Flat Bar Road Bikes with Low Step-Over, i.e Mixte

On 4/27/2015 9:08 PM, sms wrote:


Frank can turn any thread into a helmet thread. And once he starts up
with "motoring helmets" he's already lost the debate. That was fast.

A person with less bias and/or more reading ability would note that I
didn't introduce helmets in this thread.

Phil mentioned the "funny hat brigade." Jay continued the theme before
I responded. John B. introduced the data showing helmets make more
sense inside cars. (Only two out of my twelve posts in this thread
mention hats of any kind, and only briefly.)

"sms" AKA Scharf, plus Duane and Sir, have now introduced the usual
data-free whining. I can understand why you guys don't like people
talking about a topic on which you've been proven very wrong; but why
not just not ignore it instead of whining?


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/27/2015 8:08 PM, Duane wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 1:43:41 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/27/2015 8:25 PM, Duane wrote:


Again we have a helmet thread.

Don't like 'em? Don't read 'em. Or definitely don't comment on them.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why don't you **** off and go start your own thread, Franki-boy, instead
of hijacking someone else's thread? I'll tell you why: it is because you
know nobody will come. So you ruin other people's successful threads with
these tendentious, boring repetitions of yours. You're a menace to
cyclists, Frank Krygowski, to cycling, and to the cyling ideal. It
doesn't help, either, that personally you're clearly a pompous,
self-important, asshole, and a sociopath who cannot see that others have
a right to express their opinions free from this sort of bullying by you.

Andre Jute

+1

I don't care if a thread digresses naturally. It's not "my thread." But
the tendency of some people to try to turn every thread into the
promotion of their personal agenda is rather annoying. Especially when
they trot out the same old tired arguments that have been thoroughly
discredited in the past.

The "driving helmet" is always good for a laugh. As soon as cyclists are
protected by 12 air bags, seat belts, safety glass, side-impact
reinforced doors, padded dashboards, collapsible steering columns, and
crumple zones, they can ditch the helmets.

Am 28.04.2015 um 01:08 schrieb sms:
On 4/27/2015 1:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I don't know why you Ohio guys think you're so smart. How many
cyclists are there in your village? Toledo has a .3% mode share which
puts it near the bottom of the top 70 cities.
http://bikeleague.org/sites/default/...eCommuting.pdf
Go Toledo . . we're 61st, we're 61st (repeat after me).

Portland is indeed #1 among large cities in bicycle commuting.
Surprisingly. D.C. is second, and San Francisco Bay Area is 3rd. But the
SF Bay Area is so large, and the rates among different cities vary greatly.

Are you having different data than this PDF above? This PDF says that
Minneapolis (confirming my feeling that in the mid -1990's, Minneapolis
was first) and SF are joint second, and D.C. is fourth.

On 4/28/2015 12:07 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 28.04.2015 um 01:08 schrieb sms:
On 4/27/2015 1:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I don't know why you Ohio guys think you're so smart. How many
cyclists are there in your village? Toledo has a .3% mode share which
puts it near the bottom of the top 70 cities.
http://bikeleague.org/sites/default/...eCommuting.pdf
Go Toledo . . we're 61st, we're 61st (repeat after me).

Portland is indeed #1 among large cities in bicycle commuting.
Surprisingly. D.C. is second, and San Francisco Bay Area is 3rd. But the
SF Bay Area is so large, and the rates among different cities vary
greatly.

Are you having different data than this PDF above? This PDF says that
Minneapolis (confirming my feeling that in the mid -1990's, Minneapolis
was first) and SF are joint second, and D.C. is fourth.

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/acsreport2014forweb-140929110935-phpapp01/95/where-we-ride-analysis-of-bicycling-in-american-cities-2014-3-1024.jpg?cb=1412078567

This was for 2013.

On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:14:40 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:41:29 -0400, Duane
wrote:

On 27/04/2015 11:44 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On 2015-04-27 15:04:39 +0000, Frank Krygowski said:

On 4/27/2015 4:17 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Frank Krygowski schreef op 27-4-2015 om 5:11:


I remember when we were in Saltzburg, Austria on our bikes. I took a
blurry photo of a middle-aged guy biking home from work wearing his
nice
suit, carrying his briefcase. I remember missing the photo of another
similarly-dressed gentleman riding while carrying an umbrella over his
head.



