KVOA is reporting that a man riding a motorized bike was killed this morning when he lost control and swerved in front of a car.
TUCSON – An early morning accident leaves a bicyclist dead.
Tucson Police say it happened on 4th Avenue and Congress around 5:00 a.m. when the bicyclist and a vehicle were both headed westbound on Congress.
Witnesses say the bicyclist lost control and swerved into the vehicle. Tucson police police say preliminary reports show that the cyclist is at fault.
No citation will be issued for the driver.
KOLD is reporting he was a 60-year-old male riding a motorized bicycle.
The Star is reporting that he was 47.
I am trying to get in touch with TPD to get more details. This is the intersection with trolley tracks going in various directions that could have been a factor.
I hate to say this, but I've been thinking that it's only a matter of time before a motorized bike accident like this happens.
I've seen many people going around town on these things, and I think they're overpowered relative to their stopping power. Not to mention the higher-than-pedal-bike rates of speed that they're being ridden at. Put these things together, and you have a bike that's easy to lose control of.
I've also noticed quite a few of the motorized bike riders not wearing helmets. While I can't say that, if this rider had a helmet, he might have lived, but helmets can save lives.
Another motorized bike rider was killed a few months back on Roger too.
Should the regulations be changed for these types of vehicles?
The regulations are adequate, it is the lack of enforcement that is the problem. The regs severely limit the power and speed of the assisted bikes to that of pedal-only cycles (actually quite a bit lower than a really fit rider on a good bike) but I commonly see bikes with ICE assist doing 5-15 MPH faster than legally allowed for this class of assist. They're still well under the posted speed limits so they get the same level of abuse from drivers for “impeding traffic”. The only time I ever saw the regs enforced was against a man who had lost his license because of multiple DUI, and the ironic part about that was that one particular bike was 100% legal, gear ratio limited top speed, under displacement limit, better than required brakes, everything totally legal and by the book.
I agree with you, especially regarding helmets. Even though I'm probably in the minority of avid cyclists who support helmet use, I think helmets should be compulsory for riders of bikes, motorcycles and all vehicles in between.
It won't solve many of the problems between cycles and cars, but an ounce of prevention would certainly be prudent, whether we like it or not.
No matter how much you want or think helmets will save lives, statistics don't support it. Bicyclists deaths have not decreased in areas with mandatory helmet use. If you want to wear a plastic hat to keep from getting cuts and scrapes go ahead, but don't expect it to save your life despite anecdotal evidence. And it shouldn't be mandatory for all bicyclists, that just causes a decrease in bicycle usage.
What is wrong here is that the Star always throws in the gratuitous line about helmet use by the rider with no regard to cause or effect. How do they know if the helmet would have been of any use in the accident or “if it would have saved the persons life”. They need to stick to the facts, and get them right, without the gratuitous comments by the reporter.
Enforcement of existing statutes would probably go further in preventing these motorized bicycle problems than much else.
These things can't be made safe. The motor
throws off the center of gravity and adds too
much weight for the frame and the components
(steerer, brakes, wheels & hubs) aren't made for
the added speed. That they could go faster than
they were supposed to was a down-low come-on
used by Spooky Tooth to sell these things.
So if he lost it on the trolley tracks at a fast speed,
there's not much safety available, in equipment or
regulation.
Dammit. I made a point to find some statistics to refute your statement, but it's all pretty slanted either way. I wouldn't expect it to save my life, but it is definitely safer to wear a helmet than the alternative. Even if it's only a 1% chance to keep me from a traumatic brain injury or death, I owe it to my son to wear one.
I agree, though – most newspaper articles are unfairly biased towards the drivers and the commenters on those sites are absolutely infuriating and ignorant.
I hate to say this, but I've been thinking that it's only a matter of time before a motorized bike accident like this happens.
I've seen many people going around town on these things, and I think they're overpowered relative to their stopping power. Not to mention the higher-than-pedal-bike rates of speed that they're being ridden at. Put these things together, and you have a bike that's easy to lose control of.
I've also noticed quite a few of the motorized bike riders not wearing helmets. While I can't say that, if this rider had a helmet, he might have lived, but helmets can save lives.
Another motorized bike rider was killed a few months back on Roger too.
Should the regulations be changed for these types of vehicles?
The regulations are adequate, it is the lack of enforcement that is the problem. The regs severely limit the power and speed of the assisted bikes to that of pedal-only cycles (actually quite a bit lower than a really fit rider on a good bike) but I commonly see bikes with ICE assist doing 5-15 MPH faster than legally allowed for this class of assist. They're still well under the posted speed limits so they get the same level of abuse from drivers for “impeding traffic”. The only time I ever saw the regs enforced was against a man who had lost his license because of multiple DUI, and the ironic part about that was that one particular bike was 100% legal, gear ratio limited top speed, under displacement limit, better than required brakes, everything totally legal and by the book.
I agree with you, especially regarding helmets. Even though I'm probably in the minority of avid cyclists who support helmet use, I think helmets should be compulsory for riders of bikes, motorcycles and all vehicles in between.
It won't solve many of the problems between cycles and cars, but an ounce of prevention would certainly be prudent, whether we like it or not.
No matter how much you want or think helmets will save lives, statistics don't support it. Bicyclists deaths have not decreased in areas with mandatory helmet use. If you want to wear a plastic hat to keep from getting cuts and scrapes go ahead, but don't expect it to save your life despite anecdotal evidence. And it shouldn't be mandatory for all bicyclists, that just causes a decrease in bicycle usage.
What is wrong here is that the Star always throws in the gratuitous line about helmet use by the rider with no regard to cause or effect. How do they know if the helmet would have been of any use in the accident or “if it would have saved the persons life”. They need to stick to the facts, and get them right, without the gratuitous comments by the reporter.
Enforcement of existing statutes would probably go further in preventing these motorized bicycle problems than much else.
These things can't be made safe. The motor
throws off the center of gravity and adds too
much weight for the frame and the components
(steerer, brakes, wheels & hubs) aren't made for
the added speed. That they could go faster than
they were supposed to was a down-low come-on
used by Spooky Tooth to sell these things.
So if he lost it on the trolley tracks at a fast speed,
there's not much safety available, in equipment or
regulation.
Dammit. I made a point to find some statistics to refute your statement, but it's all pretty slanted either way. I wouldn't expect it to save my life, but it is definitely safer to wear a helmet than the alternative. Even if it's only a 1% chance to keep me from a traumatic brain injury or death, I owe it to my son to wear one.
I agree, though – most newspaper articles are unfairly biased towards the drivers and the commenters on those sites are absolutely infuriating and ignorant.
I agree the rider was at fault. There are not real facts about the speed at which the bike was going but I have seen pedal power road bikes cross 30+ miles an hour. I am not sure but I think the current rule is the motorized bike can not cross 25mph?? Accidents happen. I personally will never ride a motorized bike, but I do not think they should be outlawed.. There is always going to be careless motorized bike riders just like there are careless drivers and bicyclists.
Darwin's law is more effective than traffic law.
Top legal speed for gas or electric mopeds
is 19 MPH. Above that, it needs to be
licensed.
Top legal speed for gas or electric mopeds
is 19 MPH. Above that, it needs to be
licensed.