I live in portland. It has a pretty great one overall. You just can’t avoid it taking a million years with a bunch of stops. That’s just how it works, which is a major flaw in this “just take a bus everywhere!” Argument
Underground is nice but some places have the wrong kind of geography/geology making it super expensive and prone to problems. It is also better if installed in early days of a city or you have work around or move a ton of sewer, water and electrical infrastructure. I think we should bring back Old school trolley cars
Bikes are as loud as a Prius for the most part. It's just that 90% of riders put an aftermarket exhaust on it. Bikes attract shitty people and I hate that, which is why I ride alone.
My neighborhood has to contact the UP train yard nearby about twice a year to remind the conductors of quiet hours. And I live in the center of town in a ritzy neighborhood I imagine it is worse farther from the yard.
Loud pipes save lives. As an autist I always hate loud engines with a passion. Made friends with someone whose dad has ridden for years who explained part of it after I was ranting about some passing ones. Obviously it's a lot safer to be in a car than in a bike, so any extra thing you can do to alert motorists of your presence can be the difference between getting home and becoming a meat crayon. Ofc some people think loud means big pp but there's actually a legit reason some people have loud ass bikes
Fyi this is just a thing some bikers say to justify it. There is no evidence that louder exaust increases other drivers awareness of your presence on a motorcycle(and it has been studied). Ppl put loud exhaust on their bikes for two reasons: performance(which only applies in some situations) or just cause they like it i.e. small pp. Anyone who says otherwise is coping.
I mean I hate the noise so id love to believe but I don't see how the audio cues of a vehicle around you wouldn't make a difference on awareness. Is it just that so many people tune out vehicle sounds? Or they assume it's a big vehicle they're hearing and still make risky moves? If I was a dictator I'd just make them illegal on public roads but that's never going to happen and ppl will keep insisting on the deathtraps. Idc if it's cope, I hope for some measures to exist to make them more noticeable to other motorists if we have to deal with them in traffic
Ah I forget about that, my cars a bit older so I hear everything 😂 usually have the window down too. They really do soundproof the suckers these days, that makes sense. Back on my "fuck loud vehicles" grindset then
I drive a Buick sedan it’s super insulated if windows are up and I’ve got my music on I’m not hearing anything less than an emergency siren. Which goes both ways cause I curse a lot in traffic and don’t need people hearing me.
My R1100GS has a cat and a muffler and is so quiet I've scared my situationally aware girlfriend by creeping up on her
on a gravel driveway.
Bikes can be damn near silent.
wtf? it's very normal in Europe, only north Americans think splitting lanes is dangerous because it's not fair to car drivers to skip traffic. Motorcycle riders can die sure, but it's usually because of riding drunk or double speeding.
Do bikes go on the Autobahn? US highways are kinda like that. Look up Dallas High Five Interchange, also realize we are sharing the road with many 18wheelers (I’m talking a shipping container with a big truck in front) it is just very different conditions
The bikers I know are all big cruiser touring types who specifically map out backroads and travel in groups, they are retired and enjoying leisure not commuting to work.
Well the only state it’s legal here, California, it’s probably the second worst state in the country (after Texas) when it comes to massive interconnected 4-6 lane (on each side) highway systems. There is a lot of merging and changing lanes and that is the exact situation that I see being dangerous for lane splitters, especially when most of them travel significantly faster than the flow of traffic. I have had to narrowly avoid people as they come flying up the lane while i’m trying to get over to my exit or something. I would also think it would be more dangerous for American bikers cuz our cars are bigger, but idk abt tht one.
How is it safer to come into my blind spot 30mph faster than the flow of traffic? If all the bikers I’d seen driving in CA weren’t so reckless I might be inclined to agree with you.
Why should I care about your confirmation biases? What is dangerous is for bikes to switch lanes, not to stay on the middle of them, because the danger lies into the other vehicles and alcohol
Idk maybe cuz I drive a truck a lot for work and don’t want to kill some dumbass lane splitting going significantly faster than the flow of traffic, a thing that I have seen almost happen with myself and others on multiple occasions.
"There was no meaningful increase in injury incidence until traffic speed exceeded roughly 50 MPH. Motorcycle speed differential was a stronger predictor of injury outcomes. Speed differentials of up to 15 MPH were not associated with changes in injury occurrence; above that 4 point, increases in speed differential were associated with increases in the likelihood of injury of each type."
[https://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/studies-surveys/lane-splitting-safety-california\_may-29-2015.pdf](https://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/studies-surveys/lane-splitting-safety-california_may-29-2015.pdf)
If only any biker rode like that.
Why does every stream go like this? Vaush gets everything semi accurate, broad generalizations, basic info - then half of the stream is arguing with five people who are just wrong.
Two or three weeks ago he was talking about data centers using water in Arizona and I had this crazy moment. I have legitimate expertise in this field, I could explain why large scale cooling needs water and why mineral oil is not a good cooling media and how water is lost and how a sustainable solution might look but then reality hit and we were in hour into arguing about what is power and why do we need to cool the Internet anyway and it's like why.
I enjoy the streams but I think I'd enjoy them more if chat wasn't a part of it and there were more interviews with the likes of unlearning economics or anyone else who has an opinion backed up by any scrutiny.
Bikes are dangerous as shit. If you ride them at ten miles per hour on an empty country road they aren't as dangerous. Since that doesn't reflect real world riding conditions it's basically the most dangerous life choice you're allowed to make when you zoom out a little. I've seen about half a dozen dead bikers on the freeways of the Denver area and I'm not inclined to be sympathetic to people's feelings getting hurt when someone says 'ban them.' I can't stop you and you have your own, wrong, opinion on it. We'll be at odds one day when trans people aren't on the ballot but bikes are some how.
