View Single Post
  #44  
Old July 7th 17, 05:26 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Handlebar rotation

On 7/7/2017 10:26 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-07-06 19:34, wrote:
On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 1:02:53 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-07-06 12:40, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/6/2017 3:14 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-07-06 12:05, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/6/2017 10:54 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-07-05 17:49, John B. wrote:

Yet people have been riding long distances on bicycles
for years and years. The first Paris - Brest - Paris
randonnée was held in 1891. An essentially non-stop
bicycle ride of 1,200 km. The British, of course, do it
better with the 1433 km London Edinburgh London 2017 and
the 'mericans have the Boston-Montreal-Boston, again a
1,200 km ride but no longer an official randonnée and now
strictly a permanent that anyone could ride on their own
in a self-supported manner while still receiving
recognition (validation) from Randonneurs USA.

Think of it, 126 years of successful long distance
bicycle riding without Joerg built lights.


It's simple. Most humans have a habit of accepting current
state-of-the-art as "that's as good as it gets". I don't,
and I derive most of my income from not thinking that way.
And yes, I already had bicycles with real electrical
systems when I was a teenager.

The detail you're missing is that people have always ridden
_successfully_ without the systems you deem necessary.


As I said, people got used to that this is all they are going
to get. Just like people get used to walking in worn shoes if
they can't afford new ones.


There are always people who are into overkill. Some of those
will claim or pretend that their favorite overkill item is
actually a necessity. But that's disproven by every person
who does well without the overkill item.


A vehicle where the light does not go out or dim way down is
IMO not overkill. The lighting "system" bicyles have would
never pass muster at type certification for motor vehicles.
There are good reasons why not.


For just one example: I'm just back from another club ride.
About 15 people were on the ride. Two of them had the newly
fashionable daytime rear blinkies. This particular ride has
occurred once per week every week except in winter for, oh,
perhaps ten years. Nobody has ever been hit by a car,
despite the thousands of person-miles ridden (GASP!) without
blinkies.


I have never been hit from behind either but the number of
close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear
lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very
expensive to accomplish.

Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it
ain't so :-)

We've been over this multiple times, but:

If your number of close calls for hits-from-behind has gone way
down, it must have been pretty high to begin with. By contrast,
I almost never experience such a close call; therefore I'd never
be able to see a big reduction.

Why don't those close calls happen to me? Because those close
calls are almost always due in part to rider error -
specifically, inviting close passes by riding too far to the
right.


Yeah, right. The woman who rode in the lane on Blue Ravine died
because of that. The other woman in the pickup truck who was drunk
tried to evade but the lane was now too narrow and *BAM*


Well, Frank is right. Bicycles offer a far smaller target and if you
wear bright clothing so that you don't catch drivers unaware you're
pretty safe.


AFAIR she had a bright jersey on.


Unless you ride in an area and at times drunk drivers are on the
road.


Not just those, also texting ones and more recently stoned drivers.

I found that lights are far better than any neon-colored jersey. Someone
with 1/2 watt LEDs that do a police cruiser spiel like mine can be seen
from half a mile away and gets the attention. End of this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI3iZ-Ch7pY


The end of that video shows the bike light indoors in a dark room.
Nobody here is saying that taillights are not valuable in the dark. In
fact, I think they should be a legal requirement after dark.
(Currently, only about three states require them instead of reflectors.)

I'm arguing against the currently fashionable superstition that a blinky
taillight makes a practical difference in ordinary daylight. I've seen
no decent evidence that it does. I've observed many dozens, perhaps
hundreds, of riders with daytime blinkies. In no case did I spot the
cyclist only because he had a blinky. In almost every case, I noticed
the cyclist first and only later saw "Oh, he's running his magic blinky."

Just like in this advertising photo:
https://www.outsideonline.com/sites/...?itok=QBL2UTKO

I saw that photo at least ten times before I wondered "So it's a
bicyclist being passed by a car. What are they advertising?" I thought
it was funny that they pretend you wouldn't see the rider unless he had
the taillight under his saddle.

Oh, and he's riding too far to the right. There's no way that car can
give three feet of clearance without crossing the yellow line. That
means the rider should make that clear by his lane position.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home