8 ms·

In my European experience roundabouts are better for cars safety, worse for bicycle safety (cars are driven closer to bikes), use up more land, increment gas co

In my European experience roundabouts are better for cars safety, worse for bicycle safety (cars are driven closer to bikes), use up more land, increment gas consumption (almost stop and then go vs just go). The latter point could be debated because it's worse for the cars on the main road, better for the ones on the small ones.

bobthepanda 5y ago
At least in the Dutch roundabouts I’ve seen that people hold up as a standard, bicycles are not supposed to take the lane but instead have a separated path along the perimeter. I think the grandparent comment is also coming from the US, where all-way stop intersections are extremely common.
- Aerroon 5y ago
  Is there a cyclist road all around the roundabout then that easy to get on and off?
  - pmontra 5y ago
    Usually not. Bicycle roads are a pain if the road they run along has many intersections and roundabouts. You loose so much time and you don't have an engine to go back to speed. I usually stay on the road but I'm doing at least 25 km/h. Families or people with low saddles usually do half that speed and bike lanes are good for them.
  - bobthepanda 5y ago
    You would probably be in the protected path separated from the road to begin with. Reference: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/a-modern-amsterdam-roundabout/amp/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/a-modern-amste...
  - orthoxerox 5y ago
    Yes. The Netherlands have standalone bicycle paths as the standard. Not a line on the sidewalk, not a lane on the road, but a completely separate path that is designed to avoid both pedestrians and cars.
wyre 5y ago
Roundabouts would use less gas compared to stop signs or lights. A car is going to use the most fuel when it goes from stopped to moving. A roundabout will reduce the amount of cars that have to come to a complete stop, unlike a stop sign or light where stopping is mandatory.
occz 5y ago
>In my European experience roundabouts are better for cars safety Correct - roundabouts reduce traffic fatalities in intersections quite signficantly. >worse for bicycle safety (cars are driven closer to bikes) I think this probably depends on design - if cyclists have a separated path with a raised crossing, then they are likely safer than intersections. >use up more land, Arguably true. >increment gas consumption (almost stop and then go vs just go). The latter point could be debated because it's worse for the cars on the main road, better for the ones on the small ones. Roundabouts generally replace signalled intersections, and compared to those, roundabouts are probably better (slow down/yield vs full speed/full stop).
traceroute66 5y ago
There is no contest. Roundabouts are better than silly multi-way stops any day of the week. There are hundreds of reasons why. But I'll just name the most obvious one that you've missed. Traffic volume. Multi-way stops just kill traffic throughput. Its a hard fact. You make each vehicle stop. Meanwhile roundabouts can safely and efficiently move staggering amounts of traffic. Want to move more traffic ? Add an extra lane or two. P.S. As for the bicycle saftey... Historically yes, but only to a degree, because I'd argue that if you can't manage to avoid hitting a bicycle on a roundabout then you probably should not be driving because you are most likely also committing lots of other dangerous driving offences elsewhere. Going forward however, it should be stressed that a lot more attention is being paid to cyclist safety, both in terms of further re-enforcing driver awareness (i.e. more prominent in driver training and examination) but also in terms of vehicle design (especially HGVs) and roundabout design. I could also argue that with a multi-way stop, perhaps especially at night or in inclement weather or where HGVs are at play, that your cyclist might not be immune to death or injury.
- bsder 5y ago
  > Meanwhile roundabouts can safely and efficiently move staggering amounts of traffic. I don't find this to be accurate--at least in the US and in my limited experience in the UK. In computer terms, roundabouts don't guarantee progress under contention. Roundabouts seem to work when there is semi-continuous, medium-level amounts of traffic. They are better than stop signs, better than unsensored signals, and probably comparable to sensored traffic signals (which are more expensive). However, once the traffic becomes high, roundabouts are TERRIBLE. Stop signs and controlled intersections at least guarantee some progress while someone may sit at a roundabout entrance almost indefinitely since "give way to traffic on the roundabout" is the normal rule. This is particularly bad when you are entering a roundabout between the most popular inlet and the most popular outlet.
  - timthorn 5y ago
    At very busy roundabouts in the UK, drivers usually yield in turn to traffic joining that in theory they have priority over.
brimble 5y ago
As more roundabouts have appeared in my boring flyover city in the last decade (from ~none to quite a few) I have started wondering what it's doing to my tire balance and suspension.

bobthepanda 5y ago

At least in the Dutch roundabouts I’ve seen that people hold up as a standard, bicycles are not supposed to take the lane but instead have a separated path along the perimeter. I think the grandparent comment is also coming from the US, where all-way stop intersections are extremely common.

Aerroon 5y ago
Is there a cyclist road all around the roundabout then that easy to get on and off?
- pmontra 5y ago
  Usually not. Bicycle roads are a pain if the road they run along has many intersections and roundabouts. You loose so much time and you don't have an engine to go back to speed. I usually stay on the road but I'm doing at least 25 km/h. Families or people with low saddles usually do half that speed and bike lanes are good for them.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  You would probably be in the protected path separated from the road to begin with. Reference: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/a-modern-amsterdam-roundabout/amp/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/a-modern-amste...
- orthoxerox 5y ago
  Yes. The Netherlands have standalone bicycle paths as the standard. Not a line on the sidewalk, not a lane on the road, but a completely separate path that is designed to avoid both pedestrians and cars.

wyre 5y ago

Roundabouts would use less gas compared to stop signs or lights. A car is going to use the most fuel when it goes from stopped to moving. A roundabout will reduce the amount of cars that have to come to a complete stop, unlike a stop sign or light where stopping is mandatory.

occz 5y ago

>In my European experience roundabouts are better for cars safety Correct - roundabouts reduce traffic fatalities in intersections quite signficantly. >worse for bicycle safety (cars are driven closer to bikes) I think this probably depends on design - if cyclists have a separated path with a raised crossing, then they are likely safer than intersections. >use up more land, Arguably true. >increment gas consumption (almost stop and then go vs just go). The latter point could be debated because it's worse for the cars on the main road, better for the ones on the small ones. Roundabouts generally replace signalled intersections, and compared to those, roundabouts are probably better (slow down/yield vs full speed/full stop).

traceroute66 5y ago

There is no contest. Roundabouts are better than silly multi-way stops any day of the week. There are hundreds of reasons why. But I'll just name the most obvious one that you've missed. Traffic volume. Multi-way stops just kill traffic throughput. Its a hard fact. You make each vehicle stop. Meanwhile roundabouts can safely and efficiently move staggering amounts of traffic. Want to move more traffic ? Add an extra lane or two. P.S. As for the bicycle saftey... Historically yes, but only to a degree, because I'd argue that if you can't manage to avoid hitting a bicycle on a roundabout then you probably should not be driving because you are most likely also committing lots of other dangerous driving offences elsewhere. Going forward however, it should be stressed that a lot more attention is being paid to cyclist safety, both in terms of further re-enforcing driver awareness (i.e. more prominent in driver training and examination) but also in terms of vehicle design (especially HGVs) and roundabout design. I could also argue that with a multi-way stop, perhaps especially at night or in inclement weather or where HGVs are at play, that your cyclist might not be immune to death or injury.

bsder 5y ago
> Meanwhile roundabouts can safely and efficiently move staggering amounts of traffic. I don't find this to be accurate--at least in the US and in my limited experience in the UK. In computer terms, roundabouts don't guarantee progress under contention. Roundabouts seem to work when there is semi-continuous, medium-level amounts of traffic. They are better than stop signs, better than unsensored signals, and probably comparable to sensored traffic signals (which are more expensive). However, once the traffic becomes high, roundabouts are TERRIBLE. Stop signs and controlled intersections at least guarantee some progress while someone may sit at a roundabout entrance almost indefinitely since "give way to traffic on the roundabout" is the normal rule. This is particularly bad when you are entering a roundabout between the most popular inlet and the most popular outlet.
- timthorn 5y ago
  At very busy roundabouts in the UK, drivers usually yield in turn to traffic joining that in theory they have priority over.

brimble 5y ago

As more roundabouts have appeared in my boring flyover city in the last decade (from ~none to quite a few) I have started wondering what it's doing to my tire balance and suspension.