People holding an umbrella (especially women) is very common around
here. They should be 'shot dead' because:
- they can't see anything because they are hiding behind the umbrella,
- the hold their handlebar only by one hand in heavy city traffic,
- they are blown all over the place when it is a bit windy,
- they occupy the whole bikepath which makes passing difficult.

Just put on a rain cap.

Just to be sure, did you mean rain _cape_ or rain cap?

Something to prevent getting their hair wet.

Wait a minute. No one is actually suggesting to ride a bike with an
umbrella are they?

It is not uncommon in places where people use a bicycle as a means of
transportation. Not uncommon at all although it does seem more usual
with women than men and usually as a protection against the sun as (I
guess) that the girls are smart enough to "come in out of the rain"
:-)
--
cheers,

I just picture someone charging into the driving rain umbrella first and no
idea what's in front. Or getting blown away or over in the wind.

Well you see that is an error probably due to the N. Americans
thinking of cycling as some sort of a sporting activity. In other
places where it is considered simply as a means of transportation you
never see anyone "charging into the driving rain umbrella first". In
fact if it is a "driving rain" they usually take shelter, but if a
mild rain you will see them cycling blithely down the road holding the
umbrella over their head with one hand and steering with the other.

--
cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:25:05 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 17:15:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/27/2015 4:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 11:35:46 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/27/2015 12:38 PM, jbeattie wrote:


We have the highest modal share of cyclists for any large city in the US.
Helmet wearing is voluntary and probably 90% -- e.g. the "funny hat
brigade"
dominates. People wear whatever they want -- street clothes or Lycra. Your
paradigm is wrong.

Despite its pride in its weirdness (see http://www.keepportlandweird.com/ )
Portlanders are still under the sway of the American bicycling meme.
IOW, they still think that riding a bike is not only weird, but
fundamentally dangerous; that segregated bike facilities are damn near
necessary, that it's fine if they're mandatory, that any bike facility
is a good bike facility; and that of course bicycling is a major risk
for traumatic brain injury, so of course it's irresponsible to ride
wearing any other hat, or no hat.

In their weirdness, most of them are against actually mandating helmets;
but whenever they speak out against helmet mandates, they're careful to
say "But of course, _I_ would never ride without a helmet." Cognitive
dissonance rules, in order to meet the quirks of Portlandia fashion.

In fact, perhaps the main reason many Portlanders ride is _because_ they
think riding a bike is fashionably weird. It goes well with the boutique
vegan whole food restaurants, the vegan strip clubs, the piercings &
tattoos, and the super-decorated suburban kids begging spare change
while sitting on the sidewalk. We'll see if it changes in time. Who
knows? Muscle cars may come back among the tattoo set.

Gawd. You really need to spend some time actually living here. The
Bohemians and hipsters are a relatively small percentage of riders
locally. The majority of riders are very normal looking. They could be
from Ohio, and in fact, the east side looks like Ohio.

A lot of the OHSU staff rides.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0-yuiuxMJA That's hardly the keep
Portland weird crowd. These guys look pretty normal. https://vimeo.com/18289096

I don't know why you Ohio guys think you're so smart. How many
cyclists are there in your village? Toledo has a .3% mode share which
puts it near the bottom of the top 70 cities.
http://bikeleague.org/sites/default/...eCommuting.pdf
Go Toledo . . we're 61st, we're 61st (repeat after me).

I think you're conflating issues. Yes, those folks are riding in normal
clothes (except for the hats, of course) - which is what I always did
(except for the hat, of course). It shows it is indeed practical; but
that has nothing to do with my points just above.

My point above was that they have apparently bought into the "gotta
protect your head, but only when on a bike" meme. And I know from many
past visits, and from much reading that there's a huge "Now we finally
have a _safe_ place to ride!" meme, whenever another green-painted
innovation on the street - no matter what it is. On those two points,
Portlanders are very white-bread American.

