Building a Better Motorized Bicycle 373
toyotaboy writes "Saw this in 'design news' magazine. It's a bicycle using an engine that looks like something pulled off of an R/C airplane. He uses a gear reduction system as well as a overrunning clutch to keep the engine running while stopped. Claims to get 20 mile range from its 1/4 gallon gas tank (80mpg). If you figure most engines like that are 30k rpm with 1:100 gear reduction, and an average bike rim is 26", you should get potentially 1,458,000 inches per hour, or 23mph! He goes on to say that similar devices in electric form (segway) fail because of their heavy 80lb weight and limited 10-15 mile range (and where do you recharge?) This thing can be filled back up at any gas station."
Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Two other thoughts come to mind...
(1) If you're going to go the distances that might make this useful, chances are that you're not a periodic, recreational biker. Thus, are you going to really want one of these on your bike in the first place?
(2) If you ride short distances (around a college campus or in the neighborhood) do you want to have to smell the fumes and listen to the high-pitched whine constantly? These small engines generally don't have much in the way of mufflers or emissions control, so there's that to consider as well.
When I flew model planes, the fuselage was covered with unburned fuel at the end of a flight. I would presume that noise and unburned fuel have been taken into account in this design, but it's still something to consider. The designer probably went further than taking a big R/C aircraft engine and bolt it to a clutch and drivetrain.
Personally, I like the exercise and peace & quiet that comes with a nice bike ride, but as always, YMMV.
Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)
He should redesing this to take advantage of one of the most efficient and enjoyable forms of transport: the modern roadbike.
Essentially this would mean dumping the engine and all the other crap he's added.
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyways, first off I think at 23mph with the exhaust about 3-4 feet under your nose (Unless your a midget) you wouldn't have to worry about breathing in fumes. Site did say it has a centrifugal clutch which only activates the motor at a certain speed.
Also I've been reading a lot of comments about pollution too. Do 2 strokes really produce that much air pollution? I've heard that the opposite is true because since it is a gas/oil mixture the remaining exhaust resembles diesel more than 4 stroke exhaust, which just settles to the ground (Yay it gets into our streams and rivers though, which is why MTBE gas is banned in CA waterways)
I just wanted to play devils advocate, it looks like a really neat peice of engineering compared to those things I used to see in popular science.
Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Great (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:noise and no emission control (Score:3, Insightful)
Good Vibrations... (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not against it, i'm just saying, certain female population may find riding bickes are enjoyable as the first victorian females did... for prehaps not so obvious reasons.
-malakai
Re:Good Vibrations... (Score:2)
I got a lot of dates when I had an RD400.
KFG
two stroke? (Score:2)
Doen't they also have problems with fuel in the exaust stroke and exaust in the power stroke?
Have these problems been resolved or does the bike's weight overshadow the efficiency problems?
Re:two stroke? (Score:5, Informative)
While two strokes are inefficient, pound for pound a 2stroke engine will be more powerfull then a 4 stroke engine (the common type). A 2 stroke cylinder has a power stroke every revolution of the crankshaft. A 4 stroke only has a power stroke every second revolution.
Grand Prix motorcycle racing until last year was all 2 stroke engines. What used to be the class of 500cc motorcycles is now the MotoGP class which allows 1000cc 4 strokes to compete with 500cc 2 strokes. Dirt bike racing is still dominated by the 2strokes, but that is changeing as manufacturers introduce new 4 strokes. From a racing technology point of few it has only been very recently that a 4 stroke engine has been able to compete with a 2 stroke engine that is half the size.
Bicycle Smile (Score:2)
Bicycle Smile
Great idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great idea (Score:3, Funny)
Two stroke engine? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Two stroke engine? (Score:3, Informative)
Of course this situation is produced by the knee-jerk reactions of the "moral green majority" out there.
The most efficient internal combustion engines ever made are infact 2-stroke diesel engines, often used in ships and the like, these are large engines and it's well worth replacing them if a more efficient design exists.
