temp1

even in Nazi Germany you could ride a bike in the road.

Chris L

If you looked at the statistics, you'd actually see that riding on the road is not only safer than riding on the footpath/sidewalk, it's also considerably safer than driving on the road. Not to mention the fact that the busier the road, the less likely you are to be hit, and the less the impact will be if you were simply because grid-locked traffic moves slower. There's not such thing as an arrogant fool -- arrogant fool is a contradiction in terms. Arrogance is not the act of a fool and fools have nothing to be arrogant about.

BTW, quit the blatant trolling just to add a link to a post. If you want to promote your website, do it in the Shameless promotions forum.

Chris L

Actually, the weight differential between most cars and trucks is far greater than the weight differential between most cars and the average bicycle. Ergo, perhaps everone in anything less than an SAV (Suburban Assault Vehicle) should start driving on the footpath/sidewalk.

Poguemahone

...and don't forget that bicycles are slower than cars and therefore should not be allowed in traffic. Of course, this ignores the fact that some cars are slower than others, so only hi-performance cars should be allowed on the road, everything else on the sidewalk... perhaps the only thing allowed on the road should be hopped up supercharged tractor-trailers, so we can take care of both the speed and the size issues.

Chris L

It also ignores the fact that in traffic that can even be described as "moderate", bicycles are actually faster than cars -- and in gridlock, I can turn a 2-3 hour drive into a 30 minute ride. Maybe during the so-called "rush hour", all cars should move to the sidewalk to allow bikes through easier -- not that they make it overly difficult for me as it is.

LittleBigMan

Christopher, what time is it over there? It's about 4:08 here.

You're online, I was just wondering, mate!

Chris L

Right now it's about 8.30am here. I'd normally be riding during this time, however I went for a solid ride yesterday and a barbecue last night. I might head out later on for a few extra km -- even if this is supposed to be an easy weekend.

iceratt

I take the reverse position. Only the slowest should be allowed on sidewalks. Since my son Natty is slower than anything else on the sidewalk( he has taken 20 minutes to walk a whole two blocks to school), he should have exclusive rights to the city's walkways. Considering how few people walk around here, he practically does have them to himself.

LittleBigMan

Lemme tell ya...I was walking down the sidewalk from the train station to the college to meet my daughter and some green sprout comes bombing down the otherwise barren sidewalk in his bike. I thought, ya, he'll slow down, but he almost clipped me at high speed.

Chris L

I think Pogue was making that point to highlight the ludicrous nature of the troll's 'arguments'. As far as I'm concerned, the only wheeled thing on sidewalks/footpaths should be wheelchairs.

Poguemahone

"As far as I'm concerned, the only wheeled thing on sidewalks/footpaths should be wheelchairs."

Little kids on tricycles and bikes are okay, too, in my book. You've gotta start riding somewhere, and I don't think tossing 'em out into traffic first thing is the best idea. Let's not forget baby strollers.

Seriously, IMHO, cyclists can dismount/mount on the sidewalk, but should get into traffic ASAP. I'll ride a little bit on one, maybe 1/2 a block, before a dismount, but only if there are no pedestrians.

Riding on walks is fraught with dificulties, not the least of which is you're less visible to motorists, and moving faster than a pedestrian. It would seem to me you're much more likely to get hit at an intersection if you're using the walk, due to the visibility problems.

The base fallacy of the car/bike problem is that too many assume that cyclists are most often hit from behind. If you're cycling with traffic, everything I've seen indicates you're far more likely to get hit by a turning car at an intersection. I don't think riding on the walk would do anything but increase the potential for such a collision. In addition, if you're riding with and behaving as the rest of the traffic (we're talking flow here, not speed and size), you're far more predicatable to the drivers around you than a cyclist behaving in an unorthodox, take me out of the gene pool, fashion (i.e. riding against traffic or on the walk).

LittleBigMan

Absolutely.

If the main danger of cycling was posed from same-direction traffic, then freeways would be the most dangerous place to drive a car, because on freeways, everyone is flowing in the same direction. But it is precisely this same-direction design of freeways that allows traffic to flow faster with fewer crashes.

The principle of traffic flowing together in the same direction with predictable behavior at intersections is at the basis of safe traffic flow design. Removing bicycle traffic from the main flow and re-routing it to criss-cross the existing grids endangers all cyclists who use such routes. All you have to do is look at the unacceptable number of pedestrian injuries and deaths from being struck by motor vehicles to see that cyclists wouldn't fare any better.

However, cyclists who use the roads in an unsafe, unpredictable manner are at a high risk of crashing. I would strongly advocate that all cyclists know how to flow safely and predictably with traffic before being released into it, as would be the case with children (or even adults who don't know better.)

Chris L

You are right, of course. I'm just referring to teenagers on bikes who don't know how to ride them properly. I've been a pedestrian on the footpath/sidewalk in those situations, too.

Daily Commute

I've had exactly the opposite experience. In Columbus, city bus drivers are some of the most courteous drivers on on the road. I think there are three reasons for this. They are experienced, they are easily identifiable, and their employer has a financial incentive to punish dangerous driving.

