[EasyRider]

@mstone 194087 wrote:

The problem is, that isn’t what the sign communicates. It says that you’re perfectly ok going 15MPH (+ the 10MPH courtesy window) which is flat out dangerous on a crowded trail. If the intent is to encourage safe trail use, then the implementation should align with that goal–not slap on a speed limit so that bikes have to “follow the same rules as cars” even though the concerns and vehicles are more different than the same. (A speed limit sign for a car is greatly restrictive–a 20MPH bike speed limit would be like a 120MPH car speed limit, and how many of those do you see in the area?) I would love to see ideas for legislating safe behavior (rather than arbitrary and capricous restrictions that don’t really enhance safety) but it seems that it’s really hard to do so (and the concern dasgeh raised about selective/harassing enforcement is huge when it comes to things that boil down to using good judgment).

Yes, I see your point. I can see that speed limits are most practical on routes that simply bar certain types of transportation (e.g., no pedestrians walking down Wilson Blvd, no bicycles on the highway, no cars on the Mt Vernon Trail). If the route is truly multi-use, speed limits would have to be set very low. Like 10mph on busy sections. Which I think most here would be unwilling to stomach. As you point out, if the limit is set at a higher speed that is more accommodating of bikes and e-vehicles, it could endanger slower users if read without context or judgment.

Whether there are signs or not, as ebikes become more common, the average speed on the trails is going to go up; I think we can all admit that its a lot more common to be passed by an ebike that to pass one. Perhaps pedestrians and slower cyclists will acclimate and feel comfortable sharing the path with faster vehicles than they do now. Maybe where it’s practical pedestrians will simply tread desire paths alongside the trail to stay out of harms way, or the path can be widened in some spots to separate modes. Essentially, bike paths for pedestrians. And some people will probably just stop using the MUPs because they don’t feel safe on it, the way some people won’t bike without separate infrastructure.

[EasyRider]

@mstone 194063 wrote:

We’ve already been repeatedly assured that ebikes can’t speed because classes. So a 20MPH speed limit does absolutely nothing. (Logically it can’t be enforced until someone’s doing 30, which will come up so seldom that there’s zero chance that the police will commit resources to it.) If there’s a serious desire to implement a rule to improve safety, then it needs to mandate taking trail conditions into account (a speed of 15MPH is way too fast for a crowded trail, and a speed of 25MPH doesn’t affect anyone if the trail is empty–I’m much more concerned by things like passing dangerously than by absolute speed). But mandating safe behavior is hard, and slapping a useless speed limit sign on the trail is easy, so we get the useless one.

I see you point, but I guess I’d say there are rules, and then there are norms. To me, the value in a speed limit sign is the norm that it communicates — that it isn’t OK to go as fast as you please without concern for more vulnerable trail users. There’s an implied threat of enforcement that is yes, largely toothless. I’m open to alternative signage that communicates the need for courteous behavior in a simple, brief way. We could just put up more “Hey, be a PAL” signs and hope that works.

[EasyRider]

Apologies if this has been stated already, but “remove the point cap” refers to eliminating the limit on the number of “team points” an individual rider could contribute in a week, is that right? So all points under the proposed scoring system would count towards “team points”?

If so, I’m not opposed, and it would make things more interesting for high-mileage riders and “star players”. Under last year’s system, my motivation was to maximize my team points contribution. Along with the sleaze rides, it generally meant I rode 7 days a week instead of 5 and probably an extra 30-40 miles per week. I’d miss having the explicit target/cap for team points. On the other hand, if the new system made the leaderboard rankings was more dynamic, that would also motivate me to ride more than my usual commute.

All of which is to say I like where this is going, and thanks to the organizers.

[EasyRider]

@Steve O 194023 wrote:

I’m cool with this as long as they give the 11-mph buffer they give for cars.

Don’t forget the surprise Sunday morning buffer deactivations. Those will cost ya

[EasyRider]

@mstone 194016 wrote:

Speed limits on trails are stupid except to satisfy haters who want bikes to not be “special” and have rules even if the rules are stupid. There is absolutely no reason to ever post a trail speed limit.

