Living Car Free - why bikes are unpopular

i am in the lower economic strata and i ask my friends why they take the bus instead of the bike and more often than not it is because of not feeling "safe". perhaps if the main roads were more accomadating people would use bikes more often for their trips since taking a bus is such an inconvience.

It would be a much needed improvement if there were more bike lanes in more places. Of course there is always the fear of crazy drivers. In theory, if there are better roads for riding, more people will ride, thus decreasing the number drivers with a cell phone. There are always risks no matter how we travel, Unfortunate but true.

I am in a middle economic strata and my friends ask me why i bike instead of driving. I tell them so i don't turn into a total fatbutt like them ;) and cause I like it.

Convince them it's fun. they'll come around, or at least start thinking about it.

In the last couple years, as gas prices have risen, I am seeing 4-5 times as many bikers in this college town. That means 2 bikers per day instead of 2 per week.... but still, it's gathering momentum.

Cheers

I am in the upper ecomonic strata and people don't ask me why. They can tell I have fun, I get "you're just a big kid comments" Or "How do you stay thin at your age?"

i am in the lower economic strata and i ask my friends why they take the bus instead of the bike and more often than not it is because of not feeling "safe". perhaps if the main roads were more accomadating people would use bikes more often for their trips since taking a bus is such an inconvience.

This is just an excuse, biking is extremely safe. 43,000 dead car drivers would say so, if they could.

i am in the lower economic strata and i ask my friends why they take the bus instead of the bike and more often than not it is because of not feeling "safe". perhaps if the main roads were more accomadating people would use bikes more often for their trips since taking a bus is such an inconvience.

They also have the perception that bicycles do not belong on the street. I got a long lecture by a motorist who told me to get on the sidewalk as she passed, and then I caught up with her to inform her of the real laws. She observed that the land yacht ahead of her had had to "swerve" around me to miss me, but acknowledged that I was at the right side of the road. The Mommy in her could not bear to see me in such danger I guess. I could not convince her of the error of her perception of Arkansas and Little Rock highway laws.

Note to self. You will not convince them, so don't lose your temper. ;)

I like the bus because I can read and talk to my kids. It can take me and the kiddos further than I can bike with them. I have a free bus pass through work. I get fewer chilblains in the winter when I take the bus. I don't have to park. I get to talk to my neighbors as we wait at the stop and ride the bus to our destinations.

I'm not sure that bicycling is, in fact, unpopular. I've read that the numbers of cyclists in the US has declined in the last decade or so, but my own observations tell a much different story. When I first started bicycling to work a few years ago, I usually saw no other cyclists on my commute; now I see at least a dozen, usually a lot more. The bike shops in my area are so busy that I usually have to make an appointment several days in advance to have my bike fixed (which has, in fact, inspired me to do mostly my own work).

As for bicycles being dangerous, it depends on you. If you jump from road to sidewalk and back again, run lights, pass on the right in heavy traffic, ride at night in black clothing with no lights, and generally act stupid, natural selection will eventually assert itself. Personally, I think bicycles are safer than cars if you ride like an adult. (Statistically, there are more deaths per million miles on a bike than there are driving in the US; however, the deaths per million hours on a bike are far lower than there are by car. Make of this what you will. and don't ask me the source, I forget, but I promise I'm not just pulling this out of a hat...)

There are, of course, people who get killed riding through no fault of their own, but this is true of most human activities, and it's ridiculous to imagine that riding a bike is any more dangerous than, say, attending classes at a university without wearing a kevlar vest.

I personally think bikes are simply unpopular because cycling is *honestly* an unpleasant experience in a lot of cases.

In general the experience is sort of patchy: unfriendly and extremely car-centric street designs are common, unfriendly drivers are common, bicycle security isn't well, secure.. Personally, thats my biggest irk: $120 on Kryptonite's *top* level bike chain only to find a video of it being cut down like it was tinfoil with a pair of bolt cutters 3 days later..

You can't count on there being a good bike rack waiting for you at each destination, let alone a bike rack at all.

Bicycle adjustment and maintenance is much less costly than vehicular maintenance (granted) but its much more present and finicky, in my opinion. Granted, there are some very simple and enjoyable cycling technologies out there, but none without their drawbacks. Hub gears can cost more than a lot of non-cyclists want to spend on their first bike by themselves, for instance.

Additionally, I would imagine there are a whole lot of people who experience cycling as buying a poor bike from a department store, wobbling around the street or a sidewalk, having some kind of mechanical problem, meeting a hill, getting yelled at and so on - and just giving up.

As for bicycles being dangerous, it depends on you. If you jump from road to sidewalk and back again, run lights, pass on the right in heavy traffic, ride at night in black clothing with no lights, and generally act stupid, natural selection will eventually assert itself. Personally, I think bicycles are safer than cars if you ride like an adult. (Statistically, there are more deaths per million miles on a bike than there are driving in the US; however, the deaths per million hours on a bike are far lower than there are by car. Make of this what you will. and don't ask me the source, I forget, but I promise I'm not just pulling this out of a hat...)