The US killed off the 2stroke at about the same time a number of companies were readying very clean and efficient engines for market, given a uniflow design (has exhaust valves at the to
Re:Two stroke engine? (Score:3, Insightful)
To be precise, 2-stroke diesels work on a very different principle [howstuffworks.com] than a 2-stroke gasoline engine. They do not mix raw fuel and exhaust, and they have oil pans, so they don't have problems with spewing unburned fuel and oil. They also require an external supercharger to push air into the
Re:Two stroke engine? (Score:2)
This is interesting? How about inaccurate? (Score:3, Informative)
Try some links on for size:
http://www.mowdirect.co.uk/acatalog/600i-2_2.htm [mowdirect.co.uk]
http://www.shophutt.co.nz/sites/lawnmower/online_s tore/pages/lawnmower-26.html [shophutt.co.nz]
http://www.shophutt.co.nz/sites/lawnmower/online_s tore/pages/lawnmower-27.html [shophutt.co.nz]
http://www.epinions.com/content_70547902084 [epinions.com]
In the first three, I reference not one or two, but three different 2-stroke lawnmowers that are in current production and sales. The last link is fo
Re:This is interesting? How about inaccurate? (Score:2)
Re:Two stroke engine? (Score:2)
Btw, where is the gasoline stored in this bike? Inside the frame?
Re:Two stroke engine? (Score:2)
Old tech... (Score:5, Funny)
They're called 'Motorbikes'. We even have mini versions for teenagers called 'mopeds'. Clever, eh?
Hey mister inventor Honda calls them Mopeds (Score:4, Interesting)
What I don't get is why every other "new" invention bashes electric by saying "this will tide us over till batteries get better and with gas you can fill up anywhere" I thought the whole point is to get away from gas once in for all. I have a good idea, how about spending a little more time and money on research on electric instead of fiddle farting around with glorified weed-whacker engines so we don't have to wait around. His claims of 85lbs for electric bikes are a bit off. They make NiMH electric conversions in the neighborhood of 20lbs. That's only ten pounds heavier than his "petite" 2 stroke. No gas or oil to mess with, no noise, no fumes, and nothing to have to tune up, just plug the thing in and go. I would also like to know where he rides where there is no electricity? Does he plan on using his bike for the two-hour commute into LA on the 405 during rush hour? Who would be willing to ride on a mountain bike for reasons other than sport far enough to actually run out of juice in the batteries, much less gas for his version. So range isn't really an issue since you could plug the thing in just about anywhere. This is another example of another fine product to "revolutionize" the world, as we know it. What this inventor has yet to figure out is those that are already willing to ride a bicycle to work are already doing so and that within a short period of time get in good enough shape to pedal it their damn selves, and don't need the extra weight and cost to get them up to the top of those theoretical "hills" these inventors always ramble on about as being the big determining factor as to why people don't ride bicycles. Here is a little clue for him, people who are too lazy to even pedal ten miles on a bike are certainly not going to want to even ride the same distance on a powered one. There's no heat & no AC for one, no protection from the elements, no comfortable bucket seat to park their fat ass in, no cd player, and where the hell are they going to plug in their cell phone and where are they going to put their McDonalds value meal #2 at along with all their junk they drag around with them? On top of that he hasn't even figured out the idea has already been done a thousand times, and that no one wants it. Don't take my word for it just look in the back of Popular Science or Popular Mechanics magazine you find half a dozen conversion kits "that if you order now you'll get free shipping". Aside from having no clue I do give this guy bonus points for finally containing everything in the hub instead of the ridiculous bolt on contraptions some people have come up with electric or gas.
Moped (Score:3, Insightful)
--
Re:Moped (Score:2)
Re:Moped (Score:2)
finally! (Score:4, Funny)
Mmmm.. fat people.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Mmmm.. fat people.. (Score:2)
Re:Mmmm.. fat people.. (Score:2)
Oh...you meant pedals.
Re:Mmmm.. fat people.. (Score:2)
"Push the little daisies and make them come up".
Re:Mmmm.. fat people.. (Score:2)
Pretty cool, doesn't solve the original problem (Score:2, Insightful)
doesn't this just put off the inevitable a little bit more?
(although, I must say I wouldn't mind one... altho I 'm not sure how it would handle with the engine on the front wheel like that)
Re:Pretty cool, doesn't solve the original problem (Score:2)
http://science.slashdot.org/science/03/03/09/182 3206.shtml?tid=134
Re:Pretty cool, doesn't solve the original problem (Score:2)
Re:Pretty cool, doesn't solve the original problem (Score:2)
Dumbass.
I dont' want to get into an arguement, so Im replying to your comment instead
Hey! (Score:2, Funny)
Bad for the Environment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Although a small 2-stroke may put out much less greenhouse gas than a car or motorcycle, a 2-stroke engine of any size is very damaging to the air quality. A 2-stroke engine (such as the one on this bike) must burn large amounts of oil, it's simply the way 2-strokes work. Therefore, a lot more soot, and other impurities are blown out the exhaust. This is the smelly blue smoke you always see out the back of scooters, motorboats, chainsaws and other devices with 2-stroke engines.
While this may be a more efficient form of transportation, if everyone who rides a bike road one of these our cities would be far more smoggy and smelly than they are today.
Re:Bad for the Environment? (Score:2)
This is nowhere near a super efficient engine (in terms of power/fuel consumption) it has super low power/weight ratio but it's power/fuel consumption ratio sucks. He just took a commodity part for little unreliable radio controlled toys and somehow crammed it and it's powertrain into a bibycle fork.
Not all two stroke engines burn a significant amount of oil; All four stroke engines burn some oil. Two stroke means it makes power each revolution; 99.9% of two stroke engines use a fuel/a
Re:Bad for the Environment? (Score:2)
Re:Bad for the Environment? (Score:2)
Re:Bad for the Environment? (Score:2)
Perhaps you haven't noticed, but there are many new two strokes that run cleaner than 4 strokes. Go look at new outboard boat motors... a 2 stroke doesn't have to be dirty.
Let me get this Straight (Score:4, Insightful)
This guy has basically invented a light-weight moped?
American's despise moped's, they figure if you are going to get a a cycle you might as well get one that looks cool. That is why Harley's are so popular, becuase they look cool. I have a co-worker here that is willing to spend $5,000 dollar's every couple of year's to add accessories and get some improvements done on her bike.
While the idea is neat, it will not take off simply becuase of american culture, and it sounds like a moped.
Yes, but ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Will it last? I'm no mechanical engineer, but spur gears and an overrunning clutch do not sound like overly robust components.
All in all, I wonder if a moped is a better buy.
Any gas station? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you seen the pollution in growing nations that have cities full of 2 cycle engines on motor scooters? Damn man talk about stinky horrible asthma causing pollution.
How about this one?
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/427.html [austinev.org]
This bike is probably a little bit better than some stinky ICE bike. It also has the same range. Go figure.
Re:Any gas station? (Score:2)
Maybe a fuel-cell version?
Re:Any gas station? (Score:3, Insightful)
2-stroke pollution (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sure this engine is much smaller than that, maybe 8 or 15cc's but still too much pollution for the energy created.
Who will get to 300 first, the MLB pitcher or the state of Texas? [lostbrain.com]
tcd004
Re:2-stroke pollution (Score:2)
Study done using remote sensing on Yellowstone to determine hydrocarbon pollution created by snowmobiles:
http://www.westbioenergy.org/snow/#
"Dynamometer studies and our data do not show significant effects on HC emissions, but the HC emissions are approximately sixty times greater than automobiles if compared to the Denver, CO fleet."
I'll keep looking for more.
tcd004
2 stroke and other probs (Score:4)
2. Weight. Increased weight (and vibration) means more wear on the bike bits. Earlier structural failure and potential lawsuit.
3. Speed advantage. None really 23mp? I can do that without the motor.
4. Need and want. People who will not ride a bike (for whatever reason) will not ride this (in the US anyway).
5. Special parts. Those spokes look a little short and too angled for real long term strength. Anticipate the wheel folding under load.
Re:2 stroke and other probs (Score:2)
I don't know if this guy is making a carb or if he's running fuel injection, but FI keeps 'em pretty clean. There's even some legal ones here in The People's Republic of California. Look up Aprilia. If you run a 2 stroke with modern 2 stroke oil they don't smoke.
They are being banned in places, but the world ain't America.
You can ride 23mph with a motor, but most people are lazy. There's a guy at my work who drives each day. He li
Re:2 stroke and other probs (Score:2)
Sustained speed, weight, vibration. Mopeds are heavier than bikes for a reason.
Spokes hold their strength.
Yes they do. Correct length and angle spokes. Those appear to be at a very relaxed angle, significantly reducing their strength. But I may be wrong. I wish him luck.
There's a guy at my work who drives each day. He lives 2 blocks away. No, really. That's less than a quarter mile. He
performance boost (Score:5, Funny)
You can achieve 45mph by adding a Type R sticker, chrome wheels and a large carbon fiber rear wing, a la Honda Civic.
bling bling
Re:performance boost (Score:2)
It's a culture, man... [sarcasm off]
The Human-Powered Bicycle (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Human-Powered Bicycle (Score:2, Insightful)
These things really make me mad. You have to be incredibly lazy to want one of these things. Why put an internal combustion engine on the most efficient form of transportation? With the level of gear reduction on most bikes, you can ride up any hill you can walk up... These must be for people who can't even walk uphill.
</rant>
couple of details not right... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:couple of details not right... (Score:2)
A ruined concept (Score:3)
Two-strokes not only create more polution but they're also significantly less fuel-efficient than a four-stroke engine of the same power.
I mean, if you're after thrills rather than efficiency then why not just build a scooter like the one on this page [aardvark.co.nz]?
Re:A ruined concept (Score:2)
Why isn't it a 4-stroke? Weight. Size. Power. 2 cycles like this one will produce gobs more power with smaller weight than 4 strokes. Plus they are simpler, easy to rebuild, and can be mounted in different positions because they don't have an oil sump.
Re:A ruined concept (Score:3, Informative)
Obviously you haven't looked at the latest four-stroke model airplane engines.
These things operate in any attitude (heard of aerobatics?), are not much heavier than a two-stroke of equivalent power, and offer much better fuel economy, less polution and less
Recharge vs. Fill up (Score:3, Interesting)
R/C Engine (Score:5, Funny)
Powered bikes are cool (Score:4, Interesting)
If this engine isn't an emissions disaster, and isn't too loud, it may be very cool.
I have an electric power-assist (Currie) kit for my commuter bike. I use it for my 2 mile commute to work, and for running errands in a ~5 mile radius.
It's great- I can pedal hard if I want to, or take it easy and cruise at 17-18 mph if I don't want to sweat (like on my way to work in the summer). I'm not lazy- I run marathons and stuff- but I find that I use the bike more often for errands than I used to, pre-motor.
One of the only drawbacks is that the battery pack is heavy and awkward to haul up to my office to get charged every day. If I could get a kit with a *clean* gas engine, I'd be interested. But I have my doubts about this. For now, I'll stick with the clean electric (yeah, I know there are emissions associated with my bike's electricity consumption, but we're talking about 1 kWh per day).
Re:Powered bikes are cool (Score:2)
This is not the solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Does it come with a neckbrace? (Score:2)
That must be one hulava jolt.
segway ht has worked out great for me... (Score:2, Troll)
i wrote about here:
http://www.bookofseg.com/100days/ [bookofseg.com]
the bike article says that there aren't places to charge a ebike, there are more outlets than gas stations. and for me, for my commute- i take my ht to work and charge it while i'm at work (it's not needed, but i do charge it since it's just sitting there). i don't see why the goal is to trash elect
Something no Mountain biker would want. (Score:2, Informative)
http://ww
Hybrind Segway! (Score:5, Funny)
2) Mount it to a Segway
3) Watch Dean Kamen recoil in horror!
Home conversion mopeds (Score:3)
The hardest part was attaching a #35 go-kart sprocket to the rear cassette of the bike. I had to cut little splines into the sprocket to make it attach properly. Anyway, it worked out great. Top speed of 52 km / h (I could get it faster, but then it's too hard to get going from a stop... only one gear, remember...) And oh man, does it ever attract attention around Burlington. I have been offered two jobs (At machine shops) simply based on the home-built moped. Overall, a great project. I'm now building an offroad go-kart and an on-road trike.
