You Know What Really Grinds My Gears? Now with 3x more gears...

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I forgot to put my other idea. If you see a guy in spandex the game is you get to try to throw a stick in his spokes. It'll keep him hustling, which is what he wants, and the rest of us get a little something out of it, too.

I appreciate a fit man in form-fitting attire more than the next guy, but there is something about people cycling in the city dressed as if they’ve entered the Tour Dé Calgári that just makes me want to take the piss out of them a little bit.

Not like hitting them with my truck or anything. Maybe a nudge.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by GGG

People getting hit by bikes kill them.

I don’t know of the proportion of damage or incidents per km and how they compare but

https://globalnews.ca/news/6622149/c...-sentence/amp/

Given the few opportunities for this to occur relative to the cars and bike interactions it may be similar risk.

It can kill them, but I don't think the story linked is particularly a good representation of the normal outcome of cyclist - pedestrian collisions.

I actually think your perfectly mis-worded first sentence is better: "People getting hit by bikes kill them." Yeah, I would probably kill the damn cyclist too if he hit me.

[Table 5]

The only way we will ever come close to solving this issue is if we physically separate cars and bikes and pedestrians as much as possible. None of this sharing kumbaya crap.

Bikes are not cars, nor are they pedestrians. Bikes are their own thing...and sharing with cars or pedestrians just leads to trouble because all 3 of them travel at different speeds. In the same way that driving fast on the highway is safe as long as everyone is generally travelling at the same speed...but as soon as you introduce someone going much quicker or much slower, it turns into a dangerous situation. Mixing bikes and cars is stupid and dangerous, as the typical speed disparity is just too big. Mixing bikes with pedestrians is stupid too, but at least the speed disparity isn't quite as lethal.

We need more dedicated, physically separated (not just painted) bike lanes in any scenario where we're trying to encourage biking as a transportation alternative. When that's not possible, we should push bikes to ride in side streets...I find it insane to put painted bike lanes onto arterial roads that act as major traffic corridors, and pretend that they will get along. Never gonna happen.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The only way we will ever come close to solving this issue is if we physically separate cars and bikes and pedestrians as much as possible. None of this sharing kumbaya crap.

Bikes are not cars, nor are they pedestrians. Bikes are their own thing...and sharing with cars or pedestrians just leads to trouble because all 3 of them travel at different speeds. In the same way that driving fast on the highway is safe as long as everyone is generally travelling at the same speed...but as soon as you introduce someone going much quicker or much slower, it turns into a dangerous situation. Mixing bikes and cars is stupid and dangerous, as the typical speed disparity is just too big. Mixing bikes with pedestrians is stupid too, but at least the speed disparity isn't quite as lethal.

We need more dedicated, physically separated (not just painted) bike lanes in any scenario where we're trying to encourage biking as a transportation alternative. When that's not possible, we should push bikes to ride in side streets...I find it insane to put painted bike lanes onto arterial roads that act as major traffic corridors, and pretend that they will get along. Never gonna happen.

Ban all Bikes

agreed

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Sliver

#### that. Cyclists should get on the sidewalk if there isn't room on the street. IDGAF that isn't legal, but it's safer and sidewalks are honestly barely used in most areas. Pedestrians on the sidewalk? Cyclist can go slow. Or take their chances on the street. But inconveniencing cars is off the table. On a 50km/h road the last thing we need is some tit in spandex going 17km/h.

I think it make more sense to allow them to take the lane like squiggs says.

I dont care that they're going slow, I care that they're unpredictable.

If a cyclist takes the lane at least I know where they are, what they're doing and what their most likely next actions are going to be.

What pisses me off is cyclists switching between pedestrian and vehicle and changing the rules as they see fit, it makes them unpredictable in traffic and ergo a hazard.

Further, I dont want to hurt somebody.

[Sliver]

And dedicated bike infrastructure is stupid in Calgary, anyway. I know there are 11 guys who bike year round, but #### em. Best-case scenario we get that to 17 guys and that's about where it'll top out at for 70% of days per year.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Sliver

And dedicated bike infrastructure is stupid in Calgary, anyway. I know there are 11 guys who bike year round, but #### em. Best-case scenario we get that to 17 guys and that's about where it'll top out at for 70% of days per year.

fixed

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Agree with Sliver on the bike thing and have always thought it’s insanely stupid of society to herd bikers onto roads where cars drive. This is from the simple logic of damage done in an incident.

