Same applies to the cyclists ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
Bicycle Protests
- Thread starter nobbie48
- Start date
- Status
The investment company ruined the brand. Dentists continued to support it. Sadly, I don't consider modern Cervelo at all special and I would prefer one of the mass-market brands over them. I definitely wouldn't pay any Cervelo premium for their modern bikes.
A TdF cervelo has almost nothing in common with the one you or I can buy. Just marketing. That's like people buying a Toyota because it won Nascar on the weekend. Sure, maybe over a long period of time there will be some trickle down but what you can buy today has nothing to do with what they are racing today.
Actually, the frames are pretty much the same, like the cervelo s5 when it gets released for 2023 (which is what they were riding) will be the same frame that was used in the tour, the dura ace groupo will be the same with maybe slightly different gearing, the wheels can be bought as well usually unless they are custom (which might happen for a pro team).
A lot of the components are available in the consumer market, it's basically a showcase for next years gear. Same for triathlon.
What might be different is the way it gets fitted to a general consumer that doesn't have the same flexibility and endurance to stay in a specific position for hours on end which can usually only be attained by the inhuman amounts of practice the tour riders put in.
Just open up the chequebook
here's an article about it
Are the bikes the pros ride in the Tour de France the same as you can buy in the shops?
Tour de France tech questions: how the pros’ bikes are the same… but different
So in a fictional world, where all road users had to have insurance policies. Trucks, cars, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, motorcycles, pedestrians...
Who do you think would weigh in as the most lethal on the road creating the bigger majority of "Liability claims" ?
How many more claims do you think cyclists would file for being run into the gutter or driven into by cars? (currently, most occurences don't get reported since they're hit and runs)
How easy do you think it will be to create fraudulent claims while cycling or walking?
In a lot of jurisdictions, the car driver is guilty until proven innocent and having a lot of at-fault claims for your pool of road users = higher risk = high premiums. It would also add a bigger load on our court system, while a licensing system for bikes has been turned down several times over in the past century.
I don't know if it's truly worth the hassle.
It's a fine line between financial oppression of those doing the best they can and making sure people carry their share of the insurance burden. E-bikes would be the obvious place to start as they seem to be a larger problem (more weight, more speed, more drunk) but if Ontario insurance industry touched them they would cease to be viable as yearly insurance would exceed the cost of the bike.
If Toronto allowed an organized group to utilize some roads, that group could carry insurance for all members and cost becomes reasonable (probably in the ballpark of $30/yr/person). Toronto already farms out most of their tennis courts, they have a working model that can probably be adapted. There are mtb trails near me on public land maintained by a local club. You are supposed to buy a pass to use them. ~$80/yr IIRC. Seems reasonable. The complicating factor in Toronto is there is no dedicated space available (or maybe more accurately, there could be dedicated space but politicians will never do it as the uproar from the old bittys would be huge).
Last edited:
Mad Mike
Well-known member
How do they stick? Not knowing your speed doesn't pass as a reasonable defense.
In a motor vehicle which is required to have a speedometer. A bicycle is not required to have a speed measuring device. If you had a chance in court (which I'm not sure you do for these tickets), you may have a chance if you were only slightly over. I can guess my speed but not accurately enough to say 19 or 21 with certainty. If I am going 40+ down a hill, I don't see many paths to a win (nor should there be).
Boots
Well-known member
I'm in the industry and see it every single day.
Liability policies will 1) make them think twice about riding like maniacs because now they will have claims attached to their names if they don't have a vehicle policy of their own and 2) It will make it so that they contribute to the premium pool that they dip into every now and then whether or not they pay into it.
They're a liability risk on the road whether it's their fault or not. I can't tell you how many claims i've gotten where they get severely injured off the most minor accidents (some of which they are at fault for) and they don't pay a penny in premium by virtue of them being cyclists. It's the same reason why we pay higher premiums for being a bigger liability risk on the road. We aren't protected by cages and neither are they.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
There is a law for this. The HTA section 132 states: “No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances.”
If a driver disobeys this law, they can lose two demerit points and receive a fine of $110.
The HOV lane on a freeway is not a highway onto itself, if it's the rightmost lane -- its the right lane, the only restriction are the use qualifications.
Dunno about that.
I don't see a JP deciding just because the cops turn a blind eye to enforcing 120+, doesn't mean it's not OK for you to drive the posted limit. HOV lane is not the passing lane.
Plus you can only change lanes into/out of the HOV at certain sections.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
A gal I work with had this happen to her, an elderly man riding the sidewalk on McCowan muffed a right turn into Markville mall. She was stopped waiting for a light change, he plowed the side of he SUV. Rider and car got a few scrapes, bicycle was undamaged. A month later she learned about a $250k injury claim. In the end her insurer settled for $15k.
Weighed hard on her for 2 years while it played out.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
There isn't a passing line in the hta, it's considered the left lane on a highway whether HOV or not. (I goofed in the earlier post, side streets use the right for HOV. )
I do agree it may be hard to make it stick, I guess that depends on the cop. I've only heard that charge once, for a pair of cars marshaling speed on tge 404 by driving 100 side by side.
Surprisingly nuanced piece by the Sun
torontosun.com
WARMINGTON: Compromise needed to deal with high-flying cyclists in High Park
Perhaps when a cyclist flies through a stop sign and strikes a baby in a stroller, Toronto will find a solution to the High Park danger zone.
torontosun.com
Wrong. Normal and reasonable movement of traffic means at the posted speed limit. NOT above it.
You cannot be ticketed for driving 100 in the passing lane even if there are 20 cars behind you wanting to go 119.
Rude? Yes. But not illegal.
The case for higher speed limits on Hwy. 401
I believe they got him under this statute:
Unnecessary slow driving prohibited
132 (1) No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
The case for higher speed limits on Hwy. 401
freerepublic.com
I believe they got him under this statute:
Unnecessary slow driving prohibited
132 (1) No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances.
Side by side without passing is probably what got him... not the speed or lack of it.
Righthand lane.. unless you're passing. Rarely enforced.
- Status
|
|
|
|
|