Cyclists are the bane of the planet

In WA it is illegal to ride more than 2 abreast.

 

Pull your head out and share the road😡


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well, well, well... for me, on my heavy bike, on an 85-degree afternoon, riding home I crushed it!

It does make me curious what my times would be like with a proper road bike. (But not enough curiosity to open my wallet just yet)
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

That's the same app I use. Better than Strava I find

Btw, started a new thread about bikes in Health and fitness for lack of better place to include it, if anyone is interested...

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/health-fitness/496885-bicycles.html

 

Daniel,

What ap is that?

 

So when we have self-driving cars what will the car cyclist relationship look like? Can a driverless car drive within a foot of a bike and no hit it so we can cram more cars on the road? Will bikes be outlawed on narrow roads in favor of cars? Will left lanes be driverless and bikes still contend with drivers in the right lane?

 

If they'll be able to make self driving cars, surely self driving bicycles will have been around for a while already? How hard can it be?

Btw the app is runtastic bikes

 

Yes. App is Runtastic Roadbike PRO running on Android

 

Always getting in the way of a good street race

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACwkQP6q1QQ

 

Ok, this thread intrigues me.

I have communicated with RobLay, Sherpa, and TRScotty and found all of them to be helpful, reasonable, agreeable, and likable guys; as such, it would bother me a little for any of them to think less of me for an opinion that I hold (almost, I suppose, as much as finding out that I really am an ***hole).

I'd appreciate the chance to plead my case. While opinionated, I consider myself a very open minded person, and, as anyone who knows me personally will attest, I will be the very first person to offer the most sincere apology ever if convinced I've done/said wrong. Here is some background :

I live in the burbs, bordering pastoral settings. Depending on which way I turn out of my development, it's either @ 2.5 miles of windy, hilly (read: chock full of blind corners) roads, or @ 6-7 miles of the same, before getting on a major road. In my area, the bicyclists LOVE these roads. I believe that the speed limit on these roads range from 35-45 MPH. These are two lane roads (one lane going each direction), and due to erosion on the sides, are at some points barely wide enough for two cars to fit abreast whilst passing each other. Oftentimes, I end up behind someone peddling up a hill at what I can only estimate is @ 1-2 MPH (if that). I cannot pass, as I cannot see what is over the hill, and am not interested in risking a head on collision; so I have to wait until this cyclist crests this hill (one of a few I might add). Now, even I'm over the hill(s), I usually still have to wait, as there are usually bicyclists holding up traffic both ways by riding in the middle of the lanes going both (or either) direction. Keep in mind that there are no bike lanes on either side of the road here. From being stuck behind them innumerable times, I'd report that these bicyclists are usually going between 18 and 23 MPH on the (relative flats), and anywhere from (effectively) 0 and 5 MPH on the hills. I have actually timed it (WAAAY BEFORE this thread popped up btw), and going the shorter way,it adds between 1 and 3.5 minutes on what is, when bike-free, a 1 minute leg of my journey (so it adds 100% to 350% to my travel time). I've only timed it once going the longer way (and aborted that experiment out of frustration), but at the time I said **** this and turned off to go a different way, it had already more than doubled the time it usually took me to drive about 3 miles.


Also, and I'm not back peddling here (see what I did there ), I should qualify the statement that got me in hot water- My feelings for bicyclists going 5-20 MPH in a 35 are EXACTLY the same as my feelings for ANYone going 5-20 MPH in a 35 IN ANY MODE OF TRANSPORTATION. I HATE anyone wasting my time or costing me time. The men in my family tend to die young-like mid-40s young; I'm 45. I only have a certain amount of time on this planet, and generally do take kindly to others depriving me of that time; I also extend the courtesy to others of not stealing their time as well, since I realize how precious it really is.

So here are my thoughts, in no particular order; please feel free to let me know where I'm wrong

