Sierra Club -- cycling is scary

If the law says it is so,
then so be it. I just have visions of getting creamed somewhere that
is
so far out you wind up as road paste before someone figures out that
was
a human and not a deer that was hit.
You guys win, but I will stick to the mountain bike for my thrills and
avoid those cars and trucks doing 80 in a 65 because there are not
enough police to patrol.
I was rr,rrr, wrong.
Bill Baka
It is legal as needed, but I fully agree on it not always being the
wise option. I do agree also with the idea that the number of accidents
would be lower on a highway than elsewhere, due to the fact that the
high speed drivers are in thier line and vary little. The shoulders are
indeed huge, so long as there aren't any re-treads and glass in them.
To be hit at such velocity would certainly be fatal, but the risk I
thing is far greater where we all ride, normal roads. The roads that
have little or no shoulder, and curve in all manners not conducive to
sight.
AKA, what I commute on. 35mph speed limit, but no safer in my view.


--
Conniebiker

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:01:53 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote:

dgk wrote:

I once, when young and foolish, hitched along an interstate. The wind
caused by passing trucks could blow a biker right off the shoulder.
You really have to be nuts, or drunk, to try that.

It probably feels worse at walking speed. I had a permit to ride the
interstates (not all of 'em though...) in New Jersey, and used to do
regular rides on I-195. Since it's NJ, the speed limit was 55mph
(yawn) and it was heavily patrolled, so most cars and trucks weren't
doing much above that... but it really wasn't an issue at all -
certainly much less of a problem than a "normal road" where a truck
might pass you doing 45mph MUCH closer.

I'd say that riding the interstate highways with their enormous
shoulder lanes and the long, long line of sight would be far less
dangerous than a "normal road". You just have to pay attention at the
exit/entrance ramps.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

I was out of town so didn't get to read this thread until today. Yup,
my ignorance of interstate roads. I guess they are a good way of
riding. There was another post about using them as the only way to get
from town to town in some areas. Perhaps someday I'll get to ride on
one.

Something that I thought was misleading was the figure that 85% of the people
who were fataly injured whilst cycling were not wearing a helmet.

I am not sure if this is true, but for the sake of argument, lets us accept it.
The thing is that most of the bicycle fatalities are suffered not by competent
cyclists but people on bicycles operating the bikes in an intrinsically unsafe
manner. I doubt very much that had all these people been wearing helmets that
the fatality rates would have been decreased much.

I think the fact that so many cyclists who are fatally injured are not wearing
helmets has little to do with helmets protecting people from fatal injury and
more to do with the fact that there is a class of "cyclists" out there who take
virtually no safety precautions like riding in a safe, prudent and lawful
manner and people like that are not likely to wear helmets.

In article ,
Bill Baka wrote:
Every entrance ramp I have ever seen in California has
said that Pedestrians, bicycles, and motor powered cycles are
prohibited.

I've seen some that do not have such signs. Granted, such entrances
without those signs are rare near urban areas.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Timothy J. Lee wrote:
In article ,
Bill Baka wrote:

Every entrance ramp I have ever seen in California has
said that Pedestrians, bicycles, and motor powered cycles are
prohibited.


I've seen some that do not have such signs. Granted, such entrances
without those signs are rare near urban areas.

True. Most of the signs have been leading into urban areas or suburban
but there are places where it would not make sense to allow bicycles,
like on interstate 5 between Bakersfield and highway 152.
Bill Baka

Timothy J. Lee wrote:

In article ,
Bill Baka wrote:

Every entrance ramp I have ever seen in California has
said that Pedestrians, bicycles, and motor powered cycles are
prohibited.


I've seen some that do not have such signs. Granted, such entrances
without those signs are rare near urban areas.

You can find these signs in San Mateo county, on 280.

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
Timothy J. Lee wrote:

In article ,
Bill Baka wrote:

Every entrance ramp I have ever seen in California has said that
Pedestrians, bicycles, and motor powered cycles are prohibited.



I've seen some that do not have such signs. Granted, such entrances
without those signs are rare near urban areas.


You can find these signs in San Mateo county, on 280.

I may concede that one since a bike on the shoulder should be able to
beat gridlocked traffic any day. There would be some smug satisfaction
in looking at the drivers faces as they realize you will bet them to
work while they sit there and burn gas.
Bill Baka