What made the last big bike boom? The next?

[Jeff Potter]

I'm not sure it has to happen at the expense of cars. They appear to be here to stay. Why can't
bikes be ADDED to them?

People getting out in the fresh air and exploring around could become popular---as long as some open
roads remain.

But maybe things are getting too built-in. I think that bikes work for fun and transit as long as
there are options to the 'ring of death' that the car creates (especially in suburbs). But the last
time I drove (a car) in the eastern part of the US, I was just SHOCKED at how hellish the traffic
was everywhere including the countryside. I got immediately and intolerably claustrophobic. Yet it's
where the people are. We in Michigan seem to have it about 5 TIMES EASIER in terms of car traffic
congestion.

Art Harris wrote:

> If there is to be another bike boom among the general public, it will likely be driven by some
> sort of hybrid bike that's easy to ride, comfortable, inexpensive, and can be ridden in ordinary
> clothes.

--

Jeff Potter
****
*Out Your Backdoor * http://www.outyourbackdoor.com publisher of outdoor/indoor do-it-yourself
culture... ...offering "small world" views on bikes, bows, books, movies... ...rare books on ski,
bike, boat culture, plus a Gulf Coast thriller about smalltown smuggling ... more radical novels
coming up! ...original downloadable music ... and articles galore! plus national "Off the Beaten
Path" travel forums! HOLY SMOKES!

 

[Jeff Potter]

"David L. Johnson" wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:44:20 +0000, Jeff Potter wrote:
>
> > *cheap light 10speeds hit US shores for 1st time
>
> Actually much of that boom -- depending on how you define it -- was populated by people riding
> Schwinn Continentals.

Which were light compared to what was before. Contis started the boom but cheap Flandrias really set
it off (maybe).

> > *US bicentennial, with its urge to 'ride across the country'
>
> I was there during the bicentennial, and do not recall such an urge being suggested.

The bicentennial created its own urge for people to get out and look around their land. I definitely
remember the public being in an expansive outdoorsy mood then.

> > *high gas prices
>
> That was the big difference. This happened in 1973-74, and probably had a huge impact.

Outdoorsiness in general was HUGE then, even faddish. Not necessarily at the expense of the car but
I guess in general people were going nuts over the idea of the ecology. They wanted to stop
pollution BUT ALSO to get outside themselves. These are somewhat separate issues. Today people
probably are aware of distastrous contamination and would stop it if it was found...yet they don't
go outside.

> > *low-traffic backroads
>
> Not really. Most riding, then or now, is on city streets.

Backpacking and bike touring were perhaps 10X what it is today. Hitchhiking was maybe 100X what
it is today.

> > *plentiful public culture: living downtowns, nonlitigious property owners, generous campsite
> > finding, cheap tentsites
>
> What country are you talking about? Downtowns NOW are much more vibrant

I don't mean urban areas. Bike touring brought people into small towns not big ones. Today the small
town is dead.

> than they were in the '70s in the US. Look at Boston. In the '70s it was a pit. Same for
> Philadelphia (still....) and Baltimore. Many cities have made huge progress in terms of livability
> and ridability. Property owners were just as litigious then as now; the acronym NIMBY came from
> the '70s. There were no multi-use paths then. I also question your idealized version of campsites
> and campgrounds from that time, but that really isn't anything beyond the noise in terms of
> general riding popularlty.

You could readily ask people/farmers if you could camp on their land and they'd say Yes, today they
say No. Big difference! The difference supported many more thousands of tourists, travelers on the
road back then compared to today.

--

Jeff Potter
****
*Out Your Backdoor * http://www.outyourbackdoor.com publisher of outdoor/indoor do-it-yourself
culture... ...offering "small world" views on bikes, bows, books, movies... ...rare books on ski,
bike, boat culture, plus a Gulf Coast thriller about smalltown smuggling ... more radical novels
coming up! ...original downloadable music ... and articles galore! plus national "Off the Beaten
Path" travel forums! HOLY SMOKES!

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:09:29 GMT, bb <[email protected]> wrote:
> of the beasts. Nothing can beat sloth and greed.

That's why sloth and greed are my lord and saviour. <G>

> It doesn't matter who you think you are. If you own a bicycle which you actually ride, you are
> counter-culture.

Aw, crud. I gotta get rid of my bike now.