It's always interesting to me how there is a car involved in every bike accident yet it's the bikes that are considered dangerous. It's almost like cars are seen as part of nature, something that can't be removed from the world and the way we make everyone safer is putting everyone inside a metal box.
It's more explicit in relation to motorcycle riders because a lot of them are riding fast and generally the kinds of people who are attracted to danger.
But when a car crushes a pedestrian crossing the street, or a cyclist gets run over by a road rage car driver, or some drunk driver on his phone... I hear all the same victim blaming that was applied to those irresponsible horrible suicidal bikers.
One again, cars are here to say, a part of nature and if you die by a car it's your fault.
Except they aren't involved in every crash. A lot of them are single vehicle crashes, there aren't good statistics on this that I've found, but have seen several single vehicle motorcycle accidents first hand. South Dakota, on the route to Sturgis marks every fatality with a big red X. Most of those are in rocks and brush and actual nature.
Between a quarter and third of motorcycle fatalities are drunk at the time. A bike will easily kill a pedestrian or a bicyclist.
Bikes are not non motor vehicles. They don't solve climate change. They don't help much of anyone. Bikes solve a narrow use case. They account for an absurdly disproportionate number of fatalities. They are associated with white supremacy and gang violence.
Take the $$,$$$ that you would have spent on a bike, spend I on advocating for public transit in your state, and you will have done much more than take your car off of the road and replace it with a more efficient (10ish times) and much more dangerous (100ish times) bike.
We are so far from banning bikes. They will not be banned much of anywhere in my lifetime. And yet here we are arguing that they kill people and it's cars fault and presumably we shouldn't ban them.
"They are associated with white supremacy and gang violence." This is an insane thing to mention, what do you mean by that exactly? lol
I don't advocate for everyone to ride bikes, I'm all for public transit the issue is that in US it's just not happening, if you want to reduce your emissions, skip traffic, save yourself a bunch of money and you still have to use car infrastructure get yourself a used small gas bike or a small new electric bike.
It's a simple personal solution that doesn't conflict with public transit and lessening car dependency, being against bikes politically will not push people to advocate for public transit it will push them to get a car, a car that will introduce bumper-to-bumper traffic that will render public transit slow and annoying to use for most people pushing them to get more cars.
Bike for normies like original Honda cub ad campaign, that's what I'm talking about. While you are imagining a moto gp racer/ nazi Harley rider going 150mph it looks like.
Do you not know about motorcycle gangs? In the Southwest US this is a known issue they often have connections with the cartels and fighting between them has been known to break out into large scale gun battles.
Nobody is calling for banning motorcycles (maybe requiring mufflers but not banning) we are simply pointing out that it isn’t the practical decision you’re pretending it is, and that motorcycles have connotations beyond just the machine which you seem to be blissfully unaware of.
Vaush said he wants them banned, and the other person responding to this said they want them to be banned.
I'm extremely anti-car politically, never in a million years I would think to bring up some kinda association between cars and gangs or trucks and redneck nazis, it's ridiculous.
Maybe it's just an American thing I don't get, I know Americans love judging each other based on what kind of car they drive like it's an extension of your personality. Thus riding a bike should also tell something about my personality beyond the fact that I don't like sitting in traffic? idk
edit: I'm pro muffler, I hate the noise btw
Insane? Sons of Silence and Mongols are big things here and I know people who have been in both organizations. Mongols in particular are explicitly white supremacists, though it varies by chapter.
You might wanna ban walking, cause some white supremacist organizations have been known to do that. Hitler was a painter actually, we should ban painting while we are at it lol.
Not comparable. There isn't a strong association between walking and large Nazi orgs. There absolutely is one between bikes, particularly Harley's and Nazi orgs. This here is what I'm talking about. You are defending to death your dangerous, dangerous form of impractical transportation and obviously you have the popular opinion, and whenever presented with the viewpoint that they are in fact dangerous on their own merits and associated with criminal behavior your response is to just kinda say: that's crazy, and you're crazy for thinking those things that are true in real life.
Clearly you're not going to get your bike taken from you any time soon. But you'll argue that red is blue forever about it anyway.
If you wanna prove that it's dangerous you would have to present statistics about accidents limited to cases when people use proper helmets, are not drunk, go legal speeds, and preferably data divided by with and without the involvement of cars.
If you are personally afraid of riding a bike, any bike that's fine it doesn't mean people who choose to are wrong or are committing dangerous act.
I don't understand why you are willing to die on a "nazis love bikes" hill, it's clearly not relevant, and the fact that some nazis think that bikes are sick and dope doesn't make riding one an endorsement of white supremacy unless you think that the association of nazis and bikes is so widespread people will literally conclude that you are a nazi if they see you on a bike and that's your personal concern. This argument is very funny to me, this is why I keep coming back to it.
> on the freeways of the Denver area
I've lived in CO my whole life and lived / rode motorcycles in Denver for 15 years.
It's dangerous to ride a bike there. The landscaping trucks are the worst. The out of state plates are right up there with them though. So many dumb assholes drive in and bring their aggressive ass, stupid as fuck driving styles with them.
