After reading quite a few around the world cycling blogs recently I was speaking to the GF about this and suggested that cycling around the world you would see more culture & experience more compared to if you flew and stopped off at loads of places, within the same time frame (120 days for example)

This obviously hypothetical as I wont be doing either, but her argument was that if you fly you have longer at each place and therefore can experience more in each location, which is kind of true, but still i’d much rather cycle the world.

What you think?

Cycle…you get to see all the places in-between the places tourists would normally go to.

I think 120 days on a bike is VERY different to 120 days using planes and trains and automobiles (and buses). You’d see a lot more of culture in a lot fewer places. So your choice is more in depth in a few countries or more countries.

Motorcycle would be [was] my preferred method

d45yth – Member
Cycle…you get to see all the places in-between the places tourists would normally go to.

That was my point! She just said i’d see boring roads 🙄

do it off road you snowdon hypothermic lycra clad pansy.

I bet it’s more off road than on actually

You could circumnavigate the globe in 120 days on a bike, so assuming you only cycled to the furthest interesting point and got the plane home then I reckon you’d see and experience loads more on a bike.

On the bike you’d feel the journey, smell, hear and see your surroundings, be able to reach out and touch things as you ride and stop absolutely anywhere for as long as you like. The pace on a bike is such that the journey becomes part of the experience rather than a means of getting to point ‘B’.

Pook – Member
do it off road you snowdon hypothermic lycra clad pansy.

I bet it’s more off road than on actually

How rude 😆

What’s that saying, perhaps coined by Ted Simon?

“Travelling in a car is like watching a road movie, travelling by motorcycle is like starring in one.”

So what’s travelling by bicycle like? Narrating a BBC4 documentary? And what’s travelling by plane like? Perhaps actually watching a road movie, if one happens to feature on the in-flight entertainment playlist.

Whatever it is, hopping around between airports is too goal orientated. There’s no meandering, and to really see a place one must meander. Cycling through a landscape takes you wherever you go, and you stop where you fancy. You don’t just see places near airports that you’re on a specific mission to see – you see random interesting things in far flung places only locals generally know about.

Travelling in a plane isn’t travelling – it’s going on a holiday. Ruskin might have had a point:

“All travel becomes dull in direct proportion to its rapidity.”

But then he did divorce his wife for having a hairy faff, so do we really want to be listening to him?

I genuinely think two wheels is the best way to see the world. Pedalling for for intimacy and experience, twisting throttles for distance and variety.

I was speaking to the GF about this and suggested that cycling around the world you would see more culture & experience more compared to if you flew and stopped off at loads of places

Blimey.. no comparison. Unless you are talking about taking the same amount of time with both. That’d allow you to hang out for a month or so in each place if you flew.

However, there’s no comparison to cycling places. Imagine the experience of weeks of barren steppe or putting your own effort into crossing the Himalayas. It’d be just incredible, you’d see far far more than you ever would hanging out in some city of people you don’t know. The sheer time commitment and mental experience would be profound.

The only better way to see places would be to work in them, I reckon.

My twopennyworth: having done a bit of each I’ve come round to the view that it’s the bits in between the big-name highlights that stay with you, the bits you experience rather than the sights you saw. You’re perhaps more likely to expose yourself to those things travelling by bike than you are zipping around by plane.

Obviously that’s a huge generalisation, and your GF’s right in that there’ll be lots of tedious stuff to go with it, but that’s all part of the experience and adventure.

But if both of you aren’t properly invested in it it could suck big time.

Also, what molgrips said.

Another advantage of bike touring is the random element. Even if you are aiming at a specific goal – RTW, crossing a continent, etc the fact your are limited to a daily distance of 50-100 miles means you visit places you wouldn’t otherwise go to. It is a cliche but if you go to tourist destinations you meet tourists if you visit random places you meet locals.

There is a tendency when traveling by plane/car to go between “destinations” and not see much in between. On a bike you are going at a speed where you can enjoy small scale scenery and there is a certain amount of satisfaction from crossing mountain ranges and deserts under your own power.