Wait, if you don't drive, and only ride a bike, you are pro-culture in two ways:
1. You need to live in a dense city to survive
2. You need to buy bicycle, supplies, parts from greedy evil corporations (and you need
money with which to do it, so you have a job working for a company too).

Hmm...maybe a bicycle isn't a political statement, but rather, just a fun way to excersize, get
around, and enjoy life.

Hey, I thought I promised myself I wouldn't get into these discussions anymore. *slaps self
upside the head*

> bb
--
Rick "Greedy Capitalist Pig Pop-Culture *****" Onanian

 

[Don Demair]

"Don DeMair" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Tanya Quinn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Ken Kifer's website has an excellent article on cycling in the 70's:
> > http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/lifestyle/70s.htm
> >
> > Its sad we won't get to read more of his thoughts.
>
> Why not?
>
never mind. I just read the post with "Ken Kifer" as the subject line. Very sad indeed.

 

[Buck]

"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:KX3ab.1535

> I doubt it. The pricing of gas is not nearly as important as its availability. It's possible that
> $4/gallon gas might bring on much
greater
> demand for fuel-efficient cars (which would be a good thing!) but until people have to wait in
> long lines, they'll still drive.
>
> The love affair with the auto is all about convenience, not expense. When it becomes less
> convenient to drive than to ride (as happens when gas is rationed), then they'll look to
> alternatives.

I think for much of the U.S. it is already too late. The location of suburbia, especially in
sprawling cities, will keep people driving no matter what. Jobs are now scattered across the city,
so the old notion of going downtown to work is largely lost (I've seen figures that place less than
30% of the total workforce in downtown on average). Because of the distances, people aren't likely
to seek out bicycles as a viable form of transport. Perhaps hybids or other high fuel efficiency
vehicles, but not bicycles. A study in Kentucky found average daily driving distances to be 27
miles. (check with www.dot.gov to find it). This is much farther than most people would even
consider riding. Heck, many people consider a ride around the block a major trip by bike!

I think the auto is here to stay. Our cities have been designed around them. No form of public
tranpsortation will ever be enough to cover every place and human-powered transportation is just not
going to happen. We will always have the auto in one form or another.

-Buck

 

[Trg]

"Andreas Oehler" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message news:
[email protected]...
> Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:09:29 GMT, bb:
>
> >As prosperity arrives, every country abandons bicycles as transportation.
>
> This seems to be not the case in the Netherlands: A rich country (at least compared to the UK) but
> lots of bicycle use (at least compared to the UK). Most people there own a car and also drive too
> much. But using a bicycle is an obvious alternative to car-use.
>
> In Germany there are also some medium-size towns with nearly the same modal split bike and car. It
> has to do with tradition, geography (no too steep hills) and town design (good tight mixture of
> living and working instead of business areas and suburbs separated). I have the pleasure to live
> in a town, where new quarters with "short ways" as the most important design rule are planned.
>
> Andreas

Not true in Denmark either. Attitude, ecological concerns and programs help a lot. In addition to
insisting that there is a proper network of bike paths (when a road gets built, a bike path gets
built next to it), they put about 200% tax on cars. Many people have cars (especially for work), but
just about EVERYONE has a bike, and uses it.

Plus they elected a politician who promised that cyclists will always have a tailwind!

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> I'm not sure it has to happen at the expense of cars. They appear to be here to stay. Why can't
> bikes be ADDED to them?
>
> People getting out in the fresh air and exploring around could become popular---as long as some
> open roads remain.
>
> But maybe things are getting too built-in. I think that bikes work for fun and transit as long as
> there are options to the 'ring of death' that the car creates (especially in suburbs). But the
> last time I drove (a car) in the eastern part of the US, I was just SHOCKED at how hellish the
> traffic was everywhere including the countryside. I got immediately and intolerably
> claustrophobic. Yet it's where the people are.

Most of the people who live there don't like it either, but that's where the jobs are...

...

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Art Harris]

Jeff Potter wrote:
> I'm not sure it has to happen at the expense of cars. They appear to be here to stay. Why can't
> bikes be ADDED to them?

I agree; hope I didn't imply anything to the contrary.

> People getting out in the fresh air and exploring around could become popular---as long as some
> open roads remain.

