Why Cyclists May Avoid "Their" Bike Lanes

My dog isn't too interested, but the dedicated bike lane has some issues

A classic example of how the bike lane, created with much (ok, not much) fanfare when this bridge was resurfaced a few years ago, has become the place for little trashy crap kicked up by the passing cars - just the sort of thing to flat a bike tire. Mighty convenient for all of it to be stored right there in a special lane just for the bikes (and their tires)!


Close-up shows how much crap is in the bike lane

Cyclists Annoying Cyclists, or Drivers? Or Both.

Bicycling magazine has had an increase in ad revenue but it's apparently too much to hope that the magazine would be more pleasing to read (at least for me). Fancy road bikes for "only" $2,xxx dollars, products you don't need from Rapha and the like, and then there's the edgy interview with "Alleycat Racer Lucas Brunelle."

Q: Do you worry that you're making drivers hate cyclists?

A: Mostly it's other riders who get pissed. . . But motorists generally don't have a problem with us. We're not blocking traffic like Critical Mass. We know when we're in the way, which most riders don't.

Well, maybe. Mr. Brunelle is a videographer (according to Wikipedia) who made the movie for which the following is the trailer, which glorifies riding in as many risky ways as possible in an urban environment.



A heroic fellow, no doubt. Of course nothing's perfect - in order to make these videos, he has to ride his bike like this:


Cameras facing fore and aft, all strapped to his head

Anyway, I'm pretty sure he is at least partially wrong about who is mad at whom and why. The cyclists who ride more or less like rational people, rightly in my view, of course are annoyed by someone who is out there making cylists look like idiots - but the motorists are plenty unhappy as well. Since they are in their hermetically sealed cars or other vehicles, this point seems to not to have made its way into Brunelle's conciousness plus he is likely most often leaving them behind in traffic. So that's good (for him) as long as nothing goes wrong - because I don't think anyone will be rushing to help him.

I'm puzzled why Bicycling magazine seems to be suggesting that something about this guy is worthy of admiration.

Schrader Valve Patent - 1892

A patent for a product used widely to this day

The Schrader valve had a patent application in 1892 and the patent was issued in 1893 - and they are used on bicycle and car tires even now. (Racing bikes usually use Presta valves, however.) Every once in a while, looking at these old patents, one sees something like this.

Kickstarter Reflective Sticker = Success

This project, creating stickers for bicycle wheels, succeeded quickly

I find it interesting that this project was successfully funded through Kickstarter reasonably quickly. My observation is that Kickstarter bicycle projects that look for funding for bicycle lighting (which is what this is, more or less) that focus on "fun" are more likely to be funded that ones that focus on safety. This seems all about safety, although the video makes it look modestly fun (I guess) to have your wheels light up as complete circles with reflectors that run around the entire rim. The video is remarkably focused on the guy's technical process - perhaps that has an appeal to a certain Kickstarter audience? I have never seen so little video of the product in action.

It's possible that this was funded easily because of the low price point - compared to many Kickstarter projects you don't have to contribute too much to get the actual items when produced, if that's what you want (and apparently it is what people want).

The idea of having more visibility from the side for bicycles is harmless enough, but as usual with such Kickstarter projects, the video shows the bicycle with the product with no other lighting, front or rear, to emphasize the wonderfulness of this product. In reality, of course, this product does not replace good front and rear lighting for a bicycle. The Kickstarter come-on admits this, stating "Even though Fiks:Reflective Rim Stripes offer a huge increase in side visibility, you should always ride with front and rear lights at night" although it kind of suggests otherwise with the statement that "the special retroreflective material offers a [sic] increase in night visibility of bicycles from any angle."

An obvious question, not addressed, is whether the absence of a high level of side visibility for cyclists contributes to bike accidents - the answer would appear to be no. In urban areas, bike accidents fall into a number of categories - this bike safety page, How to Not Get Hit by Cars-important lessons in Bicycle Safety describes the most common. The right hook, which many cyclists do not much worry about, is the most common and side reflectors would address this not at all. In fact, of the ten listed, the only one where side reflectors might help would be the "left hook" where an oncoming car makes a left turn into a cyclist - and as someone who was involved in a major left hook bike-car accident years ago, the usual scenario involves a motorist waiting at a light for traffic to clear, the slower moving bike is screened from the motorist's view and he/she jackrabbits when the car traffic clear and hits the bike - having reflectors on the side would likely not help much for this.

One can also review statistical analysis done in reports such as this one from Colorado that is not necessarily easy to parse but which does suggest a little more utility for side reflectors (looking at the "broadside accident" category) than the Bike Safety page.

Of course one could simply make do with the simple side bike reflectors provided with many bikes.


A more traditional side-facing wheel reflector - not sexy enough, apparently

Other than my questioning how much this contributes to real improvement for operating a bike at night, I tend to question this statement, "Since the profile of rims vary from model to model, there will be a few sizes available to accommodate most modern rims." Rims of course vary endlessly and I can't imagine how a small operation will make clear which version will fit a particular wheelset so that the stickers fit well to create a good looking round reflective circle with the stickers laying nicely flat. One good idea is to have a black reflective version for black rims - then if it doesn't match up quite right it won't be so noticable.

