hotbike

Effective Cycling author John Forester dies at 90

Published April 23, 2020SAN DIEGO (BRAIN) — John Forester, considered the father of "vehicular cycling," died last week at age 90.

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...o#.XqI3CCUpCEc

Sad to report, John Forrester has died. I debated him here on Bikeforums dot net dozens of times.
He was known for telling cyclists to “Take the Lane”.
I will miss his insight. May he Rest In Peace.

nomadmax 

R I P John

TiHabanero

I agreed with Mr. Forester back in the 80's and I still do. He was right. Hope someone can say the same about me after I die. RIP

100bikes

I met John back in the late 1970's, as he was peddling his "new" Effective Cycling book store to store -
which I have a copy of the 3rd edition, spiral bound in my collection.

He stood out for his knowledge and passion.

RIP, John



rusty

Lemond1985

Cause of death?

hotbike

Very interesting obit in Forbes:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton.../#77ae0fe71cc3

hotbike

Obit in Forbes
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton.../#77ae0fe71cc3

pdlamb

Pretty sad Forbes had to give Pucher a pulpit in Forester's obit.

Without Forester's encouragement, I doubt I'd have been able to complete my cross country ride, much less become a daily commuter.

base2 

John's lifetime achievement is for the most part about asserting rights. One always has a right to assert rights & he did so in an unyielding, steadfast, absolute manner. I think that's what rubbed people the wrong way.

John is the reason we have bike lanes. No, not to protect the cyclist, or to make a cyclist feel more comfortable, but to assert by way of infrastructure to drivers that the cyclist has a right to be there, on that road, at that time, in that manner. I don't know that he would see it that way. No doubt making some derision towards comfort or reduction in perceived risk but not actual risk on the part of the cyclist. But nevertheless he was successful in a civil rights perspective that I think most either can't or don't appreciate.

On the topic of dedicated, protected bike lanes...That's just a bridge too far IMO, & he's right about that too. Riding with cars eliminates the half-dozen-odd path crossings between modes on every city block & puts you where you are visible. I've ridden quite a few & the prospect of T-boning an eager driver with obscured sightlines that just crossed your path &/or the deprioritization of signaling along the path to pedestrian speeds keeps me out of them or regretting I got in one nearly every time.

On many fronts his influence was successful with concepts that grew out of (what some would call "vulnerable users") being there, out in front, & visible. I can't help but wonder if eliminating the "free-right" turn in places & giving pedestrians 2-3 seconds of walk signal at crosswalks to get ahead of motorists before the car signal lights change, can be traced back to him, somehow.

Yes, measuring road capacity by car throughput by hour is dated. We now know it's dated. Thanks to Johns lifetime efforts & influence in various circles, that metric has become a lot more nuanced & inclusive to all road users. Road-diets are one such result I can think of off-the-top-of-my-head of feeding more & better design objectives to traffic engineers.

Thank You John for asserting we are all equal & valid road users & should be treated as such. Your life's work has expanded my liberty & opportunity to pursue happiness in ways no one will ever be able to fully account.

noglider 

It doesn't matter if you agree with him or disagree or even agree partially. We owe him a debt. I have the paperback edition of his book. I should dig it up.

tburke

R.I.P John

Kabuki12

I have to admit I knew nothing about this man. My wife and I took a cycling class at Ventura college sometime in the late seventies. We were taught vehicular cycling. Our instructor told us that once you put your fanny on the saddle and your feet on the pedals , you are a vehicle. Do not use sidewalks, crosswalks and obey the same rules as vehicular traffic. We were taught to use the same turn lanes as motor vehicles and hand signals. Other things regarding bike maintenance and repair, cadence, and proper use of gears to maintain our cadence. I often think of that class when I hear people griping about a cyclist on the open road vs on a path “ where they belong”. I still ride the way I was taught and detest bike paths for the reason Mr. Forrester stated, it is used by everyone other than cyclists. Too often I find myself trying to navigate people walking abreast of one another, dog walkers with retractable 20 foot leashes , joggers with ear buds that can’t hear you coming. Thank you Mr Forrester for bringing this type of cycling( vehicular cycling) to the forefront. Share the road, we belong, Joe

2_i 

He certainly had been a strong personality who felt that he had a special license for truth. Certainly his aim was to advocate for the rights of cyclists, I got his book too, Yet, after encountering him on some bike forums, I could not get myself to read more than half a page or so of that book, better reading the personality coming through. I also evacuated myself away from one of forums, just because he was frequently posting authoritative statements there and public was buying the declarations coming from the heaven. He still has my respect - people can be of different mold - but with some I might not want to be in the same room.

Bill in VA

RIP!

When I started serious biking in the 1970s, I was a big devotee of his position, although at that time did not know of him. At the time bike lanes forced you to the curb and even worse sometimes exposed riders to the drainage grates with slots parallel to the road which could catch a wheel and launch a rider like a cannon. We liked the OPTION of the lane, but did not want its use to be mandatory and be marginalized into the lane and have it become and easy excuse for driver negligence ; i.e., the bicyclist was in the main roadway and not THE BIKE LANE. What is often left off now is that the claim the lane idea also included that the cyclist in the lane was bound to and should fully obey the traffic laws.

However that was then, and this is now and drivers are far, far, far more inattentive and distracted by phone, GPS, radio and A/C button punching. To me the main problems of bike lanes was they did not allow for a safe left turn from the lane. Now I am older and stick to the MUPs or side roads, and my purpose is to return in one piece.

rydabent

Dont know much about him, but sad to loose "one of ours".

However the picture of his book raises questions. I guess I dont approve of a cyclist splitting lanes and riding between cars as the cover shows.

Ken2

Judging by the poles for streetlights in the cover drawing, the cars on the rider's right are PARKED at the curb. The rider appears to be allowing sufficient room to avoid dooring from the parked cars; he's not lane splitting.

Miele Man

Decades ago I learned to NEVER ride in the door zone. Last summer I had a police officer pull me over to ask me why I was not riding in the painted bicycle lane. I told him it was a dangerous place to ride because of the chance of being hit by an opening car door, and being deflected into traffic as you crashed. I then showed him with his door just how far out a car door went when even partway opened. He told me to carry on as I was and that he never realized how bad those door zone bicycle lanes could be.

Forester was a real advocate of not riding in the door zone. I've never read his books but might have read an article by him in some bicycling magazine back in the early 1980s.

Cheers