Here's one spot on my commute where I take the sidewalk (image courtesy of Google). It's about an 8% incline for 1km. The road is narrow with poor visibility. Cars go by at 60 kmph (about 40 mph). I rarely encounter pedestrians.

Rampe de Cologny, Geneva, Switzerland

As long as any pedestrians are on the sidewalk, I get off and walk.

I sidewalk-ride on one ~quarter-mile section of my commute if I ride a certain way home. I ride that way rarely. 4-lane road, no shoulder (curb at lane-edge). Heavy traffic. Lots of turns for roads, driveways, and businesses. It is one of those roads where it is indeed unsafe to ride a bike. Like other riders, I ride slowly and consider myself at the bottom of the right-of-way food chain. My head is on a swivel, too. Never had a problem, but as I said, I don't do it often.

There have been meetings to discuss making this section of road bicycle-friendly, but so far nothing has come of it.

Good for you, what other tricks can you do?

Yes, sometimes I ride on sidewalks. And you know what, there is nothing wrong with riding on the sidewalk. Please I don't want to hear this crap and BS that Real cyclists only ride on the roads.

Nothing wrong? Many people who are concerned about cycling advocacy worry that riding on the sidewalk conveys the worst possible message to non-cyclists and policymakers, a message that consists of at least two parts: 1) Bicycles are toys that do not have a place on streets; 2) Cyclists are scofflaws that want all of the benefits, and none of the responsibilities, that belong to other forms of transportation. Sure: certain circumstances, such as those described in previous posts, may encourage or even require that you get your bike off the street. That's consistent with the belief that the road's the place for a bike to be, all things considered.

There's nothing wrong with riding on the sidewalk IF

-the road is not usable for bikes (covered in broken glass and obstacles, covered in snow, no bike lane and high speed traffic
-the sidewalk is either very wide or has very little to no pedestrian traffic

and even then, you have to ride slow like people are saying.

Otherwise there's really no excuse. Obviously some sidewalks are better than others for riding on but really, there's no reason to do it at all unless both of the above conditions apply. If the road is unusable and there are even a moderate number of pedestrians, it won't kill you to just get off and walk.

And see ortcutt's post for the excellent reasons.

I have a single speed cross-check and a geared LHT that share my commuting duties. They're the best for me, but maybe not everyone.

There is not much difference between the sidewalk and a Mup.

I bombed down one sidewalk here in town once, last year. It was fun, because almost that entire street is downhill. That road is just too heavily trafficked for me to feel comfortable riding in the lane. It's a state route. (actually two of them) I did move out into the street, once I got to the four lane section of it. There's a lot less traffic per lane there, and I think the lanes are a little wider, too. BUT, anytime I saw pedestrians ahead of me I slowed down well before I got to them, checked traffic, and moved out into the street long enough to get past them. Since then, I've made it a habit to use the much less traveled roads in town. They're not as smooth, but they get me more safely to the same places.

Seat adjustment is a personal thing. That's actually where I prefer to have my seat, while some people feel that it puts their knees in their chests. But, I live under no illusions that it's the "correct" height.

Let me give you a little FYI hook-up; non-cyclists don't know or CARE what the laws are about bike riding, they only want cyclists to get the hell out of their way so they can drive/waddle wherever they're going. And policy-makers are so removed from reality due to their status as government workers, they have less-than-zero clue about cycling, PERIOD.

In areas with strong cycling advocacy, these problems are the exception rather than the rule. That said, there will ALWAYS be the clueless ones who do what they learned (firsthand -- or from grampa's experiences -- in the 50's) as beginners.

Perhaps, given your experience, you have good reason for your skepticism. I see things differently. One of our city councilors lives just down the street from me, and I've spoken with her. She's neither clueless nor reality-challenged. I persist in the belief that real change tends to be effected by people too determined, or stupid, to give in to worldly-wise cynicism.

yes, I'd be on that sidewalk, too... even in Geneva, where motorists may more attention than they do here. (and yes, I've been there several times)

myth:

you're saving the earth with your commute....

:eek: :rolleyes: :innocent:



I'm not trolling-- promise.

As a matter of fact, this is a myth that I happen to have faith in.

I am impacting the local air quality and quality of life positively. I'm keeping physically fit. I'm putting a dent in my carbon footprint. I'm serving as a good example for my students.

But I'm not some kind of eco-hero, even though I imagine myself to be most of the time.

Don't worry about the earth, it'll be fine. The narrow band of specific ecological conditions that the human race has evolved to tolerate, on the other hand...

Hey me too!

Sorry, I meant my response to be tongue in cheek, not a real gripe. I was just giving Surlys a hard time because they get so much praise on these boards. They do make nice commuting bikes, though, and I can see how they would be ideal for some.

I assume you know I wrote that as another "myth" of cycling. I totally agree with you. Seat height shoould be where the individual is most comfortable and confident. Non-cyclists in the US and many people here in Taiwan often tell me my seat is too high because I can barely put a toe down when stopped. But it's the most comfortable while riding.

Similar myth: Cyclists ride just to show everyone how they're saving the Earth.

Personally, I ride because I really enjoy it. I don't ride as any sort of ecological policy statement.

Another (unrelated) myth: Commuting saves you money. For me, the money I save on gas and operating expenses for the car is more than offset by the huge wads of cash I seem to regularly throw at my bikes - upgraded parts, tires, accessories, clothes, the list goes on and on. :D

There is nothing wrong with setting a good example of lifestyle choices

I agree with you 100% but look at the money you invest into you bicycle as a trade off to what you invest into you Road-a-Dode. Auto maintenance far exceeds what you invest into you bicycle not to mention the health benefits

I think that most commuters come to the exact opposite conclusion. Just because your personal experience doesn't reflect the common experience doesn't push the concept into the realm of myth. Poke around on the internet for a bit and look for average costs of motor vehicle and bicycle operation. The numbers for both fluctuate, but annual car costs don't drop below $3000 and annual bike costs don't rise above $600.

I understand the feeling of throwing loads of money into the bike. Over the last year I've replaced the entire front end of my bicycle; forks, wheel, summer tire, winter tire, bars, stem, stem riser, brake levers, shifters. Cost me as much as the whole bike did originally, but I've got a setup that I'm happier with and should last me for years. So this year is an expensive bike year, but if I average the cost over the total life of the components it's still a fraction of automotive upkeep.

Average savings for people using public transport instead of driving.

Car costs vs. bike costs

Like Timber said, this doesn't take into effect health care cost savings. Nor does it reflect the tax savings possible regarding decreased need for road maintenance (automotive road wear vs. bike road wear, and square footage of transport infrastructure needed for cars vs. bikes), less stress on the energy grid (taxpayer funded subsidies for energy companies and military budgets for defending energy interests), and less stress on our emergency services systems from a decrease in the daily automotive carnage that we all pay to clean up.

You ought to check out some of the foot forward and recumbent bikes. You can put your feet on the ground and still get the full extension and full power that you're missing now.

Like "hybrid" the term MUP is used to describe a number of different things. In some cases they aren't much more than sidewalks but in general they don't have as many intersections with streets as sidewalks do. And well designed ones intersect the road in a way that's more visible to motor traffic than a typical sidewalk is. Further many MUPs separate rolling traffic from pedestrians.

Here's a sidewalk:

http://www.adrants.com/images/kinkos_sidewalk.jpg

Here are some MUPs:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/...cfa7aea6e4.jpg

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicy...cription-6.jpg

Yeah, sidewalks and MUPs are significantly different. MUPs are usually wider (and the widest sidewalks are usually the heavily used ones, with quieter residential neighborhoods having narrower ones), have less intersections if any, have few or no car crossing points, have few if any places where pedestrians will be coming in and out regularly such as storefronts or houses, few if any obstacles like trees or trash cans in the walkway, and most importantly, bikes are expected on them.

No, really, my cousin knows this guy who has a friend who says that he's been riding his bike on the sidewalk for like 20 years and has never had any accidents or flat tires even.....


Myths:

It's OK to drive a car in the bike lane if you're going to be turning right soon and the cars in front of you are stopped at a traffic signal.

It's OK to park your car in a bike lane.

As long as you don't actually hit a cyclist, it doesn't matter how closely you pass him.

Bicycles and pedestrians move at about the same speed.