For being a little less young, I am a pretty decent, rule-abiding yet defensive and anticipatory driver. And I just want to drive more to get better! And now I just miss having access to any fucking car whatsoever, regardless of ownership. If I knew how to hot-wire one I would do so! Two more months I guess
they're awkwardly shaped (and small!) so you can't really smoothly drive through them.
one of the dudes I do re-enactment with is really bad at and terrified by driving
roundabouts are weird and scary! i had never even seen one until i was like 20.
It's time to start driving like you expect there to be cyclists on the road.
Are roundabouts only common in britain?
roundabouts are weird and scary! i had never even seen one until i was like 20.
I just don't understand how this is possible. Are roundabouts only common in britain?
Ok, Americans, lots of you drive cars, yes? What I would like to talk about is driving well. Do you really know what you are doing with that 3000lb killing machine? I would really like for you to stop and think about it for a minute. Are you afraid of the other drivers around you? Do you sort of zone out and let auto-pilot get you from point A to point B? Do you yell at everyone else on the road and try to get back at them when they do a maneuver that is offensive?
if we missed our exit she would panic and take the next one instead of just going around again.
I have to ask the question. If he's terrified by driving, why was he given a license in the first place.
i've been driving almost daily for about 8 years now. i have broken many rules and i drive very aggressively, yet i've never been in an accident or caused one. i think the key is not suprising anybody even when you're gonna do something stupid. just make it clear that you'll be cutting'em or whatever, and everything will be alright.
my biggest problem is speed, i just can't keep myself from speeding, and usually scare people that drive with me. thing is the line where it starts to be scary instead of mischievous is not clear to me so i just keep pushing on and on and on.
driving distance is the other thing i can't keep for the life of me, for that i find it so easy to synchronise my driving style to the driver i'm following. i can go for miles at any speed behind almost anybody, being just 2-3 meters apart - and that includes sudden-out-of-nowhere braking etc too.
i think i should get one track and one slow shitbox car before i grow old and my reflexes get slower, or i'll surely kill myself.
I suppose it's inaccurate to describe him as a bad driver, in the sense that he's dangerous to other road users. He's bad in the sense that he literally can't do anything except drive and mutter under his breath. He doesn't seem to be able to treat driving as in any way a natural action, in marked contrast to pretty much everyone else I've ever observed driving. Actually, the fact that his attention is constantly riveted on everything he's doing means he's probably actually a very safe driver.
I'm that Masshole they always warn you about
Blind Spots:
I never look behind my shoulder, because it disorients me to whip my head around while I drive. I have only driven one car that had true blind spots. Most people just don't know how to properly adjust and use their mirrors. For one thing you should be looking before you start to change lanes, When you see something is there you should be able to keep driving, not have to jerk back into your lane.
oh and assume every driver is an idiot and will kill you if no one said that yet
Also, what is the generally accepted rule on how to inform someone their lights are off at night?
Also... if their lights are off, how are they able to see the dashboard?
if their lights are off, how are they able to see the dashboard?
3) HOOK TURNS!
Ohhh no, something rarer and far more magical than U-turns:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_turn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_turn)
If I tried to drive in Boston the way they taught me in driver's ed at 16 I would die 28 times daily. I break several traffic laws on a daily basis, and have never been in an accident or been ticketed. In fact, being conditioned into a somewhat hilariously aggressive driver (at times) has helped me avoid several accidents.
I still contend that cars are Faraday Cages for common sense and decency. Two people that I met last year have been killed this month due to basic motorised idiocy.
it gets dark and I wonder why I can't see anything
Does anyone else have Michigan Lefts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Left)? They're so easy and I can't believe other places don't have them.
I'm that Masshole they always warn you about
Does anyone else have Michigan Lefts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Left)? They're so easy and I can't believe other places don't have them.
That's neat, thanks for the education! - I do it on my bike quite regularly. The idea is that you stick yourself on the front of the traffic queued in the side street, and cross with them instead of trying to find a gap in the moving traffic.
I'm that Masshole they always warn you about
Nah dogg, I think my spotless traffic record speaks for itself, I'm goddamned amazing at my Massholery driving habits! That Masshole they always warn you about is the one with 8 billion dents in his car, all the tail lights cracked, and a back window covered in WAAF and Scott Brown stickers.
What do you make of cyclists who have the gall to imagine that they have the same right of way as cars?
When was the last time you saw a cyclist pulled over by a cruiser anywhere but in a large city?
people who don't accelerate off onramps until they're in the highway travel lane, people who don't know how to take ramps properly so they slow down to 20 MPH
I get equally annoyed when I come to a 4-way stop several seconds after the person to my right, and it's just the two of us, and they sit and expect me to go. It's not polite, it's screwing with how traffic is supposed to work.
Over the past couple of years I adopted the Let Them Win attitude to driving and I've definitely become a safer driver as a result. I only came to this conclusion when I got a SatNav some years ago. Regardless of where I was going, I'd punch in my destination (usually my office 50 minutes away) and it would tell me the time I would arrive. First of all I'd try to race against that time, trying to see if I could get it down. However, eventually traffic and traffic lights would unavoidably slow me down and the count would return to the original time of arrival. Sometimes I'd rush like an absolute asshat and arrive about two minutes earlier.
Two minutes. What's the point? Is it worth driving like an aggressive idiot for the sake of gaining one hundred and twenty seconds? Of course it isn't. Now I drive carefully and consistently instead. If some guy wants to race for the right to have those two minutes, let him have it. I don't care that much.
My favorite thing is the cyclist who thinks he can hang out in the left turn lane in front of other cars.
*sigh* You just can't buy good sextants nowadays.
My favorite thing is the cyclist who thinks he can hang out in the left turn lane in front of other cars.
i don't understand why cyclists can't just ride on the fucking sidewalk
it's like a self-preservation instinct never manifested in 99% of the bikers I see
if I was riding my bike somewhere I would ride as far away as fucking possible from the speeding automobiles because I'm sort of partial to living and/or full use of my limbs/brain
It's often helpful to ride in such a way that motorists won't hit you even if they don't see you. You're not trying to be invisible, you're trying to make it irrelevant whether cars see you or not. If you ride in such a way that a car has to see you to take action to avoid hitting you (e.g., by their slowing down or changing lanes), then that means they will definitely hit you if they don't see you. But if you stay out of their way, then you won't get hit even if they didn't notice you were there.
but roads are for cars. bikes are not even close to cars and should not be driving down the middle of the road.
my point is that most cyclists (at least around here) are idiots with an absurd sense of entitlement and a sort of "i deserve to be treated just like a car even though I am on a fragile little frame going 25 under the speedlimit on a narrow road with no passing!" attitude which I find really obnoxious and borderline offensive.
[words]
fake edit: Alex, that website you linked has alot of good advice and I totally agree with the parts that I jut read, but the entire thing is superceded by this quote from the sidebar:
You're too slow to drive like a car. You're too fast to dart around like a pedestrian. You can stop a hell of a lot faster than a car. You are smaller than a car. Don't expect us to yield to you as you glide through the intersection where you do not have the right of way. Obey road signs, stay visible, and most of all stay the hell in the gutter or designated bicycle lane* where you belong.
That bicycle safety website is full of the smug attitude that fuels this little rage fire. Unless you can keep up with traffic you shouldn't use an entire travel lane.
Maybe my perception is skewed because the last time I got hit by a car, the driver was brushing his teeth.
A study of 24 intersections converted to roundabouts found:
- crashes dropped 40%
- injury crashes dropped 76%
- fatal crashes dropped 90%
Also, put your ####ing cell phone down when you drive.
Also, put your ####ing cell phone down when you drive.
Also, put your ####ing cell phone down when you drive.
Also, put your ####ing cell phone down when you drive.
Also, put your ####ing cell phone down when you drive.
That book that Steve linked (it looks pretty good, actually!) mentions these things and the fact that they might contribute to driver complacency, actually.
It seems to me from some of the stuff said here as if driver training in the US doesn't include telling drivers that cycles on a road are vehicles and are required to behave as such and to be treated as such.
My favorite thing is the cyclist who thinks he can hang out in the left turn lane in front of other cars.
Actually, I do that deliberately - well, in the right-turn lane in my country, of course. If I try to leave room for a car, some arsehole will crowd me out, or just not see me. By asserting my right to a place on the road in such a way that the driver is forced to acknowledge it, I can actually be safer.
I want to run down everyone, no prejudice.
There will be a point where they are suddenly in every single car and everyone will wonder how on earth we survived without them. It's almost here in the UK.
Every modern vehicle has some kind of navigational tool aside from the motor car. It's an inevitable development and makes life so much easier.
the laws of phsyics are such that you can stop a bike if you need to
That book that Steve linked (it looks pretty good, actually!) mentions these things and the fact that they might contribute to driver complacency, actually.
