I ride a bicycle to work and back home in Melbourne, roughly 40kms a day.
Have been doing this since 1999 and have seen a few changes in that time...more people riding, a good thing, and a huge increase in the amount of cars on the road....a bad thing.
Train travel is slow and crowded...not my thing, specially when cycling is free and quicker.
I found this interview intersting from a few points of view.
Firstly, to my way of thinking, the E-bike is the local transport future...maybe along with small electric cars.
It’s a long interview with Stephen Hodge, who sold me my first decent bike at Spokesman cycles in Canberra in the early 1980’s.
I ride a normal bike, not an E-bike.
Hope you enjoy.
Unfortunately e-bikes in Australia are crippled by by government standards which actively prevent the effective use of e-bikes. Too low a maximum electric motor capability for battery only use, and too slow a maximum speed for battery assisted.
What e-bikes that are permitted to be sold here do not come close to the capabilities of what's available in Japan.
As for braving the traffic, the hostility of motorists toward cyclists, combined with the lack of bikeways and bike lanes that go to usable destinations, it really feels like cyclists are not acceptable road users.
I don't know what the solve is to fix that.
I see an attitude thing most days in that cycleways and theres lots where i live are empty ,, the roads beside are well full of lycra most of the time ,, Why ?
Listening to a lot of talkback on many radio stations, a lot of people believe that it is time bikes should pay rego and insurance, and have identification of some sort, like everyone else, if they want to have unfettered access to the roads.
Too many ( but not all ) cyclists pay lip service to the road rules at present, and that annoys people, as the perpetrators cannot be identified.
I was constantly riding a bike from around 6 years old until well after I obtained my drivers licence.....'56 - late '60's and didn't sell my last bike until around 12 years ago. We rode with some very specific "rules" ..........have respect for motor vehicles, of any sort. Clearly use hand signals to indicate your intentions, DON'T ride two abreast and have an understanding of basic road rules.......a "STOP" sign means just that, same with traffic lights, etc., etc.
With a tad over 50 years of driving cars, in more recent years, I've gradually come to understand the emergence of the angst between the cycling fraternity and motorists, I have honestly lost count of the instances of cyclists, regardless of whether they're part of the lycra brigade or general people riding to and from work, that appear to believe that they are beyond, not only the rules of the road, but beyond being expected to have any degree of either common sense or respect for other road users regardless of what mode of transport they are using. For too many, the above mentioned Stop signs, traffic lights, etc., are nothing more than an inconvenience to be ignored, there seems to be a total lack of any thought of self-preservation.
AndrewJ nailed it, it is beyond time that laws were changed to ensure that anyone who used a "wheeled" means of transport was able to be made accountable for their actions.
Unfortunately, as an ex cyclist, I have to say that a large group of the current vocal generation appear to have a philosophy of "being always wronged but never wrong.
We are just about to get an E bike for my wife. I will put the counter argument that I think they have got the specs about right given what Chris posted above me. Many (Certainly not all and almost certainly not even the majority) of cyclists ride in a way that seems to give no thought at all to their own safety, let alone anyone elses. Imagine giving these people an extra KW or two to play with and assistance that would let them ride an E bike at 60KMH. If they can, they will!
What I saw when I used to commute in to the city all day was probably 95% of cyclists doing the right thing, 3% that you were just glad they were on a bike not driving a car as it limited the damage they could do to others and 2% that were just death on wheels. In that last case, I was literally 100M away from someone who ignored a red light and cycled through an intersection at full pace, only to be knocked down by some poor sap traveling through a green light, the bike would have just appeared from between the lines of stopped cars right in front of them. I never heard the actual outcome of that one. The cyclist could perhaps be glad there was an ambo stopped there!
My view is to separate bike and motorised traffic wherever possible. I have ridden bikes in Holland and where it is a big part of the culture there are few problems, but they also have a network of bike paths that are bike only.
I rode 40km a day during my uni days in Canada and never had any problems co-existing with vehicle traffic, but times have changed. The resentment felt by folks stuck in traffic has a lot to do with the problems.
