Quite a lot:
Is it worth it? I guess it depends on the use you make of you bike…
They grew after BMW bought the company, so most of that growth was after that, specifically 3rd Gen.
The point of the post is not much that cars grew, they have always been doing so.
The main point is that the growth in dimension happen, but manufacturers don’t want to highlight it, and in the ad the old and the new Minis look like they are roughly the same size.
this is very interesting, but it is relatade to a specific USA place and to a specific change (4 lanes to 3 lanes+cycle paths). unfortunately conclusions can’t be generalized, in this case.
except for the “cars are great” part.
Yeah… Excluding moron drivers you have:
I’m probably still forgetting something important…
I was genuinely surprised, because what you wrote was really different from what I experienced. But my experience i Munich is objectively limited. I somehow hoped that Germany, and Munich (along with other European cities) could be used as a model of how to do things right.
What drives me mad here is the absolute inaction
Exactly, and all this stuff about counting the cars is to try to move something. I have not much hope honestly, but excluding violence and vandalism, I think this is as much as someone can do
The city even responds to requests with the risk of damage to cars (!!) instead of considering humans.
This is completely crazy. In Milan they justify bad parking by saying things like “it has always been like this” or “yeah, but you can go around it” etc. FFS, do your job!!
Yes burning them all would have been much more satisfying.
But we needed to know how many matches we needed to buy 😈
I don’t know… I have been there twice in the last 4 years, and I went in many places (touristy and not, I was there for work, Just as examples: Truderinger Str. or Marsstraße are not so central) and never saw anything like that. For sure I didn’t see cars parked on the bus stop or on the zebra crossings.
But anyway, with a similar car density (but people density is almost double in Milan) I am not be surprised that the situation is comparable in both places.
So, well, you should organize and count them too! I think that such a status is unacceptable independently of where it happens 🙂
I have been in Munich… Not remotely comparable.
Did you see the pictures in the article below? They are not an exception. Cars are parked like this in all Milan, on all the streets.
What surprises me the most is maintenance cost of thosr urban highways, when compared to every other alternative project!
I don’t see any difference:
you get the only thing I openly say it is an opinion (based on my experience anyway) to dismiss all the other points like an opinion where instead I offered some observed facts
What you reported are anecdotal facts. Things you observed. Objective facts and data are what we need to improve. The fact that you see people not using the bike lane is not relevant.
Did you check these?
Practice:
The 3 points you mention as practice are not practice at all. They are theory, they are laws that are usually not respected.
Obviously if you reduce speed you reduce the possibillity of a fatality. Following this way of thinking, if you reduce the speed to 10 Km/h you reduce even more the crashes and fatalities. Even better, remove the cars, 0 crashes (not sure about 0 fatalities btw).
30 km/h is only the maximum speed allowed. And it is a compromise that wold allow for a huge reduction of crash damage, while not reducing travel time by much. Because the average speed in cities is, let’s remember that, more in the 10-20 km/h range. So, speeding between red lights does not save anyone’s time, just increase the danger.
Don’t make me look up for articles about that (please, do it yourself, there is plenty), but the increase of travel times when maximum allowed speed is decreased from 50 to 30 is very low (much, much lower than 50/30 ratio), and the benefits in terms of danger is so high, that it is totally worth it. So the argument “let’s make it 10 km/h” doesn’t make any sense
we are taking for granted that it is always the car the guilty side
it’s not a question of who is guilty, it is a question of where the danger comes from. And it doesn’t come from pedestrians or cyclicsts (see my previous post), it comes from cars. Stop signs exist because of cars. Traffic light exist because of cars. Car insurance exist because of cars.
So my point, in the end, is that concentrating only on the speed, again in my opinion, we are just looking at the most easily factor to “punish”
No, nobody wants to punish. It is because of facts (not anecdotes). It is because it works in theory and in practice, as I fully documented in my previous post. And I was only taking into consideration the 50 to 30 km/h reduction. It works in all the cases, even highways https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598360/
The problem with your comment is that you have a lot of opinions, and they all may sound reasonable, but the facts and data give away a different story, and it is hard and takes time to demonstrate that most of what you state is, to say it kindly , false
So I’ll take only one of your statements and answer that, and won’t waste more time for the rest.
Speed itself is a factor, not the main one, which in my opinion is inattentiveness.
Theory:
So, based on the data above, how can speed not be a main factor, especially if we are talking about road fatalities?
So to support theory with fact, there is ton of data on cities that lowered speed limit from 50 to 30 km/h. And data consistently shows reduction in crashes, injuries and fatalities.
I’m not wasting time describing each of the articles below:
Well it is a permanent April fools provocation.
And then, if it works, it works!
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2024/04/01/pedestrian-safety-brick-april-fools/
Please share it, then, if you really do!
To cross the roads safely when needed 🙂
Relevant video in which a guy stands still at the side of a road next to a pond:
Hands free: he gets a lot of splashes by uncaring passing drivers
Holding a brick in his hand: drivers slow down and avoid the pond.
It’s really funny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQpaEN_TN_U
As usual drivers care more about their car than other people’s wellbeing.
BTW: any shop that sells inflatable bricks?
This ☝
Cars in cities are already dangerous and terribly inefficient. Flying cars would be worse in every sense.
Relavant Adam something video about it for a sum-up
Maybe the author of this comment would think twice about threatening someone if he/she was banned from this community for some time
That said, Plug in hybrids are still ‘better’ than petrol or diesil cars for overall emissions. The title makes out they’re worse. Which is untrue.
A title is a title. I added a clarification at the top post. I have mo intention to deceive anyone
Just guessing: trying to minimize vortexes and turbulences.