[LittleBigMan]

What is the best solution?

Cars travel about 40 + mph. Cyclists, 7 - 35 mph (varying). Pedestrians, 2 - 6 mph (including joggers). Dogs don't count.
(For the sake of argument, let's ignore bladers, skateboarders and scooterers --sp?.)

And what about that Rhodes Car that Joe saw? (Are you sure you were IYRM, Joe? --"in your right mind") ;)

Anyway, cyclists and pedestrians don't mix. Period.

Some say that cars and cyclists don't mix. Do they have a point?

What is the best solution, honestly? Where should cyclists
ride?

:confused:

[The BikeForums Team]

This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.

Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)

Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net

[Allister]

I've considered this very question often. The conclusion I've reached is that it's not so much about realtive speed as it is about orderly use of the facility.

Pedestrian facilities are generally fairly chaotic with people doing all sorts of things in all sorts of directions, and this is fine when it's only pedestrians using it. Walking is fairly forgiving in the event of a collision.

Add other much faster modes into the mix and much more regulation is required of everyone's movements. Shared bike/ped paths can work satisfactorily as long as everyone understands and follows a few simple rules, the same as the road. Pedestrians seem to be naturally averse to this though and frankly I don't blame them, but it makes sharing a path with bikes difficult.

Roads on the other hand need strict adherence to the rules even if everyone travels at the same speed. Driving is much much less forgiving of errors. As such bikes can fit in relatively easily with motor traffic despite the big speed differential, again as long as everyone understands and follows the rules. This is much more likely to happen on the road than on a path.

With bikes on the road pedestrian can walk unfettered by many rules, which I support, bikes can travel at a reasonable speed without, and cars hardly notice the difference. Everyone's happy - except perhaps for the occasional irrational whiner, but whatever you do you get them.

Allister

[thbirks]

Well, it comes down to whether the bike is being used as a toy or a vehicle. If it's a toy, stay on the bikepath. If the bike being used as a vehicle, the road is the place to be.

[Chris L]

As usual, Allister makes a lot of sense. Using an area like the road brings responsibility, and this includes responsibility for one's own safety as well as the safety of others. Contrary to popular belief, riding on the road is not overly dangerous. You just need to use a little commonsense. My crash this morning could have happened anywhere, because I did something stupid.

I do a lot of walking, and as a pedestrian, I feel safer on the footpath if bikes are on the road. As a cyclist I feel safer on the road than the footpath. Maybe some of those drivers that yell at cyclists to get on the footpath should give that some thought.

[LittleBigMan]

Good points.

But what if cars do not follow speed limits or respect cyclists' rights? Don't roads become more dangerous than need be?

Today, a large truck crossed the center line while passing a cyclist.
Both were travelling towards me, in the opposite direction.

The truck forced everyone in my lane to squeeze over, almost off the road.

Is everyone brainless???

(I looked in my rear view mirror--I was driving--and the cyclist had taken the sidewalk. This is bad.)

[Chris L]

Originally posted by Pete Clark

But what if cars do not follow speed limits or respect cyclists' rights? Don't roads become more dangerous than need be?


Absolutely, and this is why I have always supported stricter enforcement of road rules and stronger penalties for breaches.

[John E]

Speed IS a problem, because it makes collisions more likely and exacerbates their effects. Ideally, all neighborhoods should be interlinked by low-speed (30mph/50kph) roads, which cyclists and pedestrians could safely share with cars and neighborhood electric vehicles. The segregated interstate highways and prime arterials would still exist. Where local-style low-speed connections are not feasible, wide shoulders or bike lanes should be provided on the faster streets.

I am an advocate for cyclists' rights, and I use whatever roads I need to get to my destination, but if I have a choice, I will choose the traffic-calmed, slower-paced "road less traveled." As I have observed before, Los Angeles was actually a great place to ride a bike, because the streets are laid out in a big, well-connected grid, with very few culs-de-sac.

The greatest problem, however, is careless motorists. We need a MADD-like organization to get inattentive, incompetent, inebriated, and irate motorists off the road.

[pat5319]

We should ride on the road, THAT IS WHERE WE BELONG.

Traffic laws in (most) states and countries concur.

Bicycle paths, statistically, are the MOST dangerous place to ride.

We NEED to ride on the road in increasing numbers, to "stake our rightful claim". When we ride on the road we need to obey the laws in our areas and be courteous and considerate of all others we share the road. We cannot expect acceptance without considering others.

Our numbers will increase as the society's ecological awareness grows and as our resources diminish.

Ride More Roads
Pat

[John E]

I agree completely, Pat, but it also makes sense to select the safest available roads for a particular trip. I also agree that there is safety in numbers, and that cyclists fare best along routes where motorists are accustomed to seeing them.

I just returned from a 250-participant memorial ride for Larry Mahr, a longtime member of the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition and the Knickerbikers. Larry, a 70-something-year-young, experienced, lawful cyclist, was killed three months ago by an inattentive motorist who had drifted into the bike lane. Kearney Villa Road does have bike lanes and a generous shoulder, but it also has a 65mph speed limit and intimidating freeway-style on-ramps and off-ramps. Unfortunately, there is no nearby parallel, traffic-calmed alternative. This is the sort of situation in which I would probably use a separate Class I facility, if one were available. On slower roads, I cautiously mingle with traffic and take the lane as needed, and definitely prefer to be on the street instead of on some sidepath.