A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

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

Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 1st 18, 11:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 334
Default Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!

On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 12:23:11 PM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 2:53:32 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 1:28:16 PM UTC-7, Andy wrote:
On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 7:06:01 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1/2018/09/...7819759698.jpg

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

I think the photo is fake.

The impact would have forced the bike forward.

Andy


I would have checked it with Snopes but they have banned me for proving that they are politically motivated on a high percentage of their "fact checks".


I didn't find anything on Snopes but I found this very similar image from 2012

https://jalopnik.com/5918071/look-at...is-chinese-car

Also found on reditt

https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comment..._a_germanmade/

Cheers


BINGO - the comment there proved it a hoax. The traction of the bicycle wheel would not be enough to overpower the construction of the car. It would simply push it forward or even lift it off of the ground.

Do you note that not only is it a different bike but it has flat rims. Al's picture shows a Fixy and not only that but no brakes at all and no one could stand on the pedals with a push like that. Also the car is completely different.
Ads
  #22  
Old October 2nd 18, 01:16 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,770
Default Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!

On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 6:36:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 12:23:11 PM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Snipped
Do you note that not only is it a different bike but it has flat rims. Al's picture shows a Fixy and not only that but no brakes at all and no one could stand on the pedals with a push like that. Also the car is completely different.


Which is why I said I found a "VERY SIMILAR" image. Emphasizing "very similar".

Cheers
  #23  
Old October 2nd 18, 02:05 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,779
Default Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!

On 10/1/2018 7:16 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 6:36:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 12:23:11 PM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Snipped
Do you note that not only is it a different bike but it has flat rims. Al's picture shows a Fixy and not only that but no brakes at all and no one could stand on the pedals with a push like that. Also the car is completely different.


Which is why I said I found a "VERY SIMILAR" image. Emphasizing "very similar".

Cheers


Right, they are clearly different instances which means
either this staged meme snapshot is trending or that crappy
thin polymer front valences of modern cars are less strong
than some bicycle wheels in some crashes.

Or, given two in several years' span, these are merely a
couple of anomalies from which deeper meaning ought not to
be drawn.

I enjoyed the image.

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


  #24  
Old October 8th 18, 10:40 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 334
Default Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!

On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 6:05:44 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2018 7:16 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 6:36:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 12:23:11 PM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Snipped
Do you note that not only is it a different bike but it has flat rims. Al's picture shows a Fixy and not only that but no brakes at all and no one could stand on the pedals with a push like that. Also the car is completely different.


Which is why I said I found a "VERY SIMILAR" image. Emphasizing "very similar".

Cheers


Right, they are clearly different instances which means
either this staged meme snapshot is trending or that crappy
thin polymer front valences of modern cars are less strong
than some bicycle wheels in some crashes.

Or, given two in several years' span, these are merely a
couple of anomalies from which deeper meaning ought not to
be drawn.

I enjoyed the image.

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


Consider Andrew, there is no possible way a bicycle tire has sufficient traction to do this. The total amount of traction of the tire has to be measure in ft/lbs of energy. Even a paper mache front end could exceed that.
  #30  
Old October 10th 18, 03:17 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,339
Default Buy that wheelbuilder a drink!

On 10/9/2018 9:26 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 18:35:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/9/2018 5:25 PM, wrote:
On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 7:08:14 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/8/2018 5:40 PM,
wrote:

Consider Andrew, there is no possible way a bicycle tire has sufficient traction to do this. The total amount of traction of the tire has to be measure in ft/lbs of energy.

Tom, those units of measurement don't make sense.

"Traction" usually refers to a force. Depending on context, I suppose it
could possibly refer to a coefficient of friction. Neither of those is
"energy." And neither force, coefficient of friction nor energy have
units ft/lbs.

--
- Frank Krygowski

ft/lbs/sec if you have to have your hand held.


Nope, wrong again. Sorry!



Braking force is measured in different ways, but the easiest to
visualize is kinetic energy in kj and braking time which equals
kilowatts .

kj (kilo joules) is usually calculated as half the product of the
mass times the square of the speed.

Or perhaps mass (in Kilograms) times deceleration (meters per second)
equals Force (in Newtons).

See
http://www.adilca.com/BRAKING_FORCE.pdf


If Tom's use of "traction" was intended to mean a force, then as the
example on page 5 of that PDF says, an appropriate unit would be Newtons
(or kiloNewtons). In the U.S., the appropriate unit would be pounds.

Again, depending on context, someone might use the word "traction" to
refer to the coefficient of friction. In that case, it would be
unitless, since coefficient of friction is a ratio of one force to
another. Newtons/Newtons = unitless.

I can't think of another possible meaning for the word "traction," but
I"m willing to listen to ideas.

The last units Tom gave would simplify to ft*sec/lb which would be
something like velocity/force. It makes no sense in relation to "traction."


--
- Frank Krygowski
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rec? wheelbuilder in SF Bay Area m&m Techniques 2 November 13th 07 03:09 PM
Atlanta wheelbuilder mike[_5_] Techniques 6 August 31st 07 01:00 AM
DFW Wheelbuilder? Not LBS? Hell and High Water Techniques 19 October 17th 05 05:54 PM
Looking for a Wheelbuilder Wasatch5k Techniques 9 February 10th 05 02:29 AM
Perth: Good Wheelbuilder [email protected] Australia 7 July 28th 04 11:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.