Mine come off with a simple flick of the wrist, and I only put them on when I ride in dark, otherwise they're in the panniers that come with me.

Same as lights.

I agree with you there...I'm quite partial to my Brooks, and even though I didn't pay for it, my Imperial means more to me than my Champion Standard (it's the comfiest thing I've ever set upon).

Always goes with me. I look like a Fred, but why take it off?

Seriously? Aren't they on your feet?

In my panniers, with me.

I don't want to alter a personal preference, but helmet mirrors are good. Then again, I don't even have mirrors.

I use Banjo Bros Saddlebags, they come off VERY easily. Dunno about your trunk.

Lemme see, $3 for tire levers, $5 for tube, $3 for patch kit, $10 for Home Depot allen sets, $5 for cheapie chain tool...I'm not upset about losing any of that, and I'm not sure where you get $70 from or why you paid that much when they're potentially items that will be stolen

The big loss, in all reality, and the only thing I'd be pissed about, aside from the saddle. BUT, at least the bike can be covered under your insurance.

Good tires are king. I don't have them. I've never paid that for tires and I don't feel like I'm missing out.

For my 1-2 mile trip to King Soops et al I take the $75 budget bike I scored off of craigslist. It pulls a trailer, too!

If you've got the capital to throw at a custie then spring $75 for a Puch Free Spirit or something crappy off of CL. Even if you have to spend $100 for necessities to make it truly rideable, you'll have something you don't feel that bad about losing.

In college I inherited an old Peugeot. It was rideable, so I left it as is, though it had no functioning brakes or derailleurs (default SS). I rode it everywhere and never locked it up. Sometimes people would take it, and I'd spot it across town or at someone's house during a party. I knew it was mine because of specific parts, so I'd just take it back!

It was sweet.

I think the Southern suburbs are pretty good to bike commute on. There are nice wide bike lanes along the side of the main arterial roads. Once you know the area, the trails inside the community and open space areas can be used cut alot of distance off of the road routes. From my home I can hit the C-470 trail for east and west access. I can take the platte river trail to downtown or catch the light rail as well. I am also within riding distance of Waterton and Deer Creek Canyons. My commute is 15 miles to Inverness Depending on my mood I have the choice to ride streets or mups. I have noticed several other commuters lately as well. There are enough people riding to the grocery store that they recently installed a bike rack there. I routinley ride to the library and run quite a few errands on my bike. Weekends are for sure the busiest times for bicycle traffic but I still see other riders every day of the week.

No retail business is going to give up their precious parking spaces to bike lockers. They won't cater to cyclists unless they SEE cyclists and the demand is there. Chicken and egg. For a business to create better bike parking they need to see cyclists in large numbers AT their business FIRST.

It IS great they have bike lockers at Denver park and rides where like autos theft and vandalism is more prone to happen - and has happened. Even if a business HAS a bike rack I often prefer signposts instead - reason being those posts are right in front of the door where people are coming and going. Not on the side of the building next to the dumpster. No one is going to F with my locked bike knowing I could walk out the door at any second.

My setup is:

Bike
Rack Trunk - which I have a strap for and can take into stores OR
Messenger Bag.
Detachable front light. Click and its off.

I'm not careless about my bike. I secure it every time and when I go to a movie or a long dinner I lock use two good u-locks and always lock the front wheel. But to this day I have yet to even have my bungie cord stolen off the back.

Anyway I wouldn't wait around for bike lockers and valet parking to start springing up all over town. But the more people that park their bikes in front of stores, shops, and restaurants means management will see them, and cater to them. And I'd prefer a row of solid upside down U bike posts over a bank of lockers. I don't care to fiddle with keys and doors just to go in and get eggs. And in downtown areas it would just result in homeless people sleeping in them.

Agreed it is not going to happen for most businesses. My present gig has bike lockers and so I cyclocommute. Without them I would drive. The only way it is going to happen is:
A- some cities starting to require all big box stores to supply them, so something like a disabled law suit claiming discrimination
B- Lockers could be designed so they are not available to homeless,
C- something like the Japan/French, put in a credit card, put you bike in some mechanism and off it goes until you come back and retrieve it. {For those who haven't heard, the French idea is ugly, like a umbrella of bikes that are stored above ground. The Japanese idea is a huge storage unit for about 200+ bikes}

I'm not waiting for any of these solutions. I just do as roadies, forget small errand cycling, only ride for commuting or joy on the road.

I'm just moaning the lack of options. It's not expensive, it's a lot cheaper than paying a full parking lot. It's more lack of vision and a view of bikes as toys rather than transportation. Realistically I don't see it happening until yuppies catch the cycling fever.