People getting hit by bikes (injured) is not like bikers getting hit by cars (killed). Not everything we do as a society needs to make driving slower, ####tier, and generally insufferable.

People getting hit by bikes die or are seriously injured all the time (on the flip side, not every cyclist is killed when getting hit by a car). cyclists don't have a requirement to have insurance either, which is a huge issue when people are injured in pedestrian collisions.

There is also very little room on sidewalks with almost no "traffic" laws to determine fault. no speed limits, no should checks when passing people, etc.

roads are large, wide, and have consistent rules to follow to determine fault. Further, motor vehicles are required to have registration and insurance so when the inevitable does happen, there is insurance to cover major incidents.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Sliver

And dedicated bike infrastructure is stupid in Calgary, anyway. I know there are 11 guys who bike year round, but #### em. Best-case scenario we get that to 17 guys and that's about where it'll top out at for 70% of days per year.

In the summer the bike lane on 5th earns its lane when compared to traffic counts on 4th and 5th.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Cappy

People getting hit by bikes die or are seriously injured all the time (on the flip side, not every cyclist is killed when getting hit by a car). cyclists don't have a requirement to have insurance either, which is a huge issue when people are injured in pedestrian collisions.

There is also very little room on sidewalks with almost no "traffic" laws to determine fault. no speed limits, no should checks when passing people, etc.

roads are large, wide, and have consistent rules to follow to determine fault. Further, motor vehicles are required to have registration and insurance so when the inevitable does happen, there is insurance to cover major incidents.

This mostly isn't true or an issue. Typically your home insurance will cover these situations.

Suppose a cyclist collides with a pedestrian, no motor vehicle is involved, and the pedestrian decides to launch a personal injury lawsuit.


“If a cyclist is sued, and the allegation is that they are negligent and caused a personal injury, (the cyclist) would likely turn to a home insurance policy or a renter’s policy first,” said Krajden.

https://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/i...ts-1004165099/

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by GGG

In the summer the bike lane on 5th earns its lane when compared to traffic counts on 4th and 5th.

Yeah, 30% of the year they're useful, but, unfortunately, I just don't think they're worth the investment. Plus I never go downtown so I don't care about that.

[OutOfTheCube]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Yeah, 30% of the year they're useful, but, unfortunately, I just don't think they're worth the investment. Plus I never go downtown so I don't care about that.

Yeah, I was going to say investing anything into bike lanes in a city with 7-8 months of winter is just dumb to begin with.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Sliver

And dedicated bike infrastructure is stupid in Calgary, anyway. I know there are 11 guys who bike year round, but #### em. Best-case scenario we get that to 17 guys and that's about where it'll top out at for 70% of days per year.

I think you're out of touch on this...I don't think bike lanes are just for the hardcore guys anymore. I live/work by several of them, and I see a ton of use by regular people and families...maybe not year round, but enough to make a difference. Personally, I'm not a hardcore cyclist (I only bike about 6-7 months of the year, and own zero spandex)...but I find the bike lanes/pathways make a massive difference in the amount I ride my bike. They give you confidence to ride, and are great for encouraging biking amongst seniors and kids too. There's no way I'm taking my kids on a street shared with a car, but I have done it plenty of times on a pathway or separated lane.

I like cars. I like bikes. Transportation options are a good thing.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This mostly isn't true or an issue. Typically your home insurance will cover these situations.


https://www.canadianunderwriter.ca/i...ts-1004165099/

If you have home insurance.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Slava

And this is why this isn't a solution. A bunch of these people are training for the Tour de France (I assume). They're decked out in their spandex and trying to set land speed records, they're going way too fast to be inconvenienced by warning a pedestrian.

