nearly stolen bike

You have my sympathy. I had a similar experience in 1978, before D-Locks
were around. I had locked frame and one wheel to signpost and other
wheel to frame.

I returned to find frame and both wheels bent, but locks intact. The
bike was an obvious write-off.

I managed to salvage many components.

It is *horrible* to return to a wreck of what was once your pride and
joy. I's rather return to nothing, or a wrecked lock (as has happened
three times) and buy a shiny new mount; sometimes you can lock a bike
too well...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

"Michael Klontzas" wrote in message
...

All people who saw the bike agreed it is a write-off. The dent in the
down tube is small but as we all know aluminium doesn't like dents.
Perhaps it would be better if it was stolen. Now it will just be binned.

How straight is the frame?

Provided it's not horribly twisted, I'd just ride it, and keep an eye out
for cracks. I wouldn't take it mountain biking, but for a hack bike it now
has the advantage that it looks a wreck.

cheers,
clive

Michael Klontzas wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:21:35 GMT, Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:

It is *horrible* to return to a wreck of what was once your pride and
joy. I's rather return to nothing, or a wrecked lock (as has happened
three times) and buy a shiny new mount; sometimes you can lock a bike
too well...

I thought about that too. I believe that the reason they couldn't remove
the bike was because of my usual locking strategy. Crucially, the d-lock
was holding a fat aluminium down tube, the front wheel and a rail. This
means there wasn't much space for handling really, particularly as the
keyhole was as always on the other side of the rails and closer to the
spokes. It takes me a while to unlock it with the key! Also, the
handlebars were entangled in the rails so that rotating the bike was
almost impossible.

Knowing about the twisting-the-d-lock trick, I was thinking it would
perhaps be a better strategy to use the d-lock on the rear wheel instead,
since the tubes there are so much thinner and rotating the bike would
certainly make them snap. The assumption here is that noone in the right
mind would attempt this because the bike would quickly be rendered
worthless.

Both strategies fail to recognise that actually someone could be
irrational enough to have a go (and take certain risks), even if that
meant the frame would certainly be damaged beyond repair.

The explanation might be simpler. They might just be really really
stupid. I once lived in a street which was pestered by local thieves
because it had a good runaway on one side into an open densely wooded
park. They used to have a go at breaking the first and easiest lock on
my motorcycle. They'd cause a bit of local damage, and give up. I
couldn't understand it, because if they hadn't the kit to get through
the first lock, they were certainly going to be defeated by the next
two much tougehr locks, which were deliberately placed and coloured so
as to be highly visible.

But they kept doing it. In a despairing attempt at humour after
replacing my third ignition lock I taped a waterproof notice to the
petrol tank, headed "NOTICE TO THIEVES". It explained that there were
three locks on the bike, and that they shouldn't bother messing with
the first one unless they were confident they could tackle them
all. To my astonishment the attempted thefts immediately ceased, for
good.

I concluded that they could read, but were just really really stupid.

--
Chris Malcolm +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

"Michael Klontzas" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:09:04 -0000, Clive George wrote:

"Michael Klontzas" wrote in message
...

All people who saw the bike agreed it is a write-off. The dent in the
down tube is small but as we all know aluminium doesn't like dents.
Perhaps it would be better if it was stolen. Now it will just be binned.

How straight is the frame?

Provided it's not horribly twisted, I'd just ride it, and keep an eye out
for cracks. I wouldn't take it mountain biking, but for a hack bike it
now
has the advantage that it looks a wreck.

I am tempted to do just that, particularly now that I know the home
insurance policy doesn't cover the bike. To my inexperienced eyes it
doesn't look too bad: http://www.klontzas.com/bike/

and I don't ride hard anyway -- only on tarmac but there is always the
occasional pothole or hump, and thin-ish high pressure tyres don't absorb
much of the shock.

It could be wishful thinking but I get the impression people quote from
the textbook that aluminium just snaps without warning before they even
see the damage. Either that, or aluminium is a lot more brittle than I
could possibly imagine and I may end up in hospital.

The PC who came to my place for fingerprints today even suggested that
perhaps I could support the dented area with an outer tube or something!

--
Michael Klontzas
'If everything seems to be coming your way,
you're probably in the wrong lane'
(Borstelmann's Rule)


I've just looked at your pictures - sadly I think it's a write-off as the
dent is right next to the bottle boss therefore weakening the frame in an
area already compromised. As food for thought it might be an idea to get a
bike that's a bit less "sexy" next time. American manufacturer and black
seems to be a bit of a thief magnet.

Sorry not to be the bearer of glad tidings

Julia

JBB wrote:



I've just looked at your pictures - sadly I think it's a write-off as the
dent is right next to the bottle boss therefore weakening the frame in an
area already compromised.

I can't see much on the pictures, but if the paint still adheres to the
tubing I'd chance it. But stay tuned to creaky noises or extra flex
--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl