Interstate Highways Safer?

[erickson9502]

We all have to get on the interstate at sometime or the other. You can make great time on them but are they safer? I do not get warm and fuzzy riding on them but for autos they are safer mile for mile. Does the same hold for bikes?

[glennhendricks]

But a close friend was lane changed by a tandem semi on the superslab in Nebraska. The Road King is not built for off road and he was torn up pretty badly, hit helmet and gear probably saved his life.

I don't like the interstates, even though I have to commute on one, because many of the drivers seem to zone out (hell, I had a bad moment this morning) on the slab.

Two lanes seem to engage the drivers more.:dunno

[jimfastcar]

I do not have the stats to back me up on this, but I have always wondered if it is not a question of probablility, in other words, the odds of being in a plane crash are pretty slim, but if you are in one, you can usually KYAGB. Same on Interstate, odds are less than two lane roads, but if an "event", outcome usually much more serious.
Interested in data if someone has it....

[Greenwald]

I do not have the stats to back me up on this, but I have always wondered if it is not a question of probablility, in other words, the odds of being in a plane crash are pretty slim, but if you are in one, you can usually KYAGB. Same on Interstate, odds are less than two lane roads, but if an "event", outcome usually much more serious.
Interested in data if someone has it....

Not bad logic, Jim.

Interstates are far safer than state roads, city streets or rural routes, due to:

1. Multiple lanes to handle changing traffic volume
2. A passing lane when the need exists
3. Multiple lanes for evasive action
4. Run-off shoulders on both sides (again for evasion, or breakdown)
5. Median seperation of a diverse traffic flow
6. Collision barriers / energy-absorbing abutments / mandated maintenance of painted lines
7. Limited access points (On-ramps and Off-Ramps) to control traffic conflict
8. Radius of curve that has been calculated for the posted speed (+10%)
9. Obstructions to visibility controlled by statute
10. No mandatory stopping (i.e. traffic signals, stop signs) unless in an urban area

Now the bad news - due to higher speeds, when something does happen, it is usually severe and with a dire outcome.

But mile for mile, especially on a motorcycle, super-slabbing is safer than tangling with soccer mom at every other intersection in town.

Safe Riding!

[flash412]

We all have to get on the interstate at sometime or the other. You can make great time on them but are they safer? I do not get warm and fuzzy riding on them but for autos they are safer mile for mile. Does the same hold for bikes?For me, the threat assessment requirements and the revenue-enhancement-detection requirements of two-lane "blue highways" are both much much lower, making for a more relaxed ride. This means I can ride much further in a day with less stress OFF of interstates than I can on interstates. During the periods between towns on a blue highway, I can almost totally relax and ANY vehicle rivets my attention. On the interstate, I am surrounded by bogies almost all the time. On a blue highway, when I get to a town, the fact that I have been riding relaxed means that I can be VERY sharp with my assessments and visual surveys. On the interstate, it is all the same and fatigue sets in.

I saw more revenue enhancement officers on thirty miles of I-70 than I saw in nearly 1000 miles on US-412. I make MUCH better time and ride much more relaxed across Oklahoma on US-412 than I do across Kansas on I-70.

Personally, I am a whole lot safer OFF the intestate for long distances than I am ON the interstate. Maybe that's just me. Maybe not.

[Easy]

I'd have to say it depends on the interstate, and what you're comparing it to. I've ridden during rush hour on some of the interstates in L. A., and I would stack them up there with some of the unsafest roads I've been on.

It just depends.

I'd be interested in hearing what some of our California friends think.

Easy :german

[osbornk]

Not bad logic, Jim.

Interstates are far safer than state roads, city streets or rural routes, due to:

1. Multiple lanes to handle changing traffic volume
2. A passing lane when the need exists
3. Multiple lanes for evasive action
4. Run-off shoulders on both sides (again for evasion, or breakdown)
5. Median seperation of a diverse traffic flow
6. Collision barriers and energy-absorbing abutments
7. Limited access points (On-ramps and Off-Ramps) to control traffic conflict
8. Radius of curve that has been calculated for the posted speed (+10%)
9. Obstructions to visibility controlled by statute
10. No mandatory stopping (i.e. traffic signals, stop signs) unless in an urban area

Now the bad news - due to higher speeds, when something does happen, it is usually severe and with a dire outcome.

But mile for mile, especially on a motorcycle, super-slabbing is safer than tangling with soccer mom at every other intersection in town.