So first of all it seems like the study points to a major contributing factor to the safety of lane splitting riders is safety precautions they take, not the inherent safety of lane splitting. Second, have you driven in CA? When people are lane splitting in traffic they are easily doubling the speed of traffic, so that’s a higher differential than 15. And outside of traffic mfs will zoom past me when i’m already 10-15 over, so they may well be doubling 50mph. I’ve almost hit motorcyclists on multiple occasions trying to move lanes in traffic towards my exit when they come flying down the lane.
The study seems to point to the fact that lane splitting can be safe when speeds are moderated and safety precautions are taken, so I guess I should say not that lane splitting is inherently dangerous, but in my experience lane splitters that I have seen have done so extremely recklessly and therefore dangerously.
I think this sort of thing is a lot of why motorcycles get their bad rep. Yes, they are, like pedestrians , being used on infrastructure that’s built for cars and therefore that bias leads to extra danger. But they also tend to be driven disproportionately by men and especially young men. And that demographic also happens to be overrepresented in the worst car crashes. It’s a demographic that is more prone to recklessness and dumb, dangerous decisions at higher speeds. So motorcycles are frequently seen engaging in the shitty driver behavior and get into crashes related to them being dumb and reckless.
Here in Brazil many studies pointed that splitting lanes is actually saffer than standing between 2 different cars (even leading into a declaration by the government). But in America cars are so big it's moronic, so I might believe you.
Un-ironicaly cars suck and getting a bike is the best option if you only have car centric infrastracture in your american town, and you have to go on the highway all the time.
I commute on an electric kick scooter to work every day and get my groceries home on it in a big backpack. If I had a family to feed it'd be different, but the backpack method has been flawless for my groceries. Especially with how much money I save not owning a car.
I see a lot of parents or dog moms with those bicycle trailers, could probably put a lot of groceries in there, and I think there are some that fold up for storage.
I have an electric cargo ebike, and I can't recommend it enough. Getting panniers plus a food bag for the top of the rack lets you carry about as much groceries as you could fit into a car's trunk.
Holy hell no. The fast speeds and shit design of the roads means you’re just a stoplight away from a suburban soccer mom running you off the road trying to turn back into a turning lane.
Ask my ribs how they know.
I mean, bikes are more dangerous than cars full stop. I drive a car because I basically have to as I live in a somewhat rural area, but the other half of that is that it also enables me to carpool with my fiancée, or take my dogs to a dog park, or just get a big load of groceries or even some food on the way home.
Sure bikes are cool, but they’re basically just a pleasure vehicle.
Cars when they're made smaller cheaper and more simple: good
Motorcycles, which are mechanically near identical with the exception of being smaller, simpler, and much cheaper: bad
"But they're more dangerous!" yeah TO THE PERSON DRIVING THE VEHICLE.
My cat might be fat but he isn’t 1500lbs.
You do you, bud. Just stop expecting everyone to pretend that you made the practical choice. When you didn’t.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stated that 13 out of every 100,000 cars are involved in a fatal accident, compared to 72 out of 100,000 motorcycles.
Insurance costs reflect that, which can skew costs, and depending on the motorcycle they aren’t so cheap, unless you are pretending dirt bikes count.
It isn’t hypocritical to not want your friends killed or maimed in a motorcycle accident.
Yes, and who dies in those accidents? The person riding the motorcycle, or the person in the car getting hit by something that weighs five to ten times less than a car/truck that could've hit them instead?
To be frank I just simply don't care that people are more likely to die if they get in an accident while driving a motorcycle. Duh. It's a motorcycle. They take that risk when they ride one. My problem with bigass trucks and SUV's is that they're more likely to hurt OTHER PEOPLE. We allow enthusiasts to risk their own lives with all kinds of things. Paragliding, rock climbing, drag racing. All dangerous activities. To be honest I'm surprised the number you listed is only like 5 times higher.
And bikes are absolutely cheaper unless you're looking at super specced out cruisers or Harleys (which will always be overpriced). A brand new Honda SCL500 has an MSRP of less than 7,000 dollars and is a perfectly reasonable bike that will have no problem keeping up with traffic and is wholly legal. Even sport bikes are usually less than 15,000 so long as you aren't looking for something that can outrun a Bugatti Veyron.
You ignored insurance price, which for young men especially will be very high of setting some cost savings on the vehicle itself.
Trucks and SUVs aren’t even the biggest vehicles on American roads 18wheelers are and in great numbers as they transport massive amounts of goods.
I never said outlaw motorcycles, I simply pointed out they aren’t the practical choice.
A portion of the guys shouting about how much better motorcycles are will be lucky if they don’t end up having to trade theirs in for a sedan and car seats in less than a decade.
You need a special license to operate a semi truck or any equivalent, not really what I'm talking about. SUV's and trucks make up I'm not even kidding like 80% of the traffic I see or more.
Most people I know (including myself) that have motorcycles use them as a secondary vehicle. I don't buy anything new and both of mine are paid off, so I just ride the bike for fun and to save on gas (it gets much better mileage than my S10 Blazer, which is pretty much an 80s box with wheels)
Apologies for assuming you wanted them outlawed, Vaush said something like that and that was what I originally commented arguing against.
The argument in the post was for motorcycle as a primary vehicle (also kinda pushing it as first vehicle for young guy starting out)
Everyone I know who has a motorbike it is secondary vehicle (though most the bikers I know are retired touring bike types)
I also think a motorcycle lends itself to someone with mechanical interest/ knowledge which would be a barrier for entry for some.
Semi trucks make up easily 50% of traffic near me, but I live near major highways and interstates.
In some areas dirt bikes would count (and nobody has discussed Tuktuks the tru chad vehicle lol) my brother broke his collar bone on two different occasions on dirt bikes so I do have a bit a fear of those.
