Keep on truckin'

You're passing roadies like they're fence posts, by the hundreds, on a loaded tourer and you expect them to say "thank you"!?

Returning to the OP's question - are utility cyclists "holier than thou" (which is presumed to be wrong)? Well - how about actually holier? Everyone is challenged by birth to assess the soundness of the culture they were born into, and decide how to respond to it. SUVs and 4,000-square-foot houses really do r.a.p.e the planet - it's not just a pose or a question of style. The person who has repudiated the communal orgy has gone through a process of judging it.

As for bike moves, one salubrious effect is presumably causing people to see possessions as costly in themselves - to become aware of their existence and weight as negatives. Living lightly on the land grows out of becoming sensitive to and repelled by such costs. A path to a considered life, and a wisdom manifested as frugality.

The Kikuyu funeral used to involve leaving the body out for hyenas. I like that - a humble sense of one's place in the scheme of things.

"...The person who has repudiated the communal orgy has gone through a process of judging it.

As for bike moves, one salubrious effect is presumably causing people to see possessions as costly in themselves - to become aware of their existence and weight as negatives. Living lightly on the land grows out of becoming sensitive to and repelled by such costs. A path to a considered life, and a wisdom manifested as frugality."

What he said. Utility cyclists are actually holier, and they judge people.

Not all utility bikers are snobs.

This utility biker was friendly even though I was riding a bike with no rack. I don't ride drop bars or wear lycra shorts, but somehow I don't think it would have mattered.


Some riders feel a kinship with their fellow wheelmen and some do not.

Getting groceries

I made a passing remark yesterday about how "people driving to the park to walk in circles is an indicator of how messed up our society is" and I got seriously flamed by a friend of my wife's. She swore up and down that it was fine, and that she had to drive everywhere. She lives less than 3 miles from Wal-Mart. Well, I mentioned that, and it didn't go over too well.

Apparently, being a "utility" cyclist doesn't hold much weight, because people will swear up and down that "you could do it, but I never could."

SUVs aren't much more of an environmental issue than any other car; the bigger issue is the amount of kinetic energy on the road. Think about how much damage is done by a 40mph head-on collision in two Miatas. Now imagine that in two 6000 pound SUVs. The "Crumple Zone" expends energy by heat released during deformation of a metallic solid (i.e. bending metal), and lengthens the impulse (slows it down). Good freaking luck with that when you dump in twice or three times as much energy.

An SUVs fuel consumption is typically higher than a lighter vehicle's fuel consumption; however bigger engines are also much more efficient. While the fuel consumption isn't that much higher, it's still wasteful; but when you want to move a lot of heavy stuff, you're better off with the V8 than the I4. A loaded I4 will consume more fuel, whereas a nicely unloaded I4 will consume less fuel than an unloaded V8. The V8 always eats more unloaded, though, because the V8 is heavier (the moving parts physically weigh more) and the car is heavier. If you could make a high volume engine without making the pistons and crank shaft heavier than a small volume engine, you'd get much more efficient energy usage and lower the fuel consumption.

People are using the wrong tool for the wrong application. You might think 16 miles is nothing; but 16 miles is a significant trip for most people, it's just easy for dedicated cyclists. At a point, though, it becomes ridiculous: why are you driving to the liquor store 4 blocks away to get a 24 pack of beer that'll easily fit in the bike rear basket? Anything under 2-3 miles is going to take the same time on a bike as in a car if you're in the city, maybe 2-3 minutes longer; unless you're hauling unwieldy cargo (most people shouldn't pull trailers; I won't pull a trailer), why are you going by car?

We live in a country where people sell us things. People started buying lots of SUVs in the 90s when the TV started telling them they needed an SUV. After that, they started believing you need an SUV to be safe. Women buy SUVs when they're single simply "to protect themselves." Ironically, this is often because they're told or they believe that they're bad drivers; or because they ARE bad drivers, typically due to being afraid of other cars on the road. Truth is an SUV has worse handling characteristics (don't BS me about newer SUVs with awesome handling: it's a myth, you're not driving a Miata or a Monaro), worse 360 degree visibility (bigger vehicle), a larger stopping distances (it's friggin' heavy), etc. You're never going to learn to control your vehicle well enough to escape emergency situations that way; you have far too much blind area to even properly assess potential hazards on the road and pick your escape paths.

