An article about the evolution of bicycles and not one word about recumbents.
I saw my first recumbent bike as a child in the 1970s. I didn't know what it was but I did know that it made sense to me. I have been riding a recumbent (as it turns out, not that different then the one I saw over 40 years ago) for over 12 years now; and it's contribution to changing my interaction; no, my relationship with the world around me cannot be overstated by calling it eye-opening.
In my teens I was at competition level cycling. But coming from a small town, and a poor family there was no way I could ever compete. I cycled everywhere, as that was the only way I could get around. I would even ride to nearby towns 40 miles away, just to see if I could; alongside a 2-lane highway.
Cycling was how I explored my world. Computers & books fed my mind, cycling fed my heart and my insatiable wanderlust. But even with all the freedom that a bicycle gives you, that traditional diamond-frame upright bicycle limited that view to 4 feet infront of the bike. The uncomfortable hunch, bent neck, and numb genitals was a labour of love that while freeing me to explore, still left me shackled to a narrow view of the world. Riding a recumbent opened that view into a panoramic vista.
This is now the 3rd age of biking, electrically assisted cycling. The more people that try it, the more people will want to do it. It is fun in a way that awakens the inner glee that only comes from childhood. There will always be 'purists' that believe that the way they suffer is the only "real way to do it".
You don't have to suffer. Embrace the evolution, and enjoy the ride.
That aside I like the idea of recumbents. I've test driven them several times, adjusted to my body, even with the Rohloff speed hub. Whee! Almost effortless 50 kph on flat grounds! Alas. Several things I don't like in reality. They are more heavy. Not good. Riding uphill is strange, depending on the seat you can push into the pedals, but it's not the same like you'd push from upright with your full body weight down into them. But the real deal breaker for me was more limited vision in flowing traffic from down there. Couldn't get used to it, and felt much more unsafe regarding situational awareness.
It's much more comfortable, looking forward, and in a seat meant for comfort, not speed.
That said, it wasn't so easy to find that style of bike given all of the mountain bikes and road bikes.
Still, it was easier than finding a recumbent, which is why my wife has.
She loves her trike, but there are some downsides. Some are specific to a trike (we've found it hard to find a bike shop that will work on it; biking on dirt paths is harder because of its width requirements).
One more generic problem is she often doesn't have the panoramic vista that I have. Most notably when we're biking through a field when the crops are high. All she sees is the plants, which I am usually able to see over.
OTOH, she loves the attention her trike gets. Lot of people want to try it out.
It is harder to do a shoulder-check when changing lanes.
"Abandon the bike and dive to the side" is not an option. But, I don't ride in those kinds of traffic conditions either.
When I was in university I rode in Toronto. That city is so hostile towards cyclists that I had cars TRY to hit me; intentionally try to run me off the road, and worse. I never needed to dive off my bike there either. I wouldn't ride my recumbent there unless I could stick to dedicated and secure lanes.
> “I don’t think a lot of Americans are aware . . . how far behind we are on bicycle and pedestrian safety,” Pete Buttigieg, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, said. Republicans warned, “Democrats are coming for your cars.” No one is coming for your cars.
I'm actually surprised that there isn't more direct action against overly aggressive drivers, "rolling coal", and the like, given how passionate cyclists often are about being cyclists. It's amazing how so many of them seem to take gratuitous threats to life and limb in stride. Perhaps that's survivorship bias, inasmuch as the people who don't have this reaction stop cycling instead (at least on roads).
"Well there's your problem" and NotJustBikes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm29fd-s7tQ had a discussion about [John Forester](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forester_(cyclist)) and that generation of cycling activists in the US. For whatever reason, they were extremely vocal about having cyclists treated the same as cars; they're the people we have to thank for Sharrows, denoting car lanes as also valid bike lanes. Its unfortunate that the kind of rider we need to enable is precisely the kind who doesn't care enough to advocate on their own behalf.
