leimkuhl@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU (11/21/85)
I have always ridden on larger county roads and smaller state highways, thinking that it was better to live with the traffic than to dodge pot-holes and dogs. I saw a statistic once that said that accidents in which a bicycle is struck from behind by a car are extrememly rare, and I had patterned my riding accordingly. Now I think that statistic may have been wrong. Within a span of about a month, both myself and one of my housemates, in separate incidents, came very close to being hit from behind. In my case, I was not even aware that he was behind me until he had entered a skid to try to avoid hitting me. His rear bumper swept by in a great arc, coming within perhaps a half foot of my left crank before he fishtailed away down the road. From now on, I'll take my chances with dogs and cruddy pavement. After all, dogs are good sprint training and rims are cheap. -Ben Leimkuhler
bill@utastro.UUCP (William H. Jefferys) (11/23/85)
> > > > I have always ridden on larger county roads and smaller state highways, > thinking that it was better to live with the traffic than to dodge pot-holes > and dogs. I saw a statistic once that said that accidents in which > a bicycle is struck from behind by a car are extrememly rare, and I had > patterned my riding accordingly. > It depends on where you are and what the conditions are. John Forester gives the following table [*Effective Cycling*, MIT Press 1984, p. 160]: Urban Rural _________________________________ Turning and Crossing 89% 60% Motorist Overtaking 7% 30% Other Parallel Path 4% 10% Out in the country, therefore, the kind of accident you described is substantially more frequent than in the city, although they are still a minority of all accidents. So I would say that your experience and that of your friends are not in contradiction to what the statistics say. 30% is a *substantial* minority!