Carryin' children bikes, trikes, etc.

[Anthony King]

Hello all,

I am going to be married soon and am starting to think about solutions to carrying children around. My fiance and I are both on the same page as far as cars go, so we've been thinking about our options for getting around with children and without a car.

I know about trailers, but I'm wondering what else is out there that can transport children and have some cargo room to boot.

I'd like nothing better than to pedal down the road in some ginormous contraption with the wife and about five kids. Talk about taking the lane.

Smaller suggestions also welcome because, you know, we won't have five all at once.

AK

[skvidal]

Don't have more than 1 or at most 2 children.

The planet is deeply overpopulated as it is. 5 children just makes sustainability (both personally and globally) that much harder.

2 kids - space them 3-4 years apart. Much more do-able and the kids will be able to evolve their own personalities without a huge impact from the other one.

And then biking with them won't be too bad at all. :)

-sv

[tfahrner]

see http://www.workcycles.nl/bakfiets/fietsen/bakfiets.nl/bakfiets.nl-cargobike-lang.html or http://todd.cleverchimp.com/blog/?p=84

[MarkS]

First year: No biking :( -- child's neck is too wobbly
Year #1 - ~30 lbs: Child carrier. Have to have secondary biker carry extra gear, or carry on your back as most child seats require a special rack that prevents the use of panniers. Actually, I was able to find some army surplus bags to strap on, but that's a different story.
Year #1 - ??: Child trailer. Some kids love these. Mine didn't :( -- too lonely back there. Plenty of room for extra gear. Was a great way to attend local parades, since there was no problem carrying thermos with hot chocolate.
Year 4+: Trail-a-bike. Use grocery panniers to bring along goodies. Have done family outings to beach this way.

I understand there is a thingy that will allow you to attach a child's bike to the rear of your bike, but haven't seen any testimonials to know if they're any good/safe.

[patc]

Don't have more than 1 or at most 2 children.

The planet is deeply overpopulated as it is. 5 children just makes sustainability (both personally and globally) that much harder.

YES! This message is just not getting out... so many so-called environmentalists with their 4+ kids. One day they chant about the evils of oil, cars, chemical agriculture, and the next day they insist on their "right" to reproduce without concern for the resources those kids will use.

Evolution is such a funny thing. Mother Nature must be kicking herself for not making intelligence a requirement for procreation. I'd say that any idiot can learn to use birth control, but all the "accidents" out there prove that most idiots can't.

[gwd]

Evolution is such a funny thing. Mother Nature must be kicking herself for not making intelligence a requirement for procreation. I'd say that any idiot can learn to use birth control, but all the "accidents" out there prove that most idiots can't.
Doesn't it seem that people who choose to adopt kids are more intelligent than those who have "accidents"? Would that cause average human intelligence to decrease without other selection factors? Does that explain anything?

[cerewa]

http://www.solocycles.com/Day_eleven.html

http://www.bikeiowa.com/uploads/gallery/39_PedalBarOnwheels.jpg
http://www.oklahomabicyclesociety.com/Scrapbook/image_72.html


but more seriously- you could combine multiperson bikes with twoperson trailers, trail-a-bike's, etc. for four people, there's the rhoades car, http://www.rhoadescar.com . For commercially available 3-to-5-person bikes, there's http://www.precisiontandems.com .

More than 5 people, and you're talking custom-made.

Don't rule out electric assist for your odd contraptions. They'll still probably be cheaper and more environmentally-friendly than minivans.

The planet is deeply overpopulated as it is. 5 children just makes sustainability (both personally and globally) that much harder.

Very true-- if you want more than 2 children, consider adoption.

[LarryD]

Don't have more than 1 or at most 2 children.

The planet is deeply overpopulated as it is. 5 children just makes sustainability (both personally and globally) that much harder.

2 kids - space them 3-4 years apart. Much more do-able and the kids will be able to evolve their own personalities without a huge impact from the other one.

And then biking with them won't be too bad at all. :)

-sv

Anyone within range of an internet connection already has received the message. Over population is a 3rd world problem for the most part. Some 1st world populations have already tipped over and are receding (I think Italy is the leader in this category). Demographics is a really cool field. See the Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography

The OP can have 10 kids if he wants without any danger of reversing the trend. Not that I'm recommending this of course!

[patc]

Anyone within range of an internet connection already has received the message. Over population is a 3rd world problem for the most part.

Only if you count absolute numbers, and don't look at resource use. Sure, people in so-called first world countries have fewer kids and are often better able to take care of them, but each of our children will consume many times the resources of a kid in the "third world". Our families with 2 kids may be the same as, say, a family of 10 elsewhere.

