Cycling on the road: Myths vs. Reality

[cfsmtb]

Ok I'm ****** off.

I'm sick of morons with poor impulse control believing the Law of the Jungle validates or moralises any bad behaviour on the road. Sure there's always going to be a small percentage of nutters that no amount of positive campaigning is ever going to reach. That's a given.

But the rest of them? There's never an intelligent excuse for threatening or marginalising cyclists.

For the more erudite out there on aus.bicycle, how about compiling a lengthy list of debunking the myths vs the reality of cyclists on the road. Make it witty and to the point.

List the perfect comeback, carthesis, rebuttle to *****y dinner party conversations, rejoinder to radio squawkback and newspaper letter writing tips. And regardless of all that, just to know you are right.

Example: Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road. And if they do it should only be in marked bicycle lanes.

Reality: Under AusRoads (Dec 1999) all cyclists over the age of 12 are considered road traffic. Cyclist under 12 can be accompanied by an adult on the footpath.

Now as Lotte says, your turn..

 

[GPLama]

Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road unless they pay rego.

(Warped)Reality: I do pay rego. I use my car to get to and from the gun
store on the other side of town when I'm out of ammo... then I engrave
licence plate numbers on the bullets... Tomorrow is 'even numbers' day..

cheers,
GPL
acking heat:

 

[cfsmtb]

Here's some O/S examples, for the US sites they ride on the right (ditto, so reverse)

http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/bicycles-faq/part5/section-2.html

http://www.mkweb.co.uk/cycling/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=11978

http://www.reddirtpedalers.com/whissues/Debunk.asp

http://www.teamestrogen.com/articles/articles_myth2.asp

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/EffectiveAdvocacy/BicycleMyths.htm

http://www.smartcommute.org/BikeWalkMyths.htm

 

[PiledHigher]

Here's some O/S examples, for the US sites they ride on the right (ditto, so reverse)

http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/bicycles-faq/part5/section-2.html

http://www.mkweb.co.uk/cycling/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=11978

http://www.reddirtpedalers.com/whissues/Debunk.asp

http://www.teamestrogen.com/articles/articles_myth2.asp

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/EffectiveAdvocacy/BicycleMyths.htm

http://www.smartcommute.org/BikeWalkMyths.htm

BV has some, sometimes too verbose.
http://bv.com.au/topic.php?a=4&b=23

This is the current winner:

Cyclist piggy bank
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46435249@N00/45186864/in/photostream/

Car drivers piggy bank
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46435249@N00/45186863/in/photostream/

 

[flyingdutch]

Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road unless they pay rego.

(Warped)Reality: I do pay rego. I use my car to get to and from the gun
store on the other side of town when I'm out of ammo... then I engrave
licence plate numbers on the bullets... Tomorrow is 'even numbers' day..

cheers,
GPL
acking heat:

remind me not to beat you in a sprint, skinny!

my version
Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road unless they pay rego.

Reality: Rego doesnt give you a right to drive on the road. 15% goes to admin costs. 85% is a TAC insurance premium to clean up the carnage on our roads

 

[531Aussie]

Reality: Rego doesnt give you a right to drive on the road. 15% goes to admin costs. 85% is a TAC insurance premium to clean up the carnage on our roads

alternate reality : the state gov would love 10,000 more daily bike commuters if it meant 10,000 less cars on the road. In other words, they wanna encourage cycling, not discourage it by charging us.

 

[PiledHigher]

alternate reality : the state gov would love 10,000 more daily bike commuters if it meant 10,000 less cars on the road. In other words, they wanna encourage cycling, not discourage it by charging us.

More bikes mean less cars, car commuters notice how much better traffic is on the school holidays. If every one rode 1 day per fortnight there would be 10% less traffic, about the amount that is the tipping point between peak hr traffic jams and flowing traffic.

Oops, not sure that want to encourage that one!

