Bicycle Commuting

[Pointedstick]

The real problem is the lack of bicycle-appropriate lanes, IMHO. On the street, traffic moves too fast and motorists get pissed off. On the sidewalk, bicycles can be dangerous to pedestrians (personal experience with this). By contrast, I never feel any danger from scooterers on the sidewalk, probably because the vehicle in question is smaller and slower.

[MediumTex]

Im a bicycle commuter and when Im in the road I get yelled at by drivers to get out of the road, and when I ride on the sidewalk I get yelled at by pedestrians to get off the sidewalk. This type of treatment is why a lot of bicyclists have a devil may care attitude toward rules and regulations when riding. Its hard to give respect, when you dont get any.

My perception as a driver is that it is disrespectful to bring a vehicle onto the roadway that is not equipped to safely travel along that roadway.

If my car had a maximum speed of 13-17mph and I took it out on roads with speed limits of 35, 40, and 45mph, it would be irresponsible of me (and probably even negligent if it led to an accident) and I wouldn't expect other motorists to respect my decision to place all motorists I encountered at risk because I thought that 13-17mph was the right speed for me.

I fully agree that it sucks that in some situations a bicyclist can't ride comfortably on either the sidewalk OR the street, but why would that be the problem of all of the drivers in cars who are more or less traveling at the same speed?  Wouldn't it be the bicyclist's responsibility to either find roads on which he can ride safely or lobby his local government to build dedicated bike lanes?

As I said before, the basic issue to me is whether ANY vehicle should be allowed to travel on a roadway for more than a short distance if the vehicle isn't designed to travel at or near the speed of traffic on that roadway.  Thus, for a road with a speed limit of 35mph, I would say that no wheelchairs, skateboards, scooters, riding lawnmowers, roller skates, OR bicycles should be allowed because none of these vehicles are designed to be operated in a safe manner when sharing a roadway with cars that are moving so much faster.

[Gumby]

I fully agree that it sucks that in some situations a bicyclist can't ride comfortably on either the sidewalk OR the street

There's no real standard, but in high-population areas, and cities, it's usually illegal for bicycles to be operated on sidewalks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_la ... crosswalks

So, some municipalities treat cyclists as pedestrians but most municipalities treat bicycles as vehicles (i.e. most sidewalk riding is illegal). Nevertheless, cyclists generally have a "right" to use the road no matter what the sidewalk options are.

[Austen Heller]

My perception as a driver is that it is disrespectful to bring a vehicle onto the roadway that is not equipped to safely travel along that roadway.

If my car had a maximum speed of 13-17mph and I took it out on roads with speed limits of 35, 40, and 45mph, it would be irresponsible of me (and probably even negligent if it led to an accident) and I wouldn't expect other motorists to respect my decision to place all motorists I encountered at risk because I thought that 13-17mph was the right speed for me.

I fully agree that it sucks that in some situations a bicyclist can't ride comfortably on either the sidewalk OR the street, but why would that be the problem of all of the drivers in cars who are more or less traveling at the same speed?  Wouldn't it be the bicyclist's responsibility to either find roads on which he can ride safely or lobby his local government to build dedicated bike lanes?

As I said before, the basic issue to me is whether ANY vehicle should be allowed to travel on a roadway for more than a short distance if the vehicle isn't designed to travel at or near the speed of traffic on that roadway.  Thus, for a road with a speed limit of 35mph, I would say that no wheelchairs, skateboards, scooters, riding lawnmowers, roller skates, OR bicycles should be allowed because none of these vehicles are designed to be operated in a safe manner when sharing a roadway with cars that are moving so much faster.

As someone who rides a bike more often than driving a car, I disagree strongly with your position.  The speed limit on your road is not the speed which you are entitled to travel at all times...it's the LIMIT.  Adjust your speeds downward as needed, to avoid running over crawling babies, crossing sheep, bicyclists, or whatever.  If I ride a bike for 20 or so miles, I just saved the gallon of gas that my car would have burned; that's 1 gallon of gas (or around 10 pounds) of stuff that I didn't just spew into the atmosphere for everyone in the world to deal with.  Now sure there's a carbon footprint for the food I'll have to eat to replace the calories I burned, but I bet it's less than 10 pounds.  My view is that having cyclists among us is a net positive for us all, even in light of the safety risks (which are almost entirely borne by the cyclists).

Cyclists should definitely try to choose roads with bike lanes, but sometimes there is just no option, and you have to ride for a while in the road (or as close to the white line as possible).  Give 'em a brake!  I pay my fair share of taxes, so I find the "roads are only for cars" argument pretty frustrating. 

[Xan]

Operating a slow, entirely vulnerable vehicle on roads which were not designed for them, right alongside giant pieces of metal moving really fast, is just plain not a good idea.  You're daring people to kill you.  Brilliant!