I'm hesitant to blame Forester for the GP's question. Yes, Forester was against bike lanes, but he still championed for equal treatment that would result in the courts actually taking car-bike collisions seriously.
The sad fact is most Americans view biking as a "hobby" and not a viable mode of transportation. So bikes don't belong on the road [0]. The politicians who make the laws, the police who enforce them, the judges who would oversee any trials, and the media who reports on this deaths all suffer from this "windshield perspective". They prioritize cars above all.
It's only recently with a new generation of urban planners are we finally seeing improvements in infrastructure and policy.
That podcast is over two and a half hours long so I didn’t listen to find out exactly what points they make about this, but presumably the strategy was because at the time cyclists not being treated like cars didn’t mean “bike lanes everywhere” but rather “bikes banned on city streets”
It's a good listen; it's been a few months since I heard it at this point, but the long and short of it is that vehicular cycling could be sensible as a compromise step if your starting point is complete, hopeless addiction to the car. Forester, though, thought of it as a set of prescriptions for how cycling should be done, and was influential in advocating to the DOT against dedicated cycling infrastructure.
Cyclists in the US are mostly well aware of how hated we are for even just basically following the law and somehow surviving with motorists who probably shouldn’t be allowed to drive.
You unfairly blame motorists. They are pissed off because bikes don't belong on roads, but politicians make them ride there. They'd be angry if you drove the same speed in a car, too.
Blame the politicians for refusing to fund separate infrastructure so bikes, cars, and pedestrians don't have to share the same piece of asphalt. As a car driver I don't want bikes in the lane with me. And as a pedestrian I don't want them on the sidewalk with me. We know the solution but refuse to implement it.
They do belong on roads. Paved roads were created for bicycles. The law classifies them as road vehicles.
You are required to know the vehicle code in order to qualify for a drivers license. Right of way precedence is one of them. Being "pissed off" because another citizen is exercising their rights within the law isn't an excuse to harm them without repercussions.
You're making an argument to authority, which is not what I was doing. In fact, I was saying I think the authority is wrong. Physics says bikes and cars should not share the same space.
At a certain point, if you want to push it that far, you have to answer the question of why bicycle riders aren't required to have a driver license, carry insurance, register their bikes, and have license plates. Because if you think a bike can't cause a serious accident, you haven't driven the roads too much.
Bikes should have an actual bike lane dedicated to them. Full stop. Putting them on roadways just makes everyone less happy and less safe.
> if you want to push it that far, you have to answer the question of why bicycle riders aren't required to have a driver license, carry insurance, register their bikes, and have license plates.
Because both the scale of destruction and death a cyclist is capable of is nowhere near that of someone driving even a small compact economy car, and the relation between damage caused vs suffered is nowhere as disproportionate?
A driver can plow through a crowd of dozens of people, killing and maiming, and not suffer the slightest injury.
> Because if you think a bike can't cause a serious accident, you haven't driven the roads too much.
Never has a cyclist damaged a building, much less obliterated a storefront or killed people sitting inside said building. Or taken out a traffic light, or telephone pole.
Never has a structural engineer had to evaluate a building or bridge after a cyclist hit it.
Never has a cyclist caused a mass casualty event.
A cyclist causing a death is so unheard of it's literally national news.
I think this depends, and I'd like to see numbers on it.
When I commuted by bike to work, I would go at a gentle pace so that I didn't end up drenched in sweat. Lots of my coworkers also just cruised in and very few of them showered at the office after arriving. I think in cities, bike commuters generally just try to go at a safe speed that isn't too exhausting.
The furthest anyone in my office rode one way was about 10 miles, and that guy hustled and did competitions. He certainly was the outlier.
I base most of my speculations on "not just bikes" videos. Well and that I used to bike to work, and took my time (after I got used to the trip).. It was about 8 miles..
If I'd have had an E-bike, I would have gone about the same speed, but with less sweat.
