Motorcycles may be allowed in HOV lanes? | GTAMotorcycle.com

Motorcycles may be allowed in HOV lanes?

Rehashing of a stupid (and very wrong argument).

"motorcycles in Ontario are not allowed to use them, despite taking up very little space in the road – certainly less space than a car with two people"

A single motorcycle uses maybe 2m less length on the highway than a car (which needs about 37m) and needs the same width. Only when you start riding in formation do they use significantly less space.

EDIT:
To be clear, I don't really care whether bikes are allowed in HOV or not (I probably lean towards not) but I hate it when people make stupid arguments.
 
Last edited:
HOV = High-Occupancy Vehicle, you are going to need at least 1 passenger.
 
HOV = High-Occupancy Vehicle, you are going to need at least 1 passenger.

In some states it's perfectly legal to use HOV as a motorcycle (with 1 passenger), the reasoning being it's safer to keep 2 wheeled vehicles on the go instead of stuck in stop/go conditions.
 
In some states it's perfectly legal to use HOV as a motorcycle (with 1 passenger), the reasoning being it's safer to keep 2 wheeled vehicles on the go instead of stuck in stop/go conditions.
lol you're preaching to the choir.
;) I think we should be allowed to ride Over stopped traffic if we can do it without inflicting too much damage.
 
In some states it's perfectly legal to use HOV as a motorcycle (with 1 passenger), the reasoning being it's safer to keep 2 wheeled vehicles on the go instead of stuck in stop/go conditions.

With no physical divider to the HOV lanes, it is probably one of the most dangerous places to ride. People cross the line all the time and many times don't see cars closing in on them. High closing speeds plus hard to see bikes is about as dangerous as you can get. In stop and go, sure people get knocked over occasionally, but I can only remember one rider that died while going slowly without cross traffic (at a light, a dump truck behind didn't see him and ran over him).
 
Nit picking but a Smart car is only 2 inches longer than my Goldwing so if a solo Goldie is allowed in a HOV why not a solo Smart car?

Do we need more laws, regulations and exceptions?
 
With no physical divider to the HOV lanes, it is probably one of the most dangerous places to ride. People cross the line all the time and many times don't see cars closing in on them. High closing speeds plus hard to see bikes is about as dangerous as you can get. In stop and go, sure people get knocked over occasionally, but I can only remember one rider that died while going slowly without cross traffic (at a light, a dump truck behind didn't see him and ran over him).

+1

It would be great to be able to use the HOV lanes on a bike without a passenger. But given the number of accidents I've seen with cars crossing the line and moving into the HOV lane at a snail's pace and then getting clipped by someone doing 100 km I' d say you'd see a big bump in bike accidents and fatalities. Shouldn't be that way, but that's the reality in the GTA.
 
The article seems to state that they think they have a very strong case in favour of allowing motorcycles to use the HOV with a single occupant. But I am struggling a bit to see solid points as to why it would be safer and help the flow of traffic. I certainly agree that it's probably not the safest place to be especially when its flowing at a high rate of speed and traffic in the next lane over is almost dead stopped. I'm sure it's happened to many of us where cars will just cut over without warning.

Regardless of what happens it wont bother me, but I'm trying to figure out what the arguments on both sides would be aside from the obvious.
 
When the DVP had the HOV/Games lane, it was great getting downtown. Always had to be extra cautious of the stopped traffic on the right pulling a lane change, but overall was nice to use. I made it a practice to run the left non-blocking position track though.

Safer for bikes, maybe not so much cause drivers don't care. HOV?....well we do use 50% or 100% of the vehicle seating capacity('cept for sidecars). So the argument can be made for Smartcars. Then again a green SUV can use the HOV with just the driver, HO isn't part of that equation....just an incentive to go electric? Congestion in traffic, yep bikes take up less room on the road and are easier on infrastructure(lighter than cars). So overall, sure bikes should be allowed.
 
Last edited:
+1

It would be great to be able to use the HOV lanes on a bike without a passenger. But given the number of accidents I've seen with cars crossing the line and moving into the HOV lane at a snail's pace and then getting clipped by someone doing 100 km I' d say you'd see a big bump in bike accidents and fatalities. Shouldn't be that way, but that's the reality in the GTA.

