Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 599 posts

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#571

Post by Symbiote »

mrep wrote: post #205
wanderingstan wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people mention this, I always ask what percentage of cars are following the speed limit—a rule of the road all the more important when piloting a vehicle which can easily kill. Cyclists disregarding the rules of the road are lower percentage, and primarily endanger themselves.

Fare: I agree that cars speed more than cyclists blowing stop sings/red lights but the latter is far more dangerous in my opinion and I see them do it constantly. I had to slam on the breaks 3 weeks ago when making a left because of a biker completely running a red light in front of me.

Count the proportion who run the light given the opportunity. All cyclists have the opportunity, but only the front car - if it stops, it blocks others.

I find the number running lights to be similar.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#572

Post by louhike »

_ph_ wrote: post #521
louhike wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on where you ride. My commute is 5 miles, and it takes 30 minutes, even though I'm used to bike, because of the circulation, all the time I have to stop. I agree it's easy if you're fit though. But I know it can be a pain for people who don't do sport at least weekly.

Well, first of all, if you bike regularly, you get all the training you need. The first couple of weeks are perhaps a bit hard, but that's about it for anyone in somewhat ok shape. And then there is the catch which is also the headline of the article we are discussing here: e-bikes. They allow anyone to go at a reasonable speed even uphill. That is, why they create a huge biking crowd.

Indeed!

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#573

Post by Symbiote »

Rapzid wrote: post #304
celtain wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the alternative to making the bikes take a detour was that there would be more congestion, not that the road would be closed to cars entirely? It sure doesn't sound like the "bike special interests" were the ones being unreasonable here.

The parallel road is not a full city block away as you might imagine. More like an ally but an actual road; the businesses have back entrances and there is foot traffic. The congestion would not just be on that section of road, it would propogate out and cause major issues. The bikes are not going to experience congestion.

It should reduce the number of people driving. Sounds like a win.

In the gold standard countries for cycling, this sort of design is done on purpose. Pedestrians get the best route, followed by cyclists, and vehicles have what's left.

Elsewhere, doing the easy work to accommodate cycling, then ignoring anything that would cause even the slightest inconvenience to cars, is the norm.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#574

Post by bagacrap »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #467
bagacrap wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, they do have a motor, so I don't see why they should be less regulated than other motorized vehicles. They're just as dangerous to the user as a moped.

>They're just as dangerous to the user as a moped. In the UK (and the EU) they are restricted to 15 mph so no different to a traditional bike. If you want a speed pedelec (28 mph) then it needs to be registered like a moped and mostly can't go on bike paths.

The speed limit is higher in the US, but I don't think the top speed per se is the main factor that contributes to danger. E bikes are dangerous because they empower novice users (teenager with a ferrari type of deal), and because they slot in somewhere between cars and normal bikes/peds in terms of speed, meaning their users wind up on roads, where they're vulnerable to cars, or on paths, which are often poorly engineered with tight/blind curves and where pedestrians aren't expecting someone to fly by at 22mph.

I find the average motorist expects to be able to save themselves from any dangerous situation by simply slamming on the brakes. With traditional bikes piloted by neophytes, this works alright since the top speed is probably ~15mph. But this doesn't work as well for two wheeled vehicles traveling at high speeds, where slamming on the brakes can cause a loss of traction and ultimately balance. Mopeds and motorcycles require special certification in the US (beyond a normal driver's license) because they are not just tiny cars, and the same should apply to ebikes.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#575

Post by rectang »

542354234235 wrote: post #562
rectang wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on road conditions and layout, typical traffic, weather, general health (need decent balance, eyesight, hearing, ability to ride over potholes, enough toughness that a spill isn't life-threatening)... I could go for "often doable".

>general health (need decent balance, eyesight, hearing That’s a pretty uncharitable reading of their comment. It is obvious we are talking about people that are already physically capable of riding a bike and are discussing a specific distance for a commute.

Well, that comment is quite absolute in its assessment of a five mile e-bike commute as "trivial". It brooks no exceptions even for stoplights or congested traffic conditions. It is not at all obvious to me what assumptions I am supposed to make when reading it, and its ancestor comments do not establish context as to what assumptions to make either.

Even so, I tried to find common ground by merely softening the "trivial" language to "often doable" rather than contradicting. Because clearly it will sometimes be "trivial".

So, I disagree with your assessment of "uncharitable". And I am taken aback that there is so much bitter contention over this issue when it seems to me as though the important thing is that e-bikes have made commutes much easier in general.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#576

Post by joshuaissac »

Johnny555 wrote: post #554
joshuaissac wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a bike's job to maintain safety and traffic speed, but the opposite. It does not matter whose job it is. If increasing speed improves safety for the cyclist, in this case by reducing the incentive for car drivers to overtake, then a good number of cyclists will do it.

I'd like to see the proof that increasing speed improves safety for the cyclist. There's no road I commute on (including 25 mph city streets) where a 30mph bike would keep up with traffic, riding a skinny tire 40 lb bike at 30mph in the road shoulder that passes for bike lanes around here sounds hazardous. If I wanted to keep up with car traffic so I can ride in the road, I'd get an e-scooter or e-motorcycle that's d…

> in the road shoulder that passes for bike lanes

Bike lanes do not exist in most places. The poster had said that their comment was about:

> areas where the bike infrastructure is poor or nonexistent

If there are bike lanes, then being overtaken by cars is not as much of a problem. But in most places, cyclists have to use the same lanes as motorised traffic, so it is more important to be able to keep up.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#577

Post by Spunkie »

wolverine876 wrote: post #298

What is the solution for weather? Major cities in the US can regularly be in the 30s F (~0-5 C) in the winter. Add to that a nice 10-15 mph wind in your face from riding. And especially add snow and ice - or worse, rain or freezing rain - and I don't see many people wanting to rely on an e-bike for unavoidable trips.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#578

Post by mike_d »

mjmahone17 wrote: post #254
mike_d wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Responsible bike riders should publicly condemn Critical Mass. They are the type of people that make drivers and pedestrians hate people on bikes, and go out of their way to escalate confrontations due to some bike rider victim complex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicts_involving_Critical_M...

I’m not sure why responsible riders wouldn’t want to see huge groups of riders asserting their equal right to public space? Critical Mass helped spur NYC’s bike lane growth. If you’re against direct action that’s fine, but it’s hard for me to see what works better in initiating long term transformation than direct action protests like Critical Mass.

No doubt violence and intimidation is an effective way to get what you want, but isn't what is best for a civil society.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#579

Post by mike_d »

clairity wrote: post #318
mike_d wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3. Dedicated bike police enforcing bike laws.

that would be a waste of resources. in my area, it's the cars that need more enforcement. every single day i see multiple cars brazenly running stop signs and sometimes even stop lights. they don't even slow down. that's potentially deadly ; not so with bikes.

[flagged]

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#580

Post by bpye »

nitrogen wrote: post #409
grayfaced wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason people accept cars as the natural order. Challenge that assumption. There are lots of deficient drivers too, why do we so heavily subsidize the road system? Because it's an investment that pays back in increased economic activity. The same argument applies to public transit. In many cases it costs more to collect the fare then they ever make in fare.

There are lots of deficient drivers too, why do we so heavily subsidize the road system? Because it's an investment that pays back in increased economic activity. Also because when you are in separate cars, you can't get sick from, or harassed by, or groped by, other drivers. If another driver is bothering you, you can usually just speed up or slow down to increase distance. To get true mass adoption of public transi…

Except deficient drivers can and do result in serious injury or death of other drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, etc. I’m still not too sure I understand your argument… Why should we so heavily subsidise car drivers?
Post reply on HN