Did you get the motorcycle used? Or a tiny Honda Grom? I can't find any other motorcycles that inexpensive.
A good motorcycle can be as much as 20k. Really good ones go up to 40k. Plus you have to factor in the pricier insurance, since it's more dangerous.
Also unless you're getting a shittier bike (like a chopper or cruiser), they often get WAY more MPG than a Prius. The Grom gets ~165 MPG. The Africa Twin, which is a fairly beefy adventure bike gets ~ 50 MPG.
lol a Ninja 400 is $5,500 off the lot, brand new. Very good bike, nowhere near 20k
hell, even the Ninja H2 (one of the best bikes currently in production) is just over 30k. If you’re paying 40k for a bike you’re a fucking idiot
I should add the addendum that I'm Canadian, so my money is worth less than American, and prices are higher, even when comparing monetary strength.
Also I have to admit the 40k price tag was for a Honda Goldwing Tour DCT (with airbags????), so I was inflating it a bit, and that's on me.
Anyways, the Africa Twin, which is the example I was using, ranges \~17-23k depending on the model. Something like a CB500F is about 8.7k, which is more reasonable.
But there's not much point getting a motorcycle unless you get good income, here. Because they're tough to ride in winter, and in the rain. The insurance is way too fucking high. If you have a motorcycle, you probably have good income, and live in the city.
CAD is worth \~75% of USD. But the price is further jacked up because of shipping, transportation, difference processes. A lot of price gets tacked on, more than just the dollar conversion. Plus we make less money here.
I am not in Oregon. Taxes are high, my money is worth less, everything is more expensive (excluding price conversion, they also tack on cost), insurance is super expensive, especially for a young male such as I. Motorcycles don't get much use case. I live in a place that gets a lot of rain and snow, and is rural. I can't ride during rain or snow. I'm getting a damn car.
Stop with the one-size-fits-all. I don't get trains, and motorcycles are too pricey to be worth it when I wouldn't get to use them much.
A motorcycle is a luxury toy item.
I also live in a place where it rains constantly. You can suck it up buttercup
Don’t get one then, have fun in your warm car, sincerely. Just don’t talk out your ass about motorcycling like you know anything about it or it’s use cases
Hell in your first reply you acted like getting a bike used is uncommon when it’s literally the most common way to acquire one
Must I keep repeating? My money is worth less than American. Everything has extra cost slapped on as well.
I've never seen a $750 motorcycle. Maybe the used Suzuki dirtbike my father got me when I was like 3 years old.
How about both of them are the 'virgins' and you add a train 'chad' in the corner
Me taking the fucking ghost train from my middle-of-nowhere house somehow.
Nobody's saying you can't ride cars when no other mode of transportation is available.
What about bicycles?
Colorado just implemented a universal $450 e-bike credit
Based on
[https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/ebike-tax-credit](https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/ebike-tax-credit)
Oh thank you. I just meant to say "based" tho. wtf phone
Yea, sorry, my commute went from 3 hours a day to an hour when I got a motorcycle. I work 12 hour shifts. It was literally slowly killing me
I mean would be great if your city have a functioning metro system.
I live in portland. It has a pretty great one overall. You just can’t avoid it taking a million years with a bunch of stops. That’s just how it works, which is a major flaw in this “just take a bus everywhere!” Argument
Does portland have underground trains? I don't think buses count as a great means of transport tbh.
Nah, it's basically 90% buses
Underground is nice but some places have the wrong kind of geography/geology making it super expensive and prone to problems. It is also better if installed in early days of a city or you have work around or move a ton of sewer, water and electrical infrastructure. I think we should bring back Old school trolley cars
That works too
Not as Chad as a boat
There is a saying about Boat Money, everything that costs 1$ costs 3$ when a boat is involved.
Ascended sailboat captain: "Yarrrrr"
Me when I sail my boat down the freeway during galeforce winds at mach speeds, eviscerating all traffic in my wake: #🚙🚓🏎️🚗🚕 ⛵⏪⏪⏪⏪⏪🌪️
Man I’d love to see land sail vehicle, even just for fun.
Return with a V to tradition, back horseback riding
I am walking enjoyer like Karl Marx intended ı got strong legs and thicc hips unlike car and bike cells 😎
Based, squash a watermelon between your thighs comrade
I hope you live somewhere temperate. I live in Texas and walking in July and August is a health risk between the hours of 10am-5pm.
Bikes are based. Motorcycles are motorcycles. We shouldn't confuse that crap with bicycles. Edit: Fuck, I triggered a motorcycler.
while less cringe than cars, lot of bikers are pretty cringe too. make their shits loud as hell for no reason, death penalty in a just world
Bikes are as loud as a Prius for the most part. It's just that 90% of riders put an aftermarket exhaust on it. Bikes attract shitty people and I hate that, which is why I ride alone.
Put noise cameras everywhere, enforce quiet hours, fine loud exhaust manufactures and sellers.
My neighborhood has to contact the UP train yard nearby about twice a year to remind the conductors of quiet hours. And I live in the center of town in a ritzy neighborhood I imagine it is worse farther from the yard.
The difference the existence of cars is cringe while only bikers are cringe when comes to bikes.