 

[531Aussie]

car commuters notice how much better traffic is on the school holidays. !

you got that right. I drove to Black Rock on Monday at about 3pm -- couldn't believe the differnece. Let's just ban school!!

I once asked a guy who was complaining about bikes on the road to imagine if he was the only person in the city who drove to work, and everyone else rode their bikes. All the bikes would be lucky to take up one lane of all the main roads, so he would basically have all the road to himself....until he wanted to turn left somewhere

 

[PiledHigher]

you got that right

I once asked a guy who was complaining about bikes on the road to imagine if he was the only person in the city who drove to work, and everyone else rode their bikes. All the bikes would be lucky to take up one lane of all the main roads, so he would basically have all the road to himself....until he wanted to turn left somewhere

They could live in a better suburb/house if they got rid of the car. From the RACV running cost survey they suggest that the range for new cars in australia is $105 to $312 per week. This amount services additional home loans in the range of $70k to $200k respectively.

 

[ghostgum]

They could live in a better suburb/house if they got rid of the car. From the RACV running cost survey they suggest that the range for new cars in australia is $105 to $312 per week. This amount services additional home loans in the range of $70k to $200k respectively.

Not to mention that a few years down the road the car is worth
almost nothing and the house has increased in value.
I prefer to cope with depreciation on a $2000 (or cheaper) bike
rather than a $35000 car. In the first year alone, depreciation
will cover the cost of a bicycle.

In my case the choice was between getting a second car,
or getting a bicycle. The bicycle travel time was almost as
quick as a car, half the time of public transport, and cheaper
than either. Although sometimes I think the cost savings
are eaten up by the extra food I need.

 

[Tamyka Bell]

PiledHigher wrote:
>
> 531Aussie Wrote:
> > alternate reality : the state gov would love 10,000 more daily bike
> > commuters if it meant 10,000 less cars on the road. In other words,
> > they wanna -encourage- cycling, not -discourage- it by charging us.
>
> More bikes mean less cars, car commuters notice how much better traffic
> is on the school holidays. If every one rode 1 day per fortnight there
> would be 10% less traffic, about the amount that is the tipping point
> between peak hr traffic jams and flowing traffic.
>
> Oops, not sure that want to encourage that one!

Sure you do. Once they realise how fun it is to ride their bikes one day
a week, it'll become two... then three... then four (except on weeks
after an ultra...)

Tam

 

[PiledHigher]

Not to mention that a few years down the road the car is worth
almost nothing and the house has increased in value.
I prefer to cope with depreciation on a $2000 (or cheaper) bike
rather than a $35000 car. In the first year alone, depreciation
will cover the cost of a bicycle.

To be fair I believe that the running costs include depreciation.

In my case the choice was between getting a second car,
or getting a bicycle. The bicycle travel time was almost as
quick as a car, half the time of public transport, and cheaper
than either. Although sometimes I think the cost savings
are eaten up by the extra food I need.

Most people are eating the extra food already (and storing it for later!)

 

[PiledHigher]

I'm of the direction towards this stuff is that the best revenge is living well.
For me riding is about doing things that other people wish they could do.

Eat more.
Be thinner.
Have more disposable income.
Live in a better house or suburb.
Get to work quicker.
Have fun.

Most of the objections to cycling are 'for the good of society' wrapped in a thick layer of selfishness, laziness and ignorance.


PiledHigher
Its not those with the most toys but those that get to play with them the most!

 

[Marx SS]

Compared to cyclists, motorists on the road have it easy, if they have a problem, then go ‘round!

Myth: ‘Cars’ have precedence on the road over cyclists & other non-motorised transport (ie horses & rickshaws).
Reality: Motorised vehicles have an obligation to make allowances for all other road users. If you’re stuck behind a horse drawn carriage up a hill on a road with a double white line, then you wait & pass when road conditions allow, even if you’re reduced to travelling below 10kms/hr.

Myth: Motorists go out of their way to ‘be careful’ of cyclists, giving them room etc.
Reality: Motorists only look out & give room to cyclists when they’re not late for anything or are otherwise distracted (ie: unfamiliar road, phone conversation [hands free], Sun in their eyes, Got a headache or tired etc).