At the same time, you certainly can't deny there's a pretty unique
Portlandia culture! It's not monolithic, and I never claimed everyone
was tattooed and pierced. But it's the only city I've visited where I
saw dogs in restaurants. And where despite all the rain, you'd go broke
trying to sell umbrellas. It's prevalence of light rail and street
cars, while not unique, is quite unusual for the U.S..

It's not that I disapprove. I really like the city, but everyone knows
it's culture is unusual. Heck, there's never been a TV series called
"Clevelandia."

Portlanders have their own reasons for doing things. I think that, as
in most places, they do them mostly because they see others doing them;
and I think the reason so many wear bike helmets is because, well, so
many wear bike helmets.

So when they say "Gosh, they painted my street green, so _now_ I can buy
a bike..." they finish the sentence with "... and of _course_, a helmet.
Because, you know, I could hit my head - um, only on a bike."

I just read a statement that " there are approximately 1.5 million
people in the U.S. who suffer from a traumatic brain injury each year"
and "50,000 people die from TBI each year and 85,000 people suffer
long term disabilities" and that ""Over half of all reported traumatic
brain injuries are the result of an automobile accident"
http://www.traumaticbraininjury.com/...-accident-tbi/
It would seem that the emphasis for helmet wear would be aimed at the
automobile operator rather then the cyclist, if, in fact, the emphasis
is actually aimed at safety.

Mandatory helmet use while motoring "might" prevent 25,000 deaths
annually while mandatory use while cycling "might" prevent as many as
150 - in 2013 (see http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm ).

On another site ( http://www.statista.com/topics/1686/cycling/ ) I see
that there are from 42 - 51 million cyclists in the U.S. so universal
helmet wear "might" save as many as 150/46.5 million, or 0.0003% of
the cycling population, while mandatory helmet wear "might" save as
many as 0.01% of motorists from deaths.
--
cheers,


Again we have a helmet thread.

Or perhaps simply ridicule of those who cry,_"Oh! you gotta wear a
helmet" or "Oh! you gotta wear tight pants" or any of the other
mandatory gotta do's that I read.

As an aside, I recently read in an American cycling magazine the
thought that if one was wearing a pair of $200 Okley sun glasses on
should NOT remove the price tag.

--
cheers,

John B.

John B. wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:14:40 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:41:29 -0400, Duane
wrote:

On 27/04/2015 11:44 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On 2015-04-27 15:04:39 +0000, Frank Krygowski said:

On 4/27/2015 4:17 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Frank Krygowski schreef op 27-4-2015 om 5:11:


I remember when we were in Saltzburg, Austria on our bikes. I took a
blurry photo of a middle-aged guy biking home from work wearing his
nice
suit, carrying his briefcase. I remember missing the photo of another
similarly-dressed gentleman riding while carrying an umbrella over his
head.



People holding an umbrella (especially women) is very common around
here. They should be 'shot dead' because:
- they can't see anything because they are hiding behind the umbrella,
- the hold their handlebar only by one hand in heavy city traffic,
- they are blown all over the place when it is a bit windy,
- they occupy the whole bikepath which makes passing difficult.

Just put on a rain cap.

Just to be sure, did you mean rain _cape_ or rain cap?

Something to prevent getting their hair wet.

Wait a minute. No one is actually suggesting to ride a bike with an
umbrella are they?

It is not uncommon in places where people use a bicycle as a means of
transportation. Not uncommon at all although it does seem more usual
with women than men and usually as a protection against the sun as (I
guess) that the girls are smart enough to "come in out of the rain"
:-)
--
cheers,

I just picture someone charging into the driving rain umbrella first and no
idea what's in front. Or getting blown away or over in the wind.

Well you see that is an error probably due to the N. Americans
thinking of cycling as some sort of a sporting activity. In other
places where it is considered simply as a means of transportation you
never see anyone "charging into the driving rain umbrella first". In
fact if it is a "driving rain" they usually take shelter, but if a
mild rain you will see them cycling blithely down the road holding the
umbrella over their head with one hand and steering with the other.

