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

The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 108 posts

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#81

Post by makeitsuckless »

krschultz wrote: post #76
makeitsuckless wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh god, not again. Wearing a helmet when biking is like wearing a bullet proof vest when walking. It may be necessary in some environments, but it's those environments that are the problem. If you don't know how to ride a bike (which includes how to fall), don't project it on other people. Please stop spreading the fud about cycling itself being dangerous. It's no more dangerous than walking. The Netherlands says hi:…

That's such a load of crap. See my other comment below, the reason why I had that accident was my bike wheel had a mechanical failure. I was on a bike lane in the middle of a college campus 500 yards from the nearest car. It was a peaceful afternoon with no one around. The environment didn't mean anything at all. If your sneaker fails, you don't get thrown 20 feet onto concrete.

20 feet. Seriously.

Which would mean you were racing, not just cycling. And on a bike line "in the middle of a college campus" no less.

So basically you were just being irresponsible, not just for yourself but also towards others. Oh, of course, there was "no one around", which makes it alright.

No wonder cycling has a bad name in the US.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#82

Post by panglott »

hkmurakami wrote: post #77
panglott wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the single best argument I've ever seen for not wearing clip pedals. I always commute with flat pedals because it's easier and more convenient, but the safety issue has got to be huge.

I use all sorts of pedals, ranging from Look, Shimano SPD, plastic based straps and metal based straps to flats. In city traffic I'd probably stick to flats or straps. In suburbian commutes with less stop and go, I found SPDs to be a good compromise since they are pretty easy to get out of (my falls have been when I was using look pedals on a pretty stiff setting). In the end you go with whatever you're comfortable w…

Yes, the frustrating thing about the bike helmet debate is that it totally misrepresents the kind of safety gear that's important.

I never wear a helmet, but I ALWAYS have reflectors, front and rear lights, a hat to keep the sun out of my eyes, rear fenders, and mirrors to check for traffic behind me.

Visibility and awareness are infinitely more important than helmets.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#83

Post by makeitsuckless »

hkmurakami wrote: post #47
u801e wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wear a helmet. They not only save you from dangerous environmental situations, but they save you from yourself. Given the CPSC test procedure for bicycle helmets, I seriously doubt it: http://www.helmets.org/cpscstd.htm >> 1203.15 Positional stability test Test that the helmet doesn't roll off when a 8.8 lb weight in a guided free fall from a distance of 2 feet strikes the helmet. >> 1203.16 Dynamic strength of ret…

> Regarding the last test procedure, that would be like testing the helmet on an adult male of average height, where, while standing, suddenly suffered a stroke and fell over With all due respect, do you ride a bike extensively? Because these exact sort of accidents happen all the time. I've fallen sideways from a stationary position several times over the last 5 years as an avid cyclist when I've had lapses in judgm…

"declipping"

In other words, you're one of those who races in traffic. I rest my case.

Personally, I've been on a bicycle almost every day since I was a kid. In busy traffic. Without a helmet.

You wear a helmet because you ride dangerously and/or in dangerous situations. The helmet isn't about cycling. It's about you, and your behaviour.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#84

Post by WildUtah »

hkmurakami wrote: post #47
u801e wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wear a helmet. They not only save you from dangerous environmental situations, but they save you from yourself. Given the CPSC test procedure for bicycle helmets, I seriously doubt it: http://www.helmets.org/cpscstd.htm >> 1203.15 Positional stability test Test that the helmet doesn't roll off when a 8.8 lb weight in a guided free fall from a distance of 2 feet strikes the helmet. >> 1203.16 Dynamic strength of ret…

> Regarding the last test procedure, that would be like testing the helmet on an adult male of average height, where, while standing, suddenly suffered a stroke and fell over With all due respect, do you ride a bike extensively? Because these exact sort of accidents happen all the time. I've fallen sideways from a stationary position several times over the last 5 years as an avid cyclist when I've had lapses in judgm…

"I've fallen sideways from a stationary position several times over the last 5 years as an avid cyclist when I've had lapses in judgment or focus when declipping from my pedals."

Maybe you should try being a lot more careful. I've been riding 10,000km per annum for a decade, two of those years in Mexico City with the worst traffic in the hemisphere. I routinely do 40km up and down rides in the mountains at high speeds and medium length rides in city traffic. I've had one crash and that happened on wet cobblestones with a new bike whose brakes I didn't know well; I endoed over the handlebars and scraped my hands up a little and then rode home 10 more km.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#85

Post by JoeAltmaier »

panglott wrote: post #80
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negligible for walking. Its different to be hurtling along at 20mph on a contraption of pipes, gears and chains and hit a storm drain, launching headfirst into the back of a parked car, than to trip and skin your knee. One requires a helmet to survive. And driving - there's airbags and the steel cage and belts and padding. Another storey altogether.