That's a bit over the top, don't you think? And you make it kinda personal, calling me an asshole for suggesting that we'd all be better off if we built actual bike infrastructure. I'm very courteous to other road users, whether they be driving cars, riding bikes, or walking. I'm not the asshole in this conversation.
No, I do not think the following is over the top- it is hypothetical. You can choose whether or not you want to follow the rules we've settled on and you can choose whether or not you want to behave nicely/kindly:
> If for some reason you think that the physics of your vessel makes you immune to being nice, kind, or otherwise agreeable to our societal constructs, I’m forced to assume you are an asshole.
Most states don't have a minimum speed limit or only have it on limited access highways. There will be a classification for slow moving vehicles with additional stipulations. Most states also have an AFRAP rule for being as far to the right as practicable. The key point is that practicability may require being anywhere in the lane depending on circumstances. If you have the right of way people without the right of way have to yield and drive safely. Driving behind a bicyclist in the lane to avoid debris is no different that driving behind a combine taking up 75% of the entire road.
I can't remember the last time I've witnessed a motorist abusing a bicyclist. I'm sure it happens, because of course there are exceptions. By and large most people seem to share the road just fine.
The one time I thought I might see some actual mayhem was after I waited in a long line of cars on a relatively narrow uphill street that were waiting for an opportunity to safely pass a slow moving bike. It went pretty well. But about halfway up that hill we got stopped at a light, and that bicyclist rode right up the line of cars to the front, and made everyone pass him again. LOL. Nobody actually did anything aggressive, but you could feel the unhappiness there. He was a dick. Most riders are not, just like most motorists are not.
> I can't remember the last time I've witnessed a motorist abusing a bicyclist.
It's easy to not witness something when you're not the subject of it. For example complaints of racism, sexism, etc by the victims in the workplace are often met with claims by white men that they 'rarely see it.'
This is cultural, believe it or not. In Korea, bicycles are expected to be on sidewalks and not sharing the road with cars, and there are often bike paths on pedestrian sidewalks.
To an extent, yes. But just as recreational vehicles are treated a bit more loosely, so are bikes. In large because they do post relatively little risk to others.
Is akin to boating laws. By and large, take a kayak wherever you want. Bigger boats, though?
Sorta. The motorists do need to grow up and realize they are driving a giant machine that has a ton of responsibility with it.
I live in an area with basically no bike lanes. Few street lights. Yet we are fairly well known for being very favorable for cyclists. So it can happen. And make no mistake that there are some folks that hate sharing the road with cyclists. By and large, they act like adults and don't pitch fits.
That works the other way, too. Bicycle riders frequently treat pedestrians just as badly as cars treat them, so I don't see anyone with the high ground here. I don't much care to ride a bike, but I love to walk everywhere, and I have to tell you that getting hit by a bike hurts. I love to see them get their own lane.
Certainly there are bad bikers, too. Probably bad joggers.
To a large extent, it is the same in all cases. The heavier item has more responsibility to pay attention in mixed use areas. The really dangerous vehicles should be separated and put in dedicated lanes.
No I do not. Motorists in this country are quite literally insane, whether I am sharing the road with them in a bicycle or a car. It’s so bad I can barely even cross the street as a pedestrian- even when I’m clearly with my children!
This is very regional, you cannot generalize across a country the size of the United States. In my city motorists stop immediately if you even look like you might want to cross the road. I've even inadvertently caused someone to get a ticket myself because I didn't look before stepping off the curb, and as soon as I did that the crosswalk became mine. I would have just let the car go, he was pretty close, and it would have been unreasonable to force him to jam the brakes and screech to a halt, but by putting my foot in that crosswalk I made it illegal for him not to stop, and the cop 100 feet up the road whipped out and wrote him a ticket for it. Cops around here like to do that.
Agree. I'm a very levelheaded, defensive driver, and I never actually do anything to harm bicyclists, but they make my blood boil every time I get stuck behind them.