....Uh, my name's not Steve?
the laws of phsyics are such that you can stop a bike if you need to
um, have you ever ridden a bike? No, you can't stop suddenly. I mean, obviously you can stop eventually, but you are talking about stopping on a dime.
I hate it when people don't understand that turn signals are to remove ambiguity. Yes, turn it off when not turn. Yes, turn it on when turning.
But then you have shit like this:
(http://pretentiousgamer.com/etc/intersect1.PNG)
Intersection near my house
See how the road from the northeast shifts over to the left a bit at the intersection? I regularly see people turn on a left signal in order to indicate they are going straight. THIS IS NOT HELPFUL. I now no longer know if it is safe to cross at the same time as you in the opposite direction. I was never going to assume a lack of turn signal meant your intent was to crash into the house in front of you. Fuck you.
More to the point, who was the drunken dipshit who designed that intersection anyway??!! :-o
i don't understand why cyclists can't just ride on the fucking sidewalk
it's like a self-preservation instinct never manifested in 99% of the bikers I see
if I was riding my bike somewhere I would ride as far away as fucking possible from the speeding automobiles because I'm sort of partial to living and/or full use of my limbs/brain
Because it's dumb and illegal. You know when tons of cycling deaths occur? When people cross the street from the sidewalk on their bicycles. Quite simply, motorists don't watch what is happening on the sidewalks. When you cross from the sidewalk it's like you're materializing from the ether at 12 mph as far as they're concerned. Plus, wide swaths of the country don't even have sidewalks in the US.
but roads are for cars.
and most of all stay the hell in the gutter or designated bicycle lane* where you belong.
I am glad we're on different continents.
i can go for miles at any speed behind almost anybody, being just 2-3 meters apart
i have never put anybody's life in the slightest danger.
-i have broken many rules
-i drive very aggressively,
-i just can't keep myself from speeding
-the line where it starts to be scary instead of mischievous is not clear to me so i just keep pushing on and on and on.
-i think i should get one track and one slow shitbox car before i grow old and my reflexes get slower, or i'll surely kill myself.
i don't do stuff if i'm not 99% sure i can pull it off
These two statements are simply not compatible:
famous last words
i can go for miles at any speed behind almost anybody, being just 2-3 meters apart while not putting anybody's life in danger
i can go for miles at any speed behind almost anybody, being just 2-3 meters apart while not putting anybody's life in danger unless the car in front of me just f*cking explodes or something.
fuck tailgaters
That's a sure way to make sure I drive exactly the speed limit in front of you.
I know spiteful driving is a bad idea but man I just really hate when people follow too close.
but roads are for cars. bikes are not even close to cars and should not be driving down the middle of the road.
my point is that most cyclists (at least around here) are idiots with an absurd sense of entitlement and a sort of "i deserve to be treated just like a car even though I am on a fragile little frame going 25 under the speedlimit on a narrow road with no passing!" attitude which I find really obnoxious and borderline offensive.
[words]
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14073868/pictures/emotes/emot-golfclap.gif) This is exactly my point. Cyclists around here think they deserve for motorists to treat them like they're driving a car and yield to them as though they were a pedestrian, so they take up a third of a travel lane (never mind the buffer you have to leave around them when passing) and dart around everywhere because they're king of the friggin world.
You're too slow to drive like a car. You're too fast to dart around like a pedestrian. You can stop a hell of a lot faster than a car. You are smaller than a car. Don't expect us to yield to you as you glide through the intersection where you do not have the right of way. Obey road signs, stay visible, and most of all stay the hell in the gutter or designated bicycle lane* where you belong.
* And not one of your "I'm making a statement" special snowflake DIY painted-with-exterior-latex-at-3-AM bike lanes, either. The ones the highway department put there.
That bicycle safety website is full of the smug attitude that fuels this little rage fire. Unless you can keep up with traffic you shouldn't use an entire travel lane.
Okay, here's the thing: the average car in the US weighs 2 fuckin' tons. It's simply not the time or place to get in a pissing match with some fuckin' asshole stranger just so your self-esteem doesn't take a hit. Get a self-help book instead or something. Good lord.
fuck tailgaters
That's a sure way to make sure I drive exactly the speed limit in front of you.
I know spiteful driving is a bad idea but man I just really hate when people follow too close.
I'm usually a pretty big ass when it comes to dealing with tailgaters. I think I get it from my dad who generally just freaks out at that them and flicks them off. Once this guy was tailgating me in the far left lane, the one closest to the barrier on the highway, so I speed up so that we had a semi truck on our right. I then slowed down, trapping him from going any where unless he would slow down enough to get behind the semi truck on our right. I got a few honks and finger gestures, and a few times it seemed like he was going to tap me, but semi truck pulled away to get off and he zoomed on by me.
This is one of the reasons why I really, really dislike Critical Mass, which seems to go out of its way to make bike-riding as obstructive and as disruptive to motorists as possible. This is not the way to ensure that the single cyclist riding down a busy road is going to be treated with respect and concern by motorists.Oh yes. So very much.
how do i get this much misunderstood :psyduck:
This is one of the reasons why I really, really dislike Critical Mass, which seems to go out of its way to make bike-riding as obstructive and as disruptive to motorists as possible. This is not the way to ensure that the single cyclist riding down a busy road is going to be treated with respect and concern by motorists.
You could have just gotten out of the way. From the way you described it, you were in the passing lane and were able to change speed and get next to a semi (a dangerous and stupid thing to do), so it seems as though you could have easily slowed down and move aside to let the car pass. By blocking the car behind you, you were obstructing the flow of traffic.
I really don't get this self-righteous stance that people take against people who tailgate, in that you must obstruct them and slow them down, just to stick it to them. Yes, what they are doing is wrong, but what you're doing is no better and just increases the chance that an accident can happen.
I know it is a terrible idea, but I want so badly to invest in a whiteboard and marker and keep it in my car, then I can have my passengers write messages to show to the people around me. Not even jerky stuff, since I tend to be pretty easy-going on the road. But stuff like "Hey your taillight is out!" or "Nice job avoiding that dick back there!"
I know it would be bad and distracting but I just want to make the road a friendlier place.
Cyclists who illegally block intersections so other cyclists can run through red lights are assholes.
Either get a permit for your cycling parade, or obey the rules of the road.
The other is riding for health or recreation, usually travels in a large spandex-clad pack, and chooses routes which are "scenic" (aka winding and rural, rendering them invisible until the last minute) or "challenging" (aka very hilly, also rendering them invisible and making sudden downhill braking a dangerous necessity).
Cyclist/ASSHOLE
and spinning it around
ASSHOLEI'm not spinning anything. How is calling people assholes for riding bikes up hills not argumentative?
some wierdo fabric called cotton duck
No offense Amanda but if in that situation you honk at the cyclist or act like he has no right to be on the road then I think you're dead wrong.
People who make roads dangerous by their activities are assholes. Whether they are a speeder careering around a hilly curve in a 2-ton vehicle or a cyclist panting around that hilly curve on a road bike, they are both endangering other people with equal rights to drive/ride on that road by their actions, and in either case I think it is reprehensible.
Please tell me all you QC cyclists wear at least 1 of those blinking lights that atrap to your arm, or have one on your bike.
I live in Pittsburgh, well, about 3 miles away from downtown actually, and none of the onramps I can think of have stop signs. Except when the onramp is on a stretch of roadway that is under "road work", then there is a stop sign.
People who make roads dangerous by their activities are assholes.... a cyclist panting around that hilly curve on a road bike, ... in either case I think it is reprehensible.
I really have got to second Amanda's bit about the windy hilly roads.
You get on the bike and go; you don't need special clothes or gear or shoes, just a bike.
What's peoples position on helmets? I don't wear one. No point.
On top of that, I ride with a hard saddle and eight panel padding in my shorts.
People who make roads dangerous by their activities are assholes.... a cyclist panting around that hilly curve on a road bike, ... in either case I think it is reprehensible.I really have got to second Amanda's bit about the windy hilly roads.
Sorry but this is absolute nonsense.
Firstly the incredibly high majority of cyclists riding on these winding hilly roads will hear you way before you're aware of them and will take necessary action to a) make themselves visible to you and b) ensure that you can overtake them safely and reasonably.
Secondly, if you are driving in such a manner that you could crash into a slow moving cyclist on a hill then you're already putting yourself at risk of far greater hazards. Any decent driver should always be able to stop in the distance that they can see. If you can't do that then you're basically driving too fast and too recklessly. It's not the cyclists that you need to worry about, it's the broken down car, the fallen tree, the wild animal that has run out into the road (for many years the greatest cause of death on roads in Newfoundland were moose), a shed load from a logging truck and so on. Driving like that might kill a cyclist, it will almost definitely kill you, at that speed it's just a numbers game. Maybe you'll be lucky all your life, but I don't recall anything in the driving test about trying to be lucky.
