Re: [Bikies] Stop vs Yield

[Doug Adler]

I think it reduces anti-bike sentiment because when motorists see bikers going through stop signs they won't think "Damn law breaking bicyclists!!".   While some may resent the "privelege", I find it hard to believe there would be more overall resentment than with seeing bicyclists break the law.  I'd be very interested to see any data either way if you've seen some.  I do the balance stop too, but I always wonder how long I have to balance for most motorists to recognize it as a full stop  Half a second, one, three?.  And physics dictates that stopping does slow you down, whether it bothers you or not.  Takes more energy too: From an article in the current issue of "Access," by Univ. of California/Berkeley physics professor Joel Fajans and Access managing editor Melanie Currie. Both commute by bicycle. "...On a street with a stop sign every 300 feet, calculations predict that the average speed of a 150-pound rider putting out 100 watts of power will diminish by about forty percent. If the bicyclist wants to maintain her average speed of 12.5 mph while still coming to a complete stop at each sign, she has to increase her output power to almost 500 watts. This is well beyond the ability of all but the most fit cyclists..." "Access" is a journal of the University of California Transportation Center at U.C. Berkeley. More info at: http://www.uctc.net/access/access18lighter.pdf   Bear in mind I'm not trying to argue, just discuss.  Because if this audience really doesn't like it, it's probably a bad idea.   Thanks, Doug Richard Frueh wrote: On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Doug Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Stop signs seem to be a recurring theme in any discussion about cars vs. bikes. It seems to me that allowing bicycles to treat stop signs as yields (like some other states do) would go a long way towards reducing anti-bike attitudes. Stop sign running isn't likely to end anytime soon no matter how much it's preached, so why not take away the excuse it gives drivers to be anti-bike? Not to mention making biking more efficient and pleasant. Not sure how it makes motorists be less anti-bike. In states where it is legal, it makes the motorists resentful. other measures do the same thing - in CA, motorocycles could share lanes, which enables them to head up to the stop line at lights, going by cars. The fact that it is legal didn't prevent drivers from popping open doors or flicking lit cigarettes at the riders. I see no personal gain in being able to do this - I start from a stop quickly enough to not lose time, and can usually balance enough to lock both wheels and pause, without having to drop a foot. Rich

_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
Bikies@danenet.org
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies