Probably depends on the locale. In Europe, riding a moped in a big city is a way to drastically cut your commute compared to driving a car. It's not exactly dangerous when all the other road users are moving at 5m/min, and being able to just skip all the traffic jams is a godsend. By car, my trip to the office was about 45min - it was 15min on a moped, a stop at a shop for some snacks included. And that's with riding speed never exceeding 50km/h.
I had two accidents during my 5 years of commuting, and both times I only got minor scratches and had to replace my shoes. Both happened at speeds a determined bicycle rider could achieve, but I suspect I wouldn't be as well protected on a bicycle (both the machine itself and the protective gear tend to be much lighter there than on a moped). If I needed to do that again, I'd buy a model with two wheels at the front, which would have prevented both accidents - though I'm not sure if added stability wouldn't encourage me to ride faster.
So it's pretty specific, but if you're somewhere where driving culture is not too cutthroat, the roads can support single-track vehicles, and the traffic rather than actual distance is the limiting factor - owning a bike can be an objectively better option.
In Europe many people have both, and use the motorcycle to go to work/etc because it's faster and more convenient, especially in a larger city with traffic jams.
I am going to get to work with my classic Vespa scooter.
Its cheaper than a car and i live only 7 kms away from my workplace.
Riding bus and tram is time consuming and expensive.
Its fun to ride a classic scooter and it never failed so far because i use it everyday.
My classic runs up to 70km/h and people think its a slow, modern scooter so they dont really pay attention to me.
I've always thought it made more sense that instead of large metrobuses the local transit authority operate more like a locals-only taxiservice – similar to their already-existant handicapped-access services (which send a solitary transport driver, with ramped single-occupant van/vehicle).
I'm a motorcyclists. We usually refer to the smaller bikes as "motorbikes". Two wheels in the west is usually a hobby. In other parts of the world it might be a necessity, they don't do it for the pleasure. A lot of people forget this.
Part of the reason for "US culture" (specifically: not walking mostly) is that zoning laws largely prevent over/under residential/storefront construction.
This makes everything so far apart as to make walking inconvenient. Add in unbearable weather for half of most years (whether hot/cold), and it just isn't convenient to grab something "on a quick walk" from the grocery store that is miles away from most homes.
Thankfully (some) cities are beginning to realize this, and are changing (IMHO: stupid) zoning/regulations. My favorite example has been of my own hometown's (Austin) reduction in required parking spaces for most commercial activities. This increases density, and encourages more walking. ATX's buslane-onlies leave a lot to be desired... but at least they've gotten rid of (most) downtown oneways.
Probably depends on the locale. In Europe, riding a moped in a big city is a way to drastically cut your commute compared to driving a car. It's not exactly dangerous when all the other road users are moving at 5m/min, and being able to just skip all the traffic jams is a godsend. By car, my trip to the office was about 45min - it was 15min on a moped, a stop at a shop for some snacks included. And that's with riding speed never exceeding 50km/h.
I had two accidents during my 5 years of commuting, and both times I only got minor scratches and had to replace my shoes. Both happened at speeds a determined bicycle rider could achieve, but I suspect I wouldn't be as well protected on a bicycle (both the machine itself and the protective gear tend to be much lighter there than on a moped). If I needed to do that again, I'd buy a model with two wheels at the front, which would have prevented both accidents - though I'm not sure if added stability wouldn't encourage me to ride faster.
So it's pretty specific, but if you're somewhere where driving culture is not too cutthroat, the roads can support single-track vehicles, and the traffic rather than actual distance is the limiting factor - owning a bike can be an objectively better option.
oh interesting, I should have realized it was fairly common in Europe
In Europe many people have both, and use the motorcycle to go to work/etc because it's faster and more convenient, especially in a larger city with traffic jams.
I am going to get to work with my classic Vespa scooter. Its cheaper than a car and i live only 7 kms away from my workplace. Riding bus and tram is time consuming and expensive. Its fun to ride a classic scooter and it never failed so far because i use it everyday. My classic runs up to 70km/h and people think its a slow, modern scooter so they dont really pay attention to me.
>Riding bus is time consuming and expensive.
I've always thought it made more sense that instead of large metrobuses the local transit authority operate more like a locals-only taxiservice – similar to their already-existant handicapped-access services (which send a solitary transport driver, with ramped single-occupant van/vehicle).
I'm a motorcyclists. We usually refer to the smaller bikes as "motorbikes". Two wheels in the west is usually a hobby. In other parts of the world it might be a necessity, they don't do it for the pleasure. A lot of people forget this.
And thank God for it.
If every scooter rider in Taipei had a car, the city traffic would move a meter a day.
It's also about convenience, btw, not just cost. It's basically impossible to park a car here. Scooters are also difficult but at least possible.
A huge chunk of people here just take public transit now, as it should be.
Part of the reason for "US culture" (specifically: not walking mostly) is that zoning laws largely prevent over/under residential/storefront construction.
This makes everything so far apart as to make walking inconvenient. Add in unbearable weather for half of most years (whether hot/cold), and it just isn't convenient to grab something "on a quick walk" from the grocery store that is miles away from most homes.
Thankfully (some) cities are beginning to realize this, and are changing (IMHO: stupid) zoning/regulations. My favorite example has been of my own hometown's (Austin) reduction in required parking spaces for most commercial activities. This increases density, and encourages more walking. ATX's buslane-onlies leave a lot to be desired... but at least they've gotten rid of (most) downtown oneways.