Bicycle issues in Winnipeg

Now we have gone to far .

"It'll be ok in a month or so when I'm the guy riding on the bike holding up all those folks on the bus."

LOL... heh that pretty much sums it up for everyone thought eh? Its okay as long as its me doing it

Pavolo wrote:Bikes still need to ride to the rules , and I think as long as safely done be on the sidewalk. better there as it is safer then the streets in many circumstances .

STAY OFF THE SIDEWALKS!!!

NO MATTER HOW "SAFE" OR HOW "CAREFUL"...STAY OFF THE SIDEWALKS!!!

IF FOR NO OTHER REASON...THEN IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO RIDE ON THEM!!![size=24]

holly golightly wrote:the lights at Logan. I am travelling north bound on McPhillips and for those of us who travel this stretch know, the curb lane at Logan is right turn only. So for this instance, as the laws of the road state, if I am not turning right I must be in the middle lane to travel straight.

Actually Holly...this isn't true.

Those diamond lanes ALL say "Right Turn only EXCEPT buses & cyclists". So you (as a cyclist) can go straight without any problems (as can buses).

I had a guy whip up that lane when I was driving my car once though. Big puddle there...splashed me and the guy standing on the sidewalk. When we got to the next read light. I pulled up and put my window down. He actually put his down too and I said "WOW...I didn't know they made buses that small." and pointed at the sign over his head about the diamond lanes. Apparently..it's the first he had heard of them!!

He stayed in the centre lane till he got past Inkster and then moved over again.

Get a bike with small wheels and it's legal.

If it's legal for some, why isn't it legal for all then?

Pavolo wrote:Well I agree with the bikers rights why can you not take the quieter side street one over from the busy route and enjoy the ride . Many times the side street one over or the back route is faster and much safer . leave all us idiots on the main drags to kill our selves .

The same reason the cars don't take those roads.

Stop & Go traffic.
The roads don't travel directly to where we want to go.
Crime on those "quieter" streets is higher for pedestrians & cyclists.
Unfamiliarity with the city (ie. haven't been there before...don't wanna try it).

If a marked/designated bike path was made that had no traffic, and/or had no lights...you can bet most cyclists would use them.

the law was meant to be so that children could ride on the sidewalks.. in many areas that is in fact the way the law is written.. based on age. However for whatever reason in our area they decided to go with wheel size instead. some possible reasons.... its hard to tell what age someone is and cops did not want to be pulling over "kids" who just looked older, was a time when the wheel issue was not an issue an Adults would not use the wheel size trick...
CT actually sells fold up bikes that meet the requirement in wheel size straight from the manufacturer. However the wheels are that size not to flout the law but to make it easier to carry the bike once folded up.

JTF wrote:Get a bike with small wheels and it's legal.

If it's legal for some, why isn't it legal for all then?

Speed.

Bikes with smaller wheels can't travel as quickly (laws of physics), as it takes more force to get them moving.

And...logic...MOST people riding bikes are looking to get from point-a to point-b as quickly as possible.

And pride...most adults don't want to be seen riding a "kid's wheel" bike...so the risk is lower since kids riding smaller bikes tend to ride slower.

I will grant, there should be minor exceptions for large-wheeled bikes...such as those towing child carriers, those riding with small children (child seats), those riding among others on smaller bikes (ie. parents riding alongside their children).

AGEsAces wrote:

Pavolo wrote:Well I agree with the bikers rights why can you not take the quieter side street one over from the busy route and enjoy the ride . Many times the side street one over or the back route is faster and much safer . leave all us idiots on the main drags to kill our selves .

The same reason the cars don't take those roads.

Stop & Go traffic.
The roads don't travel directly to where we want to go.
Crime on those "quieter" streets is higher for pedestrians & cyclists.
Unfamiliarity with the city (ie. haven't been there before...don't wanna try it).

If a marked/designated bike path was made that had no traffic, and/or had no lights...you can bet most cyclists would use them.

Thats fine, cyclist don't stop for red lights or stop signs anyways. So its not like they have worry about stop and go traffic!

for the most part there isish... most cops wont pull over people under those conditions Ages.. hell most cops dont bother with the sidewalk riders at all and only do something if it looks like it is causing a problem.. AND even if they do pull them over... chances are that as long as you are not an ass about it, all you will get is a warning.

AGEsAces wrote:

JTF wrote:Get a bike with small wheels and it's legal.

If it's legal for some, why isn't it legal for all then?

Speed.

Bikes with smaller wheels can't travel as quickly (laws of physics), as it takes more force to get them moving.

And...logic...MOST people riding bikes are looking to get from point-a to point-b as quickly as possible.

And pride...most adults don't want to be seen riding a "kid's wheel" bike...so the risk is lower since kids riding smaller bikes tend to ride slower.

I will grant, there should be minor exceptions for large-wheeled bikes...such as those towing child carriers, those riding with small children (child seats), those riding among others on smaller bikes (ie. parents riding alongside their children).

but the have more torque! lol

I would think that children would be more dangerous to pedestrians on sidewalks than older folks...less experience, slower reactions, etc.

I don't see the line of logic being a straight one in this case.

btw, I've seen some pretty wild and spiffy bikes with small wheels nowadays...isn't it all about the gearing anyway?

