Two wheels beats four

[wombatK]

I also increasingly resent the concept of paying tax to build these things, and finding there is not parallel fast cycle infrastructure - all of the major tunnels in Sydney ban cycles, and none of them have anything that actually facilitates a fast journey in parallel on a cycle.

FWIW, the M5 East Tunnel was to have a cycleway alongside Wolli Creek - RTA got to an advanced planning stages. But opposition
from tree-huggers in the Bardwell Park area put a stop to it. Talk about Pyrric Victory - couldn't stop the car tunnel, but dammit,
they were gonna make sure they stopped somethin: the environment friendliest option.

Bourke St cycleway was meant to be the counter measure to the Eastern Distributor/Airport Motorway, and very
nice plans were included in the Local Traffic Plan for the ED - uni-directional bike lanes on each side of Bourks St.
What has now materialised is a far cry from that - and just look at how ballistic the business interests
have gone over that little.

The Lane Cove Tunnel project included provision of a 3m wide cycleway or a 4m wide shared cycleway/ pedestrian
footpath (intended for pedestrian and pedal bicycle use) from Wicks Road North Ryde to Park Road
Naremburn.

Off course, Park Road Naremburn isn't much of a destination - it's the same-old same-old problem of disconnected cycleways.

For the Harbour Tunnel, the parallel fast cycleway is on the Harbour Bridge. Just don't mention about the steps and lack of
connection up to Park Rd Naremburn etc

Cheers

[martinjs]

This so called contest is dodgy as! Ok so we all know that in a big percentage of rush hour trips a bicycle is going to beat in most cases cars and public transport. The question I'd ask (putting aside for a moment the health benefits) is who would win if you included say a 400cc commuter motorcycle or large moped design. Good fuel economy, good travel times and if proper parking take up less space.

Having ridden both motorcycle and cycle in commuting in Melbourne I know the answer.

Martin

[AndrewBurns]

This so called contest is dodgy as! Ok so we all know that in a big percentage of rush hour trips a bicycle is going to beat in most cases cars and public transport. The question I'd ask (putting aside for a moment the health benefits) is who would win if you included say a 400cc commuter motorcycle or large moped design. Good fuel economy, good travel times and if proper parking take up less space.

Having ridden both motorcycle and cycle in commuting in Melbourne I know the answer.

Martin

Speed-wise the motorbike/scooter would probably win. One problem with everyone using scooters or motorbikes instead of cars is that they're actually worse pollution-wise. Yes motorbikes are more fuel efficient and produce less CO2 per km than cars by a long way, unfortunately motorbikes don't have all of the emissions control devices that cars have (for example catalytic converters) which means that per km motorbikes put out hugely more emissions of other greenhouse gasses and pollutants such as nitrous oxide and hydrocarbon emissions when compared to cars. The bicycle on the other hand does not and if it's also faster than driving in peak hour then why not...

[martinjs]

This so called contest is dodgy as! Ok so we all know that in a big percentage of rush hour trips a bicycle is going to beat in most cases cars and public transport. The question I'd ask (putting aside for a moment the health benefits) is who would win if you included say a 400cc commuter motorcycle or large moped design. Good fuel economy, good travel times and if proper parking take up less space.

Having ridden both motorcycle and cycle in commuting in Melbourne I know the answer.

Martin

Speed-wise the motorbike/scooter would probably win. One problem with everyone using scooters or motorbikes instead of cars is that they're actually worse pollution-wise. Yes motorbikes are more fuel efficient and produce less CO2 per km than cars by a long way, unfortunately motorbikes don't have all of the emissions control devices that cars have (for example catalytic converters) which means that per km motorbikes put out hugely more emissions of other greenhouse gasses and pollutants such as nitrous oxide and hydrocarbon emissions when compared to cars. The bicycle on the other hand does not and if it's also faster than driving in peak hour then why not...

Not sure about that, but motorcycles and bicycles are better options than cars. As far as I'm aware motorcycles still need to meet certain emission and sound laws.

Green Page
Motorcycles are Environmentally Friendly

Motorcycles and Scooters

Fuel efficient
Cheap to operate, even large motorcycles only use half of a car’s fuel
Now meet Euro 3 environmental exhaust emission regulations
Lightweight, less mass to get moving or keep moving, road wear negligible.
Efficient commuting, less travel time
Only need a small space to park
Almost completely recyclable
An excellent alternative to a car

http://www.mccofnsw.org.au/a/207.html

Lets be fair here, are we for a better and less congested road system or are we wearing blinkers and only want to see cycling as an option?

Martin

[JV911]

Speed-wise the motorbike/scooter would probably win

only if you're lane-splitting (isn't that illegal?) otherwise you just have to sit in traffic like everyone else

[martinjs]

Speed-wise the motorbike/scooter would probably win

only if you're lane-splitting (isn't that illegal?) otherwise you just have to sit in traffic like everyone else

And of course cyclist never lane split! Not sure of the laws in NSW but when I did my refresher motorcycle course at HART in Melbourne they told us as long as you didn't ride on the white line it was ok. Usually you could go through a lot smaller gaps at legal road speeds as well, not to mention filtering at the lights which of course meant you could leave traffic for dead at take off and it was legal.

Road pushies and motorcycles in Melbourne.

Martin

[Mulger bill]

Pretty sure filtering a moto is fine but lane splitting is not.