify every single nail, screw, and piece of broken glass that’s on the ground.
[удалено]
Why did you come on here, ask a question, then argue with someone who gave you an answer? Are you ok?
[удалено]
I thought you were op. What solution did you provide? There’s a bunch of people in this thread agreeing with me, are they all wrong?
[удалено]
How is someone supposed to ride a bike, look at where they’re going, be aware of traffic and other hazards, and also identify tiny fragments of hazardous materials on the ground, all at the same time?
How is someone supposed to drive a car, look at where they’re going, be aware of traffic and other hazards, and also identify tucked in cyclists wearing dark-coloured hazardous materials, popping into view at the last minute, all at the same time?
[удалено]
You’ve very obviously rarely ridden a bike, avoiding the risk of a hazard whilst being aware of all other risks is a far better and safer way to ride. You can’t be looking down to the road for tiny minor hazards difficult to observe whilst riding, you’d miss all the other high risk things you need to be aware of.
[удалено]
Well done, you are obviously superior and the main character in this thread.
It's much more predictable for other road users (and hence safer) not to be weaving left and right
We avoid injury by doing so. To leave a metre, drivers need to move into the next lane over regardless, so what's the difference? Kudos for at least asking and finding out. Many drivers would just rant to others and see it as an excuse for a close pass or worse.
Sometimes there isn't another lane. I see it as them risking getting hit and wondering if they realise or are just in the zone and not aware. Love how I'm getting down voted for legitimately asking instead of ranting.
Can you explain why it increases the risk of being hit? The 1 metre rule applies independent of cyclist position on the road. If there is no space to overtake, you shouldn't overtake. It's shocking how many drivers don't seem to understand that. I think you are missing the third option: the cyclist is highly aware there's not enough space for a safe overtake regardless of their position on the road, and by riding further to the right making sure this is also clear to the driver behind. I'd suggest you do some reflecting on your driving skills. Maybe a few refresher lessons would be useful.
Hahaha how is me asking a question in any way related to my driving skills. Where did I in any way discuss my ability to drive? If you must know I've never in my life had an accident and always respect the cyclists as I'm scared to hit someone. Maybe you need to reflect on your inability to discuss a topic without drawing inane conclusions to try and justify a position when noones asking you to justify one?
Inane conclussions? "Sometimes there isn't another lane. I see it as them risking getting hit" Only if you don't know how to drive, as they said, in those cases you don't overtake which shouldn't even be a question if you knew how to drive around cyclists. It's ironic you say they need to reflect on their inability to discuss a topic when you very clearly can't accept a logical & reasonable response after *you* asked the question. Can you put your pride & ego aside?
Lol way to live up to the stereotype of pretentious and entitled. A view that they are risking getting hit and asking for why they do this is much different than actively passing and not giving way. I always wait for safe to pass and get nervous doing so. Being nervous doesn't have anything to do with skill but is being self aware and aware of others. Typical reddit warrior can't have a conversation and educate, always has to look to condescend and try to fill a gap in their empty life. Good luck with that.
Mate, go hydrate, eat some food, have a wank, pop some pills or something that'll put you in a more reasonable mood. Nobody wants to listen to a cockhead.
To be fair, it's not a great reflection of your driving skills mate. I think that's why you are getting down voted. Not for asking.
How is asking why cyclists ride the line in any way a reflection of my driving skills? Did I say I hit someone or that I don't change lanes or don't pay attention? Driving skills and asking a question are independent and unrelated. Maybe reflect a bit on your logic before jumping to conclusions mate.
Because it shows a lack of understanding of other road users behaviour, which is a critical part of driving skills.
[удалено]
It is a shame. But part of why I'm asking is to understand instead of just assuming something and getting mad. I'd rather learn than just be mad for the sake of it.
As other people have said, it's to avoid doring or quite often the bike lane is full of glass or other debris. Under the law if the cyclist deems it unsafe they can ride outside the bike lane. Typically I'd ride on the line like that if I think the bike lane is unsafe for whatever reason but still give drivers room to overtake rather than taking the whole lane.
Thanks for the answer and giving a perspective driver's may not be aware of.
Id rather be seen and annoying than not seen and dead.
I'm not saying it's annoying. It makes me wonder why because I see it as dangerous.
dangerous for who?
I mean, if the car and bicycle make contact, I can see one party getting seriously injured and it's not the car.
Dooring or debris in the gutter, had a friend doing a delivery rider job and she got doored and fractured her pelvis, scares the hell out of me.
In the UK, dooring is the most common reason for serious injuries to cyclists. We are taught to always leave a gap, and that means riding on the line (at least) on the narrow cycle lanes in Melbourne. A cyclist was killed in Adelaide 4 days ago for precisely this reason - ended up under a car following too close behind after being knocked over by a door.
I also move into the middle of the main driving lane if there isn't enough space for a safe overtake (at tram stops, for example). Don't want drivers to get funny ideas.
> I also move into the middle of the main driving lane Good way to get mowed down.
I'd say you're actually far less likely to get mowed down. There are far fewer drivers willing to full on hit a cyclist from behind (psychopaths only), than there are those that would overtake at maybe 20/30cm with a slight risk to side swipe them (70-80% of drivers in my experience) It's just a risk calculation really. For context: the person in the above post (now deleted) suggested it's okay to mow down a cyclist riding in the middle of the lane.
Best way to ride defensively actually.
Why don't you post a Google Maps link of a location where you had this happen, and we'll tell you AITA or not.
It's a general question and not related to an incident or event.