It's not mentioned, but of course this product can't be used on older style box type rims since the only flat side surface available is the braking surface - no stickers on the braking surface.


Nowhere to put rim stickers on this classic

A "Better" Drive System? 1893 Illustration

This illustration from a bound volume of issues of Cycling Monthly is the colophon at the end of the book, advertising the services of the publisher. Cycling Monthly was a publication containing patent applications related to bicycles published in the 1890s.

The publisher provided this nice line drawing of a bike - note the unusual drive system for the bike with levers as part of the pedal system combined with the usual chain drive.

A Bike in a Horse (Patent, 1892)

A "VeloHorse" patent from 1892

The oddest claim is that this is a "useful improvement" to bicycle design.

My invention relates to certain new and useful improvements in velocipedes. The object of the invention is mainly, to conceal the motive power gearing of a velocipede having its body constracted in imitation of an animal, preferably a horse or pony, and further to provide a simple, cheap and durable carrying frame of the character named, and to the accomplishment of the above the invention consists of certain novel parts and in certain novel combinations of parts as will be fully set forth and claimed . . .

Commuting and Bike Lighting

Alas, Daylight Savings Time is over, and it is the season for commuting home in darkness. While there are certain entertaining challenges to this, mostly I find myself having to resist being super annoyed with an ever-increasing number of fellow bike riders.

My approach is perfect, of course. Well, not really, but I think it is OK.

Part one is a good headlight that doesn't blink. I bought a NiteRider Sol 115 lumen headlight three years ago (almost exactly) for $99. In areas where it is truly dark on moonless, cloudless nights (the clouds can reflect a lot of city light back down, it seems) you can see the details of the trail reasonably well. On the other hand, it isn't so bright that it blinds oncoming cyclists.

Part two is to have a couple of those blinking red things on the back. At the moment I have only one because although I bought three; two are broken. The idea was to have the same bracket on several bikes so I could move them from bike to bike easily, but I wasn't expecting them to fail quite so readily. I do not recommend the "ViewPoint Flashback 5 LED Mini Tail Light" - the circuit boards are too fragile.

Part three is to add a yellow reflective belt for enhanced visibility from the rear. I particularly like this one - "3M Scotchlite (TM) Reflective Material Waist Belt" - Home Depot sells them for 11 dollars. When I ride with a messenger bag, I wrap it around the bag and it helps with visibility from the rear. When I ride a bag with panniers, I make the belt as long as it can be and wear it like a sash, which enhances visibility front and rear.


The NiteRider "Sol" 115 lumen + headlight I use

The "the more the better" approach is getting more popular all the time, thanks I suppose to the falling price of good (as in bright) lighting. For the same $99 you can buy 250 lumens worth of NiteRider bike light at Performance. (For only another 50, you can have 600!) While I have no doubt it is wonderful to light up the trail ahead with all that light, most cyclists are pretty poor at aiming their lights so as to avoid blinding oncoming riders and I don't think the manufacturors have spent enough time focusing the light output particularly well, either.

The "headlight on head" approach is also more popular since you can now bolt 250 lumens to your helmet with a self-contained battery (no cord to a battery in your back pocket etc.). This generally is worse for the oncoming cyclists than 250 lumens bolted to a handlebar. The headlight on helmet makes a lot of sense for bombing through forests at night on a mountain bike, but that isn't what we are talking about here.

The blinky light approach has evolved to include the super-bright blinky option. 100s of lumens, flashing! Right in your face! Well, obviously I find this annoying. Am I the only one? Anyway, I don't see how this would "scale" - let's say instead of the relatively small number of people riding home in the dark on bikes we have now that we had four times as many. It would be miserable if half of them had these lights. It's bad enough now as far as I'm concerned.

The retrograde approach of little or no light has yet to disappear - perhaps they are protesting the people with too much light by having none at all? I don't know, but they're still out there, sometimes in pretty dark circumstances.

A couple of nights ago I was entertained by a fellow who was in this last group meeting up with someone in the "power light on head" category in front of me on the trail. The underpowered fellow had an anemic headlight using a CVS brand C battery or two purchased several years ago, I would guess - completely useless for seeing the way ahead (and not much for "being seen" either). He was charging along in the dark going south under the many bridges on the GW Parkway (Mount Vernon) trail near the 14th Street bridge. Apparently he forgot that the trail takes a dogleg left and an oncoming bike with both 100s of lumens on the handlebars and on the rider's head blinded him - he rode right off the trail into the grass, but surprisingly didn't lose control. Apparently embarrassed, he tried to power back onto the trail but then the wet leaves kicked in and he almost crashed as he spun out.

No doubt to solve this he went to Performance (or the equivalent) and bought 1,000 lumens of help so as to join the "more is better" club.

Oh well.