I don’t agree. I’m not a hater. I’ve been riding here for 20 years. I think ebikes make speed limits a good idea. if we’re going to allow vehicles capable of going nearly 30mph on MUPs, vehicles which specifically appeal to and are often operated by individuals lacking experience, speed limits are helpful. Sorry if that offends; with power comes responsibility. A unenforced speed limit of 20mph on a MUPs would affect probably 2% of pedal bike riders, half of them going downhill. Basically, I think a 20mph speed limit would gesture at keeping ebikes from running amok and have almost no effect on everybody else.

[EasyRider]

@chris_s 194003 wrote:

Hey all – on November 16th the County Board will vote on the “micromobility ordinance”. Most folks think of this as the “scooter ordinance” but it’s going to have major impacts on bikes and e-bikes as well.

For instance: legalizes e-bikes on trails. Sets a speed limit for e-bikes on trails. Gives the County Manager the ability to ban bikes from certain sidewalks without defining any clear public process for making that decision. Sets a speed limit for e-bikes on sidewalks (probably at 6mph). Bans e-bikes on sidewalks on blocks that have a protected bike lane.

Read more here and let the County Board know what you think.

Chris, like you, I’m just baffled by the need for different speed limits for various modes (scooter, e-bike, pedal bike) and settings (trail, street). What do you think is their reasoning for a such a complicated approach?

Why not just set a universal speed limit of 15-20mph on MUPs and bike lanes, and if you’re in the street, you can go as fast as the posted speed limit (usually 25-30mph). Simple speed limits would be easily understood by users and anticipate future devices (I’m hoping electric caterpillar-tracked snowshoes drop soon). Speed limits would also help keep MUPs from turning into e-bike highways dominated by Commute-Slayer 5000 Turbos, without burdening electric wheelbarrow drivers like yourself

[EasyRider]

@LhasaCM 193766 wrote:

I also have the Cycliq Fly12 and Fly 6 cameras, and like them – but cannot recommend them at this time, especially for someone looking for a “not-too expensive” camera. In addition to price, quality control/reliability is a bit of an issue. From the previous generation: my Fly 6 was rock solid, but it took me three tries to find a Fly 12 that lasted more than a couple of months. For the current generation (launched January 2018): the Fly 12 CE is still running strong but I’m on my fourth Fly 6. The first one apparently wasn’t quite on the mount correctly so flew off when I hit a pothole, cracking the lens. The second one fell two feet off of a table, and then refused to turn on. Neither were covered under warranty though they did give me a 40% “crash discount” to buy a replacement. The third one just randomly stopped mid-ride one time; I could still connect it to a computer as a card reader, but it wouldn’t charge/record. That was replaced under warranty – but only after 3 months of painfully slow support responses.

It’s that lack of support combined with the QC/reliability issues that gives me pause in suggesting that others make a similar purchase now. MSRP is $279 for the Fly12 and $179 for the Fly6. While they frequently have various sales/offers available, at that price point, I think it’s reasonable to expect a product to just work (or be well supported if it doesn’t).

Thanks for the advice everyone. I’m a bike person so I’m willing to drop $300 on a weatherproof cam that takes looping footage, but only if it’s dependable, since I would be using it every day. I’ve used a cheapo one before but it was something of a novelty item, it was obtrusive, and the battery would give out almost immediately in cold weather. It seems odd to me that there isn’t a durable no frills $100 camera, but I guess there just isn’t a big enough market for it yet. I’ll look again in a year.

[EasyRider]

@ursus 193687 wrote:

Can someone mention at least one light with a cutoff pattern? I am unfamiliar with this.