[LarryD]

Only if you count absolute numbers, and don't look at resource use. Sure, people in so-called first world countries have fewer kids and are often better able to take care of them, but each of our children will consume many times the resources of a kid in the "third world". Our families with 2 kids may be the same as, say, a family of 10 elsewhere.

Which is a really good point and probably the main reason that populations are falling in the 1st world.

Much more important is how the kids are raised to view resource consumption. Most resource consumption (at least in the US) is constrained by family income and credit rating. If you can raise children to limit their resource consumption behaviorally then you are headed in the right direction. I think the OP is moving in the right direction so if he wants to have a few more kids than the zero-population number I don't see it as a problem since we really need all the good citizens (aka bicyclists ;) ) we can get.

[cerewa]

Some 1st world populations have already tipped over and are receding (I think Italy is the leader in this category).

Thing is, populations aren't actually falling in developed countries taken together. Yes, some developed countries have slightly lower birth rates than death rates, but in most of those, immigration keeps the population rising. See this page (2001 data):
http://gsociology.icaap.org/report/demsum.html


if he wants to have a few more kids than the zero-population number I don't see it as a problem since we really need all the good citizens (aka bicyclists ) we can get.

I dunno. Have you checked out those "ecological footprint calculators (http://www.bestfootforward.com/footprintlife.htm)"?

I'm quite consumption-conscious as a frugal, environmentalist, car-lite, vegetarian... but I can fudge a couple key questions in my favor on these quizzes and still come up with "If everyone in the World lived like you we would need 1.6 Planets to support global consumption."

[mike]

Hee hee. Have fun with the planning, but don't buy anything just yet.

Once you have children, all your plans will change radically; even your plans for your children. As it turns out, families have plans of their own.

[chephy]

The planet is deeply overpopulated as it is. 5 children just makes sustainability (both personally and globally) that much harder. :D Poor guy, gets reprimanded for wanting to have a family.

However, if these five kids grow up with all the right ideas about consumption, they might just set good example for fifty more people. These fifty five people will then in total consume less than the fifty would've, had the five kids never existed. ;) We need to encourage environmentally-friendly people to have more kids and discourage the heavy consumers from having any. This way will get a great next generation. ;)

[freediver]

I've got two kids spaced 2 1/2 years apart.

First year- no riding because the neck isn't strong enough- causes something similar to shaken baby syndrom. :(

Second year- rode evey day! We went everywhere and never let bad weather get in our way- she was totally dry in the Burley trailer while I rode through thunderstorms. We did have to stop and have a quick "picnic" one day during a tornado warning under a bridge- we ate and played games and she never knew anything was up. :)

Third year- new baby and I only got to ride when the wife watched him- see point #1. :(

Fourth year- My son seems to HATE the trailer, but we are working on it. At first I thought that my daughter was doing something to him while I rode (taking his nuk, hugging him around the neck, stealing his stuffed animal, ect). Everytime I called back as to what was going on all I ever heard was "Nothing Daddy!" Then, one day, I tried riding without her and he still screamed. We'll get it worked out as he doesn't have much choice in the matter about riding in the trailer. ;)

BTW- I won't use a child seat on my bike- AKA "Death Bucket". The trailer is the safest way to carry them and a trailer is worth the price in gas savings alone.

I have been seriously lusting after one of those Extracycles for grocery shopping. As soon as my son gets a bit more settled in the trailer I think I might sell off my road bike and convert my mountain bike over to one. Yeah, the road bike has gotten Zero use since I had kids, but I'm ok with that. :)

Jon

[LandLuger]

First, wait as long as is practical before having children; it's not just a cliche as children will most definitely bring about a radical shift in the paradigm of your life. Anyway, I'm facing the hypothetical challenges you are asking about in my present. A tandem with pedal shorteners serves to deliver my eldest daughter to and from school and extra-cirricular activities. My son of four is rapidly outgrowing his trailer that he shares with his baby sister of two, and I am faced with the prospect of a three person tandem ($$$$$) or a towbehindbike as others have suggested. One thing is certain in a very short period of time we are going to be quite a comical sight on the roadways. Of all these hurdles that I've overcome to be able to ride as a family the most difficult is trying to explain to my children why they are the only ones in town that have to bike to school while all their classmates are delivered in SUV's:eek:

[gwd]

BTW- I won't use a child seat on my bike- AKA "Death Bucket". The trailer is the safest way to carry them and a trailer is worth the price in gas savings alone.

