HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1421  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2019, 9:47 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Trump for Treason.
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Posts: 4,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
It is correct that the city biking advocates generally don't bike much and aren't particularly good at it but suck up 99% of the attention. There is a bike trail guy in my city who can't help but mug for the camera and tell and retell his story. I've never seen him photographed or filmed riding an actual bike.

These people poo-poo and are dismissive toward people who are good road bikers - the sort who don't care if there are bike lanes or not. They are oblivious to the existence of mountain bikers, who are usually both the most athletic and the most chill of any biking subgroup.

10-15 years ago we had the hipster city bike trend. Fixie bikes, old crap 10-speeds from the 70s. Those people managed to suck even more than their bikes. Where did they go? I don't know. I see their fixie bikes all over Craigslist now.

Those people wanted to be seen. They parked their bikes in the most conspicuous places possible. Made sure everyone on the patio saw them roll up to the bar on their old bikes. That were soon after forgotten and now litter Craigslist.
This is absolutely correct.
__________________
No Trump. No KKK. No racism in the USA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1422  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2019, 10:13 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 6,219
For the record, not every dude that chooses to ride an old lugged frame fixed gear/freewheel is a shallow hipster douche. I'm standing up for a friend.
__________________
Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1423  
Old Posted Aug 29, 2019, 4:47 AM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
is a shallow hipster douche. I'm standing up for a friend.
I could fall into that category but I just love biking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1424  
Old Posted Sep 1, 2019, 11:26 PM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,716
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1425  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2019, 7:52 AM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 882
Today I rode my fairly-expensive (roughly $1,500) 2 year-old mountain bike in the city on my way out of town to a mountain bike trail. It's a little slower than my commuter bike, but the thing is incredible in the city. The 2.8" tubeless tires mean you can run over absolutely anything (glass, etc.), the wide tires don't even notice sewers or streetcar tracks, and the disc brakes stop on a dime. The shifting is quick and perfect, every time. Unfortunately the thing is too valuable to ride in the city regularly, and so I normally pedal about on my 15 year-old commuter bike that would be lucky to fetch $100 on Craigslist.

I couldn't help but chuckle at the profound practicality of a mountain bike in the city (bike racks on college campuses in the 1990s were nothing but mountain bikes) as opposed to the repurposed hipster 1970s Schwinn. The sewers. The gravel. The glass. The streetcar tracks. The imprecise shifting on the down tube. The brakes that barely work in the rain. The hunched-over posture that doesn't keep you upright and alert. The floppy handling.

All of those downsides...but back in 2010 those idiots lorded over America's city streets with their pretentious pieces of junk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1426  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2019, 2:08 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,933
If one type of pristine $1500 bike is "a little slower" a 15 year old example of another type that's worth no more than $100, imagine the speed/efficiency difference of examples that are of the same age and quality. To me, gnarly mountain bikes vs commuter bikes vs road bikes is akin to Land Rover vs Accord vs Porsche.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1427  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2019, 5:00 PM
Muji's Avatar
Muji Muji is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnyc View Post
OK. The headline number in that article is city records that people on bikes have caused a total of 2,250 pedestrian injuries in NYC since 2011. That's a scary number for sure, and I don't want to defend cyclists who are at fault, but don't forget that the issue truly pales in comparison to the number of cyclists and pedestrians injured by drivers.

Looking at city records from just the last few years (source), motor vehicles have injured just above 10,000 pedestrians per year and over 4000 cyclists per year. If we're really concerned about street safety, crashes caused by cars are obviously the higher priority.
__________________
My blog of then and now photos of LA: http://urbandiachrony.wordpress.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1428  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2019, 5:32 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,933
Not to mention that the headline is an totally inappropriate use of the term terrorism which denotes an intentional act meant to cause mass fear and intimidation in the public toward the aim of making a political statement or achieving some political goal. People driving recklessly is not terrorism.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1429  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2019, 7:51 PM
craigs craigs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muji View Post
Looking at city records from just the last few years (source), motor vehicles have injured just above 10,000 pedestrians per year and over 4000 cyclists per year. If we're really concerned about street safety, crashes caused by cars are obviously the higher priority.
He's not honestly concerned about the actual carnage in the streets of New York, though, which is almost entirely the fault of motor-terrorists. He's merely using a right-wing rag to advance his grumpy, negative attack on "the others" who ride bicycles. He does not approve. Call them names! Imply that they cause anywhere near the carnage of our beloved motorists! Attack the other! Attack!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1430  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 1:23 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
but back in 2010 those idiots lorded over America's city streets with their pretentious pieces of junk.
Cyclists who feel the need to judge other cyclists for their choice of steed are some of the most obnoxious cyclists out there.

Just ride!

The rest is BS.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Sep 3, 2019 at 2:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1431  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 1:26 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnyc View Post
biker terrorism


Cars kill like 50,000 Americans every year, but bicycles are the real menace.

The New York post is so terrible that it isn't even suitable to keep around as emergency toilet paper
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Sep 3, 2019 at 2:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1432  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 2:47 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnyc View Post
A couple of points:

1. More people biking means that there will be more issues.
2. I think a huge issue is our culture. Biking culture here vs in Europe or Japan could not be more different. People here feel like they have to zoom everywhere quickly, this isn't the case in Japan(where bikes are usually found on sidewalks) or in most of Europe.
3. I would rather be hit by a bike than a car ANY day.