Do you see people playing in beer league hockey, and because they have a jersey on, do you assume they are training to be in the NHL? Many cyclists, myself included, wear spandex while cycling because it's clothing designed for cycling. The bib shorts have padding in them so your butt doesn't hurt. Contrary to popular belief, the padding in your shorts, not the padding on your saddle, is what makes the ride comfortable. A spandex bike jersey has pockets in the back for my phone, wallet, food, and tools. It has nothing to do with trying to set a land speed record. It has to do with being comfortable and wearing appropriate gear for the sport. Do you also make fun of skiers wearing a ski jacket and mitts? How about a guy wearing a suit going into an office? Should he not wear one because he's not on Wall Street?

Cyclists, should not be on sidewalks. I say this as a cyclist. Sidewalks are where people walk. It's in the name. They are not wide enough to have bikes going multiple ways on them. People walk their dogs, have small children, walk beside each other, have strollers, carry groceries, etc. A pedestrian should not have to move out of the way on a sidewalk for a bike coming up behind them. That is why cyclists go on roads. Whether they are going 17 km/hr or 40 km/hr.

For the argument coming up that drivers are going too fast and don't want to be inconvenienced by cyclists going to slow, it's rich to suggest in a condescending way that cyclists don't want to be inconvenienced by a pedestrian. This is why separated infrastructure aids drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

As for sliver, he's doing his usual shtick. He will come back saying it's not a shtick, but he's been around long enough we all know it. If that helps him get a little excited when he rides his rascal, then good for him.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Cappy

if you have home insurance.

Or...

“If a cyclist is sued, and the allegation is that they are negligent and caused a personal injury, (the cyclist) would likely turn to a home insurance policy or a renter’s policy first,” said Krajden.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I think you're out of touch on this...I don't think bike lanes are just for the hardcore guys anymore. I live/work by several of them, and I see a ton of use by regular people and families...maybe not year round, but enough to make a difference. Personally, I'm not a hardcore cyclist (I only bike about 6-7 months of the year, and own zero spandex)...but I find the bike lanes/pathways make a massive difference in the amount I ride my bike. They give you confidence to ride, and are great for encouraging biking amongst seniors and kids too. There's no way I'm taking my kids on a street shared with a car, but I have done it plenty of times on a pathway or separated lane.

I like cars. I like bikes. Transportation options are a good thing.

Oh man, I guarantee you I'm out of touch.

Good to hear about their use. I live in a Bonavista bubble and then another industrial park bubble. Glad to hear I'm wrong about it. Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Or...

Many renters don't carry rental insurance.

I think most would be surprised how little rental insurance is sold

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Many renters don't carry rental insurance.

I think most would be surprised how little rental insurance is sold

Then those people are idiots. [shrug]

Even when I first moved out here and made SFA for income, I still had tenant's insurance.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

Do you see people playing in beer league hockey, and because they have a jersey on, do you assume they are training to be in the NHL? Many cyclists, myself included, wear spandex while cycling because it's clothing designed for cycling. The bib shorts have padding in them so your butt doesn't hurt. Contrary to popular belief, the padding in your shorts, not the padding on your saddle, is what makes the ride comfortable. A spandex bike jersey has pockets in the back for my phone, wallet, food, and tools. It has nothing to do with trying to set a land speed record. It has to do with being comfortable and wearing appropriate gear for the sport. Do you also make fun of skiers wearing a ski jacket and mitts? How about a guy wearing a suit going into an office? Should he not wear one because he's not on Wall Street?

Cyclists, should not be on sidewalks. I say this as a cyclist. Sidewalks are where people walk. It's in the name. They are not wide enough to have bikes going multiple ways on them. People walk their dogs, have small children, walk beside each other, have strollers, carry groceries, etc. A pedestrian should not have to move out of the way on a sidewalk for a bike coming up behind them. That is why cyclists go on roads. Whether they are going 17 km/hr or 40 km/hr.

For the argument coming up that drivers are going too fast and don't want to be inconvenienced by cyclists going to slow, it's rich to suggest in a condescending way that cyclists don't want to be inconvenienced by a pedestrian. This is why separated infrastructure aids drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

As for sliver, he's doing his usual shtick. He will come back saying it's not a shtick, but he's been around long enough we all know it. If that helps him get a little excited when he rides his rascal, then good for him.

k, but you can wear padded bike shorts and throw normal shorts over top. You don't have to dress up like you're a weightlifter from the 1920s to ride your ten speed to the barber for more moustache wax.