As for that SUV that is driving right behind you flashing their lights and so on, it's important to remember that they already haven't crashed into you and haven't demonstrated any intention to do so. Sometimes you can't avoid confrontation and that's life, don't hang it on the cyclist because the person behind you is an incompetent driver.
If you get hit by a car having thirty quids worth of cheap plastic and styrofoam strapped to your head is not going to make any difference to your wellbeing whatsoever.
I have been in two cycling accidents over the past five years, in neither of which would wearing a helmet have remotely saved me from injury (either injuries that occured or could have potentially occured). The one time I hit my head it was chin first. My father was wearing a helmet when he had a fairly bad cycling accident in the early 90's and his face still got ripped to shreds; like me, he landed on the front of his face, which makes sense if you think about how you're likely to come off a bike. Unlike me, he was wearing old fashioned glass spectacles. If I was truly concerned about the dangers, I'd wear a full-face helmet. But really, statistically, cycling is about as dangerous as being a pedestrian, and I don't wear a helmet to cross the street.
This reminds me a lot of people who refuse to wear seatbelts because on occasion not wearing seat belts doesn't have a negative effect on a person in an accident. It's kind of a dumb reason to not wear a helmet.
This reminds me a lot of people who refuse to wear seatbelts because on occasion not wearing seat belts doesn't have a negative effect on a person in an accident. It's kind of a dumb reason to not wear a helmet.
#
@rocketboy2233 Thanks ass wipe. Now go fuck your sister, you useless piece of Cleveland trash! LMFAO!
MrThunderbeast 3 weeks ago
MrThunderbeast 3 weeks ago
#
@MrThunderbeast oh let me guess!! ur prlly not even from pittsburgh n love em!! and atleast we got a hall of fame if your from pitt! you guys have one of the largest gay housing communities in the U.S hahahaha! thats a fact! enjoy ur day fck hole! go blow ben u dumb ass
rocketboy2233 3 weeks ago
rocketboy2233 3 weeks ago
#
@MrThunderbeast ... go blow ben u homo.
rocketboy2233 3 weeks ago
rocketboy2233 3 weeks ago
#
@nbest18 .... your gay
I think you are all being totally ridiculous if you don't see any shred of responsibility for creating danger for other people by riding in unsafe areas.
I think you are all being totally ridiculous if you don't see any shred of responsibility for creating danger for other people by riding in unsafe areas.
No one is suggesting that any road user should not be responsible. But any vehicle on a road has the potential to cause danger to any other vehicle, regardless of type, and seeing this as a one-way transfer just isn't helpful.
Save your lecture on stopping distances for when you teach a driver's ed class because you have absolutely no idea how I drive and I find it incredibly insulting.
On certain roads, limited access highways (4 lanes), there is an expectation of a rate of speed that certain vehicles cannot maintain. Here in PA, it is illegal to have bicycles, motor scooters, etc. on a limited access highway because the limitations of those vehicles make them incompatible for use on that roadway.
the norm and the comfortable
I think you are all being totally ridiculous if you don't see any shred of responsibility for creating danger for other people by riding in unsafe areas.
No one is suggesting that any road user should not be responsible. But any vehicle on a road has the potential to cause danger to any other vehicle, regardless of type, and seeing this as a one-way transfer just isn't helpful.
Not really. On certain roads, limited access highways (4 lanes), there is an expectation of a rate of speed that certain vehicles cannot maintain. Here in PA, it is illegal to have bicycles, motor scooters, etc. on a limited access highway because the limitations of those vehicles make them incompatible for use on that roadway. While it is certainly legal to have bicycles in lanes of traffic on roads that have speed limit of 55mph, Bicyclists should realize that the average rate of travel on a road like that will be MUCH faster than what they can maintain, and that can cause dangerous situations. There are laws about obstructing the flow of traffic (by driving too slow) and while I've never heard of a bicyclist receiving a citation for that, I know of motor vehicle drivers that have been pulled over for driving a car at the speed a bicycle will go. If its bad for a car to go that slow on a road, why is it any different for a bike?
I live in Pittsburgh, well, about 3 miles away from downtown actually, and none of the onramps I can think of have stop signs. Except when the onramp is on a stretch of roadway that is under "road work", then there is a stop sign.
I guess I should have specified this was back in college, so they may have wised up by now. I remember the stop signs especially because I had to explain to my roommate why they were a bad idea. I can't imagine the right turns off the highway are gone though; do you encounter those? You had to slow down while still on the highway.
I tend to tense up a bit, or point things out, but I'm usually in a car with a shit driver.
Some people who shall remain nameless
Yes, I wind the engine up to ~5000 before I shift gears
I naturally assumed it was illegal to ride a bike on highways/freeways/motorways everywhere. Is it not?
Either way, illegal or no, it's certainly suicidal. It's not really a useful part of the conversation as far as I'm concerned because anybody who does that is just clownshoes bonkers crazy.
My car's powerband is around 4000-5000rpm. I'd rather get to 70 quickly rather than conserve gas, so I usually run it up to ~4500 before shifting, more if I'm racing.
Yes, I wind the engine up to ~5000 before I shift gears
Can I ask why?
I live in Pittsburgh, well, about 3 miles away from downtown actually, and none of the onramps I can think of have stop signs. Except when the onramp is on a stretch of roadway that is under "road work", then there is a stop sign.
I guess I should have specified this was back in college, so they may have wised up by now. I remember the stop signs especially because I had to explain to my roommate why they were a bad idea. I can't imagine the right turns off the highway are gone though; do you encounter those? You had to slow down while still on the highway.
sonofz, any chance you could confirm or refute about the need to slow down on the highway? I'm curious if my memory about that is incorrect.
I'm sorry to take this thread away from bikes but I am interested to know if any of you have returned to driving after a long break and how it went. I haven't driven since 2008 and it's quite possible I won't be doing so again until at least 2013, so that'll be a heck of a gap. Is it something you don't forget or something you have to start again?
The only right turns off the highways I'm aware of are the offramps.
SWitty, you are the person I hated for the 11 years I lived facing onto a main road. Screaming car engines make me want to stab people, particularly if it's after 10pm. No offence but ARGH.
Screaming car engines make me want to stab people, particularly if it's after 10pm
y'know I just thought of something. I've never been to Turkey but I hear the roads there are a lot like Egypt was,
Country - Year - Population - Fatalities
UK - 2009 - 62,348,447 - 2,222 - 0,00356%
TR - 2010 - 77,804,122 - 4,041 - 0,00519%
CA - 2005 - 33,759,742 - 2,767 - 0,00819%
US - 2009 - 310,232,863 - 33,808 - 0,01089% (lowest in 50 years!)
Changing Lanes in Intersections: I am guessing most states have laws like this on the books somewhere, so this probably applies in some aspects to everyone. In the state of Georgia, it is illegal to change lanes within 100 ft of an intersection. It causes accidents. Don't do it.
So with what are largely considered larger, safer, easier to drive vehicles on wider, less complicated roads with more instructional signage and consistently lower speed limits, the US has achieved a road vehicle death rate three times that of the UK.
I can't think of a perspective from which that isn't fucked up.
This is my single biggest pet peeve when driving. I have actually yelled at a friend of mine for doing this once. He got pissy and defensive, and did it again shortly after. And nearly fucking hit somebody who was trying to turn right at a red light. And he hasn't forgotten it, and hasn't done it since.
so...you know....numbers :-P
Ok, a thing I remember not knowing when I learned how to drive was that turn signals are technically required for merging and changing lanes! Most people don't do this, so I guess I will assume that they also do not know it. Use indicators, guys! Driver communication is important!
So with what are largely considered larger, safer, easier to drive vehicles on wider, less complicated roads with more instructional signage and consistently lower speed limits, the US has achieved a road vehicle death rate three times that of the UK.
I can't think of a perspective from which that isn't fucked up.
Yeah I have noticed that people trying to change lanes with no signal often seem to almost hit someone, or at least cut it really close, whereas people who change with a blinker seem to get what they wanted more often? It is a good point.You're lucky then. Most places I've lived, if you put a blinker on people will speed up to make sure you CAN'T get in. This of course leads to less people using blinkers.
Also I'm very careful with crossing streets and such, because I've been hit by a car before and boy is that terrifying. And yet, I've almost been hit at least 20 times since working at my current office. And this is just trying to walk through the parking lot. It's because no one is looking where they're going and no one seems to give a shit.
You're lucky then. Most places I've lived, if you put a blinker on people will speed up to make sure you CAN'T get in. This of course leads to less people using blinkers.This is definitely true. I also dislike when people turn on their turn signal and assume that automatically means they have the right to merge right away. Oh, and when people turn on their turn signals right as they begin to turn makes me go all murderface.
For example, when turning right at an intersection, people stop and wait, even if there is a lane dedicated to the people turning right. I get that you need to see who is coming from the left, that's great, but when there's a whole lane just for you, fucking go already. The fact that they don't see that lane means that they aren't even looking. Which means that they're morons.
