{Adel} Two wheels quicker than four

fyi - more wheelie good fun commuter cyclists vs smog boxes. Hey
Gemma, wanna take Mr Conlon out for some interval training?

**********

Two wheels quicker than four
http://tinyurl.com/fs7sf
August 02, 2006 11:30pm. Article from: The Advertiser

Cyclists commuting to work in the city have a distinct advantage over
motorists when it comes to travelling times, an experiment by staff at
The Advertiser has found.

This morning four teams set off from designated points north, east,
south and west of the CBD, one person on a bike and one driving a car,
to see who would make it to their desk first.

Every cyclist arrived first while the motorists continued to make their
way through the congested traffic, or searched for a spot in Waymouth
Street's busy Topham Mall carpark.

Notably, IT analyst Gary Pike - who used a dedicated cycling route that
runs parallel to the O-Bahn track - reached The Advertiser building 14
minutes ahead of photographer Tait Schmaal, who drove along a similar
route.

The result supports Bicycle Institute of South Australia chairman Sam
Powrie's call for dedicated cycling routes along rail corridors, known
as "green travel corridors".

Mr Powrie said the corridors would encourage more people to cycle
because they provided a safer option than riding on arterial roads.

The institute is calling for the Government to make a funding
commitment to green travel corridors in the upcoming State Budget, he
said.

See the full story and pictures in tomorrow's Advertiser.

****

The great race
http://tinyurl.com/multn
August 05, 2006 12:15am. Article from: The Advertiser

Cyclists commuting to work in the city during morning peak hour have a
distinct advantage over motorists when it comes to travel times, an
Advertiser trial has found.

Yesterday, eight staff from The Advertiser raced from their doors to
their desks - half on bicycles and the rest in cars - and the bike
riders won hands down.

But Transport Minister Patrick Conlon yesterday indicated he was
unlikely to be seen riding to work along Adelaide's failing major
transport corridors. "I'm not sure if I could beat a car on my bike,"
he said.

One of the Advertiser cyclists beat his driving counterpart by 14
minutes.

Information Technology analyst Gary Pike had an advantage over the
other cyclists - riding in from the northern suburbs he was able to use
bikeways to save himself navigating traffic on busy arterial roads.

Bicycle Institute of South Australia chairman Sam Powrie said he was
not surprised the cyclists had arrived between four to 14 minutes ahead
of the motorists.

He said Mr Pike's example supported the need for dedicated cycling
routes identified as "green travel corridors" in the State Government's
cycling strategy, Safety in Numbers.

"The bikeways Mr Pike used are not continuous - they are semi-finished
- but his example goes to illustrate the potential of cycling," he
said.

"For many people, cycling is a very realistic way of freeing themselves
from the iron grip of petrol prices and car ownership, and it has
enormous health benefits."

Mr Powrie said he was calling on the State Government to commit funding
to green travel corridors in the upcoming Budget.

RAA traffic and safety project manager Rita Excell said motorists using
Fullarton Rd were now travelling significantly slower than they were
three years ago. The average morning peak hour speed on the road is
21km/h, compared to 28km/h in 2003.

"They are spending almost five minutes longer to travel the same
distance," she said.

Over the same period, average speeds on South Rd have stayed relatively
constant at 22-23km/h, but were still well below acceptable levels of
30km/h for a road zoned at 60km/h, she said.

The RAA believes the planned north-south route and an effectively
functioning ring route around the city would reduce driving times.

"When completed, this investment will address the long-standing
congestion issues affecting commuters travelling into and around the
city from north and south of Adelaide," Ms Excell said.


--
cfsmtb

In aus.bicycle on Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:12:42 +1000
cfsmtb wrote:

Every cyclist arrived first while the motorists continued to make their
way through the congested traffic, or searched for a spot in Waymouth
Street's busy Topham Mall carpark.

Does this include shower and change time?

Bet it doesn't

None of these comparisons seem to, and I think that's a flaw. It
should be table to desk - that is, get up from the kitchen table
after breakfast wearing the clothes you are going to leave in, pack
all things needing packing, out the door and go. Clock doesn't stop
till you are sitting at your desk ready to start work.

This means the cyclist might have to have a few minutes sorting their
work clothes and 10-20 minutes showering and changing.


Zebee

In article ,
Zebee Johnstone wrote:

Does this include shower and change time?

Bet it doesn't

And it probably doesn't include any shower time before they leave
either. If the person needs a shower -- and a lot of people with short
commutes don't, not forgetting many blue-collar workers -- it may be a
case of having the shower after the commute rather than before. That
means no extra time.

None of these comparisons seem to, and I think that's a flaw. It
should be table to desk

If you're going to be scrupulous, surely it should be from alarm to desk.

But insistence on exactness is blurring the real point: that the
pre-conceived ideas many people have about cycling being slow aren't
always based on fact.

--
Shane Stanley

In aus.bicycle on Sat, 05 Aug 2006 16:52:51 +1000
Shane Stanley wrote:

If you're going to be scrupulous, surely it should be from alarm to desk.

Maybe. But if it is about shorter time to commute then the whole of
the commute has to be sorted.

After all, if parking time is counted so should shower time. Just as
you might not need a shower, you might easily find a park. (eg, most
folk at my work who drive have a carpark they pay for. So they aren't
going to be spending time parking.)


