Where did I mention risk aversion? I used the term "unuseable" as in "cannot be cycled at all." A road closed for flooding or a road with 6 inches of heavy wet snow (and the need to travel 7 miles on said roads in a reasonable amount of time) is not useable for cycling. That says nothing about the risk of using those roads.

To answer your first question, "route adjustment or management" is not addressed by vehicular cycling. Vehicular cycling isn't about finding the most pleasant or direct routes. That's what maps are for. Vehicular cycling insures that the cyclist can safely travel whichever route they decide to take.

so, can vehicular bicyclists choose a more mellow route? and can ordinary, able to cycle according to the rules of the road do the same?

do both suffer inferiorities when doing so? what are the differences?

I suspect just because a bicyclist understands how to ride vehicularily DOES NOT mean they are comfortable on all roads all the time. that vc ldeological POV is patently false- that all bicyclists that understand how to ride according to the rules of the road are comfortable riding all roads without thought of personal route choice, safety or enjoyment.

I probably will not be riding 100 miles for pizza any time soon,(pizza restuarant located a few blocks away):p but I will ride several extra miles of pleasant low traffic roadways after work for "aesthetic" reasons, taking advantage of the summer weather and extra daylight hours, as well as for mentally "unwinding" for the lower level of traffic concentration that is needed on the less traveled roads. I also have more time after work to devote to the extra miles ridden. When winter arrives along with the bad weather, I will return to using the more direct route home. (Be fore warned, more intense posts will occur during the winter months due to low cycling miles!):D

Cool. I used a pleasant cycling route to tote a few months worth of recycleables to the recycling center on Saturday with my fiancee. We used a pleasant route that included a sidewalk shortcut path between a neighborhood and school and a mix of neighborhood roads and lightly trafficked arterials.

A vehicular cyclist is free to choose a more pleasant route without accepting any of the cyclist inferiority thinking. On the pleasant route that we cycled Saturday, we used a default centerish position (side by side) on all roads, even those with bike lanes and shoulders.

As with almost anything, there are degrees of the manifestation of cyclist inferiority thinking. Based on what I've seen on these forums, there are a great number of cyclists who feel like they belong on single lane each direction wide roads but adding another same direction lane and making the outside lane narrow makes the road dangerous in their opinion. It's not a logical conclusion except for someone who unreasonably fears using the same lane as faster traffic.

I don't think it's a false dichotomy, but rather, as stated above, an issue of degree of acceptance of the inferiority thinking. A vehicular cyclist realizes that they are traffic and that they belong on any road that have legal access to. For a vehicular cyclist, a road could be made more pleasant for cycling by lowering the speed limit or adding extra width to the outside lane. The irrational inferior thinking cyclist wants to be seperated as much as possible from traffic to be comfortable but a stripe will do when nothing else is possible.

this is not an unreasonable fear.
this is a reasonable fear.

I choose the most direct route, reagrdless of traffic.

we choose the most direct route because we are pressed for time and dont have time to meander, dillydaddle, and get slowed down behind recreational cyclists on bike routes. Hence the reason we take major arterial routes.

Personally i'm very comfortable on high speed/high volume roads, but then and again i have 6 years of messenger experience under my belt.

Then how do you get up the muster to drive in a car anywhere? I'd be horrified to drive a car if I feared faster same direction traffic. You'd need to exceed the speed limit by about 25mph consistently around here to be sure you were always the fastest.

Does the "ordinary, able to cycle according to the rules of the road" ride along those roads feeling like they need to constantly stay out of the way of faster traffic? Does the "ordinary, able to cycle according to the rules of the road" believe that a bike lane stripe will make a fast arterial safe for them to cycle on?

What's making them uncomfortable on some roads that doesn't make them uncomfortable on other roads?

Enjoyment of cycling is a very personal thing and has little to do with understanding the rules of the road. Route choice (or choosing to cycle at all) can be governed by cyclist inferiority thinking and for some that thinking can be debilitating (as in, they won't ride at all if they have to deal with traffic). Safety is a very broad term since it only takes one mistake to end a cyclist's life and that mistake can have nothing to do with traffic. A lower traffic route isn't by definition any safer than a higher traffic route.

Dude, get a grip. a car is not a bike. we're not talking about cars vs cars we're talking about cars vs bikes. did you see the thread about the guy killed in Louisville? I know you did, you posted in it, about how you would confidently ride that bridge with a trailer. your fanaticism is blinding you to reality.

I have a thesis in my mind about how environments influence opinions on this subject. You simply do not find as much excessive speeding in Oregon. Nor are many, if any, surface streets marked for speeds over 45 mph within a city or town limit, and it is rare to see speed limits violated by more than 10 mph, even on freeways (except I-84 through the Columbia River Gorge).

absolutely. I have stated that I think it would be a blast to ride in slow-moving traffic that was going the same speed or slower than I was, like in a downtown center, but those are not the conditions I ride in. I either take the 55-65 mph arterial (45 mph speed limit) or the nearly deserted 25 mph back streets.

an example of an UNreasonable fear would be, for example, that cracks in the roadway were going to get huge and open up and swallow you. a reasonable fear is that a big enough crack could catch your tire and you'd go down. having a healthy fear of surrounding traffic can be a good thing.

