Best Cities to Ride

: To me, "bike friendly" means you can ride every day of the year. That
rules
: out the snow belt. Some people would also rule out the humidity belt
(aka, the
: southeast and gulf states). The west coast has pretty good year-round
weather.
: There are lots of college towns in California with excellent bike route
: systems.

Well, then, you had better rule out the Midwest and Texas--and maybe
Arizona, too, because we get this god-awful wind that will blow you over if
it catches you broadside....

Pat in TX

As others have said, the SW has some issues, at least in the major
cities. I have lived in Arizona, NM, and Texas and none of the big
name cities are particularly "bike-friendly" under any stretch of the
imagination or any defininition with the possible exception of Austin.
Phoenix is "LA east" and suffers from many of the same problems and
more of its own making. If I had to choose a southwestern 'city' the
short list would be Austin, Albuquerque, and Tucson.

Some of the smaller towns are fine, at least the attitudes are better
though the concessions like bike lanes may be lacking.

Don't think the SW is all sun and warmth. I have lived all across the
country and the coldest place I lived was just outside of Flagstaff,
AZ. From Oct to April it rarely got above freezing and night-time
temps would frequently be in the -30 to -45F range. The snowplows
cleared on the major roads, and then only the auto traffic lanes. By
mid-Dec most of the roads were lined with banks of snow 5-10' high and
the lanes had just enough room for a car. Point is - if you are
looking for year-round cycling you probably want to focus on locations
under 7000' elevation.

- rick

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:13:26 GMT, JoeD wrote:

When I meant bicycle friendly, that means the city government provides
bike lanes, proper signs, bridge access, law enforcement etc. and the
driving public generally respects a cyclists right of way. I've already
mentioned that I am leaning towards the SW because it is warm. Riding
year round is nice but not a requirement. I do want dry weather at least
9 to 10 months a year. The land needs rain for things to grow so rain
is ok sometimes but not all the times. Cold doesn't bother me too much.
I ride to work in 25 degrees with wind chill factor of 10 to 15 so if
the mornings and evenings drop to 40 or 50, that's ok, if I'm dressed
for it.

Love to hear from some of you with concrete city (not state) suggestions.

JoeD wrote:

Hi,

I live in NYC and am thinking of moving out of this area in the
future. I am starting to look now for any city that would be bicycle
friendly. I am leaning towards the Southwest of the country like NM,
with its warmer climate and cheaper health insurance but I am open to
any suggestions.
I use my bike to, commute to work (20m RT), local shopping, long day
trips and just getting around even though I have a car. I average
about 5k a year.
Either because I have been careful, plain lucky or a bit of both, I
have never had a serious problem in my 45 years of riding in the
streets competing with the cars, trucks, cabs and the dreaded
pedestrians. I am mentioning this because I am not afraid of city
traffic. Highway traffic is whole nother story since I want to live to
ride another 45 years.

Would anyone living in or knowing about bicycle friendly cities, want
another cyclist sharing the roads with them. I would promise to say
"Hi" as I pass you or vice versa.

JoeD wrote in message
ink.net...
Hi,

I live in NYC and am thinking of moving out of this area in the future.
I am starting to look now for any city that would be bicycle friendly. I
am leaning towards the Southwest of the country like NM, with its warmer
climate and cheaper health insurance but I am open to any suggestions.
I use my bike to, commute to work (20m RT), local shopping, long day
trips and just getting around even though I have a car. I average about
5k a year.
Either because I have been careful, plain lucky or a bit of both, I have
never had a serious problem in my 45 years of riding in the streets
competing with the cars, trucks, cabs and the dreaded pedestrians. I am
mentioning this because I am not afraid of city traffic. Highway traffic
is whole nother story since I want to live to ride another 45 years.

Would anyone living in or knowing about bicycle friendly cities, want
another cyclist sharing the roads with them. I would promise to say "Hi"
as I pass you or vice versa.

Everything in the Southwest is spreadout; you're going to have to get over
your fear of highways or find a different area. My top choices if you manage
to get over the highway fear:

Silver City, New Mexico
Fort Davis/Marfa/Alpine, Texas

Highway traffic in both areas is relatively light most of the year.

