Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 19 of 57 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 475 of 1422
  1. #451
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    I'm enjoying the discussion here but wanted to comment on this one line as I feel it's very important to realize. Whether you are riding in the lane, in a bike lane, or on a sidepath, you are riding in traffic. At some point in time, you and the other vehicles using the roadway are going to cross paths and if you don't know how to handle that conflict, you shouldn't be out there. I feel it is immoral for bike lane/sidepath advocates to encourage people to use those facilities under the false assumption that they are no longer part of traffic and thus are freed from the obligations they have to protect their own safety. Reference any thread about riding in a bike lane or on a sidewalk/sidepath and being right hooked for confirmation that some (the majority?) of cyclists using those facilities don't truly understand that they are still part of traffic and need to be aware of what's going on around them.
    1.5 miles of recreational or transportation bliss, and not a road crossing in sight:
    http://www.portlandonline.com/parks/...propertyid=105

    I'm sure there are other examples that are longer, eg. rails to trails projects etc. Anyway, what kind of dumbass doesn't check for cross traffic at an intersection? That's just common sense, not something you need to be 'trained' to do if your parents were responsible and you're over 5 years old...

  2. #452
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, DE
    My Bikes
    2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1
    Posts
    8,851
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by skanking biker
    Indeed, In addition, I would venture to guess that most cyclists that post here, like myself, who use the bicycle as a means of transportation, became interested in it BECAUSE OF recreational riding. I'll be the first to admit that I was utterly clueless when I first started. But through recreation, I developed a love of cycling that imbued me with a desire to learn as much as I could about cycling. The more I learned, the more comfortable I became. The more comfortable and knowledgable I became the more willing I was to use the roads and cycle "vehicularly." There wouldn't be many people using cycling as a means of transportation in this country if there were not adequate "recreational cycling facilities" as you use the term. If developing more "recreational facilities" with get others interested in cycling, form the impetus to learn the appropriate skills to ride in traffic, and make them feel comfortable enough to develop and hone those skills, then I can't see how one can oppose them.
    One does not need recreational facilities to learn how to love riding. I didn't grow up around any bike paths. I did my riding first on neighborhood streets (no sidewalks where I lived) and eventually moved on to more major roads so that I could ride to my friends' houses and to my summer job. More important than facilities in my opinion would be encouragement to use a bicycle as transportation at an early age (something I learned from my older sisters).

  3. #453
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, DE
    My Bikes
    2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1
    Posts
    8,851
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya
    1.5 miles of recreational or transportation bliss, not a road crossing in sight:
    http://www.portlandonline.com/parks/...propertyid=105

    I'm sure there are other examples that are longer, eg. rails to trails projects etc. Anyway, what kind of dumbass doesn't check for cross traffic at an intersection? That's just common sense, not something you need to be 'trained' to do if your parents were responsible and you're over 5 years old...
    Ok, so does everyone drive to the start then bike up and down this path in order to avoid any mixing with motorized traffic? I've used offroad cycling paths (rails to trails, mountain bike paths, and MUPs) before but they all either cross roads, require riding on a section of road to continue on the path, or require using roads to get to the start at some point. Paths which go uninteruptted by other roads crossings are quite nice when traffic is light but then again so are full sized roads.

    As to who doesn't check for traffic at crossings, I've read and heard of plenty of collisions resulting from cyclists ignoring stop signs at intersections between paths and roads. It's a very common occurence with sidewalk cyclists too.

  4. #454
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    Ok, so does everyone drive to the start then bike up and down this path in order to avoid any mixing with motorized traffic? I've used offroad cycling paths (rails to trails, mountain bike paths, and MUPs) before but they all either cross roads, require riding on a section of road to continue on the path, or require using roads to get to the start at some point. Paths which go uninteruptted by other roads crossings are quite nice when traffic is light but then again so are full sized roads.
    Yes I do see some drive-to-the-start users, usually with small children; but most cyclists I know use the esplanade as a convenient, fast and motor vehicle-free bicycle highway. And it's decidedly faster and much better paved than the closest parallel surface street routes.

  5. #455
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    As to who doesn't check for traffic at crossings, I've read and heard of plenty of collisions resulting from cyclists ignoring stop signs at intersections between paths and roads. It's a very common occurence with sidewalk cyclists too.
    Plenty of motorists and vehicular cyclists do the same things also, path users don't have a monopoly on poor practices at intersections.

  6. #456
    littlecircles bmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    3,416
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Rosar
    Perhaps in Newspeak, but not in English. A dictionary definition of 'bicycle' begins with the words: a vehicle...
    A definition for vehicle is a means of carrying or transporting something <planes, trains, and other vehicles>

    In other words, cyclists are allowed to use some of the Interstate system already.