Jon
"Death Bucket"? Where is the accident data to back that up? My kid is grown now but when she was young the CPSC put out a bicycle study. Here are two quotes:

"The use of earphones or carrying young children in child carriers did not play a major role in injury scenarios."
pg. 7

"Of note was that none of the passengers treated in hospital emergency
rooms was reported to have been in a child carrier or wearing a helmet."
pg. 58

This report is still being put out on the CPSC web site, I just checked.

More parents in my neighborhood use the child carriers than trailers, some have both but prefer the child carriers for errands and going to the park or hauling kids to school. Are they being irresponsible? These modern child carriers are much larger than the ones available 15 years ago. They are bigger than the car seats. I'm all for child safety but not spreading unwarrented paranoia. Just last weekend I ran across a mom with two kids, one on a trailabike and one in the trailer, it was the one in the trailer who got injured in the bike path accident, the trailer flipped and the mom stayed upright. If that kid had been in a child carrier seat there would have been no injury.

[Niche Kid]

Try bicycletrailers.com (http://www.bicycletrailers.com), they seem to have alot of info and carry a huge variety of trailers.

[freediver]

You can do whatever you want to with your child but I will not put mine in a Death Bucket for anything.

The trailer can stay up right if you crash your bike. IF your child is strapped in properly you can flip the trailer and they will stay strapped in tight and not move. Helmets go without saying. If your on a bike with a kid strapped on the back you are more unbalanced than if pulling a trailer- especially if they move around at all. Now just imagine what happens to your child if you fall over on your bike and the kid takes a tumble from a few feet up going at the speed your pedaling.

Death Buckets also don't work if your kid is over 40 pounds or you have two kids. People can justify all kinds of things when it comes to their kids, but I am unwilling to compromise my child's safety over a few bucks.

YMMV

Jon

[BikeSlut]

i've read a few people say to not carry your child under 1 year old. my son rode in his infant seat belted to the trailer at about 3 months. the bike was just as bumpy or less than riding in the car. and the added comfort of the infant seat led to many enjoyable rides often with the lil man falling asleep. ymmv.

[Anthony King]

Thanks to those who provided links about human powered family movin'.

The overpopulation crows might consider that the problem is not that there are too many people for our earth to support . The problem is greed, overconsumption, industrialism and the overcrowding of certain areas caused by industrialism, not overpopulation. Your environmental justification for sterile lives, sterile sex, and calculated reproduction is rationalization for our culture's vast selfishness. You want x amount of time and money to yourselves and a large family requires too much self-sacrifice. But it is comforting to pretty it up by saying you're doing it for the earth.


Have you checked out those "ecological footprint calculators"?

Yeah, check it out with a critical eye. If you check that you live in the US, then no matter what else you choose the lowest number you can achieve is that we'd need 1.1 planets to support your consumption. So the thing is rigged. If you answer the same but live in the Australia or Europe you can get below the susutainable level.

Reeeal scientific. Jeez.

[gwd]

You can do whatever you want to with your child but I will not put mine in a Death Bucket for anything.

The trailer can stay up right if you crash your bike. IF your child is strapped in properly you can flip the trailer and they will stay strapped in tight and not move. Helmets go without saying. If your on a bike with a kid strapped on the back you are more unbalanced than if pulling a trailer- especially if they move around at all. Now just imagine what happens to your child if you fall over on your bike and the kid takes a tumble from a few feet up going at the speed your pedaling.

Death Buckets also don't work if your kid is over 40 pounds or you have two kids. People can justify all kinds of things when it comes to their kids, but I am unwilling to compromise my child's safety over a few bucks.

YMMV

Jon

It reads like you are fantasizing. You can refer to no accident data to justify your use of the word "Death". Are you claiming that the consumer product safety commision falsified their data?

The trailer can flip if you keep your bike upright. The trailer that flipped last weekend had the kid strapped in and the kid had a cut face. The bike stayed upright. If the kid is in a carrier seat strapped in properly and the driver crashes the bike, the carrier takes the blow. The impact speed from a slide is less than dropping the kid and those rear carrier seats seem to surround the kid. The top tube carrier has the driver protecting the kid. Why would you ride fast with a kid in a trailer or a carrier seat? The parents seem to move at a careful pace, with either a trailer or a carrier seat. I know I am also more careful when I carry mine or anyone elses kid.

The problem with your post on this forum is people new to car free living come here for information. It isn't right for you to tell parents that they risk killing their own children when they use a bike carrier unless you have some better data than that provided by the CPSC.

[freediver]

Are you claiming that the consumer product safety commision falsified their data?

