Lane placement and lisc requirements in Texas
Road Warrior
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,892
Likes: 3
From: New Hampshire
Both MSF and MOST courses discuss lane placement, but tell you to use the best placement depending upon circumstances.
Sometimes I will ride toward the right if I know that there are driveways or roads where people can't see me between the cars if I stay in the left or middle. I am then in a position where they can see my headlight (and aux lights) and I have room to move over if needed. Of course most of the roads I run are one lane each way, and if I was in two lane traffic I might chose my placement differently.
Sometimes I will ride toward the right if I know that there are driveways or roads where people can't see me between the cars if I stay in the left or middle. I am then in a position where they can see my headlight (and aux lights) and I have room to move over if needed. Of course most of the roads I run are one lane each way, and if I was in two lane traffic I might chose my placement differently.
Club Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,864
Likes: 3
From: Dallas, TX & Santa Fe, NM when I can find the time....
Ha! You sound like a lawyer!
I just emailed my contact/trainer with the state. We shall see what she responds with. I got an out of office reply, so it may take a few days.
I was told lane-sharing (riding 2-abreast...I'm not talking about lane-splitting here) is illegal and took it at face value. Maybe I am wrong? I will say this...I actually sat in on a class being taught by 2 LEO's who were also MSF Instructors...I was very surprised when they were telling the students about the TX requirements for insurance as it pertains to riding without a helmet and they were giving wrong information! Guess it goes to show...even the professionals get it wrong sometimes!
Perhaps, if there is no "specific" code addressing lane-sharing, then maybe a driver/biker can be ticketed because it falls under the umbrella as "reckless driving". In other words...riding 2-abreast in a parade at very low speeds is not necessarily reckless, but riding 2-abreast down the highway at 70 mph could very well be considered reckless. This is the best explanation I got!
Code or not, I'm all for the LEO's stopping people who do it, otherwise, a cager deciding to come into our lane and effectively move us over and endanger our lives...would be well within legal means to do it and there would be no recourse if we were to be knocked off the road. At some point, logic and good judgement should prevail over specific codes, don't you agree?
There was a bill/code put forth in 2009 regarding lane-sharing, but after reading it...it appeared it was lumping lane splitting under the title of lane sharing as well. Not sure if the bill passed. Will wait to see what my Texas DPS contact has to say on the matter because she has the code book nearby at all times.
I just emailed my contact/trainer with the state. We shall see what she responds with. I got an out of office reply, so it may take a few days.
I was told lane-sharing (riding 2-abreast...I'm not talking about lane-splitting here) is illegal and took it at face value. Maybe I am wrong? I will say this...I actually sat in on a class being taught by 2 LEO's who were also MSF Instructors...I was very surprised when they were telling the students about the TX requirements for insurance as it pertains to riding without a helmet and they were giving wrong information! Guess it goes to show...even the professionals get it wrong sometimes!
Perhaps, if there is no "specific" code addressing lane-sharing, then maybe a driver/biker can be ticketed because it falls under the umbrella as "reckless driving". In other words...riding 2-abreast in a parade at very low speeds is not necessarily reckless, but riding 2-abreast down the highway at 70 mph could very well be considered reckless. This is the best explanation I got!
Code or not, I'm all for the LEO's stopping people who do it, otherwise, a cager deciding to come into our lane and effectively move us over and endanger our lives...would be well within legal means to do it and there would be no recourse if we were to be knocked off the road. At some point, logic and good judgement should prevail over specific codes, don't you agree?
There was a bill/code put forth in 2009 regarding lane-sharing, but after reading it...it appeared it was lumping lane splitting under the title of lane sharing as well. Not sure if the bill passed. Will wait to see what my Texas DPS contact has to say on the matter because she has the code book nearby at all times.
Thread Starter
|
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,476
Likes: 5
From: Republic of Texas
Monstead you have answered my msf question with knowledge and practice. I believe your accurate on what is taught. Too many times I hear what sounds like misinformation being passed as fact, that wasn't the case with your answer. That was the reason for the what is now taught question and to confirm that things did change for the motorcycle endorsement. We see similar arguments over lane sharing, lane splitting and non tripping red lights. I have also been told things about helmets which had enough truth to be plausible but most likely weren't true. Now I wonder if the MSF course is too generic. What is the purpose of the MSF? Basic skills----traffic laws----survivability----or insurance loss prevention? Trying not to open one of them this is what I do threads. Your honest opinion on what the MSF course does and how well it does what it does from an instructors point of view.