    Some of us already have; some others just refuse to believe it.
    Are you agreeing or arguing with me?

    I do mingle with the cars and trucks and fossil fueled vehicles - and think it is one way to ride... (95% of my riding occurs on roads travelled by a mix of 'vehicles'.... but I also mix it up with the joggers and runners and walkers on the "path".

    There are obvious differences between cars and trucks - where a mighty acceleration of lots of weight is available at the push of a pedal and a bicycle where accelration (and top speed) is directly related to the user... and one can (unscientifically) conclude that on a bike someone that accelerates and travels quickly is relatively experienced and comfortably handling his / her machine - where in a car the skills of a driver are not directly related to how fast and far they can travel - or the damage they can do when they lose control.

    If we are to break everything down to a dictionary I'd prefer to use one pre-dating autos.

    Language is relative and contextual - and I did stress in my post that I was refering to the differences between fossil fueled vehicles on the road and bikes. I do not think you can argue that there are significant differences - no matter what the definition is.

  7. #457
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by R. Danneskjöld
    Roads and streets are part of the highway system. The term highway does not exclude street.
    Damn. I need to move. My street is now a highway.

    What is odd is that when I look at the map of the National Highway System, my street isn't on it.

    Weird. Something must be amiss.
    We're lucky to have John Forester here. Do we really to waste time on trivial matters of semantics?

    The National Highway Systems is a system of National Highways.
    Not all highways are National Highways, or have highway in their names.

  8. #458
    Senior Member Brian Ratliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Near Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
    Posts
    9,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmet Head
    We're lucky to have John Forester here.
    Why?
    Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
    "If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

  9. #459
    Senior Member Paul L.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    My Bikes
    Mercier Corvus (commuter), Fila Taos (MTB), Trek 660(Got frame for free and put my LeMans Centurian components on it)
    Posts
    2,601
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
    Why?

    Well, for one, I have found it very educating as to why Helmet Head is the way he is. Kind of makes me recollect that old Magnum PI episode where Magnum was trying to get Higgins to confess he was actually Robin. . Of course Helmet Head will take that as a compliment and if the shoe fits, wear it! I would like to be associated with those I follow as well I guess, you may call me Mini-ChipRandyaBekoSBhikes. (sorry if I forgot anyone, I will have to get a mini-middle name to put you in)

    But I am not going to pose with the dog.
    Sunrise saturday,
    I was biking the backroads,
    lost in the moment.

  10. #460
    littlecircles bmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    3,416
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmet Head
    We're lucky to have John Forester here.
    I'll second the "Why?".
    Seems he's lucky we are here... in that he took quite a few BF posters words out of context and put them on his website, even going so far as to draw assumptions as to who those posters may be "in real life" - attributing words and actions to them without checking his facts - and if memory serves outing a few folks with their real names. Sloppy journalism at best and unprofessional.


    If this is how he researches and writes about cycling, I am highly suspicious.

  11. #461
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    Quote Originally Posted by chipcom
    There is nothing immoral about encouraging people to ride without testing them for some arbitrary level of competence - unless you want to force them to ride in traffic, which is what you propose.
    I'm enjoying the discussion here but wanted to comment on this one line as I feel it's very important to realize. Whether you are riding in the lane, in a bike lane, or on a sidepath, you are riding in traffic. At some point in time, you and the other vehicles using the roadway are going to cross paths and if you don't know how to handle that conflict, you shouldn't be out there. I feel it is immoral for bike lane/sidepath advocates to encourage people to use those facilities under the false assumption that they are no longer part of traffic and thus are freed from the obligations they have to protect their own safety. Reference any thread about riding in a bike lane or on a sidewalk/sidepath and being right hooked for confirmation that some (the majority?) of cyclists using those facilities don't truly understand that they are still part of traffic and need to be aware of what's going on around them.
    This thread is moving so fast it's hard to keep up with, but this point is so important I'm sure it won't hurt to repeat it.

    The idea that riding in the road in a segregated lane adjacent to traffic is not being "in traffic" is dangerous; dangerous in the same sense that Robert Hurst means when he says, "Blame is dangerous".

  12. #462
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmet Head
    We're lucky to have John Forester here.
    Why?
    Same reason we're lucky to have Robert Hurst join us, when he does.

    So those who are interested - and there appear to be many - can get it straight from the horse's mouth.