Safe Riding!

I've been riding for 40+ years and i agree. Most motorcycle accidents have one or more of "vehicle pulled out in front of, vehicle turned left in front of, ran off the road in a curve & hit a tree(or guardrail, etc), alcohol suspected, high speed involved, hit a patch of gravel, hit a deer". Some of this stuff happens on interstates but most are on local roads.

[roy]

Since most multi-vehicle accidents occur at intersections the super slabs are technically safer.

[BubbaZanetti]

Since most multi-vehicle accidents occur at intersections the super slabs are technically safer.

fewer variables.

as someone with little vacation time, aside from leisurely "funemployment" trips. i usually slab my way to all rallies, etc. i always feel safer, if more bored on them

[SIBUD]

This of course has no relationship to reality but, I "feel" safer on the slab because of the options available, even if I"m not.

[PUDGYPAINTGUY]

[QUOTE=Greenwald;306391]Not bad logic, Jim.

Interstates are far safer than state roads, city streets or rural routes, due to:

1. Multiple lanes to handle changing traffic volume
2. A passing lane when the need exists
3. Multiple lanes for evasive action
4. Run-off shoulders on both sides (again for evasion, or breakdown)
5. Median seperation of a diverse traffic flow
6. Collision barriers and energy-absorbing abutments
7. Limited access points (On-ramps and Off-Ramps) to control traffic conflict
8. Radius of curve that has been calculated for the posted speed (+10%)
9. Obstructions to visibility controlled by statute
10. No mandatory stopping (i.e. traffic signals, stop signs) unless in an urban area



These are reasons why I love interstates when having to cover ground in a car or on a bike. Not as scenic though if miles are primary concern who cares. Time in the saddle is fun even if the scenery is not premium.

[glennhendricks]

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

Nothing about interstates but some interesting factoids on motorcycle accidents

[Bob_M]

A school of thought in modern traffic engineering is that traffic circles (roundabouts) are more safe when no signs direct traffic. No yield signs, no stop signs, nothing. The theory is that without the guiding hand directing behavior drivers actually pay attention and make decisions based on what is safe and reasonable.

Freeways are engineered to be so safe that people can be comfortable not paying attention. I have seen eaters, cell phone talkers, soup slurpers, tooth brushers and my favorite: readers driving down the "safe" freeway because it demands so little of their attention (usually) that they feel at ease multi-tasking.

Freeways are safer, but IMHO freeway drivers are less safe, and isn't that what really determines safety?

[DarrylRi]

Freeways are engineered to be so safe that people can be comfortable not paying attention. I have seen eaters, cell phone talkers, soup slurpers, tooth brushers and my favorite: readers driving down the "safe" freeway because it demands so little of their attention (usually) that they feel at ease multi-tasking.

My favorite (if you can call it that) was a VW microbus I came up on in the right lane of US-101 in Thousand Oaks (not too far from LA). He was doing about 45 when the freeway was pretty clear, and was weaving in his lane a bit. I moved over 2 lanes to pass him. As I went by, I looked over to see what was going on: he was steering with his knees while he played his guitar. Didn't catch the tune, however.

[Plainsscout]

I have had bad experiences on both. If 2 lanes are safer it is probably due to decreased traffic. The more bullets shot at you make it more likely that eventually one will have your name on it.

The Zone out drivers on interstates make me nervous. On 2 lanes everyone seems to be a little bit more on the ball -- after all you may get a head on if you are asleep at the wheel.

[osbornk]

The Zone out drivers on interstates make me nervous. On 2 lanes everyone seems to be a little bit more on the ball -- after all you may get a head on if you are asleep at the wheel.

But the drunks and little old ladies in Buicks seem to prefer the 2 lane roads.

[FatChance]

We live almost 200 miles to the nearest Interstate highway, so we usually drive on one less than 100 miles a year and ride on one less than that. Personally, I avoid them whenever possible because they are boring.

[screwtop]

I would have to say that I feel safer on the interstates for many of the reasons already mentioned. I like the twisty country roads as much as anyone else, and they are a nice departure from the slab when on a trip, but from what I've experienced these roads can also be frustrating, especially when you get stuck behind a tri-axle hauling coal up a series of ascending switchbacks. The opposing traffic and blind corners make passing risky, and some are more prone than others to get impatient and take the risk to pass.

The other thing I like about some of the well maintained interstates if the game fences that help keep critters off the road, and as has been said, the extra room to take evasive action.