That is actually an extremely valid point. The real reason bicycles are perceived as "dangerous" by a lot of people is simply because those people have not had any form of training or education in how to ride properly. Just look at some of the posts on these fora from newbies and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Those of us who regularly ride for transport know full well that cycling is more than just balancing and turning the pedals. However, most people don't realise this, and without this realisation, any cycling experience they have is highly unlikely to be a pleasant one. Then of course, there is the old marketing saying that a person who has a negative experience generally tells 30-50 people about it (contrasted with the 3-5 they tell about a positive experience), and before you know it, there is suddenly an over-hyped perception of cycling as a "dangerous" activity.

For those who want to build lots of bike lanes to attract cyclists, just be careful what you wish for. Remember that even if these lanes succeed in getting all the untrained people on their bikes (which is highly unlikely and certainly hasn't been my observation in a city that spends more money on "facilities" than entire states), you'll them have to share tha narrow strip of bitumen with all those untrained cyclists wobbling about all over the place. It certainly doesn't fit with my vision of a cycling utopia.

The real solution lies in training people in riding a bicycle in traffic. For children at school I think it's essential. Cycling is a skill they can use throughout the rest of their childhood and well into adulthood. They might also graduate into better drivers if they already have several years of being trained to ride on the road (and to therefore expect cyclists to be on the road). The only downside with this is, of course, that the benefits would be more long term, and probably less visible in the immediate future that simply building a "facility", and that doesn't win votes or donations to "advocacy" organisations.

That is actually an extremely valid point. The real reason bicycles are perceived as "dangerous" by a lot of people is simply because those people have not had any form of training or education in how to ride properly. Just look at some of the posts on these fora from newbies and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. Those of us who regularly ride for transport know full well that cycling is more than just balancing and turning the pedals. However, most people don't realise this, and without this realisation, any cycling experience they have is highly unlikely to be a pleasant one. Then of course, there is the old marketing saying that a person who has a negative experience generally tells 30-50 people about it (contrasted with the 3-5 they tell about a positive experience), and before you know it, there is suddenly an over-hyped perception of cycling as a "dangerous" activity.

For those who want to build lots of bike lanes to attract cyclists, just be careful what you wish for. Remember that even if these lanes succeed in getting all the untrained people on their bikes (which is highly unlikely and certainly hasn't been my observation in a city that spends more money on "facilities" than entire states), you'll them have to share tha narrow strip of bitumen with all those untrained cyclists wobbling about all over the place. It certainly doesn't fit with my vision of a cycling utopia.

The real solution lies in training people in riding a bicycle in traffic. For children at school I think it's essential. Cycling is a skill they can use throughout the rest of their childhood and well into adulthood. They might also graduate into better drivers if they already have several years of being trained to ride on the road (and to therefore expect cyclists to be on the road). The only downside with this is, of course, that the benefits would be more long term, and probably less visible in the immediate future that simply building a "facility", and that doesn't win votes or donations to "advocacy" organisations.

Agreed, however, lack of knowledge doesn't stop them from attempting to drive a 4,000+# piece of machinery that they have no clue how to operate properly. I am in full agreement that education is the key...to many things. Ignorance can be corrected, stupid you are stuck with. When I was in school, back in the dark ages:rolleyes:, I can recall actually having bicycle education, hand outs, and practice on the school grounds. I don't remember much if any of what was taught, just that we had it. Until we develop a safe(r) method of providing for cyclists, whether it be facilities, laws, or social acceptance you will have a hard time convincing the average person to cycle in anything other than a separate location. Most roads, intersections, neighborhoods, cities and towns ARE NOT designed with any cycling in mind. I drive a fair bit, as in a fair bit more than I wish I had too. I am constantly looking at places and figuring out how or if I would ride my bike at that location. One of the worst situations that I see, is where what used to be a nice road to ride on 20 years ago that leads from a neighborhood to a business district, has become a 5+ lane abortion, that is intersected by high speed merges, and freeways. Neighborhoods are usually dead end, which DOES NOT allow for effective use of anything but a car for transport. There is one near me, that if there was a back "entrance" it would be less than 1/4 mile from the grocery store, but because it is gated to keep riff raff like myself out;):D (I wouldn't live there if they gave me a house BTW) it is over 3 miles to the store by the time you wind yourself out of it and thru the gates.

Until planning includes pedestrians and cyclists in the total transportation mix you are going to have a hard time convincing people that a bicycle is viable form of transit, especially in the carcentric US of A.

Aaron:)

Its safer riding in a group, which makes me think of- bike-pooling.
Find people on a similar commute and ride together.