This sounds an awful lot like a moped... (Score:2)
Mopeds are amazingly simple and easy to work on, there's quite a few sites on the net where you can buy performence parts (real performence, not "riced out" fart pipes) and forums [mopedarmy.com] to discuss moped-related
Transportation for the deaf (Score:2, Funny)
30,000 rpm, hmmm? So, does that mean that only dogs will hear the piercing wail of the two-stroke engine? You wish!
Great. So this gets to fail because it's noisy as all hell. I can hear him now... "My failure is better than your failure".
As far as the Segway v. RC-motor bike debate go
Re:Transportation for the deaf (Score:2)
Great. So this gets to fail because it's noisy as all hell. I can hear him now...
Your hearing is better than mine. I couldn't hear anything over the racket of his little bike engine.
Yes, but (Score:2)
Bikes often do 23 mph downhill (Score:2)
Sheesh, in the Tour De France the *average* speed of the winner is over 23 mph, and those bike use standard block brakes (well, standard design. They're probably carved from the baby teeth of yetis or something similarly expensive). I hate to think what those guys do downhill...
Great argument! (Score:2)
Wow, way to make an argument. Choose the heaviest oldest battery technology there is to defend the usage of one of the noisiest, dirtiest combustion engines that exists!
Steve Katsaros is giving hemself a big pat on the back, but he's employing an engine that would gain huge benefits out of variable gearing,
Article about my moped (Score:2)
As far as this thing goes, I wonder what the effect of having a considerably heavier, and powered, front wheel has on the handling and ride of a bicycle. Having the extra weight at the back (yes, I realise that this is going to be much lighter than the motor on my machine, but there's still a fair bit of extra weight in that wheel) seems like a better idea to me. Additionally, that range is no better than an electric bike. A few hund
Another idiot idea. (Score:2)
that's nice (Score:2)
I can do better with 1981 technology... (Score:2)
This works better. :P (Score:2)
(from their site)
Target Performance Specifications
Fuel Consumption: 180mpg
Est. top speed: 80mph
0-60mph: 6.0sec
Weight: 230lb.
Beta testing starting 2003
hmmm (Score:2)
small engines are disproportionate polluters (Score:2)
Those little weedeaters you hear screaming all the time? Some of the worst contributors to the pollution problem. At least with ele
26" Rim??? I'm Surprised Nobody's Nitpicked This (Score:2)
Can I buy one with less hype and more facts? (Score:5, Interesting)
But... If they want to sell me one of these kits they will have to be a little more fact-centric, and a little less like a Microsoft press release.
"With a quarter of a gallon of fuel, he says most bikes will have a driving range of about 20 miles."
Interesting, but what kind of mileage does the bike in the picture actually get? If you have a working prototype tell the story, and if it gets mediocre mileage tell us why, and what will be done to fix it in the version we buy.
"The problem is that it takes about 377 lbs of lead-acid batteries to equal the energy stored in a pound of gasoline"
Um, no it doesn't. At least not on my home planet. It's a shame that selling this item to the public seems to require such an obvious lie. Whatever cool formulas the chemists whip out aside, the forklifts at my client's work place use 350 lb. lead acid battery packs and run on them for 8 hour shifts. There is no forklift on the planet than can perform like they do for eight ours on 16 oz. (yes, I know that gas isn't the exact same weight as water, but it's close enough)) of gas. No way. Ain't happnin'.
"If you had to start the engine and then get on the bike, you wouldn't be able to get your balance," Katsaros says. "This gives users an easy way to get started."
Um, not so much. I started riding a motorcycle back when I had a full head of hair, and I can tell you for a fact I can reliably "start the engine, and then get on the bike." And, more usefully, other bikers and I can start the engine and engage it without duck-walking the bike up to speed so we can "get our balance." The feature of disengaging when the bike is going less than two miles an hour is there to avoid all the low-end gear + clutch crap that is necessary to to get a motorcycle going from a stop and still yield decent efficiency at normal speeds. It's a compensation for the simplicity of the design and a good trade-off in the cost/weight/functionality game. It's not a "feature for the benefit of the inept rider" any more than Code Red was a "security assurance feature for WindowsNT admins."
I sure hope Mr. Katsaros understands that selling a geeky toy means marketing to geeks, who by their nature prefer facts to hyperbole.
Re:Can I buy one with less hype and more facts? (Score:4, Informative)
Motor Assisted Bicycles are a Good Thing[tm] ...
