#21
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 2018-08-28 21:42, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:15:53 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 8/28/2018 9:01 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:49:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/28/2018 7:27 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 07:43:58 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 18:13, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 17:43:40 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 16:20, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 5:49:57 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 13:53, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Reading the thread about bus racks being to short for some bicycles got me to thinking about how the bicycle is supported in the rack. When I worked in bicycle shops we called those bicycle parking racks with the two low hoops to hold the wheels "wheel benders" as we often had wheel repairs that were caused by the sideways force on the wheels. I wonder if bus racks have the same problem at times if that front wheel hook is not supporting the bicycle from swaying a bit side to side. The wheel hook is what is supposed to prevent it from swaying. A wheel itself can't. Just imagine: While the racks on our buses are barely wide enough to squeeze in my 2.25" wide rear tire a 25mm road bike tire would make the bike almost fall over, considering that the slot is just around 4" deep. Some people who still run 23mm tires or even less would also risk marring their rims badly when the sides of the rims would bang against the steel tube of the rack rail all the time. You'd likely feel the damage immediately the first time you use the rim brakes. Another detail I noticed: The handlebar end of my MTB was very close to the windshield of the bus. Scary. I watched it on the freeway and while the bike "came closer" it didn't quite touch glass. Despite the panniers. That only worked because I had shortened the handlebar significantly a few months after I bought the MTB. What would happen if the handlebar touched the glass? Possibly a crack. Since it is curved glass that would cause an expensive repair and loss of service costs while the bus is in the shop. One can only speculate. Generally speaking, if you break someone's window, you get to pay for it, in some manner. Not if the rack was sub-par and caused the event. You mean if the bus company is nice enough to install bicycle racks that, as you previously wrote, fit many bicycles and your bicycle doesn't fit so a window gets broken it is the bus company's fault? Logically then it is to the bus company's advantage to get rid of the bicycle racks and thus avoid the expense of broken windows. It's a non-issue, important only in Joerg's mind. If the bus company had a problem with broken windshields, they'd have fixed the racks or protected the windshields long ago. One might also speculate on whether the majority of the bus riders actually care whether bicycle racks are installed, or not. Sacramento Transit seems to think that two bicycle carriers per bus are adequate. This may miss the larger trend: https://www.cato.org/publications/po...sit-apocalypse Sacramento Transit is suffering a substantial decline in ridership. If they can't catch more split-commute folks (car-transit and bike-transit) they'll have serious budget problems soon. Observations: The light rail from town to the outskirts is often more than maxed out with bicycles on board. You carry them onto the train car. There are two allowed per end section of a car but often there are three to four. P&R parking structures in some areas are already full before 7:30am and then all day. There is a large number of homeless on the trains and in local buses here plus shady people milling around some stops. I know lots of potential riders who do not use the systems because of that, certainly not with young kids in tow. Transfers require another fare, meaning that many people must pay four to six times per round trip. That can result in the car being a more economical mode of transportation. So we know what needs to be done. They are trying to wing it with a 10% fare reduction but that won't be more than a drop in the bucket. https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/a...217389425.html One might ask, "why public transportation" when according to current figures the average U.S. family owns 1.968 autos? Typically because they want get to and from work faster. I do it out of environmental consciousness and it increases my cycling range. So far only light rail because the bus racks won't accommodate modern MTB. Lots of cyclists in my area use their pickup trucks instead. The environmentally worst method is the two-location shuttle method. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 8/29/2018 7:45 AM, Joerg wrote:
snip Sacramento Transit is suffering a substantial decline in ridership. If they can't catch more split-commute folks (car-transit and bike-transit) they'll have serious budget problems soon. Observations: This is an issue nationwide. There are multiple causes: 1. Ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft are heavily subsidized by investors. When you have two or three passengers, an Uber or Lyft ride is often no more expensive than mass transit, especially in cities where the distances are not great. 2. Crime. People prefer the security of a personal vehicle, whether their own or belonging to a ride-share driver. 