Pat wrote:

To me, "bike friendly" means you can ride every day of the year.
That rules out the snow belt. Some people would also rule out the
humidity belt (aka, the southeast and gulf states). The west coast
has pretty good year-round weather. There are lots of college towns
in California with excellent bike route systems.

Well, then, you had better rule out the Midwest and Texas--and maybe
Arizona, too, because we get this god-awful wind that will blow you
over if it catches you broadside....

Flagstaff may be more temperate but most of AZ is too hot to ride half the year,
unless you like to ride at 5AM.

Matt O.

Rick Warner wrote:
Don't think the SW is all sun and warmth. I have lived all across
the
country and the coldest place I lived was just outside of Flagstaff,
AZ. From Oct to April it rarely got above freezing and night-time
temps would frequently be in the -30 to -45F range. The snowplows
cleared on the major roads, and then only the auto traffic lanes. By
mid-Dec most of the roads were lined with banks of snow 5-10' high
and
the lanes had just enough room for a car. Point is - if you are
looking for year-round cycling you probably want to focus on
locations
under 7000' elevation.


I don't know if we define "frequently" the same but that sounds awfully
cold.
But sure, Flag has real winters. That's why so many teams hold their
winter camps down here in Tucson.

However you want to define it Tucson is a great cycling city. Local
goveernemnts are bike friendly and there is great weather and ride
options ranging from flat to extremely hilly. Also, there is a large
cycling community with many cycle clubs so you can easily find a fit
with your interests/personality.
The only down side is having all the super fit retirees that cycle hard
every day and just blow you up :-)

JoeD wrote in message
ink.net...
When I meant bicycle friendly, that means the city government provides
bike lanes, proper signs, bridge access, law enforcement etc. and the
driving public generally respects a cyclists right of way. I've already
mentioned that I am leaning towards the SW because it is warm. Riding
year round is nice but not a requirement. I do want dry weather at least
9 to 10 months a year. The land needs rain for things to grow so rain
is ok sometimes but not all the times. Cold doesn't bother me too much.
I ride to work in 25 degrees with wind chill factor of 10 to 15 so if
the mornings and evenings drop to 40 or 50, that's ok, if I'm dressed
for it.

Love to hear from some of you with concrete city (not state) suggestions.

With this additional info you can add Taos, New Mexico to my list. There are
more "bike lanes" and signage in this area but still you would need to get
over the highway fear thing. Try a vacation out this way and see what you
think.

Rick Warner wrote:

As others have said, the SW has some issues, at least in the major
cities. I have lived in Arizona, NM, and Texas and none of the big
name cities are particularly "bike-friendly" under any stretch of the
imagination or any defininition with the possible exception of Austin.
Phoenix is "LA east" and suffers from many of the same problems and
more of its own making. If I had to choose a southwestern 'city' the
short list would be Austin, Albuquerque, and Tucson.

LA at least has older neighborhoods where the sprawl model isn't as bad. Places
like Glendale and Pasadena are as pleasant as urban communities get, if you can
stand the heat and smog.

Some of the smaller towns are fine, at least the attitudes are better
though the concessions like bike lanes may be lacking.

Don't think the SW is all sun and warmth. I have lived all across the
country and the coldest place I lived was just outside of Flagstaff,
AZ. From Oct to April it rarely got above freezing and night-time
temps would frequently be in the -30 to -45F range. The snowplows
cleared on the major roads, and then only the auto traffic lanes. By
mid-Dec most of the roads were lined with banks of snow 5-10' high and
the lanes had just enough room for a car. Point is - if you are
looking for year-round cycling you probably want to focus on locations
under 7000' elevation.

This is true. Lower elevations are generally too hot, and higher elevations too
cold. I didn't realize winter was that harsh in Flagstaff, or that it was that
high. Our winters here in the Southeast are much milder than that.

In southern CA too, once you're just a few miles inland, it's sweltering from
May to October. If you're lucky enough to live by the coast it's great, but...

