Are they really in such a hurry ?

[Elfenstar]

  On 6/11/2012 at 5:48 AM, Joseph22 said:

this two you sala liao.

 

Buses company already pay for road tax liao. MRT are not travelling on Car Road.

 

as for walking across junctions, its cater for. so everyone please follow basic instruction to cross only when green.

 

Back to his other point. Roads were made for bicycles, not cars, so catered to liao right? Cars should be paying taxes to use the cyclist roads what.

[Elfenstar]

  On 6/11/2012 at 4:39 AM, Watwheels said:

The comments by cyclists here are definitely biased. They call themselves "fellow road user" but want to have preferential treament with that 1.5m thingy.

 

Got cyclist say dun like to cycle in lanes dedicated for bikes cos they have to slow down and siam children. SO car drivers enjoy slowing down and siam cyclist lah? If you want to travel at a constant speed, so do other vehicles what.

 

So can any cyclist tell me why the preferential treatment when you are also a road user? Why put yourself at risk and lian lei other road users? When you hold up a bus load of ppl on the bus lane, what will you be saying dan? You deserve the preferential treatment coz you are a cyclist? The passengers in the bus deserve the contant jerking from the braking just becoz you?

 

Dun make sense to me.

 

Its not preferential treatment. Its simply telling the morons on the road to keep a safe distance (as most don't even know how to accurately judge the position of their vehicle in relation to other things).

 

From my experience, the (non ah-tiong) bus drivers are the best. Most I've met while riding intentionally give a wider berth, and when they can (esp at junctions) they try and protect cyclists from other vehicles.

 

Also my friend, most people don't drive like you. So they seem to be able to pace me (when they protect me) without having the bus jerk.

 

Edited June 11, 2012 by Elfenstar

[Icedbs]

  On 6/11/2012 at 6:25 AM, JackRabbit said:

I am not sure if Singapore have this - but I recommend that cyclists wear helmets with rear view mirror so that they can see and anticipate what's behind without having to keep twisting their neck to see the back and risk falling or veering to the side. Of course it's not a 100% solution, but will complement the safety of the rider.

 

 

 

http://www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/10/article3.html

 

But such helmet is dangerous also. Wat if you fall and the mirror broke and fly into your eyes?

[Elfenstar]

  On 6/11/2012 at 7:09 AM, Gz0707 said:

need to spell clearly for you? the new batch of 800 buses means that you have lesser road space as driver. who pay for buses? taxes and bus fare lah. so bus commuter have as much right to road space as drivers. MRT stations, track pulled don't take up space that could have been converted to roads for your powerful car? sounds like you don't understand what is called public property.

 

like I said, everyone who pay taxes have a right to use the road or pavement, that's why the Stickers lady call it My Grandfather Road.

 

Don't bother about my friend unless you plan on insulting him. He's returning to his troll roots

[RadX]

  On 6/11/2012 at 7:29 AM, Elfenstar said:

Don't bother about my friend unless you plan on insulting him. He's returning to his troll roots

 

u mean he got improve meh?

go ahead take him out.....

[Taipan49]

This is a good article about how the auto industry hijacked the streets from the community: http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/02/jaywa...-motor-age.html

 

 

For 7000 years cities and their streets were places where citizens gathered, moved and played. The automobile industry were forced to use marketing techniques to win the battle for space for cars. They've never looked back.

 

Very first reference to another marketing tactic adopted by the automobile industry - jaywalking. A 'jay' was a synonym for a "country bumpkin" and pedestrians who dared to challenge 7000 years of city life were labelled as such. Crosswalks were invented to funnel pedestrians into controlled zones that would allow cars dominance over the streets.

 

Traffic fatalities were a major problem when cars started to muscle onto the streets. Most traffic safety campaigns placed the responsibility firmly on the motorists and the protests against them were massive.

 

The automobile industry needed to change this perception, and quick. They were successful.

 

 

[Elfenstar]

  On 6/11/2012 at 7:28 AM, Icedbs said:

But such helmet is dangerous also. Wat if you fall and the mirror broke and fly into your eyes?

 

Aiyah bro, thats life. A lot of what if's. You could be a passenger in a taxi, and still get hit by a speeding ferrari driven by an ah tiong. Just do what you want to as long as nobody gets hurt, and if sh|t happens it does, nothing we can do about it. Unless you're prepared to stay and home and never leave the house, IMHO there's no point in worrying about things that are out of our control.

 

Speaking of houses, I've passed yours everyday for the last two weeks

[Elfenstar]

  On 6/11/2012 at 7:31 AM, RadX said:

u mean he got improve meh?

go ahead take him out.....

 

He impoved.... Well at least he did on whatsapp

 

[Fireball0088]

  On 6/10/2012 at 9:08 AM, Bluemice said:

dear all,

we know that beating red lights seems to be the hot topic of late.Here's a different form of red light beating.... from a three cyclist.

pls ignore the wrong date.

 

mice

 

they did that probably because they actually checked the traffic before making that stupid move.

[Sk65]

i think its not a matter of if they kena knocked down you want to help a not

 

more like,

green lights in your favour,

you one cyclisy coming out (when he is suppose to stop) from your right acoss you

 

you step brake or step accelerator

[Nzy]

  On 6/11/2012 at 4:39 AM, Watwheels said:

The comments by cyclists here are definitely biased. They call themselves "fellow road user" but want to have preferential treament with that 1.5m thingy.

 

Got cyclist say dun like to cycle in lanes dedicated for bikes cos they have to slow down and siam children. SO car drivers enjoy slowing down and siam cyclist lah? If you want to travel at a constant speed, so do other vehicles what.

