bicyclesafe.com (http://www.bicyclesafe.com) is an interesting website. I agree with much of what it says, and much of it is compatible with vehicular cycling. But there are differences that are subtle yet significant. How many can you spot?

Just scanned it quickly but noticed a couple:

I don't avoid busy streets. They can be some of the safest places to ride.

I don't ride as if I'm invisible either. I ride in a way that makes sure I'm visible, and if they still don't see me, then I'm bloody audible.

I don't ride as if I'm invisible either. I ride in a way that makes sure I'm visible, and if they still don't see me, then I'm bloody audible.Who will actually be able to hear you with their stereo blasting and cell-phone in their ear?

Who will actually be able to hear you with their stereo blasting and cell-phone in their ear?


You don't know how loud I can yell. Failing getting their attention that way, it's evasive manoeuvres Mr. Sulu (actually I do both at the same time). Failing that, I crash into them (or is it them into me?). That's exceedingly rare though.

I like the "Why you don't see "wear a helmet" advice here" link on the side.
:)

I took the bike safety test and passed, but disagree on one question. The question about sewage gratings assumes that the grating is ALWAYS located very close to the curb and assumes that if you are about to hit a grating, you are already riding too close to the cub and should be further away from it. The truth is some gratings extend far beyond the safe riding distiance and require us to look, signal and swerve into traffic to avoid damage to a front wheel. Just a little technical difference. They are correct in general principle however.

I like the "Why you don't see "wear a helmet" advice here" link on the side.
:)

I enjoyed that too. I don't wear a helmet myself and I finally found someone else who shared my reasoning.

"With some trepidations, I've actually been wearing a bicycle helmet for recreational road biking, However, [a recent car-bike] accident points clearly to one of the problems with helmet usage: I can no longer hear cars coming up behind me since I've started wearing a helmet It's quite unsettling to be biking down a quiet rural road and suddenly have a giant, noisy pickup blast by completely unanticipated. There's something about how the wind passes through the air vents that greatly attenuates sounds from the rear (and perhaps otherwise)."

I've considered getting one of the motorcycle helmets that cover the same area. Besides offering even more protection, hopefully it would be a little quieter. Seems like I remember reading that the foam helmets are only good for impacts around 11-14mph. That seems like pretty minimal protection to me. However I must add that sometimes it becomes hard to hear due my big ears :( . The wind passing by turns everything into a big whoosing-hiss. Still it is made worse by a helmet. I did buy one and try it out, but now it sits in the closet.

Anyone want to buy a helmet? Size: big ol' jug-head

Lance just did a promo for the NYC Olympic bid. He rode with a bunch of regular cyclists in central park. At least on the news, he was the only one I saw in the coverage not wearing a helmet.

I personally always wear one when I ride. Kickabod may not and that is his choice. It was obviously Lance's choice too. (Even he wears one in all but the mountainous stages of TDF).

(Even he [Lance Armstrong] wears one in all but the mountainous stages of TDF).
He is required to wear one in all of the mountainous stages too.

The only exception is on the final climb of a stage if the finish of the stage is at the end of the final climb.

Actually I have another reason for not wearing a helmet, although this one may be even flakier (rubbish, nonsense, baseless, etc...). However it is still safety that dictates my reasoning.

First off, there aren't many commuters in my area. Maybe I should say there aren't many cycling enthusiast that commute. Most of the people I see commuting are the lot that appear to not be able to afford any other means of transport. I'm not looking down my nose here people, just making an observation.

So anyway, some of my "safer" routes often take me through some pretty shady parts of town. You know, CRACKTOWN. I realize a crackhead would steal a punch in nose if they could pawn it but the point I'm trying to make is, if I can blend in any/at-all with that environment, then I'll take my chances riding bare on top. When my bike gets dirty, I leave it. I'll clean the drive train but that's it. Maybe it's paranoia, maybe it's being alert and defensive, hell maybe I'm being a bigot. Let's not forget laziness; I don't particularly enjoy washing myself, much less my bike. Maybe it has something to do with being chased by some would-be thieves in the same area when I was a kid. My little heart was beating like a skitchy squirrel in traffic that day.

Most of the cyclist I see wearing helmets are usually Mormons or the guys with the really nice bikes. I'm tempted to stalk them myself. :eek: I hope I'm not coming across as snobbish. It's not like I have to pretend to be poor. I live from check to check and consider myself lucky to get that check and be able to afford a beer or six at the end of the day.