Again, until some are built no one has data in retail environments. But why have to depend on Ubars when going to movie or shopping mall? Just last week 2 riders used bikes. One walked it into the building and stored inside an unused room. The other used a post right out front the door. Both were irritated they did not have better options. Not everyone has the desire to put up with these hassles.

Why look like a homeless person carryin all that gear. You'd have to have a big backpack to throw everything inside. Again, it's the hassle factor.

It sounds like you have never tried walking with speedplays. It's doable but you want out of them as soon as possible.

Trunk is easy, it's not quick release, but it's held on a rack with bungee net.


You forgot pump, rain jacket, plastic gloves, bava, working flashlights. Sometimes if it's a long ride, I'll throw in a foldable tire. Little chance of being stolen, if riding, I carry the trunk in with me.



I understand, but that doesn't work for me. I'm doing it for fun and a worst ride is not fun. I've had 3 $20 garage sale bikes, that I didn't ride but once. If the bike fails the fun test, I drive.


The items I would miss most if stolen are:

1. headlight - hard to replace because so expensive
2. cyclometer - just expensive
3. bike - not that expensive but $1,200 is $1,200.

Interesting question about insurance. I doubt it would cover replacement value. But might cover a couple hundred. I bet it's like computers, without a rider, the default policy has a cap on value with the assumption bikes are toys and not transportation vehicles.

I live in thornton and as with most suburbs it has the same issues. I still run a couple errands each week on a bike since it is a nice way to break things up. I don't keep these many accessories on my bikes.
My garmin comes off easily and everything else is stashed in a messenger bag. With gas prices being what they are and the weather being awesome I do not understand why anyone would poo poo running errands. Plus, it is fun and an easy way to throw in a bit of different riding to mix things up. My bikes aren't exactly cheap but I lock up in safe public areas. Still, I need a better lock and a bike more appropriate to run errands with. I am thinking my next bike build will be something along these lines. Maybe an xtracycle on a MTB frame. Running errands is fun! I'm not saying your reasons have no merit. Just that it is another easy to enjoy cycling. Plus, I still have my van for when I am too tired or the weather craps out.
Too each his \ her own.

Having no car I run ALL my errands by bike. It's really not that bad. Several stores have told me to just bring the bike inside... some others I just take the bike in (Hardware stores and such... nobody has ever said anything negative about it... and I've gotten lots of questions).

When I stop in Albertsons by my work I park the bike inside next to the carts.

As far as bike lockers... I hate the way they run the bike lockers at the light rail stations... they rent them out for 6 months at a time... so the chances of getting one are pretty much zero... in fact there was an article in one of the local outdoor magazines about people that bike commute or take public transportation... one person in particular had two lockers... He rides to the light rail, parks his bike in a locker, rides the train to his destination, pulls a second bike out of the other locker, and rides to work.

Meh... for the most part the bike parking in Denver is acceptable... You just have to have an appropriate bike. I'd never park a several thousand dollar bike outside for any length of time ANYWHERE. Get a NICE utility bike and use that.

If the only bikes you enjoy riding are sub-17 lb wonder bikes that cost more than you can afford to lose? Well... stay the hell out of threads talking about utility usage of bikes and go fuel up your SUV for another trip to whatever your favorite ride is.

I live in Boulder, and ride around the area quite a bit.

I don't think any town is truly the "mecca" some people imagine that it is. On the other hand, often people who live in a nice area for biking don't see it for what it is, since they still focus on the few negatives.

Boulder is a pretty damn nice city for biking. Not perfect, but very good. I live 2 blocks from a grocery store (and if you live in boulder proper, it would be hard to be more than about 15 blocks from one), a liquor store, a laundromat, a bike shop, a coffee shop, etc. The city has pretty good bike lanes (but the old part of town usually doesn't have a shoulder, even on the arterials), and has a MUP system that is actually useful.

I commute to work, about 5 miles. I live on one side of town, and work on the other. There is a MUP path that goes along the Boulder Creek that gets me nearly all the way to work. Unlike the MUPs in many other cities I've lived in, this one is pretty bike-centric. I can haul-ass the whole way to work, and because it underpasses all the roads, I don't have to stop until I get to work. There are peds to watch out for, but they mostly stay to the side, and respond in a friendly way to my "on your lefts".

Most places have ample bike parking, but bike lockers are not common, except at the park and ride stations for the RTD bus system. Busses are pretty good, but honestly, I hardly ever take them. The exception is to the airport, it is much easier to bus to the airport than to try to drive.