[RichardCook]

What the highway engineers (http://www.transportation.org/) have told me:

Dividing traffic and eliminating left turns are probably the most significant factors in slab safety but there are other elements as well.

Keeping opposing traffic physically separated by the use of wide ditches or solid concrete barriers is critical to safety. Indeed the easiest way to make a highway safer is to divide it with barriers. Virtually all interstate highway has some physical separation to prevent vehicles moving in one direction from entering the lanes containing opposed traffic. (BTW, roundabouts are safer than 4-way-stop intersections for the same reason.)

After early (bad) experience with left-hand exists, these have been eliminated in new construction. Right lane is slow lane just about everywhere.

Slabs generally have good sight lines and substantial shoulders that allow for anticipation and avoidance. The grades are controlled by standard. The modern interstates have design speeds 120 kph or more with exceptions for hilly areas... but basically the designs eliminate unannounced tight curves.

Signage is carefully controlled and consistent so that there is plenty of notice about approaching exits and merges. Nearly all exits are right hand (there are few exceptions).

The painted line system and reflectors for entrances and exits are carefully maintained across the system.

Slow moving vehicles and pedestrians are prohibited from interstates so that traffic tends to move at a constant speed.

In an unfamiliar area, I would MUCH rather ride on an interstate than any municipal or county road.

[GRANT63RT]

When I took the MSF class 10 years ago the instructor claimed that statistics prove the safest place to be is in the left hand lane of an interstate travelling a little faster than the traffic flow. The theory is you only have to worry about cars on one side or ahead of you. The right hand lane is dangerous because of people getting on and off at the ramps. I don't know of any data to back this up but I've heard others make the same claim.

I don't know if this is corect info or just another urban myth but I do spend alot of time in left hand lanes travelling faster than traffic. :evil I have a feeling someday I may have to explain this theory to a state trooper. I'll report back if he buys it. ;)

[glennhendricks]

a little faster than the traffic flow =/= Warp 7 just in case it comes up.:stick

[26667]

when i took the msf back in the stone-age the instructor suggested that by passing frequently you were constantly approaching "new" traffic on "your terms" and not giving them a chance to get used to your presence and then forget about you.

I kinda try to follow that advice when it's practicable and keep looking for the holes in the traffic where I can be the furthest away from the greatest number of cars. Of course that mostly means passing on the right on the expressways and interstates. There's usually someone practicing for the Shriners' Parade in the left lane.

[rfisher]

When I took the MSF class 10 years ago the instructor claimed that statistics prove the safest place to be is in the left hand lane of an interstate travelling a little faster than the traffic flow. The theory is you only have to worry about cars on one side or ahead of you. The right hand lane is dangerous because of people getting on and off at the ramps. I don't know of any data to back this up but I've heard others make the same claim.

I don't know if this is corect info or just another urban myth but I do spend alot of time in left hand lanes travelling faster than traffic. :evil I have a feeling someday I may have to explain this theory to state trooper. I'll report back if he buys it. ;)


Note that this was the instructor's opinion/statistics, not part of the old MSF MRC/RSS curriculum. It is also not part of the new BRC curriculum. The MSF courses do not make absolute statements about the rider's best lane position, speed, etc. Rather, they recommend varying lane, lane position, and speed to meet conditions.

Roy F.

[jdmetzger]

Generally I feel better on the slab than through in town traffic, but my opinion is changing, a bit. I took a new job and my commute has changed quite a bit. The weather hasn't yet been bike-friendly for work (hopefully next Monday). I go through one choke point where traffic backs up a bit, and then I pass two other on/off ramps area that slow traffic down. Just about every morning traffic suddenly slows and someone nearly rear-ends me because they aren't paying attention. Yesterday I cut over into the birm to give the person behind me more space; I had plenty of clearance for myself, though. One eye must stay on the rearview. I keep thinking about how this is going to go on the bike; I guess we'll see. Of course, if I go in 15 minutes earlier (I've been running a few minutes late), it will greatly cut down on traffic.

My other option would be to go through town; far slower, and LOTS of intersections and people turning left across traffic.

One scary thing I'm also noticing is lots of road hazards. I actually saw an 18" piece of wood (a log about 8" in diameter, I'd say) in the road get hit by a semi. I swear it fell from the overpass, but I can't figure out how (safety fencing and lots of traffic would witness it). It scared me a bit as I thought about how that would have gone if I was riding the bike at highway speeds. :uhoh