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole wrote:


This is true. Lower elevations are generally too hot, and higher
elevations too
cold. I didn't realize winter was that harsh in Flagstaff, or that
it was that
high. Our winters here in the Southeast are much milder than that.

In southern CA too, once you're just a few miles inland, it's
sweltering from
May to October. If you're lucky enough to live by the coast it's
great, but...

Seems to me some diligent work with a good atlas might tell us a lot
about where the climate is good.

What would we want? Relatively low summer temperatures, relatively
high winter temperatures, fairly low humidity, no killer winds, maybe
rolling terrain (instead of super-steep hills or dead flat). Oh, and I
prefer not being by a coast. It takes away 50% of your roaming
territory, unless you pedal a boat.

What else would we want?

Personally, and a little off-topic: My favorite would be a fairly
small town in an old farming area of the country, preferably with
minimal sprawl. I prefer a tight network of small country roads to
explore, and a human-scale town where the vehicle speeds are low.
Ideally, the town would be large enough to have decent cultural
amenities, but small enough that I can get to the countryside in
reasonable time.

To me, this is much more important than bike paths or bike lanes - both
of which I tend to dislike. Put such a town about 30 miles from a
larger city, and I think it's about perfect.

I am SHOCKED nobody from Minneapolis/St. Paul has spoken up. This is an
outstanding bike town.

First, the cities and their suburbs spend MILLIONS on bike paths. Some
shared, and some gloriously bike-only. Almost all of the famous
sparkling lakes are ringed with both, and the people-watching is second
to none. Minnesota has been turning old railroad beds into bike paths
for years, so you can go to many towns on these gorgeous, tree-canopied
crowned roads. The downtowns have lanes everywhere, much respect, and a
healthy messenger culture. Surly bikes is based in Minneapolis.

Second, the metro area here is fairly tiny. Ten minutes' drive puts you
in the burbs, and twenty minutes' drive lands you smack dab in
gently-hilly farm country. Small towns dot the landscape. You can ride
to Duluth, rural Wisconsin, North Dakota, and all around the metro on
paved paths.

Third, winter riding is immensely popular here, even among sporadic
riders. College kids and city commuters ride bikes year-round. Surly
Bikes even has a new frame, the Pugsley, specially designed for snow
and ice riding. (Think huge tires and a fork like a Texas rider's
stance.) With all the frozen creek beds, a good ice bike can take you
anywhere. And the best part is, you're not alone - it doesn't seem half
as cold if five other people are out there on the lake at midnight too.

Fourth, a practical and left-leaning culture in the Twin Cities fosters
a bike-friendly lifestyle. The city buses have bike racks. There are
shops everywhere. And if you've ever seen a northern city's populace
decide to "wake up" all at once on the first warm day, you know they
don't sleep until December: rollerbladers, pedestrians, coffee-shop
junkies, bicyclists, sand-castle freaks, kayakers, joggers, yoga and
Tai Chi nuts in the park... This city is so beautiful for outdoors
activities. It's the cold that keeps the assholes out.

wrote in message
oups.com...

What would we want? Relatively low summer temperatures, relatively
high winter temperatures, fairly low humidity, no killer winds, maybe
rolling terrain (instead of super-steep hills or dead flat). Oh, and I
prefer not being by a coast. It takes away 50% of your roaming
territory, unless you pedal a boat.

What else would we want?

Personally, and a little off-topic: My favorite would be a fairly
small town in an old farming area of the country, preferably with
minimal sprawl. I prefer a tight network of small country roads to
explore, and a human-scale town where the vehicle speeds are low.
Ideally, the town would be large enough to have decent cultural
amenities, but small enough that I can get to the countryside in
reasonable time.

To me, this is much more important than bike paths or bike lanes - both
of which I tend to dislike. Put such a town about 30 miles from a
larger city, and I think it's about perfect.

Wow. Except for the temperature extremes we sometimes experience and the
steep mountains nearby - which is actually a plus IMO - you've just
perfectly described Carson City, NV. It really is a nice place to live if
you ride, for both road riding and mountainbiking.

Cheto