Boulder is a college town, which is GOOD for cycling advocacy, lots of educated outdoorsy people, boulder has one of the highest college degree per capita rates in the whole country. It is also a transient town, and a party college, which is tough. The first time I've EVER been hit by a car was when I moved back to Boulder about a year ago, and got hit crossing the street, with the light, in a bike lane, covered in blinkies, by a guy with a .2 blood alcohol in a pickup. He drove off, and fortunately, was identified by a friendly passerby and caught by the police. I wasn't seriously injured, his insurance replaced my bike and he lost his license, but still, after 7 years of riding daily in St. Louis city, I didn't think Boulder would be the first place I got run down.

So anyway, I think Colorado in general is quite good for biking. I've lived and commuted in Boulder, Fort Collins and Denver, and of the three, I'd rank their "bike friendliness" like this:

* North Fort Collins (no-pro, to anyone living there)
* Boulder
* The rest of Fort Collins
* Downtown Denver
* The rest of Denver

That is a pretty simplified list, based on where I've lived and ridden, but its how I see it for the moment. There are still some things I'd like to see improved in all of these areas, but I think we've done a pretty good job, and I'm happy biking around every day.

-Sam

It is dumb to have long rentals on bike lockers, unless there is lots of extra space for bikes. First come first serve makes much more sense. The concepts I've seen for lockers were something like $1.00 a park for a day. I don't have any idea what the going rate is. My guess is a dual 6 bike pod would take up 3 parking spaces. Add a tad for the extra cost of material, and you should get the cost for parking in bike lockers.

{Commuting may be utility cycling or something different. As soon as you start boxing in commuters as XYZ, you reduce their numbers less than the 1% they are. If you only want to discuss utility cycling, get to the utility subforum.}

Wow...seems to me Denver is taking an unfair hit here.

A couple of things worth mentioning:

First off, Denver was awarded (along with six other cities in Colorado) Bicycle Friendly Cities award. I think we received a Bronze while Boulder rocked a gold. Portland, incidentally, received Platinum status though I often hear that while their bicycle infrastructure is great their bikeability is overstated.

You ask why Denver is good for cyclists? What brought us here? I think there are a number of reasons:

Yes, paths make a difference, especially to new riders. So our system of paths is pretty good, we also have bike lanes and bicycle designated roads all through the city as well as maps that are available to cyclists that show off this planning. (some cities wouldn't waste time creating a map, much less an actual network) I think that the bicycle friendly cities award also has encouraged cities trying to draw larger populations/businesses/etc... now have guidelines with which to improve the cycle friendly nature of their cities and (hopefully) receive an award. Can you convince your local government that one of these awards is helpful for their economy?

I read about infrastructure and culture but I'm curious, why hasn't anyone mentioned advocacy? I am a little biased here, but Bike Denver and Bicycle Colorado are two organizations here in Colorado that are constantly on the lookout to improve conditions in Denver (and the state). If you don't have a well staffed organization like this who is watching the legislature for changes in the law that will affect bicycling, who is pushing for laws that will positively impact the cycling community? Who is educating drivers and cyclists on what they should be doing? Who is getting kids excited about riding and teaching them the skills they need to become part of the cycling army in your city?

Advocacy, Infrastructure, Culture, Education =More bikes on the road = safer cycling and improved conditions for cyclists = more bikes on the road = safer cycling and improved conditions for cyclists ad infinity

By the way, I work for Bicycle Colorado.

This was the original question. I'm not knocking Denver/Boulder as a place to bike. I'm just saying it isn't the Bicycle Mecca that it's been portrayed as. It's still dominated by a (often very aggressive) automobile oriented culture.

Having grown up in Boulder (Niwot) and still going there several times a year to see my parents, and currently living in San Francisco, I laughed so hard at this it is not even funny.

Someone in LCF needs to get from Denver to Loveland on his bike. I couldn't come up with anything decent for him. "back in the day" I would ride 287 from Niwot to Loveland. No way in hell would I try that now. I've ridden from Boulder to Loveland in the last couple of years and it involved 119, 36, 66, before finally getting some backroads.

I can get from San Francisco to work in Mountain View - 45 miles, with a dozen or so traffic lights and mostly on low traffic roads or roads with excellent shoulders. Saturday I rode from SF to Healdsburg, 85 miles and aside from the bridge crossing (scary only due to tourist cyclists) it is on small roads with little traffic.

I ride around SF daily, and can give excellent routes to anywhere in the city that avoid routes I consider "dangerous" and even can usually avoid "steep frickin hills". Cycling around Boulder is going to involve something gnarly comparitively. Bike lanes and shoulders sure, but much higher speed traffic.