All that being said, police need a crackdown on idiots who are clearly being dangerous. This won't hurt the "cause" of wanting more people to ride bikes. Hell, it will only help.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1433  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 5:23 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
Cyclists who feel the need to judge other cyclists for their choice of steed are some of the most obnoxious cyclists out there.
Those people aren't riding anymore. That they became bikers was as much as a fad as the bikes themselves.

There is some baseline of biking that needs to happen before you can call yourself an "experienced" bicyclist or a "cyclist" or whatever. I'm not sure exactly what that baseline is. But there is definitely a difference between a "bicyclist" and a "dude on a bike".


Is a homeless guy walking around his circa-1992 Murray mountain bike a "bicyclist"?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1434  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 5:35 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
Those people aren't riding anymore.
and you know this how? you've done the necessary polls/studies?

far more likely, you're just making shit up to fit your little manufactured outrage narrative.

"goddamn THOSE people, why don't they ride the kind of bikes that I want them to ride?"



FWIW, i still see PLENTY of people riding fixies and vintage 10 speeds here in chicago (along with every other style of bike under the sun).




Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
there is definitely a difference between a "bicyclist" and a "dude on a bike".

Is a homeless guy walking around his circa-1992 Murray mountain bike a "bicyclist"?
by definition, anyone riding a bicycle is a bicyclist.

doesn't matter if it's a $5,000 Cervelo or a $50 '90s walmart BSO.

similar to how anyone driving a car is a car driver. doesn't matter if it's a Kia or a Bugatti.


to differentiate between regular bicyclists and those who take a particularly strong interest in the endeavor, the word "cyclist" is most often used.

likewise with cars, to differentiate between regular car drivers and those who take a particularly strong interest in the endeavor, the words "car enthusiast" or "gearhead" are most often used.



just ride!

the rest is BS.
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Sep 3, 2019 at 6:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1435  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 8:18 PM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muji View Post
Looking at city records from just the last few years (source), motor vehicles have injured just above 10,000 pedestrians per year and over 4000 cyclists per year. If we're really concerned about street safety, crashes caused by cars are obviously the higher priority.
Typical predicted response from the pro bike crowd. Cars do it so its okay.

Leaving out the fact that common sense would tell you more deaths would be associated with cars anyways given the modal share of cars vs. bikes. Simply put there is more people in cars so more chances of wrecks happening.

Though I don't agree with the term "bike terrorism," this is a good article publicizing that bikes aren't the cure all to pedestrians deaths many publications like citylab and curbed make them out to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1436  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 11:53 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,218
Assuming we are using 2011-2018, the final number of 2,250 comes out to 281 injuries a year from bikers.

80,000 people would have been injured by cars in that same timeframe. 112,000 if you include bikers being injured by cars.

If bikers make up 1% of the commuters and they had the same pedestrian-injury rate as cars, they would injure 1,120 people a year vs what the number really is, 281.

So bikers are like 4-5 times safer for pedestrians vs cars. This isn't even accounting for deaths, which I assume would make cars look even worse.

NOTE: I suck at math(I know I didn't do the math correctly), but if I am ANY near close to the real numbers, there is no debate.

Last edited by jtown,man; Sep 4, 2019 at 12:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1437  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2019, 12:12 AM
Muji's Avatar
Muji Muji is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda View Post
Typical predicted response from the pro bike crowd. Cars do it so its okay.
In no way did I imply or say that reckless cycling is "okay". The point is that NY Post took one number out of context to push their view that cyclists are somehow more of a danger to pedestrians than motor vehicles.

I'll second Jtown, man's comment above.
__________________
My blog of then and now photos of LA: http://urbandiachrony.wordpress.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1438  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2019, 9:03 AM
accord1999 accord1999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
Assuming we are using 2011-2018, the final number of 2,250 comes out to 281 injuries a year from bikers.

80,000 people would have been injured by cars in that same timeframe. 112,000 if you include bikers being injured by cars.

If bikers make up 1% of the commuters and they had the same pedestrian-injury rate as cars, they would injure 1,120 people a year vs what the number really is, 281.
112,000 is over 8 years, or 14,000/year. The equivalent at a 1% share would be 140 injuries per year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1439  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2019, 4:32 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
112,000 is over 8 years, or 14,000/year. The equivalent at a 1% share would be 140 injuries per year.
See, I knew my math was wrong and the actual answer was probably even less damning regarding bikes than what I figured up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1440  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2019, 6:59 PM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
Assuming we are using 2011-2018, the final number of 2,250 comes out to 281 injuries a year from bikers.

80,000 people would have been injured by cars in that same timeframe. 112,000 if you include bikers being injured by cars.

If bikers make up 1% of the commuters and they had the same pedestrian-injury rate as cars, they would injure 1,120 people a year vs what the number really is, 281.

So bikers are like 4-5 times safer for pedestrians vs cars. This isn't even accounting for deaths, which I assume would make cars look even worse.

NOTE: I suck at math(I know I didn't do the math correctly), but if I am ANY near close to the real numbers, there is no debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muji View Post
In no way did I imply or say that reckless cycling is "okay". The point is that NY Post took one number out of context to push their view that cyclists are somehow more of a danger to pedestrians than motor vehicles.

I'll second Jtown, man's comment above.
Right, and I am not disputing any of that. Again, this is common sense. You get hit by a bike vs. a car and it doesn't take much thought as to who will be injured worse regardless of speed(in most cases). My point is articles like these dispose of the notion set fourth but not explicitly stated in the tone of many pro-urban publications like Strongtowns in cycling being angelic while cars are the devil. It paints a different picture. Now I'm sure we can agree that the term "bike terrorism" is stupid and doesn't apply here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:55 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.