( unless one's Gov't has decided to destroy one's possible choices, for the benefit of their authority, OR for the benefit of their preferred lobby-groups )
... compared with many alternatives...
BUT:
MX5 Super Bike Engine [fiveflagsmotorbikes.com] seems to be the one that works best ( though I gather it requires a bit of break-in/tuning ), and unfortunately, it's a 2-stroke, and
( halfway down the page ) Honda 4-stroke 31cc Bicycle Engine [edgesports.net], while it is a 4-stroke, it boshes one's ability to stack stuff on the rear rack...
Also, I'm told that Small Engine Care & Repair [leevalley.com] is the best book to get with 'em.
/dev/motor-assisted-bicycle(random||forum) can be found here [moped2.org]
80 mpg? Big deal. (Score:5, Interesting)
Smaller engined conventional motorcycles (under 250cc) get 100+ mpg.
taken care of... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:2)
This will give poor cooling performance for the heatsink, which should have air flowing through the fins, not around and with the engine on it's side, the piston will wear one side of the cylinder more, due to gravity, leading to an even more inefficient, smelly 2 stroke. Just like an old boxer engine that leaks oil.
I've been thinking about building some electric motor assistance to my mountain bike, with an array
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:2)
I've been thinking about building some electric motor assistance to my mountain bike, with an array of rechargable batteries within the larger triangle of the frame and perhaps a solar panel for more prolonged usage away from AC outlets.
I've been thinking about a "stepper motor" idea for a while, for a simple 21-speed bicycle where the motor *is* the front wheel. This wouldn't interferer in any way with manual operation, and would provide a nice way to add power to an otherwise standard bicycle.
The whe
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow, that sounds like it would have plenty of torque.
a few UPS batteries, or even motorcycle lead-acid batteries
Check this company out for perhaps a better future battery: http://powergenixsystems.com/ [powergenixsystems.com]
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:2)
Putting it up front doesn't seem like that bright an idea, either...hit a slick patch of road while it's trying to pull and you lose control. Hit a slick patch with the front wheel freewheeling and you should be OK as long as you're going straight. (I took an icy patch the wrong way once when I was a kid...wiped out pretty spectacularly. Knobby BMX tires didn't help at all.) That's why you don't see any
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:2)
No it isn't. Look closer. That's not a drum brake on the front wheel. Can you not see the heatsink of the 2 stroke engine to the left of the large central portion of the front wheel?
Where does it say this is just an example bike?
Re:will these things ever catch on.. (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.power-assist.org/
The list has both ICE and EV partisans.
Most of the commerical and homebrew systems strike me as more clearly thought out than the "headline" design. I don't see why the
Re:two stroke myths & real reasons for failure (Score:2)
Re:miles/$ (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're purely a cyclist you don't need a drivers licence or insurance. Perhaps more significantly, you rarely if ever need to pay parking fees. Cars (and motorbikes, to a lesser extent) have a myriad of costs to the user, and more costs to society. Motorists always minimise the costs as a way of rationalising their actions. I recently heard a psychologist, who is paid large amounts to advise the auto industry, on why SUVs are so popular -- he said they appeal to our reptilian brains, with their aura of power and invulnerability, regardless of data on rollovers, low mileage, risk to other users (which reptiles don't care about anyway). Cars are marketed and to a large extent bought as status symbols, fashion accessories, or for machismo.
and spent much more money on food than I ever would have on gas
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But generally if you are exercising a lot you load up on carbs, (bread, pasta, rice) which are pretty cheap.
When I was a cycle commuter my expenses were annually a new chain ($7) and tyres ($8). Theft insurance was too expensive (two or three years would buy a new bike), so I just went for a U lock, and locked it outside police stations when I was in the city at night.
Re:no place for bicycles, motorized or otherwise (Score:3, Insightful)
If you were in the bike lane, and riding responsibly (following the law) I'm inclined to think that the person who hit you was at fault. Stand up for your rights. A bicycle does not belong on the sidewalk, it belongs on the road. If a bicycle lane is provided, all the better. Granted a bicycle could be unsafe on anything faster than, say a 45 MPH road, but otherwise it's perfectly safe and reasonable t