[LRVNHQ]

> But NL is also a huge bike country. And at most roundabouts, bikes have right of way.

The fact that it's on a case-by-case basis an not actually a consistent traffic law is really awful. To add insult to injury, the only signage is usually a yield sign painted on the road that is invisible as soon as it's dark and the road is wet. And this is of course further combined with the absolute scandalous amount of cyclists who don't have lights at night and are dressed in fully dark clothes.

Roundabouts are already a traffic situation that require heightened attention as a driver, so in the interest of safety I believe crossing cyclists should yield to cars at the exit. It's too many things to worry about otherwise. But at the very least, make it the same everywhere so it's always absolutely clear to both drivers and cyclists who has the priority.

[ryukafalz]

> To add insult to injury, the only signage is usually a yield sign painted on the road

Doesn't the red asphalt denoting a cycleway also typically continue across the exits when cyclists have priority?

[martijnvds]

Generally but not always. The triangle markings on on the ground (like tiny "yield" signs) are a better indicator.

[martijnvds]

It's supposed to be consistent: within built-up areas ("bebouwde kom") bicycles have priority, outside of those areas they don't have priority.

[gpvos]

In built-up areas it's often (usually?) a bicycle lane, i.e. on the same piece of asphalt as where the cars are. In that case, bicycles always have priority. It's the same as taking a right turn: wait for bikes that go straight. Outside built-up areas it's always a separate bicycle path, often with some distance from the car lanes.

The confusion can arise inside built-up areas where there's a separate bicycle path, usually close to the car lanes.