It's a bigger problem than just urban sprawl--though that's certainly a major contributor. I had to fight tooth and nail with my LBS's to get back into cycling. In the period between when I used to ride in the early 90's and when I started up again in 2006, the cycling world had changed dramatically. Bikes for general use, better known as utility bicycles, were virtually impossible to find. Everything had to have a niche-usually in the context of an "EXTREME" sport. Racks, carriers, baskets, etc. were frowned upon and kept in the back if they were kept at all. The message from the salesmen was clear. Bicycles for daily use were not available. You were a good customer if you were an extreme athelete or if you were a suburban schlub who planned on hauling some bikes out to a local trail on the SUV a few times then forgetting about them in the garage.

I see the situation slowly improving, thankfully. There are more European style utility bicycles and cruisers available, and less emphasis on the "extreme" end of sport cycling. I think this is a response to the aging customer base. But much more could be done.

Agreed, however, lack of knowledge doesn't stop them from attempting to drive a 4,000+# piece of machinery that they have no clue how to operate properly.

Yes, but it has big comfy seats, a roof, a stereo, videos, cell phones and the internet. ;)

I can recall actually having bicycle education, hand outs, and practice on the school grounds. I don't remember much if any of what was taught, just that we had it. Until we develop a safe(r) method of providing for cyclists, whether it be facilities, laws, or social acceptance you will have a hard time convincing the average person to cycle in anything other than a separate location.


There's more to it than that. Building facilities won't stop people getting flat tyres, for example. The fact is, most people have no idea how to fix a flat, or perform any other basic repair, yet the ability to do this relatively quickly on a bicycle is one of the main advantages of cycling. In the last two years I have been averaging one flat tyre every two weeks, yet haven't been terribly impeded because I have the knowledge of how to fix them. Again, this is something else that people need to be trained in and informed about if they are going to consider cycling as a realistic transport option.

And once again I'll ask the question: Do you really want to be sharing "facilities" with untrained, incompetent cyclists who will put you in danger?



Neighborhoods are usually dead end, which DOES NOT allow for effective use of anything but a car for transport. There is one near me, that if there was a back "entrance" it would be less than 1/4 mile from the grocery store, but because it is gated to keep riff raff like myself out;):D (I wouldn't live there if they gave me a house BTW) it is over 3 miles to the store by the time you wind yourself out of it and thru the gates.

Until planning includes pedestrians and cyclists in the total transportation mix you are going to have a hard time convincing people that a bicycle is viable form of transit, especially in the carcentric US of A.


It's the old chicken and egg dilemma. Neighbourhoods like this are only built that way because it's what people want. People want the "gated" community miles from nowhere, that's why they all bought houses there. We hear all sorts of talk from "advocates" about needing "more people cycling" so that we get "more facilities", then we hear talk about needing "facilities" or "friendly neighbourhoods" to "encourage cycling". So which is it?

I tend to think that for all the whining about it on fora such as this one, the reality is that in most places, these "facilities" are a long way off, if they're ever going to happen at all. If people are ever going to consider the bicycle as a realistic transport option, they need to learn to deal with gated communities, roads without facilities, and flat tyres. Until this happens, and more importantly "advocates" start to realise the importance of it, most people will continue to consider cycling as nothing more than a fringe recreational activity for a few die-hards.

It's a bigger problem than just urban sprawl--though that's certainly a major contributor. I had to fight tooth and nail with my LBS's to get back into cycling. In the period between when I used to ride in the early 90's and when I started up again in 2006, the cycling world had changed dramatically. Bikes for general use, better known as utility bicycles, were virtually impossible to find. Everything had to have a niche-usually in the context of an "EXTREME" sport. Racks, carriers, baskets, etc. were frowned upon and kept in the back if they were kept at all. The message from the salesmen was clear. Bicycles for daily use were not available. You were a good customer if you were an extreme athelete or if you were a suburban schlub who planned on hauling some bikes out to a local trail on the SUV a few times then forgetting about them in the garage.

I see the situation slowly improving, thankfully. There are more European style utility bicycles and cruisers available, and less emphasis on the "extreme" end of sport cycling. I think this is a response to the aging customer base. But much more could be done.

I don't think of North American style of riding as "extreme" so much as sporty. Cycling is often refered to as a "sport" and all you have to do is sit along the sides of any nice bike path and see the Lance Clones ride along in the finest too tight "bike uniforms" that discouraged any but the most monied crowd from joining in. Thank God I grew up before this madness happened. In the late 1960s and a little later, there was no spandex, no overrated bike shops pushing all that overpriced unnecessary accessories on the unsuspected. I grew up near a nice Dutch bike shop that imported the nice what is known here as utility bikes and I stick with them ever since-now in the form of folding bikes.

i am in the lower economic strata and i ask my friends why they take the bus instead of the bike and more often than not it is because of not feeling "safe".

Riding a bike does not feel safe if you can't see whats coming up from behind. I don't feel safe riding on the roads either unless I'm using a Take A Look mirror. Knowing what's coming up from behind is a huge confidence boaster. Tell your friends to get this mirror and your fear of the cars goes away.

The reason bicycles are unpopular in the US is the opposite reason that people let TV think for them. It requires people to do things for themselves. The reason so many think it's dangerous is because they drive like everyone else is in the way.

