You are funny.

Silly boy can't you tell he has super powers and can read our minds? He is very special.. his mother says so.

Phuney schtuff. You forgot ping pong, and what about chess? Was that considered a sport? I recall some chess match on ABC Wide World of Sports.

Poker is on ESPN. It must be a sport...

I was laid up for six months with a tidily wink injury!

No I have not. Can you provide evidence or solid statistics supporting this?

I am looking forward to your empirical data. I'll read it after I get back in from my ride.

angela

If the sport does not have cheerleaders then odds are most Americans are clueless about it.

Almost a lifetime ago I was in the gym getting some upper body conditioning in. This older guy came up and (looking at my cycling legs) asked "are you a body builder?" Haha - I weighed all of 165 lbs at the time. When I responded that I raced bicycles he immediately brightened up with "My wife and I are cyclists! We have a lake house and ride our bikes there at least 4 times a year!" That was so awesome!

I run in my neighborhood (not a busy highway) if I cannot use a local track. For the life of me, I cannot understand riding a vehicle on a street that cannnot keep up with traffic. Much less in the middle of the lane (sometimes even in the dark). I cannot imagine riding a bike in the middle of a narrow rural highway at 15 mph when the slower vehicles are going 55 mph. Especially when there are plenty of bike trains and roads with bike lanes. It seems incredibly rude and incredibly dangerous.

Serious question and a chance to educate me. :)

Should bikes be allowed on the highway? If not, then why not? And how do those reasons not apply to a 4 lane 55mph roadway?

Like all questions, the answer is the same - it depends.

In general I think CA has it right. Bicycles are not allowed on freeways (and multi-lane highways) except in a few areas where there is no surface road alternative (parts of the 101 north of LA for example). They are allowed on "highways" where there is only one (or maybe two) lanes in each direction. And often these roads are the only way between certain points (eg Angeles Crest Hwy). And on ACH, bikes can actually go as fast or faster than cars on downhill sections. So at some point the cars are in the way of the bicycles :D

Can but don't :) But seriously there is no answer in there. If you don't feel bikes should be allowed on expressways, what is it about 4 or even 2 lane roads with 55mph limits that is different?

Apparently you haven't seen the guys on bikes in our local mountains. They can and do go as fast or faster than cars on the downhills.

As for the follow-up question, because freeways are single use - vehicles only. Almost all 2 lane roads I know are essentially multi-use - pedestrians, mopeds, bicycles, horses, etc.

Not to place too little importance on your anecdotal evidence, but I'll try this a different way. What do you feel are the main couple of reasons bikes aren't allowed on expressways? We'll move on from there.

I can go faster than many cars and motorcycles on the downhills. I don't always pass because it isn't safe to cross the double yellow and because the idiots (they are driving slower than me so they must be idiots ;)) don't always move over.

However, I look behind me often and do let faster traffic past. That is only ever sport bikes and rarely something like a GT3 or RS replica. It spoils a few turns for me but it is no big deal because I ride so often.

Those Harley riders are the worst. I should start a thread. Why won't they move over? Many of them go just barely faster than I do uphill.

I've ridden on the 1 but never the 101. The bike lane is pretty wide and I try to stay to the right of it. On some of the 55mph "highways" it is narrower and a little scarier, but not anymore than the canyons. The roads are basically straight so the odds of someone hitting me are lower than in the twisty canyons with all the nuts driving and riding over their own limits. I don't really see a problem with it as long as there is a dedicated bike lane.

What's anecdotal? Those are the laws in CA. Freeways are single-use. 2-lane highways are multi-use. What's so complicated about that?

If you're fishing for "because they can't go fast enough" what's the point? Typical speed on an LA freeway at rush hour is about 7mph so actually a bicycle would be faster. Maybe we should allow them on the freeways at rush hour if relative speed is the gold standard.

If you were late and a car was driving along in front of you at 5mph on a 55mph road for the next half hour or so...would you be as quick to accept it as you would if it was a guy on a bike?

A car isn't a bike. Much easier to safely pass a bike.

You guys are insisting on black and white rules.

Well bully for the drivers that happen to be behind you on a good downhill with a tailwind :)

But seriously, why can't you just say why you don't think bikes should be allowed on expressways?

I have no desire to hurt anyone, my whole family rides bikes. I ride on the sidewalk whenever possible (avoiding foot traffic of course) though.

My point is simple, the laws are outdated and bikes should not be allowed on certain roads that they currently are. I realize guys like to play in the road and a few even ride to work, it's a shame those few would be inconvenienced.

Nostatic keeps telling me what the law is regarding use as if its existence is at the same time its justification. Yea I get it, bikes are legal on these roadways, they just shouldn't be. It's for every ones safety and efficiency of transit.