But insistence on exactness is blurring the real point: that the
pre-conceived ideas many people have about cycling being slow aren't
always based on fact.

I don't think that's what these stunts are about at all.

They are about how cars are now slow. Secondarily that bikes are
quicker than cars.

If they are going to push the idea that cycling will get you there
quicker, then they should be upfront about the times.

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:12:42 +1000
cfsmtb wrote:
Every cyclist arrived first while the motorists continued to make their
way through the congested traffic, or searched for a spot in Waymouth
Street's busy Topham Mall carpark.

Does this include shower and change time?


I really can't understand why this gets raised all the time. If I drive,
or motorbike, I shower before I leave, then drive. If I cycle, I shower
when I get to work. Either way the shower the takes up the same amount
of time, so is irrelevant to the comparison between car and bike. The
only way it would be relevant is if you wouldn't shower before driving
to work and I don't knwo anyone who does that.

DaveB

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message
...
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:12:42 +1000
cfsmtb wrote:

Every cyclist arrived first while the motorists continued to make their
way through the congested traffic, or searched for a spot in Waymouth
Street's busy Topham Mall carpark.

Does this include shower and change time?

Bet it doesn't

None of these comparisons seem to, and I think that's a flaw. It
should be table to desk - that is, get up from the kitchen table
after breakfast wearing the clothes you are going to leave in, pack
all things needing packing, out the door and go. Clock doesn't stop
till you are sitting at your desk ready to start work.

This means the cyclist might have to have a few minutes sorting their
work clothes and 10-20 minutes showering and changing.


Zebee

If I drive or catch publice transport, I shower and dress and home. If I
ride, I do it at work. Donning knicks and jersey is the work of a moment. In
other words there's no real time penalty for me.

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote:

I don't think that's what these stunts are about at all.

They are about how cars are now slow. Secondarily that bikes are
quicker than cars.

These stunts are about travelling time as far as I can see. Travelling by
car in city peak hour is not very fast. Last time I checked showering didn't
come under the category of 'travelling'. It is more a case of preparation
for travel, and as far as I'm aware most people shower about once a day
anyhow, the question of whether it's before breakfast, after the commute or
in the evening is pretty irrelevant to travel times. Sure there is some
extra organisation of bags, clothes etc. to ride, and bike parking and maybe
a change at the end, but car drivers have other hidden time swallowers.

When I drive home from work, for some reason I am often tempted to stop off
en-route to get a snack, or do a bit of unnecessary shopping. I manage to
avoid this temptation when I ride.

If they are going to push the idea that cycling will get you there
quicker, then they should be upfront about the times.

If you want to include all preparation time you should include the dead time
queueing for and buying petrol, the time spent getting a service organised,
the time spent in the bank organising a loan to pay for the car. Then
there's all that time spent to actually earn the extra $$$$ to pay for all
these things.

Where do you think we should stop in the time calculation for travelling?

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

Resound wrote:

If I drive or catch publice transport, ........
^^^^^^
another reason to bike it instead of catch the bus

--
beerwolf (remove numbers from email address)

Peter Signorini Wrote:

These stunts are about travelling time as far as I can see. Travelling
by
car in city peak hour is not very fast. Last time I checked showering
didn't
come under the category of 'travelling'. It is more a case of
preparation
for travel, and as far as I'm aware most people shower about once a
day
anyhow, the question of whether it's before breakfast, after the
commute or
in the evening is pretty irrelevant to travel times. Sure there is
some
extra organisation of bags, clothes etc. to ride, and bike parking and
maybe
a change at the end, but car drivers have other hidden time swallowers.

Precisely, whatever 'penalty time' is irrevalent. When I took part in
the Commuter Challenge whatever last November on ABC 774, a main time
swallower for car-driving Jeremy was finding a carparking spot +
ticket. Possibly the worst a cyclist could content with is a waiting
line at the showers, if the workplace has end of trip facilities. Or
not planning properly and having to walk around all day in the tap
dancing disco shoes. (I've done worst than that & survived the
embarrassment!)

However, going back to anecdotal stuff I've heard from car commuters,
how many cyclists have to go move their bike constantly during the day
to avoid the grey ghosts? Nup?


--
cfsmtb

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:12:42 +1000
cfsmtb wrote:

Every cyclist arrived first while the motorists continued to make their
way through the congested traffic, or searched for a spot in Waymouth
Street's busy Topham Mall carpark.


Does this include shower and change time?

Bet it doesn't

None of these comparisons seem to, and I think that's a flaw. It
should be table to desk - that is, get up from the kitchen table
after breakfast wearing the clothes you are going to leave in, pack
all things needing packing, out the door and go. Clock doesn't stop
till you are sitting at your desk ready to start work.

This means the cyclist might have to have a few minutes sorting their
work clothes and 10-20 minutes showering and changing.


Zebee


Well I have done mine brecky table to desk and working. From Glen
Iris to Hawthorn

Bike. Besk 14 mins. Worse (well worse when I was hurrying) 17 min
Motorcycle. Best. 11 min. (Silly effort) Worse 17 min
Car. Best 12 min. Worse 44 min.

Dave