Myth: Cyclists flout road rules & do what they feel like, riding in a dangerous manner on the roads.
Reality: ….only for a relatively short period of time…..

Myth: “If you [cyclists] can’t ride the speed limit you should not be on that road.”
Reality: If you [motorists] can’t stay under the speed limit you’ll get booked.

 

[Brett]

Marx SS <[email protected]> wrote
in news:[email protected]:

>
> Compared to cyclists, motorists on the road have it easy,
> if they have a problem, then go ‘round!
>
> Myth: ‘Cars’ have precedence on the road over cyclists
> & other non-motorised transport (ie horses & rickshaws).
> Reality: Motorised vehicles have an obligation to make
> allowances for all other road users. If you’re stuck behind
> a horse drawn carriage up a hill on a road with a double
> white line, then you wait & pass when road conditions
> allow, even if you’re reduced to travelling below 10kms/hr.
>

Be a bit careful here, the horse drawn carriage is
specifically not a vehicle and in fact is no longer allowed
to travel the roads in some states without a special permit.

Not that they often bother to get them. (But in the US in the
areas where there are Armish they generally have to register
the buggy)

A horse being ridden beside the road is a very different
thing (motorists must avoid spooking the horse).

A rickshaw is a bike so that's a vehicle and it can have a
lane. Unless there is a bike track/lane. Now that would be
fun with the r*nners/w*lkers on the bike path. Put a couple
of hefty b*ggers in the back and mow them down :-D

Myth: Your government cares enough to spend decent money on
cycle facilities

Well where the hell did they put them.

Actually I've managed to up bridge prices here by an average
15% because we have added bike lanes to several new bridges.
And noone is arguing - Yay!

Cheers

BrettM

 

[aeek]

Myth: riding on the paths is safer than riding on the road.

 

[cfsmtb]

Myth: riding on the paths is safer than riding on the road.

Funny that.

 

[Absent Husband]

Agreed, of course!!

Just to add further -
Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road unless they pay rego

Reality:
So how does 'rego' pay for all those federally funded highways?? And
why are all the state transport/roads departments always lobbying for
federal roads funding?? I'm pretty sure that the federal govt doesn't
charge us rego... *grins*

Cheers all,
Abby

 

[aeek]

Funny that.

which reminds me, I yelled at a police van this morning. It was on the shared path maybe about to go into the underpass/chokepoint below the road I was riding on.
"INSANE ... YOU'RE CRAZY"
I was more concerned with how a naive path-cyclist might react, than any possible damage to the path.

 

[ritcho]

Ok I'm ****** off.

I'm sick of morons with poor impulse control believing the Law of the Jungle validates or moralises any bad behaviour on the road. Sure there's always going to be a small percentage of nutters that no amount of positive campaigning is ever going to reach. That's a given.

But the rest of them? There's never an intelligent excuse for threatening or marginalising cyclists.

For the more erudite out there on aus.bicycle, how about compiling a lengthy list of debunking the myths vs the reality of cyclists on the road. Make it witty and to the point.

List the perfect comeback, carthesis, rebuttle to *****y dinner party conversations, rejoinder to radio squawkback and newspaper letter writing tips. And regardless of all that, just to know you are right.

Example: Myth:
Cyclists shouldn't ride on the road. And if they do it should only be in marked bicycle lanes.

Reality: Under AusRoads (Dec 1999) all cyclists over the age of 12 are considered road traffic. Cyclist under 12 can be accompanied by an adult on the footpath.

Now as Lotte says, your turn..

Myth: Riding to work is too hard
Reality: No it isn't - you're too soft.

Myth: Cyclists are wannabe motorists but can't afford a car
Reality: Some of are, some of us aren't.

Myth: Cyclists is a term describing a homogeneous group
Reality: You gotta be kidding!!!

Ritch