Made of tough stuff.

On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

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

On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 1:12:13 AM UTC, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

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

A brilliant example of what I mean; thanks Andrew.

Actually, unlike almost every other cyclist, I once rode an ancient, original Penny Farthing for several undulating miles on the occasion of a tercentenary. So, in theory, I have experience of precisely what "gear inches" means, because gear inches tell us how tall a penny farthing wheel equivent to the sprocket ratio on a modern bike would be: it is obvious that, the greater the diameter of the penny-farthing wheel, the stronger you must be to pedal it, and the smaller the diameter of the penny farthing wheel, the easier it will be to pedal.

But that's post hoc justification. I just like gear inches because I already learned that 16 gear inches is a stumppuller ratio that I might need when I'm 90, and that anything over 90 gear inches on a touring bike confers no benefit beyond bragging rights.

Gain ratio? Development in meters? WTF? Tell them to me only if you have already offered me a mental rithmetic shortcut for converting them to gear inches, or take them away and trash them.

Notice that I don't even enquire whether development in meters isn't, just possibly, superior. Actually, I seem to remember that Sheldon condemned the other one, gain ratio, as useless: that's good enough for me! Now that Andrew has mentioned it again, I also vaguely recollect looking into meters development and being terminally disgusted with being asked to multiply by an arbitrary fractional constant, pi -- how impertinent can these Frenchmen get?

Andre Jute
And if you don't adhere to my tolerant standard, I'll riot in the streets and smash parked bicycles until you so, so there

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

On 11/17/2016 6:12 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

And one can get used to a more logical system. I'm in the only
industrialized country that still uses units related by factors like 3,
12, 5280, 231, etc. I'm already fine with factors of 10 and would love
to switch to SI.

BTW, the only U.S. measurement that makes more sense to me than SI (or
the Metric System) is temperature. 100 degrees Fahrenheit aligns nicely
with "As hot as it should _ever_ get." Zero works for "as cold as it
should _ever_ get." Converting from Celsius (as seen on some
international news) drives me slightly nuts.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 7:01:04 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/17/2016 6:12 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

And one can get used to a more logical system. I'm in the only
industrialized country that still uses units related by factors like 3,
12, 5280, 231, etc. I'm already fine with factors of 10 and would love
to switch to SI.

BTW, the only U.S. measurement that makes more sense to me than SI (or
the Metric System) is temperature. 100 degrees Fahrenheit aligns nicely
with "As hot as it should _ever_ get." Zero works for "as cold as it
should _ever_ get." Converting from Celsius (as seen on some
international news) drives me slightly nuts.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Actually the ONLY place it makes the slightest difference is when you're converting from one system to the other. What difference does it make if an English mile is 5280 ft or the maritime mile 1,852 meters? The only sense a kilometer makes in the US is to make fun of. This country is so large that km are simply stupid. Why should we use a meter which is a rare metal object kept in an airless container away from sunlight or a kilogram which is the same? These units despite the care given them change over time. We are now trying to make standards based on the frequency of a certain color of light. But then how do you identify THAT COLOR?

Measurements will always be in arbitrary units and there's nothing wrong with that.

On 11/17/2016 10:58 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 7:01:04 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/17/2016 6:12 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

And one can get used to a more logical system. I'm in the only
industrialized country that still uses units related by factors like 3,
12, 5280, 231, etc. I'm already fine with factors of 10 and would love
to switch to SI.

BTW, the only U.S. measurement that makes more sense to me than SI (or
the Metric System) is temperature. 100 degrees Fahrenheit aligns nicely
with "As hot as it should _ever_ get." Zero works for "as cold as it
should _ever_ get." Converting from Celsius (as seen on some
international news) drives me slightly nuts.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Actually the ONLY place it makes the slightest difference is when you're converting from one system to the other. What difference does it make if an English mile is 5280 ft or the maritime mile 1,852 meters? The only sense a kilometer makes in the US is to make fun of. This country is so large that km are simply stupid. Why should we use a meter which is a rare metal object kept in an airless container away from sunlight or a kilogram which is the same? These units despite the care given them change over time. We are now trying to make standards based on the frequency of a certain color of light. But then how do you identify THAT COLOR?

Measurements will always be in arbitrary units and there's nothing wrong with that.

We once lost a space probe because of difficulty in working with
different systems of units.
http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/01/news/mn-17288

There have been many other such mistakes.
http://www.godfreyhoffman.com/civil-...ty-measurement

In fact, I recall reading an article in an engineering journal that said
unit conversion mistakes were THE most common engineering calculation
error in U.S. industry.

Units of measurement don't matter at all - unless, that is, you actually
have to use them to get work done.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 3:58:20 PM UTC, wrote:
On Thursday, November 17, 2016 at 7:01:04 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/17/2016 6:12 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

And one can get used to a more logical system. I'm in the only
industrialized country that still uses units related by factors like 3,
12, 5280, 231, etc. I'm already fine with factors of 10 and would love
to switch to SI.

BTW, the only U.S. measurement that makes more sense to me than SI (or
the Metric System) is temperature. 100 degrees Fahrenheit aligns nicely
with "As hot as it should _ever_ get." Zero works for "as cold as it
should _ever_ get." Converting from Celsius (as seen on some
international news) drives me slightly nuts.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Actually the ONLY place it makes the slightest difference is when you're converting from one system to the other. What difference does it make if an English mile is 5280 ft or the maritime mile 1,852 meters? The only sense a kilometer makes in the US is to make fun of. This country is so large that km are simply stupid. Why should we use a meter which is a rare metal object kept in an airless container away from sunlight or a kilogram which is the same? These units despite the care given them change over time. We are now trying to make standards based on the frequency of a certain color of light. But then how do you identify THAT COLOR?

Measurements will always be in arbitrary units and there's nothing wrong with that.

Sure, but, though they now appear arbitrary, each derived from a usage that in many cases is no longer convenient. I'm for the most convenient measures, the ones that are easiest to remember, to work with, to do mental arithmetic with, to get to the algebraic variants of, but when none of these factors come into play, I like the consistency of working with factors of ten. Above all, I don't want some poncey homologation clown to come take away measures I'm used to and replace them with tiresome complications merely for the sake of bureaucratic tidiness (a case we have seen far too much of in the European Union's drive to universal conformity).

As a practical example of the value of SI units (when specified by men who knew what they were doing) and the metric system, from electronics rather than bicycles, just as a matter of intellectual exercise I wanted to create in a single formula a grand unified theory of now generally obsolete (or at least esoteric) thermionic vacuum tubes. The result of three years of work, which appears incredibly simple if you know what is involved, is at
http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/...dre%20Jute.htm
where you will instantly note that, though not as simple as an Einsteinian formulation (I was working with many more elements!) it is still amazingly simple for a subject on which the standard short handbook runs to 1418 pages of very fine print, and the standard reference comes in 20-plus thick, dense volumes. I managed to simplify it that much because electronic reactions have for a long time been given in standard SI units, which all work with factors of ten, and are all more or less exhaustively related to each other, both of which tremendously aids simplification. The proof of the formula, the whole thing written out in full, consumes three entire six foot blackboards, eighteen feet of blackboard space. An important side note: untangling and recombining industry constants in different measuring systems, on non-linear responses as in thermionic tubes (the rest of you may think of the transfer curve of an inadequate transistor), is a nervewracking nightmare that inculcates a fierce love of the SI units' incestuous relationships.

Andre Jute
One of the reasons I'm so keen on the Three Rs being taught is that, without them, it is easy for society to deprive itself of the next generation of polymaths

On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:01:00 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/17/2016 6:12 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:12:08 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 11/16/2016 6:46 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 2:28:52 AM UTC, James wrote:

The steering angle is certainly very different from modern road bikes,
and probably a little more of a slope (further from vertical) than a MTB.

--
JS

We're talking about the included angle between the head tube and the ground level, so 68 degrees, common on vintage bikes and modern Dutch commuters, is a more laid back bike than the steeper, more upright 72 degrees, common on road bikes. We speak of a "relaxed head tube and seat tube angle" in the first instance.

I've always found the way bicycle geometry is specified and spoken about counterintuitive. It would be so much easier to measure from the vertical and then to say that an 18 degree road bike has faster (or more forward) angles than a 22 degree commuting bike, and to say that the commuting bike has a more relaxed tube angle (22 v 18) would then make instant sense without first having to give it a moment of thought.

Andre Jute
Just saying. A lot of what we say in English makes sense only because we're used to it, not because it expresses anything rationally.


+1
The English Speaking World has gear inches.
Everyone else has meters of development.

Well, we also have horsepower and football.. which the rest of the
world seems to view with a certain amount of awe :-)

But more seriously, units of measure are commonly just whatever you
are used to. a 2mm wire? Or a #10 wire? A 25.4mm tube ot a 1 inch tube
:-)

And one can get used to a more logical system. I'm in the only
industrialized country that still uses units related by factors like 3,
12, 5280, 231, etc. I'm already fine with factors of 10 and would love
to switch to SI.


But think back, I don't remember anyone getting confused about how
many ounces to a pound or inches to a foot. Or even how many foot to a
Rod :-)

Even today, I find thousandths' of an inch much more friendly than
0.02mm. Probably because I am used to them.

BTW, the only U.S. measurement that makes more sense to me than SI (or
the Metric System) is temperature. 100 degrees Fahrenheit aligns nicely
with "As hot as it should _ever_ get." Zero works for "as cold as it
should _ever_ get." Converting from Celsius (as seen on some
international news) drives me slightly nuts.

On 2016-11-17, wrote:

The only sense a kilometer makes in the US is to make fun of. This
country is so large that km are simply stupid. Why should we use
a meter which is a rare metal object kept in an airless container
away from sunlight or a kilogram which is the same? These units
despite the care given them change over time.

1.609344 km / mi is hardly "simply stupid"; it's of the same order
of magnitude as a mile, and therefore, barely different.

The meter is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum
during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second. It isn't based
on any metallic object (and hasn't been since 1960) and does not
change over any time frame relevant to human existence.

--
Gregory S. Sutter Mostly Harmless

http://zer0.org/~gsutter/