To each his own and such.

...there are differences that are subtle yet significant. How many can you spot?

I can use the link on the page that shows the differences that are summerized,

1) EC says "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles." What they're saying is that a bicycle should behave like a car. In fact, they put it plainly on one EC-style site, with very first thing on the page being "BICYCLE = CAR" in great big letters. [I had to remove the link because that site is no longer up.] - I disagree strongly. A bicycle is not a car, nor should it behave exactly like one.

2) EC opposes bike lanes! Why? "Because a bicycle is a car, stupid, so it doesn't NEED a bike lane!" Never mind that the #1 reason that more people don't ride is because they think cycling is dangerous, and that the #1 thing that would make them more comfortable is bike lanes.

3) EC says "Be predictable." My feeling is, if you put yourself in a position where a motorist has to PREDICT what you're about to do, you're a prime candidate for getting hit! If you're forcing a motorist to see you and slow down to avoid hitting you, then they'll definitely hit you if they don't see you. My philosophy is to assume that cars CAN'T see you, or make sure you're in a position where they don't HAVE to see you and figure out what you're doing.

4) EC effectively equates obeying the law with being safe. The dangerous message that this sends is that as long as you follow the law, you'll be safe. Wrong. You can easily get killed while following the law perfectly. In

Just scanned it quickly but noticed a couple:

I don't avoid busy streets. They can be some of the safest places to ride.

I don't ride as if I'm invisible either. I ride in a way that makes sure I'm visible, and if they still don't see me, then I'm bloody audible.

Yes the last point is the one people need to consider more. I really don't get why people would advocate, "ride like your invisible".

I can use the link on the page that shows the differences that are summerized,

1) EC says "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles." What they're saying is that a bicycle should behave like a car. In fact, they put it plainly on one EC-style site, with very first thing on the page being "BICYCLE = CAR" in great big letters. [I had to remove the link because that site is no longer up.] - I disagree strongly. A bicycle is not a car, nor should it behave exactly like one.


They're emphasizing that you are legally a vehicle. Invalid.



2) EC opposes bike lanes! Why? "Because a bicycle is a car, stupid, so it doesn't NEED a bike lane!" Never mind that the #1 reason that more people don't ride is because they think cycling is dangerous, and that the #1 thing that would make them more comfortable is bike lanes.


You would oppose bike lines too, unless you're a newb.


3) EC says "Be predictable." My feeling is, if you put yourself in a position where a motorist has to PREDICT what you're about to do, you're a prime candidate for getting hit! If you're forcing a motorist to see you and slow down to avoid hitting you, then they'll definitely hit you if they don't see you. My philosophy is to assume that cars CAN'T see you, or make sure you're in a position where they don't HAVE to see you and figure out what you're doing.


Being predictable means they DON'T have to predict what you're going to do. Invalid.


4) EC effectively equates obeying the law with being safe. The dangerous message that this sends is that as long as you follow the law, you'll be safe. Wrong. You can easily get killed while following the law perfectly. In

That I agree with.

You would oppose bike lines too, unless you're a newb. ...

Not everyone concurs with your position. With 150K km in the saddle, I am no newb, but I strongly differentiate between "good" bike lanes (yes, they do exist) and "bad" bike lanes (yes, there are lots of those, as well). If a bike lane stripe reinforces a parking ban in a wide curb lane, so much the better. If a bike lane properly located BETWEEN a through lane and a right-turn-only lane emphasizes the preferred cycling position to motorists and to newb cyclists, so much the better. If a bike lane stripe tends to encourage motorists to drive a bit more to the left, so much the better. If a bike lane stripe on a 55mph road invalidates the all-too-common "bikes don't belong" attitude, so much the better.

"With some trepidations, I've actually been wearing a bicycle helmet for recreational road biking, However, [a recent car-bike] accident points clearly to one of the problems with helmet usage: I can no longer hear cars coming up behind me since I've started wearing a helmet It's quite unsettling to be biking down a quiet rural road and suddenly have a giant, noisy pickup blast by completely unanticipated. There's something about how the wind passes through the air vents that greatly attenuates sounds from the rear (and perhaps otherwise)." ... This is utter soil amendment. Wearing a typical road cycling helmet does NOT interfere with my ability to hear cars. I lost a good friend 33 years ago in a low-speed crash, precisely because he did not wear a helmet.

