Electric cars

[Josquius]

At a glance I didn't see any cycle lanes there. Took some zooming and examining to notice the little signs that seemed to indicate those paths were for bikes too. Which is surprising as they look really narrow.
The question I'd have riding there is when does the shared area end and when does it turn back into a path. Blind corners where walkers could potentially come are worrying too.
I can't say I blame cyclists for using the road there. It does seem a much better place to cycle, you can get some good speed up there and keep pace with the cars.

[Tamas]

keep pace with the cars.

Not really though. Anyways, all I have is my own perceived subjective experience of driving these roads regularly and having to deal with the queues behind cyclists and seeing the risk people take to get out of them, and you have haven't been on these roads so there's not much to compare.

[Josquius]

keep pace with the cars.

Not really though. Anyways, all I have is my own perceived subjective experience of driving these roads regularly and having to deal with the queues behind cyclists and seeing the risk people take to get out of them, and you have haven't been on these roads so there's not much to compare.

I'm just saying how I imagine it looks from the pov of someone riding a bike.
I totally understand why someone would stay where they belong on the road rather than jumping up onto the path because apparently its OK here.

I've been stuck behind cyclists on roads before. It is indeed quite annoying in the moment. But that's driving. Bikes (and horses) have had the right to use roads a lot longer than cars have. Lest we forget once upon a time roads belonged to people and not cars.

[Tamas]

Both are clearly marked cycling paths I even chose shots which show the signs. It being inconvenient are not sufficient excuse not to use them. I don't drive on the sidewalk to avoid slower cars or potholes, for example.

[mongers]

Both are clearly marked cycling paths I even chose shots which show the signs. It being inconvenient are not sufficient excuse not to use them. I don't drive on the sidewalk to avoid slower cars or potholes, for example.

Tamas I'm not sure what you're trying to convince yourself of?

Unless you both drive that road and ride on it and/or the cycle provision, I don't see how you can come to an objective opinion.

[Josquius]

Both are clearly marked cycling paths I even chose shots which show the signs. It being inconvenient are not sufficient excuse not to use them. I don't drive on the sidewalk to avoid slower cars or potholes, for example.

You would drive on a well maintained wide road over a scruffier bumpier potentially more dangerous one that goes to the same place however.
The analogy of driving on the path doesn't work as bikes have the right to go on the road (and can't go on most paths) . If they choose to go on the road then for some reason they're seeing it as the better option.
In Holland for instance bikes aren't banned from most roads.... But they usually do go on the cycle tracks instead as they see them as the better option.

[Tamas]

Both are clearly marked cycling paths I even chose shots which show the signs. It being inconvenient are not sufficient excuse not to use them. I don't drive on the sidewalk to avoid slower cars or potholes, for example.

Tamas I'm not sure what you're trying to convince yourself of?

Unless you both drive that road and ride on it and/or the cycle provision, I don't see how you can come to an objective opinion.

What I am trying to convince Tyr of is that those are cycling lanes. And thus I'd prefer if cyclists used them. I appreciate the practicality of the lanes can't be judged by those who haven't used them.

[Tamas]

This links in to the larger issue where I also think we agree is that the most road setups are just not convenient for cyclists and cars to be sharing them. I accept in many situation the road is a better option for the cyclist but I would propose that their analysis is probably mistaken in the case of every busy road. I always try and make sure I stay well clear of them when overtaking, but this is often impossible, and I see a lot of cases of cars going inches from them, that's the norm, really. I thought I must look like a right dork leaving a couple of meters or more during overtaking when I can (like I am supposed to) when I almost never see anyone else do it.

On the road, being too slow can cause issues in traffic just like being too fast. Holding up traffic creates confusion and dangerous situations. I appreciate cyclists have the right to use the road, but if they have an option to NOT be a source of danger to themselves and others I'd prefer they took it. I always take such options whenever I am aware of them, and I don't think it is irrational to expect the same.

[Jacob]

This links in to the larger issue where I also think we agree is that the most road setups are just not convenient for cyclists and cars to be sharing them. I accept in many situation the road is a better option for the cyclist but I would propose that their analysis is probably mistaken in the case of every busy road. I always try and make sure I stay well clear of them when overtaking, but this is often impossible, and I see a lot of cases of cars going inches from them, that's the norm, really. I thought I must look like a right dork leaving a couple of meters or more during overtaking when I can (like I am supposed to) when I almost never see anyone else do it.

On the road, being too slow can cause issues in traffic just like being too fast. Holding up traffic creates confusion and dangerous situations. I appreciate cyclists have the right to use the road, but if they have an option to NOT be a source of danger to themselves and others I'd prefer they took it. I always take such options whenever I am aware of them, and I don't think it is irrational to expect the same.

Yeah for sure.

I have definitely been stuck behind cyclists making some very dubious decisions in terms of what roads to use and in what manner. There's one main street where during rush hour cars typically do 70-75 km/h in a 50 zone, three lanes in either direction, bumper to bumper during rush hour.