1) someone in this thread opined that they didn't want to ride on the bike path because it was full of novices and hobbyists who would slow him down; I don't suppose that I have to point out the irony here. Where is the line drawn ? I've heard the argument about bicyclists paying taxes for the road too, but that argument doesn't hold water. I paid almost $400k just in income tax last year- does that mean that I can ride my big wheel at .005 MPH in front of the bicyclists if I'm so inclined ? Can a guy who paid $600k in income taxes walk leisurely in front of all of us ? I'm not being facetious here- this argument has been posited many times, and alluded to, if not actually 'presented' in this very thread. The argument seems to be ' I pay my taxes too, so I should get to take up this road and slow down traffic by going 1/3 to 1/2 of the speed limit.'
2) I have no problem with bicyclists riding until their hearts content on designated bike lanes. Further, I have no issue with some of my tax dollars going to support them.
3) would you drive your car 2 MPH up a hill if the speed limit was 40 MPH ? if not, why would you think it's ok to do it in a bike ?
4) to those of you who are accusing us of being jerks because we think that you're being incredibly rude and inconsiderate to slow us down by going too slowly - have any of ever been caught behind a driver going considerably slower that the speed limit in their car ? How did you handle it ? How would you feel if it happened multiple times a week ? What's the difference ?
5) when you go to a restaurant, movie, DMW, store, government agency, coffee shop, etc. and there are people there stealing your time because they're moving/working slower than they could be, do you just shrug it off, or do you get frustrated ? How would you feel if it happened multiple times a week over many years ?
6) how do you feel when walking down the street, in the mall, etc. and you end up walking behind someone else not keeping to the right, as is both customary and courteous, and they're walking slowly too, and you can't get around them ? How would you feel about it if it happened 20-40% of the time you walked out of your front door ?

Here's what it boils down to for me, and again, please let me know why I'm wrong, or if I'm just a hopeless ***hole-

I have no problem at all with bicyclists on any public road as long as they can either keep up with the flow of traffic, or at a minimum, do not slow down those wishing to travel at the legal speed limit. If they cannot or choose not to do such, I feel as though they are being selfish and inconsiderate. This is America, so one should have the right to be selfish if they're so inclined, as long as their actions don't affect me. Riding a bike (or using ANY other mode of transportation) at 10-60% of the speed limit and not making allowances for those who wish to travel the speed limit is robbing (me) of the one commodity in the history of mankind that is not replaceable- time. I'm really not trying to get all poetic or hyperbolic on y'all, but that is honestly how I look at it. If I lose 10 - 12 minutes a week (a realistic estimate) to bicyclists, @ 35 weeks a year, over the course of a decade, I've lost a (work) week of my life- unconscionable. I do not want people taking my money, or worse, taking my time-PERIOD, I do not care what they drive or ride.

If you're inclined to let me know where I'm off base, please make your counter arguments based on reason and logic, not feelings, anecdotal evidence, or emotion. I'm not trying to be condescending, just don't want this to devolve (any further) in the way that many of the P & R threads do- into a series of intersecting monologues instead if a true dialogue. I'm open to the possibility that I may be missing something, and yes, I'm painfully aware that I I may be a little high strung, though I don't think that negates any of my points.

Best

Mike

 

Hi Mike,
Not sure if it was you or others that made the statements that really irked me and others, but they were wishing bikers dead. Regardless of your personal opinion on if cyclists belong on streets or not, wishing them harm or death is not appropriate.
I understand your case that you have laid out, and using your logic it seems sound, I would say work with your city or state to make sure there are lanes on these roads for bikes so that they can ride safely AND you can drive safely. Work with your representatives to make the changes necessary.
Keep in mind that the speed limit you talk about is the top speed limit, there are roads and highways that have a lower speed limit as well as an upper speed limit and there are roads that don't permit cyclists (like some highways).
It sounds to me that the roads you have near you not only need repair and widening to accommodate traffic but also to accommodate multiple forms of transportation that travel at very different rates of speed.

 

Sherpa, we've talked and you seem like a good guy, so I'm not trying to be ****** here, but do you see the irony in what you posted here ?

'speed differential is a real thing ...' is effectively what those of us that don't feel that bicyclists should be blocking (not riding on- blocking) are arguing. Why would this line of thought be valid for bicyclists to use but not for motorists ?

Best, and safe and courteous riding

Mike

 

I can confirm...






...that you're really not an *******. Far, far from it. I very much enjoyed meeting you back in May and thought you were extremely charming.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

1) I never wished a biker dead. I saw the video of the trucker buzzing the bicyclist, and thought the truck driver was a dickhead. I also never suggested that I'd harm a bicyclist in any way.

2) maybe I'm a bad person ( I don't think so, but nobody ever does I suppose) but yes, I do wish ill for those who steal from me. No, I don't wish bikers dead; no, I don't wish them serious harm; I harbor no ill will for those bicyclists who are respectful, courteous, and don't disrupt the flow of traffic. However, if you are discourteous and disruptive ( I believe that I'm referring to the type of bicyclists that even the cyclists on here have called out ) and you steal my precious time, then yes, have a face plant.

3) it's not my job or my responsibility to work with the state. If the bicyclists want more road, let them petition for it. I've already said in no uncertain terms that I have zero problem with bicyclists using bike paths or using public roads, so long as they can keep up with traffic, or not disrupt the flow of traffic traveling at a reasonable speed. I feel as though my thoughts on this are well reasoned, even-handed, sensible, and easy to institute.

