Bus racks

On 9/7/2018 2:38 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 10:46:50 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
Snipped
BTW, I haven't tried yet but it is likely that even my 1982 road bike
won't fit properly because it's less than 3" shorter than my MTB which
was sticking out more than that.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

GOOD GRIEF! My 1980's era ROAD and MTBs both fit our STANDARD bicycle racks on t he buses without any problem whatsoever.

Cheers


Y0our average pre-1885 hi wheeler can't fit on the bus rack
either.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 07:49:45 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-04 16:55, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2018 16:10:13 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany, and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to "register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and, and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country. That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]

Highest taxes in the country?

In reality California is rated as 10th, out of the list of the 15
highest taxed states in the U.S. at 9.57%. The lowest of the 15 was
Mississippi with 9.32%, California is 9.57% and New York, the highest,
is 13.04%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/us-s...x-burdens.html


Note that I wrote "among the highest". Like I wrote several times
before, try to read more carefully.


But more important the state has between $713 billion and $1.02
trillion in unfunded pension obligation, the tax base is decreasing,
since 2000, more people have left California than have arrived from
other states every year, the gasoline tax is not large enough to pay
for road building and repairs. In short, taxes will have to increase
or the state will go bankrupt.
https://californiapolicycenter.org/c...-remains-grim/


The pension boondoggle has to be curbed. That is the only solution.


You mean that a guy ought to work for twenty years and not get any
form of retirement pension?

On 9/7/2018 5:40 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 2:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 1:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

I've seen no evidence except your assertions for the idea
that your style of bike is common among those who use buses.
I rarely trust your assertions. So do you have any evidence?

And regarding roads and Model Ts: ISTM your situation is
like that of a 1930s guy who built or bought something on
this style
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications


then complained the roads weren't suitable for its use.

Don't buy something out of spec for the infrastructure you
want to use, then complain about the infrastructure.


Roads not suitable to that ugly 3 wheel monstrosity? How so? I see them
(and copies) all summer around here.

But not in the 1930s, as I said.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 12:18, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 1:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:

And yet you expect the government to provide you with special bike
racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes that are
commonly used in this area. Just like we now have roads that
accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T. It's that simple.

I've seen no evidence except your assertions for the idea that your
style of bike is common among those who use buses. I rarely trust your
assertions. So do you have any evidence?


If you had followed the bike market at least a little you could have
answered that question yourself:

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/stud...egories-stores


Quote "Twenty-niners now account for 41 percent of dollars sold in
mountain bikes at IBDs".


And regarding roads and Model Ts: ISTM your situation is like that of a
1930s guy who built or bought something on this style
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications

I suspect that most of the people RIDING BUSES are not buying the most
trendy enthusiast mountain bikes. Instead:
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Roadmaste...lack/728826935

Walmart's cheapest 29er is $30 more. That makes a difference to lots of
bus riders.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 10:38:05 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-07 10:20, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 12:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir
Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4,
Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme
that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to
subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere
in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here
in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area
much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose)
from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails
are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents
and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and,
and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions,
the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and
illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged
and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always
end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

[...]


Every other government program is profligate and counterproductive so
why should bike racks on buses be any different?


Maybe so but that does require us to speak up. As taxpayers we have a
stake in this, our money is in this and, therefore, we have a say in
this. I can't understand people who think otherwise.


If the"US" you mention is bicycle riders then it is approximately 1%
of the population. Why do you feel that this minority should dictate
anything? But if you do it might be noted that homeless amount to
about 1.2 percent of the California. Do they get to dictate to the
state also?
https://cal.streetsblog.org/2016/03/...uting-by-bike/

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 12:42:17 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-07 12:18, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 1:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:

And yet you expect the government to provide you with special bike
racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes that are
commonly used in this area. Just like we now have roads that
accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T. It's that simple.

I've seen no evidence except your assertions for the idea that your
style of bike is common among those who use buses. I rarely trust your
assertions. So do you have any evidence?


If you had followed the bike market at least a little you could have
answered that question yourself:

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/stud...egories-stores

Quote "Twenty-niners now account for 41 percent of dollars sold in
mountain bikes at IBDs".


And regarding roads and Model Ts: ISTM your situation is like that of a
1930s guy who built or bought something on this style
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications

then complained the roads weren't suitable for its use.

Don't buy something out of spec for the infrastructure you want to use,
then complain about the infrastructure.