--
cheers,


Don't put Frank's words in my mouth. I live in North America and we're
talking about commuting. And someone posted a pic in this thread of a
rider heading into a rain with an umbrella.

No one engaged in a cycling sport event is going to have an umbrella. No
one training either.

And you can look at the stats for North America and decide no one commutes
by bike here but if you look at local stats for say Montreal, Portland etc
you'll find that it's not even across the board. I was surprised to see in
SMS's post that my home town New Orleans was up to 3.5%.

That said I don't much care whether a rider is commuting or training or
both. I understand there are those concerned with transportation issues
that are concerned about this but to me riding is what's important.


--
duane

John B. wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:25:05 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 17:15:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/27/2015 4:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 11:35:46 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/27/2015 12:38 PM, jbeattie wrote:


We have the highest modal share of cyclists for any large city in the US.
Helmet wearing is voluntary and probably 90% -- e.g. the "funny hat
brigade"
dominates. People wear whatever they want -- street clothes or Lycra. Your
paradigm is wrong.

Despite its pride in its weirdness (see http://www.keepportlandweird.com/ )
Portlanders are still under the sway of the American bicycling meme.
IOW, they still think that riding a bike is not only weird, but
fundamentally dangerous; that segregated bike facilities are damn near
necessary, that it's fine if they're mandatory, that any bike facility
is a good bike facility; and that of course bicycling is a major risk
for traumatic brain injury, so of course it's irresponsible to ride
wearing any other hat, or no hat.

In their weirdness, most of them are against actually mandating helmets;
but whenever they speak out against helmet mandates, they're careful to
say "But of course, _I_ would never ride without a helmet." Cognitive
dissonance rules, in order to meet the quirks of Portlandia fashion.

In fact, perhaps the main reason many Portlanders ride is _because_ they
think riding a bike is fashionably weird. It goes well with the boutique
vegan whole food restaurants, the vegan strip clubs, the piercings &
tattoos, and the super-decorated suburban kids begging spare change
while sitting on the sidewalk. We'll see if it changes in time. Who
knows? Muscle cars may come back among the tattoo set.

Gawd. You really need to spend some time actually living here. The
Bohemians and hipsters are a relatively small percentage of riders
locally. The majority of riders are very normal looking. They could be
from Ohio, and in fact, the east side looks like Ohio.

A lot of the OHSU staff rides.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0-yuiuxMJA That's hardly the keep
Portland weird crowd. These guys look pretty normal. https://vimeo.com/18289096

I don't know why you Ohio guys think you're so smart. How many
cyclists are there in your village? Toledo has a .3% mode share which
puts it near the bottom of the top 70 cities.
http://bikeleague.org/sites/default/...eCommuting.pdf
Go Toledo . . we're 61st, we're 61st (repeat after me).

I think you're conflating issues. Yes, those folks are riding in normal
clothes (except for the hats, of course) - which is what I always did
(except for the hat, of course). It shows it is indeed practical; but
that has nothing to do with my points just above.

My point above was that they have apparently bought into the "gotta
protect your head, but only when on a bike" meme. And I know from many
past visits, and from much reading that there's a huge "Now we finally
have a _safe_ place to ride!" meme, whenever another green-painted
innovation on the street - no matter what it is. On those two points,
Portlanders are very white-bread American.

At the same time, you certainly can't deny there's a pretty unique
Portlandia culture! It's not monolithic, and I never claimed everyone
was tattooed and pierced. But it's the only city I've visited where I
saw dogs in restaurants. And where despite all the rain, you'd go broke
trying to sell umbrellas. It's prevalence of light rail and street
cars, while not unique, is quite unusual for the U.S..

It's not that I disapprove. I really like the city, but everyone knows
it's culture is unusual. Heck, there's never been a TV series called
"Clevelandia."

Portlanders have their own reasons for doing things. I think that, as
in most places, they do them mostly because they see others doing them;
and I think the reason so many wear bike helmets is because, well, so
many wear bike helmets.

