Itsjustb

My company is US/UK, and a quarter of my colleagues work in Harlow (where this picture was taken). They are having a good laugh both at the photo and the description.

sping

Ditto. I voted that because I consider myself a vehicle and behave that way - signaling, using appropriate lanes etc., but ride in bike lanes where they're available, and frankly, there's no way I'm going to sit in a traffic queue and wait for 3 phases of a red light to get through an intersection - there's no point. I ride up the side to the light, and even (gasp) run the light if there's nobody coming, just as everyone does around here when on foot.

So, according to the Wikipedia definition, I'm not really VC at all, because I break rules where there is no adverse consequence for others.

I wouldn't run red lights if the local light systems (Boston, USA) were up to date with the latter half of the 20th century, and actually sensed when there was no traffic in the intersection, and changed. I grew up in the UK, and since the mid 80s, never saw a traffic light that just worked on simplistic timing until I came to the US... You just never have the situation of having to sit there twiddling your thumbs looking at an empty intersection. Drives me insane, or rather it would, if I waited.

Paul L.

You are going to run into trouble here regarding the purity of your sample. For every "upscale" commuter who cycles with traffic and obeys the rules most accept as the "safe" way to ride. I see dozens more riding against traffic, no spandex, no helmet, no rack trunk, no Trek, and definitely no money. This commuter often carries a small cooler for lunch. Often times they have a uniform of some sort on with a patch with their name sewn on it. I am afraid this type of commuter spends no time on bikeforums, much less any time learning the rules of the road or has any idea of the fact he is playing cycling roullet. He cycles on the wrong side of the road when there is no sidewalk. If I had thousands of votes I could vote for them on your poll and they would be an overwhelming majority. Anyway, I bike commute and ride VC but am not afraid of using the bike lane.

unixpro

I guess I'm pretty much the same as most of the other people who voted VC -- I'm really more AC than VC. I follow the rules of the road *most* of the time, but there are a few that I violate on a routine basis. When I do violate the rules of the road, I'm very aware of it, of the risk I'm taking, and of the extra care I need to take so the potential for any sort of accident or injury is minimized.

BTW, do you have to have spandex to be considered a "real" rider here??? Where are all us who wallow in our Fredness supposed to go?

genec

Not to turn this into a VC argument... but those commuters you see are also the least likely to seek any form of education, and also make up the larger share of daily riders... thus rendering the goals of the "militant VCers" somewhat moot.

JeffS

Straight to hell.

DataJunkie

I ride both ways. Must be stuck in purgatory.

tjspiel

Hadn't heard of VC until now so I wouldn't have identified that way. Now that I do know what it means and find that I do frequently ride in a VC manor, I probably still wouldn't identify myself as a VC. There seems to be a certain purity required to belong that I don't posses.

Paul L.

Yep. Like fighting the tide. Yet still they thump their chests and prosylite.

chephy

Do all "militant VCers" have the same goals? Do their goals include educating all cyclists about VC?

AlmostTrick

And do all VC'ers eschew all facilities? I know some that say riding in a bike lane IS VC. (I know, ignore the stripe )

genec

Everyone I have ever discussed cycling with, who considers themselves a strict VCer has the same goals... one of eliminating bike lanes, regardless of quality, the other is of educating all cyclists in their image... the latter, not really that bad a goal, really... however, that education needs to start at the level of parents to kids... which means even at the best possible timeline, we are at least a generation out... providing this current generation of parents are all vehicular cyclists.... wherein they can pass that knowledge onto their kids as those kids first learn to bicycle.

Look, this education thing doesn't even work with licensed drivers... who are all required to pass a test to get their licenses... but they are not all required to get the same education. So right off the bat, the goal is nearly hopeless, if not out several generations. If public schools included VC in their program, then in a generation, this could be somewhat doable, but the fact is that selling this concept to a nation of automobile drivers is just as difficult, and there is no workaround for that.

Now on the flip side, a compromise system that does promote education, but also examines the current road and political structures and works to refine them, along with an admission that perhaps some facilities might better serve everyone, can make some real headway... as it has done in certain European cities.

Further, design of facilities can be done in such a way as to be part of the educational package... just as road signs now exist to instruct drivers to "Keep Right" and "Watch for Trucks" etc. in the automotive "environment;" signs and lines can guide cyclists and other road users too. But the current trend is paint a line of paint and go to a photo op... which is what is usually done as there really is not long term political support for cyclists in this country... as we are so divided amongst ourselves as to what is best.

We have to get away from the dichromatic thinking that it is either VC or facilities... there are situations where VC works quite well, and there are situations where facilities work very well. At a simple level look at public streets... in residential areas one is not likely to find a center strip or even stop signs... but move beyond that, and you find double yellows and stop lights... all the way to divided medians and controlled access... we don't use the same configurations for all situations when designing roads, and the same consideration should apply to the design of any facilities for cyclists, whether they are "sharing the road" or riding on their own well designed bike freeway.

Paul L.

It depends on if you point out errors in their logic or not on point 1.

on point 2, My experience is yes.

There is a fine line between a good idea and that dark area wherein it becomes a dogma or battle cry.

iltb-2

Really? What does it mean to you? And what does it mean to "ride in the VC manner"?

markhr

I practice skid stops in the ballroom all the time

tjspiel

My Reference.

iltb-2

Oh, your reference is our very own Helmet Head VC purist definition. Let me know if you ever run in to anybody that meets all the requirements, or if any other self proclaimed "Vehicular Cyclist" agrees that he/she meets all the qualifications laid out in HH's grab bag definition of the legendary "Vehicular Cyclist."

I would be especially interested in if/how anyone identified any cycling population that meets the HH/Wiki definition.

iltb-2

That's the VC Manor, you silly!

genec

And of course the classic issue for those of you that don't visit A&S very often was this response by the author of Effective Cycling with regard to the above wiki entry:
Meaning of course that one of VC's biggest advocates here on BF, apparently doesn't even understand it...

So bottom line, ya'll just go on riding in a safe manner and adapt to whatever is out there on the road... 'cause that is what seems to work best.

CommuterRun

On the highways around here, by design, the cyclist has a choice:

a) Ride VC

b) Don't Ride

DataJunkie

I find that hard to believe.

zephyr

OK, this is the first time I have seen the acronym "VC" in reference to cycling. Sorry but I'm a guy who was in the Army in the early 70s, so the letters VC always meant "Victor Charlie" or "Viet Cong" (aka the other side during the Vietnam war). This is the same reason I would have not own a car called "KIA" (it means Killed in Action to me).

Wait till I tell some of my old Army buddies that I have become a VC, all to blame because of bike commuting every day to work 25 miles RT for the past umpteen years.

mev

I checked "I commute all the time, and I do not identify as VC". The reason is not my riding style (which most would associate as being vehicular), but because I've been turned off by the style of some of the most militant VC proponents. Hence, I've grown associations with the term "VC" applying more to political behavior than to riding style.

tigrrrlily

So are we your population, or are we your peer reviewers? See the discussion you sparked? See how that might affect your already biased sample?

Meh. Coffee. Then I'll come back and apologize ;-)

mike

"VC Method"?

"Big Debate about VC"?

How did I ever miss this "Big Debate"?

Honestly, when I first read the thread header, I thought VC was Viet Cong - no lie.

What is this, a debate for some label as to what to call people who commute by bicycle; exclusive vs. often vs. sometimes?

I'm thinking we must have better things to do with our minds.