Hacker News Reader

Comment by ambyra | Hacker News Reader

Try a motorcycle! The laws for lane splitting are the best in the country. You could probably fit 6 motorcycles in the space of one car.

View on HN

Motorcyles have a roughly 30 times higher fatality rate per mile driven compared to cars

And are also not great for air pollution - they burn less gas per mile, but the engines are very dirty.

But they reduce congestion, which equals less total time on the road. Everyone gets better MPGs if there is less stop and go traffic.

Imagine stop and go traffic for a minute. Now imagine it with all those cars replaced by ninjas and dirtbikes and harleys. You can’t even hold a conversation when one of these things goes by. Imagine that being everything that goes by.

Well, you can't really commute on a Ninja or a Hayabusa. Dirtbike will get old fast too.

Maxi/midi scooters like Yamaha Majesty / X-MAX are the commuting vehicle of choice.

This is america though. Rather than a sensible commuting vehicle, the best selling vehicle is the f150. There is a subset of truck owners that will put a nut sack on the hitch and blow a cloud of black diesel exhaust at a car like a prius at a light.

Pollution caused by congestion and manufacturing cars kills everyone. By riding a bike people can put their money where their mouth is regarding views on climate change; you're making a statement that says "I'm putting the environment ahead of my personal safety". Also, if you convert enough people, motorcycle riding becomes safer for everyone. Getting bumped by another 150lb Vespa isn't as nasty as getting hit by a "green" 6000lb tesla truck.

I would rather be safe than bear a cross for the environment

I’m glad we live in a democracy where telling people to endanger themselves for the environment is a nonstarter

Motorcycles are dangerous because of the speed honestly. Especially a lot of these bikes people buy that are just way too much power for anyone to be reasonable with. Like why do you need to strap yourself to a rocket that can go to 60 in less than 2 seconds? I’m sorry you aren’t even strapped in you are holding on for dear life. Theres no where you can do that and claim to be safe and responsible short of being a trained rider on a track.

If 0-60MPH is 2 seconds, then that's an average acceleration of 1.37G over those 2 seconds.

This sounds like something that is very thrilling, enticing, and "Nope!" all at the same time.

Agree, a motorcycle is a complete nonstarter for this reason. It’s just not responsible for anyone with a family.

Would you say the same thing for bicycles, in places without dedicated bicycle lanes?

I’m an avid cyclist who’s been in a few crashes. I will absolutely not bike commute in dangerous parts of the city. So yes, I’d say the same.

you aren't really answering the question.

Yes, absolutely

E-bikes are massively safer because they move slower. Yes you can still be run over by some chud truck but motorbikes are dangerous on their own.

Yes, I would say that biking with a child in certain parts of the US is incredibly irresponsible and neglectful

I would not because you don’t go 60mph with a leather jacket for protection on a bike, you go about a quarter that if you are really pushing between lights.

And honestly as a biker taking the entire lane is so much safer than some bike lanes even. Sure people honk but they arent psychotic they will pass you by merging the lane. If you ride on the shoulder they try and squeeze by and thats where there are issues. You are also more visible to turning traffic from other directions when you take the lane.

I know a large number of people who commute by bike in Melbourne. Every single last one of them has at some point been hit by a car or has suffered serious injuries trying to avoid being hit by a car. Many of them have had this happen multiple times, and these are all cases where they have dedicated bike lanes — they weren't riding with general traffic, which is of course far more dangerous.

Absolutely, but that’s not a problem intrinsic to bicycles like it is to motorcycles, so I don’t think this comparison is meaningful.

I suspect driving a motorbike in sub 40mph areas in London and other major cities is actually safer than pedal cycling.

You’re subject to fewer overtakes and have much better protective equipment if anything bad does happen.

However I’ve not been able to find any data or studies inspecting this directly. There’s some urban data but I think that can include certain motorways and high speed roads.

That sounds about right. Rode a motorcycle in SF traffic for years. About twice a day people would do something that could have killed me. Changing lanes without looking, blowing a stop sign, just generally not paying attention. I had a woman pull up while I was waiting to pull out of a gas station. She somehow thought that I should back up, up hill and let her in. I don’t think she realized that motorcycles don’t have reverse. She got super mad and her boyfriend wanted to fight me. He stormed over with chest puffed. People are dangerously stupid and clueless. About half way over he noticed the armored knuckles on my gloves and realized it probably wouldn’t go well for him.

It is super dangerous. I couldn’t stop though because my commute was 4x as long in a car and 6x-8x as long on public transportation.

This thread is full of people happy that people are wasting so much time in traffic because it will force them to change their desires

Motorcycles are not safe, and certainly not safer than cars. However, you can reduce the extreme fatality rate significantly if you cut out drunk riding and even more so if you have more than six months of experience and wear all the gear all the time. It’s a risky activity that attracts people that don’t make smart decisions. When I got my license, the five others in my class all owned a motorcycle and rode them for a year without a license or training.

It’s a weird activity that’s simultaneously very unsafe due to car drivers but also due to the average rider themselves.

I think that’s limited to the US. In Thailand, kids ride motorcycles from a very young age, and don’t exhibit the crazy driving on that they do here. I think if more families drove motorcycles, it would no longer be considered cool or extreme, and that behavior would disappear. It reminds me of the high drinking age situation in the United States. When people here start drinking, they end up in emergency room, which is not the case in Europe, where they have a much lower drinking age.

Traffic fatalities in Thailand are the highest in SE Asia and 73% of them are on motorcycles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i...

This is not necessarily from extreme behavior, most Thai are on relatively slow scooters.