Thanks for the response

Best

Mike

 

Charming.........moi ???????....... You really need to get out more my friend

Mike

 

Completely agree with you PoV Mike.

 

Hi Mike,

Again, your requests seems reasonable, thought no one is stealing anything from you, they are not breaking the law. If you don't feel you should work to change the laws to favor your perspective it's unlikely anyone else will.
Cyclists are working together at the local and national level to get more rights and more pathways and safe routes. That may not equate to what you would like to see which sounds like faster means of transportation from point A to point B.
I sure hope that the issues you run in to are resolved in a win-win for everyone including those cyclists out for a recreational ride on back country roads that climb at 5 MPH as well as those in Ferrari's that want to take a curve at just above the speed limit.

 

A public use road is just that. Road cars, road motorcycles, and yes road bicycles all have a right to use them. If you don't like sharing too bad so sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Oh yea....should people with potentially shorter lifespans for whatever reasons have signs or something on their vehicles granting them expedited access whatever they go? Seems a little silly. Life is uncertain. Deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Last night I had the pleasure of witnessing a cyclist riding in a lane going the wrong way (i.e. against the flow of traffic) in 4 lane 2-way street. WTF.

 

Abed- Thanks for your reasonable response- I think that we're going to have to agree to disagree here, my reasoning to follow.

Dave(y)- You're 0 for 2 with your useless responses; I can only assume that you missed the part of my post where I asked "...please make your counter arguments based on reason and logic, not feelings, anecdotal evidence, or emotion...".

I did some research on this, examining bicyclist enthusiast websites, NHTSA, and most importantly, the Maryland Annotated Code- excerpts as follows:

-Cyclists traveling on public roadways have all general rights and duties/responsibilities of drivers of motor vehicles.*( asterisk mine- the 'duties/responsibilities' part is important here).

-Full lane use is allowed when traveling at the speed of normal traffic

- Directly from MD annotated code: A person shall not willfully operate a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. Tran 21-804(a). (refer up to *)

In my mind this is pretty simple (though again, please feel free to logically point out where I'm off base)-

In MD, in Baltimore county, where I live, there are numerous bike paths. From what I've seen, these paths are populated largely by families and kids. Having talked to some cyclists here in MD, they have, to a man, opined that the bike paths wouldn't work for them because of too many people going too slowly, thereby preventing them from going faster. Also (thus far) to a man, the irony of their response seems lost on them.

OK, so the bike paths are too slow, so they decide to ride on the public roads on which cars drive/ride. The bicyclists with whom I've spoken, as well as some participants in this thread, have effectively said " These are public roads. I'm part of the public. I too pay taxes that go for roads, therefore, I should have use of these roads as well. " (I'm paraphrasing).

I agree with this sentiment. Apparently, whoever wrote the laws/regs for MD agrees as well, PROVIDED that they do not disrupt the normal flow of traffic.

I have stated, in terms simple enough that even Dave(y) can understand, that I have no problem with bicyclists being on public roads so long as they can keep up with the reasonable flow of traffic, or, at a minimum, not disrupt that flow; the laws/regs that govern MD roads, motorists, and bicyclists indicate to me that mine is a reasonable stance. Further, and perhaps more importantly with regards to this particular discussion, those laws/regs DO NOT, as some here have intimated, seem to effectively give bicyclists carte blanche to be on the roads going at a pace they deem appropriate.

What is so difficult about this ?

I'll ask again (since none of the bicyclists have yet answered) a few simple questions;

When driving, does it not frustrate you to be behind someone going well under the speed limit ? Do you just shrug it off, or do you get annoyed/pissed/enraged/etc. about it ?

When walking on a public sidewalk or boardwalk or in a mall or whatever, do you not get frustrated/annoyed when walking behind people that are walking way slower than everyone else ? Do you just stay behind them, or blow past them at the first available opportunity? (For the record, I'm not referring here to getting caught behind the elderly, infirm, a mom dealing with an unruly or uncooperative child, etc.- all of which fall under the category of '**** happens'.)

I'd have a really hard time believing that most on this site (a site that would ostensibly have a disproportionately high percentage of type-A personalities) would be fine doing ANYthing at a leisurely pace when it could/should/traditionally is done at a faster pace. To me, this thread is a very interesting variation of the "Not In My Back Yard" mentality, that I fully expect to see on full display by the Fchat libs, but would not expect from some here.

I'm more invested in this thread than I've been in any other for quite some time, as to me it's a fascinating study in bias and objectivity. I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not this subject hits close enough to home that some who seem to me to be rational and pretty objective have suspended those traits here in exchange for something about which they're very passionate.