... *puts on flame-retardant suit*
My fiance's sister is fucking terrible with her phone in the car. She'll call her husband as soon as she gets in her vehicle. I was riding with her about a week ago, around 5pm and she said "I need to call Dan" I said "Oh? Whats up?" to which she replied "I haven't talked to him since like 9 this morning", because being out of contact with someone for a whopping 8 hours WHILE THEY'RE AT WORK is some kind of emergency?
What do she and her husband talk about when she calls him every couple hours, anyway?
Luckily I've only got about a half hour drive to work now,
ban passengers from talking haha.
I'm not claiming that I'm immune to distraction when I'm on the phone, but there are all kinds of distractions, and driving is ALREADY a matter of being able to multi-task.
how strictly enforced it was
driving is ALREADY a matter of being able to multi-task
And if you see a cop watching for speeders, you don't have to suddenly slam on your brakes and go 15 under! Snerrrgh!
Especially seeing as most of those who lose their licenses would probably be van and taxi drivers.
I realize it's hard for folks to find someone to drive them around, but it would be nice if the government would make it a requirement that you be retested every 5 years after you hit, say, 65 years old, and if you can't pass then they would provide transportation. I know it's kind of a pipe dream, but still...Maybe not entirely a pipe-dream. In New South Wales, drivers aged 75 or over must pass an annual medical check including an eyesight test (though its rigour is arguable). Drivers aged 85 or over must either pass the annual medical and a biannual practical driving test, or (under new rules) switch to a restricted license which still requires the annual medical, but not the driving tests.
unfortunately the law seems to have forgotten that driving is a priviledge, not a right
unfortunately the law seems to have forgotten that driving is a priviledge, not a right
Actually, the law remembers this just fine. Sometimes it is inconsistently enforced,
So yeah I am selling my car and I wan't to buy this bike.Drool... That's a nice bike with extra cool-points for the bar-end shifter. It looks like it has traditional headset bearings too; none of that integrated headset bullshit. It looks like there's plenty of room for mudguards (fenders), and eyelets front and rear to mount them, for those inevitable rainy commutes. The rims and tyres look a bit narrow for a commuter though, unless your neighbourhood has really well-maintained roads. I like kevlar-reinforced tyres myself (I run Schwalbe Marathon); the puncture-resistance is well worth the slight weight penalty IMHO. Oh, and if you're going to commute on a pretty bike like that, buy a good lock! :wink:
QuoteCountry - Year - Population - Fatalities
UK - 2009 - 62,348,447 - 2,222 - 0,00356%
TR - 2010 - 77,804,122 - 4,041 - 0,00519%
CA - 2005 - 33,759,742 - 2,767 - 0,00819%
US - 2009 - 310,232,863 - 33,808 - 0,01089% (lowest in 50 years!)
The strongest conclusion you can make based on this data is that a person is more likely to die in a motor vehicle accident in America than in Turkey. That's not meaningless, but it only makes a statement on the victims, not the drivers.
(bridge collapse due to building fault, tree branch falling on vehicle, etc),
Ooh, that is a tasty ride. Looks like a cyclocross frame which usually makes for a pretty good commuting. Is it lugged for panniers?
Drool... That's a nice bike with extra cool-points for the bar-end shifter. It looks like it has traditional headset bearings too; none of that integrated headset bullshit. It looks like there's plenty of room for mudguards (fenders), and eyelets front and rear to mount them, for those inevitable rainy commutes. The rims and tyres look a bit narrow for a commuter though, unless your neighbourhood has really well-maintained roads. I like kevlar-reinforced tyres myself (I run Schwalbe Marathon); the puncture-resistance is well worth the slight weight penalty IMHO. Oh, and if you're going to commute on a pretty bike like that, buy a good lock! :wink:
If you've specced it up that far, you should go for SPDs or feetbelts.
The strongest conclusion you can make based on this data is that a person is more likely to die in a motor vehicle accident in America than in Turkey. That's not meaningless, but it only makes a statement on the victims, not the drivers.
I don't agree.
How cheap is cheap for shoes? You can get some cycling shoes for fairly low prices.
Another name for toestraps.
How cheap is cheap for shoes? You can get some cycling shoes for fairly low prices.
Also aren't Avid BB5 brakes are only cable pull rather than hydraulic? If so you'd probably get better performance out of a decent set of canti's.
Akima - I run 700x23 in Sheffield, the self proclaimed pothole capital of England and they do fine.
To compensate, we have dog parks in urban areas for the city-dwellers who own dogs.
Frankly I'm surprised that the American YIELD signs haven't been replaced with BACK OFF MOTHERFUCKER.
Actually, I can completely understand the absence of dog parks in the UK, considering how seldom I have ever seen anyone need their dog on a leash at all. Something about people and their dogs in the US just doesn't work, so we are not allowed to have them off-leash in cities pretty much ever. To compensate, we have dog parks in urban areas for the city-dwellers who own dogs.
here in the US, but dogs are fucking mean. I've been bitten by unleashed dogs while walking down the sidewalk
Obtuse, adj (1) annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand; difficult to understand, especially deliberately so.
Obtuse, adj (1) annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand; difficult to understand.
Just checking. Opaque would, to me, suggest a fairly obvious reference which I was worried about missing.
I always think of The Shawshank Redemption when I hear it.
So today I watched some asshole student as he went the wrong way in a one-way parking lot to steal a spot out from under the nose of someone else who went the proper way around and had been waiting on it.That is just asking to get keyed or bottle-capped or your tyres slashed.
It seemed like the actual act of driving was turning people into assholes, because in other contexts they were perfectly normal and decent. Now I’m curious if this anecdotal observation is true, and if so why (if I had to guess, it’s because people drive so often that they end up with no tolerance for the inconveniences that come up.)
I refer you to the LFGSS, Women: What's your favourite saddle? (http://www.lfgss.com/thread19250.html) thread on another forum that I occasionally frequent.
3 of them were Tow Mirrors on Pick Up trucks.Yes, those things are a menace. Not so much here on pick-ups as on Luton vans (box truck in the USA?). I've been clipped a few times on my right shoulder (we drive on the left in Australia). Never badly enough actually to crash, but certainly to rip my clothes and cut my shoulder. Quite why cars have to have smooth folding mirrors, while trucks are allowed to have sharp metal brackets sticking out at cyclist-shoulder (and pedestrian-head), level, I do not understand.
I don't ride it much because I'm out of shape and have crazy long legs so I end up sitting super high which honestly sort of scares me.I wish I had crazy long legs... :-( If there is a bike-shop in your area that can do a proper bike-fitting, you might want to have one done, and get your bike adjusted. I did that a few years ago, and a small adjustment (replacing the handlebars and stem) made a huge difference to my comfort and my ability to ride up hills. If you are comfortable on your bike you will feel (and actually be) much safer.
Apparently my car is invisible. There's a section of I-95 just south of Boston that splits into two, then merges into one lane (where it splits into 93 and 128). Idiots on their cell phones love to merge into the space I currently occupy. One time some idiot in a red minivan got close enough for me to knock on their passenger side window. (That was the only way to get their attention; apparently I'm the only one who can hear my horn.) Stopping to let them by usually isn't an option, because most of the time there's a pickup truck or a BMW Bro tailgating me. Either I need to start driving a fluorescent green Econoline or I need to install a set of these (http://www.hornblasters.com/). :|
I have never met anyone who rides a fixed-gear bike I wouldn't happily shoot in the face. Real talk. What the fuck, get some fucking gears you pricks. Get some fucking brakes. What are you even doing.
What is it about running on a single gear that makes someone a prick?
At least I wasn't wrong about you being a cockwomble.
I have never met anyone who rides a fixed-gear bike I wouldn't happily shoot in the face.I suspect Khar is irritated by the sort of fixie-fashion-victims who provide BikeSnobNYC (http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/) with most of his material. I sympathise, though I would never favour violence, but I have a lot of respect for traditional fixed-gear enthusiasts like the late Sheldon Brown (and possibly The Seldom Killer). Cycling is as bad as music for cliquey snobbery, and I'm about to engage in some. I do not ride a fixed-gear myself, by the way.
The light was solidly green, right in the middle of the cycle, and this jogger standing on the median decided to cross the street anyway. With his dog. With 4 cars coming at him. WHO DOES THAT???
Also you can't really go into 'attack mode' with a fixed gear. having the pedals set level when zipping through traffic is far safer than not.
Might explain why my last stack on fixed didn't result in any shin/pedal related damage, my foot was still attached at the sole.