Sorry for the sour grapes but I'm tired of our (I'm in the US) car centric society.

The reason bicycles are unpopular in the US is the opposite reason that people let TV think for them.

There maybe something to this. I've always said the bicycle is considered the poor mans motorcar. The person using a bicycle is considered too poor to own an automobile. It's an image problem that forces millions to go out and buy cars.

There's more to it than that. Building facilities won't stop people getting flat tyres, for example. The fact is, most people have no idea how to fix a flat, or perform any other basic repair, yet the ability to do this relatively quickly on a bicycle is one of the main advantages of cycling. In the last two years I have been averaging one flat tyre every two weeks, yet haven't been terribly impeded because I have the knowledge of how to fix them. Again, this is something else that people need to be trained in and informed about if they are going to consider cycling as a realistic transport option.

Flat tires are to me a minimal issue. I seldom get them. If we had a sizable cycle commuting population a couple of people could be outfitted with "service" bikes to ride along the heavily used routes to provide assistance. Similar to the current trucks they use along the interstates for motorist assistance. Or we could even develop something along the lines of AAA. Or :eek: a person COULD assist a fellow cyclist.;)


And once again I'll ask the question: Do you really want to be sharing "facilities" with untrained, incompetent cyclists who will put you in danger?

I would rather ride around incompetent cyclists than incompetent motorists...




It's the old chicken and egg dilemma. Neighbourhoods like this are only built that way because it's what people want. People want the "gated" community miles from nowhere, that's why they all bought houses there. We hear all sorts of talk from "advocates" about needing "more people cycling" so that we get "more facilities", then we hear talk about needing "facilities" or "friendly neighbourhoods" to "encourage cycling". So which is it?

I don't want them and I am sure there are many others, I suspect if we didn't build them people would live where the housing was. But that is just me. But by NOT having ANY form of cycling facilities, like racks and access other than high speed arterials to shopping centers is not helping. Give equal access to ALL forms of transportation including walking. Problem is a matter of scale...if walking is a 1, a bicycle is +3 and cars run from +15 and up. This means a facility for a single pedestrian needs to be increased by a factor of 15 to make it work for a single car. Think access roadways, parking lots, etc.


I tend to think that for all the whining about it on fora such as this one, the reality is that in most places, these "facilities" are a long way off, if they're ever going to happen at all. If people are ever going to consider the bicycle as a realistic transport option, they need to learn to deal with gated communities, roads without facilities, and flat tyres. Until this happens, and more importantly "advocates" start to realise the importance of it, most people will continue to consider cycling as nothing more than a fringe recreational activity for a few die-hards.

I think that the Americans in particular and many other nations will hang onto their cars until the pumps either run dry, or a single fill up costs more than the monthly car payment. Facilities of some sort will come, all it takes is vision. I hold up Copenhagen, Denmark as a working example (there are others). The Danish goverment made a conscious decision to support bicycle infrastructure. Today upwards of 65% of the Copenhagen population commutes to work by bike. The numbers vary by the season, and they have some miserable winter weather, but even then over 1/3 of the people still commute by bike. They are in the process of closing down a major roadway in the heart of Copenhagen to cars...to make rooms for the bikes. There are less than 15,000 cars a day using that road and over 25,000 bikes a DAY! So the bikes are getting more room.

Aaron:)

I would rather ride around incompetent cyclists than incompetent motorists...

Aaron:)

Same here, but I have few encounters locally with incompentent cyclists, they won't stay incompetent for too long since our local incompetent motorists generally eliminate the incompetentcy right out of them.

Another reason came to mind as to why bikes are so unpopular....people are pure T lazy...period. Anything that requires effort and not handed to you is bad:rolleyes::p

Aaron:)

Almost no one uses the "main" bike lane in my town because it is the most dangerous place to ride here. There are a few other bike lanes here and there which rarely are used because they are in completely random places that make no sense. Yet we also have an MUP that runs for 4.5 miles right through the middle of town, and on a nice day it is completely packed with cyclists and pedestrians. I very rarely see anyone else biking on the streets. I've been commuting to work for a little over a year and a half and in that time I've seen two other commuters (in a town of over 90,000). I've had people tell me it's too dangerous to bike on the road because of "all those crazy drivers", then those very same people will get in their cars and drive just as badly as everyone else! News flash, YOU are a crazy driver! Occasionally I'll ride with one of my coworkers to pick up lunch and it is amazing how badly the average person drives. Speeding, tailgating, no turn signals, braking waaay too late, every single one of them. It's no wonder they are afraid to bike on streets, the streets are filled with people that even they consider bad drivers.

Im poor and get around mostly by bike... most other poor people ride really ****ty bikes though, when you see them on a bike at all. like an old huffy with half inflated knobby tires. i'd pick the bus over one of those too.

Same here, but I have few encounters locally with incompentent cyclists, they won't stay incompetent for too long since our local incompetent motorists generally eliminate the incompetentcy right out of them.