These days I no longer live in a city, so I get to ride without anxiety, other that the damn bagpipes swooping me.
It is interesting that this came up now, they were talking on the radio this morning about a push to reconsider mandatory helmets and the things some cycling advocates had to say I thought were concerning.
Firstly the rep of the cycling body misquoting or at least misunderstanding OH&S methodology. Quoting that 80% of cycling accidents are the fault of the driver of a car (Cant comment on that figure, so I wont) and talking about the "Hierarchy of controls" starting, as you should, at the top, with "Elimination" saying that what you need to do is to stop cars hitting bikes (You do always start with elimination if it is possible and practicable)
I work in an OH&S heavy industry. The HAZARD is falling off your bike (Whatever the cause of falling off may be) The risk is how likely that is to happen, and on top of that you have to look at the potential consequences of the hazard coming to pass (Catastrophic)
"Elimination" of the hazard is entirely possible, don't ride a bike, but obviously not practicable. I could go on and on down the hierarchy of controls but in the end, if you are going to ride a bike the hazard of falling off is there and the least effective form of control comes in to play, PPE (Wear a helmet)
The other one was a cyclist who came on and more or less advocated that helmets should be voluntary for adults (Who obviously know not to fall of their bikes and of they do, not to hit their head!) and that responsibility should be put on to car drivers, anyone but the cyclist themselves! She actually did say that riders should not be responsible for their own safety when it comes to being around cars, more than once!
I think both of them put pretty good arguments forward for the case of helmets remaining mandatory.
"Elimination" of the hazard is entirely possible, don't ride a bike,
I am going to channel Alex :-)
All pushbikes will need to have a spaceframe rollbar system
such that if you fall, you are encased in a protective structure.
( Similar to what they want for quad bikes )
On top of that, all cyclists must wear clothing that incorporates air bags.
ie https://hovding.com/ is a start
Its only a matter of cost, and the govt doesnt care re that, as long as its the user that pays. ( And if they make the fines > cost, people will use em :-) )
Bikes should have roll bars, side impact protection, seatbelts (stop you going over the handlebars) and airbags for protection from frontal collisions.
Bikes should have roll bars, side impact protection, seatbelts (stop you going over the handlebars) and airbags for protection from frontal collisions.
What I saw when I used to commute in to the city all day was probably 95% of cyclists doing the right thing, 3% that you were just glad they were on a bike not driving a car as it limited the damage they could do to others and 2% that were just death on wheels.
I wish those first two percentages could be applied around here, unfortunately, I'd probably change them to 60% and 37%.
All that said, we are still looking in to an E bike for my wife, just waiting on the local bike shop who was getting a new brand in to store soon so we can test ride a few different ones.
The ones he had in there all had Chinese motors, but he was looking at getting a couple of Trek bikes in (Bosch motors and batteries)
I cant recall the Chinese brand he had in there, but like the Trek it had a crankset mounted motor which is my preference, aside anything else if you come to a really steep hill you can use the gears on the bike and multiply the assist torque available as well as your own effort. The Chinese one I had a really brief ride of and on full assist it was really punchy, a bit of a shock for a first time E rider, but it still makes sense to me to be able to give the motor an easy run at hills.
My gripe about all E bikes I have seen so far, why no regenerative braking (Even on the hub motor ones) so if you have a nice coast downhill you could use generator drag to control your speed and extend the range?
why no regenerative braking (Even on the hub motor ones) so if you have a nice coast downhill you could use generator drag to control your speed and extend the range?
Good Point .... extend Battery Charge and Battery Life.
and that responsibility should be put on to car drivers, anyone but the cyclist themselves! She actually did say that riders should not be responsible for their own safety when it comes to being around cars, more than once!
On a few trips to Taiwan, I noticed an excessive amount of moped/motor scooter use. I asked about this, and it boils down to something similar: A moped rider in Taiwan is completely absolved from all blame (in legislation), in the event of a moped+car accident. Under no circumstances can a moped rider be penalised in such an altercation. Thus leaving the car driver to be "taken for a ride". I guess this is Nirvana for the woman on radio you mentioned.