Stick with the drops for a bit. Cyclocross bikes generally have wider bars and you may well find them more versatile than flat bars. It's not like you'll lose out.Or consider touring or "randonneur" style drops (less drop), or "moustache" bars (much less drop). Flat handlebars can be good, but it depends what you mean by "flat". The typical straight "mountain bike" style bar that bike-shops tend to fit is not a good idea for road riding IMHO. They force your arms into a rather unnatural "elbows out" position that can become seriously uncomfortable after a few hours of riding. People fit bar-ends and other extras to alleviate the problem, but I don't think they're a good idea for riding in urban traffic, because you can't cover the brakes from a bar-end riding position. A better option is one of the M-shaped handlebars that used to be typical of traditional utility bicycles. These are sold under various names, including "North Road", "Town", and "Sweep". They're the same tube diameter as standard straight bars, so fully compatible with brakes, shifters etc.
I swear, if you run your stupid ass out in the middle of the street when you do not have the right of way in any sense of the law, and I hit you, I will not feel bad, and I will not feel bad about not feeling bad. Get your ass back on the sidewalk, go to the corner, and wait for the light.
Awesomeness (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/Something_Witty/photo-1.jpg)
my bike has pedals. I put my feet on them
Collegiate road season starts in a week. I'm super pumped. First race is going to suck though, it's at Rutgers University in New Jersey, I bet it will be super cold.
an 0.6 mile loop with 4 turns. ... the crit might get hairy ....
Collegiate road season starts in a week. I'm super pumped. First race is going to suck though, it's at Rutgers University in New Jersey, I bet it will be super cold.
Hey, does Williams have any "home" races? Wouldn't mind going to see one.
This is my bikeNice Peugeot mixte. Those frames make a lot of sense, especially for shorter riders like me, but they're hard to find down here. Don't let it go!
<Sadly stolen classic Raleigh Shopper>I used to own a folding Raleigh Twenty. I sold it very reluctantly when I got my present bike because I just don't have the storage space, but it went to a good home and is still ridden regularly.
my bike has pedals. I put my feet on them
Also because you're in northern Europe I'm going to assume you brake by cranking them backwards.
I refuse to ride a bike that doesn't do this. Unfortunate they're rare in the UK these days, so I'm walking everywhere instead.
Awesomeness (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/Something_Witty/photo-1.jpg)
8-) Nice Vulcan. 800-ish?
I wanted to buy a CB360 last fall but unemployment meant no disposable income.
The other article I just read talks about rear-end collisions caused by red light cameras: http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/bedard-crashesThis page doesn't actually offer any statistics, or even a link to where they might be found. It merely fulminates about what the author claims someone else's statistics mean. To be fair however the article doesn't actually go to the length of claiming that red-light cameras cause rear-end collisions, merely that there is a correlation. It does of course gloss over the fact that rear-enders at traffic lights (or anywhere else for that matter) are actually caused by drivers driving too close to the vehicle in front for the speed they're doing, and implicitly accepts that drivers should only brake for the red light, not the amber/yellow.
The other article I just read talks about rear-end collisions caused by red light cameras:
This page doesn't actually offer any statistics, or even a link to where they might be found. It merely fulminates about what the author claims someone else's statistics mean.
stopping in the middle of the intersection
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XL3g4vPK30&feature=player_detailpage#t=52sFuck! I'm no fan of Critical Mass events, but that's just... :psyduck: Some of the comments are revolting, but that's YouTube. Or maybe just people.
:psyduck:
If I lived in a city where I had to worry about critical mass I would drive the most awesome tank I could find
If I lived in a city where I had to worry about critical mass I would drive the biggest, oldest, diesel-est piece of rusty, black smoke blowing, winter ending, sky darkening tank I could find and run over every goddamn one of them that stopped in front of me.
Your solution to getting me to ride a bicycle is to make me late to work?
the bunch of twats who get out of bed on whatever day of the month and go swarm an intersection or whatever with cyclists for the sole purpose of being cocks about riding a bike.
I'm seriously considering selling my car and buying a bicycle to ride to school/work (same place). This both terrifies and excites me.
How about a compromise between bicycle and car?The velomobile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velomobile). Combining the disadvantages of a car and a bicycle in one vehicle for over a century.
Well, not all of the disadvantages of a car.I never said all, but the environmental advantages of a velomobile over a car are also offerred by a bicycle, at lower cost financially (usually, though admittedly there are stupidly expensive bikes (http://www.sidiergo.com/blog/10-most-expensive-bicycles-on-earth/) on the market), in natural resources, in "real estate" on the roads, and space required for parking/storage.
So long after reading this thread I have noticed that a lot of people like to pass on the right instead of the left.Roughly a third of the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_on_the_right). :-D
In the countries where I drive (UK, Europe) it is generally not permitted to pass on the inside (to keep it generic), except in specific situations where traffic is stuck in lanes (in a jam where different lanes are inching forward at different times; in the turn lane at a junction). In the UK, even bicycles are not strictly permitted to do this, say, to run up the inside of waiting vehicles at lights (unless a bicycle lane is marked out); but it is rare to find anyone who respects that fully.In New South Wales (traffic laws are a matter for the states in Australia) passing on the inside (the left for us) is permitted on "multi-lane roads" subject to certain restrictions.
Special caution is required when overtaking on the inside between traffic and a row of parked cars, to avoid opening doors.
If we wanted to avoid confusion we could call it my side/your side or good side/bad side, but obviously everyone who partakes in traffic is aware of this rule (to some extent) so it doesn't matter as long as you know which side is for overtaking and which isn't.
Just built this up. I shall call her beatrix.It is pretty. No room for mudguards though... :lol:
That is so like the Peugeot I had in the early 80s (apart from the blue tyres)! Looks like a 21" frame to me.
You know seatposts are made out of metal pipe, right? That isn't exactly tough to come by. You might run into difficulty with metric measurements but even then I doubt it'd really be that big a deal.
You know seatposts are made out of metal pipe, right? That isn't exactly tough to come by. You might run into difficulty with metric measurements but even then I doubt it'd really be that big a deal.
Seriously. I had my bike jacked like three times in my freshman year of high school. Cut the cable with bolt-cutters in their backpacks, it was fucked. I really, REALLY hope your post isn't relevant to your current situation, man.
I have an old peugeot.
It is pretty but it is so painful to ride, I think it is a bit big for me. The brakes are pretty much non-existent and the seat is the most uncomfortable thing ever, it hurts my lady areas so much.
...Did you run into it backwards?
I have an old peugeot.
It is pretty but it is so painful to ride, I think it is a bit big for me. The brakes are pretty much non-existent and the seat is the most uncomfortable thing ever, it hurts my lady areas so much.
'Parrently pro cyclist guy Dave Zabriskie has a company called "DZNuts" which makes dude and lady-part friendly seats.
edit: No, sorry Ally. Cream, not seats. Cream.
http://www.dz-nuts.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_id=20
Hoogerland impressive?Nothing is Hoogerland impressive
Based on wasted time and fuel, congestion cost about $115bn (£74.5bn) in 2010
1.9 billion gallons of fuel were wasted while standing idle, which would fill 38 super-tankers
Source: Texas Transportation Institute
Oh wait, this thread is about bikes, isn't it?
So now I have a wheel that whirrs.
But if in Baltimore, a city of 2.7 million people, 50,000 of those single occupancy commuters were to move to public transport, that would be an extra 2.5 million into the local public transport economy, reduce congestion by the equivalent of 43,000 cars (even buses could move faster and more predictably) and create several jobs. That's just on the idling costs of commuting by car alone.
Yes, but you still have to cover the issues of "now" is the problem, and even then there's no guarantee that the bus system will actually change it's routine in a positive way. I can't say much for Baltimore's public transportation cause I have never been there, but there is a reason why the bus is not anyone's first choice in Rochester, NY.
... It's more like coming across one of your old favorite toys in the attic, only I'm not too big for it.
Guys, you have no idea how happy this makes me!
Myself, this is my cycle:I'm not a huge fan of recumbent trikes, but that is a very nice rig. Mudguards, rack, matching luggage, serious lighting system... Very cool!
I'm going to have to actually drive on the street for my test.
And, because this is the cycling thread, a rant on transportational cycling gear that's been brewing for a while: http://bhtooefr.org/blog/2013/06/25/a-rant-about-transportational-cycling-gear-in-the-us/Exactly the same situation applies in Australia. There is precisely one shop in Sydney that specialises in transport cycling, and they are not cheap. Otherwise it is cycle-sports all the way. The problem for the cycle-trade is that cycle-commuters etc. are a niche market here. If a distributor imports a container-load of stuff from Europe, they'll have to pay import-duty, charge sales-tax, tie up their capital etc., when they know that people like us order direct from overseas vendors, don't have to pay sales-tax, and normally the cost is below the import-duty threshold. When I ask my LBS for European gear, they simply tell me, right up front, to order direct over the internet.
Everyone else is definitely safer, especially with the power restrictions that are in place (although, they don't seem to legislate power directly, more displacements and specific models).Apart from the maximum capacity limit of 660cc, the key number is power-to-weight ratio. It must not exceed 150 kilowatts per tonne. The list of small capacity bikes that are banned for learners are all two-strokes with high power-to-weight ratios.