Like the fellow riding against traffic in New Brunswick two weeks ago who felt the need to cut in front of me as I approached. I guess the car following me scared him.

The most common reasons I hear for not wanting to ride a bicycle for transportation include:

"It will take too long," or "Isn't that really far?"

"Won't it get stolen if I lock it up outside?"

"It's too hot/cold."

"It might rain."

The safety thing comes up as well, but the excuses I hear the most have to do with the fear of getting too hot or too cold (or too wet) while riding too far. Basically people just see the bicycle as being totally slow and inconvenient. That's unfortunate.

When I lived in Washington, DC the bicycle was among the fastest and easiest forms of transportation available. Mass transit was pretty good there as well, depending on where you needed to go. Where I live now (Bellingham, Washington) is great for cycling... but it is hilly and it does rain (but not as often as people think).

I do think the safety issue is an important one to address though. In the USA we are conditioned to believe that when you're on the road you need as much metal around you as possible, so I think that is one reason people are scared about cycling on roads with cars.

Last month our community bicycle shop hosted an "Alleycat" scavenger hunt by bicycle that had quite a turnout... including a lot of people who weren't already bicycle commuters. People had a great time and the route took them all over town (within an area that could be covered in about two hours), and required a lot of stops to collect items or perform tasks. One of my non-biking friends was amazed at how many of these "errands" she was able to do all over town in two hours. I think it was a good event to show people that running errands by bicycle can be convenient, fast enough, and even fun.

Sean

Like the fellow riding against traffic in New Brunswick two weeks ago who felt the need to cut in front of me as I approached. I guess the car following me scared him.
I've seen way too many of those folks riding around. One idiot thought he was some kind of knight, that this was a joust or something and tried to ram me. At the last minute he thought better of it. Good thing as I was prepared to knock him clear of me. I'm not about to fall into traffic. I know how to handle bumps and such (first don't panic) but I prefer not to have to deal with such idiots.

That Alleycat idea sounds like a really smart way to promote cycling! Some of my car only friends don't believe me when I tell them how many errands I can finish by bike just as fast as by car. When I'm offered a ride to meet with them, I decline, ride my bike and show up at about the same time as they do! Sometimes they still don't believe it until I show them my bike locked up outside. All kinds of excuses are giving as to why more people don't ride, but I TRUELY BELIEVE people are just LAZY!!

That Alleycat idea sounds like a really smart way to promote cycling! Some of my car only friends don't believe me when I tell them how many errands I can finish by bike just as fast as by car. When I'm offered a ride to meet with them, I decline, ride my bike and show up at about the same time as they do! Sometimes they still don't believe it until I show them my bike locked up outside. All kinds of excuses are giving as to why more people don't ride, but I TRUELY BELIEVE people are just LAZY!!

When I lived in Washington, DC I could get almost anywhere by bicycle faster than a car could make the same trip. Far faster than the bus. It's geographically compact, but with some of the worst traffic in the country. Often it takes an hour to drive ten miles there.

i think bikes give the illusion of being slow even though sometimes they are faster than car travel in heavy traffic areas.
i always tell people,i use a bike because a car is only for long trips or when you are in a rush. today society is fast paced. people are always in a rush. the concept of bicycle travel in antithetical to today's society. there is a certain tempo of slowness to bike riding, a rythm of sorts to riding a bike that is for people that prefer a slow paced lifestyle.

I think it all boils down to laziness.Society has figured out ways to make our lives "easier".Just look how many things have a remote control.How are we to get John Q Public on a bike if they won't even get off their a** to change the channel or turn on a light?It's all about the luxuries that people feel they need/deserve to make their lives bearable.If it requires effort,then pay someone else to do it.We have to change people's attitudes about more than just biking.

Bikes are not cool.

Bikes are unsafe to ride to work on in traffic.

Bikes leave you out in the cold and wet.

I don't like helmet head.

I hate the rooster tail strip.

I don't want my bike to get stolen.

It's too hard.

It takes too long.

I can't afford to buy a good bike.

I'm not in good enough shape.

As soon as I save some money I'm going to buy a car.


We live in a car culture. Road infrastructure is designed primarily with cars in mind. Cars are status symbols. If you don't own a car you're poor, a drunk driver or a hippy. We drive to the gym to exercise. You could walk/ride/jog to gym. Get there and turn around and walk/ride/jog home and get as good a workout.

It's all about the luxuries that people feel they need/deserve to make their lives bearable.If it requires effort,then pay someone else to do it.We have to change people's attitudes about more than just biking.

Our convenience gadgets and high-tech electronics are actually destroying our quality of life. Cell phones mean we now get calls all the time, even when we don't want them. Personal mp3 players serve to isolate us from those around us. Home theatre and remote controls mean we get flabby and out of shape as we watch entertainment. E-mail often includes spam and unwanted messages which take time to delete. Each of these changes was first touted as a convenience or a time-saver.

We drive to the gym to exercise. You could walk/ride/jog to gym. Get there and turn around and walk/ride/jog home and get as good a workout.

This year, as part of a fitness challenge, I'm wearing a pedometer and recording the number of steps I take each day. The site I'm using also allows me to convert other activities to the equivalent number of steps. If I walk to the gym, work out and then walk home, I've spent almost as much energy on the walk as on the workout. If I go for a nice bike ride, I can record a lot more steps than if I'm at the gym.

This year, as part of a fitness challenge, I'm wearing a pedometer and recording the number of steps I take each day. The site I'm using also allows me to convert other activities to the equivalent number of steps. If I walk to the gym, work out and then walk home, I've spent almost as much energy on the walk as on the workout. If I go for a nice bike ride, I can record a lot more steps than if I'm at the gym.


There's a gym just 3 blocks from my house, but I'm not going to pay 600 to 800 US dollars a year to use only whatever machine happens to be available. Between my job, bicycle commuting, home maintenance chores, I get all the exercise I will ever want. I combined the gym savings with my fuel savings and bought a new winter comuter, plus had money left over to put towards a vintage Schwinn restoration.

Our convenience gadgets and high-tech electronics are actually destroying our quality of life. Cell phones mean we now get calls all the time, even when we don't want them. Personal mp3 players serve to isolate us from those around us. Home theatre and remote controls mean we get flabby and out of shape as we watch entertainment. E-mail often includes spam and unwanted messages which take time to delete. Each of these changes was first touted as a convenience or a time-saver.


Careful, you might be called a Luddite. ;) I stopped using a cell phone a couple of years ago, since I couldn't see paying of something I used maybe all of 10 minutes a month. My wife gets her money's worth though, but she has finally learned to turn the phone to silent during a evening out and return any calls at a later time.

I find it perplexing that an otherwise rational and open minded person who has not ridden a bike at all as an adult can form an elaborately detailed opinion of most aspects of utility cycling, albeit completely wrong, and choose to beleive it as if it were irrefutable fact. I don't think there's many other daily human activities where this phenomenon can be observed.

...and did anyone else pick up on how Chris used the correct plural form of forum?:eek: now there's something you don't see every day, even around these fora :D


...Just look at some of the posts on these fora from newbies and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about....

I find it perplexing that an otherwise rational and open minded person who has not ridden a bike at all as an adult can form an elaborately detailed opinion of most aspects of utility cycling, albeit completely wrong, and choose to beleive it as if it were irrefutable fact. I don't think there's many other daily human activities where this phenomenon can be observed.

...and did anyone else pick up on how Chris used the correct plural form of forum?:eek: now there's something you don't see every day, even around these fora :D

Some people just have to show off;)....I did notice and puzzled over it for a bit, then recalled some Latin lessons from my dim past:o

Aaron:)

Our convenience gadgets and high-tech electronics are actually destroying our quality of life. Cell phones mean we now get calls all the time, even when we don't want them. Personal mp3 players serve to isolate us from those around us. Home theatre and remote controls mean we get flabby and out of shape as we watch entertainment. E-mail often includes spam and unwanted messages which take time to delete. Each of these changes was first touted as a convenience or a time-saver.

Resistance is futile.

I'm surprised nobody up to this point has mentioned another reason (in the US, I've got no idea on this subject for other countries) that commuting to work by bicycle is so unpopular. Even knowing better, and using a bike for all my lunch hour commuting, there's still a certain thought that immediately pops up in the back of the mind when you see an adult on a big-box store mountain bike, wearing clothing that makes no allowance for bicycle commuting (fast giveaway: no helmet), obviously riding a bike to work in the morning:

DUI. Or for those states who term it differently, DWI.

As in, having lost one's drivers license for drunk driving. Which means that the odds are fairly good that the rider is an alcoholic with a certain degree of social adjustment problems (like getting home sober and getting blitzed out of sight of the rest of the world - I know that one real well, as my sister-in-law is a recovering alcohol who had that exact modus operandi).

Yeah, yeah, I'm being judgmental, unfair, etc., etc., etc. But in a lot of cases, my observation is dead on accurate, and I'm probably far from the only one seeing it that way. I work for a Honda motorcycle shop, and we sell a lot of those 50cc Metropolitan scooters - the one's that can be driven without a driver's license in Virginia. Our clientèle for the scooters is primarily one of two groups: hip, trendy college students and DUI drivers - the latter group predominates to the point that the scooter is jokingly referred to as a "DUI Cadillac" at work.

Now, if I'm seeing this I'm wondering how many other people notice? And a little bias forms deep in the back on one's mind against seriously bicycle commuting to work.

Please note: This submission was written on the day that I finally did the dry run to test the feasibility of bicycle commuting the 42 mile round trip to work. It'll work out just fine, roughly 1-1/2 hours each way. I'll start this Saturday (I work 0900-1500), going to four days a week, weather permitting, once the daylight starts extending past 1930 (normal hours are 0900-1800 and I have no desire to be doing back country roads after dark).

