Cars are WAY more dangerous than bicycles.
wrong.
cars are more dangerous on average (the concept of average should be banned from any statistical analysis) because they travel many many many more kilometers than the average bike and mostly for very long distances at high speed.
But if you notice, I wrote "than slow 4 wheeled cars".
Ami is much safer than a bike, especially for the occupants.
A bullet weights 50 grams.
Would you prefer to be hit by a bike or a bullet?
All the traffic rules had to be created just because how dangerous and deadly cars are.
that's part of the problem.
The bullet is also shaped to cause damages
If the same 50 grams were a disc of few microns of thickness and a diameter of 50 cm, they would be much less dangerous.
A bike is shaped like a battering ram, an Ami has to pass very rigorous safety tests and is shaped to cause the less damage possible on impact, because it's the law.
So a bike going 20mph is more dangerous than an Ami going 25mph.
Because the Ami has a real braking system and it's possible to maneuver it out of the danger zone at the same time. A bike is much harder to handle in emergency situations, because, you know, the aforementioned gyroscope effect does not work as flawlessly as having 4 stable wheels on the ground.
Good news is that when a biker does some stupid shit, they can blame cars.
Except that when a bike hits a pedestrian it usually causes grave damages, ask my cousin, who got a broken hip from a bike riding on the pavement.
> All the traffic rules had to be created just because how dangerous and deadly cars are.
That's like saying that rules around train safety were created after trains were invented.
No sh*t Sherlock!
Bike safety rules existed before, because bikes existed already.
This is absurd. It makes me really doubt if you have any understanding of physics.
I also don't appreciate you editing your earlier posts to pad out your arguments.
You are looking at the problem from the wrong angle.
Weight is not the issue.
How about this: would you prefer to be hit full force in the face with a pillow weighting 1Kg or with a bar of steel weighting the same 1Kg?
Or maybe you would prefer to be hit with a metal ruler weighting less than 100 grams.
Sounds better than 1Kg, doesn't it?
I don't know you, but I would choose the pillow any time.
I might be wrong, but I think that density is discussed in physics too.
The point is not that a bike runs as fast as a bullet, but that a bike is basically a bar of very hard, very dense, very rigid, indeformable stuff (metal and/or composite materials) like a bullet, while a car is made in a way that in case of impact its deformable body absorbs a good chunk of the kinetic energy.
The same way being hit with a piece of metal embedded in a pillow causes less harm than being hit by the naked piece of metal, even though the weight of the pillow + metal bar is higher than the metal bar alone.
TBH a car is a very heavy pillow, running too fast too often, but looking at just 15 years ago cars have gone a very long way towards safety, bikes haven't, they have in fact gained a brand new clean and green engine, becoming much heavier, much faster and much more dangerous.
The bicycle is also more dangerous for the occupant, it's irrelevant what the biker hits, could be a wall, a car, a bus, another person, the person riding the bike will be projected forward at the same speed she was riding, no way to stop it, no safety mechanism.
That's why in the Netherlands are worried about "fewer road fatalities but more serious bike accidents" and are thinking about making it mandatory to wear an helmet when riding a bike.
I'm quite sure the problem is speed.
Specifically they state that
- the number of motorcyclists or moped drivers who died following an accident increased by 24 victims to 101 last year
- While the overall number of road fatalities has reached a seven-year low, number of cyclists seriously injured in accidents continues to rise, data released by Dutch safety organisation SafetyNL reveals that the number of cyclists seriously injured in road accidents has increased by a third over the past 10 years likely as a result of the rise in popularity of the e-bike. (too fast, maybe?)
When we talk about safety, rising numbers are always a net negative, no matter the reason why. Cars are getting safer, bikes are getting less safe over time.
Bikes are not for everybody, I think not everyone should drive a car, but slower, lighter, smaller, mostly made of derformable plastic city cars will have a major impact on urban transportation, while bikes will not.
Let's talk about it in 5 years, I bet I won't be proved wrong.
maybe a video made by someone "addicted to cycling and coffee", living in a very bike friendly Country, will give you some more perspective.