[driving exam questions]
The pedals... the trick is that folding pedals make it smaller, and AFAIK, there is no folding SPD pedal.You might want to look at the MKS AR-2 EZY quick-release pedal system. I have not used it myself, but MKS stuff has a good reputation, and the users I've spoken to rate the system highly. You remove your old pedals and replace them with the "sockets" into which MKS pedals then lock. There are platform and SPD pedals available for the system, and you can buy the sockets separately, allowing you to swap pedals quickly between bikes. Bike Friday sells them (http://store.bikefriday.com/index.php?cPath=33&osCsid=e9dd887388cb66f420a0adf5ddd617a7), but you might be able to get them cheaper elsewhere.
Oh, and re: the dynamo setup, it's actually only running the front light. This is a hub dynamo, not a sidewall dynamo, which reduces drag and eliminates tire wear and slippage. The headlight is switchable, and has a standlight (so it stays lit on lower brightness for ~5 minutes when stopped).Yeah, I could see that it was a hub dynamo (the only sort I would consider), and that you run a battery-powered rear light. You have a nice set-up altogether. My problem with dynamo systems is more fundamental; I just don't think they are powerful enough, no matter how cleverly the optics are designed to make the best use of the rather limited power available from a bike generator.
Alright, looks like this is the cycling thread, even though this will be a massive necropost...
Quick interlude on Ohio cycling laws:
- Passing in a double yellow has been explicitly legal since 2006, if it is safe to do so, and the vehicle you are passing is going less than 1/2 the speed limit.
- Ohio requires that motor vehicles maintain a rate of speed that does not impede traffic - note that bicycles are not motor vehicles. That said, if traffic can't safely pass me, I'll pull off when it's safe to do so.
- Ohio requires that cyclists stay as far right as practicable. This is widely interpreted as taking the lane any time the rideable (this means not riding in the marked shoulder or the door zone) lane is less than 14 feet wide - the minimum safe width for a cyclist and a vehicle to share a lane by AAHSTO standards. In certain situations, even 14 feet isn't enough
- Ohio does not require that cyclists keep to the sidewalk, although it is allowed (except in municipalities that don't allow it). Personally, I avoid it, although I have done it, at walking speed, when the road wasn't practical.
- Freeways are dedicated to motor vehicles with at least 5 bhp, and not farm vehicles. I may have once taken advantage of the fact that my Golf TDI has issues with fuel injection quantity, and sooted a roadie that got on the freeway, when there's an excellent trail that PARALLELS the freeway in question!
Regarding roads that are unsafe to cycle on due to conditions such as blind corners and hills... IMO, it's irresponsible to ride on such roads due to the extreme risk of personal danger, but if they're the only way to get where you want to go reasonably, then it's justifiable - and, in many of those areas, getting dedicated cycling infrastructure is about as likely as the government buying everyone a holopony.
Re: Velomobiles, most of the popular ones are HEAVY. Like 75 pounds. But, once you get them going, as long as you don't have to go up a hill, they can get going QUITE fast, due to their greatly reduced drag (which is why most velomobiles are Dutch), and they've got weather protection (even the open cockpit ones - there are ways to get it).
Myself, this is my cycle:
(http://bhtooefr.org/images/terratrike4.jpg)
TerraTrike Path 8-speed, with a Sturmey-Archer X-RF8(W), no-name disc brakes on the front only (rear braking on a trike is a BAD, bad idea - it'll get you a nasty crash quickly), rack, fenders, Philips SafeRide 80 front light and the Philips led lights (http://www.niceledlights.com) (StVZO compliant front lighting is the ONLY way to go for see-with lighting - mind you, be-seen lighting is a little different - and this is a damn good setup), and a Garmin Edge 205 (because I couldn't be bothered running cabling for a speed sensor, and wireless sucks especially on a 'bent, so I went for GPS so a sensor wasn't needed). I use Arkel RT-40 panniers (they're on backwards in that pic :lol:), and not pictured are the Performance Bike el cheapo platform/SPD combo pedals (really, on a trike, you REALLY want some sort of foot attachment - you spend a lot of energy just keeping your feet on the pedals otherwise, and if your foot slips off, the trike will try to run you over, and that HURTS (luckily, the one time that happened to me, before going SPD, I was going slowly, so I didn't break my leg).
I'm slow, I usually average 12 mph (not including time stopped), but I'll blame the 40 psi tires for that. I'll switch to Schwalbe Trykers when these wear out.[/u]
light bracket on my handle bars
I need to get a fairly bright, good-quality light (definitely a front one, probably a back one as well) for my bike, which I can attach despite the fact that I have a large rounded wicker basket on the front and therefore can't put the light bracket on my handle bars.
I haven't cycled the road route to uni yet, and I don't even know where I'll be going for hospital placements, but one of the places I'm intending to cycle in dusk at least, if not in the dark, is the canal towpath. So I'd need very good lights for that, since I suspect it's unlit.I'll note that the strongest lighting requirements are generally when riding amongst cars, in unlit areas.
I'll bet that four-speed hub was Sturmey-Archer.
This. But do consider the following (hopefully in your country this is irrelevant): in the 80s and 90s local insurance companies insisted that a bicycle theft claim should be accompanied by all the keys to a lock of a certified type that had to be permanently attached to the bike frame. Usually meaning that the lock woud be screwed/bolted to seat stays and thus only able to wrap around the rear wheel. I guess they were more worried about people forgetting to lock their bikes and/or false claims (if you used chain only, you had a harder time proving that you had not just been very careless). They have wisened up since I think. But, as evidence of this past, I present my wife's bike. That is still the only type of lock it has, but she rarely rides in the city, so risk of theft is very low (and it is obviously an unattractive target as an old bike). On my own bike I use an Abus U-lock (http://www.abus.com/eng/Mobile-Security/Bike-safety-and-security/Locks) that can reach around the front wheel, downtube and a railing/lamp post/rack.
- Don't forget to lock your bike to a sturdy fixed object, whether the bike-rack, lamp-post or whatever. Don't laugh; I've seen locked bikes that a thief could just pick up and carry away.
I have hub gears on my bike because I think they are better for commuting/transport cycling, and one reason is that they are much less vulnerable to damage than derailleurs.This may be true. I do not have any experience with hub gears. But I don't want to try to service hub gears, whereas replacing a freewheel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogset#Freewheels) is relatively straightforward (with proper tools). I realize that your point may be that hub gears rarely need such maintenance.
Currently I have 3 chain rings and a cogset of 6 (from year -89, when that was considered cool). On the largest chain ring I only use the three smallest cogsThat is because you have a clue. It is a very bad idea to ride large-chainring-large-rear-cog, or small-chainring-small-rear-cog. It's inefficient and hard on your equipment. One of the reasons I think hub gears are better for utility cyclists is because their operation is simpler; just one control to shift up and down, and no need to worry about juggling chainring and cluster shifts to get the ratio you want.
It is a very bad idea to ride large-chainring-large-rear-cog, or small-chainring-small-rear-cog. It's inefficient and hard on your equipment.
Yep, the tyre pressure is too low. I know about that, and I had the adaptor for filling them up at the nearest gas station in my pocket, but I didn't manage to do it until then. I never said it wasn't my fault.Pumping up bicycle tyres (or rather inner-tubes) at air-lines designed for cars is a bad idea. The gauges are inaccurate, especially at the high pressures (relative to typical car tyres) used for bikes, and many have mechanisms that deliver air in "bursts" which are fine for high-volume/low-pressure car tyres, but can blow the tyre off the rim on high-pressure/low-volume bicycle tyres. The worst pumps in this regard are the ones where you set the target pressure on the pump, and the pump decides when it has reached it. With Schwalbe Marathons (I ride those too!), if you are pumping them to their minimum pressure, you will probably get away with using a car air-line, but what you really want is a floor-pump. I recommend the Topeak "Joe Blow" range (http://www.topeak.com/products/Floor-Pumps); I bought the cheapest that had a built-in pressure gauge years ago and it is still going strong. You will want to carry a pump on the road as well, and if your budget will not stretch to two pumps (or you have nowhere secure to store a floor-pump), I suggest the Topeak Morph range (http://www.topeak.com/products/Morph-Pumps). No, I don't own shares in Topeak :wink:, but their pumps are good, and I own two.
It certainly needs cleaning (I am reluctant to do this because it will take approximately 0.212 seconds cycling to uni next week before it's covered in mud againAs I recall, your bike is something like this:
Well, I guess the frame size and alignment does define the feel of the bike (along with the handlebar stem), but even so...!
It's a little unstable, a bit hard to get used to and slightly scary. It is also a lot of fun.