Ha! You sound like a lawyer!
I just emailed my contact/trainer with the state. We shall see what she responds with. I got an out of office reply, so it may take a few days.
I was told lane-sharing (riding 2-abreast...I'm not talking about lane-splitting here) is illegal and took it at face value. Maybe I am wrong? I will say this...I actually sat in on a class being taught by 2 LEO's who were also MSF Instructors...I was very surprised when they were telling the students about the TX requirements for insurance as it pertains to riding without a helmet and they were giving wrong information! Guess it goes to show...even the professionals get it wrong sometimes!
Perhaps, if there is no "specific" code addressing lane-sharing, then maybe a driver/biker can be ticketed because it falls under the umbrella as "reckless driving". In other words...riding 2-abreast in a parade at very low speeds is not necessarily reckless, but riding 2-abreast down the highway at 70 mph could very well be considered reckless. This is the best explanation I got!
Code or not, I'm all for the LEO's stopping people who do it, otherwise, a cager deciding to come into our lane and effectively move us over and endanger our lives...would be well within legal means to do it and there would be no recourse if we were to be knocked off the road. At some point, logic and good judgement should prevail over specific codes, don't you agree?
There was a bill/code put forth in 2009 regarding lane-sharing, but after reading it...it appeared it was lumping lane splitting under the title of lane sharing as well. Not sure if the bill passed. Will wait to see what my Texas DPS contact has to say on the matter because she has the code book nearby at all times.
I just emailed my contact/trainer with the state. We shall see what she responds with. I got an out of office reply, so it may take a few days.
I was told lane-sharing (riding 2-abreast...I'm not talking about lane-splitting here) is illegal and took it at face value. Maybe I am wrong? I will say this...I actually sat in on a class being taught by 2 LEO's who were also MSF Instructors...I was very surprised when they were telling the students about the TX requirements for insurance as it pertains to riding without a helmet and they were giving wrong information! Guess it goes to show...even the professionals get it wrong sometimes!
Perhaps, if there is no "specific" code addressing lane-sharing, then maybe a driver/biker can be ticketed because it falls under the umbrella as "reckless driving". In other words...riding 2-abreast in a parade at very low speeds is not necessarily reckless, but riding 2-abreast down the highway at 70 mph could very well be considered reckless. This is the best explanation I got!
Code or not, I'm all for the LEO's stopping people who do it, otherwise, a cager deciding to come into our lane and effectively move us over and endanger our lives...would be well within legal means to do it and there would be no recourse if we were to be knocked off the road. At some point, logic and good judgement should prevail over specific codes, don't you agree?
There was a bill/code put forth in 2009 regarding lane-sharing, but after reading it...it appeared it was lumping lane splitting under the title of lane sharing as well. Not sure if the bill passed. Will wait to see what my Texas DPS contact has to say on the matter because she has the code book nearby at all times.
Tourer
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
98% of the time I"m in the left 1/3 of the lane, almost hugging the line. It allows me to typically see whats going on several cars in front of me instead of just one. It also establishes that this is my lane, I don't have any cagers trying to lane share with me when I'm hugging the road. I think it also makes me more visible to others on the road in normal situations.
When I see a situation where I don't think someone can see me, you bet I"m on the break and moving to where they can, but it's just for a few seconds until I'm threw and then I'm back to the line.
When I see a situation where I don't think someone can see me, you bet I"m on the break and moving to where they can, but it's just for a few seconds until I'm threw and then I'm back to the line.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,820
Likes: 6,614
From: Northern California
I'm usually in the left 1/3 of my lane, but it's variable.
The California DMV book from 40 years ago said to avoid the center and ride where the car and truck tires roll. But the roads back then weren't a line of ruts, potholes, and patches from vehicle traffic and vehicles don't leak like they used to when they had zerk fittings. So I go where it looks cleanest and safest.
I'll listen to California tell me where to ride just as much as I'll listen to them tell me how to balance a budget.