  13. #463
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,070
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya
    1.5 miles of recreational or transportation bliss, and not a road crossing in sight:
    http://www.portlandonline.com/parks/...propertyid=105

    I'm sure there are other examples that are longer, eg. rails to trails projects etc. Anyway, what kind of dumbass doesn't check for cross traffic at an intersection? That's just common sense, not something you need to be 'trained' to do if your parents were responsible and you're over 5 years old...
    Consider the angles of required vision when riding on a sidepath through an intersection. For both cyclist and motorist, it is substantially impossible to check for traffic at the required angles. This is one reason for the higher rate of collisions per cyclist on sidepaths than per cyclist on the adjacent road. This was demonstrated in Wachtel's paper in the ITE Journal many years ago. The analysis of required angles of vision was done in 1972 and published generally in 1976. Any person who intends to be a cycling advocate should know these things; they are basic. Any person who just wants to entertain is wasting the time of those with more serious intent.

  14. #464
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester
    So, "we all should have just kept our mouth's shut and went by our city engineer's recommendations?"

    Well, no, because in the case of bicycle transportation your city engineer is at least as likely to be misinformed as the general public. Bicycle transportation is one of those rare cases in which the official opinion is nothing more than superstition, and is actually even less than that. In the case of bicycle transportation, the city engineer is likely to consider the AASHTO Guide to Bicycle Facilities (or your state's equivalent) and, possibly, the FHWA's implementation guide titled Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles. In doing so he would be building a system that was designed by motorists to make motoring more convenient, regardless of the harm done to cyclists. Is that what you would like to have done?
    No, the point, John, is that the issue is more than just a technical one, so many opinions are welcome and indeed required for policy makers to come to an informed decision that takes into account ALL of the issues, not just your narrow technical view? IMO, if one is not willing to engage in discussion with those who may not have the same level of knowledge, he/she is pretty much useless in the areas of public policy AND education? Indeed, when engaged in educating cyclists, are you of the school that the student should only listen and that any questions he/she might ask are irrelevant and not useful to the lesson?
    "Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

  15. #465
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    2,209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=joejack951]One does not need recreational facilities to learn how to love riding. I didn't grow up around any bike paths. QUOTE]


    I never said so. When I was a kid, there were no bike paths either. I was simply pointing out that fact that many cyclists develop their love of cycling because of the recreational opportunities allowed by bikeways. In turn, this results in more cycling advocates and more people utilizing the roadways, and hence, more people to put pressure on the politicians to design safe roadways. The more people that safely use the roadways, the more comfortable and accepting motorists will become.

    In fact, I beleive one of the primary reasons motorists get so angry at cyclists is because (in addition to the perceived notion of "slowing them down") there is also the sesame street factor--one of these things does not belong here. If 99% of the time you drive you do not encounter cyclists, I think you are more likely to not know how to drive appropriately around them. There is a gut instinct that says--hey--that doesn't belong here. On the other hand, if you are used to cyclists being part of the traffic flow and know to watch for them, you will more than likely treat them with more respect and acceptance, simply because you are used to seeing them.

    I know this is not "scientific evidence" but case in point. The City of Madison, Wisconsin has some of the best biking "facilities" I have seen in this part of the country, including bike lanes, bikeways and wider lanes on newer roads. Madison is consistently ranked as one of the best cities in which to live if you like to cycle. There are bikeshops almost on every corner downtown (ok-maybe an exaggeration but there are a lot) and many people commute to work on the roads, as well as on the bikepaths. In fact, the city is probably better at clearing the bikeways in winter than the roads--thus, some of the bikeways are, in fact, safer in the winter. I am not saying the city is some biking utopia and that there are no problems w/ vehicle/bicycle interaction, (like the wonderful bikelane/buslane in the middle of the street with parking on eithrer side) but it does provide a good contrast to other cities in which I have lived like Milwaukee or Greenbay.

    While lately these cities have attempted to become more bike-friendly, there are few biking facilities in these cities and while you will see a few people commuting to work on the roadways, there are not a whole lot. Further, at least in Milw., the biking facilities I have seen are not maintained well and are not connected. Also the number of bike shops is limited in these places. In Madison, the bike facilities are integrated into the rest of the road system so that you can get to most anywhere in the city safely on a bike.

    In short (i know, too late), I believe that well-designed roads integrated with well-designed biking facilities can create a "culture of cycling" in a city that can lead to greater cycling awareness, advocacy, and safer cycling.


    I know I never would have even dreamed of cycling to work in traffic had I not first felt comfortable doing so on a bikeway.
    Last edited by skanking biker; 03-15-07 at 06:51 PM.

  16. #466
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by skanking biker
    1. Every freeway i've ever seen has a sign that says no bikes allowed. Others also ban mopeds and other slow moving vehicles.
    Sorry pal, but cyclists are allowed to use the Interstate in some parts of the country. I used to ride I-25 between Raton, NM. and Trinidad, Co all the time - legally. In some places, if you can't use the Interstate, you just plain can't get there from here.
    "Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

  17. #467
    Senior Member Bruce Rosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    My Bikes
    Road, Mtn, Tandem
    Posts
    760
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    Just to be clear, what I'm considering an intersection is ANY place someone could turn right (driveway, parking lot, dirt road, etc.).
    Just in case it hasn't already been pointed out, an intersection is a specific type of junction; that of two or more highways (a.k.a., roads, streets, etc.).

