• horse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      You’d be surprised how far you can travel on a bike. As long as you cycle within your ability/fitness level and eat enough you can basically cycle forever. I cycled 300km in one day last year and it wasn’t even that hard. I just made sure to eat enough carbs and stick to a sustainable pace. It took some determination, but it was not difficult physically. Humans are built for endurance.

      • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You cycled for 300km for fun. You didn’t cycle 240km to another city with a 10kg boardgame hanging off your back, taking your dog and gf with you, while it was -15c and snow drifts in winter. And you had to get back home by a certain time in the evening for another thing.

        I did this described trip with a train and I won’t do it again without a car. Public transit is only as good as its schedule is frequent and stops are closeby.

        • horse@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I didn’t say cycling 300km was the most convenient way to travel such a distance, just that travelling long distances by bike is doable.

          • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            People don’t want bike as a hobby they want it as a viable way to go a to b. Bikes are not a viable method of travel for anything that is further than 30minutes and without hills. Ebikes shoot up viability greatly though.

    • Karjalan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yes, but have you considered this extremely selective list of positive features for bikes?

      • unknown1234_5@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Most cities aren’t big enough to be bike friendly or have public transport at all, let alone good public transport (as an issue of not enough taxes to do it bc small and not enough demand for private section either).

        • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          You mean not dense enough (as in high concentration of people).

          Commutes need to be short enough that bikes are a reasonable alternate mode of transportation. That means you have to get to work and shopping within 30 minutes or it isn’t feasible for most folks.

          That can only work if they get rid of a lot of residential suburbs and instead build condos and apartments close to places that offer a lot of jobs. Then it’ll work out.

          • unknown1234_5@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            no I mean too low in population. it is not reasonable or feasible to make anything other than a large city bike-friendly, and suburbs are large cities in comparison to the majority of cities. also replacing real homes with apartments is a bad idea because it takes away true personal ownership of your home. you seem to be unaware that small towns exist and that a lot of people do not want to live in a big, dense, concrete slab of a city. you should leave your city sometimes and remind yourself that the people outside of it do exist.