If I am out for a leisurely ride on a Sunday afternoon then yes I go to the back route or side street, but when I am commuting I will use the designated diamond lanes that were set up by the city for buses and cyclists as they are the fastest to my end location. There are also times when there are no back routes for me to go. If the lanes are there for the cyclists to use, then use them because if they aren't used the city will determine they aren't needed and take them away and then the outcry will be just as bad. The only way motorists are going to get the point that they need to share the roadway with "green" commuters is by seeing the "green" commuters out there every single day. Why should we have to hide?

and ... using the back routes can easily add 15 minutes to a commute...

holly golightly wrote:If I am out for a leisurely ride on a Sunday afternoon then yes I go to the back route or side street, but when I am commuting I will use the designated diamond lanes that were set up by the city for buses and cyclists as they are the fastest to my end location. There are also times when there are no back routes for me to go. If the lanes are there for the cyclists to use, then use them because if they aren't used the city will determine they aren't needed and take them away and then the outcry will be just as bad. The only way motorists are going to get the point that they need to share the roadway with "green" commuters is by seeing the "green" commuters out there every single day. Why should we have to hide?

Green? get a electric car or hydrogen car and I am glad to share the lane with ya!

JTF wrote:I would think that children would be more dangerous to pedestrians on sidewalks than older folks...less experience, slower reactions, etc.

I don't see the line of logic being a straight one in this case.

btw, I've seen some pretty wild and spiffy bikes with small wheels nowadays...isn't it all about the gearing anyway?

No...children are not so dangerous...simply due to size & speed.

Once the kids get past a 16" wheel though...then they become more dangerous...and yes, technically they are still "kids"...being aged 10-??? but they are also old enough to know the rules...and follow them.

I've seen adult bikes with the 12" wheels on them. But I'd hate to have to hop a curb on it...much less forgiving than a 20" wheel.

Most the adult bikes with small wheels are made to either: 1) commute with easy storage (as DeanK mentioned) or 2) look "spiffy" like the low-rider cars & motorcycles...but not go speeding down the streets/sidewalks...so really offer little danger.

IG Guy wrote:Green? get a electric car or hydrogen car and I am glad to share the lane with ya!

Actually...CT has an electric bicycle available now...for about $700.

Still not legal to ride on the sidewalk...but apparently they sold quite a few of them last year when the gas prices spiked so high.

yeah its tempting... real tempting.
they also offer the electric one in the fold up variety.. but its not as fast as the non fold one.

I don't hate all cyclist... its just the ones that dodge in and out of traffic and that cut me off. I love it when I'm in my truck. One time i had a guy in the center lane. I came up to him and tried to cut me off and I didnt slow down and then he started tapping the front of my truck with his hand as if to tell me to move... So I did, I slowly moved over in to the lane beside me making him go into that lane aswell. Its people like that.. that make me dislike all cyclists.

I would suggest that an 8 year old on a bike can cause just as much damage to a pedestrian as a 28 year old.

It has nothing to do with age, but rather speed and weight.

IG Guy wrote:I don't hate all cyclist... its just the ones that dodge in and out of traffic and that cut me off. I love it when I'm in my truck. One time i had a guy in the center lane. I came up to him and tried to cut me off and I didnt slow down and then he started tapping the front of my truck with his hand as if to tell me to move... So I did, I slowly moved over in to the lane beside me making him go into that lane aswell. Its people like that.. that make me dislike all cyclists.

Who had the legal right of way IG?

If he's in front of you in the lane...HE DOES...plain and simple...and no matter how big your truck is (overcompensating?) does not change that.

If I was in front of you in a lane and you tried to push me out with your truck...I would not have tapped my hand on your hood. I would've grabbed the pump off my crossbar and taken out your mirror...possibly a window.

Bicycles on the roadway have the right-of-way the same as any other vehicle out there. DRIVERS who don't accept that...are the ones who should be turning their license in.

For those cyclists blowing red lights, and violating other rules...I agree that they should be ticketed and/or have their bike confiscated as well...but the rules are simple...a bicycle is a VEHICLE...and have the same rules to follow as everyone else.

JTF wrote:I would suggest that an 8 year old on a bike can cause just as much damage to a pedestrian as a 28 year old.

It has nothing to do with age, but rather speed and weight.

That would be one HEAVY 8-year-old...peddling his little legs off.

An 8-year-old would typically be riding a bike with 16" wheels...a 28-year-old one with 18"+ (18" is the cutoff for sidewalk use). Most 16" wheeled bikes are simply a single-speed (maybe a 3-speed) and generally can't get as fast as larger bikes.

On my 21-speed bike...I can usually pass cars on Portage once I get my speed up...I don't think any 8-year-old can do that.

Has Critical Mass in Winnipeg done its job? Is that why we dont hear from them anymore? Or is it because there were more police officers attending the critical mass rides then actual riders?

Well of course a large male can do more damage than a small kid can, but that's not the point.

This law assumes that a small kid cannot do any damage and that's absurd, as is the logical reason for the law.

No...the law is in place to protect the kids.

To keep the 8-year-old from riding out in traffic where he/she hasn't learned the rules...and because they may be too small to see.

If it was reasonable to keep the kid off the sidewalk, the rule would be there...but it's not.

That 28-year-old...whether they have a license or not...can be seen, and can learn the rules.

[quote="AGEsAces"]

IG Guy wrote:

Bicycles on the roadway have the right-of-way the same as any other vehicle out there. DRIVERS who don't accept that...are the ones who should be turning their license in.

For those cyclists blowing red lights, and violating other rules...I agree that they should be ticketed and/or have their bike confiscated as well...but the rules are simple...a bicycle is a VEHICLE...and have the same rules to follow as everyone else.

If a cyclist is switching lanes and dodging in and out of traffic... even another motorist for that matter, I am not gonna give them respect on the road. I am not gonna go out of my way to harass them, but I am not gonna accomidate them either. If you are a douche on the road (again either cyclist or motorist) you will treated as a douche! I just notice that more and more cyclist seem to think that the road way is all their's and they do not need to follow the most basic traffic laws! I wish bicycles had lisince plates so these people could be reported!