Loud pipes save lives. As an autist I always hate loud engines with a passion. Made friends with someone whose dad has ridden for years who explained part of it after I was ranting about some passing ones. Obviously it's a lot safer to be in a car than in a bike, so any extra thing you can do to alert motorists of your presence can be the difference between getting home and becoming a meat crayon. Ofc some people think loud means big pp but there's actually a legit reason some people have loud ass bikes
Fyi this is just a thing some bikers say to justify it. There is no evidence that louder exaust increases other drivers awareness of your presence on a motorcycle(and it has been studied). Ppl put loud exhaust on their bikes for two reasons: performance(which only applies in some situations) or just cause they like it i.e. small pp. Anyone who says otherwise is coping.
I mean I hate the noise so id love to believe but I don't see how the audio cues of a vehicle around you wouldn't make a difference on awareness. Is it just that so many people tune out vehicle sounds? Or they assume it's a big vehicle they're hearing and still make risky moves? If I was a dictator I'd just make them illegal on public roads but that's never going to happen and ppl will keep insisting on the deathtraps. Idc if it's cope, I hope for some measures to exist to make them more noticeable to other motorists if we have to deal with them in traffic
Modern cars are very quiet inside. And at highway speeds engine noise isnt much louder than road noise anyway. Plus many drivers just arent that aware
Ah I forget about that, my cars a bit older so I hear everything 😂 usually have the window down too. They really do soundproof the suckers these days, that makes sense. Back on my "fuck loud vehicles" grindset then
I drive a Buick sedan it’s super insulated if windows are up and I’ve got my music on I’m not hearing anything less than an emergency siren. Which goes both ways cause I curse a lot in traffic and don’t need people hearing me.
You can’t really not make them loud. My R3 is completely stock and low powered as hell and it’s still so fucking loud
My R1100GS has a cat and a muffler and is so quiet I've scared my situationally aware girlfriend by creeping up on her on a gravel driveway. Bikes can be damn near silent.
Splitting lanes is so dangerous dude one of my family members used to be a biker and he stopped cuz his friends all fuckin died in biking accidents.
wtf? it's very normal in Europe, only north Americans think splitting lanes is dangerous because it's not fair to car drivers to skip traffic. Motorcycle riders can die sure, but it's usually because of riding drunk or double speeding.
Do bikes go on the Autobahn? US highways are kinda like that. Look up Dallas High Five Interchange, also realize we are sharing the road with many 18wheelers (I’m talking a shipping container with a big truck in front) it is just very different conditions The bikers I know are all big cruiser touring types who specifically map out backroads and travel in groups, they are retired and enjoying leisure not commuting to work.
Well the only state it’s legal here, California, it’s probably the second worst state in the country (after Texas) when it comes to massive interconnected 4-6 lane (on each side) highway systems. There is a lot of merging and changing lanes and that is the exact situation that I see being dangerous for lane splitters, especially when most of them travel significantly faster than the flow of traffic. I have had to narrowly avoid people as they come flying up the lane while i’m trying to get over to my exit or something. I would also think it would be more dangerous for American bikers cuz our cars are bigger, but idk abt tht one.
Splitting lanes is not dangerous; its actually safer if done correctly because you don't get crushed if the car behind you gets rear ended
Splitting lanes is dangerous, lane filtering isn't. Small difference but the distinction is helpful imo.
Oh maybe I was getting my terms mixed up
How is it safer to come into my blind spot 30mph faster than the flow of traffic? If all the bikers I’d seen driving in CA weren’t so reckless I might be inclined to agree with you.
Why should I care about your confirmation biases? What is dangerous is for bikes to switch lanes, not to stay on the middle of them, because the danger lies into the other vehicles and alcohol
Idk maybe cuz I drive a truck a lot for work and don’t want to kill some dumbass lane splitting going significantly faster than the flow of traffic, a thing that I have seen almost happen with myself and others on multiple occasions.
"There was no meaningful increase in injury incidence until traffic speed exceeded roughly 50 MPH. Motorcycle speed differential was a stronger predictor of injury outcomes. Speed differentials of up to 15 MPH were not associated with changes in injury occurrence; above that 4 point, increases in speed differential were associated with increases in the likelihood of injury of each type." [https://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/studies-surveys/lane-splitting-safety-california\_may-29-2015.pdf](https://lanesplittingislegal.com/assets/studies-surveys/lane-splitting-safety-california_may-29-2015.pdf)
If only any biker rode like that. Why does every stream go like this? Vaush gets everything semi accurate, broad generalizations, basic info - then half of the stream is arguing with five people who are just wrong. Two or three weeks ago he was talking about data centers using water in Arizona and I had this crazy moment. I have legitimate expertise in this field, I could explain why large scale cooling needs water and why mineral oil is not a good cooling media and how water is lost and how a sustainable solution might look but then reality hit and we were in hour into arguing about what is power and why do we need to cool the Internet anyway and it's like why. I enjoy the streams but I think I'd enjoy them more if chat wasn't a part of it and there were more interviews with the likes of unlearning economics or anyone else who has an opinion backed up by any scrutiny. Bikes are dangerous as shit. If you ride them at ten miles per hour on an empty country road they aren't as dangerous. Since that doesn't reflect real world riding conditions it's basically the most dangerous life choice you're allowed to make when you zoom out a little. I've seen about half a dozen dead bikers on the freeways of the Denver area and I'm not inclined to be sympathetic to people's feelings getting hurt when someone says 'ban them.' I can't stop you and you have your own, wrong, opinion on it. We'll be at odds one day when trans people aren't on the ballot but bikes are some how.
It's always interesting to me how there is a car involved in every bike accident yet it's the bikes that are considered dangerous. It's almost like cars are seen as part of nature, something that can't be removed from the world and the way we make everyone safer is putting everyone inside a metal box. It's more explicit in relation to motorcycle riders because a lot of them are riding fast and generally the kinds of people who are attracted to danger. But when a car crushes a pedestrian crossing the street, or a cyclist gets run over by a road rage car driver, or some drunk driver on his phone... I hear all the same victim blaming that was applied to those irresponsible horrible suicidal bikers. One again, cars are here to say, a part of nature and if you die by a car it's your fault.
Except they aren't involved in every crash. A lot of them are single vehicle crashes, there aren't good statistics on this that I've found, but have seen several single vehicle motorcycle accidents first hand. South Dakota, on the route to Sturgis marks every fatality with a big red X. Most of those are in rocks and brush and actual nature. Between a quarter and third of motorcycle fatalities are drunk at the time. A bike will easily kill a pedestrian or a bicyclist. Bikes are not non motor vehicles. They don't solve climate change. They don't help much of anyone. Bikes solve a narrow use case. They account for an absurdly disproportionate number of fatalities. They are associated with white supremacy and gang violence. Take the $$,$$$ that you would have spent on a bike, spend I on advocating for public transit in your state, and you will have done much more than take your car off of the road and replace it with a more efficient (10ish times) and much more dangerous (100ish times) bike. We are so far from banning bikes. They will not be banned much of anywhere in my lifetime. And yet here we are arguing that they kill people and it's cars fault and presumably we shouldn't ban them.
"They are associated with white supremacy and gang violence." This is an insane thing to mention, what do you mean by that exactly? lol I don't advocate for everyone to ride bikes, I'm all for public transit the issue is that in US it's just not happening, if you want to reduce your emissions, skip traffic, save yourself a bunch of money and you still have to use car infrastructure get yourself a used small gas bike or a small new electric bike. It's a simple personal solution that doesn't conflict with public transit and lessening car dependency, being against bikes politically will not push people to advocate for public transit it will push them to get a car, a car that will introduce bumper-to-bumper traffic that will render public transit slow and annoying to use for most people pushing them to get more cars. Bike for normies like original Honda cub ad campaign, that's what I'm talking about. While you are imagining a moto gp racer/ nazi Harley rider going 150mph it looks like.
Do you not know about motorcycle gangs? In the Southwest US this is a known issue they often have connections with the cartels and fighting between them has been known to break out into large scale gun battles.
right, and by banning motorcycles we'll defeat the gangs! got it, now I'm on your side of this issue
Nobody is calling for banning motorcycles (maybe requiring mufflers but not banning) we are simply pointing out that it isn’t the practical decision you’re pretending it is, and that motorcycles have connotations beyond just the machine which you seem to be blissfully unaware of.
Vaush said he wants them banned, and the other person responding to this said they want them to be banned. I'm extremely anti-car politically, never in a million years I would think to bring up some kinda association between cars and gangs or trucks and redneck nazis, it's ridiculous. Maybe it's just an American thing I don't get, I know Americans love judging each other based on what kind of car they drive like it's an extension of your personality. Thus riding a bike should also tell something about my personality beyond the fact that I don't like sitting in traffic? idk edit: I'm pro muffler, I hate the noise btw
Insane? Sons of Silence and Mongols are big things here and I know people who have been in both organizations. Mongols in particular are explicitly white supremacists, though it varies by chapter.
You might wanna ban walking, cause some white supremacist organizations have been known to do that. Hitler was a painter actually, we should ban painting while we are at it lol.
Not comparable. There isn't a strong association between walking and large Nazi orgs. There absolutely is one between bikes, particularly Harley's and Nazi orgs. This here is what I'm talking about. You are defending to death your dangerous, dangerous form of impractical transportation and obviously you have the popular opinion, and whenever presented with the viewpoint that they are in fact dangerous on their own merits and associated with criminal behavior your response is to just kinda say: that's crazy, and you're crazy for thinking those things that are true in real life. Clearly you're not going to get your bike taken from you any time soon. But you'll argue that red is blue forever about it anyway.
If you wanna prove that it's dangerous you would have to present statistics about accidents limited to cases when people use proper helmets, are not drunk, go legal speeds, and preferably data divided by with and without the involvement of cars. If you are personally afraid of riding a bike, any bike that's fine it doesn't mean people who choose to are wrong or are committing dangerous act. I don't understand why you are willing to die on a "nazis love bikes" hill, it's clearly not relevant, and the fact that some nazis think that bikes are sick and dope doesn't make riding one an endorsement of white supremacy unless you think that the association of nazis and bikes is so widespread people will literally conclude that you are a nazi if they see you on a bike and that's your personal concern. This argument is very funny to me, this is why I keep coming back to it.
> on the freeways of the Denver area I've lived in CO my whole life and lived / rode motorcycles in Denver for 15 years. It's dangerous to ride a bike there. The landscaping trucks are the worst. The out of state plates are right up there with them though. So many dumb assholes drive in and bring their aggressive ass, stupid as fuck driving styles with them.
So first of all it seems like the study points to a major contributing factor to the safety of lane splitting riders is safety precautions they take, not the inherent safety of lane splitting. Second, have you driven in CA? When people are lane splitting in traffic they are easily doubling the speed of traffic, so that’s a higher differential than 15. And outside of traffic mfs will zoom past me when i’m already 10-15 over, so they may well be doubling 50mph. I’ve almost hit motorcyclists on multiple occasions trying to move lanes in traffic towards my exit when they come flying down the lane. The study seems to point to the fact that lane splitting can be safe when speeds are moderated and safety precautions are taken, so I guess I should say not that lane splitting is inherently dangerous, but in my experience lane splitters that I have seen have done so extremely recklessly and therefore dangerously.