[MediumTex]

My perception as a driver is that it is disrespectful to bring a vehicle onto the roadway that is not equipped to safely travel along that roadway.

If my car had a maximum speed of 13-17mph and I took it out on roads with speed limits of 35, 40, and 45mph, it would be irresponsible of me (and probably even negligent if it led to an accident) and I wouldn't expect other motorists to respect my decision to place all motorists I encountered at risk because I thought that 13-17mph was the right speed for me.

I fully agree that it sucks that in some situations a bicyclist can't ride comfortably on either the sidewalk OR the street, but why would that be the problem of all of the drivers in cars who are more or less traveling at the same speed?  Wouldn't it be the bicyclist's responsibility to either find roads on which he can ride safely or lobby his local government to build dedicated bike lanes?

As I said before, the basic issue to me is whether ANY vehicle should be allowed to travel on a roadway for more than a short distance if the vehicle isn't designed to travel at or near the speed of traffic on that roadway.  Thus, for a road with a speed limit of 35mph, I would say that no wheelchairs, skateboards, scooters, riding lawnmowers, roller skates, OR bicycles should be allowed because none of these vehicles are designed to be operated in a safe manner when sharing a roadway with cars that are moving so much faster.

As someone who rides a bike more often than driving a car, I disagree strongly with your position.  The speed limit on your road is not the speed which you are entitled to travel at all times...it's the LIMIT.  Adjust your speeds downward as needed, to avoid running over crawling babies, crossing sheep, bicyclists, or whatever.  If I ride a bike for 20 or so miles, I just saved the gallon of gas that my car would have burned; that's 1 gallon of gas (or around 10 pounds) of stuff that I didn't just spew into the atmosphere for everyone in the world to deal with.  Now sure there's a carbon footprint for the food I'll have to eat to replace the calories I burned, but I bet it's less than 10 pounds.  My view is that having cyclists among us is a net positive for us all, even in light of the safety risks (which are almost entirely borne by the cyclists).

Cyclists should definitely try to choose roads with bike lanes, but sometimes there is just no option, and you have to ride for a while in the road (or as close to the white line as possible).  Give 'em a brake!  I pay my fair share of taxes, so I find the "roads are only for cars" argument pretty frustrating.

Don't misunderstand what I am saying. 

Bicycles are a great form of transportation and the world would probably be a better place if more of us rode bicycles.

However, if the configuration of our roadways is based on the design concept that cars will be the main vehicles using them and the cars will all be traveling at more or less the same speed, the introduction of another type of vehicle traveling at much slower speeds can be problematic.

I agree that bicycles have the RIGHT to be out there.  What I'm suggesting is that from a safety perspective it might not be a good idea for bicycles to be out there sharing the road with larger vehicles traveling at much higher rates of speed.

How would you feel if there was a car driving down a 45mph road at 17mph while you were going with the flow of traffic at 40-45mph?  Would you consider this to be a safety hazard?  I would, and it's not because I have anything against going 17mph.

To take the logic you are offering a step further, why shouldn't bikes be permitted on interstate highways?  Why not tell people traveling at 70mph that they will just need to slow down and make room for any bicycles they may encounter?  This seems like an obvious safety issue as well, even though on interstate highways it might be less dangerous for a bicycle than on busy city streets because there are no turns or intersections to deal with.

I just think that traffic is far safer if all vehicle operators can assume that more or less all other vehicles that they encounter will be traveling within a speed range that is based on the speed limit on that road.

Another thing that troubles me about bicycles on roadways is that they do not have to meet any of the requirements that other vehicles must meet to be "street legal."  Thus, bicycles are not required to have a standardized set of lights, signals, and other items that automobiles and other licensed vehicles must have, which means that as a driver I don't really even know what I need to be looking for if I'm trying to make sure I don't run over a bicyclist.  Some bicyclists are very easy to see and some are not.

I'm not arguing that bicyclists don't have a right to ride on the roadways.  What I am arguing is that it just might not be a very good idea for the bicyclists and the cars to be out there together sharing the same space.  I don't want to hit anyone in my car any more than I want someone to hit me when I am riding my bicycle.

Think about it like this: If there were a series of bike paths and bike lanes that were the width of a single lane on a regular street and they were used heavily by bicyclists, how do you think those bicyclists would feel if I drove my car down these bike paths?  What about an ATV?  How about a motorcycle?  They wouldn't like it.  Why not?  Because it wouldn't be safe.  That's all I'm saying.