So when they say "Gosh, they painted my street green, so _now_ I can buy
a bike..." they finish the sentence with "... and of _course_, a helmet.
Because, you know, I could hit my head - um, only on a bike."

I just read a statement that " there are approximately 1.5 million
people in the U.S. who suffer from a traumatic brain injury each year"
and "50,000 people die from TBI each year and 85,000 people suffer
long term disabilities" and that ""Over half of all reported traumatic
brain injuries are the result of an automobile accident"
http://www.traumaticbraininjury.com/...-accident-tbi/
It would seem that the emphasis for helmet wear would be aimed at the
automobile operator rather then the cyclist, if, in fact, the emphasis
is actually aimed at safety.

Mandatory helmet use while motoring "might" prevent 25,000 deaths
annually while mandatory use while cycling "might" prevent as many as
150 - in 2013 (see http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm ).

On another site ( http://www.statista.com/topics/1686/cycling/ ) I see
that there are from 42 - 51 million cyclists in the U.S. so universal
helmet wear "might" save as many as 150/46.5 million, or 0.0003% of
the cycling population, while mandatory helmet wear "might" save as
many as 0.01% of motorists from deaths.
--
cheers,


Again we have a helmet thread.

Or perhaps simply ridicule of those who cry,_"Oh! you gotta wear a
helmet" or "Oh! you gotta wear tight pants" or any of the other
mandatory gotta do's that I read.

As an aside, I recently read in an American cycling magazine the
thought that if one was wearing a pair of $200 Okley sun glasses on
should NOT remove the price tag.

--
cheers,


Are you replying to me? If so I missed your point.


--
duane

On 4/28/2015 8:13 AM, Duane wrote:
John B. wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:14:40 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

I just picture someone charging into the driving rain umbrella first and no
idea what's in front. Or getting blown away or over in the wind.

Well you see that is an error probably due to the N. Americans
thinking of cycling as some sort of a sporting activity. In other
places where it is considered simply as a means of transportation you
never see anyone "charging into the driving rain umbrella first". In
fact if it is a "driving rain" they usually take shelter, but if a
mild rain you will see them cycling blithely down the road holding the
umbrella over their head with one hand and steering with the other.


Don't put Frank's words in my mouth.

Which of those words were mine, Duane?

You need to drop your weird fixation on me, and your habit of attaching
my name to every statement that somehow makes you feel defensive.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/28/2015 6:45 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/28/2015 12:07 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 28.04.2015 um 01:08 schrieb sms:
On 4/27/2015 1:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I don't know why you Ohio guys think you're so smart. How many
cyclists are there in your village? Toledo has a .3% mode share which
puts it near the bottom of the top 70 cities.
http://bikeleague.org/sites/default/...eCommuting.pdf
Go Toledo . . we're 61st, we're 61st (repeat after me).

Portland is indeed #1 among large cities in bicycle commuting.
Surprisingly. D.C. is second, and San Francisco Bay Area is 3rd. But the
SF Bay Area is so large, and the rates among different cities vary
greatly.

Are you having different data than this PDF above? This PDF says that
Minneapolis (confirming my feeling that in the mid -1990's, Minneapolis
was first) and SF are joint second, and D.C. is fourth.

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/acsreport2014forweb-140929110935-phpapp01/95/where-we-ride-analysis-of-bicycling-in-american-cities-2014-3-1024.jpg?cb=1412078567


This was for 2013.

I'll point out (again) that Portland's figures, at least, are a bit
unrealistic, or at least prone to great misinterpretation. It's not
that 5.8% of vehicles on the roads & paths in Portland are bicycles.
Bikes comprise a far lower percentage, from what I've seen.

The 5.8% claim came from surveying only residents of the city about
their commute mode. It ignores the vast hoardes of suburban commuters
that drive into the city. Portland's streets, freeways and major
highways are still bursting with bumper-to-bumper cars. The highway
traffic jams sometimes stretch for miles.

I don't know how other cities percentages were calculated, and in
particular, I don't know how this compares with European cities. But in
the U.S. cities are often dominated by their external suburbs. It can
lead to some misleading data.

--
- Frank Krygowski