As to riding on the sidewalk, I only do it for very, very short distances, usually right before I dismount outside of my office. Crossing streets while riding on sidewalks is extremely dangerous because cars aren't looking for you. I agree with the numerous posters who say that when on the sidewalk, ride like you are walking. Better yet, if you have to be on a sidewalk, get off your bike and walk. If that's too slow, get back on the road.

franklen

A thought just popped into my mind. I know the safety issue with riding sidewalks instead of roadways, but everyone seems to always spout off about how cars are not looking for bicyclists at intersections and when crossing roadways, driveways, etc from sidewalk to sidewalk ("Crossing streets while riding on sidewalks is extremely dangerous because cars aren't looking for you."). But that is not a radical behavior because pedestrians cross all the time, and car drivers have to be aware and on the lookout for them. Nothing really makes the bikes any different than the walkers, unless they choose not to stop or slow down to pedestrian speed at each of these intersections, which is the difference I guess.

Daily Commute

Bikes on sidewalks are at higher risks at crosswalks than pedestrians because bikes generally go faster than pedestrians. Bikes are also not as maneuverable. Try stopping on a dime and jumping backwards on your bike. Or a yard to your right.

ngateguy

[QUOTE=franklen\. But that is not a radical behavior because pedestrians cross all the time, and car drivers have to be aware and on the lookout for them. Nothing really makes the bikes any different than the walkers, unless they choose not to stop or slow down to pedestrian speed at each of these intersections, which is the difference I guess.[/QUOTE]

You need to be a pedestrian they don't watch out forthem either. They just move slower. I still have to dodge cars when they are turning and I am walking.

madpogue 

The speed difference factor (bicycle vs. pedestrian) in a crosswalk has two manifestations. Not only is it more difficult (as has been stated) for the bicyclist to react than the pedestrian, but a car driver approaching the crosswalk has less reaction time with a bicyclist coming into a crosswalk at higher speed than a pedestrian.

This doesn't excuse a motorist from failing to yield. And here, in one of the supposedly most bicycle-friendly cities in the country, pedestrians are routinely brushed back to the curb by motorists who fail to yield.

They recently instituted a "flag" system, where you pick up a little red flag at the corner, carry it as you cross, and drop it off on the other side, at several of the city's busiest crosswalks. To me, it's a silly idea. It puts the onus on the pedestrian to do something extra to get the motorist to do what s/he's legally required to do in the first place. Plus, it establishes two standards; drivers might get the (wrong) idea that if there are no flags at the intersection, they don't have to yield (they do).

Generally, when I want to cross in a crosswalk, I'll dismount and walk it across. Yeah, my right-of-way is the same, but I want to leave the driver no excuse; I want to make sure the motorist sees me in time to yield. Often I do this for the express purpose of getting across faster than if I stay on the street, and have to wait like any other traffic.

ngateguy

I agree that is a silly idea. That seems to be the trend is to try and take more responsibility off the driver. A lot of our underground parking lots here in Seattle have warnings now for when cars are comming out. I think it should be the other way around, they need to be reminded that there is pedestrian as well as other traffic out ther to be cautious.

Roughstuff

Absolutely spot on. I have seen more accidents of this type than all the others combined. If you are not careful you'll slide right under the car and get squelched by the rear wheels. I am always ultra vigilant when I come up to a major right turn. Here is exactly a situation where it is probably better to completely claim your lane so no one can pass you.

The best case I ever got cut off was on a bike tour years ago in Czechoslovakia. I swung out my left hand to hit the guys' passenger window and not only BROKE IT (the window, not my hand) but shattered it completely and scared the hell out of the passenger. For some odd reason all the glass still managed to fall outside the vehicle. We didn't have any languages in common so i just shrugged my shoulders and rode off; never heard anything else about it.

roughstuff

Richard D

Pedestrians are far less predictable than car drivers - I'll stick to the roads, but then in this country riding on the 'sidewalk' is illegal anyway.

franklen

I was wondering yesterday whether any of the studies that determined that bicycling on the road is safer than bicycling on the sidewalks, took into account the skill and biking knowledge level of the riders. I mean in the end it is no excuse to not know the proper rules and procedures for operating your vehicle whether a car or bicycle. But might not the people who are injured while riding thier bikes on the sidewalk (by weaving through peds and not being careful at driveways and crosswalks)also be the ones who would regularly run redlights and stopsigns, squeeze through long lanes of traffic, ride in the door zone, and ride the wrong direction on the street, and thus probably also get injured if they were actually on the roads? I mean if you aren't going to ride safe, you aren't going to period. But if you are riding safe and conscientiously then you are in good shape. Just a thought I had floating around during the ride home yesterday.

Poguemahone

franklen, you might see if you can dig up a copy of a book called Effective Cycling by John Forrester (I think, I'm going from my extraordinarily faulty memory). He analyzes the exact points you bring up... he's got another book called, (I think) Bicycle Transportation but I've not read it.

Daily Commute

The safety arguments are valid, but they miss the main reason not to ride on sidewalks--it's rude.

Unless you are about to dismount, or unless the city has stupidly made the sidewalk a bike path, it is best to stay off the sidewalks. We bicyclists have enought PR problems without scaring the bejeebers out of pedestrians.

Allister

This is a valid point. I do believe that the stats for collisions on footpaths is skewed by the number of children crashing.

Yes you can ride safely on the footpath, IF you're always ready to stop on a dime, IF you hold your speed under 15km/h or preferably 10km/h, and IF you don't mind getting clocked in the melon by low hanging branches.

I generally prefer the speed and convenience of the road.