@antlerboy
this blog post appears to be obvious clickbait gibberish
there is no link to the first study, just the name of the journal, but it doesn't soundl ike a decent study
the second study
**contradicts the blog post and is BS anyway
@antlerboy
It's a weird read from the perspective of a cyclist who has been car-less for over a decade and commutes everywhere and does everything by bicycle. The article makes it sound like non-electric riders are all recreational and out for a bit of exercise instead of going to a spin studio. I know there are many other pedal bike commuters like me, but as long as eBikes get more ppl out, replacing their cars with bikes, then whatever type of bike they choose is great for all of us! #yegbike
@ned@antlerboy You are totally right. This article misses a lot of caveats WRT people who actually cycle a lot. But, I think it’s meant to counter the attitude I get about my e-bike that it is somehow “cheating”. When I’ve taken it in public to events, woman* are much more interested and curious and see the advantage while men* are more concerned it’s a cheat.
But average non cycler, yes may go farther/longer on an ebike than regular cycle.
I can vouch for this even for people who don't bike recreationally. I'm a bike commuter with the option of driving and taking the bus. Switching to an e-bike has massively increased the days that I bike. I've also started going to stores farther away than I would be comfortable pedal biking.
Plus, some days I just go for a bike ride for fun, something I rarely did with the pedal bike.
@MCDuncanLab@IcooIey@antlerboy
Yeah, people need to stop gatekeeping! The more people leave behind their car for more trips, the better it is for literally everybody who lives in the city. Whether it's for all their commutes or just occasional trips, it helps. Whether you're a cyclist, a motorist, a pedestrian, or whatever, you all benefit from it.
I've seen the "cheating" argument in some groups, and will definitely concur with it usually being men. They need to drop that bullshit. #yegbike
@MCDuncanLab@IcooIey@antlerboy
So just as an aside though, besides choosing a pedal bike or eBike to get fit, for those wanting to use their car less I wish we had more conversations about the more glaring decision in front of them, which is Cost of Entry vs Ease of Use. In both instances, both bicycles and eBikes score high but pedal bikes have an obvious advantage in cost and eBikes in ease. Both are much cheaper to use than cars, but only pedal bikes beat out public transit on both fronts.
@MCDuncanLab@IcooIey@antlerboy In short, there are so many reasons to get people into both these forms of active transportation, and those reasons can vary greatly to each person. I'm glad we're laying to rest the idea that one is better for your individual health than the other, because they are both just as important! Also consider that each can bring different mobility options to those with reduced mobility as well. Anything to get moving on their own will help them live healthier! #yegbike
Interesting observation, about men vs. women. Initially, my husband was in the 'it's cheating' camp. But two years in, he's gotten interested in getting an e-bike too.
I think it may have to do with the fact that I now bike far more frequently than him. Previously, with the pedal bike, he biked more frequently than I did.
However, on my commute, most of the other e-bikers are men. Men overall outnumber women, probably 5-10:1. So it's hard to tell the % dif.
I have to add, that when I do hear the "eBiking is cheating" comments these days, they are quickly and thoroughly debunked. :D There's definitely been a change in awareness. #yegbike
@ned@MCDuncanLab@antlerboy That’s good to hear! In CT, we successfully lobbied for e-bikes to be included in a clean air incentive program. In first year, all funds went in two days and all to people in prioritized ‘distressed communities’. Hoping program funded again since they received 3x applications as had funding. Way more cost effective and successful than subsidizing electric cars.
Why make a small impact on the environment while making absolutely no impact on urban mobility, when you can make a huge impact on both climate change AND urban mobility, while saving tax payers huge dollars on infrastructure at the same time?
Why, the answer is simple. Automotive manufacturers still get all the profits and benefits of the first option (propping up EVs), while they lose their cut on active transportation.
We need to focus on making roadways that are safe for pedestrians, bikes, e-bikes, scooters, and public transport that is faster than cars (e.g., with dedicated bus lanes). Cost is far outweighed by the benefits https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915000907.
I'm incredibly fortunate to have a safe bike commute with only a few minutes on a route that is shared with cars.