If the gov wants to do something useful, they should do a trial of those flappy plastic columns to separate the hov lanes. If/when, a crash requires moving people across, they can be held down, otherwise they beat up the cars of anyone that tries to cut across. Alternatively, with the installation of very few cameras and a little bit of manpower, a crapton of tickets could be generated (similar to redlight cameras, no points as the driver isn't identified, just tons of money).
 
This topic comes up all the time with why motorcycles should use the HOV.

And the end of the day bikes add less congestion when reaching their final destination. You can park 20 bikes in a spot that would fill 2 cars.

We are safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. We also do less damage to the road surface.

Every other City in the world understands this.
 
The article seems to state that they think they have a very strong case in favour of allowing motorcycles to use the HOV with a single occupant. But I am struggling a bit to see solid points as to why it would be safer and help the flow of traffic. I certainly agree that it's probably not the safest place to be especially when its flowing at a high rate of speed and traffic in the next lane over is almost dead stopped. I'm sure it's happened to many of us where cars will just cut over without warning.

Regardless of what happens it wont bother me, but I'm trying to figure out what the arguments on both sides would be aside from the obvious.

Just look *every* other place in the world. They all allow single-rider motorcyclists to use HOV lanes (or whatever they may be called locally).

I recall that this came up in the USA in which some state (don't recall which) was looking into banning motorcyclists from using HOV lanes, so they commissioned a study ... and that study didn't come up with the conclusion that they were looking for, it was the other way around. A motorcyclist stuck in traffic is vulnerable to getting hit from behind. A motorcyclist who is moving is (relatively) more in charge of their own destiny.

An extension of this argument also favours allowing motorcyclists to split lanes (it allows them/us to escape potential rear-ender situations). Every place in the world outside of Canada and most of the USA allows it. But, one step at a time.
 
HOV = High-Occupancy Vehicle, you are going to need at least 1 passenger.
Exceptions already exist for Green Vehicles to use HOV lanes with only the driver. Motorcycles are already allowed to use HOV lanes as long as there is a rider and a passenger.
 
I just commute in the HOV lane on the 403 daily on my bike anyways....as do pretty much every single other bike I see on the hwy in rush hour. Never have I seen 2 wheels pulled over from the HOV lane on 403. I just don't think cops really give a darn tbh.
 
.... Motorcycles are already allowed to use HOV lanes as long as there is a rider and a passenger.
:rolleyes: that's why I said, you are going to need at least 1 passenger.
 
A motorcyclist stuck in traffic is vulnerable to getting hit from behind. A motorcyclist who is moving is (relatively) more in charge of their own destiny.

An extension of this argument also favours allowing motorcyclists to split lanes (it allows them/us to escape potential rear-ender situations). Every place in the world outside of Canada and most of the USA allows it. But, one step at a time.

I do like this point and always hate sitting and watching my rear view for people who aren't paying attention.

I wont complain if it becomes legal, I would likely use it if traffic slows down, but due to my current ride choices I don't like cruising much above 110-115ish so I don't want to be a pylon either if it's flowing quickly.

So if it's not about safety and the data supports bikes in the HOV, is it just about granting special privileges that people don't like? Since there is such a small percentage of bikes on the road compared to cars I can't see it slowing things down.

Interesting stuff I guess we will see what happens
 
It IS at least partly about safety. It's been shown to be safer to let motorcyclists use HOV lanes (and split lanes, but I digress).

Nowhere is lane splitting advisable at highway speed. It's only for traffic-jam and slow conditions. But, this is a different discussion.

As for HOV usage, the one thing to be aware of is the risk of someone in the jammed adjacent lanes changing lanes into the HOV lane (whether in a permissible place or otherwise) in front of an approaching rider. This situation killed a rider on the 403 this past summer. Whether HOV lane or otherwise ... if I am moving in a lane that's next to a lane of stopped traffic, I am on high alert and definitely not interested in maximizing that speed difference.
 
With no physical divider to the HOV lanes, it is probably one of the most dangerous places to ride. People cross the line all the time and many times don't see cars closing in on them. High closing speeds plus hard to see bikes is about as dangerous as you can get.

My thoughts exactly as well.

The lady that was killed on the 401 this summer was this exact scenario. Yes, she wasn't riding in an HOV lane, but it was effectively the same thing - riding at high speed in the fast lane, car pulled out in front of her from the adjacent lane, the rest is history.
 

Back
Top Bottom