You don't seem to even know what spec is these days. Hint: We are in the
21st century now.

Yesterday I rode light rail back to where our truck was parked. My old
1982 road bike was riding next to a 26" of a friend which would barely
fit the bus rack. My road bike is longer! Any questions? Luckily light
rail allows to take bikes on board so it doesn't matter.

Hmmm... the last you wrote you owned two vehicles one a new (to you)
SUV and you had passed your old car on to your wife. Now you mention a
truck? You mean that you have purchased a truck just to haul your
oversized bicycle around?

Apparently you are flush with cash if you have a new truck... so three
vehicles for a 2 person family is correct but ask you to contribute to
the common good by paying taxes and you fall down on the floor and
kick your feet and scream.

On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 19:21:20 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/7/2018 5:40 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 2:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 1:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

I've seen no evidence except your assertions for the idea
that your style of bike is common among those who use buses.
I rarely trust your assertions. So do you have any evidence?

And regarding roads and Model Ts: ISTM your situation is
like that of a 1930s guy who built or bought something on
this style
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications


then complained the roads weren't suitable for its use.

Don't buy something out of spec for the infrastructure you
want to use, then complain about the infrastructure.


Roads not suitable to that ugly 3 wheel monstrosity? How so? I see them
(and copies) all summer around here.

But not in the 1930s, as I said.

I was alive in the 1930's and I can assure you that the two lane
blacktop roads in New Hampshire (at least) would accommodate a three
wheel motorcycle... at least the three wheel Harley's that the Police
had would fit.

On Sat, 08 Sep 2018 06:27:27 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Fri, 07 Sep 2018 10:38:05 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-07 10:20, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 12:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir
Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4,
Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme
that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to
subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere
in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here
in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area
much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose)
from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails
are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents
and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and,
and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions,
the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and
illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged
and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always
end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

[...]


Every other government program is profligate and counterproductive so
why should bike racks on buses be any different?


Maybe so but that does require us to speak up. As taxpayers we have a
stake in this, our money is in this and, therefore, we have a say in
this. I can't understand people who think otherwise.


If the"US" you mention is bicycle riders then it is approximately 1%
of the population. Why do you feel that this minority should dictate
anything? But if you do it might be noted that homeless amount to
about 1.2 percent of the California. Do they get to dictate to the
state also?
https://cal.streetsblog.org/2016/03/...uting-by-bike/


Correction. Homeless in California are about 0.5% of the population.

On 9/7/2018 5:41 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 2:38 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 10:46:50 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
Snipped
BTW, I haven't tried yet but it is likely that even my 1982 road bike
won't fit properly because it's less than 3" shorter than my MTB which
was sticking out more than that.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

GOOD GRIEF! My 1980's era ROAD and MTBs both fit our STANDARD bicycle
racks on t he buses without any problem whatsoever.

Cheers


Y0our average pre-1885 hi wheeler can't fit on the bus rack either.

Nor the typical long wheelbase recumbent bike. Nor, I suspect, the
typical short wheelbase recumbent. Nor any tricycles at all. Nor...
well, you get the idea.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/7/2018 7:42 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 19:21:20 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/7/2018 5:40 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 2:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 1:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

I've seen no evidence except your assertions for the idea
that your style of bike is common among those who use buses.
I rarely trust your assertions. So do you have any evidence?

And regarding roads and Model Ts: ISTM your situation is
like that of a 1930s guy who built or bought something on
this style
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications


then complained the roads weren't suitable for its use.

Don't buy something out of spec for the infrastructure you
want to use, then complain about the infrastructure.


Roads not suitable to that ugly 3 wheel monstrosity? How so? I see them
(and copies) all summer around here.

But not in the 1930s, as I said.

I was alive in the 1930's and I can assure you that the two lane
blacktop roads in New Hampshire (at least) would accommodate a three
wheel motorcycle... at least the three wheel Harley's that the Police
had would fit.

I don't doubt that. But I said "something on this style."
https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/07/2...specifications

For more specifics, that Polaris is wider than a Corvette, with a 69
inch front track measurement. And the ground clearance is just over 5
inches, with a 105" wheelbase. And it requires three decently smooth
tracks in the road, not just two.

Imagine trying to drive that on a typical 1930s country road.
http://www.dcnyhistory.org/Fact_Fancy/images/6.07.jpg

(BTW, why is the Polaris driver wearing a helmet? Does he think it will
tip over?)

--
- Frank Krygowski