  18. #468
    Banned. Helmet Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,075
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bmike
    I'll second the "Why?".
    Seems he's lucky we are here....
    That too.

    I think there is much for everyone to learn here.

  19. #469
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul L.
    Assuming it actually is Forester behind that user name of course.
    I'm willing to take the risk...and if it isn't, it's not like I never made a fool of myself before.
    "Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

  20. #470
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester
    Consider the angles of required vision when riding on a sidepath through an intersection. For both cyclist and motorist, it is substantially impossible to check for traffic at the required angles.
    Not sure what angles you're referring to or whether you are narrowly defining a 'sidepath' as something specific. Most MUPs I'm familiar with have intersections at right angles to the streets they cross, but they may not meet your definition of a 'sidepath'.

  21. #471
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    2,209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmet Head
    I think there is much for everyone to learn here.
    I can agree with that. Learning through an open exchange of ideas is always a good thing

  22. #472
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester
    So, we have radya and skanking advocating the use of the roads by people who do not have the appropriate safety skills. And, in some cases, justifying this by saying that we allow motorists to do so.
    What's to advocate, John...it is already being done and indeed HAS been done since before either you or I were a glint in our daddy's eye. As far as motorists go, do you really think that a 16yr old has the skills to drive a car in traffic after minimal 'sanctioned' training and no-brainer tests required to get a license? They usually don't, but we let them and the majority actually survive. While education is indeed important and desireable as a baseline, that baseline does not have to come from some sanctioned course (my daddy taught me to ride and drive) and experience provides the bulk of the education thereafter.

    In the case of those who don't take up cycling until later in life, I would imagine that most of them have quite a bit of driving experience and understand at least the basic rules of the road, so they have a fair base to work from.
    "Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey

  23. #473
    Senior Member kalliergo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    SF Bay
    My Bikes
    Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
    Posts
    708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya
    Not sure what angles you're referring to or whether you are narrowly defining a 'sidepath' as something specific. Most MUPs I'm familiar with have intersections at right angles to the streets they cross, but they may not meet your definition of a 'sidepath'.
    (EDIT to add image)

    Sidepath does, indeed, mean something specific: a path alongside a roadway. It is not just John's idiosyncratic usage; it is fairly standard terminology.

    Last edited by kalliergo; 03-15-07 at 07:01 PM.

  24. #474
    Senior Member Paul L.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    My Bikes
    Mercier Corvus (commuter), Fila Taos (MTB), Trek 660(Got frame for free and put my LeMans Centurian components on it)
    Posts
    2,601
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester
    Consider the angles of required vision when riding on a sidepath through an intersection. For both cyclist and motorist, it is substantially impossible to check for traffic at the required angles. This is one reason for the higher rate of collisions per cyclist on sidepaths than per cyclist on the adjacent road. This was demonstrated in Wachtel's paper in the ITE Journal many years ago. The analysis of required angles of vision was done in 1972 and published generally in 1976. Any person who intends to be a cycling advocate should know these things; they are basic. Any person who just wants to entertain is wasting the time of those with more serious intent.

    Ok I can relate to this a bit but still like MUPs for some things, wouldn't necessarily use them for transportation though (although my brothers pictures of his commute down a beautiful tree lined MUP in DC next to a traffic jam fill me with jealousy occasionaly).
    Sunrise saturday,
    I was biking the backroads,
    lost in the moment.

  25. #475
    Senior Member Bruce Rosar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    My Bikes
    Road, Mtn, Tandem
    Posts
    760
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by joejack951
    I didn't grow up around any bike paths.
    Quote Originally Posted by skanking biker
    When I was a kid, there were no bike paths either.
    In neighborhood where I grew up, all we had to travel on were unmarked roads; there was nothing to the side of the road besides lawns and woods (i.e., no paths, walks, or shoulders).

    Quote Originally Posted by skanking biker
    In fact, I beleive one of the primary reasons motorists get so angry at cyclists is because (in addition to the perceived notion of "slowing them down") there is also the sesame street factor--one of these things does not belong here.
    That's one of the drawbacks to having cyclists using paths to the side of ordinary traffic; folks tend to perceive that pedal vehicles don't belong in the road with other vehicles.

    Quote Originally Posted by skanking biker
    I believe that well-designed roads integrated with well-designed biking facilities...
    I was just out pedaling on well-designed roads integrated with well-designed biking facilities; the markings for my cycling lane (that's whichever traffic lane I happened to be in) were always at least 10' wide.

Page 19 of 57 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •