US bikesharing systems ranked by size

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

All due respect Steely, but hardcore cyclists like you are not the target demographic either.

oh, i'm well aware that bikesharing is not for a hardcore cyclist like me. i merely took exception to your statement that only "lycra wearing Lance-wannabes" care about bike weight.


also, i do think if there were a practical way to get these bikeshare bikes under 30 pounds, that people would have more fun riding them and potentially use them more often. a 27 pound bike is simply more fun to ride than a 42 pound beast, especially if one has to ride up any hills, as 202 pointed out. i don't know why those 15 pounds make such a huge difference, but they do for some reason. i know it's completely impractical to have 17 pound titanium rockets for these bikesharing programs, but you don't need to use any space age materials or super high end components to get a modern day bicycle under 30 pounds.

my guess is that everything on these bikes is simply over-engineered to cut down on maintenance cost and time, which makes sense for the way they're used. and the step through frames these bikeshare bikes use are an inefficient use of steel in frame design, but as i pointed out in a different thread, step-through frames offer the advantage of easier, more controlled mounts and dismounts for more casual cyclists.

[Cirrus]

everything on these bikes is simply over-engineered to cut down on maintenance cost and time, which makes sense for the way they're used

Yes, but that's not the only reason. There are many benefits to heavy bikes that specifically make them better for public bikesharing systems:

1. They're more stable and easier to ride, thus they appeal more to people who are not expert cyclists.

2. In order to make bikes fully "ready to go" and eliminate the need for users to carry a bunch of their own equipment around with them in order to use the system, it's desirable for bikesharing bikes to integrate a number of additional components into the bike frame, such as rear lights and locks.

3. Since the target market is functional riders, it is desirable to provide sturdy baskets so people can carry bags.

4. Skirt and chain guards are desirable both to allow people dressed in regular clothing to use the bikes easily and to provide a space for advertising, which is an extremely important part of the financing.

5. Step-through frames (heavier than traditional frames) are desirable to allow female cyclists (including those wearing skirts) to use the system.

6. Heavier bikes discourage theft.

7. Bikesharing bikes require unique mechanisms to lock into stations, which have to be heavy in order to make them unbreakable.

[202_Cyclist]

1. They're more stable and easier to ride, thus they appeal more to people who are not expert cyclists.

This is probably a signifant issue. There are a lot of people who use the Capital Bikeshare who haven't been on a bike in a long time. A 40 pound tank of a bike is more stable and probably makes them feel more confident.

On an unrelated note, I was thinking if I was a bike mechanic or recently out of college, it would be a lot of fun to work on the Capital Bikeshare program, either repositioning the bikes or repairing/maintaining them.

[fflint]

I doubt a 42-pound bike would work well in hilly cities like mine. Indeed, SF's large fleet of commercial rental bikes are mostly Trek 7200-class--sturdy, stable, and about 30lbs fully loaded. I see tourists on them all the time (they have a tell-tale pouch up front) out far from the rental sites, so I know they're facing hills at some point. An extra 12 pounds would make a huge difference even on our more gentle slopes.

[gtbassett]

Originally Posted by fflint

I doubt a 42-pound bike would work well in hilly cities like mine. Indeed, SF's large fleet of commercial rental bikes are mostly Trek 7200-class--sturdy, stable, and about 30lbs fully loaded. I see tourists on them all the time (they have a tell-tale pouch up front) out far from the rental sites, so I know they're facing hills at some point. An extra 12 pounds would make a huge difference even on our more gentle slopes.

Agreed, as an avid cyclist here, I do know that riding a super heavy bike would not be enjoyable in most cases while biking through the city. That said, I'm kinda a hypocrite considering I have a steel framed road bike, and detest most bikes aluminum and carbon (this is a feel argument, I just enjoy the feel of the steel frame road bikes, they can take a beating and fare better on the rougher roads.)

The problem that I see with a bike share program here in SF is the topography of our city. I suspect that all the bikes would end up down in the Market street area and other lower elevation stations while the higher elevation stations would be left high and dry of bikes just because of everybody riding the bikes down the hills, but nobody taking them back up.

[fflint]

Originally Posted by gtbassett

Agreed, as an avid cyclist here, I do know that riding a super heavy bike would not be enjoyable in most cases while biking through the city. That said, I'm kinda a hypocrite considering I have a steel framed road bike, and detest most bikes aluminum and carbon (this is a feel argument, I just enjoy the feel of the steel frame road bikes, they can take a beating and fare better on the rougher roads.)

My commuter Trek weighs in at a hefty 29lbs, so I know how it is to lug a heavy bike up the hills--but 42lbs sounds like a nightmare. I'd bet even the Mint Hill slope on Market would be too much for an inexperienced rider on a tank like that.

The problem that I see with a bike share program here in SF is the topography of our city. I suspect that all the bikes would end up down in the Market street area and other lower elevation stations while the higher elevation stations would be left high and dry of bikes just because of everybody riding the bikes down the hills, but nobody taking them back up.

Good point, I think you're right.

[Cirrus]

All bikesharing systems include redistribution by truck in order to ensure availability of bikes and docking at all stations. San Francisco would be a more difficult case, but that functionality is already built in to mature bikesharing providers.

[penfold]

Originally Posted by gtbassett

The problem that I see with a bike share program here in SF is the topography of our city. I suspect that all the bikes would end up down in the Market street area and other lower elevation stations while the higher elevation stations would be left high and dry of bikes just because of everybody riding the bikes down the hills, but nobody taking them back up.

I was told in Paris that Velib would give me 15 minutes of extra free time if I parked at the top of a hill and somehow get to keep the free minutes I didn't use for the future (not sure how this works but sounds like phone rollover minutes). I still didn't attempt any, but maybe it makes a difference for younger everyday users, as the price goes up fast after the usual free half hour.

You also see a lot of trucks redistributing bikes from lower to higher altitudes throughout the day, which is probably the most effective, but expensive, solution.

[KevinFromTexas]

From the Austin article, it mentioned the price of the bikes is $1,000 each. I can't imagine where a 40 pound bike would cost that much. And also, why put the basket on the handlebars? You would have more control with the weight on the rear. 20 pounds on your handlebars would suck.

Originally Posted by Cirrus

^
Nobody cares about the weight of bikes if they're just riding for transportation on city streets. The market for bikesharing is NOT lycra wearing Lance-wannabes; it's everyday people who want a convenient way to travel short distances.

The purpose of bikesharing isn't exercise, racing, or recreation; it's transit. If you're the type of cyclist who cares about the weight of your bike, you're not the target demographic.

Well I ride for transportation, too, since I don't have a car. The thing is, we have hills and heat here so we most certainly care about bike weight. When it's 101F outside with 70 percent humidity and you're looking up at a 75 foot hill, you totally care about the weight of your bike.

And no, I'm not a Lance wannabe rider. I'm all about commuting and turning my bike into a practical workhorse.

Originally Posted by Cirrus

All due respect Steely, but hardcore cyclists like you are not the target demographic either.

I see your point of course. Most people who would rather ride a light weight bike probably have that knowledge that those bikes exist outside of department stores, and so they already have them. Still, though, being a bike geek, trendy, or just being a really really picky person about what you ride, or your everyday person who hardly ever rides or is just starting out, weight affects them all.

Anyway, I went downtown yesterday for a ride and photos. I mostly ride for transportation, so it's nice sometimes to just ride not really having to go somewhere. I hit all the lights green heading down South Congress into downtown and was able to keep up with traffic doing about 30 mph.

[Smuttynose1]

Boston's system will launch this summer with 1,000 bikes and 85 stations.

The plan is to expand the system to include 3,000 bikes and 290 stations extended into the neighboring communities of Brookline, Cambridge and Somerville within three years.

[202_Cyclist]

Apparently, the Govinator was biking around DC yesterday. It would have been even better if he used the Capital Bikeshare. Unfortunately, DDOT and the US DOT missed a great PR opportunity with this.

http://schwarzenegger.posterous.com/...our-by-bicycle


http://dccycling.blogspot.com/2011/04/ello-guv.html

[202_Cyclist]

There is a posting today on Greater Greater Washington about the expansion of Capital Bikeshare in DC and Arlington. A new station was installed today at the Wilson building (DC's city hall). Altogether, there are more than thirty new stations planned in the District alone.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/...e-stations-go/

[Boquillas]

Hey Cirrus-- could you update your table in the first post so S.A. is #4? It's so rare that we are so highly ranked in anything (except obesity), and something so progressive at that, that I think it would be nice to throw the S.A. boosters a bone.

Plus we'll probably only be #4 for a couple months until other programs come on-line.

[Cirrus]

You'd be 5th right now. Miami Beach has since launched with about 1,000 bikes.

Anyway, it's too hard to keep the list running all the time, since expansions happen gradually (DC added 4 new stations last week, 1 today, etc). I'll update it once per year or so, around the new year. San Antonio will probably be about 7th by that time.

[KevinFromTexas]

It's still cool as hell that San Antonio got the jump on Austin on this. San Antonio is actually a very good candidate for a bike share program. It has a large tourism industry in the heart of its urban core. I take my bike to San Antonio every time we go down there.

[202_Cyclist]

It is a little disconcerting that a location can have the fifth largest bike-sharing program with forty bikes but at the same time it is kind of amusing that the fifth largest system is at UC Irvine, in the heart of the Orange Curtain with its eight-lane roads.

[202_Cyclist]

Hub set to launch bike-share program
Menino to sign deal worth nearly $6m today; 600 bikes, 61 stations to be ready by July


Boston’s bike-share program, scheduled to debut this summer with 600 bicycles and 61 stations in the city, was modeled after a similar program in Washington, D.C. (Mark Gail/The Washington Post)

By Eric Moskowitz
Globe Staff / April 21, 2011

"As early as this summer, residents and visitors taking quick trips in Boston will be able to rent bicycles from dozens of sidewalk kiosks, under an agreement expected to be signed today that will create a bike-sharing network inspired by those in Paris and Washington.

Boston officials said the system, to be called Hubway, will open in July with 600 bicycles and 61 stations in the city, though they envision growing in a few years to as many as 5,000 bikes at more than 300 kiosks, from Brookline to Somerville.

At an afternoon ceremony with bicycling advocates, Mayor Thomas M. Menino is scheduled to sign a contract worth nearly $6 million with a company called Alta Bicycle Share to build and operate Hubway for three years. Alta is also behind a program that debuted last year in the Washington area and now boasts 1,100 cherry-red bicycles at 114 stations..."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...ram/?page=full

[Cirrus]

Hubway is a great name. I'm a little jealous.

[KevinFromTexas]

Austin360's Pamela Leblanc tries out San Antonio's new bike share program.

http://www.austin360.com/blogs/conte...rk=RTR_1168346

Trying out San Antonio B-cycle

By Pam LeBlanc | Friday, April 15, 2011, 04:41 PM

I headed to San Antonio last week to check out the city’s new bike share program. Austin is looking at getting something similar, and I wanted to try it myself.

Here’s how it works: If you buy a yearly membership ($25 a year now, soon to go up to $60 a year) to San Antonio B-cycle, you get a swipe card that you can take to any of 14 bike stations around downtown. You use the card to check out a bike, and have 30 minutes to ride it before you check it back in to any of the other stations. If you keep a bike longer than 30 minutes at a time, you pay an extra $2 every half hour.
You can also use a credit card to buy a $10 day pass.

We stopped by The Hub in Hemisfair Plaza, where operations for San Antonio B-cycle are headquartered. We met the folks who run and maintain the system, which opened in late March. Then we all hopped on big gray B-cycles and started pedaling.

My first reaction? The seats are broad and cushy, and you sit fairly upright while you ride. That’s good. But the bikes, which have big baskets attached to the front, seemed top-heavy and tippy at first.

Also, San Antonio is flat. Austin’s pretty hilly. I wondered how easy it would be to slog up a big hill on one of these 40-pound, three-gear bikes.

[ChiDowntowner]

Citing budget issues and concerns over the openness of the selection process, Madison's new mayor has put the brakes on the city's B-Cycle program that was to be implemented in May with 350 bikes at 35 stations:

New Bicycle Rental Program In Jeopardy
Soglin Wants To Revisit B Cycle Program
Updated: 11:33 am CDT April 22, 2011

MADISON, Wis. -- Biking is big in Madison, but a plan to put rentable bikes on the streets could be in for a rough ride.

"A proposed bike share program is set to kickoff in May, just in time for a conference on urbanism that the city will host in June. But, like he said during the campaign, new Mayor Paul Soglin wants to take a closer look at the proposal.
'Conceptually, I'm fine with it. I think it's a great concept,' said Soglin. 'But there were some concerns.'
Soglin said his apprehension lies with a potential $18 million budget hole and the details of the project.
'It was introduced very quickly. It was done without bidding. It amended our sign ordinance very quickly,' he said."

http://www.channel3000.com/recreatio...51/detail.html