 

So can any cyclist tell me why the preferential treatment when you are also a road user? Why put yourself at risk and lian lei other road users? When you hold up a bus load of ppl on the bus lane, what will you be saying dan? You deserve the preferential treatment coz you are a cyclist? The passengers in the bus deserve the contant jerking from the braking just becoz you?

 

Dun make sense to me.

 

This is not asking for preferential treatment. Cyclists just want to be treated equally. Do you overtake a car as close as possible or do you go to the next lane before you overtake?

[Fireball0088]

  On 6/11/2012 at 6:51 AM, X3mblack said:

No, I didn't say motorist should stay off right most lane. I said cyclist want to be treated like they exist. Overtake them not over run them. Read carefully. I said 1.5 m is a guide. As long as you overtake safely, you don't really have to give the 1.5 m. If you are passing them at a safe speed, you don't need to open a 1.5 m gap.

 

think the cyclists are on the right track asking for 1.5m gap, but still not enough, it's still quite dangerous, especially some drivers cannot estimate 1.5m gap when traveling at 50-70 km/h.

 

why not all the cyclists write to LTA and ask for the whole left lane. That should be safe all motorists

[Nzy]

  On 6/11/2012 at 3:12 AM, Royho1979 said:

Are you trying to me humorous? A driver driving his car at cruising speed at Coastal Road on the left lane causes far far less congestion than cyclist travelling at 20km/h that requires people to over take them.

 

Anyway, 1st we do not know if they are also motorist and 2nd they would not be driving too if they are on the pedestrian path or at East Coast Park.

 

They would be driving too if they are at East Coast Park. Or else how they get there? Then people will start complaining about cyclists putting bicycles on the back of their cars and blocking their license plates.

[Royho1979]

  On 6/11/2012 at 3:57 AM, Nzy said:

Because that cycling lane is not really a dedicated cycling lane. Got pedestrians walking, got some families with small kids learning to cycle. A road bike on level road will be travelling at roughly 35-40km/h. If a kid learning to cycle suddenly swerve infront of the cyclist, he'll definitely not be able to stop in time. Many of those cyclists on changi coastal road are trying to cycle fast for training. Not like those cyclists cycling leisurely in the park. I tried cycling on a cycling lane before and even at 25km/h got pedestrians staring at me like as if I am wrong to cycle of the path. And I still have to keep braking and looking out for children running around.

 

So let me get this. There is a cyclist lane at Coastal Road but:

 

1) Cyclist at Coastal Roads are Morons - There is a cycling lane, because there are pedestrians it, and instead tackling the problem and asking pedestrians to move off, cyclist would rather endanger their lives and whine about drivers not caring about their safety when there already is a DEDICATED cycling track.

 

2) Cyclist are freaking prima donnas - They refuse to accommodate fellow cyclist who may be travelling slower, thus obstructing their path and causing them delay to overtake, but think nothing of causing the same inconvenience to drivers who paid a premium to ensure the traffic is smooth.

 

Wow... just wow.... Double freaking standards... there goes all remnant respect I have for cyclist ... esp on coastal road.

 

[Royho1979]

  On 6/11/2012 at 4:19 AM, Elfenstar said:

Lets put i this way. Historically, bicycles came first.

 

Also from your statements, I'm guessing you're encouraging commuter cyclists then. Good on you for encouraging others to using cycling as a form of transport. It should cut down on a lot of traffic congestion!

 

Historically, horses comes first ... so? Lets start horse riding ?

 

Commuter cyclists? Sure, when cyclist learn to behave. Even when there is a dedicated cycling lane at coastal roads, you guys insist on cycling on the road. What hope is there for local cyclist?

[Royho1979]

  On 6/11/2012 at 4:50 AM, X3mblack said:

No cyclist are not asking for preferential treatment. They are asking drivers to overtake them like they exist and not just push them over the Kerb. The 1.5 m is just a guide line. As long as the driver make a conscious effort to move a little out and not have their side mirror narrowly brushing the cyclist is good enough.

 

 

When there is a dedicated cycling track and it is not used and u guys some onto the road... you are asking for preferential treatment. Why? A freaking lane is built and you refused to use it and you insist on inconveniencing others for your convenience! Utter anti-social selfish behavior!

[Nzy]

  On 6/11/2012 at 9:03 AM, Royho1979 said:

So let me get this. There is a cyclist lane at Coastal Road but:

 

1) Cyclist at Coastal Roads are Morons - There is a cycling lane, because there are pedestrians it, and instead tackling the problem and asking pedestrians to move off, cyclist would rather endanger their lives and whine about drivers not caring about their safety when there already is a DEDICATED cycling track.

 

2) Cyclist are freaking prima donnas - They refuse to accommodate fellow cyclist who may be travelling slower, thus obstructing their path and causing them delay to overtake, but think nothing of causing the same inconvenience to drivers who paid a premium to ensure the traffic is smooth.

 

Wow... just wow.... Double freaking standards... there goes all remnant respect I have for cyclist ... esp on coastal road.

 

1) Cyclists cannot ask pedestrians to get off it. Its not for cyclists only. There is no law stating pedestrians can't walk there.

 

2) Drivers have somewhere they can use to get the hang of driving before they drive out onto public roads. Whereas cyclists don't.

[Royho1979]

  On 6/11/2012 at 6:51 AM, X3mblack said:

No, I didn't say motorist should stay off right most lane. I said cyclist want to be treated like they exist. Overtake them not over run them. Read carefully. I said 1.5 m is a guide. As long as you overtake safely, you don't really have to give the 1.5 m. If you are passing them at a safe speed, you don't need to open a 1.5 m gap.

 

 

They should exist on the cyclist lane when such lanes are available. When there isn't ... despite my unhappiness, ok... I agree to give them the space... when there are cyclist lanes, dun give us crap about the lanes not good etc... when the roads have potholes, do drivers move onto the pavements?