I've seen some guy decide that - in the dark, in the rain - it was a good idea for him to take up a lane with no helmet and no lights, when there are side streets that go in the same direction and are much much safer for him (and less annoying to drivers). Just fucking stupid. So I'm not saying that some bicyclists don't make dumb ass decisions, and I don't begrudge anyone calling them fucking idiots either. I sure called that guy one in my internal monologue.

Personally when biking I try to stay as far away from cars as I possibly can (taking protected bike lanes or side streets as much as possible and avoiding big streets, even if I have a right to be on them). I prefer avoiding getting in the way of cars (and pedestrians) where at all possible. It's as much because I don't want to be a dick as it's for my own safety, because if a car and I have a disagreement while I'm on a bike it's going to be much worse for me. And hitting a pedestrian isn't exactly the kind of interaction I'm going to enjoy.

All that said - and while conceding that there are definitely cyclists who make stupid, dangerous, and / or inconsiderate decisions about where they bike - I think if there's a bike lane somewhere and large number of bicyclists consistently avoid it and use the road instead that's indicative of a problem with the bike lane rather than bicyclists.

[Josquius]

I think the split here is on the road you're taking the risk on yourself. It's down to your skill cycling and the luck that there won't be a stupid / bike hating driver that you survive. Drivers are generally pretty switched on and expecting things like bikes. It seems in your power and any injuries that result you're likely to take on yourself.

On the path meanwhile its not in your power. Pedestrians will act stupid - bikes on the path is normally illegal and not usually seen so of course they're not ready for it - and there's a good chance you'll hit one. You'll be hurting other people here.

Iirc there might be a ridiculously slow speed limit on these shared paths too?

[Tamas]

I think the split here is on the road you're taking the risk on yourself. It's down to your skill cycling and the luck that there won't be a stupid / bike hating driver that you survive. Drivers are generally pretty switched on and expecting things like bikes. It seems in your power and any injuries that result you're likely to take on yourself.

On the path meanwhile its not in your power. Pedestrians will act stupid - bikes on the path is normally illegal and not usually seen so of course they're not ready for it - and there's a good chance you'll hit one. You'll be hurting other people here.

Iirc there might be a ridiculously slow speed limit on these shared paths too?

But see? What you describe for the cyclist on the path is very similar to the situation the cyclist on the road puts all car drivers to. Sure, if the cyclist falls over in front of me or something else happens that ain't my fault, the cyclist gets hurt and I probably won't due to the ton of metal around me. But if something serious happens it will be my life on the line, having to hope I won't end up in prison because the situation won't be judged correctly.

Plus, I think the surest way to an early death is assuming car drivers are "pretty switched on". Best advice mar car instructor gave me was "do not assume anything except stupidity" (it was in the context of ensuring I always look in every direction even where people are not supposed to be coming from, but it holds for traffic in general).

[Maladict]

The Windsor lane:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4662563,-0.5933267,3a,75y,114.42h,92.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3TaTss0FwIoQyTHc0HF2iw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The one on the main road not too far from me:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5233688,-0.6952619,3a,75y,114.74h,71.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2R0MALMgTGB1bhppRkz8BQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There's not a lot of space but you could probably narrow the car lanes to allow for a dedicated bike lane.

[Berkut]

The Windsor lane:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4662563,-0.5933267,3a,75y,114.42h,92.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3TaTss0FwIoQyTHc0HF2iw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The one on the main road not too far from me:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5233688,-0.6952619,3a,75y,114.74h,71.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2R0MALMgTGB1bhppRkz8BQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There's not a lot of space but you could probably narrow the car lanes to allow for a dedicated bike lane.

You can, but should you?

I am all for biking, but from the standpoint of the purpose of roads and bike lanes (to allow people to transport themselves and their stuff from A to B) bikes are terrible. The carrying capacity of a given width of bike lane has to be horrible compared to a similar width of car lane, right? Bikes are just relatively slow, and don't carry very much.

If you could somehow convince 50% of commuters to switch to bikes....well, that actually would probably not be possible, I am guessing, in most congested places. There just would not be enough "bike lane space" to handle that much bicycle traffic even if you took 50% of the existing roads and dedicated them to bikes.

I suspect a road has probably at least an order of magnitude greater carrying capacity then an equivalent width of bike path per "rush hour".

And I suspect, at the end of the day, that is why we very rarely see adequate to the needs of cyclists bike paths in areas where the space is a limited resource.

[crazy canuck]

Though with conventional cars you're an idiot (and/or flash git) to buy new, I have heard it muttered that with electric this is far less clear cut considering battery capacity loss (albeit better than with eg phones).

Used electrics have far less range then most new models.  So if you are going to be buying used there should be a pretty steep price difference.

[Barrister]

I really dislike dedicated bike lanes in Edmonton.  I never see them get used.  It was a "build it and they will come" sort of design philosophy, but one that appears to have failed.