Yeah, Critical Mass is the one org I’m aware of that does direct action, and it’s moment has kind of faded, for various reasons.
But yeah, I don’t really take it in stride, I go home and whine about it, but getting spit on, called a faggot, driven off the road and hit by red light runners is just normal for biking in the US (and it doesn’t vary that much regionally either, when I lived in California people yelled slurs more, but maybe drove a little more reasonably than where I live now)
There is not really a natural coalition for this topic. Cycling is kinda seen as a crunchy or vaguely liberal thing, but in local politics the left is pretty strongly against doing anything punitive, for principled reasons. Which ok, no technological enforcement, no stronger license requirements, no more stringent vehicle inspections, I get why, but sorry, funding the bus system does nothing when a large part of the problem is people doing it on purpose. The guy doing 25 over the speed limit in the wrong lane running red lights is doing it for fun, not because his bus is 20 minute headings instead of 15.
>I'm actually surprised that there isn't more direct action against overly aggressive drivers.
What direction action could a cyclist take on a car driver that intentionally buzzed them while passing? I suppose if you happen to catch up to them at a light you could vandalize their car. Make a habit of doing that and you'll wind up the victim of an unfortunate accident that no one will be punished for.
I'm sure there are logistical hurdles to this that aren't occurring to me, but I was basically thinking along the lines of posting GoPro videos with visible license plates to an online community of like-minded folks and "allowing nature to take its course", so to speak.
It's generally been my experience that online communities of cyclists tend to have fairly high moral standards (for example, every single one I'm in has very strict and explicit rules against sexism, racism, homophobia, etc) and vigilantism isn't really even joked about. People will get plenty upset and outraged, but I've never seen people even joke about harming a driver in an incident, even when they caused substantial injury or even death.
Literally all we want is for people to be held legally accountable - in both the criminal and civil sense.
That aside, vigilantism is by and large something that only ingroups can "get away" with. When outgroups do them, things generally end very poorly for them. Politicians, press, police, courts, etc would never abide violence by cyclists. I mean, for chrissakes, cyclists are subject to incessant violence by motorists and nobody bats an eye.
I think maybe the better answer is to give that to the cops. And if you're unhappy with enforcement, elect different politicians. A major reason we have a justice system to begin with is so we don't have vigilantes.
ebikes create a shift in how we should build neighborhoods, if not cities. The quality of life frontier has already shifted out from under the previous equilibrium: living in a place where you can comfortably ebike to amenities is a massive life upgrade.
I have an e-bike (and a standard errands bike). For my small city of 100,000 people, it's great. The no-pedal range is about 15 miles, and it costs pennies to charge. And e-bikes are fun to ride.
When riding it, it's an interesting thought experiment to imagine all the cars on the road also being e-bikes. It would be an amazingly different experience.
All that said, I'm a big fan of the right tool for the job. When I ride to the store, about 2 miles away, I ride my pedal bike. When I go all the way across town 7 miles away, I ride the e-bike (for speed/time reasons). When I need to pick up heavy or bulky items or go farther, I drive the car. I found that in the nice spring, summer, and fall months, I really didn't need the car very often.
I'd considered that route, but my car is paid for and insurance and registration is pretty cheap in my state. Also, my recreation needs would drive the price of using rentals through the roof.
It would have worked better when I lived in a place with good public transportation.
I could not agree more. I’m a few years from the financial independence I need to pursue this fully, but my life dream is to build a large neighborhood / small town exclusively for bikes and pedestrians (minimal car access for deliveries etc worked in following Dutch safety standards).
Steve Jobs said almost the same thing about the Segway. He said it we would design cities around it. How often do you see one in use? The reality is that most people don't like to cycle. They like to drive. They like to be protected from the rain, cold, heat, and other vehicles as they move from place to place. Especially if they have kids, or elderly passengers, or have to move stuff with them, or have to travel any appreciable distance. eBikes are good for out-of-shape people who think they want to start cycling, and not much else.
