Sunday, November 3, 2013

Riding for fun - Ferraris versus Fords

I just came back from a great ride - an 11+ mile loop around some of the local islands. The ride was invigorating and it was a beautiful day (albeit somewhat windy), but something was odd: I wasn't actually going anywhere.

It's funny, but I don't really "go on a bike ride" as much as you may expect. I was thinking about it on my ride today, and I realized it's because I bike commute and there's a different mindset between the two approaches. I still bike the same way I did when I was a kid - to go places, and for a bit of fun. And I like it that way.

I was actually passed by a pace line of recreational cyclists during my ride, and it really illustrated the difference to me: I was wearing an athletic shirt and shorts, riding along on Amelia, and enjoying the scenery. They were in logo-covered Spandex, on lightweight racing bikes, cruising along, heads down. Don't get me wrong - I have nothing against this approach to cycling, but it just isn't me. I don't even own any Spandex. To me, it's the difference between seeing biking as a sport, versus as a means of transportation. To see it as a sport is fine, but these are (often) also the people who, come Monday morning, hop in their car to go to work. The bike is a toy, a piece of exercise equipment, no different than a pair of running shoes. You may love it, but it's not transportation any more than going for a run is. That's just not my philosophy when it comes to cycling. My only criticism of the "recreational cyclist" point of view is that I believe it holds people back from viewing their bike as a means of transportation.

For me, the bike is no different than a car. Think back to when you were young: before you got your driver's license, your bike was your only form of independent transportation. For many, though, once they get their driver's license, their bike gets shoved in the garage, only to come out for Sunday rides in a pace line. Where's the fun in that? To me, the bike holds an absolutely equal standing with the car - both are valid, useful, practical forms of transportation. I'll still go on fun, recreational rides, or rides for exercise like today, but it feels the same way "going for a drive" does in a car. Just without the concern over the cost of gas.

What I'm saying is, I want to see more people combat this preconception of the bike as a "toy" or a piece of sporting equipment. This view prevents people from seeing bikes the way they did when they were young - as a vehicle. It also sets an artificial barrier to cycle commuting, because the expense associated with racing bikes and gear, and the focus on speed and athleticism, just isn't for everyone. It would be like wanting to buy a car for driving to work, and only seeing people in Ferraris. They're part of an enthusiast's club, and you just want to go to the grocery store.

There's a place for racing bikes, just like there's a place for Ferraris, but if that's the only way you see bicycles, you're doing yourself a disservice. If you have the money and want to race on the weekends, go buy a Ferrari. But if you just want to go to work every day and run some errands, get a Ford.

*Addendum: I want to clarify that I have nothing against racing bikes or the cyclists who ride them. My problem is when the focus on cycling as a sport overshadows cycling as a means of everyday transportation and prevents people from giving it a try. -K

No comments:

Post a Comment