@MCDuncanLab@ned@antlerboy The times I’ve taken my ebike to events and let people try it out, everyone who approaches and tries has liked it. But women much more likely to approach, often with reluctant partner. I see more far more male road bikers in our rural area overall, but maybe equal ebikers. Students on campus more likely to have an e-scooter than bike which is far easier for short cross campus commuting and follows Ned’s ease of entry observation.
I don't have an eScooter but around the neighborhood in the summer I always love to grab the push scooter over the bicycle. Nothing like just folding it up to bring it inside with you. :D
It's not a dang sport, it's utilitarian transportation. Did you get to your destination safely? Were you able to bring all the stuff you needed? Was the process enjoyable? Great!
The only beef I have with eBikes is people driving them 50mph down protected bike/ped paths where people are walking. That should be easy to regulate too.
@MichaelTBacon@dragonfrog@IcooIey@antlerboy
Agree to a point, but I personally find on the MUPs I commute on, that all the conflict between groups lie only in pedestrians who don't know how to stay on one side of the road, or don't know which side of the road to stay on. I get passed by eBikes without issue, and see them interacting with pedestrians in the same way. I don't have a problem with them, myself. Things only get hairy when pedestrians sway along the center, or jump into your path.
When small children and pets are involved, this is something different. Any decent rider should be taking their time to safely get around them and allowing them to move any way they will, as they cannot be predicted. However, I see so many grown adults act just as unpredictably because they don't understand the simple safety of "keep right except to pass".
When the rules are followed, we can all get along just fine. Education is the missing key.
The lack of education is a purposeful thing, and is seen in victim-blaming signs which read, "cyclists must ring bell to pass" and "cyclists must dismount" instead of actually informing rules for all like, "Keep right except to pass". #yegbike
Yeah, sorry, but I disagree. There's not a damn thing wrong with people walking side by side down a paved trail for bicyclists and pedestrians. You're on an ebike, you can slow the fuck down, ring your bell, wait for acknowledgement, then go around.
Uh, yes there is something completely wrong with pedestrians purposely taking the entire path and not letting others pass unhindered. You are certainly part of the problem, so whatever your opinion on eBikes is, I can't say that it matters to me. I prefer to be a part of the solution, so we can all use infrastructure inclusively... and safely.
I guess that you do not realize that multi-use paths are necessary commuter routes, not just recreation.
Many seem to miss this point, because they can only imagine commuting in their car, and everything else is recreation to them. Many do commute by active transportation, and deserve to have trouble-free routes which they can SAFELY use to get to and from work, home, shopping, appointments, etc. This is inclusivity, and we can all use such infrastructure together.
Roads which are only made for motorists should not be the only way around.
Yeah, maybe we have different paths in mind, but this is both a commuter route and a recreational route. It's an ebike, for fucks sake, it's going to help you get back up to speed. I have as much sympathy for an ebike in that instance as I do for a car who's "inconvenienced" by a bike being on the road and slowing them down.
Yes, the pedestrian should move over if they hear a bell. Otherwise, slow the fuck down to 25 mph and ring your bell.
25 miles per hour? That's 40 kilometers per hour! So fast! I don't think it would be possible for most ebikes to slow down to 25 mph, only to slow down from that speed, that being their top speed.
In Canada, legally, ebikes have 32 km/hr (20 mph) top speed - the motor must stop providing power if the bike goes above that speed. If someone here has an ebike that can provide power above 32 km/hr they either specially ordered components from a jurisdiction where those restrictions don't apply, or downloaded and installed another country's firmware on their domestically purchased bike controller.
So, to slow down to 25 mph, they'd have to get up to 20 with the motor's help, then continue accelerating a further 6+ mph on their very heavy and suddenly unpowered bike. At which point no wonder they're going to slow down, they're probably on the verge of passing out from exertion.
@dragonfrog@ned@IcooIey@antlerboy Yeah again context. No such rule here. And sure, you can get a regular bike up to 45 or 50 mph but it’s a lot harder.
