In case any of you were hoping this thread would dry up and go away, my apology in advance for reviving it.

I've posted in this thread before, but as my thoughts evolve, I'm finding myself more and more in agreement with the basic premise of the article cited above. While I haven't come to a definitive conclusion, I've been thinking a lot about why we feel so strongly about more people bike-commuting to work (the one place we need to arrive on-time, clean, and well-dressed every day, in every type of weather) rather than biking to the store, to dinner, to the mall, etc.

Perhaps it would be a more realistic goal to make these activities more bike friendly than to expect employers (who have the right not to want sweaty, smelly people working in their offices and retail stores) to modify their policies for those of us who want to bike to work?

Just a thought.

I'm sure many Iowans wish Portland were an imaginary dreamworld but in the real world Portland (MSA) has ~80% of the population of the entire state of Iowa.

I can't think of a single example of an employer here who discourages cycling. Moreover, most actively support it with infrastructure. My employer actually provides me with a $1 cash incentive for every bike commute.

I can see your point. But for me, the article's reasoning hinges on this key statement "With commuting we’re trying to get a lot of people to do something that they really don’t want to do instead of getting people to do something that they will want to do." And I take issue with it.

On the face of it, it seems self-evident. So few people are bike commuters, therefore they really don't want to do it. But do all of these people have enough knowledge and experience to rationally evaluate bike commuting? And is it really true "something that they will want to do" excludes bike commuting after they've gained that knowledge and experience? I disagree on both points. From my own conversations, from opinions I've read, from the perspectives I've seen in news stories and features, people simply don't believe that it's really possible other than for extreme sorts of individuals. They think it is unsafe. Inconvenient. Too much work, too uncomfortable. Too far for them personally, or some other feature of their route which they believe is somehow unique or a deal-breaker. All of these may be sometimes true, but more often wrong. I don't think that they really know enough about it for us to say that "really don’t want to do" it.

As for the second part, some stick with it and some don't. There is something I've gleaned from my conversations with the head of Clean Air Foundation, now a joint program with Georgia DOT and regional transportation manager to promote alternative commuting. That is, bicycle commuters do tend to stick with it. They enjoy it, need the exercise, whatever of a myriad reasons but the end result is that they do, more so than car-poolers, van programs and public transportation users. It is explicitly why they provide less incentives for bicycle commuters, because they simply aren't needed as much! Other alternatives, people need at least three months habit for it to become a long term practice for them, so the program provides monetary incentives. It's just not as necessary for cyclists, who tend to stick with it or not for their own reasons, regardless of monetary incentives. My takeaway from that is that the second part is wrong - cycling IS "getting people to do something that they will want to do", much more so than the other alternatives.

So what?

Glad you are helping keep Burlington Iowa non-weird, ILTB.

Making my daily rounds, I see a few companies like Microsoft and Boeing that obviously and actively support cycling, while most are like the company I work for, fairly indifferent other than some very basic accommodations.
I don't know of any that actively discourage it as they're usually far more concerned about employees not showing up, and don't want to provide excuses.

I also try and keep my BF posts free of weird ideological and/or irrelevant commentary.

I'm not sure how big of a role employers play. I think for most people the number one thing that keeps them from bike commuting is safety. They look at the routes between home and work and don't want to even think about riding a bike on them. Beyond that though, is the image of spandex clad cyclists an issue? Do people have bikes that are appropriate for commuting? Would it be easier to get people to start riding a mile or two to dinner or for ice cream or groceries?

Maybe it's easier to turn bike commuting into a habit, because work commuting itself is already a routine. For most workers, the daily commute always involves the same schedule, miles, and terrain. Also, of all the things you could do with a car, work commuting is probably the most unpleasant, and the least amenable to improvement by changing your driving habits.

So, once you've got a few rides under your belt, to work out the details of your equipment and timing, then it's easy to keep it up.

That's what I think. For me the commute is easier than short errands - I just do it, no deciding or second-guessing. It's the default. I won't even get warmed up on a short errand, and I think that makes it harder for me to decide to hop on the bike sometimes.

And then further down the line, at some point some of us realize that we enjoy the activity for its own sake, and the driving commute is drudgery. Or at best neutral, wasted time. Then we're hooked.

Ah, now I'm going to put the pressure on you. ;)

Really, this isn't directed at you, but it does raise an interesting question: Once we have "won" the commuting debate, then it will be time to address other possible bike uses that are "commuting" in the sense that they have a specific destination or utilitarian purpose.

One thing for me is that if I drive, then it's a chore, but if I hop on my bike, then the fun begins immediately. Also, I've found that if I choose my route carefully, some shopping areas are actually more bike friendly than car friendly, especially as I can park my bike right in front of each shop.

Get a shopping bike: One that you can ride in your street clothes, park anywhere (kick stand), not worry about getting stolen, and load with crap. I prefer baskets over panniers for shopping, but whatever. It's always good to have one more bike anyway.

We've got a couple of different types of bike shops around here. Not too many specialize in "road bikes". One of the problems in the low end bike industry is time. Say you take a $100 junker into a shop for repair, then a simple tune-up could easily cost more than the bike is worth. One may be better off just going to Walmart and buying a new $200 bike.

Of course a home mechanic can do well rebuilding the junkers, but it is always frustrating to buy a bike for $10, then pay $20 EACH for new tires.

Personally, I think many of the bike shops could do better with one-stop-shopping. There is no reason not to carry things like caged bearings for the low-end bikes.

Oh please. I ride my 19 lb carbon fiber bikes in street clothes. I park them everywhere. I don't particularly worry about them being stolen. And I routinely transport 40 lbs of booze and groceries on flimsy crabon.

I hate baskets and panniers for shopping. If its something light I will simple carry it. If its something that can fit in my massive german ortlieb backpack I put it in the bag. If its too heavy or large to fit in the bag I take my shopping bike. Nevertheless, I use my shopping bike about 12 times a year at most. I could easily replace the shopping bike with an e-car 2 go.

My point is not to say that everyone should be like me. My point is that I find it divisive, unhelpful, and ridiculous for people who become enamored with the north american copenhamsterdam subculture to judge others who have different utilitarian or aesthetic sensibilities.

So I'm different from you but *not whatever*. I love seeing people ride their dutchies or their 16 lb track bikes to bars/stores/restaurants/entertainment equally.

Sure you do. ;)

I think the main issues are (not in any particular order):

safety
time
level of effort / concerns about being fit or healthy enough
needing a car at work
logistics (have to get kids to/from daycare, etc)
concerns about weather (heat, cold, rain, snow, storms)
wanting to be "fresh" for work
safe place to keep bike at work
Don't have a bike
They like driving
concerns about image


There are probably others. Though the idea of having to wear spandex being a deterrent to potential commuters has been brought up multiple times, I personally don't buy it. About 1/3 of American adults own or have easy access to a bike. Even if they don't have a bike now, the majority rode them as kids. Most of these adults and kids ride spandex free.

If anyone were to tell you they don't commute by bike because they don't want to wear spandex my guess is that if you dug a little deeper, the real reason(s) are in the above list or put more simply, they have no interest in it. The spandex is just a convenient reason they can give that won't reflect poorly on them in any way.

I also believe that of those people that own bikes that are in reasonable condition and that fit them, their bikes are more than likely appropriate for commutes up to 10 miles or more. Some minor changes might be required.

I think riding recreationally (that would include getting ice cream or dinner) and commuting are complimentary activities. By promoting one you are promoting the other.

Running errands where you have to carry stuff, especially a fair amount of stuff like when grocery shopping I think takes more of a commitment.

The guys at the local bike co-op always laugh at me when I show up pulling a very battered trailer with my well worn Colnago.

My Velo-Cheapo bike for the year was a Litespeed Titanium. It became more expensive than I had originally planned, but it has a hard life ahead of it. And, as part of the official Velo-Cheapo mileage, it has already had about 35 miles of pulling a trailer. And, that is only the beginning. No rack yet, bit is coming.

BUT DEFINITELY NO BASKETS.

I don't own any spandex.

As far as I know, all of my century-plus rides were done wearing jeans. There certainly is no reason not to wear casual clothes while bicycle commuting. I suppose I might want a good chain guard if I was commuting in a suit, but fortunately that hasn't been a requirement.

Only in Portland. You never get that in my area.

One of the big differences between the USA and Europe is urban sprawl.

A city with a population of 100,000 in Europe might cover a couple of square miles. The same 100,000 population in the USA might cover a few hundred square miles. It makes a big difference for the bicycle commuters.

One can usually get across most small cities in a few miles, although they are sometimes laid out in long, narrow corridors. It is much more difficult to do so with big cities.

Someone mentioned going downtown. It all depends on the city. I much prefer going downtown in Portland on bicycle. Traffic and parking is just miserable in a car.

But, say going from Beaverton to Gresham regularly would be a long haul on the bikes. Fortunately the Portland light rail system is relatively bike friendly, although do they limit the times and directions one can take the bikes on the light rail?

Often one can choose a house near one's work, but sometimes that is not possible, or perhaps family members would have offices that would be separated by quite some distance.

Anyway, I occasionally do a "fun ride", but the majority of my mileage is going somewhere, errands, commuting, etc.

Amusingly, this is probably the first time since it was made in 1982, that anybody has accused the owner of this bike of following a "subculture," or of having any aesthetic sensibilities whatsoever. I'm flattered. ;)

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=435400

Gresp15c, Glad you took my mini-rant as it was intended. Your bike is quite aesthetically pleasing. I find bikes that have been iconoclastically optimized for an individual's use to be beautiful.

I did a good bit of that, for about four years when I was car-free. I still take a bike some times. But a mile and a half, or two miles, doesn't make that much of a ride. It seems easier to hop in a car for those, than for the commute. It also isn't as significant in the larger scheme of replacing autos on the road, not for a regular commuter. That's another thing I think that the article has wrong.

Thanks. ;)

Good points. In terms of sheer miles, etc., nothing compares to commuting.

For me, I'm so close to the nearby shops, that I can just walk, and actually get more exercise than riding. But I still enjoy hopping on the bike.

Our car use is pretty much narrowed down to a big shopping trip every few weeks to load up on non perishables at a particular store with really low prices, carrying heavy loads when needed, and "activities." The kids are in music and sports, and I play in a band.

Good list. I think safety is likely number one for the majority of people, the others vary in priority from person to person.

As to a bike fit for the purpose I'm thinking more along the lines of having a full chaincase and fenders so they don't have to worry about grease/gook getting on them, having an easy way to carry stuff, and something that is comfortable in normal clothes (e.g., upright, not leaning forward). Using myself as an example, I typically wear nice jeans, leather belt, oxford or mock turtle, maybe a sweater, Sperry or better shoes, maybe a sport coat or heavier depending on weather. I can easily ride any of our Dutch bikes like this very comfortably. Riding a hybrid, mountain, or road bike in these is much more difficult (roll up pants legs, ideally put on some kind of gator to reduce grease problems), and leaning over much at all in jeans with a leather belt is not overly comfortable for many people and you'll sweat more.