#31
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 12:14:33 -0700, Joerg
wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:05, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 10:54 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-05 17:49, John B. wrote: Yet people have been riding long distances on bicycles for years and years. The first Paris - Brest - Paris randonnée was held in 1891. An essentially non-stop bicycle ride of 1,200 km. The British, of course, do it better with the 1433 km London Edinburgh London 2017 and the 'mericans have the Boston-Montreal-Boston, again a 1,200 km ride but no longer an official randonnée and now strictly a permanent that anyone could ride on their own in a self-supported manner while still receiving recognition (validation) from Randonneurs USA. Think of it, 126 years of successful long distance bicycle riding without Joerg built lights. It's simple. Most humans have a habit of accepting current state-of-the-art as "that's as good as it gets". I don't, and I derive most of my income from not thinking that way. And yes, I already had bicycles with real electrical systems when I was a teenager. The detail you're missing is that people have always ridden _successfully_ without the systems you deem necessary. As I said, people got used to that this is all they are going to get. Just like people get used to walking in worn shoes if they can't afford new ones. There are always people who are into overkill. Some of those will claim or pretend that their favorite overkill item is actually a necessity. But that's disproven by every person who does well without the overkill item. A vehicle where the light does not go out or dim way down is IMO not overkill. The lighting "system" bicyles have would never pass muster at type certification for motor vehicles. There are good reasons why not. You don't suppose that is because the auto is capable of speeds in excess of 100 kpm, do you? For just one example: I'm just back from another club ride. About 15 people were on the ride. Two of them had the newly fashionable daytime rear blinkies. This particular ride has occurred once per week every week except in winter for, oh, perhaps ten years. Nobody has ever been hit by a car, despite the thousands of person-miles ridden (GASP!) without blinkies. I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) Well, I ride in what is generally considered the 2nd, or third, most chaotic traffic in the world and I have seen no evidence whatsoever, in the past 10 years or so, that a blinkie on a bike had decreased the number of close calls. I might also add that the number of all the "close calls" I have had can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, perhaps without using the thumb. In fact I would suggest that if you are having more then a very few actual "close calls" riding in what would be classed as far less chaotic traffic then I normally ride in that the reason is not a blinking light, or lack thereof. -- Cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On 7/6/17 12:14 PM, Joerg wrote:
snip I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) Just because something didn't happen to you even though you decided not to take advantage of available safety measures, doesn't mean much. Of course it would be equally ludicrous to claim that if you were hit, and didn't have that safety measure, that you would necessarily have been okay had you had the safety measure. What most of us have found is that using adequate lighting causes a change in behavior of motor vehicles because the cyclists is much more visible. You have fewer close calls. You have fewer vehicles turning left in front of you as you approach a traffic light, and fewer vehicles exiting parking lots or driveways in your path because they can see you. At some point it's necessary to use common sense. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 13:02:57 -0700, Joerg
wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:40, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 3:14 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:05, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 10:54 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-05 17:49, John B. wrote: Yet people have been riding long distances on bicycles for years and years. The first Paris - Brest - Paris randonnée was held in 1891. An essentially non-stop bicycle ride of 1,200 km. The British, of course, do it better with the 1433 km London Edinburgh London 2017 and the 'mericans have the Boston-Montreal-Boston, again a 1,200 km ride but no longer an official randonnée and now strictly a permanent that anyone could ride on their own in a self-supported manner while still receiving recognition (validation) from Randonneurs USA. Think of it, 126 years of successful long distance bicycle riding without Joerg built lights. It's simple. Most humans have a habit of accepting current state-of-the-art as "that's as good as it gets". I don't, and I derive most of my income from not thinking that way. And yes, I already had bicycles with real electrical systems when I was a teenager. The detail you're missing is that people have always ridden _successfully_ without the systems you deem necessary. As I said, people got used to that this is all they are going to get. Just like people get used to walking in worn shoes if they can't afford new ones. There are always people who are into overkill. Some of those will claim or pretend that their favorite