Exactly! And I know other bike-friendly countries have similar regulations on eBike output. Traffic signs and speed limits come from a municipal level, but this sort of regulation is Federal. That's where the real lasting change comes from. ;)
@IcooIey@ned@MichaelTBacon@antlerboy and I imagine it's a lot easier if you want a really zoomy ebike to just shop one state over than for a Canadian to go to a whole different country.
@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@ned@antlerboy the fastest I’ve ever had my e bike was 28mph going down a big hill and it was terrifying. Also my motor cuts out at 20 mph.
@IcooIey@dragonfrog@ned@antlerboy when I was young and stupid I pushed my fat tire mountain bike to 50 mph on the downhill Street. But again, young and stupid
When I was young and stupid there was no such thing as fat bikes. :D But then, I had motorcycles... Scraping tailpipes with sheer cliff down on one side and sheer cliff up on the other, on unfinished roadway with blind corners, that was my adrenaline.
The Dragon's Tail, the Paul Bunyon trail, hwy 6 to Needles and the Lillooet road in BC... and when there were no speed limits in Montana, those dicey mountain roads were done at 190km/h, lol
@MichaelTBacon@ned@dragonfrog@IcooIey@antlerboy "pedestrian should move over if they hear a bell". Screw that. You don't know if a person is deaf, is listening to music, just zoned out thinking. Asshole bicyclists do not have special rights over others sharing spaces, even it it means loosing their @#$#@ momentum. I've had too many scary experiences with entitled asses on bikes who think everyone else needs to jump out of their way. There have been injuries caused by them.
I can't say my experiences match this, but I do agree with the point. I ring and ring and ring. If nobody moves, no problem. I'm traveling at walking pace until there's room to move, and that's that. I don't feel inconvenienced, or upset.
(As far as my experiences not matching though, I usually get the opposite reaction... pedestrians acting angrily when I'm just patiently biding my time behind them, waiting for a safe opening.)
@ned@MichaelTBacon@dragonfrog@IcooIey@antlerboy It could be based on past experience. There are a lot of entitled asses on bikes. On shared trails, I always walk facing potential traffic because I don't want to be surprised by someone whizzing by, expecting me to jump aside at the last second.
I get impatient as a fast walker stuck behind someone slow, but folk travel at the rate they travel, and I pass when I can.
It shouldn't really matter who's traveling at what speed, so long as we stay to one side, stay patiently behind others when we can't pass, pass on the other side when we can, with the person doing the passing taking all the precautions to ensure a safe pass. This is how we all get along.
Any knee-jerk reaction to seeing other commuters on different forms of transportation is wrong, whether a pedestrian at a biker, or a biker at an eBiker.
Yes, when I'm on foot I should move over if I hear a bell, or a "passing on your left".
Yes, when I'm on my bike I should be aware that not everyone on foot can hear a bell, and keep to a speed so if they don't hear me I can maneuver around them safely and without trying to shoot a narrow gap.
I've been yelled at for startling people by ringing my bell (and heard their whole diatribe because I was barely going at a jogging speed so I was close to them for a while).
I've been yelled at for not ringing my bell because the path was wide and I could easily pass with lots of clearance (and again heard the whole diatribe because I wasn't zipping off anywhere).
@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@ned@IcooIey@antlerboy The bell should be to alert them you're there, not to expect them to leap out of the way. And faster traffic suddenly coming up on someone can startle folk.
Generally, cyclists don't expect pedestrians to leap out of the way when they ring their bell. They expect them to stay where they are, and that's the purpose of ringing to let them know they're there. To avoid sudden action.
Plus, many cyclists are scolded for not ringing their bell, and have signs telling them they must ring every time they pass, even when it's not needed.
Just assume that they just want you to keep walking as you are.
I hate those guys. And in my experience it's always guys.
Folks who startle and leap to the left into my path upon hearing a bell - I'm not mad at them, just have to be cautious because I don't want to hurt someone who does that.
But the people who gave them that case of nerves, I get mad at.
How, without eyes on the back of their head, is anyone to know which "ding" means "I'm approaching at 15 km/hr, I have lots of room to slow down before I'm close to you, once it's safe I'll pass", and which "ding" means "I'm approaching you at 40 km/hr, by the time you process that fact I'll be right on top of you, and will not be slowing down"?
Hence being yelled at for something someone else did earlier.
Also part of the confusion is that a cyclist needs to ring early but switch lanes late, to be safe. So when a cyclist rings, he's still in your lane, though he intends to switch lanes to pass. Sometimes pedestrians don't get this, and move into the passing lane.
I think the expectation of ringing bells causes more harm than good, when it is used in place of education instead of along with it. "Cyclists must ring bell" is the easy way out.
@ned@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy That is a problem because pedestrians aren't taught biking rules. Many hear a bell and think it's someone "yelling" at them to get out of the way. The ones who hear them and move think they're being helpful.
Exactly! I often don't want to ring my bell if pedestrians are where they're supposed to be, because I don't want to confuse anyone. In a motor vehicle we don't honk at people before we pass them, we just pass.
The bell-ringing rule, though it could have had good safety applications, was borne out of victim-blaming and as such was not thought out and implemented with education campaigns. Criminalize cyclists instead of teaching everyone.
More specifically, in a motor vehicle we signal then pass. And there's another problem, cyclists can be so busy dinging their bell at pedestrians that they fail to make their proper shoulder checks and signals to see or alert other cyclists trying to pass. The whole system is a clusterfuck, lol.
In my unscientific poll over the years, when you say "on your left" the lefties will instinctively go to their left. I do it all the time and I should have been road-kill a long time ago 😄 Bells scare the crap out of me and I have one on my bike and use it well in advance of runners or pedestrians - but the headphone thing really messes things up - because they just don't hear you and you startle them.
@michaelbrien@LiamEgan@ned@CStamp@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@antlerboy I think “on your left” or “passing on your left” is nicer than a bell, but feels less confrontational or impersonal, but IDK. There are vibes to different places. On a rail trail in upper Michigan was very surprised that every cyclist going the opposite direction passed with a cheery “Hello!” or “Good Morning”. Weird but nice.
IMO proper bell etiquette is to ring a good 5-10 seconds before the pedestrian needs to do anything. A bicycle bell from a distance doesn't signal panic, it places the idea of a bike in the pedestrian's head.
Nothing you can do about full headphoners, though.
Yup, that's spot on from my perspective as well! And in the case of the headphones, it's really no big deal, just as if the person was actually deaf. Slow down, stay behind until it's safe to pass. It's really simple.
I don't put any expectation on pedestrians to be aware of me on a bicycle, it's on me to be aware of them. It's on them to stay to the right when they can, and that's the only reasonable expectation.
@LiamEgan@ned@CStamp@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy Sorry to interject but I'm a pedestrian who uses a cane and can't jump out of the way. Maybe riders should say "Passing" instead of a phrase which may not be heard in its entirety. If I heard that, I'd keep to my lane and expect someone approaching at whatever speed. I've never been a bike rider but slowing down a bit sounds like a sensible way to deal with an unpredictable obstacle, aka a living human.
I have always lived by the rule that the fastest has to look out for anyone slower. So, cyclists have to look out for runners and pedestrians and runners have to look out for pedestrians. Being in all 3 groups at various times allows me to complain about the other groups. I always go wide when passing and if I can't go wide, I just wait until I get a chance to pass. I still haven't figured out a nice pass routine.
Exactly! And if you can't pass safely you slow down behind them to their speed, until you can. This is something a motorist would never consider doing for a cyclist on the road; they only slow down for slow-moving vehicles that can cause damage to their own vehicle, like a tractor. As a cyclist, I do it for every pedestrian. I consider them to have the right-of-way, almost always. Especially if there are kids or pets.
@LiamEgan@lydialurch@ned@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy If a bicycle is ahead, has been driving predictably, then suddenly, without warning or checking, swerves into the road, then that person is creating a dangerous situation. It could've been safe to pass before the person pretended they were the only one on the road and the laws of physics don't give a dam.
As a pedestrian, I never cross sides without checking it's safe because I am not an entitled ass. On a road, more so.
For the purpose of this discussion, I am talking about multi-use pathways that allow bikes, runners and pedestrians only. Cars and bikes are a whole different matter and you seriously don't want me to go on that rant 🤣
Cyclists are the most aware though, because they deal with it from both ends of the spectrum, from speeding cars to sloppy pedestrians, and are always told that no matter what infrastructure they use, they should not be there.
To a cyclist there is no actual hierarchy of awareness (only theoretical), from car>bicycle>pedestrian; it's just watch out for anyone, at any speed, in any space. "You do not belong in any."
Except bicycle lanes, that's literally the only space that's safe for a cyclist to use, but unless it's a separated cycle track then it's full of cars and car doors, and road signs.
Inclusive infrastructure, that's where it starts and ends.
@LiamEgan@lydialurch@ned@CStamp@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy
Not always fastest. I was a motorcyclist and expressly bought something with "the snot to get out of its own way, and, occasionally, trouble". It was worth it. Cycles of any kind tend to be invisible to a lot of automobilists, and I have the incidents that bear out this dictum. Most vulnerable has to be most vigilant, and is most deserving of the respect and consideration of all those less vulnerable.
Ikes. Now I'm not going to use a sidewalk unless I find it completely necessary, but I will never pass on one unless requested to. Sidewalks are not shared use, and that's where I'm actually not supposed to be. Cyclists are forced onto sidewalks all the time due to bad infrastructure, but they need to hold extra respect for pedestrians and never get in their way. I don't ring my bell or expect to pass, I just go slow.
On the MUP I commute on to work, there are several intersections with sidewalks where people just wander across listlessly, thinking it's just another sidewalk, lol. I know where to expect them, but those new to the path would not.
Simple signage would solve this danger (ie, "Shared Use Crossing Ahead", or something), but there has never been a sign approved here, which asks pedestrians to watch out for others. lol.
A bike on a MUP should be safe, but I always thing of anyone walking as a squirrel that will run back and forth in front of you. Pedestrians are in their own world and cyclists just have to look out for them. If you think of it, there should always be a separation between walkers/runners and cyclists.
However, you also have to look at it this way: Without separation between bicycles and pedestrians, MUPs become inefficient for commuting for cyclists.
Meanwhile, without separation between bicycles and cars, roads become a death trap for cyclists (and also become inconvenient for motorists).
So MUPs are a bad solution, but they're an infinitely better solution than saying, "you can just use the road".
I love MUPs when I am the only one on them, because they are safer and fast. I agree, that roads are death traps for cyclists - mainly because they are too slow for the cars and signage like "share the road" is the stupidest idea ever - it just infuriates the car drivers and gives cyclists a false sense of security.
@LiamEgan@CStamp@lydialurch@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy
I love MUPs too! My only real issue with them in my town is that we notoriously have lots of cycle paths "to nowhere". They never go all the way to intersect other paths or end up where people want to go. They always stop short.
We were talking about being forced onto sidewalks before. Most MUPs here force you to use sidewalks to get to them, lol. Just like many sidewalks here force you on the road to get to them, lol.
MUPs were never designed as part of a grand transportation plan - they were always a replacement for a sidewalk that had a limited budget that restricted its length. I have been on way too many MUPs and bike lanes that just end in the middle of nowhere. WTF My favourite 'bad design' has a concrete pillar at the end of the bike lane - so either veer onto the road or crash into the pillar.
My city (Edmonton) has been doing a lot of work on a downtown "bike grid". I hear amazing things about it from all who use it, but I no longer go central much so have only experienced tiny portions. I wish this was done when I actually lived and worked downtown! Not only is the grid interconnected, but it also features separated cycle tracks! :o
This is the most progressive thing our city has ever seen... #yegbike
@ned@LiamEgan@CStamp@lydialurch@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy I do live downtown (and work just on the other side of the river, in a neighbourhood fully connected with separated bike paths), and I can vouch for how great it is to use! It’s not JUST downtown, though, but also in all the central neighbourhoods. I rarely go anywhere on my bike that can’t be reached 90% on protected bike lanes.