Yes the last point is the one people need to consider more. I really don't get why people would advocate, "ride like your invisible".

Okay, ONE MORE TIME. When people advocate for us to "ride like you're invisible", it means for us to think that we're invisible to the motorists that aren't looking for us. This means that we should do all the things that folks on here like Allister, Serge, yourself, and many others advocate doing to ensure we are visible. It does not mean to try to be invisible(I only do that when the wife is angry).

Assume that motorists don't know you're there and ride in such a way that they won't hit you even if they don't see you. You're not trying to BE invisible, you're trying to make it irrelevant whether cars see you or not. If you ride in such a way that a car has to see you to take action to avoid hitting you (e.g., by their slowing down or changing lanes), then that means they will definitely hit you if they don't see you. But if you stay out of their way, then you won't get hit even if they didn't notice you were there.

Anyone who's spent any significant amount of time on public roads should be able to spot this as absolute crap.

Riding like you were invisible, staying out of the way of traffic, as suggested above, is the surest way to ensure you are invisible.

Invisible cyclists get hit. Get in the way of the car and they'll notice you.

There's nothing you can do about a driver totally not watching the road. You're just as likely to be hit on the shoulder or in the lane by this lot, 'cause they'd even hit a car if it was in the way or parked on the shoulder.

But the vast majority of motorists, even distracted ones, have enough awareness and peripheral vision that they will see you if you're in their intended path of travel.
Even alert motorists, though, get tunnel vision -- it's the psychological nature of motoring -- and you will be invisible in the shoulder.

Since you're not in the "tunnel," and you don't trip their "obstacle" sensors, a motorist who's distracted won't snap out of their trance and may drift into the shoulder.

I enjoyed that too. I don't wear a helmet myself and I finally found someone else who shared my reasoning.

"With some trepidations, I've actually been wearing a bicycle helmet for recreational road biking, However, [a recent car-bike] accident points clearly to one of the problems with helmet usage: I can no longer hear cars coming up behind me since I've started wearing a helmet It's quite unsettling to be biking down a quiet rural road and suddenly have a giant, noisy pickup blast by completely unanticipated. There's something about how the wind passes through the air vents that greatly attenuates sounds from the rear (and perhaps otherwise)."

I looked at the site again, and I didn't see this clip. Where is it, or is it from somewhere else?

What I saw was,

Summary
* Bicycle helmets probably have some protective value, but not nearly as much as has been claimed, or most people seem to think.
* Wearing a helmet does nothing to prevent you from being hit by a car.
* Real bicycle safety involves learning how to ride properly.
* Crash helmets could easily save more lives for motorists than bicyclists.
* Helmet laws restrict personal choice, may result in the targeting of minorities, discourage cycling, and shift the blame in car-bike collisions to helmetless cyclists even if it was the motorist who was at fault.

... "ride like you're invisible" ... means ... to think that we're invisible to the motorists that aren't looking for us. This means that we should do all the things that folks on here ... advocate doing to ensure we are visible.That's not the most effective slogan to communicate such a meaning. We can (and should) advocate for the use of a more effective phrase. Here are some suggestions; ride to be visible ride like you're operating a vehicle drive your vehicle as you'd like others to drive theirs

This is utter soil amendment. Wearing a typical road cycling helmet does NOT interfere with my ability to hear cars. I lost a good friend 33 years ago in a low-speed crash, precisely because he did not wear a helmet.
I concur, I've never had a problem hearing because of my helmet. None of the air vents on my 3 helmet whistle so I'd like to know what model helmet you are riding with Hickabod.

That's not the most effective slogan to communicate such a meaning. We can (and should) advocate for the use of a more effective phrase.

Very good avatar!

I sent picture of a new bike lane I took that looked just like that to my local bureaucrat who was responsible for the new bike lane along with a dozen newspaper reports of dooring incidents that led to death in bike lanes like that and asked if this lane could be changed so there was no parking on it's right side.

I didn't make difference. The lane is still there beside the parked cars.

I concur, I've never had a problem hearing because of my helmet.

I concur as well. I don't know where he got that quote, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't from the site we've been talking about.

Michael Bluejay's pretty clear on his view.


It's not that I'm against helmets, I'm against all the attention placed on helmets at the expense of safe riding skills.