The California DMV book from 40 years ago said to avoid the center and ride where the car and truck tires roll. But the roads back then weren't a line of ruts, potholes, and patches from vehicle traffic and vehicles don't leak like they used to when they had zerk fittings. So I go where it looks cleanest and safest.
I'll listen to California tell me where to ride just as much as I'll listen to them tell me how to balance a budget.
Elite HDF Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,759
Likes: 1
From: Republic of Texas
As for lane sharing, we occasionally will do so on Patriot Guard missions with the big flag bikes escorting the family and the coach carrying the Fallen. When I run a mission, I only select riders with whom I have absolute confidence in their capabilities. If I see amateur moves like brake lights while cornering, I assume the rider was either never taught how to ride or has forgotten (or is ignoring) the principals of static and kinetic friction. In any case, they have no place near my Soldiers' families.
Last edited by Shrug; Feb 28, 2011 at 03:01 PM.
Cruiser
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 189
Likes: 4
From: Kansas
The Handbook clearly shows and teaches there are 3 lane positions for a mc. It's even on the test.
We do tell students the center is usually not the best place to ride as that area is generally slippery. I've not heard anyone use the word NEVER as your Instructor did. Personally, I avoid using the words never and always because things are rarely absolute.
I went through the training in October (I'm a newb) and the info I was taught is pretty much the latest and greatest. The curriculum is always being tweaked, so if someone went through some while back, the Instructor may not necessarily be presenting it the way it "should be" now. The material updates come to us via email and it is left up to the Instructor to login to the site and navigate to the update area then manually correct any wording that has changed. My guess is many Coaches do not do that regularly, if at all.
So, when a Rider Coach went through training along with the quality of his/her Instructor Trainers as well as the ability/willingness of the RC/Instructor to teach the material as laid out all can account for differences among Rider Coaches/Instructors.
We do tell students the center is usually not the best place to ride as that area is generally slippery. I've not heard anyone use the word NEVER as your Instructor did. Personally, I avoid using the words never and always because things are rarely absolute.
I went through the training in October (I'm a newb) and the info I was taught is pretty much the latest and greatest. The curriculum is always being tweaked, so if someone went through some while back, the Instructor may not necessarily be presenting it the way it "should be" now. The material updates come to us via email and it is left up to the Instructor to login to the site and navigate to the update area then manually correct any wording that has changed. My guess is many Coaches do not do that regularly, if at all.
So, when a Rider Coach went through training along with the quality of his/her Instructor Trainers as well as the ability/willingness of the RC/Instructor to teach the material as laid out all can account for differences among Rider Coaches/Instructors.
Road Master
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,212
Likes: 3
From: DFW Metroplex
No, not an attorney....but this subject has come up many times. Thought maybe something had changed, maybe back in September, and you being an MSF Instructor would know.
This, and of course the "iPod while riding" subject. Yes, you can wear earbuds in Texas while riding. There are no laws on the books that prohibit it.
This, and of course the "iPod while riding" subject. Yes, you can wear earbuds in Texas while riding. There are no laws on the books that prohibit it.
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Southpaw Super Glide: A Left-Hand-Drive 1979 Harley FXE Built to Fit the Rider
Verdad Gallardo
Road Captain
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 520
Likes: 1
From: Newark OH
Also in a single lane road I tend to prefer the right side of the lane as my default (providing it still gives me good visibility) Why do I do this? Because it gives a cager behind me better visibility to see hazards that I am seeing and reacting too. Many times I have noticed a cage fall back when they saw something and it gave me more options on how to react and not worry about being run over. It also gives me more of a buffer zone if an oncoming cage crosses into my lane. Some of our roads out here are narrow with no shoulders so often times cages are right on the line or over it. Now i do utilize lanes based on visibility, upcoming corners to apex them, or hazards or to make myself more visible to others. But all things being equal I'm back to the right side.
Anything else and its usually left side or guard my lane. I almost never run the center due to what others said about the oils etc in the center. However yesterday many times the center was the best since it was the dry section of the road.
Road Captain
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 724
Likes: 2
this thread is great. thanks to monstead for factual and accurate info. now for my 2 cents worth of opinion. i think the oily center is a complete myth. in the rain you are more likely to run into depressed wheel tracks with deeper water in them leading to hydroplaning. the center is likely to have less water on it.