Confirmed. Kinetic energy is E = 1/2 m v^2.
A bullet might have v = 1000 m/s, m = 0.01 kg, E = 5000 J.
A bicycle with rider might have v = 5 m/s, m = 100 kg, E = 1250 J.
Does that mean we should all ride bullets traveling at 20 km/h?
cars are much more comfortable than bikes though.
so ranking things by speed we get
- bullet +3
- car +2
- bicycles +1
ranking them by comfort
- car +3
- bicycle +2
- bullet +1
final ranking
- cars +5
- bullet +4
- bicycle +3
cars win, bikes come last.
and most of those deaths were caused by cars.
Or by the humans driving them?
It's no surprise that the most common vehicle is involved in most of the fatal accidents.
Absolute numbers are not very interesting in this context, the difference in number of vehicles is at least an order of magnitude, it's obvious that cars are top of the list, like adults cause most of the homicides and you won't find many toddlers there.
As a data point, when Rome was in lockdown and cars were banned from the streets, accidents involving bikes and other means of transport like e-scooters, went up 5x and hospitalizations to HR went up 3x for the same kinds of accidents, compared to when cars were allowed to drive around.
Not to mention no need to stand in an overcrowded metal box.
yeah, the subway in Paris is not great, but that's mainly because a lot of people use it.
one particular reason people feel they are fast using bikes is because a few people use them.
it's always underestimated by bike users how terrible bike jams are.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/resizer/2nIUJ2wOHIuaxiM6vvCL...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3052767/this-is-what-rush-hour-l...
If you are the only one crossing a street with your bike, good, if you are in a lane with hundreds other people, not great.
Paris has that problem with the subway, doesn't mean that the subway is slow, it is simply crowded.
Bikes also seem faster because they break every rule in traffic, stopping at the traffic light is mostly about biker's own safety, but skipping traffic lanes it's not permitted by any traffic regulation and yet every biker does it (every two wheeler actually).
This is what the average traffic light stop looks like where there are a lot of bikes or motorbikes.
https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/crowd-motorbikes-stand-red-t...
https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/schema_org/pu...
Even in the presence of bike lanes, everyone tries to be in front, of course they are faster, they are literally cheating.
I would be the fastest in every line, if i could skip it and pass in front of everyone else.
Truth is other people would not like it, but we tolerate it for bikes (and motorbikes) for reasons I still don't fully comprehend.
Paris has one real feature: it's a greatly enjoyable city to walk and a terrible city for bikes (or cars)
So if you are in Paris, walk!
Nobody can steal your feet!
- As bicycling boomed in the French capital during the Covid pandemic, so has the number of stolen bikes.
- “This is the worst place for bikes, The mafia networks are organized to steal them. With everyone currently riding bikes in Paris, it’s become a simple and easy way for thieves to make a lot of money.”
That does not invalidate the point of a mean of transport alternative to big empty cars riding one person each and to bikes, that ride one person each and have no trunk.
Bikes are also more dangerous than small slow 4 wheeled vehicles. Because, you know, bikes don't stand on their own, their braking abilities are very limited due to very thin tyres, they have no stop and turn signals, no rearview mirrors, etc etc
Cars are expensive because of safety devices and regulations, not because a box of metal with an engine could not be built for a couple of thousands euros.
ALSO the subway is much faster than a bike, cost much less and does not interfere with pedestrian walking spaces, I can pay 10 years of public transport with 1,200 euros.
Of course bikers of HN will not like it, but cars are the killer app for private transportation, the ICE engine is an accident, it's their form factor that wins.
Decades of design have been spent on them. while bikes are still the same old two wheelers now with an electric engine, so more like stripped down mopeds, not so great if you ask the majority of people who simply need to move and don't care about the flex.
Please, don't be un parisien.
p.s. I'm a biker and a pedestrian, I drive less than 100km a month, only when I have to and don't own a car since 10 years ago. But Ican't stand the attitude of many bikers that think that if they do it, everybody should or could do it. It's simply wrong.