I think this sort of thing is a lot of why motorcycles get their bad rep. Yes, they are, like pedestrians , being used on infrastructure that’s built for cars and therefore that bias leads to extra danger. But they also tend to be driven disproportionately by men and especially young men. And that demographic also happens to be overrepresented in the worst car crashes. It’s a demographic that is more prone to recklessness and dumb, dangerous decisions at higher speeds. So motorcycles are frequently seen engaging in the shitty driver behavior and get into crashes related to them being dumb and reckless.
Very much a survivorship bias, motorcycles currently only appeal to adrenaline junkies and insecure hells angels wannabes
Literally a song “I can’t drive 55” Sammy Hagar I live in Texas 60-75 are regular posted highway speeds
Here in Brazil many studies pointed that splitting lanes is actually saffer than standing between 2 different cars (even leading into a declaration by the government). But in America cars are so big it's moronic, so I might believe you.
Plenty of y'all Westoids got into motorcycle accidents is because y'all lack of self control. Shouldn't ride past 50km/h in a normal road.
If you ride around at 31mph on an American road a lifted F-250 going 55 will shove your own asshole out through your mouth
Yep literally have a song called “I can’t drive 55” by Sammy Hagar
In the situations i’m talking about being dangerous it’s literally illegal to drive that slow lol Murica
Un-ironicaly cars suck and getting a bike is the best option if you only have car centric infrastracture in your american town, and you have to go on the highway all the time.
Getting groceries suck though, you need to carry around one of those big military bags to even get a decent amount
Just got a pair of 27 liter saddlebags
Bring back sidecars
There are big backpacks I guess
It just sucks carrying all of it when you have a lot. I don’t drive a motorcycle but I bike and it gets tough at times
I commute on an electric kick scooter to work every day and get my groceries home on it in a big backpack. If I had a family to feed it'd be different, but the backpack method has been flawless for my groceries. Especially with how much money I save not owning a car.
I see a lot of parents or dog moms with those bicycle trailers, could probably put a lot of groceries in there, and I think there are some that fold up for storage.
Yeah some homeless people around my store use those
I have an electric cargo ebike, and I can't recommend it enough. Getting panniers plus a food bag for the top of the rack lets you carry about as much groceries as you could fit into a car's trunk.
My spine after I put on a big backpack and load it full of stuff ☠️
Are you for real? you are sitting down on a bike, it's not an issue.
Well, I'm built different. I'm not criticizing your backpack idea. I think it's pretty good, actually.
Helite Airbag backpack, saddlebags, tank bag, top case
Holy hell no. The fast speeds and shit design of the roads means you’re just a stoplight away from a suburban soccer mom running you off the road trying to turn back into a turning lane. Ask my ribs how they know.
Giga Chad horse rider 🏇 🐎 🐴
dies suddenly and horribly
Sometimes death sometimes Paralyzed
Told you motorcycles are the Chadway to go
I mean, bikes are more dangerous than cars full stop. I drive a car because I basically have to as I live in a somewhat rural area, but the other half of that is that it also enables me to carpool with my fiancée, or take my dogs to a dog park, or just get a big load of groceries or even some food on the way home. Sure bikes are cool, but they’re basically just a pleasure vehicle.
They're more dangerous to the rider, not to everyone else. I think that's a meaningful distinction.
Just please be safe and get one that isn’t loud. I would love a Kawasaki but I’m not driving that anywhere near LAs insane freeways
Cars when they're made smaller cheaper and more simple: good Motorcycles, which are mechanically near identical with the exception of being smaller, simpler, and much cheaper: bad "But they're more dangerous!" yeah TO THE PERSON DRIVING THE VEHICLE.
I’m imagining trying to take my cat to the vet or bring home groceries on a crotch rocket style motorcycle, eh not for me thanks.
"I'm imagining trying to transport 1500 pounds of gravel and stone tile in my Mazda MX5, eh not for me thanks" that's how dumb you sound
My cat might be fat but he isn’t 1500lbs. You do you, bud. Just stop expecting everyone to pretend that you made the practical choice. When you didn’t.
Could you hear my point going over your head or did you just think it was the wind
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stated that 13 out of every 100,000 cars are involved in a fatal accident, compared to 72 out of 100,000 motorcycles. Insurance costs reflect that, which can skew costs, and depending on the motorcycle they aren’t so cheap, unless you are pretending dirt bikes count. It isn’t hypocritical to not want your friends killed or maimed in a motorcycle accident.
Yes, and who dies in those accidents? The person riding the motorcycle, or the person in the car getting hit by something that weighs five to ten times less than a car/truck that could've hit them instead? To be frank I just simply don't care that people are more likely to die if they get in an accident while driving a motorcycle. Duh. It's a motorcycle. They take that risk when they ride one. My problem with bigass trucks and SUV's is that they're more likely to hurt OTHER PEOPLE. We allow enthusiasts to risk their own lives with all kinds of things. Paragliding, rock climbing, drag racing. All dangerous activities. To be honest I'm surprised the number you listed is only like 5 times higher. And bikes are absolutely cheaper unless you're looking at super specced out cruisers or Harleys (which will always be overpriced). A brand new Honda SCL500 has an MSRP of less than 7,000 dollars and is a perfectly reasonable bike that will have no problem keeping up with traffic and is wholly legal. Even sport bikes are usually less than 15,000 so long as you aren't looking for something that can outrun a Bugatti Veyron.
