Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

[FasterFerret]

I'm not sure everyone posting has actually looked at the link or understood the OP. It's got nothing to do with how much room to give a car or being doored. It's using a door as a visual example of how much room to give a cyclist you're overtaking, it's really got nothing to do with doors!
Whether it's enough depends on how big someone thinks a door is, it's probably better than saying 1.5m because IMO unless you're someone who measuring things frequently you're unlikely to be able to accurately gauge what 1.5m looks like.

Yes, the point that I was making (obviously not very well ) is that I don't think that many car doors are actually 1.5m. So using it as a gauge for how much room you should give when passing a cyclist isn't that helpful (for us cyclists). My example (Ford Mondeo) gives a passing room of less than 1 meter. I just think 'a car door width' is such a bad example to use.

I do think that it is good advice for anyone passing a line of parked cars, but not for passing cyclists (or walkers, or horses).

I also think that most people will struggle to picture what a 1.5m gap looks like. So I agree that some form of 'interpretation' is probably needed.

Maybe if it was brought to life a bit better by saying more realistic things - the width of a Fiat 500 (measured door to door 1414mm). There is a Welsh campaign showing two imaginary cyclists I much prefer that to the blue and white sign. 1.5m is 5ft can you think about someone you know who is 5ft tall lying on the road in that gap?

Perhaps a campaign featuring 'things that are 1.5m wide' might have some impact and stick in people's minds?

[FasterFerret]

This

I'd suggest the rule of thumb should be to move the car completely into another lane. Then even with narrow lanes, I think you'll still be more than 1.5m away - and seeing as even with wide lanes, you have to put some of your car into the next lane (do the maths), so you have to wait for a gap in that lane anyway, why not move over completely?

all day every day for me.

[Pete Owens]

To put this in perspective we have yet another police force taking action on close passing - which is an overwhelmingly good thing whatever quibbles we may have about a car door being a good visualisation of enough space.

Probably the reason the car door came into it is that part of the training that police give to motorists they pull over is to counter the excuse given by drivers that they were "forced" to pass too close because the cyclist was riding in the "middle of the road". The mat is designed to show the minimum clearances that cyclists need to give to the kerb and parked cars for their own safety (the 0.7m & 1.5m dimensions) so motorists cannot expect us to put ourselves at risk by riding in the gutter or the door-zone - even if some muppet from the council has painted a cycle lane there.

[Pete Owens]

That said, I agree that it's not the best measure. I'd suggest the rule of thumb should be to move the car completely into another lane. Then even with narrow lanes, I think you'll still be more than 1.5m away - and seeing as even with wide lanes, you have to put some of your car into the next lane (do the maths), so you have to wait for a gap in that lane anyway, why not move over completely?

Depends on the Lane width.

If you have wide lanes (>4.25m) there may well be enough room for a car (though not a bus or truck) to safely overtake in the presence of oncoming traffic.

Take the dimensions from the mat as an absolute minimum then that would be 0.7m (kerb-cyclist) + 1.5m (cyclist-car) + 1.8m (width of car) = 4m. IMO that is not quite enough I would like to see an extra 50cm, which can be achieved in a 4.25m lane by overrunning the centre line with the right hand wheel.

Unfortunately the standard lane width in the UK is 3.65m - which most certainly is not enough to allow safe overtaking - so a general assumption that you needs to change lanes to overtake is sound.

[Thornyone]

Not directly relevant to the original question, but related. There has been a proliferation of central refuges in my neck of the woods. These seem to me to be a classic example of where infrastructure for pedestrians conficts with cyclist safety, because the resulting road lanes are now effectively too narrow to allow safe passing. In other instances, instead of a central refuge, the pavement projects into the road at a pelican crossing (and the marked cycle lane magically disappears for a few metres). However, unless a cyclist confidently moves toward the centre of the lane he/she is likely to be close-passed by motorists squeezing through the narrowing. So the cyclist’s choice is to either move towards the centre of the lane and hope that the (usually speeding) motorists don’t hit you and stay behind you, or negotiate these stretches of road on the pavement.

Another issue is that the presence of a marked cycle lane on the road often seems to be taken by motorists to mean that it is OK to drive within inches of the line and that all is fine as long as the car’s wheels don’t actually cross the line.

[Cyril Haearn]

I'm not sure everyone posting has actually looked at the link or understood the OP. It's got nothing to do with how much room to give a car or being doored. It's using a door as a visual example of how much room to give a cyclist you're overtaking, it's really got nothing to do with doors!
Whether it's enough depends on how big someone thinks a door is, it's probably better than saying 1.5m because IMO unless you're someone who measuring things frequently you're unlikely to be able to accurately gauge what 1.5m looks like.

Yes, the point that I was making (obviously not very well ) is that I don't think that many car doors are actually 1.5m. So using it as a gauge for how much room you should give when passing a cyclist isn't that helpful (for us cyclists). My example (Ford Mondeo) gives a passing room of less than 1 meter
..

Some may be wider, I do not know how wide each door type is! 2m minimum gap should always be quoted

[Tangled Metal]

If we're quibbling any 1.5m door width bit for overtaking cars then why is the inside distance for cyclists only 0.7m from kerb or parked car doors? Is 0.7m enough to prevent dooring accidents?

[brooksby]

I remember reading a blog post somewhere, which suggested that you educate motorists that "If that cyclist you are intending to overtake suddenly laid down in the road in front of you, and you couldn't steer, would you run over them? If the answer is 'Yes' then you are not passing them with enough room."

[FasterFerret]

... why is the inside distance for cyclists only 0.7m from kerb or parked car doors? Is 0.7m enough to prevent dooring accidents?

I don't think anyone is saying that 0.7m overtaking a row of parked cars is the maximum you are allowed to move out. It's good practice to avoid the door zone and be vigilant (I am always looking to see if there is actually anyone in the car - I find empty cars pose a lot less risk to overtake).

Taking the lane might be needed to ensure everybody's safety because if someone opens a door on you and you have nowhere to go, because the car behind is not leaving enough passing distance, it isn't going to end well.

So we are back once more to appropriate (car) passing (cyclist) distance...

[FasterFerret]

... I do not know how wide each door type is!

I think that's partially my point.

Referencing an object that has so many variable sizes is not helpful.
Referencing an object that people probably can't picture very well (other than envisaging, for some strange reason, opening a car door whilst overtaking a cyclist) is probably not the best thing to use.

Use something that is easier to visualise in the gap, use something a bit more consistent and I think that we will get more success in getting the message across.

Oh, and of course, if nothing is coming the other way, use the whole of the other lane to overtake!!!!!

[FasterFerret]

Not directly relevant to the original question, but related. There has been a proliferation of central refuges in my neck of the woods. These seem to me to be a classic example of where infrastructure for pedestrians conficts with cyclist safety, because the resulting road lanes are now effectively too narrow to allow safe passing. In other instances, instead of a central refuge, the pavement projects into the road at a pelican crossing (and the marked cycle lane magically disappears for a few metres). However, unless a cyclist confidently moves toward the centre of the lane he/she is likely to be close-passed by motorists squeezing through the narrowing. So the cyclist’s choice is to either move towards the centre of the lane and hope that the (usually speeding) motorists don’t hit you and stay behind you, or negotiate these stretches of road on the pavement.

Another issue is that the presence of a marked cycle lane on the road often seems to be taken by motorists to mean that it is OK to drive within inches of the line and that all is fine as long as the car’s wheels don’t actually cross the line.

Primary position or 'taking the lane' is what is needed.

There is a really good video on YouTube aimed at educating driving instructors:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJHXzt7TC2k

1min 45s

"As instructors it is really important that we make pupils aware" Amen to that!

[FasterFerret]

"The standard width of a grand piano is also about 5' "

http://www.bluebookofpianos.com/types.html

We recommend that you leave the width of a...

Grand Piano

between you and the cyclist.

[Tangled Metal]

My point about 0.7m inside gap is that IMHO you should give parked cars more space and indeed take the lane. There's a few rows of parked cars on my commute and you can't see far enough to be sure there's nobody in a car capable of having it open by the time you get there.

The gap between cyclist and the row of parked cars should he sufficient to ensure you have your space on the road. That way you're either completely clear of all car doors or you can guarantee no overtaking car will prevent any sudden movement away from an opening car door. The first option is best of course. To me that means taking primary. We should all take primary where there's parked cars.

BTW what's the motorcycle take on this?

[thirdcrank]

... BTW what's the motorcycle take on this?

I don't think motorcycles are perceived as delaying traffic. There are all sorts of reasons why some drivers don't like motorcycles and their riders, but causing a hold-up isn't one of them.

[mjr]

"The standard width of a grand piano is also about 5' "

http://www.bluebookofpianos.com/types.html

We recommend that you leave the width of a...

Grand Piano

between you and the cyclist.

Grrr now I've tubular bells in my head!