CliffordK

Certainly not everyone. However, there are many people with no retirement savings, and something small like a flat tire on their car is enough to be a major emergency.

Perhaps the perception of public transport varies from community to community. Students?

I'm not sure. A good MTB or Hybrid can go for quite a while... and the owners may not care about little things like cone pitting, or even a bent axle.

Of course those bikes being ridden for 50,000 miles are usually not the bargain basement department store bikes. But, they also tend to get quite a bit of maintenance over their lifetime.

A good Hybrid often has a lot more tread on the tires than the typical road bike with skinny tires.

mcours2006

To make a blanket statement like everyone who rides transit is living from paycheck to paycheque is just plain silly. Sure there are people living this way who ride transit, but there are also people who have decent salaries who ride transit, just as there are motorists who live from paycheck to paycheque.

I think department store bikes can last a long time because they are built with heavy gauge steel as opposed to light-weight aluminum or carbon. They require maintenance just as higher-priced bikes from LBS. Perhaps people who buy the Walmart/Canadian Tire bikes tend not to be so much into cycling and do take care of their bikes as well as,..well people on this forum, for instance, and that's why the bikes don't last as long.

tjspiel

It might be true in Novi Sad, I have no idea. It is not true here but there is a definite perception among some that buses are used primarily used by low income people.

Cycling is my primary means of getting to work, but I'll also take the train during a winter storm, and I'll drive if I need a car for some reason. I've taken buses in the past. They all have their pros and cons but we could manage as a society with a lot fewer cars. Improved public transportation and cycling infrastructure are both needed.



I think department store bike FRAMES can last a long time. The components can last a long time too if used infrequently. Some of the lower pricing is due to volume and reduced labor costs. Walmart doesn't have bike mechanics. The other reason their bikes cost less is that they use cheaper components. Sometimes that means that the components are heavier or don't work quite as smoothly, but other times it means they aren't as durable.

acidfast7

I think that's pretty much a US-only phenomenon. And one of the more interesting ones at that, to be honest.

CliffordK

It would depend from city to city.

But the USA very much has a car culture.

The other thing is that depending on the route, buses often waste a lot of time. A few minutes to wait for the next bus. Then driving slow with frequent stops. Transfers & more waiting? Walking to and from the bus stops. A simple 15 minute drive can easily take an hour on the bus. And a good bike can often beat the bus.

So, once one starts valuing one's own time, then public transportation drops.

Big cities like NYC, however, get to the point where it is more convenient to ride the subway than drive a car. So, perhaps one gets a greater mix of public transportation users.

It all depends on the bike. A steel chainring can last as long as an aluminium one. The big manufactures are working on the lifespan of chains, but if an 11 spd chain is 5 times as expensive as a 7 spd chain, it doesn't mean it will last 5x as long.

I've been doing some tinkering on a "franken-bike". One of the things I've noticed is that things like bushed derailleur jockey wheels are fine (perhaps even preferable) for non-indexed shifting, but are not precise enough for indexed shifting (at least with 9 or more speeds). And the bushed jockey wheels will last for eons.

So, the cheaper components work fine as long as they are matched with the rest of the component group.

tjspiel

This is something that kept me from riding a bus for a long time when I first started working (after college). To drive took me 25 to 40 minutes but the bus took 45 to 55 by the time I included the waiting and the walking. What I quickly discovered though is that I could get some things done on a bus or just sleep. You can't do that in a car (or at least you shouldn't). On that route at least, taking the bus was often better use of my time. Now you're starting to see trains and even some buses equipped with wifi.

But it all varies. If you have a lot of transfers and have to wait at each one, it's hard to do much with that time. On the other hand, driving isn't necessarily door to door either and there can still be a walk involved. Most of the people in this office park in a ramp that's about 6 blocks away.

noglider 

My wife did something incredible: she tried to convince me to commute by car. Insane. I have two good choices already: subway and bike. The car might be faster but definitely not less stressful or cheaper. She asked me to consider it because this way, I would be moving my car out of a street parking space every day and taking a new one every night. Uh, no thanks. I leave my car up in the country, and I've been meaning to sell it for a while now. When I drive a car, something unexpected always happens, and I mean something unpleasant. I'm getting a lot of reading done on the subway lately. Plus a good portion of my trip involves riding subway cars that aren't terribly crowded. I'm really pretty lucky, even though my commute is about 70 minutes.

Sullalto

Let me clarify: Outside of areas with a very robust and capable public transportation system(Which is NOT most metro areas in the US), you won't find very many remotely affluent people on the bus.

And yes, I do believe that-as someone who hasn't owned a car in, hell, 6-8 years now.

scroca

In mass transit, you have no control over who's sitting there next to you.

In a car, you may have more control but not necessarily have complete control.

On my bike, I'm the boss. (And nobody'd fit on the saddle with me anyway).

acidfast7

Let me clarify my comment.

In Central/South America, I have never heard public transport considered "for poor people only." Although my Spanish isn't tiptop.
In Western Europe, most well off people prefer public transport. Unless they're so well off they have a 24/7 car service, driver. Even those with a company car, still use public transport. In Eastern Europe, the roads can be quite bad for bus and for auto.
In Asia, in the large cities, but transport was used by everyone (China/Japan). It was €0.20 for a subway ticket in China. Why use a taxi? And it was brand new.

