...or this could happen to you:


Click that link to watch a graphic video of somebody who gets doored and is flung into the path of oncoming traffic.

And now a question for those in local councils, including the otherwise bike-friendly City of Sydney - what are your plans for removing all door-zone bike lanes? It is a cheap thing to do as it requires only paint, and so should be able to be achieved very quickly.

Views: 2127

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Dont necessarily look at those lanes as a "MUST ride here" type of thing...


The trouble is that this is exactly what many motorists think they mean, even though that isn't the case (unless the lane is signposted as a bicycle lane, which nearly all are not).


That road above (posted by Bill Parker) is much better. I particularly like that the bike logos are in the centre of the lane, not right at the left hand side. Great to hear that CoS is doing this work too.

If there is a white sign with a picture of a black bike with the word "LANE" under it, that is what it means. You must ride in the lane where practical.

Of course some may argue that risk of mortal death is not terribly practical.

I think it totally depends on your speed whether it is safer to ride in the door zone or in the lane. Can't agree with any assertions like "never ride in a bike lane in the door zone" etc.


At lower speeds you have more time to react to an open door, and the consequences of an impact will be less.


Moving out into the lane usually means traffic will pass closer to you, which is a risk in itself. Getting hit from behind is a fairly common way people get injured unfortunately.


I think it would be far better to have the bike lane between the footpath and the car parking as Colin suggested. I reckon this would reduce the risk of dooring by about 90% - all cars have a driver but only about 1 in 10 will have a passenger.

It does however leave you with nowhere to go unless you can hop the gutter onto the footpath

Makes you feel sick... I've been so close so many times.

The driver couldn't have timed it better if he (or she) had tried.  It's almost as if they waited and flung the door open as hard as they could.

"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" should be seen as an admission of guilt, not a defence. It is the responsibility of each driver to be aware of their surroundings, including other road users. Unfortunately, that responsibility seems to be overlooked all too often, including by the police when investigating collisions (very rarely are they truly 'accidents').

At speed


Don't ride in the door zone at speed.

Not really. You can be travelling slowly, have someone open a door beside you and still end up under a car as you take evasive action. It's not just about colliding with the door...

if you're travelling slowly wouldn't it be better to hit the door than take evasive action?

assuming you have not kept an awareness that there was room for said manouvre

Very possibly. Although our natural instinct is usually to avoid rather than collide with something.

Lack of speed won't stop you sprawling to the right when you stop.  Its just random unless you get your right foot down in time. 


Also the door can open as you pass, and push you over, or the door can open as you pass, snag your left bar, which turns the bars left, which due to the way counter steering works, sprawls you to the right if there is any motion left.

Franklin you said: "if you're travelling slowly wouldn't it be better to hit the door, than take evasive action?"

If you were travelling slowly you wouldn't hit the door, you'd perhaps bump it or get bumped, but you should be travelling at a speed where you can simply just grab the brakes and put your foot down.


And no you shouldn't take evasive action, if there is space to take evasive action you shouldn't be in the door zone in the first place.


Default riding position should be out of the door zone.


© 2019   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service