I just got a good tip-off from Peter Chen about a commuter challenge reported in the Herald Sun today:
Melbourne's gridlocked peak-hour traffic has slumped to roughly the same speed as a 60-year-old on a penny farthing, our experiment has found.
The Herald Sun trial also revealed chronic congestion makes it quicker to pedal a pushbike from suburbs to the CBD along gravel tracks than drive a four-cylinder sedan on major city roads.
Hey, they didn't really need to test this – it's hardly a revelation to anyone who rides the Gardiners Creek-Yarra Trail route in the morning.
The time tests pitted a bicycle and a penny farthing against a car with a top speed of 180km/h over a 17km course from Chadstone to Federation Square during morning peak.
Interesting comment there about the top speed of the car – in what way is that relevant? Except, perhaps, to highlight how ludicrously overpowered the average family car is?
And I've got to say that the penny-farthing was a nice touch – I wonder if the rider had to stop and get off to go under the Great Valley Road underpass?
The cyclist beat the motorist to the city by 11 minutes.
And the driver reached Federation Square only five minutes before the arrival of the 60-year-old on his penny farthing.
Once time spent searching for a park was added, the car was slower than both the bike and the antique contraption popularised in the 1880s.
The trip took 45 minutes by car, 50 by penny farthing and 34 by bike.
No doubt the cyclists arrived refreshed and alert; the driver grumpy and aggravated.
Doctor, I'm seeing [red] spots!
Apparently this report was triggered by the RACV's red spot survey in which, according to the little paper, "more than 4000 angry drivers have vented their anger to an inquiry by the state's peak motoring body into the worst gridlock hot spots".
RACV chief engineer for traffic and roads Peter Daly said member feedback in the "red spot" survey showed growing anger over gridlock around the CBD.
"It appears the density and sheer level is now enough that it's making people see red. People are saying this is getting beyond a joke," he said.
And on that point I'll return to the remarks made by woowoowoo on this topic:
Lets face it, if you are sitting in a traffic jam, steaming up about the time you're wasting, you are part of the problem!
Or in economist-speak, as Harry Clarke puts it:
People who travel on roads impose congestion costs on others.
Dodgy
But to return to the "experiment" itself, I reckon their methodology is a bit dodgy when it allows this kind of outcome:
Ben Douglas said his bicycle chain snapped after two kilometres and he had to bow out of the challenge. Yesterday he rode the whole course in 34 minutes.
Would we accept the car doing a second run on a Sunday if it had had a flat tyre during the main event? Of course not.
But it serves to highlight something that needs to be taken into consideration: how do cycling commuters get to work in the event of mechanical problems? RACV Bike Assist not withstanding, you're pretty much on your own when your bike breaks down, so you've got to be self-sufficient or have a fallback option. I'd suggest that Ben exercised his fallback option and jumped on the train at East Malvern or Darling. But then not every current or potential cycling commuter has such convenient access to an alternative mode of transport.
Comments
Lately, my commute takes more time by motorcycle than bicycle. Then if you add in the time taken to robe/disrobe at either end, it's a no-brainer.
Then, if you think you're on your own on a bicyle, try a motorcycle. RACV will help, but the answer is (in my experience) always a trip on a flatbed truck to a repairer. Even for very minor issues, they won't even attempt a repair.
Hmm, I suspect that Bike Assist consists of a very similar thing – except you have to stuff your bike into the back of a taxi. Better to be self-sufficient and able to fix most common problems I reckon.