In 2020 the Netherlands bought more ebikes than pedal bikes for the first time. They also paid on average $2000 for their ebikes compared with $1000 for their pedal bikes. So in terms of dollars (or Euros) the market in the Netherlands is now 66% ebikes.
What people in the Netherlands found was that an ebike would allow them to do errands up to a distance of about 15km whereas with a pedal bike the distance was more like 5km before they would take their car.
My experience is similar. Ebikes in practice are more like a smaller car than they are like a bigger bike, when the roads or bike paths are suitable.
I don’t understand the last sentence about avoiding the inevitable e-bike. The inevitable part I agree with, but the dislike from others has never made sense to me.
Where I live (San Diego), they're big, heavy, mini-motorcycles zooming past others at top speed in narrow bike lanes. Is the hate for that so hard to understand?
Yes, because we have the ability to differentiate reasonable vehicles from unreasonable vehicles regardless of their designation. E-bikes with pedal assist seem ok. E-bikes which are basically just electric dirt bikes don't seem ok (for bike lanes).
I agree logically, but an important point is that pretty much any pedal assist on the market will have a top speed only marginally faster than a biker's actual top speed - compared with the pure e-dirt-bikes which are exceptionally faster than most biker's top speed.
You don't need a shower when you get to work on a regular bike, either. You just need to slow down and budget more time for your commute.
That's it.
Slow down.
I have given this advice to multiple people who were new to bike commuting and every single one looked at me like I was a Martian. A week later they said "You were right!"
I've biked in one hundred degree weather and arrived in barely a light sweat. Yes, I put on hiking shorts which were passable, and the lightest athletic shirt I owned, but I didn't need a shower.
I just budgeted a bunch of extra time that morning, and barely pressed the pedals, whereas usually I'd be pedaling decently hard the entire way, even down hills. Because I was expending virtually no effort - biking is more efficient than walking - and had a ~10mph breeze - I was comfortable.
It helps that I eat a decently varied diet so I don't have horrific BO, use soaps that aren't loaded with shitty artificial scents and chemicals, and wash my clothing with no softener and "free" detergent that lacks any sort of perfume.
My experience using an ebike to commute with children is way nicer than when I was doing it with my unassisted bike. There is only so much slower you can go with an additional 100lbs.
Even so, you really made the argument for ebikes. With the e-bike, you’d get there at a normal pace, carry cargo, wear ordinary clothing, and not need a diet change.
two avid cyclists I know, (off road) say that the ebike has revolutionised "cycling together" for people of different abilities and pedal cadence. She can now keep up with him, for a 60km ride, compared to 20km before. Same amount of physical effort, more companionable, better outcome overall.
As a non-ebike rider I admit my lack of peripheral vision (age) is making the zoom! of an ebike or scooter past me increasingly scary, but the fact is, my declining vision is more of the issue than the ebike is.
I think the author is just being wistful about ageing, which is inevitable.
E-bikes should take over in most cities. All but the most disabled can ride them. Cities like Taipei and Barcelona that already move on scooters would get much cleaner air and have the same low-cost mobility. New York makes no damn sense for cars. Even large spread-out cities are easily traversed on e-bikes. Assholes on e-bikes can be annoying but rarely deadly. Drivers who kill cyclists should be imprisoned until too old to drive again. Cars should all be required to have passive braking that won't come within 6 feet of a cyclist or pedestrian. regarding pedestrians, we could start by recognizing that "jaywalking" isn't a thing.
Bikes are not ride-able for lots of people with disabilities, but trikes reduce that number dramatically, yes. Rehab hospitals often have fleets of recumbent or regular trikes because nearly everyone can use them, and they can be hand-pedaled.
Problem is cops don't care. I find this to be an interesting opportunity: Brutal cops are currently a large liability on municipalities who have to pay out for their misbehavior. Instead, make these cops the bike thief patrol and organize a public cryptocurrency tontine that pays out to the cops when they beat the snot out of a bike thief.