[doodle]

Ive been riding a bike as my exclusive form of transporation for about 6 years now. I think after a while one just adapts to the traffice situations and learns how to survive on the roads. I ride pretty agressively and havent had a single accident with a car yet. Maybe my day is coming, but it is surprising how nimble a bike can be if the rider is skilled. I regularly ride up the wrong side of streets, hop up and down off sidewalks, cut through allys and parking lots etc. etc. to find the best and safest line from point A to B. I find it vastly more entertaining than being confined in a boxy car as one moves through and around traffic rather than in it. Even riding a motorcycle was too constricting for me and so i gave that up as well.

This video has some of the most amazing hair raising bicycle footage ive ever seen filmed. Now, these guys are definitely over agressive and dangerous (much more so than I am) but one is able to get an idea of how a skilled bicyclist can weave through traffic. It is quite an amazing dance...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0npCFw9TEnA&sns=em

[Pointedstick]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0npCFw9TEnA&sns=em

For the benefit of those who might otherwise be inclined not to watch this video: the guy at the 1:50 mark has a sweet Tavor.

In general though, my impression so far is of a bunch of rude assholes whose reckless behavior is going to get themselves killed.

[doodle]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0npCFw9TEnA&sns=em

For the benefit of those who might otherwise be inclined not to watch this video: the guy at the 1:50 mark has a sweet Tavor.

In general though, my impression so far is of a bunch of rude assholes whose reckless behavior is going to get themselves killed.

Yes, rude and reckless....but to my eyes the timing and skill is a thing of beauty. Its even more amazing when one considers that many of these guys are out there with no brakes.

Also, I have learned that agressive riding can be a survival tactic as well. Motorists generally notice crazy erractic bicyclists a lot more than the quiet calm guy poking along down the side of the street. Sometimes they give these guys a lot more extra room because they have no idea where the hell he is going or what kind of drugs he might be on. As they say...some times the best defense is a good offense.

[Pointedstick]

Also, I have learned that agressive riding can be a survival tactic as well. Motorists generally notice crazy erractic bicyclists a lot more than the quiet calm guy poking along down the side of the street. Sometimes they give these guys a lot more extra room because they have no idea where the hell he is going or what kind of drugs he might be on. As they say...some times the best defense is a good offense.

I guess... it just seems so rude. I mean, people would probably give me a wide berth on the sidewalk if I acted like an aggressive jerk, too. I get what you're saying though. It's an imperfect solution to a real problem. Sad that it's a solution that's likely to result in a net increase in societal blood pressure.

[Gumby]

In general though, my impression so far is of a bunch of rude assholes whose reckless behavior is going to get themselves killed.

Additionally, the video documents damage to private property — such as cyclists breaking car mirrors [@ 1m:49sec] — as well as endangerment to pedestrians who legally have the right of way at all times. The video seems to glorify moments of pedestrians who are totally freaked out from cyclists almost hitting them.

[MediumTex]

In general though, my impression so far is of a bunch of rude assholes whose reckless behavior is going to get themselves killed.

Additionally, the video documents damage to private property — such as cyclists breaking car mirrors [@ 1m:49sec] — as well as endangerment to pedestrians who legally have the right of way at all times. The video seems to glorify moments of pedestrians who are totally freaked out from cyclists almost hitting them.

Really, it's little more than a shocking display of bicycle hooliganism.

[doodle]

In general though, my impression so far is of a bunch of rude assholes whose reckless behavior is going to get themselves killed.

Additionally, the video documents damage to private property — such as cyclists breaking car mirrors [@ 1m:49sec] — as well as endangerment to pedestrians who legally have the right of way at all times. The video seems to glorify moments of pedestrians who are totally freaked out from cyclists almost hitting them.

Really, it's little more than a shocking display of bicycle hooliganism.

Yes, but as I said...difficult to give respect, when you dont get any. This fellow trys to make a point of that by endangering his own life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ&sns=em

[Pointedstick]

Yes, but as I said...difficult to give respect, when you dont get any. This fellow trys to make a point of that by endangering his own life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ&sns=em

*HUGE FACEPALM*

That guy is an idiot. So the bike lane isn't always perfectly clear. Well guess what, there are often obstructions in the road too. Does that entitle drivers to drive on the sidewalk or the median? No, they slow down and navigate around them like sane human beings, or else they incur damage to their vehicles and possibly their bodies. If a truck is unloading stuff in the right lane and I plow into it, who's fault is that? I mean, seriously.

And antagonizing a cop is about the dumbest thing I can imagine. That guy is talking back to the cop, using profanity, acting spoiled and entitled. Knowing NYC cops, he's lucky he didn't get a taser sandwich or a couple of new holes in his body.

That's my problem with folks like this. They act like the world should work the way they want it to rather than dealing with it the way it is. That attitude can lead you to do tremendously stupid things, like riding your bike against traffic, expecting your roadway to be perfectly clear, and talking back to cops.

