Originally Posted by
John E
I do not think we are being harsh at all. Dan and Brian are great guys who have given much of their valuable personal time and financial resources to the cause of cycling safety. I acknowledge this gift with profound gratitude. The video is quite good, and I have already stated that it should be viewed by motorists, cyclists, and law enforcement officers.
I would simply like to see the same route shot under fast and heavy traffic conditions, just as I would welcome a training video shot at one of our nightmarish fast freeway-style merges or diverges, again under fast and heavy traffic conditions, preferably into the rising or setting sun.
I too think it is a great video... It shows how a cyclist can use vehicular cycling on the right streets... and frankly I have no problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is strict vehicular cyclists insisting that vehicular cycling can work anywhere and for anybody... And with that mantra... insisting that "all roads are bike lanes... "
I firmly believe that on higher speed roads the difference in speed between motor traffic and cyclists can make vehicular cycling "less than suitable... " and that if road engineers are going to insist on building near Freeway like conditions into surface streets shared by cyclists and pedestrians, provisions such as separated paths should be provided.
I feel that Vehicular Cycling works quite well on streets posted up to about 35MPH (my personal experience), and beyond that, it becomes increasingly difficult for cyclists to negotiate with motorists. (Forester says when there is a 15MPH difference... negotiation becomes "impossible.")
I feel that there are separated roadways for fast auto traffic and those are just fine... (limited access Freeways) but that should be the only place that motor traffic should be moving at those speeds...
I base all this not only on the speed issue, but also traffic density, roadway design, and driver distractions.