Poll of cycle accidents

If you have had a significant cycle accident, was a vehicle involved?

1 accident where a vehicle was involved
13
27%
1 accident where a vehicle was not involved
18
38%
2 accidents where a vehicle was involved
8
17%
2 accidents where a vehicle was not involved
3
6%
3 accidents where a vehicle was involved
1
2%
3 accidents where a vehicle was not involved
2
4%
4 accidents where a vehicle was involved
2
4%
4 accidents where a vehicle was not involved
0
No votes
5 or more accidents where a vehicle was involved
0
No votes
5 or more accidents where a vehicle was not involved
1
2%
 
Total votes: 48

User avatar
geomannie
Posts: 1093
Joined: 13 May 2009, 6:07pm

Poll of cycle accidents

Post by geomannie »

In cycle campaigning much focus is given to the need to separate cyclists from vehicles on the basis that this makes it safer for cyclists.

Whilst I have no doubt that is likely to be true, when I think back to the significant cycle accidents that I have suffered, one was due to clipping wheels with another bike and two were due to slippery road/gravel surface. All three of these accidents resulted in significant medical intervention. The one time I was T-boned by a car, the bike was written off but I walked away with scratches and bruises.

For me my ratio of car-related to non-car related accidents in 3 to 1. In other words, if I had kept away from cars, I could/would (arguably) still have had 75% of my accidents and all of the serious ones.

In the simple desire to know if I am unusual, I have made this simple poll. I would grateful for your statistic to compare to mine.

You may click on two options

Thanks
geomannie
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by meic »

It might of been interesting to see how many on the forum had had no significant accidents.
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by mjr »

I wonder if the poll says "vehicle" when the author meant "motor vehicle".

It also depends what "significant" means. I've never had a serious (or fatal, obviously!) collision, but I've had some memorable minor ones, from riding into a car to running myself over. The causes were generally silly/trivial, but I suspect the presence of motor vehicles risks making the outcomes far worse.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by tatanab »

mjr wrote:It also depends what "significant" means.
Also, over what sort of period. e.g in 50 years of cycling (other than childhood) I have had 2 collisions involving motor vehicles. One involved 5 days in hospital, the second just a few stitches which I would not consider "significant". I do not recall any self induced or rider induced incidents requiring any treatment other than when racing.
User avatar
Guy951
Posts: 1599
Joined: 14 Jul 2009, 8:23am
Location: Mid Beds

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by Guy951 »

I have had one significant incident*, taking "significant" to mean being off a bike for more than a few minutes and/or a visit to hospital. Not bad for 40-odd years of cycling on British roads.



* I refuse to use the term "accident" because that implies a lack of fault. While I am satisfied the driver hadn't intended to hit me, had he been paying attention and driving properly it would never have happened.
Last edited by Guy951 on 24 Feb 2017, 12:36pm, edited 1 time in total.
What manner of creature's this, being but half a fish and half a monster
User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 7804
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by Paulatic »

meic wrote:It might of been interesting to see how many on the forum had had no significant accidents.

Yes I agree. I've only fell off once on the road when starting with clipless pedals. Did once crack some ribs but that was mtbiking and slipped and hit a gate end. So I assume that doesn't count either?
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by Mick F »

Significant?

What does that mean?

I've had a the odd bump and incident with motor vehicles. Maybe three or four in my cycling life.

I was once badly hurt by a pothole. :wink:
Mick F. Cornwall
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by meic »

I would enter that I had had no significant cycling injuries, then I remembered breaking my arm twice and stitches in my knee. Those happened when I was a teenager and I did things like that on and off the bike. More of playing accidents than cycling accidents.
Yma o Hyd
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by Psamathe »

Mick F wrote:Significant?

What does that mean?

I've had a the odd bump and incident with motor vehicles. Maybe three or four in my cycling life.

I was once badly hurt by a pothole. :wink:

I considered mine minor (bruises and scuffed elbow&knee and damaged rear mech. ('cos I can't spell daurelliau).

Also, I wonder is the results would actually indicate anything as, as you point out "in my cycling life.". Because somebody having e.g. 2 accidents when they only started cycling yesterday is a very different case to somebody with 3 accidents who has been cycling and commuting by bike for 40 years.

Ian
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by pjclinch »

geomannie wrote:In cycle campaigning much focus is given to the need to separate cyclists from vehicles on the basis that this makes it safer for cyclists.


It's rather more complicated than that.

The sort of folk mixing it with traffic on the roads in the UK have a significant proportion of Enthusiasts, and compared to places like NL relatively vulnerable riders like primary school children and pensioners are greatly under-represented. What a setup like NL gives you is the ability for the likes of primary school kids to use their bikes as transport across busy areas, so it's not that mixing it with traffic makes getting mown down a Sure Thing, it's that mixing it with a traffic is a fundamental deal breaker for many users.

I probably wouldn't be much safer on a fietspad than a road, but then again I've had 40 years road experience and teach people how to ride in traffic so I'm not necessarily representative. We make primary school kids cycling in areas of heavy urban traffic safe by making them too scared to even try it, and that does indeed keep the prang-count low. That's not necessarily a good thing though...

Segregated infrastructure isn't all about safety. It's also about lowering the bar to a greater range of cyclists, making it acceptably safe for a wider ability range and also making it more pleasant for those riders. More experienced riders can use them too.

Beyond that point, while you can get in to hospital without a motor vehicle's "help", you really have to be going some to kill yourself armed only with your own bike. Add a motor vehicle, particularly a fast/heavy one, and it gets a whole lot easier. I doubt that many people who've found that out the hard way will be responding to your survey :(

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by [XAP]Bob »

By definition any cycling accident involves a vehicle.

I can only think of one incident where I was sufficiently shocked that I nearly made it serious by wandering across the road.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by Mick F »

[XAP]Bob wrote:By definition any cycling accident involves a vehicle.
Does it?
Why?
Mick F. Cornwall
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by irc »

I'd have ticked the no injury accidents box had there been one.
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by irc »

Mick F wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:By definition any cycling accident involves a vehicle.
Does it?
Why?


Because it involves at least one bicycle.
User avatar
geomannie
Posts: 1093
Joined: 13 May 2009, 6:07pm

Re: Poll of cycle accidents

Post by geomannie »

Folks

My apologies if the poll could have been better constructed. This isn't science but me simply wondering if I am careless, unlucky, or simply have the typical type of accident.

Maybe if there is interest we could work out some better questions and do a proper survey?

In the meantime I am delighted to have your poll entries. Keep 'em coming!

Cheers
geomannie
Post Reply