This! So many of the issues brought up in this thread are caused because cyclists and pedestrians are all fighting over the meagre scraps that we're told to be grateful for, when all of the space and resources go into car infra.
And it's an endless cycle. The more money is invested in autocentric infrastructure, the more the costs of maintenance skyrocket for everyone, requiring more and more public funds to be funneled in for autos. At this stage of the game, with so much money tied into automobiles, every dollar invested on Active Transportation saves money. There is no real cost, only savings. This includes transit and cycling.
I have been on a bunch of Toronto recreational trails and dislike all groups using them 🤣 The cyclists are using the runners and pedestrians as slalom gates, the runners are zigging and zagging to avoid everyone and the pedestrians are oblivous to the world. But, you won't get run down by a car - so that's a good thing. I expect pedestrians to be totally unpredictable and they generally are 😄
Where I am right now, I am forced to use the sidewalk for cycling because of the bad infrastructure. It is a miserable experience because I slow down all the time to stop from spooking pedestrians. On the plus side, it turns into a good cardio workout because of the variable speeds, but bikes should never really be on sidewalks.
Well, a cyclist on a sidewalk is better than a pedestrian on a road, which is unfortunately a situation I'm very often forced into, while walking with my family and 3 children, because of bad infrastructure here. :(
It’s sounding from this thread like it’s a common occurrence, but I can’t imagine moving left as a pedestrian… I do move over (especially if the trail is crowded), but always tighter to the right and as smoothly and predictably as possible.
@dragonfrog@MichaelTBacon@IcooIey@antlerboy
I agree with this! However, I have to point out that ringing the bell usually doesn't get anyone to move over, recreational or commuter route alike, lol.
However, if it's a recreational route then that's fine too. I'll take whatever time it takes to let pedestrians disperse, though as I mentioned in another comment I will be moving slowly and patiently at their pace behind them because they didn't hear, then they get angry when they notice me. smh.
There's an art to ringing the bell—you can't wait until you're on top of people, you have to ring like 25 yards back and then ring again up close.
And yes, pedestrians with two headphones on not paying attention to their surroundings are a problem. They should 100% move when someone's coming up behind them, provided some reasonable amount of warning is given.
Oh trust me... I ring for about a block every time. That doesn't make much difference. I still do it anyways, because sometimes it does help. Point is, we* act as if any conflict is BECAUSE of a cyclist not ringing their bell, which is horseshit, lol. :D No, it's not something that can be relied on or expected. It's just something that helps.
(*By "we" I mean society in general... just look at the way all the posted signs read, for instance.)
This for example is a multi-use path where I live - it's by far the best route between downtown and the university.
At rush hour it looks like the first picture - walk on the right.
(The light and angle make it look dystopian, but it's actually between the quite open box girders of a bridge, and the quite open safety barrier to stop people falling / jumping in the river. Lots of light and beautiful views. The second photo at a quiet time shows that)
Yeah, it's the odd "bad apple," assuredly, but that's why regulation is needed. My 79 year old father quit using his favorite trail after one too many assholes buzzed him on their ebikes.
I agree, there should be speed limits on shared paths--e-bike or not.
I'm a lollygagger and routinely get passed by bike-bros that I think are going too fast on their pedal bikes given the chance there is a child or pet that could dash in front of them.
I also think e-bikes that can go faster than a certain threshold should be considered motor vehicles and banned on pedestrian routes.
Ah, as a cyclist I think there is also a broad misconception on how fast a bicycle can slow down to walking speed. The only time a cyclist needs to slow down "for safety" in the case of unpredictable children or pets, is when going around blind corners. Otherwise, any normal path provides plenty of sight for a cyclist to slow down to a walking pace in an instant. Of course, if a cyclist isn't at walking pace around kids, that's wrong.