I agree with that too. But I think it has to start with kids riding bikes. Most kids don't seem too
interested. I have to wonder whether I would have taken up cycling as an adult if I hadn't learned
to enjoy it as a kid.

Art Harris

 

[x]

RE/
>I don't think its so much sloth and greed, but convienence that gets people off their bikes and
>into cars. People just want to get to places now. A car helps you do that

Somebody I know was in a high-level urban planning session in Shanghai about 12 years back.

A group of Australians were presenting and one guy was going on and on about how fortunate Chinese
cities were to have all these bikes and so few cars...and how they should try to build something
into the plans to try to keep it that way.

As he was going on-and-on in English and somebody was translating, this one career civil engineer in
his fifties started muttering to himself in Mandarin and finally sort of burst out with something.

The Australian guy asked the translator what he was saying, but the translator danced around it -
giving a more-or-less evasive rendering.

What the guy actually said was "You are sooooo full of ****! Have you *ever* tried living where you
always have to go everywhere by bicycle or bus?"
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

 

[Ray Heindl]

"(Pete Cresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Based on those anecdotes I'd guess there's been 600% inflation - absolute minimum - maybe 800%
> since 1958.

Good guess -- it's 634%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

--
Ray Heindl (remove the X to reply)

 

[Simon Brooke]

"rosco" <reverse-the-following"ocsor_g"@hotmail.com> writes:

> "David Damerell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:J4m*[email protected]...
> > David L. Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:44:20 +0000, Jeff Potter wrote:
> > >>What will inspire the next boom?
> > >$4/gallon gas would go a long way. That would quickly empty the streets of all the big
> > >ego-boosting trucks, making it easier to ride -- and would give people an incentive.
> >
> > Petrol is about $4 a gallon here and we have an ever-increasing number of land barges.
> > Admittedly, they're not as silly as American ones, but they're still a lot sillier than cars.
>
> Based on the commonality of BIG SUVs here in the suburbs you would think we had no paved roads.
> Without going down the anti-SUV rathole, I don't think $4/gallon gas would be the end of this
> SUV/truck silliness. Lexus is planning to release a hybrid SUV in a year that will probably get
> between 30 to 40 mpg. This show what can be done if a manufacturer applies some relatively simple
> technology. The auto industry won't let high gas prices get in the way of selling these very high
> profit margin vehicles.

Well, I drive what gets sold in the US as an Isuzu Amigo. I don't know whether you would count it as
an SUV, although it is by UK standards. I drive it mainly for pulling large boats around and for
forestry work. It has a two litre four cylinder petrol engine and does better than 35 MPG on road.
Living where I live (remote rural area) and doing what I do (among other things, secretary of a
forestry charity) it seems a reasonable choice of vehicle, and I don't see it as 'silly' at all.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; my other religion is Emacs

 

[Paul Floyd]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:44:18 +0200, trg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Plus they elected a politician who promised that cyclists will always have a tailwind!
>

I don't remember where it was (I might even have read it in a local paper), but covered cycle paths
with air blown through them with fans
do/have existed.

A bientot Paul
--
Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr (for what it's worth) Surgery: ennobled Gerald.

 

[Mitch Haley]

Art Harris wrote:
> I agree with that too. But I think it has to start with kids riding bikes. Most kids don't seem
> too interested. I have to wonder whether I would have taken up cycling as an adult if I hadn't
> learned to enjoy it as a kid.

Me too. When I was a kid, everybody rode a bike, and nobody tried to tell us it was more dangerous
than kids running around on our feet. There were no "safety equipment" makers trying to scare the
@^%*@ out of our parents in an effort to sell **** to them either.

The current issue of Good Housekeeping has an article on the best states to raise children in. I
opened it up and the first thing I saw was high praise for Florida having one of the most
restrictive bike helmet laws in the country. Yep, keep them inside playing video games, that's the
way to help them live long healthy lives. Then when they are 16 you can let them ride a bike without
a hat. (fat chance, when they are 16 they want a car) Mitch

 

[x]

RE/
>I think for much of the U.S. it is already too late. The location of suburbia, especially in
>sprawling cities, will keep people driving no matter what. Jobs are now scattered across the city,
>so the old notion of going downtown to work is largely lost (I've seen figures that place less than
>30% of the total workforce in downtown on average). Because of the distances, people aren't likely
>to seek out bicycles as a viable form of transport.