Skye,
You are about dead on. However I look at anyone on bicycle as a fellow cyclist regardless of what put them there. I have had several conversations with an old black man that rides the same road I do to get to the grocery store. I gave him my spare safety vest. The roads we ride on are very similar to the ones you have...narrow 2 lane and no shoulder. He has never had a license, never been married. His sister used to do the driving but she died a few years back. He is basically uneducated and is around 75 years old, but in robust health. He lives in a cabin on land that his father purchased way back when. Doesn't drink at all. But sure fits the description. Most of his bikes are WM specials. I am working on getting him something a bet better, but not so nice it draws the crack heads. He rides at about 6-8mph on the shoulder because the cars worry him.

I think as gas prices continue to escalate we will see more and more people on bikes and a lot of them are going to be from the lower economic strata. They won't have a choice.

Aaron:)

That's a good point--they figure an adult rider who isn't a serious sporting "cyclist" must have some kind of problem. DUI or mental illness. But what can you do? People are complete idiots for the most part, and have a herd mentality. There will always be those who can't comprehend not following the herd. My sister is convinced I lost my license or forgot how to drive. I guess eventually the herd will figure out the cars are killing them, but maybe not before it's too late.

That's a good point--they figure an adult rider who isn't a serious sporting "cyclist" must have some kind of problem. DUI or mental illness. But what can you do? People are complete idiots for the most part, and have a herd mentality. There will always be those who can't comprehend not following the herd. My sister is convinced I lost my license or forgot how to drive. I guess eventually the herd will figure out the cars are killing them, but maybe not before it's too late.

I agree, but there's also poverty in addition to DUI and mental illness. Many people consider bicycles to be vehicles for those too hard up to afford a car. And six years ago, I was one of those "idiots" - I compared owning a bike to living out of a cardboard box in a posting to a newsgroup.

...and did anyone else pick up on how Chris used the correct plural form of forum?:eek: now there's something you don't see every day, even around these fora :D

"Forums" is also correct.

Skye,
You are about dead on. However I look at anyone on bicycle as a fellow cyclist regardless of what put them their. I have had several conversations with an old black man that rides the same road I do to get to the grocery store. I gave him my spare safety vest. The roads we ride on are very similar to the ones you have...narrow 2 lane and no shoulder. He has never had a license, never been married. His sister used to do the driving but she died a few years back. He is basically uneducated and is around 75 years old, but in robust health. He lives in a cabin on land that his father purchased way back when. Doesn't drink at all. But sure fits the description. Most of his bikes are WM specials. I am working on getting him something a bet better, but not so nice it draws the crack heads. He rides at about 6-8mph on the shoulder because the cars worry him.

I think as gas prices continue to escalate we will see more and more people on bikes and a lot of them are going to be from the lower economic strata. They won't have a choice.

Aaron:)

Aaron,

Don't ever think I look down on anyone in that position. I spent 1978-1986 employed by a county (PA) drug and alcohol program and certainly have an understanding of what's going on.

What I'm considering is the social stigma - anyone in this position is definitely seen as uncool at best, a drunk, ******** or mentally unbalanced at the worst. That definitely doesn't give Joe Suburbanite any incentive to try cycling, even if he is in shape and not thirty pounds overweight. I know the look, because there are more than a few days when I'm a bit grubby from work and the only immediate visual difference between one of 'those' folks and me is my helmet.

While we're on the negative social stigma cyclists, there's another example that I'll admit I know little about, but I see around Richmond in my rides. The bike, as usual, is a fully suspended Next or Magna mountain bike. The rider is obviously Hispanic, speaks incredibly broken or completely non-existent English . . . . . . . . and I don't think I need to push too many other details. Once again, it certainly doesn't make cycling look like a respectable commuter alternative.

I wish the colleges could be more spread out throughout the city, because that group, even down to the most annoying fixie hipster still looks exciting, neat and reasonably respectable to the suburbanite in his/her Lexus.

Since the Model T, cycling has always been for the poor, and in America you never want to admit to being poor - even if all those bills at home have you bankrupt.

Aaron,

Don't ever think I look down on anyone in that position. I spent 1978-1986 employed by a county (PA) drug and alcohol program and certainly have an understanding of what's going on.

What I'm considering is the social stigma - anyone in this position is definitely seen as uncool at best, a drunk, ******** or mentally unbalanced at the worst. That definitely doesn't give Joe Suburbanite any incentive to try cycling, even if he is in shape and not thirty pounds overweight. I know the look, because there are more than a few days when I'm a bit grubby from work and the only immediate visual difference between one of 'those' folks and me is my helmet.

While we're on the negative social stigma cyclists, there's another example that I'll admit I know little about, but I see around Richmond in my rides. The bike, as usual, is a fully suspended Next or Magna mountain bike. The rider is obviously Hispanic, speaks incredibly broken or completely non-existent English . . . . . . . . and I don't think I need to push too many other details. Once again, it certainly doesn't make cycling look like a respectable commuter alternative.