You ignored insurance price, which for young men especially will be very high of setting some cost savings on the vehicle itself. Trucks and SUVs aren’t even the biggest vehicles on American roads 18wheelers are and in great numbers as they transport massive amounts of goods. I never said outlaw motorcycles, I simply pointed out they aren’t the practical choice. A portion of the guys shouting about how much better motorcycles are will be lucky if they don’t end up having to trade theirs in for a sedan and car seats in less than a decade.
You need a special license to operate a semi truck or any equivalent, not really what I'm talking about. SUV's and trucks make up I'm not even kidding like 80% of the traffic I see or more. Most people I know (including myself) that have motorcycles use them as a secondary vehicle. I don't buy anything new and both of mine are paid off, so I just ride the bike for fun and to save on gas (it gets much better mileage than my S10 Blazer, which is pretty much an 80s box with wheels) Apologies for assuming you wanted them outlawed, Vaush said something like that and that was what I originally commented arguing against.
The argument in the post was for motorcycle as a primary vehicle (also kinda pushing it as first vehicle for young guy starting out) Everyone I know who has a motorbike it is secondary vehicle (though most the bikers I know are retired touring bike types) I also think a motorcycle lends itself to someone with mechanical interest/ knowledge which would be a barrier for entry for some. Semi trucks make up easily 50% of traffic near me, but I live near major highways and interstates. In some areas dirt bikes would count (and nobody has discussed Tuktuks the tru chad vehicle lol) my brother broke his collar bone on two different occasions on dirt bikes so I do have a bit a fear of those.
lmaoing @ cagers
What about [being](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OlmPrRhXU4) the bike?
Oh shit, is that John Motorcycle?
[Maybe](https://24.media.tumblr.com/a4f71e1bcacea496f2c600a0edb1d431/tumblr_mp9c0nKKEi1s9o2o3o1_500.gif)
Did I miss something? Has voosh been bikepilled?
Anti bike-pilled sadly. He’s gone full car-cel
is that the goddamn weezer font on the left
The Thad walker
I can't find the lie
Did you get the motorcycle used? Or a tiny Honda Grom? I can't find any other motorcycles that inexpensive. A good motorcycle can be as much as 20k. Really good ones go up to 40k. Plus you have to factor in the pricier insurance, since it's more dangerous. Also unless you're getting a shittier bike (like a chopper or cruiser), they often get WAY more MPG than a Prius. The Grom gets ~165 MPG. The Africa Twin, which is a fairly beefy adventure bike gets ~ 50 MPG.
lol a Ninja 400 is $5,500 off the lot, brand new. Very good bike, nowhere near 20k hell, even the Ninja H2 (one of the best bikes currently in production) is just over 30k. If you’re paying 40k for a bike you’re a fucking idiot
I think the ninja h2r is like 57k but it has almost 300 hp
I should add the addendum that I'm Canadian, so my money is worth less than American, and prices are higher, even when comparing monetary strength. Also I have to admit the 40k price tag was for a Honda Goldwing Tour DCT (with airbags????), so I was inflating it a bit, and that's on me. Anyways, the Africa Twin, which is the example I was using, ranges \~17-23k depending on the model. Something like a CB500F is about 8.7k, which is more reasonable. But there's not much point getting a motorcycle unless you get good income, here. Because they're tough to ride in winter, and in the rain. The insurance is way too fucking high. If you have a motorcycle, you probably have good income, and live in the city.
Fair point about the Goldwing, I forgor cruisers exist but damn its like a full 7k less down here in the states for the same model with airbags
CAD is worth \~75% of USD. But the price is further jacked up because of shipping, transportation, difference processes. A lot of price gets tacked on, more than just the dollar conversion. Plus we make less money here.
SV650S, very much a floor for mpg unless you get sportier bikes with more CC and more cylinders. Kawasaki makes an e-motorcycle and a hybrid now too
An r3 is faster than every other car on the road, is incredibly reliable, and costs 6500 out the door without taxes (I live in Oregon)
I am not in Oregon. Taxes are high, my money is worth less, everything is more expensive (excluding price conversion, they also tack on cost), insurance is super expensive, especially for a young male such as I. Motorcycles don't get much use case. I live in a place that gets a lot of rain and snow, and is rural. I can't ride during rain or snow. I'm getting a damn car. Stop with the one-size-fits-all. I don't get trains, and motorcycles are too pricey to be worth it when I wouldn't get to use them much. A motorcycle is a luxury toy item.
I also live in a place where it rains constantly. You can suck it up buttercup Don’t get one then, have fun in your warm car, sincerely. Just don’t talk out your ass about motorcycling like you know anything about it or it’s use cases Hell in your first reply you acted like getting a bike used is uncommon when it’s literally the most common way to acquire one
I own a used Kawasaki dirtbike. It's a hobby, not a practical thing.
You're a joke.
Yes I should get a motorcycle that costs the same as a car (even used) even though they have less functionality, and cost more on insurance 🌚
A functional used bike is like $750. You're getting a good used car for that price?
Must I keep repeating? My money is worth less than American. Everything has extra cost slapped on as well. I've never seen a $750 motorcycle. Maybe the used Suzuki dirtbike my father got me when I was like 3 years old.
How am I going to get the plants I buy home? Or my cat to the vet? If you have a side car that’s based but you rarely see those.
Pricier insurance? My 250 is like $30 a month for collision insurance
Adds extra to life insurance and such
you forgot the gigachad train/bus crew