Yes, Peter White Cycles has them, and other online retailers do too. I use a B&M Ixon IQ, which is battery powered, and doesn’t require a generator hub. It uses AA rechargeables, but you don’t need to remove them to charge, you just plug the entire unit into the wall with an AC adapter. If you want to do a long night ride, you can just carry spare batteries with you. You can also buy additional mounts so you can use the light on more than one bike. Mounts for handelbars/rack nubs are available. It costs more than a Cygolite, and it’s physically larger. But I think it’s worth $100, if you’re going to use it every night from October through March, year after year. I’ve used mine for the last two winters, no problem. I do carry a cheap Cygolite as backup, but I’ve never needed it.

[EasyRider]

@ginacico 193677 wrote:

Ditto. Next time you’re riding on a narrow trail, reach down and grab your head tube badge and see how much fun that is.

I went and got a dynamo-powered light with a sophisticated beam like that of an automotive headlight. Then I adjusted it so it points exactly where it’s supposed to, not dazzling anyone but allowing me to see clearly when riding in the dark (the whole point of a light). It doesn’t strobe, I turn it on only when needed for safety, and I’ve never gotten a complaint.

So, nope.

Last night I was driving my way out of backwoods Manassas on a twisty, hilly, 2-lane road with zero street lights and no shoulders. There were lots of cars coming the other direction (half of which forgot to dim their high beams). Did I politely turn off my headlights for every one of them? No. Because passing each other in pitch darkness seems stupid.

Not putting myself at risk for some really questionable etiquette.

Bike headlamps with cutoff patterns are just great. I really encourage everyone to give one a try this winter. Not only are they better for fellow trail riders, they are better for their owners as well. The beam pattern more evenly lights the road ahead, unlike the overpowered flashlights that have become ubiquitous.

[EasyRider]

@Steve O 193614 wrote:

https://reasonstobecheerful.world/a-republican-suburb-designed-for-cyclists/

[h=1]A Republican Suburb Designed for Cyclists[/h][FONT=&quot]A deep-red town in Indiana has a bicycling network that would make Boulder blush. Their secret? Forget the politics and treat bikes more like cars.
[/FONT]

Carmel is also famous for having over 100 traffic roundabouts. The longtime mayor there sounds like a force of nature.

[EasyRider]

@Judd 193403 wrote:

Was that you with the bike with the small front wheel and rack?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, that was me. It’s a Crust Clydesdale fork on a old budget Trek “mountain” bike. Unloaded, the handling is no different than a normal bike, just a little harsh because the fork is so stout. The ride softens up once you get about 20 pounds or two bags of groceries on it. With 7+ gallons of water, it was hard to get started, and called for restrained steering input. I walked it up hills and got off and walked when the path was crowded, because I just couldn’t react very fast. For loads under 50 pounds, it’s great fun and has a smaller footprint than rear trailer. It’s currently my daily commuter.

[EasyRider]

Yes, once Team Sandals is properly classified as Team, and the Family E-Sponders are broken out from the non-e-assist Family Responders, Team 505 moves up from 5th to 3rd in our category I didn’t carry 66 pounds of water over my front wheel for 5th place!

[EasyRider]

Pics: https://dominioncyclingphotography.zenfolio.com/f761474438
Results: https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2019/09/2019-DRT-score-sheet.pdf

I had a great time. Special thanks to all the volunteers, who were very, very kind to my super-eager 6 year old.

[EasyRider]

It’d be nice if it was harder to pick, but that still took effort and skill. Not a 5-second Bic pen job, a 4 minute, burglarious tools job.

[EasyRider]

@Hancockbs 189117 wrote:

The 100 mile cap actually made me ride farther than I would have otherwise. I expected to get 50-75 miles per week, but having the cap encouraged me to meet it every week, which I did. So, yes, I as one member of Team 7, did ride farther than anticipated.

My experience was similar. I can’t recall if the registration question was how many miles do you ride a week, or how many miles will you ride? I want to think it was the former, and I said something like 80, which was truthful.

For team assignments, either question (do/will) might be too blunt an instrument. Perhaps a couple more simple yes/no questions could be used help characterize riders (high-mileage commuters; weekend centurions, etc) so that they could be more evenly distributed across teams. And past BAFS data could also be used. I also like the idea of hidden special days (like a Daily Double from Jeopardy).

[Author]

Posts