Plus, there's the condition of the roads/behavior of drivers.

I'm in a suburb of Philadelphia where I could ride a bike to work in 15 minutes max (I can walk it
in 38 minutes).....but if somebody rode that route every day they wouldn't last a year: areas with
no shoulder, cars doing 50-60 in 25mph zones while the drivers talk on cell phones, people careening
around blind corners with one wheel a foot over the double line....and so-on and so-forth...

I think cell phones have had a major deliterous effect. People talking on them is bad news...but I'm
seeing people writing things down while they talk....dunno how they're able to *do* that....I don't
think I could...
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

 

[Paul Floyd]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:35:16 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Well, I drive what gets sold in the US as an Isuzu Amigo. I don't know whether you would count
> it as an SUV, although it is by UK standards. I drive it mainly for pulling large boats around
> and for forestry work. It has a two litre four cylinder petrol engine and does better than 35
> MPG on road. Living where I live (remote rural area) and doing what I do (among other things,
> secretary of a forestry charity) it seems a reasonable choice of vehicle, and I don't see it as
> 'silly' at all.

The 'silly' users are the ones that live somewhere like Reading, and use them for taking the kids
to school (1 mile) and shopping at Tescos - we all know you need to engage 4 wheel drive to get
into a car park.

A bientot Paul
--
Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr (for what it's worth) Surgery: ennobled Gerald.

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Art Harris wrote:
> > I agree with that too. But I think it has to start with kids riding bikes. Most kids don't seem
> > too interested. I have to wonder whether I would have taken up cycling as an adult if I hadn't
> > learned to enjoy it as a kid.
>
> Me too. When I was a kid, everybody rode a bike, and nobody tried to tell us it was more dangerous
> than kids running around on our feet. There were no "safety equipment" makers trying to scare the
> @^%*@ out of our parents in an effort to sell **** to them either.
>
> The current issue of Good Housekeeping has an article on the best states to raise children in. I
> opened it up and the first thing I saw was high praise for Florida having one of the most
> restrictive bike helmet laws in the country. Yep, keep them inside playing video games, that's the
> way to help them live long healthy lives. Then when they are 16 you can let them ride a bike
> without a hat.

Since when does requiring helmets equate to "keep them inside playing video games"? Requiring some
protection for their heads while they're still learning to handle their bikes and ride on busy roads
is fine by
me. I require my kids to wear a helmet any time they're on human- powered wheels in the road,
whether it's on a bike, scooter or roller blades. They whined at first, but now it's a habit
and they grab their helmets automatically when they go out, and it doesn't seem to have any
effect on their desire to go out and roll around.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"Joseph Kubera" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I don't know. It's about $2.00 right now, and listen to all the *****ing and moaning.

They may be *****ing and moaning, but they're not giving up their SUVs...

Matt O.

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

JP-<< What will inspire the next boom? >><BR><BR>

Global cisis that will hammer the energy business and force people to use other ways to get around.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Andrew Rakeman]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

>
> But how far is the Dutch person's job and other places they go to away? The Netherlands is a
> teeny place, still centered around small towns where people live, work and die. Samo for Japan,
> and they also have a great train system(ride to train station). With the US and it's sprawl, it
> just won't happen.
>

Even in places in the US where the train service is pretty good, the infrastructure for bicycles is
non-existent. For example, I grew up on Long Island, about 40 minutes outside Manhattan by the Long
Island Railroad, in a town with a train station and good service.

A lot of people in that town work in Manhattan and take the train in, I'd say most people live
within 3 miles (probably less) of the station, yet almost no one rides a bike there.

Why? Although there are parking lots surrounding the station, there are only two or three bike
racks, and bikes get stolen from the station as a matter of course. If there was ample and secure
bicycle parking there I am sure more people would ride to the station.

Andrew

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> But how far is the Dutch person's job and other places they go to away? The Netherlands is a
> teeny place, still centered around small towns where people live, work and die. Samo for Japan,
> and they also have a great train system(ride to train station). With the US and it's sprawl, it
> just won't happen.

This is true, but...

Americans have far more choice than they realize, with where to live and work. They would probably
make different choices, if the current default choices weren't so unnaturally easy and cheap.

Sprawl, and poor urban planning (or complete lack of it) are major social problems that we need
to address.

These things are not written in stone. We *can* change.

Matt O.