Do all automobile/truck drivers take the most direct route without regard to traffic and road hazzards?

NO!

Then why should cyclists?

First off it does not matter if you are a motorist or a cyclist we all like roads that are comfortable to drive/ride on. We all like direct routes but will go out of our way to avoid things that are uncomfortable. Motorist here will generally choose a route that is double the distance and no better time wise then a direct route because it is less aggravating or more “comfortable.” And I don’t think cyclists are much different we differ in the detail what we like to avoid but the general principles are the same.

While the main principals of Vehicular Cycling should be concerned about how to ride safely in any conditions those of us involved locally should be concerned about road traits that make roads more comfortable for cyclists. Besides the obvious of liking low traffic roads I have noticed that roads that have extra width to allow cyclists to avoid motorists or have frequent passing opportunities so motorists can avoid cyclists plus a low frequency of angst or aggressive drivers seem to score high on the more comfortable routes for cyclists.

I have also noticed that cyclist are more inclined to take a longer route that arcs then a route that goes out and back to avoid some unpleasantness. So some perception of directness is important but it is not a pure mathematical calculation.

Nobody is making the claim you so proudly dispute.

Vehicular cycling proponents don't think less of any cyclist who takes a longer road route that they find more pleasant. The more pleasant routes there are available for vehicular cycling, the better for everyone.

What vehicular cycling proponents are concerned about is what happens when cyclists who dislike unpleasant roads end up advocating cycling contrary to vehicular rules, typically through the application of traffic control devices or sidewalk-type facilities that conflict normal vehicular cycling practices.

Vehicular cyclists would MUCH rather see (a) the unpleasant roads improved to be made more pleasant for cycling in a manner that is compatible with vehicular cycling, (b) alternate routes available for more pleasant cycling in the normal vehicular manner, and (c) traffic-averse cyclists become more skilled and confident operating according to normal vehicular rules.

Here is a catch-22. Cyclists are also known to take unpleasent routes in order to get to a particularly good cycling route.... such as riding through an industrial area to get to a good path or known good road with few intersections such as an airport or river road.

They are also known to extend a ride in such a manner as to incur more distance for the sheer pleasure of riding the bike.

I myself used to go 35 miles out of my way to a college actually only 5 miles away.

I take the most direct route when I commute to work by bike. But then again the most direct route is still 32 miles each way...

-D

If maximizing speed and "efficiency" is their chief (or only) priority in making cycling decisions.

I will answer your question specifically.

In the morning when traffic is sparse and temps low, I take the most direct route to work. That way, it takes me about an hour, like it did this morning (about 14 hilly miles on a heavy recumbent.) I would drive the same route (if I had to drive, for some strange reason.)

In the afternoon, I take basically the same route, but I choose many more pleasant parallel routes through quiet, shaded neighborhood streets. It often takes me 15 to 20 minutes longer, due to the heat and the detours (if I stop at the store, it's even longer.) But since I'm not in a hurry (and stop for a couple of drinks of water,) it's fine. Who wants to sit in hot, stinky gridlock on steaming pavement in direct sun? The bike was meant for flying through the breeze!

So the problem with your question, as I see it, is that you are being legalistic in your perception that "Foresterites" have a religious conviction that forbids them from using bike lanes and requires them to use the most direct route possible, regardless of whether there are more pleasant side streets available.

Actually, I have more freedom to use any road or side street I want. This morning, because I didn't want to wait for a red light, I turned right on red and cut onto a RR-side bike path for about a quarter mile. On the final stretch, I used the wide bike lane as usual, but cut out of it for a few feet due to storm debris.

"The Church of Foresterism of Latter-Day Cyclists" has actually given me more options, not less. The Apostles, Prophets, and Deacons don't visit my house to reason with me if I use a sidewalk cut-through, bike lane, or bike path. If they did, I'd tell them where to go in a hurry. :)

No, I won't go to Cycling Hell if I do whatever (the Hell) I want.

I'm free. It's a good feeling to have more options. :)

:beer: +1

Peace. :)

Enjoy riding your bike, wherever it takes you.

That is not a catch-22 as long as the score for the route as a whole ends positive.

The catch-22 is if we build more roads that are pleasant for motorists, the more motorists and the more unpleasant the road will be. If we build more pleasant roads for cyclists the more unpleasant the other roads will be.

Brian,
Please point out the post where I said "I was wondering why all threads lead to bike lanes".
Otherwise stop making such claims to set up your Bek style straw men.

Brian and Bek,
How many folks have to repeatedly tell you that VC does not dictate route selection; before either of you get it?

I opine that some 'vehicular cyclists' are NOT comfortable riding all roads, all the time.

I suspect there are some chicken little, probably more than a few even among the VC. who've taken the classes, etc... and choose routes because some traffic volumes/roads ARE unpleasant.

vc, the hype.

Anyway, put down 110 miles for the pizza. Man, was it good.

Many of the things that can make a road more pleasant for motoring can also make it more pleasant for cycling. Compared to a narrow two lane road without shoulders, we could build a two lane road with shoulders, and it would be more pleasant for both motorists and bicyclists.