People don't buy things by assessing what they need; they want a one-size-fits-all solution. I think a small sports car like a Mazda MX-5 Miata is the best starting point for a first car, but only with appropriate driver's education. It's great, because you get a 6 speed stick shift and--get this--you have to remove the cell phone from your face to make the car move at all! At a light? One hand on the wheel, hit the clutch, one hand to the shifter. No hands free to keep texting while you just rock on the accelerator and ease through the light without even looking. The car handles well enough; you can only carry one passenger (who has to be over 21 and licensed, according to the law here); etc. So teach everyone all the collision avoidance and skid recovery and proper vehicular awareness stuff, put them in this tiny 4 cylinder car (it'll 0-60 in 7 or 8 seconds, it's not too slow; that's important, too, for safety reasons, but you don't need a 0-60 in 3.8 V8 BMW), let them go back and forth to school with all of a backpack to carry.

But then, maybe you get a kid that's 17 and helping his friends move a lot or whatever. He needs like ... a pick-up truck. Maybe his friends carpool to work with him; cool, he needs a 5 seat Sedan with some trunk space (Toyota Solara is an excellent car for this; too bad it's not RWD). Sure the Miata is a great introductory car; but it's a great introductory car for hauling very little, with exactly one or two people in it, without burning tons of gas or drag racing (speaking of racing, take that thing to the AutoCross on weekends; you can win races in the Miata, MUCH more fun than illegal street races, especially since a Miata is too slow to win those......).

An SUV isn't needed until... I don't know when you need an SUV. You need a full passenger load and a LOT of equipment to need an SUV. Hatch back is minus trunk space; if you have stuff to transport routinely that's too big to fit in the trunk (not too much, just too big) and needs to be covered (not chucked in the bed of a truck), you need an SUV.

People are just bad at making these decisions. SUVs are overall more dangerous to drive due to lack of handling, lack of stability (they can actually roll; my GTO was impossible to roll, you could make it drift or power slide, something I unfortunately never had a chance to try... still don't know where I'd find a track to play on for that, no way I'm doing that on the street), and lack of visibility. They have a specific use, which isn't a significant use case for most people. People are not optimizing their driving experience.

That's why they can't: they fail. When I got to work the first time, my heart was giving out (about 4 miles ago), my legs had already given out (6 and a half miles ago), and I could barely stand. My body was shaking, everything was shutting down. Don't tell me what I can't do; I've never failed at something because I can't.

Human powered SUV

I constantly find myself wishing that society appreciated and valued the most elegant solutions to life's problems instead of the most heavy handed . . . It's true across the board be it laptop capabilities, television size, cell phone specs, camera megapixels, or driving choices . . . the sledgehammer solution is perceived as superior to the most efficient one.

My trailer is bigger than yours.

I don't expect them to.

It's good for me, though. I can buy tech that's two generations old and it's still better than the best of the best 5 years ago, right? And the 20" 4:3 SDTV I bought before my 23-year-old son was born still works fine with the old satellite box. Why do I need something bigger/better? A lot of people pride themselves on being early adopters of technology. Let 'em blaze the trail, work out the bugs, find out what works and what doesn't, and I'll buy those same things when the shift from being "high tech" to being "commodities". Even with my bicycles that's true. I don't need the latest 11-speed Campy; 7-speed SIS does the job perfectly well, day in, day out, without having to change the chain every 500 miles.

Another image of an SUV driver

Nice trailer!

This is cool....just get on the bike an ride....sensible hees and all. As some easy utility with what ever that little trailer is.

Nice picture. Did you take it? I love how the background is blurred and the rider is sharp. It gives a nice sense of motion.

Images of utility biking in our nation's capitol. Business suits, high heels. I've only been posting trailer haulers in this thread, but commuters are utility bikers too and we have a lot of them here.

The trailer is a Burley Travoy.

Thanks. I only post pictures I took myself and they are almost always posted the same day they are taken. My camera may be capable of capturing a moving subject and the background both in focus, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet, so I try to move the camera with the rider.

It's a burley travoy. Pretty nice, detaches into a little cart so you can take it with you shopping!

I wouldn't worry. As noted, this is a very good shot with blurred background. That's what many photographers strive for: shallow DOF or motion blur, looks great. That's a really good shot.

And yeah, I see people "dressed up" on bikes in NYC too: suits, dresses, high heels. Many people ride short distances in Manhattan, they can wear pretty much anything. And the humidity has been surprisingly low so far, which makes it much easier to ride.

Thanks. I like the blur on this one I took a few months ago.


This actually looks a little sketchy. I shouted "Pop a wheelie!" as I rode by.

nice bike focused graphics on the that upper crust pizza box looks like they focus on bike delivery?

I've posted a picture of the bike parked. I've never seen the in use before, but I'm usually out of downtown before dinnertime.

The logo certainly shows a desire to be associated with bicycle delivery. It seems they're out of Boston.