*Racing cyclists (especially criterium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criterium) racers) like high bottom-brackets because they can continue pedalling through tighter corners without a pedal striking the ground. Mountain-bikers like high bottom-brackets to give them better ground-clearance over logs, rocks etc. Bicycle manufacturers like to use the same frames in bikes sold for multiple purposes because it reduces their costs.
I know that studded tires for cars are illegal in the UK.
TSK's 'bent is very cool (review here (http://mccraw.co.uk/challenge-fujin-sl-review/)). I would not like to manoeuvre it round a lot of the stupidly-tight hairpins on cycle-paths in Sydney though.
As for knees, I'm not sure how far a 'bent bicycle would help. One of the advantages claimed for 'bent trikes is that you can install gearing as low as you like, and never face the risk of falling, no matter how slowly you crawl up hills, but that might not apply to a two-wheeler.
Fuck, and the check engine light is on! Dammnit all. Looks like I need to the spark plugs and wire harness. At least.
Shit.
The British Advertising Standards Agency have seen fit to ignore decades of experience, study, provable facts and analysis and banned an advert encouraging cycling because it doesn't fit with an outmoded and ill advised point of view.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572)
Personally cyclists should fuck off back to the sidewalk.How can you cycle on the sidewalk? It's full of pedestrians!
How can you cycle on the road? It's full of cars!
If you can't keep up with the speed and flow of automotive traffic, get out of the way.
How can you cycle on the road? It's full of cars!
If you can't keep up with the speed and flow of automotive traffic, get out of the way.
Bikes in Michigan share the road with cars, and motorists are expected to avoid the bikes. But it's still a hairy, risky experience. I like the idea of dedicated bike lanes, and I think in the U.S., some federal highway funds are allocated for development of non-motorized vehicles.
Every time you see a bike in front of you, remember that it could have been an SUV instead.
Every time you see a bike in front of you, remember that it could have been an SUV instead.
Every time you see a bike in front of you, BACK OFF. We stop a lot faster than you can.
Every time you see a bike in front of you, BACK OFF. We stop a lot faster than you can.Unless of course it is some clown on a
That's a very strong opinion. I assume you're referring specifically to helmets?
I had the priviledge of watching a bright, likably guy repeat grade 12 after a very slow speed bike accident. It was pretty heartbreaking.
I'm open to stats trumping anecdotes, but my personal anecdote of watching someone try to relearn what they KNEW they'd learned last year but couldn't quite remember will always influence me to wear a helmet.
the idea that cyclists should ride no more than 50cm from the edge of the road, that really will get people killed. It directly contravenes any Government and ACPO approved cycling training in use in the UK today.
Furthermore, for all of the stories where someone didn't wear a helmet and it was tragic or someone did wear a helmet and it "saved their life" is the reality is that we simply do no know.
Moving on to the other stuff, we know that mandating helmet use will almost definitely result in a decline in cycling numbers
Yeah, you're going to need to bring some actual stats to the party,
because that seems pretty damned implausible to me. Why? Because if you grow up in a world of mandatory seatbelts, it never occurs to you to not drive because seatbelts are mandatory. Ditto bikes and helmets, sure it affects the numbers for a while, but not permenantly.
There has been no recovery to pre-law levels – the trend continued downward over the next decade,
Yeah, you're going to need to bring some actual stats to the party,
Here you are. (http://cyclehelmets.org/1194.html)
I was hoping for a MUCH longer duration survey.
Yeah, you're going to need to bring some actual stats to the party,
Here you are. (http://cyclehelmets.org/1194.html)
Thanks.
Fwiw,(click to show/hide)
I pulled the codes at lunch (at auto zone as it happens, you East Coast types are weird again, out West you give them your driver's license, they give you the scanner and go get your own codes, here they do it for you! Madness!) Any way misfires on all six cylinders plus the random misfire code. Apparently that's commonly an issue with the plugs and wires, and can also be a sensor screen getting gunked up from shitty oil. The other primary possibilities are the coil going bad, the timing belt being off, which at my mileage needs to be changed if it hasn't been already or and this would REALLY suck, the computer being on the fritz.
How can you cycle on the road? It's full of cars!
If you can't keep up with the speed and flow of automotive traffic, get out of the way.
So in a city during rush hour, if the cars cant' keep up with the speed and flow of bikes, they should pull over, too, right?
I am an asshole in my head. I am very polite to the outside world.
on the bus from Heathrow today I saw signs referring to "variable speed limits." Is that the same thing?
Given the choice between roads full of uninsured, unregistered, speeding vehicles and an automated system of computers logging numberplates, I would prefer the former.
I think we all agree some degree of regulation is a good thing, it's the amount of regulation where things get sticky.
Given the choice between roads full of uninsured, unregistered, speeding vehicles and an automated system of computers logging numberplates, I would prefer the former.
Latter, surely!
Given the choice between roads full of uninsured, unregistered, speeding vehicles and an automated system of computers logging numberplates, I would prefer the former.
Latter, surely!
When I moved to England I noticed a lot of differences from Denmark. When I moved back to Denmark I noticed even more. One being that "cyclist" means different things.
In Denmark a cyclist just means a person on a bike (and most Danes are cyclists), but in England it's mostly used about people who are really really REALLY into bikes.
I really hate talking to aggressive cyclists who are trying to convert the flock.
Sarcasm aside I really hate talking to aggressive cyclists who are trying to convert the flock.It's a funny thing about people who care passionately about something, are deeply concerned about legal threats to their right to continue their preferred activity, are irritated by misrepresentation of them in media, and have *ahem* forceful opinions about people who do not share their interests. We had a thread on one such subject (http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,28160.0.html)...
I wouldn't say I'm a cyclist, just that I have a bike and cycle to get places."I'm not one of those feminists, it's just that believe in equality for women!"
Sarcasm aside I really hate talking to aggressive cyclists who are trying to convert the flock.It's a funny thing about people who care passionately about something, are deeply concerned about legal threats to their right to continue their preferred activity, are irritated by misrepresentation of them in media, and have *ahem* forceful opinions about people who do not share their interests. We had a thread on one such subject (http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,28160.0.html)...
Why bikes make smart people say dumb things. (https://medium.com/@CarlAlviani/why-bikes-make-smart-people-say-dumb-things-9316abbd5735) An interesting examination of Americans' irrational biases against bikes and cyclists.
Sadly we can't all be urban types and actually have to go places in a quick and timely manner.
It's the same mentality as those who stop at an intersection with no stop sign, motioning the people with a stop sign on, like it was a 4-way stop. There's one of those in front of our house, and the result is an occasional rear-ending. Worse, someone got t-boned when they accepted the other driver's offer, but the car going the opposite way had no intention of stopping without a stop sign.Here I've seen the opposite problem. 4-way stops are so common here that I have to be extra-careful at intersections that aren't 4-way stops, because people will assume that the fact that they have a stop sign means that I have a stop sign as well.
Excessive politeness can be a hazard... usually only when mixed with stupidity, though.
When in Cambodia, I was interested to see bikes with bamboo frames. I was even more interested to see one parked at work today!I saw one of those for sale online and it was about ten times as expensive as a similar bike made of metal. Guess it's down to the marketing as eco-friendly! and sustainable! and trendy as fuck! but not affordable, oh no.
Indeed it is the PBP. Went out in the 90 group last time (2011) bit I'm going to have a punt at the 84 hour group. Did Super Brevet Scandinavia last year which was pretty impressive and there's a couple of others on the list;
I cycled across Canada in 2006 and Cape Breton was pretty awesome. Even better was the Petit Train du Nord in Quebec which I think is local to you.
I may never actually do Lands End to John O'Groats although I've done a lot of the roads that make it up. Give us a shout if you come over though, I'd be happy to give you come company on the Welsh Marches.
It's going to come in at around £1200 (£1k on the bike to work scheme) fully built but it could easily be sold for quite a bit more.Fuck, there's no way I'd ever pay that much for a bike if it didn't have a motor and at least 750cc.
A high-end TREK bicycle comes in at less than that... though at $1,979, with tax added it probably nicks that total.
A high-end TREK bicycle comes in at less than that... though at $1,979, with tax added it probably nicks that total.
That's... not high-end, and Trek's got a bike over $10k.
$2000 is very much mid-range.
All this talk about $2000 motorcycles ...
Hedgie was talking about motorcycles, and a Harley Sportster can be had for cheap if you do your own work, and buy one from the 80s. I don't buy nearly ANYTHING new.For a lot of things, it's better that way, especially if one is frugal || on a tight budget. It rather boggles my mind what some people pay for the new shiny, when after 6 months, it can be found second-hand, or discounted to being a model that's being phased out, or a refurb for a fraction of the price.
My 'Beast' is still limping around with a Spare tire.
Two new tires will run $250-300.
...and I'm still UNDER-employed. :(
fuck.
Nice little bit of advice
But man, fuck roundabouts. They put in a few in north of my city and nobody gets how to use them. More often then not traffic is jammed an extra mile cause of those fuckers.
