A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

letter to editor



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 31st 18, 02:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default letter to editor

From my industry magazine this morning. Letters are not
published online so I took the initiative:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfr...t/1802lett.jpg

I do not know the writer, but he's perspicacious and
("Advocacy Industrial Complex") pithy.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Ads
  #2  
Old January 31st 18, 02:56 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Emanuel Berg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default letter to editor

AMuzi wrote:

From my industry magazine this morning.
Letters are not published online so I took
the initiative:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfr...t/1802lett.jpg


I knew it! It is the car industry's fault!
Ha ha ha

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
  #3  
Old January 31st 18, 05:33 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default letter to editor

On 1/30/2018 8:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
From my industry magazine this morning. Letters are not published
online so I took the initiative:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfr...t/1802lett.jpg

I do not know the writer, but he's perspicacious and ("Advocacy
Industrial Complex") pithy.


Very well said. But LAB's going to kick him out of the "Bicycle Friendly
Business" club.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #4  
Old January 31st 18, 07:33 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default letter to editor

On 2018-01-30 17:35, AMuzi wrote:
From my industry magazine this morning. Letters are not published
online so I took the initiative:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfr...t/1802lett.jpg

I do not know the writer, but he's perspicacious and ("Advocacy
Industrial Complex") pithy.



He is wrong in some statements. Infrastructure can increase ridership,
big time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/30/n...commuting.html

We just have to recognize that Americans are, as the author says, a bit
lazy when it comes to actually using muscles for propulsion. So we'll
never be able to achive Dutch or Danish mode share numbers. Is the
infrastructure worth it if the mode share then goes from 0.1% to 1.5%?
My opinion is yes.

I try a lot convincing people to ride. Almost every single time the
answer is "Oh no, I am not going to ride Green Valley Road!" even though
that has a reasonable shoulder most of the time. When I tell them about
a backroads way to get to the bike trail network in the valley or about
the long singletrack that crosses town yet isn't even on Google Maps
their attitude changes. Many have then gone on rides with me and with at
least three of them the bug caught on to the point where they bought
more decent bikes.

The notion that E-commerce isn't the problem is also incorrect. Example:
One of my riding buddies bought one MTB at a local bike shop. It was a
previous-year model so it sold for a serious discount. He bought another
four (!) MTBs online. Plus loads of tires, chains, cassettes et cetera.

Same with me. Yes, I bought the MTB and the road bike at bike shops.
However, the last time I bought something at a bike shop was about two
years ago and I wear through a lot of bike stuff. I am simply not
willing to, for example, pay $17 for a pair of measly organic brake pads
when I can get a pair of much better motorcycle-quality pads for $2
mail-order from Asia, including shipping.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #5  
Old January 31st 18, 08:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Emanuel Berg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default letter to editor

Joerg wrote:

He is wrong in some statements.
Infrastructure can increase ridership,
big time.


I didn't understand any of it. First it was the
car industry PR guys to blame, then it was
Hollywood, then the elite guys being on dope,
then it was Americans being plain fat and lazy
(chicken-or-egg situation anyway), then it was
defaitism just carry on only don't expect to be
rich doing it. But "bike retailers" don't get
rich here either - salary a month is somewhere
between a nurse and a school teacher.

Thanks for the scan anyway.

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
  #6  
Old February 1st 18, 04:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default letter to editor

On 2018-01-31 11:03, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Joerg wrote:

He is wrong in some statements.
Infrastructure can increase ridership,
big time.


I didn't understand any of it. First it was the
car industry PR guys to blame, then it was
Hollywood, then the elite guys being on dope,
then it was Americans being plain fat and lazy
(chicken-or-egg situation anyway), then it was
defaitism just carry on only don't expect to be
rich doing it. But "bike retailers" don't get
rich here either - salary a month is somewhere
between a nurse and a school teacher.


Nurses in the US often make more money than engineers and teachers get a
fat retirement package, courtesy of the taxpayer.

The way to really foster cycling is simple: Provide bike paths and
trails. Yesterday I took the singletrack to Placerville about 12mi east
of here. Still pretty muddy from the rains. I felt like a kid again, got
all dirty. Fun!

You can also go west on that singletrack for hours. When at the local
trailhead I found this new bike shop:

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/...4aae05fff73191

He plans to offer locker rentals so you can leave a bike at the
trailhead and then go there by bus or car. I always ride straight from
home but that would be a really smart move.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #7  
Old February 1st 18, 10:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default letter to editor

On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 7:55:50 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-31 11:03, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Joerg wrote:

He is wrong in some statements.
Infrastructure can increase ridership,
big time.


I didn't understand any of it. First it was the
car industry PR guys to blame, then it was
Hollywood, then the elite guys being on dope,
then it was Americans being plain fat and lazy
(chicken-or-egg situation anyway), then it was
defaitism just carry on only don't expect to be
rich doing it. But "bike retailers" don't get
rich here either - salary a month is somewhere
between a nurse and a school teacher.


Nurses in the US often make more money than engineers and teachers get a
fat retirement package, courtesy of the taxpayer.

The way to really foster cycling is simple: Provide bike paths and
trails. Yesterday I took the singletrack to Placerville about 12mi east
of here. Still pretty muddy from the rains. I felt like a kid again, got
all dirty. Fun!

