If you could cycle exclusively on cycle tracks, would you?

[jowwy]

i can do a 40 mile loop from home and back on cycle tracks and towpaths, i can also commute 15 miles each way exclusively on cycle track and towpath.....if all routes i wanted were like that, then yes i would have no issue with it

 

[Dogtrousers]

I think 'normal' non-cyclists are very nervous about cycling amongst traffic. I know it's still statistically unlikely but there are the constant near misses and unreasonable drivers as well as some who actively hate anyone on a bike.
I haven't got the stats to hand but I would think the number of people killed or seriously injured on cycle paths in comparison to on roads is probably miniscule.
This is a huge barrier to people cycling in this country.

This is a very good point that it's easy for those of us who are comfortable sharing the road with motor and other traffic to forget.

I tend to view cycle paths as a necessary evil, needed to get around very large roundabouts, dual carriageway or mortorway crossings and the like. Most (nearly all) of my cycling is on minor roads and I wouldn't have it any other way. In the back of my mind is an uneasy feeling that cycle paths are the thin end of the wedge and once you take a cycle path you are acknowledging that you are a second class road user and the eventually will never be allowed back on the road network again.

But that's looking at it from the privileged viewpoint of a moderately experienced and confident long-ish distance cyclist. It's worth remembering that there are very many cyclists, or would-be cyclists, to whom the lack of segregated facilities is a real barrier.

Back to the original question - I actually could do long distance rides entirely on cycle paths, but I've never seriously considered it. I have a couple of facilities available to me: The Cyclopark at Gravesend and the Lee Valley VeloPark. Theoretically I could do my 100 mile rides as laps round one of those. It might be a tad tedious, and because I'm so slow I would probably run into problems with opening hours.

 

[Panscrank]

The thing to remember is that you are not cycling in traffic, but cycling in other traffic, when using the roads.

You're a part of the traffic, not something else on the road.

It's fine to think that but you can't force the small percentage of idiot drivers to either think that way or respect you
Safety and self preservation could always come before principle.

 

[matticus]

It's fine to think that but you can't force the small percentage of idiot drivers to either think that way or respect you

The way you ride makes a big difference to how people drive around you.

Safety and self preservation could always come before principle.

It's a compromise (like everything in life): eliminating risk of road-death would enormously constrain your life, and the actual risk from riding "in the traffic" is incredibly small compared to the rest of real life.

 

[classic33]

It's fine to think that but you can't force the small percentage of idiot drivers to either think that way or respect you
Safety and self preservation could always come before principle.

It's not a principle, it's fact.
On the road you are a part of the traffic flow, not seperate from it.
It's something that you have to accept and get used to if you use the roads. Beit on foot, two wheels or four.

 

[Alex321]

It's fine to think that but you can't force the small percentage of idiot drivers to either think that way or respect you
Safety and self preservation could always come before principle.

It isn't about "thinking" that, or about principle.

You ARE a part of the traffic ion the road, like it or not, and you need to remember that as part of keeping yourself as safe as possible.

 

[Milkfloat]

I haven't got the stats to hand but I would think the number of people killed or seriously injured on cycle paths in comparison to on roads is probably miniscule.

I don't know if it is true, but I hard that it was more dangerous on cycling infrastructure than on normal roads. I assume this includes magic white paint and not just cycle tracks. @mjr is likely to know.

 

[harlechjoe]

I enjoyed the Rhine route but even then I found some sections tedious. Almost too much of a good thing, so I went off piste to explore some villages and hills. Loved the feeling of security without traffic though.

I did the same as you and didn't like the industrial areas. I wrote the story of my adventure on www.harlechjoe.wordpress.com with photos you will probably recognise.

 

[Ian H]

Cycle tracks feel slower than a road ride, Swansea sea front for example, where there’s a cycle track and footpath side by side, you can’t really put your foot down.

For a casual ride, yeah they’re fine, but for getting somewhere or getting there quickly atleast, the road is preferable.

I was confused by this. Putting your foot down means stopping in cycling terms.

 

[Vantage]

No I wouldn't.
I personally don't remember any cycle lanes/tracks/paths being around when I was younger and I'm only 46. It was a case of ride the roads or ride the trails. Even then, I had to ride the roads to get to the trails. Still do.
I've never felt comfortable around traffic due to being hit by drivers on multiple occasions but at the same time they don't intimidate me enough to stay off the roads.
The roads are cycle lanes. Generations of cyclists before us are the reason they're paved. The motorists as far as I'm concerned can just f off if they don't like me being there.

 

[T4tomo]

Surely transport links stimulate demand for busniesses like cafes and pubs?

Currently, most of them are by roads. Eg Drive-through Starbucks (wind down your window, suck in a lungful of fumes and particulates, and order your coffee, all surrounded by acres of parked cars and tarmac on the edge of a motorway).

The nicer option is to find the equivalent on a cycle track, eg the Atlantic Coast Express on the Camel Trail; coffee in a proper mug, with a delightful view of a river, hills and countryside, and some fascinating abandoned quarry workings. Clean fresh air, peaceful, perfect.

I go to lots of lovely independent cafes, all of them are accessed the road network....none remotely resemble your description above, they are more like your description of the one off the camel trail.

Yes a decent cycle path might attract a business to set up, there are nice ones on such as the Tissington Trail, but its no coincidence they are situated at access points / car parks so serve cyclist, walkers, and those who have arrived by car too to do one or neither of those activities.

see also the tea garden on the camel rail - which next to a road.

 

[Ian H]

No I wouldn't.
I personally don't remember any cycle lanes/tracks/paths being around when I was younger and I'm only 46. It was a case of ride the roads or ride the trails. Even then, I had to ride the roads to get to the trails. Still do.
I've never felt comfortable around traffic due to being hit by drivers on multiple occasions but at the same time they don't intimidate me enough to stay off the roads.
The roads are cycle lanes. Generations of cyclists before us are the reason they're paved. The motorists as far as I'm concerned can just f off if they don't like me being there.

I'm old enough to just remember these. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-22/reviving-the-u-k-s-giant-network-of-bike-highways

But of course these are only urban main routes.

 

[Panscrank]

I've never felt comfortable around traffic due to being hit by drivers on multiple occasions

Same here and the main reason I avoid roads as much as possible and have so far never been hit or knocked off my bike.
I prefer to stay uninjured/live than take the (albeit statistically small) risk, not to mention the constant 'over the shoulder' anxiety and kerbside potholes.

 

[Oldhippy]

Nearly 60 and been riding since I was a kid on the road. Never been killed or injured by a car.

 

[Vantage]

Nearly 60 and been riding since I was a kid on the road. Never been killed or injured by a car.

I've been killed loads of times. It's getting tedious.