I wish the colleges could be more spread out throughout the city, because that group, even down to the most annoying fixie hipster still looks exciting, neat and reasonably respectable to the suburbanite in his/her Lexus.

Since the Model T, cycling has always been for the poor, and in America you never want to admit to being poor - even if all those bills at home have you bankrupt.

Skye,
I did not mean to insinuate that at all...I was speaking in general terms. I have an attitude problem :rolleyes: about herd mentality and attitudes of people that think they are better than someone else because...

I have a college education, but choose to work in a hands on field of commercial roofing as a field project manager. I wear jeans, work boots and shirts with my name on them. I don't particularly like golfing so it sets me apart from "the group" and I quite often get disparaging remarks from certain parties, but the joke is on them.

I have seen your "hipster" crowd up in Carytown, in fact I about flattened one, early one morning when he rolled out from behind a parked box truck, no lights, no reflectors and wearing black:rolleyes:

I too see the hispanics on a semi regular basis in the small town near me. Never get to say much to them, I don't speak enough Spanish and they pretty much stick to themselves.

I attached a copy of an article that deals with just this very phenomenon.

Aaron:)

Flat tires are to me a minimal issue. I seldom get them. If we had a sizable cycle commuting population a couple of people could be outfitted with "service" bikes to ride along the heavily used routes to provide assistance. Similar to the current trucks they use along the interstates for motorist assistance. Or we could even develop something along the lines of AAA. Or :eek: a person COULD assist a fellow cyclist.;)

Flat tyres were only one example, and while they aren't a problem for those of us who know how to fix them, they're a major problem for the newbie who then has to walk 7km to get to work or get home. It only has to happen once for them to quit and go back to the car. It's all well and good to talk about what would happen "if we had a sizable cycle commuting population", what is overlooked is just how this might happen.



I don't want them and I am sure there are many others, I suspect if we didn't build them people would live where the housing was.

But how much would they pay for it? Contrary to what some think, property developers are more interested in maximising their profits than trying to re-define the urban landscape. I'm sure urban planners realise that people will live wherever the housing is, but they'll pay a lot more if it's located where they want it.


I find it perplexing that an otherwise rational and open minded person who has not ridden a bike at all as an adult can form an elaborately detailed opinion of most aspects of utility cycling, albeit completely wrong, and choose to beleive it as if it were irrefutable fact. I don't think there's many other daily human activities where this phenomenon can be observed.


This is exactly why cyclist education and training is so important. Most adults think that riding a bike is "childs play" and just a matter of turning the cranks and balancing. Having seen the extremely poor skills displayed by a lot of teenagers on bikes and the experience that follows in most cases, I'm not surprised most of them have such a negative view of bicycles and cycling generally. If they received detailed and accurate instruction at a young age, I suspect this problem would disappear.

The number of transportation cyclists in my town has gone way up over the last two or three years. I even see a fair number in the winter months, and I used to be about the only sinter cyclist in the whole city.

Unfortunately (for them) most of the newbies ride on sidewalks, and they never get much above 10 mph, even the young and fit ones. I wouldn't be much enthused by cycling if I had those limitations, so I predict that most of these people won't be riding any longer than they have to. I agree with Chris L. that people need more education and training, but I don't see this happening anytime soon. We do have "Ride to Work" classes every spring, but these appeal mainly to commuters from the wealthier suburbs.

I only hope that some new city riders will see me riding in the traffic at a good clip, and decide to try it for themselves. All they have to do is ask, I will be glad to help.

This is exactly why cyclist education and training is so important. Most adults think that riding a bike is "childs play" and just a matter of turning the cranks and balancing. Having seen the extremely poor skills displayed by a lot of teenagers on bikes and the experience that follows in most cases, I'm not surprised most of them have such a negative view of bicycles and cycling generally. If they received detailed and accurate instruction at a young age, I suspect this problem would disappear.

I pretty much agree with Chris L's posts. I received instruction from the local police at age 8. We had a skills test for on road riding after a morning of safety lectures and movies. I got a little sticker. I was an impressionable kid and immediately began mixing it up with cars, using hand signals and taking the lane and everything. I believed the cops when they told me that when on the bike I'm just like a car, just obey the traffic laws and you'll be OK. It wasn't until I was a teenager that I began riding fast and breaking bones in crashes- not with cars just being careless. The last visit to the emergency room for a bike crash was when I was 48 or something. I hope it is the very last one for me ever. There is something about men that when we get in shape and get on a bike we just start feeling good and in control and going too fast for the conditions. I don't think it is just me either. After I warm up and my heart rate gets up I start to feel like I've taken some stimulant and pleasure drug. I think the effect might be stronger with younger men. After the last broken clavicle I've decided to control myself and also I sold the carbon fiber racing bike and chill out when I ride. I don't know how you teach self control except through painful experience?

Another reason came to mind as to why bikes are so unpopular....people are pure T lazy...period. Anything that requires effort and not handed to you is bad:rolleyes::p

Aaron:)

+100