@MCDuncanLab@MichaelTBacon@dragonfrog@IcooIey@antlerboy
I also notice that when, as a cyclist, I'm just lollygagging around pedestrians at their speed, waiting for a nice easy opportunity to pass, they get uncomfortable by my presence. There is also a misconception that a bicycle is harder to handle at walking pace than your own two feet, which is also misconstrued. If I'm behind you just moving at your pace, I'm not being intimidating, and I'm not in any loss of control. I'm just like you.
Having a speed limit I agree with in many cases (and, again, if it's a busy straight-line commuter route, it probably shouldn't be a shared path that needs a speed limit).
Banning bikes based on the potential top speed I disagree with - we don't ban cars from residential streets just because they're also capable of highway speeds.
Yeah, exactly. Shared pathways can have a speed limit of 30 mph and not slow anyone down that much. We're trying to get cars to understand that they don't save that much time going 55 mph vs. 30 mph over relatively short distances, but we can't get ebikers to slow down? What?
I should be 100% clear here I'm not calling for banning ebikes on pathways. I just want speed limits on them, and rules of interaction with pedestrians that aren't trying to mimic a limited access highway.
That's fair, and a very good point. One of the big problems with many MUPs is that they just stick a shared-use sign on it and think that's all it needs. Of course, all MUPs have a larger minimum width than regular sidewalks in my city, so that's good but could be a lot better. Wider paths with a painted yellow divider line down the middle are infinitely easier for everyone to navigate. They're a pleasure to ride on, and to walk on.
@MichaelTBacon@dragonfrog@MCDuncanLab@IcooIey@antlerboy
Mutli-use infrastructure should be built to be multi-use! If I can't walk holding hands with my wife or kids, that's infrastructure's fault. If my family doesn't feel safe spreading out without knowing if traffic will hit them, that's infrastructure's fault. We need to invest in active transportation to encourage and allow it.
More use of eBikes should help encourage this investment but speed limits would curb problems arising from it.
I'd much prefer 20 but am doing 30 to try to be accommodating. The ebikes on our nearby trails really do sometimes get close to 60.
Context is everything of course. This is the trail I'm talking about.
This is just an image search photo but I've seen bikes try to shoot gaps like the one in the photo at 45-50mph rather than just waiting 5-10 seconds and passing each group individually.
@ned@dragonfrog@antlerboy or, you are cheating yourself out of all the fitness gains you could be getting. Except, as the article states, you aren’t, since you cycle longer, farther, more.
If you call your own use of an ebike "cheating" I guess that's fair, because you get to make up your own rules. But calling someone else's riding an ebike "cheating" is just eugh.
Like if I just walk without minding my stride length I can say I'm cheating at the "don't step on the pavement lines" game, but I can't say someone else is cheating for stepping on the lines.
Yeah, there are ebike systems that are actually for cheating - the motor drops into the seatpost tube of a regular bike, and the battery is disguised as a water bottle.
Their disadvantages of complexity, maintainability, efficiency, power, etc. all make sense only when weighed against the thing that makes them unique - that they are clandestine, so you can use them for an advantage in a cycling race whose rules don't allow motors.
I have no problems with e bikes in town -I love to see them! I might get one.
BUT I DO have a problem with e bike riders smugly riding past me out in the middle of nowhere on a multi use path that clearly says "no motorized vehicles". (I've experienced this more than once) It does take away from enjoying the solitude of a road now more traveled that it used to be.
Esp, when there are THOUSANDS of miles of off road trails they -can use-
@cjpaloma@dragonfrog@IcooIey@antlerboy I have seen this, ironically moreso with gas-powered rigs (on a bicycle or skateboard/scooter) than with eBike/eScooter. That's a real disturbance to a quiet trail, marked for "no motorized vehicles". Unfortunately, this kind of behavior also makes it more likely for normal bicycles to be banned for no reason.
@antlerboy I'm currently doing 60km+ per week on my ebike, while WFH 3 days/week. Previously, I walked and caught buses and ubers. I'm starting to get noticeable fitness and weight loss gains. Perhaps ironically, I'm now looking for a cheap pedal bike to ride on the weekends for an occasional 'harder' workout
Add comment