Looking forward to some intelligent and interesting responses.

Best and safe motoring/cycling to all

Mike

 

I guess i'll be an ******* as usual. It goes both ways. Should people choose to ride their bikes 4 wide on a single lane road with 2 way traffic, don't complain when you see people getting injured or killed. Life is uncertain. Deal.

Do I wish them actual harm? No. But there's something called common courtesy. If you can ride single file when there's no space and no bike lane, do so. This way you stay safer and you don't hold up traffic. If you're purposely riding 3 wide, then you're an ass and don't get upset when people scream, throw stuff, or buzz you.

 

There are lots of strong opinions on cyclists on the road. I have a problem when cyclists break the laws and endanger themselves and I have a problem when they are clogging up the street.

I came to a 4 way stop in a remote area and saw a group of cyclists 10 or so coming from the road on my right. I had been stopped and was ready to proceed. As I moved my foot to the accelerator and started to roll out, I realized the group of bikes wasn't going to stop. As they blew threw the stop sign and I slammed on the brakes, I pointed to the stop sign and shrugged my shoulders with my hands out. I got flipped off. It is that kind of ignorance that is upsetting.

In Utah where I spend most of my time, it is the law that bikers ride single file when impeding traffic and that I pass with 3' of space. This makes it easy to pass even on narrow roads, it keeps people safe. There was a group of cyclists a few weeks ago that were riding and taking up both lanes of the road traveling the same way as me. This was frustrating to be stuck on a road with a 50mph speed limit with two lanes of traffic being blocked. (It WAS the Iron Cowboy completing his 50th Iron Man length course on the 50th day so I wasn't too grumpy about it but they could have just used one lane...) I see groups of cyclists blocking entire lanes and impeding traffic it is frustrating because of the lack of courtesy.

We have a good sized thoroughfare with four lanes divided by a median. There were three cyclists on the right side of the road (The road has an 8'shoulder) The were right on the line or slightly to the right of it. A knuckle-dragging mouth breather in a jacked and stacked Dodge Cummins rolled coal on the three cyclists like you wouldn't believe. It was a dumb move and I felt badly for the cyclists. I tried to catch the truck but got stuck in traffic and couldn't catch him.

Anyway, I am torn. We need to share the road and cyclists have the right to be there. I think there needs to be some courtesy on both sides and if you are going to ride on the road, you had better obey the laws. If you blow through a stop sign at full speed, you shouldn't feel bad when my 5,000lb car kills you. I promise to try and make your ride as safe as I can and give you the space and respect you deserve. Please give me the same respect.

 

It sounds like cyclists want more pathways and drivers want clear roads. The two are very compatible goals. I think many automotive clubs would support the objective to provide more safe paths for cyclists on the condition that cyclists would preferentially use these provisions instead of the road.

I think if cyclists could adhere to those regulations, the overwhelming majority of drivers and automotive enthusiasts wouldn't have any problem whatsoever with cyclists.

While it may well be a tiny proportion of cyclists that are disruptive to the flow of traffic, the cyclist community to make it socially unacceptable to impede traffic and thus damage the reputation of cyclists.

The current perception many drivers have of cyclists is that they will pick and choose in any given moment how they want to define themselves and therefore which set of regulations they want to apply to them. I have observed many instances where a cyclist will want the same space/respect as a car when cycling down the road, only to then want to be treated as a pedestrian when the pedestrian crossing activates and therefore they blow through the red light holding up the cars. Each time this happens, the cyclists are effectively undertaking the cars at every set of traffic lights in order to get ahead while the cars are required to stop at the lights - meaning the car gets held up multiple times and needs to attempt multiple overtakes of the exact same cyclist on the same journey.

Throughout all of this, the onus seems to be placed on the car driver to look out for cyclists and ensure the safety of the cyclist, with the majority of blame for any incidents placed on car drivers even when it is the cyclist that does something unpredictable. I understand that there is a disparity of outcome in the event of a collision, but that shouldn't shift responsibility. So the perception is that cyclists claim more legal rights than car drivers while car drivers are assigned the burden of responsibility. Car drivers need to have licenses and insurance for the vehicles they control, so why not cyclists? Cyclists might argue that they have car licences and car insurance, but perhaps it is time to have a cyclist test and bike insurance too.

It's the picking and choosing from the different sets of rules and not rigidly adhering to either being considered a mechanised pedestrian or a human-powered vehicle. If cyclists would collectively pick how they want to be defined and rigidly stick with it, with penalties for flouting regulations (as drivers have), then I feel the objections drivers have to cyclists would be resolved.

Hear, hear.

All the best,
Andrew.