Walking is pretty dangerous: you could be walking and spontaneously stumble, or slip on wet leaves, and clip your temple on a fire hydrant. That's it for you! Walking is quite dangerous, and is in fact has the highest rate of injuries and fatalities per mile traveled. That's mostly because pedestrians get hit by cars, but that's surely an even better reason to get pedestrians to wear helmets. What if you get hit by a…

I suggest all walking accidents are possible on a bike as well. While bicycles have even more potential accidents.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#86

Post by JoeAltmaier »

panglott wrote: post #82
hkmurakami wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use all sorts of pedals, ranging from Look, Shimano SPD, plastic based straps and metal based straps to flats. In city traffic I'd probably stick to flats or straps. In suburbian commutes with less stop and go, I found SPDs to be a good compromise since they are pretty easy to get out of (my falls have been when I was using look pedals on a pretty stiff setting). In the end you go with whatever you're comfortable w…

Yes, the frustrating thing about the bike helmet debate is that it totally misrepresents the kind of safety gear that's important. I never wear a helmet, but I ALWAYS have reflectors, front and rear lights, a hat to keep the sun out of my eyes, rear fenders, and mirrors to check for traffic behind me. Visibility and awareness are infinitely more important than helmets.

I suggest that 'survivor bias' may apply. Anyway, Be safe out there!

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#87

Post by stronglikedan »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #79
stronglikedan wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://blog.ycombinator.com/new-hacker-news-guideline

Yeah, that's exactly why I have a bit of a problem with such guidelines. It protects people from the normal consequences of insulting outer people's intelligence. Sometimes it's useful to know when your behaviour pisses other people off.

If what I said pisses you off, then you have bigger issues to work on.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#88

Post by maxerickson »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #81
krschultz wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's such a load of crap. See my other comment below, the reason why I had that accident was my bike wheel had a mechanical failure. I was on a bike lane in the middle of a college campus 500 yards from the nearest car. It was a peaceful afternoon with no one around. The environment didn't mean anything at all. If your sneaker fails, you don't get thrown 20 feet onto concrete.

20 feet. Seriously. Which would mean you were racing, not just cycling. And on a bike line "in the middle of a college campus" no less. So basically you were just being irresponsible, not just for yourself but also towards others. Oh, of course, there was "no one around", which makes it alright. No wonder cycling has a bad name in the US.

What is the maximum appropriate cycling speed?

Walking is about 6 kph, so that seems like a reasonable floor.

(I'm not trying to be antagonistic, if you are going to argue that cycling above some speed is unsafe, I think it is constructive to be specific)

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#89

Post by cauterized »

cmurf wrote: post #57
cauterized wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the very least, they'd have to quadruple both the bike lane mileage and the Citibike coverage.

I don't see how NYC gets to 1% let alone 6% without pulling out car lanes and converting them into two lane bike lanes which are immutable: no parking, no blocking. Now, they get blocked the instant someone opens a car door or double parks. With higher biking density comes different speed cycling so single lane biking doesn't scale. Denver has this crazy idea also that catering to bikes is easy and cheap, the mentali…

That's one of the reasons protected lanes have been so successful. They also help car traffic move faster by making double parking less tenable.

Re: The Steady Rise of Bike Ridership in New York

#90

Post by ptaipale »

makeitsuckless wrote: post #81
krschultz wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's such a load of crap. See my other comment below, the reason why I had that accident was my bike wheel had a mechanical failure. I was on a bike lane in the middle of a college campus 500 yards from the nearest car. It was a peaceful afternoon with no one around. The environment didn't mean anything at all. If your sneaker fails, you don't get thrown 20 feet onto concrete.

20 feet. Seriously. Which would mean you were racing, not just cycling. And on a bike line "in the middle of a college campus" no less. So basically you were just being irresponsible, not just for yourself but also towards others. Oh, of course, there was "no one around", which makes it alright. No wonder cycling has a bad name in the US.

Going like 30 km/h on a clear bike path is not "racing". It's just normal traffic, gonig from place A to B. Still, a helmet can help this casual cyclist.

My experience is from a bike path, no one in sight. A ball bounces onto the the path from a bush. That would have been the time to hit brakes immediately, but I just didn't think right. Next comes the 4-year-old kid who runs from behind a bush. Now I hit the brakes, go over the bar, head first.

No damage to the head, despite a bump. Broke a radix bone, though. I definitely recommend using a helmet, however casually you ride.

Post reply on HN