3 ms·
> This is a common misconception among folks who don't cycle. Cyclists are actually safer on the street. Heard this a thousand times and I don't buy it for a s
by revmoo 9y ago
> This is a common misconception among folks who don't cycle. Cyclists are actually safer on the street.
Heard this a thousand times and I don't buy it for a second. The speed differential between cyclists and pedestrians is an order of magnitude different than the speed differential between cyclists and cars. And the argument about driveways and intersections falls 100% flat on it's face if you use the incredibly basic assumption that cyclists should (a) use crosswalks and (b) shoulder check when crossing driveways.
- u801e 9y ago> The speed differential between cyclists and pedestrians is an order of magnitude different than the speed differential between cyclists and cars. A pedestrian walks at around 3 to 4 mph. A cyclist can ride at 15 to 20 mph. Cars on suburban streets can go 25 to 40 mph. That's about a 12 to 16 mph difference between a pedestrian an a cyclist and a 5 to 25 mph difference between cyclists and cars.
- crispyambulance 9y agoSpeed differential is not the whole story. What is also important is the nature of the collision. A glancing (side-swipe) collision, is very different from a direct collision. Also in right-hooks, the most common collision of all, you have a cyclist colliding with a slowly turning car while typically braking and turning at the same time. But even if we're talking about direct collisions, the cyclist often ends up going over the hood or roof of the car simply because of the height of the bike vs the car. This looks awful but is actually better than hard impact. There are more factors than mass and speed differences.