penultimeta wrote:
rslifkin wrote:
mad_machine wrote:
Trackmouse wrote:
My city put up mandated back in parking to "protect" the idiots that ride bikes in the street. It lasted 3 months before they reversed it. In That time four cyclists we're smoked (serves them right for riding in the road.) the point? Back in parking is fun. 
I am confused here.. protect people who ride their bikes in the street. I do not know of a single town around here that allows people to ride their bikes on the sidewalk in the first place, so riding on the street is their only option
This. Biking in the street is much safer than sidewalks. Cars are much more predictable than pedestrians... Just requires the cyclists to follow the rules and be responsible.
Yes. Bicycles are supposed to be ridden on the street, not sidewalk. Around here, you'll get a ticket for riding on the sidewalk.
Pet peeve of mine...bicycles riding in the middle of the roadway. Sorry, legal or not, whatever, pisses me off. You want to ride on the shoulder, have at it fella. But get out of the damn lane, you're NOT a car. I've seen too many cyclists, dressed to the nines in their cycling gear, sit in the dead middle of the lane and act like they're a car. Stop right behind another car at a red light, then when it turns green, stay in the lane and pedal their hairless little legs to try to go 30mph. Unless you got legs like the Hulk, get out of the way, skippy.
Back to my cubicle I shall crawl....
In reply to Klayfish:
As someone who bikes, there are a few times where that's safer. The big one is intersections with a right turn lane when the bike is going straight. It's safer to move into the straight lane with the cars right before the intersection, follow it through the intersection and then move over to let the cars pass. Staying to the right leads to cars not expecting you to go straight, so they'll just keep turning right, not allowing you to go safely.
Of course, outside of that situation, if there's enough space for cars to pass safely, cyclists definitely should move over and let the cars past. The only time I tend not to is if I'm on a narrow, windy road or something where there isn't enough room for a car to pass me without putting them at significant risk of a head-on collision from an oncoming car around a blind curve. At that point, it's safer for both of us to just eliminate any doubt, take my half of the road and make it a little more clear that passing isn't a good idea right now.
codrus wrote: As for 6% -- that article just specifies that the rate in the US is below 6%, it doesn't specify how far below.
Ok, to be specific, the study put it at 5.7% That's about 12 million people (there's something like 214 million licensed drivers in the USA). To put that in perspective, that's about the population of Ohio. So yeah, perhaps nobody does it where you are; but that doesn't mean nobody does it. In my informal study of "looking out the window of my office" there are 5/31 cars backed into spaces, about 16%.
Duke
MegaDork
1/17/17 9:57 a.m.
This thread delivers the whole GRM enchilada in one package:
- millenials are coddled weenies
- no they aren't
- manual transmissions are superior
- no they aren't
- cheap simple cars last forever
- inattentive drivers suck
- so does US driver ed
- backing into parking spaces is the only intelligent way
- no it isn't
- bicyclists have full rights to the road
- no they don't
A few more Answer / P71 comments and we can lock this thread, close down the forums, and preserve it forever.
Duke wrote: This thread delivers the whole *GRM* enchilada in one package:
We need a "They need to build a simple RWD manual car, and sell it cheap!"
and a
"Lol just kidding, it doesn't have enough horsepower!"
I had no idea when I started this where it would end up. 
A note on cyclists, why do they all have to dress that way to ride a bike. What happened to shorts and a tee shirt? Is this another area where I am too old to know? 
Stefan
MegaDork
1/17/17 11:28 a.m.
racerdave600 wrote:
I had no idea when I started this where it would end up.
A note on cyclists, why do they all have to dress that way to ride a bike. What happened to shorts and a tee shirt? Is this another area where I am too old to know?
Why do race car drivers all have to dress that way to drive a car? I mean what's wrong with a T-short and jeans? Its just people who are serious about their hobby who are using the proper equipment for their passion.
It actually helps keep you more comfortable while riding as the shorts have padding built into them and the shirts help wick away moisture while the ensemble reduces the chances of chafing on your nipples or crotch. The fact that they are wild colors/branded helps them be seen by drivers, can also indicate they are part of a team or group of riders and flappy clothing adds drag (for those that are that serious about their passion).
Wall-e
MegaDork
1/17/17 11:47 a.m.
In reply to racerdave600:
Fran Lebowitz said:
"You know when George Plimpton died, someone told me, 'He was so eccentric. He used to ride his bike in a suit and tie!' and it drove me crazy. I said, 'What's eccentric is the bicycle. Everyone here used to wear suits and it was lovely! But only children rode bicycles.' The trademark of New York City fashion used to be that we dressed more seriously here. More formally. Now people need special costumes to ride bicycles.
Duke
MegaDork
1/17/17 11:50 a.m.
red_stapler wrote:
Duke wrote: This thread delivers the whole *GRM* enchilada in one package:
We need a "They need to build a simple RWD manual car, and sell it cheap!"
and a
"Lol just kidding, it doesn't have enough horsepower and new cars are for suckers!"
Yeah, and a brown diesel station wagon with a manual reference.
The crazy thing about the bicycle laws is they want you to ride in your bike lane. I find this insane. I have never lived anywhere where there were enough people on the sidewalks that you couldn't ride a bike. Think about it. 200lb man and 50lb bike collide with 200lb man walking. Not a pretty sight, but not bad when compared to same cyclist colliding with 5,000lb SUV at 50mph.
Trackmouse wrote:
The crazy thing about the bicycle laws is they want you to ride in your bike lane. I find this insane. I have never lived anywhere where there were enough people on the sidewalks that you couldn't ride a bike. Think about it. 200lb man and 50lb bike collide with 200lb man walking. Not a pretty sight, but not bad when compared to same cyclist colliding with 5,000lb SUV at 50mph.
A big part of the issue comes to crossings. If you're biking on the sidewalk, every time you need to cross a street, you have to stop, dismount and walk across as a pedestrian (it's illegal to ride through a crosswalk in many places and also unsafe as drivers don't expect something doing 15 mph across a crosswalk).
red_stapler wrote:
Duke wrote: This thread delivers the whole *GRM* enchilada in one package:
We need a "They need to build a simple RWD manual car, and sell it cheap!"
and a
"Lol just kidding, it doesn't have enough horsepower!"
No no no that has way too much horsepower and it's just a matter of time before somebody gets killed.
Wall-e
MegaDork
1/17/17 12:56 p.m.
In reply to Trackmouse:
Having been hit from behind by two bicycles that couldn't be bothered using their bike lanes I'd rather they run into SUVs.
Stefan
MegaDork
1/17/17 12:57 p.m.
Trackmouse wrote:
The crazy thing about the bicycle laws is they want you to ride in your bike lane. I find this insane. I have never lived anywhere where there were enough people on the sidewalks that you couldn't ride a bike. Think about it. 200lb man and 50lb bike collide with 200lb man walking. Not a pretty sight, but not bad when compared to same cyclist colliding with 5,000lb SUV at 50mph.
Yeah, you kinda need to hit someplace that gets busy during business hours or during vacation times. Try someplace like Seaside, Oregon or Downtown Portland or Seattle and you'll quickly realize that biking shouldn't happen on the sidewalks.
Also stopping and starting for each crossing gets old quick on a road bike with clip-in shoes/pedals aside from the dangers presented with driver's not expecting a fast moving object on the sidewalk.
Trackmouse wrote:
The crazy thing about the bicycle laws is they want you to ride in your bike lane. I find this insane. I have never lived anywhere where there were enough people on the sidewalks that you couldn't ride a bike.
What? Any place with that few people around probably has very little traffic in general, so I don't see how cyclists would interfere with traffic.
Most places have a law against riding on the sidewalk.
Many places don't have sidewalks outside of downtown/dense suburban areas.
The rule regarding sidewalks is for pedestrian safety as well. Pedestrians don't have rear-view mirrors to detect the bike coming up behind them at 20+mph.
You should active encourage bikers. Just think how much more traffic free roads would be if everyone were on bikes instead of in cars :)
Gearheadotaku wrote:
I refuse to buy a car with an automatic transmission. (unless it's getting swapped out for a manual) After the driving pleasure argument is out of the way, I see automatics as very expensive part just begging to fail at 150K or so. Manuals last basicly forever and clutches are cheap.
I bought my E38 740i Sport at 150k and it still had the original, unrebuilt automatic. It's now at 168k almost 2 years of daily driving later and still going strong. My last E38 had it's original automatic in it at 143k when I bought it, and still had its original fluid in it. When I got rid of it at 185k, it STILL had it's original fluid in it and was unrebuilt and worked just fine. I know of many automatic cars that are over 200k miles (and a few of the E38s I know of are over 300k now on unrebuilt automatics). My Suburban is a tow rig with an automatic with an unrebuilt trans and it works just fine as well.
This crap about automatics dying at 150k is just that, ignorant crap. Knock it the berkeley off. I'm really getting tired of people that should know better spouting inexperienced BS. CAN they die? Yes, of course, ANY car can have an expensive component go out at any time, from transmissions to engines. But avoiding something because of a slight possibility would keep you out of cars altogether, and that's a non-enthusiast attitude.
My E38 is a daily driver and it's just as fun as the MINI, even though the MINI has a manual and the BMW has only 2 pedals. Anyone who can't have fun in a car like it is a non-enthusiast moron.
Wall-e
MegaDork
1/18/17 11:16 a.m.
In reply to Chris_V:
I've had one auto go bad on me. It was in my first car, an 96 Monte Carlo that I drove everyday like it was stolen. Since then I've gotten at least 200k, and in my Malibu over 400k without problem.
If 4 non-abused automatics go bad on me before 120,000, and a 5 speed last beyond 250,000 on it's original clutch, towing 10,000lbs of trailer and Bobcat 85% of the time makes me distrust slushboxes, and prefer manuals, I must be that non-enthusiast. Your personal experiences are more valid than mine.
It's absolutely true that my personal experiences are more valid than yours, to me. Unless yours are reinforcing my already strongly held position(s). Which you mostly are in this case. Except I think most of the autos I have seen fail are predominantly because they are sold in such great numbers by comparison that those are the only failures you will ever hear about. Still. I'm right and you are wrong. Unless we are both right. Then that's cool.
Manual is my preference... so much so I just recently went to North Carolina to pick up a truck and drive it back 1400+ miles, only one of two that were optioned how I wanted and available for sale within my pricerange in the US apparently... The new ones are no longer available with a manual in that particular configuration.
I also back into parking spaces when it makes most sense (non angled parking) ... because of sports car with long hood and truck logic reason.
I ride a bike sometimes too...BMX 24" cruiser race bike, because exercise reasons mainly. Ride on the road some and follow traffic laws near my house to get to the neighborhood bike/jogging paths. Accelerate quicker than most cars with the bike...
So you did get that Frontier like you wanted? Awesome.
gixxeR
New Reader
1/19/17 2:43 p.m.
Can we agree that a dual clutch trans is an upgrade/improvement over a standard auto?
