How did city traffic get stuck in here anyway? The OP mentioned a freeway, the most deadly place in America (for 1-35 yr olds anyway.)
More people (1-35) die on freeways than on non-freeway roads? Per mile traveled? I'd like to see that study.

I always that, mile for mile, freeways were the safest roads to travel on, due to the lack of intersections.
But there must be a difference between urban freeways and rural ones. Same freeway, but when it enters an urban areas there can be a very high frequency of on/off ramps including sub-par designes due to integrating them into the layout of the city. Traffic slow and jams are much more common. At least here the urban freeway speed limits are 65 instead of 75 as you get near the every expanding city limits. The 'rules' of slow lane/fast lane are less adhered too as well due to short trips and there is generally a larger delta between the fastest and slowest drivers. I would guess there are a higher % of intoxicated and also distracted drivers (round here folks use freeways to get from bar to home) on urban freeways.

Al

In response to the OP...

I always thought that, mile for mile, freeways were the safest roads to travel on, due to the lack of intersections.

But do you think driving on one of those freeways is safer than riding your bicycle?

But there must be a difference between urban freeways and rural ones. Same freeway, but when it enters an urban areas there can be a very high frequency of on/off ramps including sub-par designes due to integrating them into the layout of the city. Traffic slow and jams are much more common. At least here the urban freeway speed limits are 65 instead of 75 as you get near the every expanding city limits. The 'rules' of slow lane/fast lane are less adhered too as well due to short trips and there is generally a larger delta between the fastest and slowest drivers. I would guess there are a higher % of intoxicated and also distracted drivers (round here folks use freeways to get from bar to home) on urban freeways.

Al

Ever notice that today it seems like the traffic is worse on the bypasses than on the original interstates that go through the heart of the cities? Then there are instances like I-71 between Columbus and Cleveland and I-25 between Denver and Colorado Springs where they can't add lanes fast enough to support the increase in traffic over the whole distance. 20 years ago I predicted that someday it would be solid suburbia between Phoenix and Tuscon - hows that coming?

20 years ago I predicted that someday it would be solid suburbia between Phoenix and Tuscon - hows that coming?
I flew over it recently and it's coming along at an alarming pace. I always fly through Phoenix (America West and all.)

All I know, is that you can die a much more gruesome death on the highway. Hell, a couple weeks ago I drove on the highway for the first time in months and I didn't even realize I was going 100mph keeping up with traffic, hah. An accident at that speed is almost certainly deadly. Doesn't mean I'll never do it again, but its a risk you take, just like riding. The difference on a bike is that you probably wont kill anyone else when your dumb ass gets in an accident.

The "bear" thread reminded me of this thought.

Since I don't usually drive, when I do get out on the freeway I feel less safe than I do when riding my bike in traffic. I'm not sure if I'm actually safer on my bike, but it's a feeling I get.

What's it to you?

Perhaps it's better if you don't *feel* too safe. Not feeling *safe* will keep you on your toes and ready to avoid the stupid mistakes of others, whether you are on your bike or in your car. Feeling safe and becoming complacent around 3 or 4 thousand pound hunks of moving iron is bound to eventually turn the law of averages against you and get you killed.

"STUFF" happens, be ready

Rik

Driving on the highway here is extremely sketchy. Couldn't go a week without someone trying to change lanes directly into my position.

I can't remember the last time anything has scared me at all while biking.

I once rode down the interstate highway to the mall and back in 9th grade. At the time, I didn't even realize it was illegal. I knew very little about the highway's true nature and figured it was the same as any other road except with a higher speed limit. I don't recall being scared at all even on that trip, though I didn't repeat it (turned out to be a longer route than normal roads).

So my accident rates are 0.002% for motor vehicles and 0.22% for bicycles. I have 110 times more accidents per mile on a bicycle vs. a motor vehicle. Conclusion: riding in a motor vehicle is over 100 times safer than riding a bicycle.

As long as we're deriving results from single data points...
I've driven probably about 300,000 miles, and have had 3 accidents, so 1 accident per 100,000 miles.
I've ridden my bike probably about 10,000 miles, and have never been involved in an accident (OK, I slipped on some gravel in a parking lot and cut my hand once, and needed a band-aid, but I'm not counting that).

Conclusion: Riding a bicycle is 100% safe and I can never be hurt doing it. :rolleyes:

Wait, before you start tossing stats around, You have to normalized it first. Oh course, there are going to be more car fatalities than cyclists fatalities because there are more motorists than cyclists, and a significant number of cyclists do not use public roads at all, so you most divde total number of cyclists deaths by number of cyclists who use roads, and do the same with motorists, then you can see the approriate percentage. I think the cyclists' rate is still lower, but it is better to use more accurate number.