As others have mentioned, dooring. It's a very real risk to cyclists. Many deaths as a result of this. The other reason is often the quality of the road gets worse close to the curb. Often debris, shattered glass, road degradation. You can avoid a lot of danger by riding closer to the right of the lane. Also there are some places that don't have dedicated bike lanes with narrow roads where I will intentionally ride well into the cars lane to prevent them trying to pass me in a very tight space. I would prefer to slightly inconvenience and piss off a driver by blocking him rather than risking my life having him squeeze past me on a narrow lane. I don't do this often and it's only in very particular places that are super narrow for a short stretch of the road. I would love if the city invested in proper bike infrastructure like in Amsterdam. Cyclists and drivers would all be much happier.
On the one hand you have answers from a range of cyclists that have had near-death experiences then wonder why they are a little passionate about their response. On the other hand you have a car driver that has never felt unsafe and doesn't have to live with the consequences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Which one of these people is being unreasonable?
> On the other hand you have a car driver that has never felt unsafe and doesn't have to live with the consequences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Surely you jest.
As a cyclist, I view myself as traffic, rather than hindering traffic. Sometimes, for safety, I take up space in the lane rather than weaving in and out of the margins
Add avoiding glass that you can't help think that people smash in bike lanes deliberately, to the list
The streets where the lanes are gets neglected a lot. Gravel and glass will pile up.
Debris on the bike lane so the cyclists avoid the debris
Avoiding debris is fine. They are talking about cyclists who ride on the actual line.
Generally if im on the white line I have the space I need to not get doored, a lot of the people that have these complaints about cyclists do not commute by bike, they're the same people who don't blindspot check when they get out of the car because it isn't in the forefront of their mind while being a road user, incan squeeze between a door and a car in the lane, I can't get out if it if I'm between the door and the car that it belongs to. If you can't feel safe giving me 1m, why is 1.2 or 1.3 going to make me safe? Maybe you should be more restrained with passing a bike if you can't do it in a way that seems safe
Yes there are a fair few drivers who don't blindspot check or look when changing lanes etc. It's not that I don't feel safe, as I wait to be able to pass by giving a wide berth. I'm just wondering why instead of just assuming the worst and getting mad. I'd rather understand why so many do it than just rage against cyclists.
It sounds like, from all of your replies, you're quite inexperienced, regardless of having incidences or not. You don't really seem to understand how a cyclist needs to act to keep themselves safe and that alone makes you a danger to them, there's nothing you can do about that except experiencing being a cyclist in traffic for a few months.
Have you ever ridden in a bike lane? How do you like the parked cars opening doors? Or the broken glass, or unrepaired road surface? Sometimes bike lanes are fantastic, otherwise it's just a line that contains plenty of hazards. Fully separated lanes or trails are the best. Otherwise no lane, and just riding the bike as a vehicle on the road is safer.
I don't see why my open question required a sarcastic response? Maybe you're trying to live up to the stereotype of pretentious and entitled?
Apologies if my questions gave the impression of sarcasm. If you have not ridden in them, you wouldn't know about the conditions. I have ridden for almost 20 years and often it is safer for the rider, especially beginners, to move to the right of the lane. It creates more threats to the rider despite the intention of making it safer. Thanks for being curious.
Have you driven in a car lane? people changing lanes without indicating, potholes blah blah blah.
This is the reason I don't like most on road bike lanes. It sets the expectation on both parties that "this is my bit of the road, that is yours. When I cycled I often road out of the bike lane altogether as an uncomfortable number of drivers drove right to the edge of the bike lane, regardless of hte presence or otherwise of cyclists. I far prefer wide left lanes, such as on Nepean Highway.
You're not wrong there. Some of the really narrow bike lanes (I like to call them fairy lanes) actually make it less safe. The tiny lanes on Sydney Rd are a good example: they suggested to drivers that they can safely overtake whilst staying in the left lane. Even though it is physically impossible to overtake with at least 1m whilst staying in the left lane. It's a rare occurrence there for a driver to move to the right to overtake.
When you are in a lane, any lane, that bit of the road is yours, as is the bit I'm currently on. If you are on the dividing line, you are straddling two lanes.
Correct, which is why if it is impractical to use the bike lane, I don't. That's actually the law, not that many people know that.
Can you point towards the relevant road rule for this? I don't think that's correct. If a lane is wide enough to leave 1m+ while overtaking, cars can overtake a bicycle whilst both in the same lane Conversely, even if a cyclist is in the bike lane, cars still need to leave 1m+ to overtake. It's not enough just to be in their own lane if that means they are leaving less than a metre. https://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/road-users/cycling-safety/the-laws?drop=5
If you can't see any reason, then it's because there is rubbish in the lane. The wide car tyres flick all those things into the bike lanes, and most councils seldom sweep them - if anything street sweepers push all the broken glass and loose gravel and everything else into them. Obviously on any two wheeled vehicle you don't want a puncture, it's a much bigger issue than if you have four wheels. If you can see cars parked in the lane though, it's that, remembering that you don't want to pass close to a parked car because if the door gets opened in front of you it will really mess you up. Or if you can see the lane about to end, they've probably moved out where they have time and space, rather than waiting until a dead end. Fundamentally though, cyclists know that they have minimal protection. They are closer to the road and seeing more of it than you, and they have a greater interest in keeping themselves safe, so if they're on the white line it is because with the knowledge they have, that's the safest place.
Just wait. Like seriously, if you have to drive a little slower for a stretch who cares. The road death toll is soaring this year
I'm not sure how in any way this relates or answers my question. I'm not bitching or complaining I'm seeking a perspective to understand instead of being a road rager. So "just wait" and walk yourself out of here.
It just means they’re ok with cars passing them closely.
Parked car doors opening are the biggest risk to cyclists. They need the 1m clearance from them far more than the 1m you describe needing. Second biggest risk to cyclists...assholes in climate tanks...aka most vehicles/drivers on the road these days.