I'm actually agreeing with someone above who said that "public transport is seen as something for the poor." I responded that a US-specific phenomenon. Not saying that it occurs everywhere in the US, but that I've only heard it in the US.

acidfast7

Box bike?

wolfchild

I think one of the reasons why your BSO has been reliable and problem free is because it's a singlespeed, not much to go wrong. I know because I also ride SS/FG and the only maintenance I do on them is replace chains when it wears out, never had any mechanical problems yet.....A cheap BSO with gears, suspension, and poor quality disc brakes is a different story, they never work right and are worse then Chrysler K-cars from the 1980's.

wolfchild

That's why I prefer to stand whenever I ride on a bus. If it's a short trip 20-30 minutes I don't mind standing.

Sullalto

Yeah, Santiago at least, everybody uses buses/subway/taxis. Though as a whole, those countries don't have all that many cars to begin with: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...les_per_capita

I'm having a hard time reconciling your 'nobody drives in western europe' with the traffic in germany, italy, france , spain and england though.

Omiak

When was the last time a freeway made a profit? All auto transit is subsidized by taxes as well.

acidfast7

It's almost made it's money back.

Channel Tunnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

B. Carfree

The Bay Area and Sacramento, now linked by the Amtrak Capitals train, have loads of upper-middle class (and higher) income folks on trains and buses. This is an incredibly spread out region, the type of place where one can go for century-length bike rides with minimal traffic but still be within reach of suburbs and cities. In many places of employment thereabouts, public transit use is considered the norm and people ask why you drove in to work if you happen to bring a car on occasion, assuming you have something special planned. Heck, many companies have contracted with Muni to use the bus stops for company buses, which are basically just privately run express commuter buses with a single destination.

The public transit, while functional, is hardly what I would call robust and it was almost non-existent fifteen years ago. However, the simple addition of the Capitals, light rail in San Jose and some BART extensions have dramatically changed the convenience for millions of people. Well, that and the fact that the freeways reached terminal capacity a quarter-century back. It is all relative and a degraded car experience does help the perception of the public transit option. I now see many bikes on the train and BART, which has relaxed its bike policy to allow bikes around the clock. It's certainly not a paycheck to paycheck crowd on the public transit.

I-Like-To-Bike

Ya mean public transit buses as well as commercial truck transportation use their own private right of way and not those same tax supported roads?

I-Like-To-Bike

No one needs to do without the practicality or usefulness of gears on a bicycle to find a reliable, problem free bike.

My 238DM (approx $135) big box store (Real, Germany) 7 speed IGH bike worked fine for 12 years of all weather riding in the U.S. and Germany with no complications or unusual maintenance problems. The same can be said for the 3 and 5 speed Sachs and S-A IGH equipped bikes I previously owned and used for many years of all weather commuting and recreational riding.

wphamilton

How difficult or expensive is it to change out the cogs when they wear out?

I-Like-To-Bike

How representative do you think the Bay Area is of U.S. metropolitan areas? Or the employment, housing/zoning policies and living costs of the Bay area? Or using Amtrak or other heavy rail trains is for daily U.S. commuters?

CliffordK

Hmmmm

Around here, fuel taxes go into a road fund which pay for a lot of the roads, although there are several road funds so I'm not sure of all the distinctions, state, county, city, federal highway funds (Feds also get fuel taxes).

Many toll roads and bridges actually break even, and eventually turn a profit (sometimes at the expense of reduced maintenance). Anyway, fuel taxes is one way of looking at user fees.

I doubt the public buses are paying the same fuel taxes that everyone else pays. And, yes, for the most part they do share the roads, although someone came up with the bright idea of building a few separate "bus expressways", creating essentially bus only lanes for the occasional bus that comes along.

I-Like-To-Bike

I think I changed the rear sprocket (cog) twice in 50,000+ miles of use on the Sachs 7 speed. Once I take the wheel off (5 minutes) it takes less than 5 minutes to replace the sprocket ($10) using a small screw driver to take the snap ring on/off. I replaced the chain (approx $7) every year or so (about 5000 miles). I replaced the front chain ring ($15) once due to wear, took about 30 minutes. I never wore out a sprocket on any other bike but I did replace rear sprockets for a different gearing ratio every now and then, never took more than 5 minutes.

CliffordK

Much of the West Coast lacks the extreme racial community and wealth divisions, although there are poverty stricken areas of LA. However, it may affect the overall general impression of public transportation.

Omiak

Do Roads Pay for Themselves? | Frontier Group

"Since 1947, the amount of money spent on highways, roads and streets has exceeded the amount raised through gasoline taxes and other so-called “user fees” by $600 billion (2005 dollars), representing a massive transfer of general government funds to highways."


Living near highways may be hazardous to your health


"The health care community has known for a long time that people living within 300 feet of major roadways were more prone to respiratory ailments, allergies, certain kinds of cancers and heart disease. The elderly and very young children seemed to be hit even harder, studies have shown."

So yes, I'm living car free and I'm paying for infrastructure that I don't use that is damaging my health just by living nearby.