Granted I know SF like an almanac as a cyclist and have done far more driving than riding in Boulder. But most of the "improvements" (Foothill/etc...) have made things much better for cars and much worse for bike access since my misbegotten youth.

And the number of "trucks with gunracks" is a lot lower around here. Comments in the paper are far less hostile.

Don't get me wrong - I bring my bike everytime I come out. Even as a recreational cyclist it sucks because there is usually "one road". You go up Left Hand Canyon and share it with cars. Around here there always seems to be a parallel backroad with little or no traffic.

Beats Houston with a stick though.

That's basically my point...not even just advocacy, but general interest. It's the people, the culture here in the city, that drives bicycle friendly legislation.

I also don't think you'd call it a bike haven if there weren't cyclists, even with all the infrastructure in place.

Small businesses will recognize cycling, too, and make their stores more cycle friendly with things like racks, art, and other conveniences.

I think if more people in Ontario just rode then the interest in the community would garner attention from the government.

I was comparing freeway congestion and and aggression between Denver and the San Francisco area, not bike-ability. I'm biased since most of my highway driving has been in other cities, but California metro highway driving scares the bejeesus out of me. I haven't biked in San Francisco or its suburbs at all, on that point I'll defer to you on how good it is. Pretty cool you bike in both places and can offer a direct comparison!

Totally agree on this point, I believe the one time I was told to "get on the sidewalk" it was a guy fitting this description. He might have had dog-boxes too, couldn't tell for sure.

I gotta completely disagree with you on this one.

I've done the opposite, tried to bike in San Fran, and encountered so many thugs, and wanna-be gangbangers, that I get kinda scared. No good.

Boulder to Loveland using 119, 36, 66, so what? That's an excellent route! and it's frickin' beautiful! What's the problem? I lived in Gunbarrel til 2004 and used to ride to Longmont on the Diagonal all the time.

We might have some gun totin' trash, but you have gun totin' gangbangers. You have crowded city streets, and just like you know San Fran and how to get around avoiding traffic and hills, I know that with Denver/Boulder.

The rift is objectivity vs. subjectivity. I would MUCH rather live and ride in the smaller city of Denver. You would MUCH rather live and ride in San Fran.

Couldn't tell you who's right, I just disagree with you

US287 isn't much worse than it was 20 years ago and has actually improved somewhat since then...better shoulders. However, you post just points up the problem most people have with bicycling and bicycle commuting: They use their car brain and not their bike brain. The whole eastern plains of Colorado is a grid system set up on a 1 mile grid. Around Boulder, many of those roads are paved and run parallel to main roads. Go east or west, north or south a mile or 2 and you'll find nice quiet rural roads that are very pleasant for riding. With a little thought I could come up with a very nice route to Loveland from Boulder without going CO119, CO66 or US36. It may not be the most direct route but it sure would be more pleasant.

That's funny... last fall my wife and I rode from Longmont to Loveland and back... straight up 287. No problem at all. I fail to see where you might have an issue with it.... The road had nice, wide shoulders all the way, we never got buzzed, honked at... nothing.

Here is a nice route from Boulder to Loveland, avoiding all the major highways in the area (119, 66 and 287). 32 miles, from 28th and Iris in Boulder to Taft and Eisenhower in Loveland.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...eb4fd0b15e8632

The highways are actually not bad to ride on, but if you want to avoid them, it isn't too hard.

-Sam

I'm not going to weigh in heavy on the debate(s). I'm a 3 year bike commuter in Denver, and I use no MUPs. It is the EXCEPTION when a driver doesn't give me a reasonably wide berth, even on roads with small shoulders. I was hit by a car once, it had nothing to do with my commute (riding from apex trailhead to chimney on my MTB). Guy stopped, made sure I was OK, drove me to my car, and cleared everything with his insurance.

Denver is a fit city. Most drivers are into some sort of outdoor activity themselves, some even cyclists.

Representing Colorado Springs here. I was raised in Santa Cruz, CA, tres bike friendly, and I prefer Colorado Springs. Better infrastructure, smaller than your average capital city, plenty of trails as well as well-paved roads, and lots of wide open spaces if you want to bust off a century. I've been commuting for several years, and have had nary a run-in with traffic. The key is acting like you belong on the road and not counting on the cagers to know this. Once they see you, they typically yield happily.

And the Springs is a very different environment, but they still respect cyclists. With the OTC there and some of the best MTB trails in the world drivers are pretty used to seeing pedalers.

Similarly in Denver...everybody has a bike, it's part of the standard issue outfit you get when you arrive, along with an Arc'Teryx jacket, a Subaru and a pair of Carhartts and some Chacos.