You can also go west on that singletrack for hours. When at the local
trailhead I found this new bike shop:

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/...4aae05fff73191

He plans to offer locker rentals so you can leave a bike at the
trailhead and then go there by bus or car. I always ride straight from
home but that would be a really smart move.


How about sunshine and a desire to ride. https://bikeportland.org/2011/06/22/...r-photos-55300

Not a single-track trail in sight. If we're talking about selling bikes as transportation, most people do not want to ride to work on muddy trails. They want to ride to work, the store or wherever on pavement.

I rode to work this morning dodging other cyclists on ordinary roads, and in fact, roads with no shoulders that were bicycle-less (except for me) thirty years ago. No special facilities. Lots of people on bikes -- and like me, they were avoiding the supposedly wonderful separate bicycle facility, which is a nightmare notwithstanding the press. Fake news! https://bikeportland.org/2015/08/14/...et-bike-155284


The best bang for the buck from a planning standpoint are bike lanes and adequate education of drivers so they know that bike lanes are really lanes. Alternately, adequate shoulders or traffic calmed streets. I don't like most physically separated facilities with some minor exceptions, but those are generally linear parks and not inner-city commute routes.

-- Jay Beattie.








  #8  
Old February 1st 18, 10:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Emanuel Berg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default letter to editor

jbeattie wrote:

Not a single-track trail in sight. If we're
talking about selling bikes as
transportation, most people do not want to
ride to work on muddy trails. They want to
ride to work, the store or wherever
on pavement.


Bike infrastructure sure helps but if people
dont go by bike to begin with it may be a shot
in the dark anyway.

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
  #9  
Old February 1st 18, 11:19 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joerg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,016
Default letter to editor

On 2018-02-01 13:07, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 7:55:50 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-01-31 11:03, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Joerg wrote:

He is wrong in some statements. Infrastructure can increase
ridership, big time.

I didn't understand any of it. First it was the car industry PR
guys to blame, then it was Hollywood, then the elite guys being
on dope, then it was Americans being plain fat and lazy
(chicken-or-egg situation anyway), then it was defaitism just
carry on only don't expect to be rich doing it. But "bike
retailers" don't get rich here either - salary a month is
somewhere between a nurse and a school teacher.


Nurses in the US often make more money than engineers and teachers
get a fat retirement package, courtesy of the taxpayer.

The way to really foster cycling is simple: Provide bike paths and
trails. Yesterday I took the singletrack to Placerville about 12mi
east of here. Still pretty muddy from the rains. I felt like a kid
again, got all dirty. Fun!

You can also go west on that singletrack for hours. When at the
local trailhead I found this new bike shop:

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/...4aae05fff73191



He plans to offer locker rentals so you can leave a bike at the
trailhead and then go there by bus or car. I always ride straight
from home but that would be a really smart move.


How about sunshine and a desire to ride.
https://bikeportland.org/2011/06/22/...r-photos-55300

Not a single-track trail in sight. If we're talking about selling
bikes as transportation, most people do not want to ride to work on
muddy trails.



Out here they do. Last time I was at Intel I was surprised that about
90% of the bikes parked there were MTB. Mostly dated ones with visible
wear. Many of them with fairly bald rear tires, probably from too much
pavement riding.

I can't remember any day since about a week after I bought it new where
my MTB did not carry copious amounts of caked mud.


... They want to ride to work, the store or wherever on
pavement.


Pavement is no fun. My favorite stretch when using the MTB to run
errands in the valley:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44zqIKf2T_I


I rode to work this morning dodging other cyclists on ordinary roads,
and in fact, roads with no shoulders that were bicycle-less (except
for me) thirty years ago. No special facilities. Lots of people on
bikes -- and like me, they were avoiding the supposedly wonderful
separate bicycle facility, which is a nightmare notwithstanding the
press. Fake news!
https://bikeportland.org/2015/08/14/...et-bike-155284



The best bang for the buck from a planning standpoint are bike lanes
and adequate education of drivers so they know that bike lanes are
really lanes. Alternately, adequate shoulders or traffic calmed
streets.



I'll take those. What I don't like is fast roads without any shoulder.
Yesterday on the way to the singletrack a delivery van almost
side-swiped my at 50mph.


... I don't like most physically separated facilities with some
minor exceptions, but those are generally linear parks and not
inner-city commute routes.


I don't care whether they are called "linear parks" or whatever. If
built for cycling at reasonable speed I'll take those any day over a
road. Like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-3gnLIUum0

Best of all, no posted speed limits. They just re-paved the whole thing.
No idea why since it was still smooth enough.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
  #10  
Old February 2nd 18, 12:33 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sepp Ruf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default letter to editor

Joerg wrote:
On 2018-02-01 13:07, jbeattie wrote:

.... They want to ride to work, the store or wherever on
pavement.


Pavement is no fun.


It takes skill as well as a strong faith, Giorgio!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxKURy2yE64
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NYT\Letter to the Editor: The Cyclists and the Police Jym Dyer Social Issues 0 August 13th 08 06:01 PM
Another letter to the editor Claire Petersky General 32 May 9th 06 04:17 PM
Another letter to the editor Edward Dolan Recumbent Biking 5 May 9th 06 04:17 PM
Letter to the editor Claire Petersky General 20 April 16th 06 03:11 AM
Letter to the Editor Peter B UK 18 August 18th 03 12:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.