"The bike lane isn't perfectly clear even though the streets and sidewalks aren't either.... waaa waaa! I got a relatively small ticket for riding on the sidewalk rather than dealing with the imperfection of the bike lane... waaa waaa! This cop is being passive and reasonable but I shouldn't even be in this dumb situation... waaa waaa!"

Get real, dirty hippy!

All right, that's my daily output of stogy conservatism all poured into a single post. 

[Kriegsspiel]

LOL.... that was awesome 

Best bike lanes ever.... Germany. In most places, there is a curb separating them from the street, and a little mini curb separating them from the sidewalk.

[WiseOne]

I did find that NYC has published cyclist safety data. They have useful heat maps that show you where the most dangerous areas for cyclists are and which kinds of cyclists are most at risk (overwhelmingly male):

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/p ... lities.pdf

Thanks for this Gumby!  Very interesting reading.  I agree with MediumTex completely about bikes taking car lanes on roads with speeds > 30 mph.  If nothing else, getting rear-ended by someone who isn't paying attention would not end well for you. 

Bike lanes are often used as temporary parking, and as a right turn lane at intersections.  I take this as disrespect by drivers for bicyclists, but either way your only choice is  to swerve into traffic.  It's especially bad when a car pulls in front of you and then slams on the brakes.  So I sympathize A BIT with the guy who opted to take the sidewalk in preference to getting rear-ended or side-swiped by a car, but in general I don't consider bike lanes on a busy road to be any safer than just taking the right lane.  (Curbs protecting the bike lane would be great!)

So now I'm looking seriously at owning both a scooter and a bike:  bike for the riverside commute and recreational riding, and scooter for everything else.  At least as long as you can ride one on the sidewalk.  The more I thought about it the more I realized it's like the holy grail for one of the toughest transportation issues in Manhattan:  getting across town!  Unless you're willing to shell out $20-$30 for a cab (each way), it takes 1 - 1.5 hours by any other means.

Can I ask any scooter riders here:
- What's the longest distance you can comfortably cover on a scooter?
- How are they to ride in the rain?
- Are downhills manageable with the front & rear brakes?

[MediumTex]

Can I ask any scooter riders here:
- What's the longest distance you can comfortably cover on a scooter?
- How are they to ride in the rain?
- Are downhills manageable with the front & rear brakes?

2 miles on a scooter is no problem.  2-4 miles depends on how strong a rider you are and how much you enjoy riding a scooter.  I wouldn't depend on a scooter for much more than 4 miles, unless it was just for recreation.

Most scooters shouldn't be ridden in the rain.  Even if the wheels didn't get slippery, a lot of water will still be thrown up on the rider.

Downhills are usually fun.  If it gets scary I would step off and walk it.

[gizmo_rat]

A short interview with a psychologist that summarises current transport research as it relates to cycling.

Touches upon:
Cyclists as an out group
Unintended side effects of wearing helmets
Role of perception in common cycling accidents

As you might expect from a data based argument it all runs counter to 'common sense'.  However there is very little active research in this area which he contrasts with the money being thrown at cars;

At the moment there is an incredible research effort to design better cars for the future. None of these efforts address the fundamental design flaws of the car. Even if somebody came up with a car that runs off angels’ sighs and never crashes, it would still encourage sprawling urban planning, bad land use (especially for parking) and would still encourage its owner to get fat and unhealthy

   

Which is an angle I hadn't considered.

http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archi ... 12walk.pdf

[Pointedstick]

At the moment there is an incredible research effort to design better cars for the future. None of these efforts address the fundamental design flaws of the car. Even if somebody came up with a car that runs off angels’ sighs and never crashes, it would still encourage sprawling urban planning, bad land use (especially for parking) and would still encourage its owner to get fat and unhealthy

   

Which is an angle I hadn't considered.

http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archi ... 12walk.pdf

That reminds me of a wonderful quotation from A Pattern Language, one of my favorite books on human psychology/urban planning/architecture/gardening:

It is quite possible that the collective cohesion people need to form a viable society just cannot develop when the vehicles which people use force them to be 10 times farther apart, on the average, than they have to be. This states the possible social cost of cars in the strongest form. It may be that cars cause the breakdown of society, simply because of their geometry.

[MediumTex]

Now that it's cooling off a bit I am enjoying riding my scooter more than ever.

[doodle]

The best of cars and bicycles rolled into one: http://www.organictransit.com/

[gizmo_rat]

That reminds me of a wonderful quotation from A Pattern Language, one of my favorite books on human psychology/urban planning/architecture/gardening:

Thanks for reminding me, that's been on my reading list for years. I've just dibs'd a copy at the public library.