I advise not living in the middle of frakking nowhere, as over four in five of your fellow Americans do. Or, if you want to enjoy the privilege of living in the middle of nowhere and regularly commuting to the city, accept that such a lifestyle has costs associated with it. High-tech society and urbanization are inescapable partners, arable land is not infinite, and there's a whole, whole lot of people in the world. The idea that you can live on farmland and not use it at all, while you work at some urban job and leach off the urban infrastructure, is simply not a tenable one in the modern world.
Smart cars are nice - if you live in a big city. If you live out in the middle of frakkin' nowhere, they're not much help - especially if you burn an entire tank of fuel/all of your battery power going one way to the next major city.
Spoken like a city slicker up there who'd never left the environs of the same.
Ah kin put y'all up in dem mountins where bycicles lik that'un will getcha kilt on tha roads.It isn't bicycles that get cyclists killed; it is cars, vans, trucks etc. The fact that an incident where a car is driven into a bicycle, and kills the rider, is called a "bicycle accident", and the death is listed as a "cycling fatality", and it is bicycles that are labelled as "dangerous", is victim-blaming and responsibility-avoidance of a rather disgusting kind. It is essentially like arguing that shirts are dangerous rather than guns, because if you get shot in the chest, the shirt won't keep out the bullets.
Grande is Starfucks-speak (yes, I know it means large), and biscotti is a plural term :PSpoken like a city slicker up there who'd never left the environs of the same.
Hush, you. I'm a good half hour from anywhere that serves a grande skinny latte with an extra shot and a side of biscotti.
Please tell me all you QC cyclists wear at least 1 of those blinking lights that atrap to your arm, or have one on your bike. When it gets to be dusk, people on bikes without lights are ridiculously hard to fucking see from a vehicle. I'm not sure why, but its the truth.
Do you KNOW why we live "out in the middle of fricken nowhere"?But not, and this is rather the point I was getting at, 90% of the jobs, housing, amenities, etc. Those are all in cities. And if you want to enjoy those things and the bonuses of living in the country, via a long commute by automobile, then you're going to have to, essentially, pay extra. In the context of the discussion where you brought up living out in the boonies, you were complaining about someone's proposal to allow persons with lower qualifications to drive a class of small compacts. You complained that said compacts would not have the range you wanted, and wouldn't let you get to the city (although you were shown to be incorrect in this assertion). Under such a set of rules, though, you would simply have to meet higher qualifications to get licenced to drive the large cars you think you need and feel entitled to. That is simply the cost of trying to have it both ways.
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT 2/3RDS OF THE COUNTRY IS.
Spoken like a city slicker up there who'd never left the environs of the same.
...No offence meant, but anyone who can't figure out a simple roundabout in under thirty seconds has no business piloting anything motorised in any public place whatsoever.
The better and more humanist solution is to do away with cities, they drain resources and generate nothing.
The county in which I live has a total population of about roughly 20,000.Then your gripe about fuel capacity frankly sounds even sillier; I could bike one end of the county to the other in a few hours, let alone drive. I used to ride further for recreation, when I didn't live in the city. (It's a lot harder to find 30 miles of pleasant ride around here, and the traffic and signals and the like slows me up considerable as well).
Just about 10,000 live in the city (and I use that term begrudgingly) where I reside. There is a smaller city to the north of me that has about 6,500 . The rest of the population is scattered around the county.
My "city" is located on the south edge of the county. The county is 907 square miles - and it's practically square, too.
To go from one end of the city to the other is just over four miles - and it's not all flat.
To go from one end of the county to the other... is about 31 miles, and ALL of it is rural, and practically NONE of it is straight-line.
Three basic rules of roundabouts:
1. Vehicles in the roundabout have the right of way.
2. You should ALWAYS stop or slow down before entering a roundabout.
3. DO NOT STOP if you are in a roundabout!
Are you volunteering to be part of the ~90% of the human race that has to die for that to happen? Remember the bit about arable land being in limited supply? There's nowhere to put the human race except cities.This basically. My hometown of Shanghai has a population roughly equal to the whole of Australia (about 23 million), and has an land area roughly half that of Sydney. Imagine it... The entire human population (except for a few miners, farmers, oil-rig workers etc.) in one city, and the rest of the continent for food production, resource extraction, and national parks. We might even finally get some decent public transport. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
national chain restaurantsI spit on your national chains, from a great height. I can walk five minute from my home and pass half a dozen local eateries. Downtown, where I work, I'm within 4 blocks of two separate food cart pods, which stretch for blocks and have literally (sic) dozens of different food options, from nearly as many different cultures. That's not even mentioning the coffeeshops, which may outnumber the eateries; it's hard to say.
There's no shame in investing in a decent set of lights.
I just wish I could put a dynamo on my trike, rather than have to recharge that thing.Dynamo lights (actually, modern systems use an alternator, not a dynamo) are elegant, and the better ones impose little drag. The problem with them, in my opinion, is that they are simply not bright enough for riding at night in city traffic where they have to compete with so many, much brighter, lights in an environment designed around motor-vehicles.
I find it strange that you say you would have higher powered lighting for the city than you would for rural riding.I didn't. Ideally, I would have powerful lighting all the time, town or country. The reason I'd go with lower-powered lighting on a PBP ride, for example, is that powerful battery lights wouldn't last throughout the night. I know that the "conventional wisdom" is that some glow-worm-like blinkie is adequate for riding in the city, I just don't buy it. I've had to take avoiding action on too many occasions when drivers plainly didn't pick me out of the river of headlights flowing toward them as they squint into the dazzle.
A high-end TREK bicycle comes in at less than that... though at $1,979, with tax added it probably nicks that total.
That's... not high-end, and Trek's got a bike over $10k.
I dare say there are dangers if you don't do up your wheel nuts as well.I agree, but threaded nuts are something that most people understand pretty well because they are so widely used. QRs are more complex and you have to learn how to use them (http://www.bicyclinglife.com/HowTo/UseAQuickRelease.htm)*. Of course there is a wider problem here of casual cyclists receiving little, if any, guidance or training, especially if they buy their bike somewhere other than a bike-shop (though there are plenty of crappy bike-shops around too). The prevalence of "lawyer lips" on the front forks of many bikes (which remove the advantage of QR attachment anyway), is more evidence of this.
And of course a 5 second google search found the local raleigh official shop in VT and they told me they could get me a replacement easily. I just DON'T understand. Why couldn't this shop simply get me a proper wheel off the internet.Just as there are shitty garages that rip you off, I'm afraid there are shitty bike shops that do the same, and unfortunately you found one. Possibly they are cycle-sport jerks who don't know or care about transportation cycling, or maybe they are just jerks.
WHY would they put a RACE ready wheel on my comfort bike that I am riding everyday to work to lose weight???????????Leaving aside the probability that they are just a bunch of pricks (which seems high given their comments on your weight), there is a significant problem with bike-shops in Australia focussing very strongly on cycle-sports, and this might be true in the USA too. There is only one bike-shop in Sydney (as far as I know) that specialises in transportation cycling. It is fair to say that this reflects the emphasis of the cycling industry generally, at least in the English-speaking world, and it leads to poor choices being offered to transport cyclists.
3.1.1 Power: Vehicles must be driven solely by human power. Non-human power sources (batteries, solar cells, etc.) are permitted only for powering sensors, displays, communication equipment and lights. Control devices, cooling fans, powered aerodynamic devices, etc., may not be powered from non-human sources.
3.1.2 Energy Storage: No device which stores energy over more than one input power cycle (e.g., one leg stroke), or which releases energy under control of the operator, may be used in any event except the road race, or speed events longer than one mile. Energy storage devices are permitted in these events provided no energy is stored before the start of the event (this means absolutely no chemical, electrical, kinetic, potential, or other form of energy storage at the start.)
Cameras do make it easier to get a nice clean shape as the rider can be leaned further back. Jan-Marcel says that in his riding position he'd only be able to see his knees. As a bonus, the electronics enhance the view in low light such as we get when the evening sessions are running late. Reliability and resolution are now both very good and if you're suitably clever you can overlay all sorts of information onto the basic view rather than just scrawling a list of target speeds on the inside of the windscreen with a crayon. Todd is even monitoring CO2 levels
That's pretty much true in Australia too now, however in rural districts you still see level-crossings that are signposted, but not equipped with warning lights or barriers (http://h7.alamy.com/comp/J64327/rural-railway-crossing-berry-new-south-wales-nsw-australia-J64327.jpg). Drivers are simply expected to stop and look for oncoming trains. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/more-country-rail-crossings-to-get-safety-boost-after-vline-smash-20160724-gqcou6.html). Even where there are barriers and warning lights, you can't stop idiots from being idiots (https://www.acri.net.au/event/rtsa-engineers-australia-level-crossing-presentation/).Funnily enough, the same is true of my country, even though 'rural' means something very different in a country roughly the size of New York.