If all you want is exercise, you might as well just go to the gym and ride the elliptical. But most bikers like the experience of seeing the outdoors and covering distances. With pedal assist, you still get exercise but also are able to ride faster and for longer.
Because no one wants to solely exercise. They want to have some fun while doing it. This is like saying that if you only want to exercise when skiing, then you shouldn't take a chair lift - just use your legs!
I read a great article that I can’t find right more showing why e-bikes are a boon for accessibility in national parks. We don’t want to close off the natural world to only those in peak physical shape.
For those who feel there’s a big divergence between mountain bikers and dirt bikers (the second group having motors) the ebike is a frightening combination.
I supposed that bicycles evolve to suit a lot of people's different ideas of whats fun. I'm glad that I was introduced to the joy of less and I salute Sheldon Brown on the road beyond for inspiring so many to take a second look at something simpler.
Are you sure you need a bicycle with gears? The purest, simplest kind of bicycle is the fixed-gear bicycle. Riding a fixed gear will make you a stronger, smoother cyclist...and it is a ton of fun!
Where I live, it would also dramatically limit where you could ride. Different strokes for different folks, I'd hesitate to call one choice objectively better than another.
Pardon me, I meant no disrespect for assistive devices, one of which is the entire bike. My intent was to follow the article in recognition of cycling’s joys and add that not all evolution is an accrual of features.
I inverted Desgrange's quote from the "Are you sure you need a bicycle with gears?" section to point out how the essay contains many assertions which assume the consequence.
Pointing to that page therefore seems likely to cause non-fixie enthusiasts to turn away.
I'm glad that you and many others enjoy fixed-wheeled bicycles. Fixies = good. Gears = good. Cargo bikes = good. Bakfiets = good. More bikes = good.
In the 1980's I drove 3 times coast to coast North America, because it was so bicycle friendly. You never saw any other bicycles, except kids and fatties. So motorists were very careful.
There were no bloody bicycle lanes, so could you do any speed you want in the middle of the road. Compare this to Netherlands and Deutschland were bicycle lanes are narrow, bumpy and with pedestrians with dogs in leash. And the polize and motorist force you to use them no matter what.
I even found out that there are sections of the Interstate you can ride on a bicycle, when there is no other roads, like east of Palm Springs.
Only one problem: People were so unaccustomed to seeing bicycles on the road, that they tried to give me a ride.
And of course in Texas I was threatened with a guns because illegally sleeping on someones precious dirt. In sane countries "illegal threat" is an actual and most severe crime.
I saw my first recumbent bike as a child in the 1970s. I didn't know what it was but I did know that it made sense to me. I have been riding a recumbent (as it turns out, not that different then the one I saw over 40 years ago) for over 12 years now; and it's contribution to changing my interaction; no, my relationship with the world around me cannot be overstated by calling it eye-opening.
In my teens I was at competition level cycling. But coming from a small town, and a poor family there was no way I could ever compete. I cycled everywhere, as that was the only way I could get around. I would even ride to nearby towns 40 miles away, just to see if I could; alongside a 2-lane highway.
Cycling was how I explored my world. Computers & books fed my mind, cycling fed my heart and my insatiable wanderlust. But even with all the freedom that a bicycle gives you, that traditional diamond-frame upright bicycle limited that view to 4 feet infront of the bike. The uncomfortable hunch, bent neck, and numb genitals was a labour of love that while freeing me to explore, still left me shackled to a narrow view of the world. Riding a recumbent opened that view into a panoramic vista.
This is now the 3rd age of biking, electrically assisted cycling. The more people that try it, the more people will want to do it. It is fun in a way that awakens the inner glee that only comes from childhood. There will always be 'purists' that believe that the way they suffer is the only "real way to do it".
You don't have to suffer. Embrace the evolution, and enjoy the ride.