The average age of first drink in the us is like 16 years old. The law doesn’t stop anyone from drinking it just serves to ruin peoples lives with a criminal record for behavior a huge percent of people engage with.

Even better if you only worry about CO2. /s

How much of these fatalities involve some daredevils?

I became a motorbike in my late 30's and I see I am not taking risks like a lot of riders around me. I am taking ample distance between me and cars, act as if I was invisible and other users would do the most insane thing possible at all times and don't swerve around vehicles. I am even slower descending a mountain pass on my motorbike than I am riding my road bicycle.

I know from my experience driving cars at the same age that it would have been totally stupid to let 20y old me ride a motorbike.

OTOH motorbiking would be much safer with less cars on the road.

I’ve seen way too many clips of bikers to no fault getting wrecked that its just not for me. At least with a human powered bike you have the physics of only going about 15 miles an hour on your side and aren’t going to turn into a crayon.

Indeed, and you're also not going to travel on a high speed, congested road. For one thing, there's usually no point.

Well from these clips, the road doesn’t have to be congested for things to go sideways before reaction time kicks in. And even from my own experiences, I once hit a big board with my car on the freeway. Didn’t see it until there it was. Four flats and a bit of a scare vs the end of my life probably right then if I were on a bike in all likelihood.

I'm a daily bike commuter, though I also own a car.

I certainly can't rule out freak accidents. However, I think that both speed and situational awareness make a difference on a bike. I tend to notice things that come into my field of vision, with plenty of time to react. In fact, I probably steer clear of things like debris and potholes on virtually every ride.

The reason why I mention congestion is threefold. First, getting hit by a car is by far the predominant hazard. I consider avoiding cars to be the #1 safety measure for cycling. If you take away that factor, then I doubt that cycling is more dangerous than driving. Second, beyond a certain level of congestion, drivers are not fully in control of their cars, but are controlled by the pace of traffic. Third, dodging traffic is the primary distraction that would make a cyclist fail to notice something like debris on the road.

I'm lucky to live in a town that has a network of bike paths, bike lanes in the more dense areas, and ample routes along sleepy residential streets. I encounter very few cars, and don't have to mix it up with heavy car traffic. Granted, living in a mid-sized town doesn't solve the car problem for humanity.

Edit: Re-reading our posts, I realized that I should clarify. "Bike" is a pedal bike in my case.

Yeah I was referring to motorcycles. I think bike danger is overstated honestly. Most speeds you go you end up with scrapes and bruises laying the bike over. Sure there are freak accidents where you land wrong on your neck, but that could happen in your kitchen or shower or going down the stairs as well.

You have probably hit that big board because you are driving an extension of your living room and are thus totally incentivised by dangers and not following legal and recommended security distance between you and the vehicle in front of you.

Also dangers are easier to avoid on a bike provided you are going at reasonnable speed because your own vehicle is smaller. The biggest danger is target fixation but that is something riders need to train against.

Obviously training both of riders and drivers vary a lot between countries and that is where lie most of the problem as well as considering that driving/riding is a right and not a privilege accorded to people serious enough to operate vehicles safely. I find it completely insane that some countries like the USA allows kids to drive with barely any training. IMHO before 24-25 year old, there are very few adults that are mature enough to drive safely. I also fThat is probably ind insane that a country allow people to buy, rent and drive a vehicle after more than 2 DUI convictions. That should lead to a lifetime ban.

You can’t imagine that someone driving safely wouldn’t hit a board? On a highway you are rarely afforded the luxury of having a full stopping distance anyway. I think the book says for every 10mph you go you should factor in 10 seconds. So 60mph would be a 6 second stopping distance, so I would need to see a car pass something and count to six before I pass that. If I had that sort of spacing on my commute, people would immediately merge into it. Thats just the reality. Then I am left with what three seconds to recognize a board emerging from the rear tires in front of me and somehow also check to see if its clear and also merge out of the way of this board. Its just not happening you are hitting the board almost as soon as you recognize its there.

Indeed, I speculated that this is what happened based on your comment. It's also what I mean when I say that drivers are not fully in control of their cars in congested traffic, and why a cyclist would avoid those situations -- to avoid being that board.

So what's the problem? Solves the problem, right? (Yes, I drive motorcycles)

As a passenger in a car, watching motorcyclists zip down at high speed on the lane markers between cars in dense, stop-and-go traffic was incredibly unnerving. I can't see how that's safe.

Everyone sitting in line day in day out, breathing each other's fumes is not healthy either: https://dceg.cancer.gov/news-events/news/2023/ultrafine-poll... The motorcycles also aren't contributing to traffic congestion. The auto industry wants to sell big cars with high profit margins, they don't care about your lung cancer when you're 60 years old.

It’s not, because they aren’t following the law.

If you follow the lane splitting laws as written, it is actually pretty safe.

Thats what they say but at the same time seems like there is really hardly any room at all oftentimes. I don’t know how these guys have the nerve with the big chopper handlebars sometimes. Seems like they are like an inch from either car on some of these splits and all it would take is a driver to wiggle the wheel a little and they are launched over the handlebars. Doesn’t seem like anyone looks back for bikes coming up.

you don't have to zip down at high speed on the lane markers when you ride a motorcycle.

It is like the stupid people who say all cyclist burn the lights. They are just so jealous they only see the one that do and completely ignore those that stop at the lights.

Nope and this does nothing to the problem of not having public transit.

Where should I put my toddler?

Depends where you live. In Colorado there’s no minimum age to be a motorcycle passenger. In California, the minimum age is eight, So you would need to find some alternate transportation.

The question you are replying to was rhetorical

The #1 killer of people I know up to this point in my life is motorcycle accidents. I would never ride one and would do all I can to prevent my kids from doing so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com