|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 2016-12-29 16:25, Phil Lee wrote:
Joerg considered Wed, 28 Dec 2016 07:47:21 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-27 13:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 27 Dec 2016 08:03:05 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-26 13:10, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Sun, 25 Dec 2016 09:01:18 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-25 01:15, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:56:32 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-23 10:24, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Wed, 21 Dec 2016 14:19:25 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-21 13:11, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:27:04 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-19 18:59, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Mon, 19 Dec 2016 13:57:12 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-17 21:12, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 12/17/2016 5:22 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2016-12-17 14:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:51:14 -0800 the perfect time to write: [...] Maybe this works: https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_pi...026ed2d5844401 It's the tunnel underneath Highway 50. Quite spooky because in summer there can be rattlesnakes in there that want to cool off. Or some muggers with knives jump into the path when you emerge. Similar to the one under the A14 near Stow-cum-Quy, but ours doesn't have lights - I can't remember if they are fitted but broken or simply not there. You'd have to stand in there for a few minutes for your eyes to adjust enough to be able to see broken light fittings, which would be foolish at best, given the high level of cycle use and the fact that most are riding blindly towards the light at the other end. I never rely on road lighting, my bikes both have powerful headlights. In our tunnel that can really save the day because rattlesnakes in "cooling off mode" are often coiled up and they blend into the pavement color. Coild up snakes can strike if you see them too late. So far I only ran over one on a trail and it was stretched out where they'd have a hard time striking. But any decent cycle light will be pointing the light where you really need it - which isn't the ceiling of the tunnel! On high beam it should. On MTB it is even essential in a thick forest. However, why would you want to see the ceiling of the tunnel? [...] There are a few fully suspended touring bikes, which would seem to fit your needs better than an MTB. They'd break on the trails. Trail riding is a necessity out here. They're designed for unsupported expedition touring around the world, mostly on tracks and unsealed roads. They would survive even your abuse, unless you set out to deliberately destroy them to prove a point. I never saw anything like that here. Or in Europe for that matter. A good trail bike must survive undamaged when the whole enchilada becomes airborne and lands hard. I never do that on purpose (except with the front wheel, of course) but it happens. If you are doing jumps on a normal utility ride, you need to do it slower, but never mind, with the weight of bike you want, you will be anyway. No wonder you find cycling so risky, if you ride as if you were in a competitive MTB event on every ride. It's par for the course on some singletrack routes here. Good bikes must withstand that. Your can't pussyfoot over every rock or tree root. They aren't cheap mind you, but that is as much because of the tiny market for them as the actual building cost. I have not seen anything with the robust trail performance of a Fuji Outland or similar. Try looking at something like the ToutTerrain PanAmericana - you can even have it with a generator and full wiring harness, with a power take off for satnav or whatever. http://www.en.tout-terrain.de/bicycl...ricana-xplore/ Probably very expensive. But appears to fit your needs without even more expensive modification. Not really, I am sure I'd see frame damage quite soon and I can imagine the price tag to be very high. What I need is almost the same structure as on a GS1200 Dual-Sport which I soon will have. I have seen this kind of classic construction, it was popular in the 90's even for forks. The suspension linkage at the axle is too weak. Could be beefed up by a custom made part though. However, where it would most likely fail first is where the upper welds to the seat tube are and then the frame is toast. The gearbox is cool though. Their are a bit skimpy on specs but it looks like the front axle is the standard QR deal. Like on my bike. In conjunction with a large diameter disc brake up front and lots of load on the bike that would be a big design mistake. Well, maybe not, hard to see. They should learn more about web site design. The skills to design good web-sites and design good bicycles are rather different, and rarely coincide - that, as they say, is life. Smart business people know where to find help. In a business all aspects must be taken care of, not just 80% of them. [...] Right now I am building a strut system that allows a more safe carrying of luggage on a full suspension bike that the simmple seat tube rack that will (and has) failed over time. Has it really never occurred to bicycle design engineers that trail riders need ... water? And clothes, and tools, and food, and ... When you can get a drivers permit at so young an age and so easily as in all the states I know about, .... It's changing. The recent generation is know for a serious lack of interest in obtaining a driver's license. They are happy in their little virtual cyber world. Sad. Maybe - but if their lack of interest in travel leads to fewer of them gaining driving permits, they are more likely to cycle when they do need to travel, particularly for local trips. Not at all. They generally do not even own a bicycle and don't want one. They simply do not travel. Until some day ... oh dang ... they can't get a job. Many of them look like a blimp by the time they are past 20. That's where policies like promoting active travel to schools help. Although we do have that problem here, it is not as prevalent as there, because the UK is a pretty compact place generally, and as long as you don't live a long way out in the county, the chances are you will be in cycle commuting range of some kind of job, even if you are unfit. Here they often don't even have bike racks at school. Our local high school (Ponderosa High, Cameron Park, CA) can only be reached by narrow 2-lane fast roads. Nobody in their right mind cycles there regularly. So rather similar to the narrow 2-lane roads that nearly all cycling in the UK takes place on, except for ours being generally more twisting, narrower and with a higher speed limit! People die on those out here and many more are hurt so bad that there are nasty consequences for them. I and nearly all my cycling friends will not ride there. They certainly won't let their kids cycle there. Yeah, we know. Danger, Danger! As long as you and your friends keep telling people it's dangerous, they'll use it as a reason not to ride. We know better. The last rider here died a week ago. We don't, because we don't know why. If he was riding along at night without lights or even reflectors, you can't claim it's any indication of a general level of danger - 9pm wasn't it? They get hit during day and during night. Typically a high speed impact from behind. Data from outside your head? No, from news media. With the right training, they are as safe or safer than the routes you prefer (I noticed the very solid bollards hidden nicely in the shade of the bridge over that route you posted the link to - how long before you were even found after hitting one of them, never mind how long for an ambulance to get there? It's about car drivers, not cyclist. Hence no training effect. I know perfectly well not to careen into a bollard and this is fully under my control. However, I cannot control the driver coming from behind, slowly drifting because he is looking at who may have just text-messaged him. Those bollards are a hazard, and if you are following another rider (I know that's very unlikely as long as you keep scaring them off, but still, it is a slight possibility) who swerves at the last moment to avoid it, your first sight will be too late to avoid it. Seriously? You swerve Kamikaze-style where you can't see? Yikes! An attentive cyclist won't without good reason, but not all cyclists are attentive - and as cycling is far more popular, so the proportion of poorly trained cyclists is larger. They should switch to a car :-) And paths are poorly swept compared to roads, so the need to make sudden swerves is more frequent. Huh? We've had a few cyclists in this area quite badly injured from striking such bollards, with the result that they are being replaced with a more visible design. Those ones under the bridge in your video would be re-sited out of the shadow and painted yellow with reflective bands. They can be painted and most of them out here are bright yellow. Again, a participant in any sort of traffic shall ride in an attentive manner and at speeds commensurate with the surroundings. I admit that I sometimes push it a bit on singletrack but I have also learned how to properly roll in a fall. Or not to fall in the first place, meaning letting the bike careen a bit where possible. [...] Meanwhile, one census point in Cambridge (and not in one of the busiest cycling areas - the site was chosen so that a linked display counter would be highly visible to a very congested road, so that motorists would be encouraged out of their cars, not because it carried the most cycle traffic) was passed by over a million cyclists this year, with only about 280,000 people living in what would conventionally be called cycle commuting range, and around 130,000 actually in the city and it's semi-attached necklace of former villages. Your sprawling cities will need to collapse in on themselves and become far more compact for anything like that level of popularity there though. Most American do not want that. They want space and breathing room. And to be enslaved to the car (which makes a bit of a mockery of the "breathing room" part). I've also found that city centre gentrification is happening just as much there as here, so clearly you aren't speaking for all Americans. There are clear downsides to living a long way from work (and all the other facilities) like wasting a lot of your life traveling to and from work, stores, and other necessary facilities, and poor internet speeds (which is a matter of physics). You should come visit. Then you'd know that this isn't true. One has to be smart and find the best way to handle any potential impact. For example, my work today happens right here in this office, at home. As it does every day. My commute is 10 seconds and it's a leisurely stroll instead of standing jam-packed in some subway. Fine to work from home if you can, but not all work can be done that way - in fact, only a tiny proportion can. A lot of it can but not everyone understands. Engineering like I do can almost always be done remotely to a large extent. People are leaving money on the table hand over fist. For example, I can't find any freelance tech who'd whip up prototypes at home. Many are unemployed yet they don't do it. The investment on their part would be less than $1k. Just one example of many. Sure, but that is mainly knowledge based work ... Not really. They are building something strictly per instructions without a need to understand how the electronic circuitry works. Prototypes, usually several. ... - if you are building anything physical that involves more than one family, you need to have a separate workplace. That is a high proportion of workers who will never be able to telecommute. This is what Fedex is for. I use them all the time. ... Increasingly, that is being taken into account in people's home purchase decisions. You want fast internet, you have to be close to a major exchange, because fast digital signals don't get far on existing telco cabling, and running fibre to your door is expensive, particularly if it's a long way from the nearest concentrator. It'll be a longer process in the US, as you have further to go, but it'll happen. Nope. We figured this out a long time ago. I have 6MB/sec and could have a lot more. But since it's used mainly for biz I don't need more. Unless you are using an unusual notation, you may mean 6Mbps - network speeds are measured in bits (lower case b), not bytes (capital B). Yes, sorry, 6Mbits/sec. I get 55 Mbps down, and 12.5Mbps up - but I have teenagers in the house! I can have that from a cable company but then only in conjunction with cable-TV. No way. I get it on my telephone line, with fibre reaching to a few hundred metres away. It's known here as Fibre To The Cabinet (FTTC) and uses VDSL rather than the ADSL used on pure copper lines. I'm able to limit the amount of the bandwidth the youngsters take, so that my pet Network Time Protocol Stratum 1 server always has bandwidth available - I see clients from all over Europe (although mostly in the UK, and occasionally further afield than Europe) using my GPS/PPS system to synchronise their computers (and whole networks) to. I'm rarely outside the +/- 5µs range. Note that the last minute (UTC) of this year will have 61 seconds, as a leapsecond is occurring at that time. Thanks, I'll start my next ride one second later then so I don't arrive at the pub at 2:59:59 and find the door locked :-) There is still a copper link back to the exchange for voice traffic, so that phones work even in a power cut, when people are most likely to need to contact emergency services. The availability of fast (defined officially as 24Mbps+) internet has become a major factor in house prices here in the UK. Not here. We can always get Hughes Net via satellite. Most people around here abhor living in a cramped city space. ... The areas with the most cycle traffic are right in the old city centre, which is (with a few exceptions) a car-free zone. A similar counter next to great St Mary's church would probably run at about twice the rate, since nearly all the traffic is cycles, and it's crossed by a number of routes between colleges and university departments so there is a lot of student traffic, very nearly all on cycles (you have to be disabled or have some other special need to be allowed to bring of keep a car anywhere near the University of Cambridge as an undergraduate), and similar rules are in place for Anglia Ruskin University - so strict that my wife will need special dispensation when she starts her degree there, despite our being local residents. She certainly won't be allowed to drive there, in any case, and there isn't any parking for cars at all. Eliminating the space allocated to the idle storage of motor vehicles goes a long way towards making cities more compact, while simultaneously making them more cycle friendly. That's not how America tends to solve the problem and I am grateful that it isn't done. You LIKE your cities choked with cars? No, I do not like cities at all. I have lived in them and cannot understand why anyone would lile to like like in a can of sardines. What I certainly do not want is some government entity telling me that I cannot drive to and from my house. Like today where I need to buy fuel pellets. It is a wee problem to haul half a ton on a bicycle in hilly terrain. Well, it might take a few trips, but it worked for the NVA better than the massive motorised effort put in by the US in that conflict. What is the NVA? I suppose you don't mean the former East-German army. North Vietnamese Army. The ones who used bicycle transport to hand the highly motorised US their asses on a plate a few decades back. Yeah, at almost twice the number of deaths among their soldiers. Communists typically have a low regard for individual human life. ... There's little that encourages motorists out of their cars more readily than sitting in stationary motor traffic while a steady stream of cyclists passes them, but of course if you move all that cycle traffic onto separated facilities, they are out of sight and mind of the drivers. I believe in the more positive encouragements to cycling. Like people experience it in the Netherlands. Car use is not discouraged there, at least it was not in the 80's when I lived there. However, they have a near perfect cycling infrastructure and the mindset of the population is such that if someone would suggest going to a nearby restaurant by car people would squint their eyes "You've got to be kidding, right?". Car use is not discouraged in the Netherlands? They TAUGHT the rest of the world how to do it! Nope. Unless it has changed. I lived there for many years in the 80's and car use was easy. We just _chose_ to take the bikes. I know it's subtle, but then there are none so blind as those who don't want to see. THey even have a minor industry selling their expertise around the world, with study tours showing how motor traffic is subtly discouraged in some areas and from some routes, and how it all joins up to create people friendly cities. I think you are seeing ghosts here :-) I know, personally, a man who makes his living conducting such tours, and does so for groups from all over the world. There is always a microscopic niche market, for just about anything. Sure, you can get most places by car if you really need to, although the entry cost is high compared to most places (both for the car and the driver testing and licensing) but with very low (i.e cycle friendly) speed limits in cities, and often very convoluted routes to get from one part of a city or town to another. And nowhere to leave your motor vehicle except briefly as you load or unload it. Not to mention the cost of running a car in the NL - how many times as much as in the US is it now? Slightly higher than in Germany. No big deal for regular people. In the US it is cheaper than probably most of Europe mainly because of lower gasoline taxes but that's got almost nothing to do with car use. If people want a car they have one. Plenty of people have cars, but they don't drive nearly as much, on average, than anywhere else. Partly because parking is difficult when you get there, partly because you have to use routes which are subtly diverted so as to be longer, in both time and distance, than those you could use on a bicycle. And of course, fuel is expensive. So it's made shorter by bike, quicker by bike, and less expensive by bike. Let's debunk that myth right he http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist...ts ,_2013.png NL has more cars per capita than the UK. https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2012/1...lometres-a-day Average 13300km per car in NL. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-28546589 Average 12700km per car in UK. I trust you can do the math. [...] All fairly old, and the dates don't even match, so apples and oranges, Nonsense, it's all just a few years ago and the numbers surely will not have jumped one year to the other. particularly as the Dutch distance included foreign trips, but (due to the greater barriers to motor travel to and from the UK) there is almost none of that (in statistical terms) on UK average use patterns. Driving is driving is driving. It pollutes the environment and clogs the streets. It does not matter where. Maybe you should just admit that you were wrong? [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 2016-12-29 16:29, Phil Lee wrote:
Joerg considered Thu, 29 Dec 2016 14:16:14 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-28 07:47, Joerg wrote: On 2016-12-27 13:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 27 Dec 2016 08:03:05 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-26 13:10, Phil Lee wrote: [Clarks brake pads] ... Keep an eye on rim wear though - hard blocks can rip through rims pretty fast. Of course, they may have improved since my encounters with them, and you may find they are fine. A brief spin hinted that the performance is not as good as KoolStop but I'll see on the next 45 miler into the valley. If the difference is manageable by pulling harder on the levers it's ok, considering the huge price difference. Well, they may improve a bit as they bed in, and the blocks conform better to the precise shape of the rim. I shall hope so. We've got a lot of hills here where letting loose is not an option because of intersections. 43 miles later I have to say the Clarks pads are almost on par with KoolStop. Can't try them in wet weather for a while because no rain but in wet weather rim brakes are the pits anyways. So now my fairly international road bike also has UK parts. "Elite" brake pads no less :-) I'll reserve judgment until you find out what they are like in the wet - I think that may be a higher proportion of the time here than there, so it may be that what is ok there is less so for utility riding in the UK (and now I can't ride myself, it's just parts for other bikes I'm worrying about - principally my kids' bikes). That'll be a while. The rims did become wet and muddy during a necessary oddroad stretch and both KoolStop and Clarks reacted the same way, with compromised braking power (about the same) and an awful grinding noise. Which is why one requirement for any bike I might ever purchase in the future is disc brakes front and back. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 2017-01-02 17:33, Phil Lee wrote:
Joerg considered Fri, 30 Dec 2016 08:12:20 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-29 16:25, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Wed, 28 Dec 2016 07:47:21 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-27 13:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 27 Dec 2016 08:03:05 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-26 13:10, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Sun, 25 Dec 2016 09:01:18 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-25 01:15, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:56:32 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-23 10:24, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Wed, 21 Dec 2016 14:19:25 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-21 13:11, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:27:04 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-19 18:59, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Mon, 19 Dec 2016 13:57:12 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-17 21:12, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 12/17/2016 5:22 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2016-12-17 14:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:51:14 -0800 the perfect time to write: [...] Maybe this works: https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_pi...026ed2d5844401 It's the tunnel underneath Highway 50. Quite spooky because in summer there can be rattlesnakes in there that want to cool off. Or some muggers with knives jump into the path when you emerge. Similar to the one under the A14 near Stow-cum-Quy, but ours doesn't have lights - I can't remember if they are fitted but broken or simply not there. You'd have to stand in there for a few minutes for your eyes to adjust enough to be able to see broken light fittings, which would be foolish at best, given the high level of cycle use and the fact that most are riding blindly towards the light at the other end. I never rely on road lighting, my bikes both have powerful headlights. In our tunnel that can really save the day because rattlesnakes in "cooling off mode" are often coiled up and they blend into the pavement color. Coild up snakes can strike if you see them too late. So far I only ran over one on a trail and it was stretched out where they'd have a hard time striking. But any decent cycle light will be pointing the light where you really need it - which isn't the ceiling of the tunnel! On high beam it should. On MTB it is even essential in a thick forest. However, why would you want to see the ceiling of the tunnel? I was merely pointing out why I have no idea if the tunnel ever has been lit (but the lights are broken) or never been lit at all. If it has broken lights, it would be possible to get them repaired with a simple report to the local council. Where it will be asssigned #150 or so on the priority list and be performed several decade after you and I have left earth. Maybe. Or maybe not. If it never had any lights, getting them installed would be a bigger problem. They usually all have lights at least out here. Simple stuff with the ambience of a Soviet hallway. [...] There are a few fully suspended touring bikes, which would seem to fit your needs better than an MTB. They'd break on the trails. Trail riding is a necessity out here. They're designed for unsupported expedition touring around the world, mostly on tracks and unsealed roads. They would survive even your abuse, unless you set out to deliberately destroy them to prove a point. I never saw anything like that here. Or in Europe for that matter. A good trail bike must survive undamaged when the whole enchilada becomes airborne and lands hard. I never do that on purpose (except with the front wheel, of course) but it happens. If you are doing jumps on a normal utility ride, you need to do it slower, but never mind, with the weight of bike you want, you will be anyway. No wonder you find cycling so risky, if you ride as if you were in a competitive MTB event on every ride. It's par for the course on some singletrack routes here. Good bikes must withstand that. Your can't pussyfoot over every rock or tree root. In most of the world outside Joergville, commuting and singletrack which includes jumps are considered incompatible. Huh? I thought you had lived in Namibia. http://www.bikejuju.com/wp-content/u...Wood_child.jpg A Namibian ambulance: http://www.bikejuju.com/wp-content/u...bulance600.jpg I mean, just because it's possible doesn't make it a good idea. Someone once street legalised a genuine racing Suzuki RG500 GP bike. It would be possible to commute on that, but would it be sensible? What you are trying to do is similar. I am not trying, I am living it. The El Dorado Trail singletrack is a route I use regularly for fun and for errands. Also to get to the local software engineer when we have to work together side by side. They aren't cheap mind you, but that is as much because of the tiny market for them as the actual building cost. I have not seen anything with the robust trail performance of a Fuji Outland or similar. Try looking at something like the ToutTerrain PanAmericana - you can even have it with a generator and full wiring harness, with a power take off for satnav or whatever. http://www.en.tout-terrain.de/bicycl...ricana-xplore/ Probably very expensive. But appears to fit your needs without even more expensive modification. Not really, I am sure I'd see frame damage quite soon and I can imagine the price tag to be very high. What I need is almost the same structure as on a GS1200 Dual-Sport which I soon will have. And they weigh how much? You'd need thighs like Chris Hoy and the endurance of Chris Froome to make any real use of it, even if you can get gearing low enough (off the shelf) to be able to move it uphill at all. There's a hell of a difference in the power available between a bicycle and a GS1200, in case you'd not noticed that little problem. Maybe you also have the powered bionic exoskeleton to go with your design! Start thinking about scale and stuff. Of course I do not need a rack where a 2nd person can sit on during rough rides. I need one that can safely transport 20-40lbs. The structure my MTB will have in the back will become very similar to the GS1200. Have to do that myself because the bike manufacturers can't get it done. The machined parts are here by now and partially installed. But need more time to adapt some stuff, drill, get mounting hardware, and so on. Mainly because anything on an MTB must be smooth enough not to cause unnecessary injury in a crash. The MTB will now exceed 40lbs empty weight and that is perfectly ok with me. I have seen this kind of classic construction, it was popular in the 90's even for forks. The suspension linkage at the axle is too weak. Could be beefed up by a custom made part though. However, where it would most likely fail first is where the upper welds to the seat tube are and then the frame is toast. The gearbox is cool though. Their are a bit skimpy on specs but it looks like the front axle is the standard QR deal. Like on my bike. In conjunction with a large diameter disc brake up front and lots of load on the bike that would be a big design mistake. Well, maybe not, hard to see. They should learn more about web site design. The skills to design good web-sites and design good bicycles are rather different, and rarely coincide - that, as they say, is life. Smart business people know where to find help. In a business all aspects must be taken care of, not just 80% of them. If they are getting enough work to keep them busy (and even have a waiting list), there is little point in enhancing their ability to sell. Smart business people spend whatever budget they have available on the weakest links in the chain, not ones which perform adequately for the current state of the other parts of the business. Most such businesses I know or rather have known failed because they did good engineering but completely blew the marketing or accounting. Or both. [...] Right now I am building a strut system that allows a more safe carrying of luggage on a full suspension bike that the simmple seat tube rack that will (and has) failed over time. Has it really never occurred to bicycle design engineers that trail riders need ... water? And clothes, and tools, and food, and ... When you can get a drivers permit at so young an age and so easily as in all the states I know about, .... It's changing. The recent generation is know for a serious lack of interest in obtaining a driver's license. They are happy in their little virtual cyber world. Sad. Maybe - but if their lack of interest in travel leads to fewer of them gaining driving permits, they are more likely to cycle when they do need to travel, particularly for local trips. Not at all. They generally do not even own a bicycle and don't want one. They simply do not travel. Until some day ... oh dang ... they can't get a job. Many of them look like a blimp by the time they are past 20. That's where policies like promoting active travel to schools help. Although we do have that problem here, it is not as prevalent as there, because the UK is a pretty compact place generally, and as long as you don't live a long way out in the county, the chances are you will be in cycle commuting range of some kind of job, even if you are unfit. Here they often don't even have bike racks at school. Our local high school (Ponderosa High, Cameron Park, CA) can only be reached by narrow 2-lane fast roads. Nobody in their right mind cycles there regularly. So rather similar to the narrow 2-lane roads that nearly all cycling in the UK takes place on, except for ours being generally more twisting, narrower and with a higher speed limit! People die on those out here and many more are hurt so bad that there are nasty consequences for them. I and nearly all my cycling friends will not ride there. They certainly won't let their kids cycle there. Yeah, we know. Danger, Danger! As long as you and your friends keep telling people it's dangerous, they'll use it as a reason not to ride. We know better. The last rider here died a week ago. We don't, because we don't know why. If he was riding along at night without lights or even reflectors, you can't claim it's any indication of a general level of danger - 9pm wasn't it? They get hit during day and during night. Typically a high speed impact from behind. Data from outside your head? No, from news media. So another example of data free scaremongering then. No, real life. Stuff that happened and got reported. Sure enough the next one was killed this very morning, hit from behind as usual: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...124249469.html Sticking the head in the sand about this is not helpful. With the right training, they are as safe or safer than the routes you prefer (I noticed the very solid bollards hidden nicely in the shade of the bridge over that route you posted the link to - how long before you were even found after hitting one of them, never mind how long for an ambulance to get there? It's about car drivers, not cyclist. Hence no training effect. I know perfectly well not to careen into a bollard and this is fully under my control. However, I cannot control the driver coming from behind, slowly drifting because he is looking at who may have just text-messaged him. Those bollards are a hazard, and if you are following another rider (I know that's very unlikely as long as you keep scaring them off, but still, it is a slight possibility) who swerves at the last moment to avoid it, your first sight will be too late to avoid it. Seriously? You swerve Kamikaze-style where you can't see? Yikes! An attentive cyclist won't without good reason, but not all cyclists are attentive - and as cycling is far more popular, so the proportion of poorly trained cyclists is larger. They should switch to a car :-) If someone is inattentive, I'd far rather they were on a bicycle than in a car - it does at least limit the amount of damage they can do, and simple self-preservation will teach them some skills. They'd endanger people on bike paths. Not a good thing. And paths are poorly swept compared to roads, so the need to make sudden swerves is more frequent. Huh? You've never seen any broken glass on such paths? Oh, I forgot - you just expect the bike to take care of dealing with your refusal to take simple riding precautions like looking where you are going. Most competent cyclists avoid obstacles - you, on the other hand, seem to revel in them. I make sure my bikes have adequate tires, liners and tubes so they can take typical road litter. Or do you seriously think it would be a good idea that a car driver swerves into oncoming traffic or cyclist rapidly swerves into motor traffic every time he sees wood splinters in the lane? We've had a few cyclists in this area quite badly injured from striking such bollards, with the result that they are being replaced with a more visible design. Those ones under the bridge in your video would be re-sited out of the shadow and painted yellow with reflective bands. They can be painted and most of them out here are bright yellow. Again, a participant in any sort of traffic shall ride in an attentive manner and at speeds commensurate with the surroundings. I admit that I sometimes push it a bit on singletrack but I have also learned how to properly roll in a fall. Or not to fall in the first place, meaning letting the bike careen a bit where possible. Including careening off a concrete bollard? Good luck with that. No, good MTB riders know how to careen in a predictable fashion. Meaning without hitting rocks, trees or bollards. On rainy days my MTB is going partially sideway a lot of the ride. It's even fun. [...] Meanwhile, one census point in Cambridge (and not in one of the busiest cycling areas - the site was chosen so that a linked display counter would be highly visible to a very congested road, so that motorists would be encouraged out of their cars, not because it carried the most cycle traffic) was passed by over a million cyclists this year, with only about 280,000 people living in what would conventionally be called cycle commuting range, and around 130,000 actually in the city and it's semi-attached necklace of former villages. Your sprawling cities will need to collapse in on themselves and become far more compact for anything like that level of popularity there though. Most American do not want that. They want space and breathing room. And to be enslaved to the car (which makes a bit of a mockery of the "breathing room" part). I've also found that city centre gentrification is happening just as much there as here, so clearly you aren't speaking for all Americans. There are clear downsides to living a long way from work (and all the other facilities) like wasting a lot of your life traveling to and from work, stores, and other necessary facilities, and poor internet speeds (which is a matter of physics). You should come visit. Then you'd know that this isn't true. One has to be smart and find the best way to handle any potential impact. For example, my work today happens right here in this office, at home. As it does every day. My commute is 10 seconds and it's a leisurely stroll instead of standing jam-packed in some subway. Fine to work from home if you can, but not all work can be done that way - in fact, only a tiny proportion can. A lot of it can but not everyone understands. Engineering like I do can almost always be done remotely to a large extent. People are leaving money on the table hand over fist. For example, I can't find any freelance tech who'd whip up prototypes at home. Many are unemployed yet they don't do it. The investment on their part would be less than $1k. Just one example of many. Sure, but that is mainly knowledge based work ... Not really. They are building something strictly per instructions without a need to understand how the electronic circuitry works. Prototypes, usually several. So nothing that's in actual series production. Correct. I write very detailed documentation concurrently with schematics and other project details and not as an afterthought. They get that along with the materials. So does my layouter. ... - if you are building anything physical that involves more than one family, you need to have a separate workplace. That is a high proportion of workers who will never be able to telecommute. This is what Fedex is for. I use them all the time. OK for single items on an occasional basis, but not for moving things between stations on a production line. Sure you can. This is how whole aircraft are built. The wings are made here, the fuselage over there, the wiring over yonder, and so on. Nowadays modern electronics are often built the same way except that the stuff also crosses borders and oceans. [...] There is still a copper link back to the exchange for voice traffic, so that phones work even in a power cut, when people are most likely to need to contact emergency services. The availability of fast (defined officially as 24Mbps+) internet has become a major factor in house prices here in the UK. Not here. We can always get Hughes Net via satellite. Most people around here abhor living in a cramped city space. Yet if you look at the demographics, the overwhelming majority DO live in cities. So your "here" must mean the dormitory community you choose to live in - in other words, a cherry picked subset of the whole. It is not an overwhelming majority and they often count suburbs and small town as "non-urban". Yet those are the places where trails are used. Example: There is no safe way to get to Placerville by bicycle other than singletrack. Placerville is a city. Riding on Highway 50 is prohibited. ... The areas with the most cycle traffic are right in the old city centre, which is (with a few exceptions) a car-free zone. A similar counter next to great St Mary's church would probably run at about twice the rate, since nearly all the traffic is cycles, and it's crossed by a number of routes between colleges and university departments so there is a lot of student traffic, very nearly all on cycles (you have to be disabled or have some other special need to be allowed to bring of keep a car anywhere near the University of Cambridge as an undergraduate), and similar rules are in place for Anglia Ruskin University - so strict that my wife will need special dispensation when she starts her degree there, despite our being local residents. She certainly won't be allowed to drive there, in any case, and there isn't any parking for cars at all. Eliminating the space allocated to the idle storage of motor vehicles goes a long way towards making cities more compact, while simultaneously making them more cycle friendly. That's not how America tends to solve the problem and I am grateful that it isn't done. You LIKE your cities choked with cars? No, I do not like cities at all. I have lived in them and cannot understand why anyone would lile to like like in a can of sardines. What I certainly do not want is some government entity telling me that I cannot drive to and from my house. Like today where I need to buy fuel pellets. It is a wee problem to haul half a ton on a bicycle in hilly terrain. Well, it might take a few trips, but it worked for the NVA better than the massive motorised effort put in by the US in that conflict. What is the NVA? I suppose you don't mean the former East-German army. North Vietnamese Army. The ones who used bicycle transport to hand the highly motorised US their asses on a plate a few decades back. Yeah, at almost twice the number of deaths among their soldiers. Communists typically have a low regard for individual human life. I'm pretty sure that only a relatively small number of the deaths were in the logistical train, and most were in the combat units. Often where American soldiers would call a medic or perform heroic rescue the North-Vietnamese solution was euthanasia by Kalashnikov. They realised that the US didn't regard anything less than a truck as a meaningful target worthy of "servicing", and took advantage of that weakness. Talk to people who were there instead of guessing. ... There's little that encourages motorists out of their cars more readily than sitting in stationary motor traffic while a steady stream of cyclists passes them, but of course if you move all that cycle traffic onto separated facilities, they are out of sight and mind of the drivers. I believe in the more positive encouragements to cycling. Like people experience it in the Netherlands. Car use is not discouraged there, at least it was not in the 80's when I lived there. However, they have a near perfect cycling infrastructure and the mindset of the population is such that if someone would suggest going to a nearby restaurant by car people would squint their eyes "You've got to be kidding, right?". Car use is not discouraged in the Netherlands? They TAUGHT the rest of the world how to do it! Nope. Unless it has changed. I lived there for many years in the 80's and car use was easy. We just _chose_ to take the bikes. I know it's subtle, but then there are none so blind as those who don't want to see. THey even have a minor industry selling their expertise around the world, with study tours showing how motor traffic is subtly discouraged in some areas and from some routes, and how it all joins up to create people friendly cities. I think you are seeing ghosts here :-) I know, personally, a man who makes his living conducting such tours, and does so for groups from all over the world. There is always a microscopic niche market, for just about anything. Like the bike design you are dreaming up? How many people have actually expressed serious interest in it (when in possession of the facts about weight and efficiency penalties), apart from yourself? Lots of people but they gave up because they don't want to spend tens of hours building it. Sure, you can get most places by car if you really need to, although the entry cost is high compared to most places (both for the car and the driver testing and licensing) but with very low (i.e cycle friendly) speed limits in cities, and often very convoluted routes to get from one part of a city or town to another. And nowhere to leave your motor vehicle except briefly as you load or unload it. Not to mention the cost of running a car in the NL - how many times as much as in the US is it now? Slightly higher than in Germany. No big deal for regular people. In the US it is cheaper than probably most of Europe mainly because of lower gasoline taxes but that's got almost nothing to do with car use. If people want a car they have one. Plenty of people have cars, but they don't drive nearly as much, on average, than anywhere else. Partly because parking is difficult when you get there, partly because you have to use routes which are subtly diverted so as to be longer, in both time and distance, than those you could use on a bicycle. And of course, fuel is expensive. So it's made shorter by bike, quicker by bike, and less expensive by bike. Let's debunk that myth right he http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist...ts ,_2013.png NL has more cars per capita than the UK. https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2012/1...lometres-a-day Average 13300km per car in NL. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-28546589 Average 12700km per car in UK. I trust you can do the math. [...] All fairly old, and the dates don't even match, so apples and oranges, Nonsense, it's all just a few years ago and the numbers surely will not have jumped one year to the other. But there is no common methodology in gathering the data, meaning you can't usefully compare them. Right. It wasn't the same guys so you just claim it's all false. Phhht. particularly as the Dutch distance included foreign trips, but (due to the greater barriers to motor travel to and from the UK) there is almost none of that (in statistical terms) on UK average use patterns. Driving is driving is driving. It pollutes the environment and clogs the streets. It does not matter where. Maybe you should just admit that you were wrong? Try finding out what proportion of trips under 10 miles are conducted by motor vehicle in various places. Of course a car is going to be the choice of most for international travel, and that skews the figures, particularly when another country is so easy to reach that many near the border select different counties for different parts of their shopping list, depending on prices or quality. The cost of crossing the English Channel makes that sort of travel uneconomic from here. There is NO cost in simply shopping in a different city that happens to be on the other side of a line drawn on a map - and may even be closer than one on the same side of that line. The numbers aren't much different in other European countries. The fact is that driving a car in the Netherlands is just about as convenient as it is in the UK, France, Spain, whatever. A few years ago I was speaking at a meeting of a UN committee on inclusion when they visited Cambridge for the launch of an initiative to make cycling accessible to people with disabilities, and mentioned that it was fitting that such an initiative be launched here in Cambridge, as it was the only place in the UK which could come close to matching Dutch levels of cycling, a fact which was acknowledged by the Dutch representative on the committee. But of course, you have to know better than the Dutch representative to a UN committee, don't you? Sometimes yes. England does not consist of just Cambridge. You have said yourself that most of England has paltry to no cycling infrastructure. The Netherlands does and it is pretty much covering the whole country. Not just one college town. I mean, you (and apparently Jute) are the worlds leading experts in absolutely everything! No. However, I do know when facts presented by others are wrong. Sorry to say but in this case you are wrong and the data clearly bears that out. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 2017-01-03 18:52, Phil Lee wrote:
Joerg considered Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:57:40 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2017-01-02 17:33, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 30 Dec 2016 08:12:20 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-29 16:25, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Wed, 28 Dec 2016 07:47:21 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-27 13:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 27 Dec 2016 08:03:05 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-26 13:10, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Sun, 25 Dec 2016 09:01:18 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-25 01:15, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:56:32 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-23 10:24, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Wed, 21 Dec 2016 14:19:25 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-21 13:11, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:27:04 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-19 18:59, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Mon, 19 Dec 2016 13:57:12 -0800 the perfect time to write: On 2016-12-17 21:12, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 12/17/2016 5:22 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2016-12-17 14:05, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:51:14 -0800 the perfect time to write: [...] Maybe this works: https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_pi...026ed2d5844401 It's the tunnel underneath Highway 50. Quite spooky because in summer there can be rattlesnakes in there that want to cool off. Or some muggers with knives jump into the path when you emerge. Similar to the one under the A14 near Stow-cum-Quy, but ours doesn't have lights - I can't remember if they are fitted but broken or simply not there. You'd have to stand in there for a few minutes for your eyes to adjust enough to be able to see broken light fittings, which would be foolish at best, given the high level of cycle use and the fact that most are riding blindly towards the light at the other end. I never rely on road lighting, my bikes both have powerful headlights. In our tunnel that can really save the day because rattlesnakes in "cooling off mode" are often coiled up and they blend into the pavement color. Coild up snakes can strike if you see them too late. So far I only ran over one on a trail and it was stretched out where they'd have a hard time striking. But any decent cycle light will be pointing the light where you really need it - which isn't the ceiling of the tunnel! On high beam it should. On MTB it is even essential in a thick forest. However, why would you want to see the ceiling of the tunnel? I was merely pointing out why I have no idea if the tunnel ever has been lit (but the lights are broken) or never been lit at all. If it has broken lights, it would be possible to get them repaired with a simple report to the local council. Where it will be asssigned #150 or so on the priority list and be performed several decade after you and I have left earth. Maybe. Or maybe not. Or it could be fixed the next day. Certainly here, once that kind of thing is reported, the council is liable for any damage or injury in which the failed infrastructure plays any part. This is a great incentive to them in fixing things which are broken. In the US they've weaseled themselves out of that. As evidenced by the Oakland warehouse fire that killed dozens. Despite numerous filed complaints the city hadn't inspected the place for 30 (!) years. In one interview it was mentioned that city governments have "immunity". It's wrong. Some people (rightfully) sued the city anyhow. Let's see what results. I hope that some government employees there get fired, and soon. If it never had any lights, getting them installed would be a bigger problem. They usually all have lights at least out here. Simple stuff with the ambience of a Soviet hallway. Depends where it is - the one I describe is in a place where electrical power would not be easy to supply. That doesn't mean that they haven't, but is a possible reason why they may not have - the tunnel is completely straight, so just aiming for the light at the end is feasible, and they may not have thought it worthwhile. Here they use solar in such places except for short tunnels. Keeping long tunnels dark is not smart. They are also used by pedestrians who typically do not carry headlights and taillights. [...] There are a few fully suspended touring bikes, which would seem to fit your needs better than an MTB. They'd break on the trails. Trail riding is a necessity out here. They're designed for unsupported expedition touring around the world, mostly on tracks and unsealed roads. They would survive even your abuse, unless you set out to deliberately destroy them to prove a point. I never saw anything like that here. Or in Europe for that matter. A good trail bike must survive undamaged when the whole enchilada becomes airborne and lands hard. I never do that on purpose (except with the front wheel, of course) but it happens. If you are doing jumps on a normal utility ride, you need to do it slower, but never mind, with the weight of bike you want, you will be anyway. No wonder you find cycling so risky, if you ride as if you were in a competitive MTB event on every ride. It's par for the course on some singletrack routes here. Good bikes must withstand that. Your can't pussyfoot over every rock or tree root. In most of the world outside Joergville, commuting and singletrack which includes jumps are considered incompatible. Huh? I thought you had lived in Namibia. I've visited. I've never claimed to have lived there, and I don't know how you got that idea. You claimed you rode a normal bicycle over deeply rutted roads there. Anyway, the world is larger than your big island and there are many places where dirt tracks are used as regular routes. Check out the Intel bicycle parking lots in Folsom. There is a reason why the majority of bikes are MTB. In the Bay Area it is different. http://www.bikejuju.com/wp-content/u...Wood_child.jpg A completely standard bicycle with no suspension beyond that provided by the tyres. A Namibian ambulance: http://www.bikejuju.com/wp-content/u...bulance600.jpg Still no suspension other than the tyres, on either the bicycle or trailer. Because they can't afford that. I mean, just because it's possible doesn't make it a good idea. Someone once street legalised a genuine racing Suzuki RG500 GP bike. It would be possible to commute on that, but would it be sensible? What you are trying to do is similar. I am not trying, I am living it. The El Dorado Trail singletrack is a route I use regularly for fun and for errands. Also to get to the local software engineer when we have to work together side by side. If it's subject to that much use, it needs to be improved so that jumps are smoothed out and super-strong bicycles aren't necessary to ride it. The target should be a track that's usable by the bikes (and trailers) you showed links to in Namibia. Nah, people out here know how to ride those. Many are capable of keeping a good clip like on this route from Lotus to Folsom: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5cjAW_nrl4 They aren't cheap mind you, but that is as much because of the tiny market for them as the actual building cost. I have not seen anything with the robust trail performance of a Fuji Outland or similar. Try looking at something like the ToutTerrain PanAmericana - you can even have it with a generator and full wiring harness, with a power take off for satnav or whatever. http://www.en.tout-terrain.de/bicycl...ricana-xplore/ Probably very expensive. But appears to fit your needs without even more expensive modification. Not really, I am sure I'd see frame damage quite soon and I can imagine the price tag to be very high. What I need is almost the same structure as on a GS1200 Dual-Sport which I soon will have. And they weigh how much? You'd need thighs like Chris Hoy and the endurance of Chris Froome to make any real use of it, even if you can get gearing low enough (off the shelf) to be able to move it uphill at all. There's a hell of a difference in the power available between a bicycle and a GS1200, in case you'd not noticed that little problem. Maybe you also have the powered bionic exoskeleton to go with your design! Start thinking about scale and stuff. Of course I do not need a rack where a 2nd person can sit on during rough rides. I need one that can safely transport 20-40lbs. The structure my MTB will have in the back will become very similar to the GS1200. Have to do that myself because the bike manufacturers can't get it done. The machined parts are here by now and partially installed. But need more time to adapt some stuff, drill, get mounting hardware, and so on. Mainly because anything on an MTB must be smooth enough not to cause unnecessary injury in a crash. The MTB will now exceed 40lbs empty weight and that is perfectly ok with me. Plus your gallons of water (or beer) for coping with the punishing terrain and climate (which doesn't seem to be regarded as necessary in Namibia, despite the even harsher climate). As I said before, it is not wise to constantly ignore the longterm effects of dehydration. Once ailments from that set it it is too late. Going 3-4h full bore on a 105F day without a gallon of fluid is foolish. Yet people out here do that. More than once have I given a 16.9oz bottle to someone who was totally parched. One we had to almost revive and we thought he wouldn't make it. I have seen this kind of classic construction, it was popular in the 90's even for forks. The suspension linkage at the axle is too weak. Could be beefed up by a custom made part though. However, where it would most likely fail first is where the upper welds to the seat tube are and then the frame is toast. The gearbox is cool though. Their are a bit skimpy on specs but it looks like the front axle is the standard QR deal. Like on my bike. In conjunction with a large diameter disc brake up front and lots of load on the bike that would be a big design mistake. Well, maybe not, hard to see. They should learn more about web site design. The skills to design good web-sites and design good bicycles are rather different, and rarely coincide - that, as they say, is life. Smart business people know where to find help. In a business all aspects must be taken care of, not just 80% of them. If they are getting enough work to keep them busy (and even have a waiting list), there is little point in enhancing their ability to sell. Smart business people spend whatever budget they have available on the weakest links in the chain, not ones which perform adequately for the current state of the other parts of the business. Most such businesses I know or rather have known failed because they did good engineering but completely blew the marketing or accounting. Or both. If they can sell every bike they make, and at a profit, they are successful by any normal definition. Do they? AFAIK it is a small company in Gundelfingen, formed in 2006. Not something like Specialized or Giant which really grew fast. [...] Right now I am building a strut system that allows a more safe carrying of luggage on a full suspension bike that the simmple seat tube rack that will (and has) failed over time. Has it really never occurred to bicycle design engineers that trail riders need ... water? And clothes, and tools, and food, and ... When you can get a drivers permit at so young an age and so easily as in all the states I know about, .... It's changing. The recent generation is know for a serious lack of interest in obtaining a driver's license. They are happy in their little virtual cyber world. Sad. Maybe - but if their lack of interest in travel leads to fewer of them gaining driving permits, they are more likely to cycle when they do need to travel, particularly for local trips. Not at all. They generally do not even own a bicycle and don't want one. They simply do not travel. Until some day ... oh dang ... they can't get a job. Many of them look like a blimp by the time they are past 20. That's where policies like promoting active travel to schools help. Although we do have that problem here, it is not as prevalent as there, because the UK is a pretty compact place generally, and as long as you don't live a long way out in the county, the chances are you will be in cycle commuting range of some kind of job, even if you are unfit. Here they often don't even have bike racks at school. Our local high school (Ponderosa High, Cameron Park, CA) can only be reached by narrow 2-lane fast roads. Nobody in their right mind cycles there regularly. So rather similar to the narrow 2-lane roads that nearly all cycling in the UK takes place on, except for ours being generally more twisting, narrower and with a higher speed limit! People die on those out here and many more are hurt so bad that there are nasty consequences for them. I and nearly all my cycling friends will not ride there. They certainly won't let their kids cycle there. Yeah, we know. Danger, Danger! As long as you and your friends keep telling people it's dangerous, they'll use it as a reason not to ride. We know better. The last rider here died a week ago. We don't, because we don't know why. If he was riding along at night without lights or even reflectors, you can't claim it's any indication of a general level of danger - 9pm wasn't it? They get hit during day and during night. Typically a high speed impact from behind. Data from outside your head? No, from news media. So another example of data free scaremongering then. No, real life. Stuff that happened and got reported. Sure enough the next one was killed this very morning, hit from behind as usual: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...124249469.html Sticking the head in the sand about this is not helpful. Leaving out any details which would allow other cyclists to avoid such a collision is even less so. Were there any turnings nearby? Could the cyclist have been attempting to turn left and moved into the stream of motor traffic (relying on his blinky and helmet to preserve his life) without making a shoulder check? Have the cellphone records of both drivers been checked to see if they were distracting themselves in that way? Too many unanswered questions, and not enough to reach any conclusion. The pattern is very clear. We have about one such accident every month. The conclusion for most cyclists including myself is to use the car on such routes and not the bicycle. With the right training, they are as safe or safer than the routes you prefer (I noticed the very solid bollards hidden nicely in the shade of the bridge over that route you posted the link to - how long before you were even found after hitting one of them, never mind how long for an ambulance to get there? It's about car drivers, not cyclist. Hence no training effect. I know perfectly well not to careen into a bollard and this is fully under my control. However, I cannot control the driver coming from behind, slowly drifting because he is looking at who may have just text-messaged him. Those bollards are a hazard, and if you are following another rider (I know that's very unlikely as long as you keep scaring them off, but still, it is a slight possibility) who swerves at the last moment to avoid it, your first sight will be too late to avoid it. Seriously? You swerve Kamikaze-style where you can't see? Yikes! An attentive cyclist won't without good reason, but not all cyclists are attentive - and as cycling is far more popular, so the proportion of poorly trained cyclists is larger. They should switch to a car :-) If someone is inattentive, I'd far rather they were on a bicycle than in a car - it does at least limit the amount of damage they can do, and simple self-preservation will teach them some skills. They'd endanger people on bike paths. Not a good thing. They'd endanger even more people with a couple of tons of steel around them, which is an even worse thing. Freedom to travel is a right, using a motor vehicle to do so is a privilege, for which permission can (and should) be withheld if there is any question over the person's ability to do so safely. A judge can also take away the right to ride a bicycle if someone is proven to be a danger and won't correct. And paths are poorly swept compared to roads, so the need to make sudden swerves is more frequent. Huh? You've never seen any broken glass on such paths? Oh, I forgot - you just expect the bike to take care of dealing with your refusal to take simple riding precautions like looking where you are going. Most competent cyclists avoid obstacles - you, on the other hand, seem to revel in them. I make sure my bikes have adequate tires, liners and tubes so they can take typical road litter. Or do you seriously think it would be a good idea that a car driver swerves into oncoming traffic or cyclist rapidly swerves into motor traffic every time he sees wood splinters in the lane? Any decent cyclist avoids running over such hazards whenever possible. If you can't stop before running over it, you are exceeding your ability to ride safely and competently. And you are trying to evade your responsibility to ride safely by making your machine proof to your own misbehaviour. Wrong. A machine that is made tough enough can safely be ridden across such obstacles. That is the whole concept of mountain bikes. We've had a few cyclists in this area quite badly injured from striking such bollards, with the result that they are being replaced with a more visible design. Those ones under the bridge in your video would be re-sited out of the shadow and painted yellow with reflective bands. They can be painted and most of them out here are bright yellow. Again, a participant in any sort of traffic shall ride in an attentive manner and at speeds commensurate with the surroundings. I admit that I sometimes push it a bit on singletrack but I have also learned how to properly roll in a fall. Or not to fall in the first place, meaning letting the bike careen a bit where possible. Including careening off a concrete bollard? Good luck with that. No, good MTB riders know how to careen in a predictable fashion. Meaning without hitting rocks, trees or bollards. On rainy days my MTB is going partially sideway a lot of the ride. It's even fun. But you admit to not making any attempt to avoid other hazards, like glass. Because I don't have to. You really need to take some lessons in safe riding - my youngest child (still at primary school) knows better than you do. Nonsense. [...] ... - if you are building anything physical that involves more than one family, you need to have a separate workplace. That is a high proportion of workers who will never be able to telecommute. This is what Fedex is for. I use them all the time. OK for single items on an occasional basis, but not for moving things between stations on a production line. Sure you can. This is how whole aircraft are built. The wings are made here, the fuselage over there, the wiring over yonder, and so on. Nowadays modern electronics are often built the same way except that the stuff also crosses borders and oceans. Not by fedex! You'd be surprised what they can do. They even have a spacecraft desk. http://www.fedex.com/us/space-solutions/index.html And the factories aren't spare bedrooms of the employees, either. Believe it or not, they have to travel to their place of work. That can very often be avoided. If people are smart. [...] There is still a copper link back to the exchange for voice traffic, so that phones work even in a power cut, when people are most likely to need to contact emergency services. The availability of fast (defined officially as 24Mbps+) internet has become a major factor in house prices here in the UK. Not here. We can always get Hughes Net via satellite. Most people around here abhor living in a cramped city space. Yet if you look at the demographics, the overwhelming majority DO live in cities. So your "here" must mean the dormitory community you choose to live in - in other words, a cherry picked subset of the whole. It is not an overwhelming majority and they often count suburbs and small town as "non-urban". Yet those are the places where trails are used. Example: There is no safe way to get to Placerville by bicycle other than singletrack. Placerville is a city. Riding on Highway 50 is prohibited. Yes, we know you don't live in a civilised country (where bicycles have the right to use public highways) but in a barbarian backwater where any cyclist on a road is considered fair game and potential roadkill. What is so special about Highway 50, and how was the right-of-way for non-motorised traffic lost? The way it happens in all countries. Automotive won that competition. A new tehcnology comes in and crowds out the old one. Just like it happened when cellular phon technology began eating into the market of landline services. ... The areas with the most cycle traffic are right in the old city centre, which is (with a few exceptions) a car-free zone. A similar counter next to great St Mary's church would probably run at about twice the rate, since nearly all the traffic is cycles, and it's crossed by a number of routes between colleges and university departments so there is a lot of student traffic, very nearly all on cycles (you have to be disabled or have some other special need to be allowed to bring of keep a car anywhere near the University of Cambridge as an undergraduate), and similar rules are in place for Anglia Ruskin University - so strict that my wife will need special dispensation when she starts her degree there, despite our being local residents. She certainly won't be allowed to drive there, in any case, and there isn't any parking for cars at all. Eliminating the space allocated to the idle storage of motor vehicles goes a long way towards making cities more compact, while simultaneously making them more cycle friendly. That's not how America tends to solve the problem and I am grateful that it isn't done. You LIKE your cities choked with cars? No, I do not like cities at all. I have lived in them and cannot understand why anyone would lile to like like in a can of sardines. What I certainly do not want is some government entity telling me that I cannot drive to and from my house. Like today where I need to buy fuel pellets. It is a wee problem to haul half a ton on a bicycle in hilly terrain. Well, it might take a few trips, but it worked for the NVA better than the massive motorised effort put in by the US in that conflict. What is the NVA? I suppose you don't mean the former East-German army. North Vietnamese Army. The ones who used bicycle transport to hand the highly motorised US their asses on a plate a few decades back. Yeah, at almost twice the number of deaths among their soldiers. Communists typically have a low regard for individual human life. I'm pretty sure that only a relatively small number of the deaths were in the logistical train, and most were in the combat units. Often where American soldiers would call a medic or perform heroic rescue the North-Vietnamese solution was euthanasia by Kalashnikov. What bearing does that have on their use of bicycles? I was referring to your illusion that their army is better, not to bicycles. They realised that the US didn't regard anything less than a truck as a meaningful target worthy of "servicing", and took advantage of that weakness. Talk to people who were there instead of guessing. I have spoken to people who were there, and that is plain, unvarnished fact! So have I and they all told a very different story. ... There's little that encourages motorists out of their cars more readily than sitting in stationary motor traffic while a steady stream of cyclists passes them, but of course if you move all that cycle traffic onto separated facilities, they are out of sight and mind of the drivers. I believe in the more positive encouragements to cycling. Like people experience it in the Netherlands. Car use is not discouraged there, at least it was not in the 80's when I lived there. However, they have a near perfect cycling infrastructure and the mindset of the population is such that if someone would suggest going to a nearby restaurant by car people would squint their eyes "You've got to be kidding, right?". Car use is not discouraged in the Netherlands? They TAUGHT the rest of the world how to do it! Nope. Unless it has changed. I lived there for many years in the 80's and car use was easy. We just _chose_ to take the bikes. I know it's subtle, but then there are none so blind as those who don't want to see. THey even have a minor industry selling their expertise around the world, with study tours showing how motor traffic is subtly discouraged in some areas and from some routes, and how it all joins up to create people friendly cities. I think you are seeing ghosts here :-) I know, personally, a man who makes his living conducting such tours, and does so for groups from all over the world. There is always a microscopic niche market, for just about anything. Like the bike design you are dreaming up? How many people have actually expressed serious interest in it (when in possession of the facts about weight and efficiency penalties), apart from yourself? Lots of people but they gave up because they don't want to spend tens of hours building it. So set up a shop, employ someone with suitable skills, and make them available - according to you, demand would be high enough to make it worthwhile. As I said many times man can only do so much in 24 hours. I am already busy developing and inventing electronics for medical, aerospace, oil/gas, agriculture, automotive and some other field. I'd love to get my hands on other technology such pellet stoves where one really feels like stepping into the age of the Flintstones. However, there is no time for more. Also, at some point in life most people want to throttle back towards gradual retirement and I am now at that point. Sure, you can get most places by car if you really need to, although the entry cost is high compared to most places (both for the car and the driver testing and licensing) but with very low (i.e cycle friendly) speed limits in cities, and often very convoluted routes to get from one part of a city or town to another. And nowhere to leave your motor vehicle except briefly as you load or unload it. Not to mention the cost of running a car in the NL - how many times as much as in the US is it now? Slightly higher than in Germany. No big deal for regular people. In the US it is cheaper than probably most of Europe mainly because of lower gasoline taxes but that's got almost nothing to do with car use. If people want a car they have one. Plenty of people have cars, but they don't drive nearly as much, on average, than anywhere else. Partly because parking is difficult when you get there, partly because you have to use routes which are subtly diverted so as to be longer, in both time and distance, than those you could use on a bicycle. And of course, fuel is expensive. So it's made shorter by bike, quicker by bike, and less expensive by bike. Let's debunk that myth right he http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist...ts ,_2013.png NL has more cars per capita than the UK. https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2012/1...lometres-a-day Average 13300km per car in NL. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-28546589 Average 12700km per car in UK. I trust you can do the math. [...] All fairly old, and the dates don't even match, so apples and oranges, Nonsense, it's all just a few years ago and the numbers surely will not have jumped one year to the other. But there is no common methodology in gathering the data, meaning you can't usefully compare them. Right. It wasn't the same guys so you just claim it's all false. Phhht. It's not false, but it is also not comparable. It is perfectly possible for different groups to use a common methodology to ensure their data is comparable, but what you linked to has made no attempt to do that. The only thing it may be useful for is to compare year on year comparisons in the same place, to see how use is changing, and I would suggest that was probably the purpose and intent of the researchers. Nit-picking. The data bears out the facts. particularly as the Dutch distance included foreign trips, but (due to the greater barriers to motor travel to and from the UK) there is almost none of that (in statistical terms) on UK average use patterns. Driving is driving is driving. It pollutes the environment and clogs the streets. It does not matter where. Maybe you should just admit that you were wrong? Try finding out what proportion of trips under 10 miles are conducted by motor vehicle in various places. Of course a car is going to be the choice of most for international travel, and that skews the figures, particularly when another country is so easy to reach that many near the border select different counties for different parts of their shopping list, depending on prices or quality. The cost of crossing the English Channel makes that sort of travel uneconomic from here. There is NO cost in simply shopping in a different city that happens to be on the other side of a line drawn on a map - and may even be closer than one on the same side of that line. The numbers aren't much different in other European countries. The fact is that driving a car in the Netherlands is just about as convenient as it is in the UK, France, Spain, whatever. From town to town, yes, but not within one town or city. Sure it is. I lived there. I also drove around with my car a lot in places like Rotterdam because I had to carry a lot of gear and stuff. Big deal. It was easy. A few years ago I was speaking at a meeting of a UN committee on inclusion when they visited Cambridge for the launch of an initiative to make cycling accessible to people with disabilities, and mentioned that it was fitting that such an initiative be launched here in Cambridge, as it was the only place in the UK which could come close to matching Dutch levels of cycling, a fact which was acknowledged by the Dutch representative on the committee. But of course, you have to know better than the Dutch representative to a UN committee, don't you? Sometimes yes. England does not consist of just Cambridge. You have said yourself that most of England has paltry to no cycling infrastructure. The Netherlands does and it is pretty much covering the whole country. Not just one college town. The parts of the UK with cycling infrastructure have almost no cycling, whereas Cambridge, with almost no dedicated infrastructure, leads the country in cycle use. Because it's the only place that discourages car use. One lone example does not prove anything. Basingstoke, Stevenage, Milton Keynes, Harlow, and others were new towns built with excellent cycling infrastructure, but almost no cycling at all. Build it and they will drive instead, as long as you don't discourage them! Milton Keynes bungled lots of it and everyone knows that. Except for those with the heads in the sand. Mass use of cycles in The Netherlands preceded the dedicated infrastructure by decades! Because people could not afford cars. Once they could it changed in just about all countries with paltry or wrongly built cycling infrastructure. Yet not in the Nethelands because they built cycling infrastructure correctly. So people largely kept that mode of transportation. I lived close to the German and Belgium borders and the difference in cycle use on either side versus NL could not have been more extreme. The reasons are very clear. Discouragement is pretty subtle in The Netherlands, mostly consisting of NOT providing huge multi-lane highways into town and city centres or allowing motor vehicles to dominate the urban environment. It is not. http://investinholland.com/infrastructure/road-rail/ I mean, you (and apparently Jute) are the worlds leading experts in absolutely everything! No. However, I do know when facts presented by others are wrong. Sorry to say but in this case you are wrong and the data clearly bears that out. You haven't provided any real data. I did. Well, doesn't matter, keep the head in the sand about it like some others do. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 1/3/2017 9:52 PM, Phil Lee wrote:
Joerg considered Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:57:40 -0800 the perfect time to write: There is no safe way to get to Placerville by bicycle other than singletrack. Placerville is a city. Riding on Highway 50 is prohibited. Yes, we know you don't live in a civilised country (where bicycles have the right to use public highways) but in a barbarian backwater where any cyclist on a road is considered fair game and potential roadkill. What is so special about Highway 50, and how was the right-of-way for non-motorised traffic lost? The situation Joerg describes can be a problem. I heard about a similar thing occurring in southern Ohio, where what had been a two lane highway was converted to a freeway, and bicyclists were prohibited. The state bike advocacy organization tried to get the prohibition overturned, but the state department of transportation (which is frequently not cooperative) said that too few cyclists used that road and that parallel routes were available. They were probably right on the low bike usage, but the parallel routes are so hilly that they're prohibitive. I've biked many, many miles on limited access roads, and except in cities, I don't think bikes should be generally prohibited. Data I've seen indicates no real safety problem; and most cyclists willing to put up with the bad aesthetics of those roads are probably dedicated enough to be reasonably competent. But I do think that when such a road is built, highway departments should build (and later maintain) a separate bike path within that right of way, and afterward maintain it properly. In rural areas, the crossing conflicts are few, and those tend to be the big problem with most bike lanes, even "protected" ones. And providing some extra separation from parallel traffic would at least slightly reduce the noise level. The percentage increase of the road construction project's costs would be small. The parts of the UK with cycling infrastructure have almost no cycling, whereas Cambridge, with almost no dedicated infrastructure, leads the country in cycle use. Because it's the only place that discourages car use. Basingstoke, Stevenage, Milton Keynes, Harlow, and others were new towns built with excellent cycling infrastructure, but almost no cycling at all. Build it and they will drive instead, as long as you don't discourage them! Mass use of cycles in The Netherlands preceded the dedicated infrastructure by decades! Discouragement is pretty subtle in The Netherlands, mostly consisting of NOT providing huge multi-lane highways into town and city centres or allowing motor vehicles to dominate the urban environment. I agree that discouragement of motor vehicles is necessary to achieve high bike mode share. Unfortunately, I don't see that discouragement happening to any notable degree in the U.S. That's why I think our bike mode share will never exceed a percent or two, despite the daydreamer's fantasies. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 01/04/2017 02:26 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
I've biked many, many miles on limited access roads, and except in cities, I don't think bikes should be generally prohibited. Data I've seen indicates no real safety problem; and most cyclists willing to put up with the bad aesthetics of those roads are probably dedicated enough to be reasonably competent. But I do think that when such a road is built, highway departments should build (and later maintain) a separate bike path within that right of way, and afterward maintain it properly. In rural areas, the crossing conflicts are few, and those tend to be the big problem with most bike lanes, even "protected" ones. And providing some extra separation from parallel traffic would at least slightly reduce the noise level. The percentage increase of the road construction project's costs would be small. I've biked divided highways during some of my bike touring and while I always felt safe on the roads, the noise was really annoying over a period of hours. The breakdown lanes kept 70+ mph cars at a safe distance, but that constant noise from tires especially really degraded any enjoyment of generally easy riding. Technically, on many of these Interstates and other divided highways that allow bicycles (mostly in western states), riders are supposed to exit each off-ramp, then return on the corresponding on-ramp. While I understand the safety reasons for requiring that, I never actually did that. But if I were on a heavily trafficked highway like I-95, etc., I think I'd use the ramps. I was always quite happy to return to regular roads after riding a divided highway for a few hours or day! SMH |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 2017-01-04 11:26, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/3/2017 9:52 PM, Phil Lee wrote: Joerg considered Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:57:40 -0800 the perfect time to write: There is no safe way to get to Placerville by bicycle other than singletrack. Placerville is a city. Riding on Highway 50 is prohibited. Yes, we know you don't live in a civilised country (where bicycles have the right to use public highways) but in a barbarian backwater where any cyclist on a road is considered fair game and potential roadkill. What is so special about Highway 50, and how was the right-of-way for non-motorised traffic lost? The situation Joerg describes can be a problem. I heard about a similar thing occurring in southern Ohio, where what had been a two lane highway was converted to a freeway, and bicyclists were prohibited. The state bike advocacy organization tried to get the prohibition overturned, but the state department of transportation (which is frequently not cooperative) said that too few cyclists used that road and that parallel routes were available. The latter is often a plain lie. ... They were probably right on the low bike usage, but the parallel routes are so hilly that they're prohibitive. I've biked many, many miles on limited access roads, and except in cities, I don't think bikes should be generally prohibited. Data I've seen indicates no real safety problem; and most cyclists willing to put up with the bad aesthetics of those roads are probably dedicated enough to be reasonably competent. But I do think that when such a road is built, highway departments should build (and later maintain) a separate bike path within that right of way, and afterward maintain it properly. In rural areas, the crossing conflicts are few, and those tend to be the big problem with most bike lanes, even "protected" ones. Not in Folsom, they were smarter. Often you can even pick between a tunnel and an overpass. I can leave here in the middle of rush hour yet I can predict to within a few minutes when I will be at a destination 20 miles away. No chance in a car. Sometimes they went a bit over the top in fanciness: http://chrachel.com/wp-content/uploa...5-1024x683.jpg On freeways there is a way to do this on the cheap but it's not a scenic ride and it's noisy: Use the median for a bike path, with hard-turn ramps at exits. From Sacramento to Davis they provide a bike path next to the freeway but I prefer riding on dirt sans noise, Diesel smell and all that. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._bike_path.jpg ... And providing some extra separation from parallel traffic would at least slightly reduce the noise level. The percentage increase of the road construction project's costs would be small. However, the planners and decision makers don't get it. Instead, they equip some non-essential roads with bike infrastructure as show-off projects. The result is that us cyclists regularly have to travel the dirt paths seen here, past where the road ends: https://goo.gl/maps/Z4PM2YyLbyL2 This is real fun on a road bike after it has rained. Even more so while it is raining. The parts of the UK with cycling infrastructure have almost no cycling, whereas Cambridge, with almost no dedicated infrastructure, leads the country in cycle use. Because it's the only place that discourages car use. Basingstoke, Stevenage, Milton Keynes, Harlow, and others were new towns built with excellent cycling infrastructure, but almost no cycling at all. Build it and they will drive instead, as long as you don't discourage them! Mass use of cycles in The Netherlands preceded the dedicated infrastructure by decades! Discouragement is pretty subtle in The Netherlands, mostly consisting of NOT providing huge multi-lane highways into town and city centres or allowing motor vehicles to dominate the urban environment. I agree that discouragement of motor vehicles is necessary to achieve high bike mode share. Unfortunately, I don't see that discouragement happening to any notable degree in the U.S. That's why I think our bike mode share will never exceed a percent or two, despite the daydreamer's fantasies. Which is good enough for the US. It means zero in some rural areas without bike paths but 5% or more in some urban areas such as Portland with good cycling infrastructure. The health effect of 1-2% country-wide versus zero is tremendous. Those people usually remain net contributors to a health care system instead of net loads. Also to the economy because the get sick less often. Ever since I started serious riding against I never had more than a few days of sniffles or sneezing, and even that only once (while nearly everyone around me came down hard with some flu bug). -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Ambulance: was: Age and Heart Rates
On Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:52:42 +0000, Phil Lee
wrote: http://www.bikejuju.com/wp-content/u...bulance600.jpg I love the sunshade on the trailer -- the passenger looks quite comfortable. It might be perspective, but the tires on the trailer appear to be significantly fatter than the tires on the bike. The cot appears to be supported by the axles indirectly, by way of long tubes that can bend a little, and the fabric supporting the patient is also connected indirectly, by lacing that serves as "rope springs". I'd still hate to ride in it with a broken bone. I'm not terribly fond of riding in *anything* with a broken bone! I'd hoped for other views, but the link to Namibia on Bike Juju's home page led to an attack page that Pale Moon refused to open without permission that I didn't feel like giving. So I DuckDucked "rope spring" and learned that the right name for what the passenger is lying on is "sacking bottom". At least when it's part of an antique bed. -- Joy Beeson joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/ |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Age and Heart Rates
On 1/4/2017 3:40 PM, Stephen Harding wrote:
On 01/04/2017 02:26 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: I've biked many, many miles on limited access roads, and except in cities, I don't think bikes should be generally prohibited. Data I've seen indicates no real safety problem; and most cyclists willing to put up with the bad aesthetics of those roads are probably dedicated enough to be reasonably competent. But I do think that when such a road is built, highway departments should build (and later maintain) a separate bike path within that right of way, and afterward maintain it properly. In rural areas, the crossing conflicts are few, and those tend to be the big problem with most bike lanes, even "protected" ones. And providing some extra separation from parallel traffic would at least slightly reduce the noise level. The percentage increase of the road construction project's costs would be small. I've biked divided highways during some of my bike touring and while I always felt safe on the roads, the noise was really annoying over a period of hours. The breakdown lanes kept 70+ mph cars at a safe distance, but that constant noise from tires especially really degraded any enjoyment of generally easy riding. Technically, on many of these Interstates and other divided highways that allow bicycles (mostly in western states), riders are supposed to exit each off-ramp, then return on the corresponding on-ramp. While I understand the safety reasons for requiring that, I never actually did that. But if I were on a heavily trafficked highway like I-95, etc., I think I'd use the ramps. I was always quite happy to return to regular roads after riding a divided highway for a few hours or day! I agree with all that. I'll just note that on our coast-to-coast tour, there were times I wanted to choose a route that used side roads. I was amazed that I was outvoted by my wife and daughter, who preferred the interstates. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Highways: was: Age and Heart Rates
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 15:40:52 -0500, Stephen Harding
wrote: The breakdown lanes kept 70+ mph cars at a safe distance, but that constant noise from tires especially really degraded any enjoyment of generally easy riding. The noise didn't bother me until I had to call for a ride after flatting on the sharp debris that gets swept into the breakdown lane and then sits there until it dissolves in the rain. I managed to get enough between-semi time to communicate my location, and gave up using US 30. Except when I'm strong enough to go to Spring Creek; between Larwill and Spring Creek, there are no alternate routes. But the rumble strip is (or was; I wasn't strong enough last summer) non-lethal. And if I want to get from the bread outlet to Aldi, I have to use 30, but this is a very short distance, and most of the breakdown lane doubles as right-turn lane, so debris isn't a problem. Riprap, on the other hand: http://www.wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/CENT2016/riprap53.jpg that slope begins exactly at the edge of the pavement. I measured the distance between the *not*-non-lethal rumble strip and the edge of the pavement once, and found it wider than expected -- I think I'd thought it was eighteen inches and found it to be two feet, but I can't find my note. Kinder hair raising if I'm tired and have a lot of weight in my panniers. I think I prefer the other direction even though it means crossing 30 twice, and both intersections have stop lights. (30 is much easier to cross out in the country, as one can cross to the median and wait there for another hole, instead of madly dashing across six lanes and a median.) -- Joy Beeson joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Max heart rates and age | Choppy Warburton | Racing | 30 | June 13th 11 09:12 PM |
Max heart rates and age | Fredmaster of Brainerd | Racing | 1 | June 10th 11 09:53 AM |
Tdf 'live' Heart rates | cupra | UK | 2 | July 18th 07 12:55 AM |
decrease of heart rates | le-sheq | Techniques | 4 | February 28th 06 11:33 PM |
Heart rates. | Simon Mason | UK | 0 | January 21st 06 07:45 PM |