View Single Post
Old 07-22-14 | 07:43 PM
  #73  
Null66's Avatar
Null66
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 3
From: Garner, NC 27529

Bikes: Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek

Originally Posted by RubeRad
Comparing bike vs car per distance is skewed because of the speed difference. If you compare per hour instead of per mile, then all of those bike curves get slashed down by whatever the auto/bike speed factor is, which is at least 3x, if not 5x.
Actually average effective speed is much closer then that. I forget the actual, but I think it on the order of 1.5 to 2x... We speed a heck of a lot of time stuck in traffic. I'm sure someone in commuting forum can get you the actual numbers with references.

But even though my google-fu is quite weak. Here's a reference with citations.
http://www.ohiobike.org/misc/CyclingIsSafeTLK.pdf

It seems that the activity's decrease in mortality vastly offsets the crash risk.

And this where the bicycle fatalities there are, well they heavily skew to people NOT on this board. Sidewalk riders, Salmon, Ninja Salmon, and drunks make up the vast majority of fatalities. Heck, just drunks alone are almost a majority by themselves...
So DO YOU DRINK AND RIDE?
Sidewalk surf?
Are you a Salmon?
or a Ninja?

We have many built-in errors in the way we asses risk. Think of it as flying from NY to LA... Far more like to die in car on the short ride to the airport then the long flight by many orders of magnitude. However, we vastly over estimate the risk of flying for many reasons.
Null66 is offline  
Reply