overkill item is actually a necessity. But that's disproven by every person who does well without the overkill item. A vehicle where the light does not go out or dim way down is IMO not overkill. The lighting "system" bicyles have would never pass muster at type certification for motor vehicles. There are good reasons why not. For just one example: I'm just back from another club ride. About 15 people were on the ride. Two of them had the newly fashionable daytime rear blinkies. This particular ride has occurred once per week every week except in winter for, oh, perhaps ten years. Nobody has ever been hit by a car, despite the thousands of person-miles ridden (GASP!) without blinkies. I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) We've been over this multiple times, but: If your number of close calls for hits-from-behind has gone way down, it must have been pretty high to begin with. By contrast, I almost never experience such a close call; therefore I'd never be able to see a big reduction. Why don't those close calls happen to me? Because those close calls are almost always due in part to rider error - specifically, inviting close passes by riding too far to the right. Yeah, right. The woman who rode in the lane on Blue Ravine died because of that. The other woman in the pickup truck who was drunk tried to evade but the lane was now too narrow and *BAM* [...] You mean to say that you were run into on Blue Ravine and died? Or this is just something that you saw on the TV? But even so, www.statista.com reported to be something in the neighborhood of 66.52 million bicycle riders in Spring 2016.... and one woman died? Actually 726 died in the U.S. in 2014 ( the latest year I could find without looking very hard) and in 2014 the above site tells me that there were 67.33 million cyclists. So one cyclist was killed for every 10,096.4 that rode a bike. Obviously, statistically, bicycle riding is a very dangerious pastime! Perhaps the government should be encouraged to ban these dangerious devices. Save Lives! Ban a Bike! -- Cheers, John B. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On 7/6/2017 11:00 PM, sms wrote:
What most of us have found is that using adequate lighting causes a change in behavior of motor vehicles because the cyclists is much more visible. You have fewer close calls. You have fewer vehicles turning left in front of you as you approach a traffic light, and fewer vehicles exiting parking lots or driveways in your path because they can see you. I've seen no evidence that those claims apply to "most of us here." Instead, what I've seen is evidence that you (i.e. Stephen M. Scharf) and Joerg firmly believe that. And I'll admit that it may be true for you two, for these reasons. If a person rides as a gutter bunny, staying near the curb, he will be much less noticed and respected by motorists. I can certainly imagine that a person riding that way might get plenty of close calls. (I've witnessed close calls for riders behaving that way.) It's possible that if such a gutter bunny installs blinding lights, some of those motorists who don't otherwise notice him might spot him. But I'd also expect that the motorists who don't respect cyclists would still be willing to do close passes, right hooks and left hooks. My solution (and the solution taught by every legitimate bike education program, and AFAIK sanctioned in most state laws) is to ride prominently in any lane too narrow to safely share. Doing this, I get so few close passes and other close calls that any reduction would be undetectable. So yeah - ride in ignorance, and use lights as a partial kludge. Or ride the way the law allows and all cycling education recommends, and avoid the problem in the first place. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On Thu, 6 Jul 2017 20:00:02 -0700, sms
wrote: On 7/6/17 12:14 PM, Joerg wrote: snip I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) Just because something didn't happen to you even though you decided not to take advantage of available safety measures, doesn't mean much. Of course it would be equally ludicrous to claim that if you were hit, and didn't have that safety measure, that you would necessarily have been okay had you had the safety measure. What most of us have found is that using adequate lighting causes a change in behavior of motor vehicles because the cyclists is much more visible. You have fewer close calls. You have fewer vehicles turning left in front of you as you approach a traffic light, and fewer vehicles exiting parking lots or driveways in your path because they can see you. At some point it's necessary to use common sense. Well, to be honest I have ridden in Bangkok traffic for quite a number of years now, both with and without blinkie lights and, honestly, I have noticed absolutely no difference at all between with blinkie and without blinkie. I can only assume that bicycling in California is somehow different from the rest of the world. -- Cheers, John B. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On 2017-07-06 20:11, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 13:02:57 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:40, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 3:14 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:05, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 10:54 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-05 17:49, John B. wrote: Yet people have been riding long distances on bicycles for years and years. The first Paris - Brest - Paris randonnée was held in 1891. An essentially non-stop bicycle ride of 1,200 km. The British, of course, do it better with the 1433 km London Edinburgh London 2017 and the 'mericans have the Boston-Montreal-Boston, again a 1,200 km ride but no longer an official randonnée and now strictly a permanent that anyone could ride on their own in a self-supported manner while still receiving recognition (validation) from Randonneurs USA. Think of it, 126 years of successful long distance bicycle riding without Joerg built lights. It's simple. Most humans have a habit of accepting current state-of-the-art as "that's as good as it gets". I don't, and I derive most of my income from not thinking that way. And yes, I already had bicycles with real electrical systems when I was a teenager. The detail you're missing is that people have always ridden _successfully_ without the systems you deem necessary. As I said, people got used to that this is all they are going to get. Just like people get used to walking in worn shoes if they can't afford new ones. There are always people who are into overkill. Some of those will claim or pretend that their favorite overkill item is actually a necessity. But that's disproven by every person who does well without the overkill item. A vehicle where the light does not go out or dim way down is IMO not overkill. The lighting "system" bicyles have would never pass muster at type certification for motor vehicles. There are good reasons why not. For just one example: I'm just back from another club ride. About 15 people were on the ride. Two of them had the newly fashionable daytime rear blinkies. This particular ride has occurred once per week every week except in winter for, oh, perhaps ten years. Nobody has ever been hit by a car, despite the thousands of person-miles ridden (GASP!) without blinkies. I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) We've been over this multiple times, but: If your number of close calls for hits-from-behind has gone way down, it must have been pretty high to begin with. By contrast, I almost never experience such a close call; therefore I'd never be able to see a big reduction. Why don't those close calls happen to me? Because those close calls are almost always due in part to rider error - specifically, inviting close passes by riding too far to the right. Yeah, right. The woman who rode in the lane on Blue Ravine died because of that. The other woman in the pickup truck who was drunk tried to evade but the lane was now too narrow and *BAM* [...] You mean to say that you were run into on Blue Ravine and died? Or this is just something that you saw on the TV? I didn't have an operation to turn me into a woman :-) It was shortly after we moved here about 20 years ago. That and several other serious accidents combined with (or rather, caused by) the lack of cycling infrastructure resulted in me and lots of others to mothball the bikes for many years. While those accidents were not always fatal many were what the medical folks call "life-changing" where riders became crippled for the rest of their lives. But even so, www.statista.com reported to be something in the neighborhood of 66.52 million bicycle riders in Spring 2016.... and one woman died? That was one example of many. We have about one death a month in the area, on average. Many are hit from behind. Actually 726 died in the U.S. in 2014 ( the latest year I could find without looking very hard) and in 2014 the above site tells me that there were 67.33 million cyclists. So one cyclist was killed for every 10,096.4 that rode a bike. Obviously, statistically, bicycle riding is a very dangerious pastime! Perhaps the government should be encouraged to ban these dangerious devices. Save Lives! Ban a Bike! I read about them in our local paper and those are real stories, real people, real grieving families and all that. People like Justin Vega: http://fox40.com/2017/05/26/sacramen...d-25-year-old/ -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 7:54:44 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
Well, I ride in what is generally considered the 2nd, or third, most chaotic traffic in the world and I have seen no evidence whatsoever, in the past 10 years or so, that a blinkie on a bike had decreased the number of close calls. I might add that those blinkies only maintain maximum (barely visible in daylight) brilliance for a ride or two and rapidly fade to the point where another rider behind you can see it only because he knows it's there. I might also add that the number of all the "close calls" I have had can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, perhaps without using the thumb. I don't believe that these are close calls. I believe that they are drivers giving you a close pass to frighten you and prove that they are kings of the road. In fact I would suggest that if you are having more then a very few actual "close calls" riding in what would be classed as far less chaotic traffic then I normally ride in that the reason is not a blinking light, or lack thereof. That's pretty nasty John. I love it. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On 2017-07-06 19:54, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 12:14:33 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-06 12:05, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/6/2017 10:54 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2017-07-05 17:49, John B. wrote: Yet people have been riding long distances on bicycles for years and years. The first Paris - Brest - Paris randonnée was held in 1891. An essentially non-stop bicycle ride of 1,200 km. The British, of course, do it better with the 1433 km London Edinburgh London 2017 and the 'mericans have the Boston-Montreal-Boston, again a 1,200 km ride but no longer an official randonnée and now strictly a permanent that anyone could ride on their own in a self-supported manner while still receiving recognition (validation) from Randonneurs USA. Think of it, 126 years of successful long distance bicycle riding without Joerg built lights. It's simple. Most humans have a habit of accepting current state-of-the-art as "that's as good as it gets". I don't, and I derive most of my income from not thinking that way. And yes, I already had bicycles with real electrical systems when I was a teenager. The detail you're missing is that people have always ridden _successfully_ without the systems you deem necessary. As I said, people got used to that this is all they are going to get. Just like people get used to walking in worn shoes if they can't afford new ones. There are always people who are into overkill. Some of those will claim or pretend that their favorite overkill item is actually a necessity. But that's disproven by every person who does well without the overkill item. A vehicle where the light does not go out or dim way down is IMO not overkill. The lighting "system" bicyles have would never pass muster at type certification for motor vehicles. There are good reasons why not. You don't suppose that is because the auto is capable of speeds in excess of 100 kpm, do you? No, because they already had that in the days they put-putted slightly faster than a horse. Heck, even the mofas (Motor-Fahrrad, translates to motor bicycle) had lights that always worked, in the 70's when I lived in Germany. Mandatory by law. For just one example: I'm just back from another club ride. About 15 people were on the ride. Two of them had the newly fashionable daytime rear blinkies. This particular ride has occurred once per week every week except in winter for, oh, perhaps ten years. Nobody has ever been hit by a car, despite the thousands of person-miles ridden (GASP!) without blinkies. I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) Well, I ride in what is generally considered the 2nd, or third, most chaotic traffic in the world and I have seen no evidence whatsoever, in the past 10 years or so, that a blinkie on a bike had decreased the number of close calls. I might also add that the number of all the "close calls" I have had can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, perhaps without using the thumb. In fact I would suggest that if you are having more then a very few actual "close calls" riding in what would be classed as far less chaotic traffic then I normally ride in that the reason is not a blinking light, or lack thereof. It is. This is not hustling and bustling San Francisco, New York, Bangkok or Phuket. Here we have lots of high-speed county roads and thoroughfares where almost everyone drives 10-15mph above the speed limit and with various levels of distraction. How do you think all those "veered off the road, over-corrected and rolled over" accidents without the participation of any other traffic happen? -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Handlebar rotation
On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 8:04:04 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 7/6/17 12:14 PM, Joerg wrote: snip I have never been hit from behind either but the number of close calls has noticeably decreased since I have bright rear lights. Mission accomplished. The best is, this was never very expensive to accomplish. Now you can stick the head in the sand again and pretend it ain't so :-) Just because something didn't happen to you even though you decided not to take advantage of available safety measures, doesn't mean much. Of course it would be equally ludicrous to claim that if you were hit, and didn't have that safety measure, that you would necessarily have been okay had you had the safety measure. What most of us have found is that using adequate lighting causes a change in behavior of motor vehicles because the cyclists is much more visible. You have fewer close calls. You have fewer vehicles turning left in front of you as you approach a traffic light, and fewer vehicles exiting parking lots or driveways in your path because they can see you. At some point it's necessary to use common sense. I have no idea what you consider "adequate" lighting. Can you explain why my closest calls haven't been from vehicles approaching from behind that would be warned off by a blinkie but from cars coming at me and purposely moving into my lane to scare me. I have NEVER seen a reaction from cops for this sort of action. These cases are rare but in the last five years it's occurred perhaps a dozen times. And in most cases these vehicles do not have license plates on them. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
tube rotation | raging raven | Techniques | 37 | April 16th 10 04:11 PM |
Four-dimensional Rotation of the Universe. | Ivan Gorelik | Rides | 8 | March 30th 09 07:27 AM |
Four-dimensional Rotation of the Universe. | Ivan Gorelik | Marketplace | 4 | March 30th 09 12:00 AM |
Tire Rotation | Tom Nakashima | Techniques | 54 | August 15th 05 11:39 PM |
tyre rotation | geepeetee | UK | 4 | April 20th 05 06:17 PM |