Allister

Yeah. That won't skew the test at all

paytonc

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but I came across this in a search:

Actually, yes, the Gregg Easterbrook editorial in the LA Times that was mentioned upthread argues that average drivers do have "muscle car" horsepower nowadays. A Toyota Camry today does 0-60 in 5.8 seconds; a 1970 Ford Mustang Mach 1 Cobra Jet 428 did 0-60 in 5.7 seconds. A Porsche Cayenne gets over 500 horsepower, which would have been absolutely unheard of in the 1960s; the same Mustang Cobra Jet is listed at 335 hp. Yes, 50% more horsepower than even one of the fabled muscle cars.

What's more, only 3,500 1970 Mustang Cobra Jets were ever made; the vast majority of cars then were much, much pokier. By contrast, there are already over 200,000 Porsche Cayennes on the road, and the Camry is America's most popular car with half a million (!) sold in the US every year.

An amazing graph showing how fleet average horsepower has skyrocketed in recent years (ever since rising fuel economy standards stalled) is here:
https://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/2/27/163819/327
The average car sold in 2006 gets both 60% more power and 60% more MPG than the average car sold in 1975.

The cars that we "share the road" with today are NOT the same cars that were on the roads when Vehicular Cycling was invented.

John Forester

I don't doubt the data that you present. However, those data are rather far removed from the issues of operation in traffic. You have made a claim, while trying to conceal it, that the higher HP/ton of the present automotive population makes vehicular cycling more difficult. Such a claim needs to be either supported or withdrawn. Make up your mind as to which.

genec

Well John, you are gone from here and thus won't reply, but the obvious claim to be made is that since the '70s we are dealing with motor traffic which has the ability to accelerate far faster than the cars that were around in when you coined the terms Effective Cycling, et. al.

Human reaction times have not changed, the bicycle, coupled with the average rider has not much changed either, yet the environment in which a vehicular cyclist operates has changed... as indicated by the data presented. Further, the distractions of the motorist have also increased thanks to a plethora of electronic devices now available for use in the car. And the average speed limits have gone up due to the 85% percentile rule.

So while the rules have indeed not changed... one of the "players" is now substantially more powerful, and distracted...

Care to play again?

joejack951

Gene, I didn't grow up when you did but from the stories I've heard, there were A LOT more drugged up people running around back then. Hard to believe that none of them were out driving. As to the cars they were driving, they stopped a whole lot slower than the cars of today, had dimmer headlights, worse handling, and much less forgiving bumpers not to mention the kids climbing all over the car (I know I was even back in the 80's).

Any comments on that?

genec

Yeah, there were also a lot fewer of them... over all... and while the cars may have "stopped a lot slower" they also traveled a lot slower...

Oh and I don't know that there aren't the same percentage of drugged up people running around today... if not on the same drugs, but others, given by prescription. (only now they can call in refills from the comfort of their car while doing 50MPH down the arterial road with a lousy 5 foot bike lane)

rocksnroads7

On Harrison County, Mississippi roads (Cowan Lorraine and Hwy 67), MDOT has installed corrugation under the right white line of the motorist lanes. The paved shoulder serves as, and is marked as, the bicycle lane. Even with 55 mph posted motorist speeds, we ride with confidence, knowing that a vehicle entering the bicycle lane will make a huge noise on the rumble strip, warning the bicyclist to eject to the right of way! Feedback will be appreciated, rocksnroads7 www.gulfcoastbicycleclub.com P.S. Is there anything we can do to support this bicyclist's family?

noisebeam

Such rumble strips will only possibly save a motorists life and can only negatively impact cycling safety. If a cyclist is present and a motorist drifts over it will be too late for any warning.
Many rural roads have such rumble on them in AZ and they are exceedingly jarring to cycle over, yet one must regularly cross the rumble to avoid debris, other cyclists, right turn lanes, parked/disabled vehicles, road construction signs, etc.
Al

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_d...le_library.htm
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_d...s/gapstudy.pdf
https://www.bccc.bc.ca/srs/srs_photo_gallery8.html

joejack951

DE did this: https://www.deldot.gov/information/me...oject_rt_1.pdf

I don't ride anywhere near this area so I can't really comment. I am surprised by the 9/60 motorist drifting in cyclist collisions though.

I recently was cycling on a newly paved road in PA where the centerline stripes had the rumble effect. The road was a narrow, winding one which as far as I know has no history of head on collisions (I work right off it so I imagine that I'd have heard of at least one of them if there were many). Anyway, it was interesting to be able to here exactly when motorists went over the centerline to pass me. The only downside I can see has to do with how many motorists pass me which is to drive with their passenger side tires on the centerline (almost a complete lane change). The rumble strips might make them less likely to move so far over to avoid feeling the rumbles during the pass.