Have you ever heard of Vioxx? I'm sure no data was flasified there. ;)

You can argue whatever you want, but this is a place for people to express their opinions, and we both have them. Everyone I know who rides would never put their child in a death bucket. I do know some that started their kids out before the 1 year mark, by strapping their car seat into a trailer, and they seemed to get away with it just fine. I looked into that but decided the risk was too great for my kids and that they can take whatever goofy risks they want to when they are older, but as a parent I shouldn't be making those choices for them when they are to young to protest.

It still comes down to the fact that with a trailer you have:

1- a non-tip hitch even if you dump the bike. look at the trailer/seat site listed above and they mention it in there.

2- you can carry a kid over 40 pounds.

3- you can carry more than 1 kid.

4- you can protect your kid from the rain, snow, bugs, and sun because they are completely covered.

5- tipping over inside a roll cage is less likely to hurt you than falling 3 feet to the ground first.

Now, it is still possible for someone to strap their kids in wrong, to drive the trailer into something because they aren't paying attention, to not make their kids wear helmets, to bike while drunk, to bike while talking on their cell-phone. So you'll never protect your kids from everything.

Since we all have opinions we can all differ in them. You think that I am 'fantasizing' and being unfair to death buckets; and I feel your just trying to rationalize your purchase because you were too cheap to spend the money you needed to in order to protect your kids. :roflmao:

You can get as pissy at me as you want, but I will not back down from my opinion- after all they are my kids and I will do whatever I deem best to keep them safe. There are enough thought police running around this country trying to silence our opinions, I'll be damned if that happens to me on a biking website.

Jon

[gwd]

Are you claiming that the consumer product safety commision falsified their data?

Have you ever heard of Vioxx? I'm sure no data was flasified there. ;)

CPSC isn't in charge of Vioxx but yes I have. In the bicycle study I referenced CPSC collected their own data, in the Vioxx incident the FDA (not the CPSC) relied on the manufacturer to supply safety data.

What evidence do you have that CPSC's claim that they observed no emergency room visits due to accidents involving child carriers is false?



You can argue whatever you want, but this is a place for people to express their opinions, and we both have them. Everyone I know who rides would never put their child in a death bucket.

I didn't understand this forum living car free as a place to express opinions but to share information. I'm questioning the quality of your information.
Again why the word "death"? That isn't an opinion on your part its a descriptive adjective. And according to the CPSC's study the word "death" is the wrong adjective to apply to child carriers. If you have better information on accident rates share it with us.

It still comes down to the fact that with a trailer you have:

1- a non-tip hitch even if you dump the bike. look at the trailer/seat site listed above and they mention it in there.

2- you can carry a kid over 40 pounds.

3- you can carry more than 1 kid.

4- you can protect your kid from the rain, snow, bugs, and sun because they are completely covered.

5- tipping over inside a roll cage is less likely to hurt you than falling 3 feet to the ground first.


1. If the bike can lay down then the trailer can flip.
2. I regularly carry people over 40 lbs on my bike without a trailer. Those xtracycle users carry several adults.
3. My neighbor carries two kids in child carriers. One on the top tube and one on the rear.
4. My neighbor protects her kid from all these things if needed in a child carrier. She also owns a trailer but uses the carrier daily and the trailer rarely. For snow and sleet she uses a clear stroller cover. She also needs to use the same stroller cover for her burly child trailer- that trailer does NOT protect the kid from freezing rain. She had to use the trailer one winter day to haul training materials and asked me to help her with the stroller cover, thats how I know that the burly trailer does not protect the child.
5. I'm unconvinced that when a mom gets into an accident that it is exactly equivalent to dropping a kid from 3 feet. Out on the playground it would be hard to keep the kids from jumping or falling 3 feet but that is a different situation.



You think that I am 'fantasizing' and being unfair to death buckets;

No, you aren't justifying your use of the word "death" and unduly scaring newly car free people.


and I feel your just trying to rationalize your purchase because you were too cheap to spend the money you needed to in order to protect your kids. :roflmao:

No, I have never purchased nor used a child carrier, I carried my kid sitting side saddle on the top tube until I taught her to ride. I have used other people's child trailers though. I see far more child carriers in use than trailers so find it hard to believe that all those moms are exposing their kids to some grave danger that warrants the word "death". Although there are more child carrier seats in use around here the only time I've seen blood is the recent mom who stayed upright on her bike when the trailer flipped.


You can get as pissy at me as you want, but I will not back down from my opinion- after all they are my kids and I will do whatever I deem best to keep them safe. There are enough thought police running around this country trying to silence our opinions, I'll be damned if that happens to me on a biking website.

Jon
No, I can't silence your opinions. I'm not a forum moderator. I can try to get the facts behind those opinions. Now forum readers can see for themselves how you make things up.