3. Gentrification. There has been a big push in some areas for "Transit Oriented Development." Great buzz phrase, but the reality is that it's just another name for gentrification. How this worked in Los Angeles was that the low-income people, that were the biggest public transit users, were displaced by the construction of market-rate, expensive housing. The poor people moved to more affordable, more remote areas, and bought cars. The well-off people moved into the new housing, but for the most part they don't use transit, they drive, because either their workplace is not along a transit line, they work long or odd hours, or they don't feel safe. There's a good op-ed about this he http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-rosenthal-transit-gentrification-metro-ridership-20180220-story.html. 4. Public transit agencies operate as social service agencies. This is the case in my county. There is little emphasis on trying to get the middle class to give up their cars and take transit. The largest city, San Jose, controls the county transit agency and ensures that the smaller cities do not get the transit that would work to get people out of their cars. The light rail from town to the outskirts is often more than maxed out with bicycles on board. You carry them onto the train car. There are two allowed per end section of a car but often there are three to four. Does anyone enforce the maximum number of bicycles. I've been on those trains where there were more than two bikes per section and no one said anything. So we know what needs to be done. They are trying to wing it with a 10% fare reduction but that won't be more than a drop in the bucket. The problem with fare reductions is that for many riders they aren't paying themselves anyway. Their employer pays. So the transit agency can charge less per person but it doesn't increase ridership because fares were not the issue in the first place. Finally, there is this article from the Onion https://www.theonion.com/report-98-percent-of-u-s-commuters-favor-public-trans-1819565837. Funny, but sadly true. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 7:22:25 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
snip That's what our power company PG&E pulled off. Instead of fixing fire danger prone overhead wiring they announced they'll simply cut power if there is high wind in summer. It is up to the political leaders to pull the charter if such behavior goes too far. I believe that in most, if not all, cases the generating plants are the property of the electric company. If the local government were to "cancel their contract" where would you get electricity from? Or do you propose that the local government, in some manner, perhaps by a tax increase, purchase the generating plants? It's about the distribution, not the plant. Utilities in America run on the cost-plus basis which means carte blanche. They could let them run the power plants that way but allow competition in the distribution. Even Germany did that which, compared to a the US, is much less capitalist. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 8/29/2018 12:42 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:15:53 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 8/28/2018 9:01 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:49:49 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/28/2018 7:27 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 07:43:58 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 18:13, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 17:43:40 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 16:20, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 5:49:57 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 13:53, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Reading the thread about bus racks being to short for some bicycles got me to thinking about how the bicycle is supported in the rack. When I worked in bicycle shops we called those bicycle parking racks with the two low hoops to hold the wheels "wheel benders" as we often had wheel repairs that were caused by the sideways force on the wheels. I wonder if bus racks have the same problem at times if that front wheel hook is not supporting the bicycle from swaying a bit side to side. The wheel hook is what is supposed to prevent it from swaying. A wheel itself can't. Just imagine: While the racks on our buses are barely wide enough to squeeze in my 2.25" wide rear tire a 25mm road bike tire would make the bike almost fall over, considering that the slot is just around 4" deep. Some people who still run 23mm tires or even less would also risk marring their rims badly when the sides of the rims would bang against the steel tube of the rack rail all the time. You'd likely feel the damage immediately the first time you use the rim brakes. Another detail I noticed: The handlebar end of my MTB was very close to the windshield of the bus. Scary. I watched it on the freeway and while the bike "came closer" it didn't quite touch glass. Despite the panniers. That only worked because I had shortened the handlebar significantly a few months after I bought the MTB. What would happen if the handlebar touched the glass? Possibly a crack. Since it is curved glass that would cause an expensive repair and loss of service costs while the bus is in the shop. One can only speculate. Generally speaking, if you break someone's window, you get to pay for it, in some manner. Not if the rack was sub-par and caused the event. You mean if the bus company is nice enough to install bicycle racks that, as you previously wrote, fit many bicycles and your bicycle doesn't fit so a window gets broken it is the bus company's fault? Logically then it is to the bus company's advantage to get rid of the bicycle racks and thus avoid the expense of broken windows. It's a non-issue, important only in Joerg's mind. If the bus company had a problem with broken windshields, they'd have fixed the racks or protected the windshields long ago. One might also speculate on whether the majority of the bus riders actually care whether bicycle racks are installed, or not. Sacramento Transit seems to think that two bicycle carriers per bus are adequate. This may miss the larger trend: https://www.cato.org/publications/po...sit-apocalypse One might ask, "why public transportation" when according to current figures the average U.S. family owns 1.968 autos? https://bit.ly/2Dz12vo When we moved here (1980) we were a one car family. I very deliberately chose a house within bike commute distance, but I knew there would be many days I couldn't ride in. To resist buying a second car, I looked for alternatives. It should be easy, I thought. I'm in a suburban village where lots of university employees live. The uncongested freeway from the school runs half a mile from my house, and everyone will pass my street to get to it. Nope. Almost nobody was interested in car pooling, and widely varying class times meant it was hard to snag a ride. (For example, I was often going in at 10 AM and home at 7 PM.) Well, then, the bus! But the bus poked its way from downtown to a spot about two miles from my house. I could ride my bike there and carry it on the bus, but I'd beat the bus to work every time. If weather was OK to ride two miles, it was OK to ride seven. A fast shuttle bus running from downtown to this suburban hub seemed to make sense, and I'd have loved it. But despite the crowd of students, faculty and staff living near me, there was no such bus line. We got by for about five years with me occasionally car pooling, riding my bike, or leaving my wife car-less. Then we caved and bought the second car. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 8/29/2018 10:45 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-28 21:42, John B. Slocomb wrote: One might ask, "why public transportation" when according to current figures the average U.S. family owns 1.968 autos? Typically because they want get to and from work faster. I do it out of environmental consciousness and it increases my cycling range. So far only light rail because the bus racks won't accommodate modern MTB. Y'know, when we bought our _house_, one criterion was that it had to work for transportation by bike. I think if I were buying a _bike_, I'd make sure it worked for transportation by bike. That would include fitting a bus rack, if that were part of my needs. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 2018-08-29 09:22, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 7:22:25 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: snip That's what our power company PG&E pulled off. Instead of fixing fire danger prone overhead wiring they announced they'll simply cut power if there is high wind in summer. It is up to the political leaders to pull the charter if such behavior goes too far. I believe that in most, if not all, cases the generating plants are the property of the electric company. If the local government were to "cancel their contract" where would you get electricity from? Or do you propose that the local government, in some manner, perhaps by a tax increase, purchase the generating plants? It's about the distribution, not the plant. Utilities in America run on the cost-plus basis which means carte blanche. They could let them run the power plants that way but allow competition in the distribution. Even Germany did that which, compared to a the US, is much less capitalist. Rate-setting is not carte blanche. It is the opposite of carte blanche. An unregulated industry would mean all the remote moonscape towns you think are quaint would not get power because there is no market. The reason we got the rural electrification program, TVA, Bonneville, etc. was exactly because private industry wanted no part of it or the project was simply too big. It is carte blanche. Cost-plus means the utility can rack up any amount of cost, knowing they will always get x percent profit on top of that. I have seen the same behavior in government work. Also, how would you propose competition in distribution when the distribution lines are owned by the incumbent provider? More wires? Who in their right mind would shell out the cash for a parallel distribution system? And if there were license agreements or shared infrastructure, then you would still have an entity responsible for repairs -- and undoubtedly someone you thought was incompetent or unworthy to send electricity to your home. There will always be someone who has to fix the broken ****. PG&E probably has as much competence as anyone when it comes to keeping lines repaired. It does but it does not deliver at an adequate price. We have among the highest electricity costs in the nation and not a very reliable grid anymore. Of course, part of it are nonsensical political mandates but a utility is supposed to stand up stronger against those. Of course, in a cost-plus deal it doesn't really matter to them or is actually beneficial to them because x percent gueranteed profit of a high total is more than x percent of a lower total. ... Try this free market electrical distribution system: https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015...8699426875.jpg In many countries that _is_ the work of a government agency or a monopoly. Of course once furnishing electricity became the responsibility of the local government it would become a political factor, like road maintenance? Everything is a political factor these days. As I said it is rather easy to build a bike rack that fits contemporary bikes. But, according to your posts, the racks are already installed so you are talking about replacing them with a larger rack? Perhaps an increase in fare for cyclists until the new racks are paid for? No, I already explained that. When a design flaw is discovered they should try to get the vendor to perform the corrections for free. Munis have enough clout to tell them that else the biz in their direction could shrivel up. That's a good motivator. Competition can be a wonderful factor. Old American saying: If you don't take care of your customer someone else will. And yet in Portland, the private bus line went bankrupt -- along with the private trolley line. That's how we ended up with TriMet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Transit Depends on the company. Our waste collection is done by a private entity. That runs cheaper, more reliably and more profitably than the typical municipal deal. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 8/29/2018 12:37 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:07:09 -0500, AMuzi wrote: On 8/28/2018 8:20 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 16:58:45 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-28 16:27, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 07:43:58 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 18:13, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 17:43:40 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 16:20, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 5:49:57 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-27 13:53, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Reading the thread about bus racks being to short for some bicycles got me to thinking about how the bicycle is supported in the rack. When I worked in bicycle shops we called those bicycle parking racks with the two low hoops to hold the wheels "wheel benders" as we often had wheel repairs that were caused by the sideways force on the wheels. I wonder if bus racks have the same problem at times if that front wheel hook is not supporting the bicycle from swaying a bit side to side. The wheel hook is what is supposed to prevent it from swaying. A wheel itself can't. Just imagine: While the racks on our buses are barely wide enough to squeeze in my 2.25" wide rear tire a 25mm road bike tire would make the bike almost fall over, considering that the slot is just around 4" deep. Some people who still run 23mm tires or even less would also risk marring their rims badly when the sides of the rims would bang against the steel tube of the rack rail all the time. You'd likely feel the damage immediately the first time you use the rim brakes. Another detail I noticed: The handlebar end of my MTB was very close to the windshield of the bus. Scary. I watched it on the freeway and while the bike "came closer" it didn't quite touch glass. Despite the panniers. That only worked because I had shortened the handlebar significantly a few months after I bought the MTB. What would happen if the handlebar touched the glass? Possibly a crack. Since it is curved glass that would cause an expensive repair and loss of service costs while the bus is in the shop. One can only speculate. Generally speaking, if you break someone's window, you get to pay for it, in some manner. Not if the rack was sub-par and caused the event. You mean if the bus company is nice enough to install bicycle racks that, as you previously wrote, fit many bicycles and your bicycle doesn't fit so a window gets broken it is the bus company's fault? If the bus driver witnessed and blessed the way it was loaded, yes. Logically then it is to the bus company's advantage to get rid of the bicycle racks and thus avoid the expense of broken windows. That's what our power company PG&E pulled off. Instead of fixing fire danger prone overhead wiring they announced they'll simply cut power if there is high wind in summer. It is up to the political leaders to pull the charter if such behavior goes too far. I believe that in most, if not all, cases the generating plants are the property of the electric company. If the local government were to "cancel their contract" where would you get electricity from? Or do you propose that the local government, in some manner, perhaps by a tax increase, purchase the generating plants? Of course once furnishing electricity became the responsibility of the local government it would become a political factor, like road maintenance? As I said it is rather easy to build a bike rack that fits contemporary bikes. But, according to your posts, the racks are already installed so you are talking about replacing them with a larger rack? Perhaps an increase in fare for cyclists until the new racks are paid for? And, another thought comes to mind. Will your big brawny "new" racks safely safely carry a slick, slim, road bike? Or will we need two sets of racks? John you don't get modern political administration. The road bikes go on that _other_ bus route across town, but not between 6 and 9am and only with a bus pass showing current 'road bike' stamp. Probably not :-) My only excuse is that I live in a country where if you want to ride your bike, go ahead. But no bikes on the bus, or the sub-way for that matter. These stupid people here think that a bicycle is a transportation device and if you are utilizing your transportation device why do you need to take the bus :-) For what it's worth, I am strongly in favor of having buses carry bikes. The "last mile" issue is real. And in cities with good bus or other mass transit service, I've enjoyed using the system. It was fun using Portland's to get from the airport to within a block of my kid's apartment. I remember an amazingly sociable bus ride in Santa Fe (or was it Taos?). I used the bus a lot as a kid, and had fine experiences in various European cities. But bus lines have difficult problems in most U.S. cities. Using buses gets much more difficult if the ridership isn't there, because bus frequency drops and wait times increase. It's classic "chicken and egg" or vicious cycle situation. I can only give thanks that I was never a person poor enough to be forced to waste an hour each day waiting for buses to arrive, or forced to turn down a better job because it ended after the last bus run. Things like that really can make it hard for people to better their situation. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 2018-08-29 08:47, sms wrote:
On 8/29/2018 7:45 AM, Joerg wrote: snip Sacramento Transit is suffering a substantial decline in ridership. If they can't catch more split-commute folks (car-transit and bike-transit) they'll have serious budget problems soon. Observations: This is an issue nationwide. There are multiple causes: 1. Ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft are heavily subsidized by investors. When you have two or three passengers, an Uber or Lyft ride is often no more expensive than mass transit, especially in cities where the distances are not great. That's a problem but competition is good. For example, if transit agencies gave up this nonsensical requirement of paying a new fare for every leg (transfer) then public transit would beat Uber or Lyft. Three older adults can hardly ride an Uber for $3.75, plus they don't have to tip the train conductor or bus driver. They should look at how the airlines do it. You pay one fare from A to B no matter how many plane changes are involved. 2. Crime. People prefer the security of a personal vehicle, whether their own or belonging to a ride-share driver. That is something where transit could do better. A whole lot better. Sacramento RT has stepped up patrolling which is nice but ... unruly homeless are not removed from vehicles, nobody seems to bother when someone uses a syringe on a vehicle and there are too many non-riding people loitering around some stations right where people step off on onto trains. For example, even as a fairly large guy I would not feel comfortable waiting for a light rail train at Mather Field in Rancho Cordova yet that is a stop I'd sometimes need. 3. Gentrification. There has been a big push in some areas for "Transit Oriented Development." Great buzz phrase, but the reality is that it's just another name for gentrification. How this worked in Los Angeles was that the low-income people, that were the biggest public transit users, were displaced by the construction of market-rate, expensive housing. The poor people moved to more affordable, more remote areas, and bought cars. The well-off people moved into the new housing, but for the most part they don't use transit, they drive, because either their workplace is not along a transit line, they work long or odd hours, or they don't feel safe. There's a good op-ed about this he http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-rosenthal-transit-gentrification-metro-ridership-20180220-story.html. That is poor planning on the part of the transit agency. They need to change with the market and shift routes to where potential riders live or move. With buses that is not rocket science. 4. Public transit agencies operate as social service agencies. This is the case in my county. There is little emphasis on trying to get the middle class to give up their cars and take transit. The largest city, San Jose, controls the county transit agency and ensures that the smaller cities do not get the transit that would work to get people out of their cars. Time to vote out some people and vote more competent ones in. The light rail from town to the outskirts is often more than maxed out with bicycles on board. You carry them onto the train car. There are two allowed per end section of a car but often there are three to four. Does anyone enforce the maximum number of bicycles. I've been on those trains where there were more than two bikes per section and no one said anything. Same here but it does become a nuisance to other passengers. It's aggravating if a commuter brushes a bike chain resulting in a black oil stain on the expensive khakis. So we know what needs to be done. They are trying to wing it with a 10% fare reduction but that won't be more than a drop in the bucket. The problem with fare reductions is that for many riders they aren't paying themselves anyway. Their employer pays. So the transit agency can charge less per person but it doesn't increase ridership because fares were not the issue in the first place. Even for self-payers like myself 10% doesn't matter. Actually, the fare in general doesn't matter as long as it isn't outrageous. I am using transit for convenience and environmental reasons. For example, the commuter bus to Sacramento costs $5 which isn't cheap but I'd use it for the return trip if the racks were not inadequate and so limited in the number of bikes. I am not going to take the risk that I get stranded far away from home in the evening. Finally, there is this article from the Onion https://www.theonion.com/report-98-percent-of-u-s-commuters-favor-public-trans-1819565837. Funny, but sadly true. Quote "... to get some of these other cars off the road". Yeah, right. Transit agencies should hold surveys to find out why people do not ride. Most importantly, they need to allow detailed comments _and_ follow up on them. Most people are willing to give their contact information and are allowing to be contacted to discuss some issues brought up. Out here the reason is almost always the same, people and especially families with children do not feel safe on transit. Many of them have tried and vowed to never again. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 2018-08-29 09:50, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/29/2018 10:45 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-28 21:42, John B. Slocomb wrote: One might ask, "why public transportation" when according to current figures the average U.S. family owns 1.968 autos? Typically because they want get to and from work faster. I do it out of environmental consciousness and it increases my cycling range. So far only light rail because the bus racks won't accommodate modern MTB. Y'know, when we bought our _house_, one criterion was that it had to work for transportation by bike. I think if I were buying a _bike_, I'd make sure it worked for transportation by bike. That would include fitting a bus rack, if that were part of my needs. No, first and foremost it has to work on the trails. I tried 26" bikes and they do not feel comfortable. DH versions do but they won't fit the bus racks either. 29" did feel great and 27-1/2" would as well but those weren't popular back when I bought my MTB. 27-1/2" won't fit the bus racks either. So, naturally, I bought a 29" MTB. People in my neighborhood have a simple solution for all that: The pickup truck. Or in my case a small SUV. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Bus racks
On 8/29/2018 1:29 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-29 09:50, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/29/2018 10:45 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-08-28 21:42, John B. Slocomb wrote: One might ask, "why public transportation" when according to current figures the average U.S. family owns 1.968 autos? Typically because they want get to and from work faster. I do it out of environmental consciousness and it increases my cycling range. So far only light rail because the bus racks won't accommodate modern MTB. Y'know, when we bought our _house_, one criterion was that it had to work for transportation by bike. I think if I were buying a _bike_, I'd make sure it worked for transportation by bike.Â* That would include fitting a bus rack, if that were part of my needs. No, first and foremost it has to work on the trails. I tried 26" bikes and they do not feel comfortable. DH versions do but they won't fit the bus racks either. 29" did feel great and 27-1/2" would as well but those weren't popular back when I bought my MTB. 27-1/2" won't fit the bus racks either. So, naturally, I bought a 29" MTB. And yet, so many people find a way... -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Car racks | Owen | Australia | 4 | October 29th 09 09:58 AM |
Racks is racks, right? | Mike Rocket J Squirrel | Techniques | 46 | September 24th 08 02:46 PM |
Racks...Racks...Who needs a Rack??? | [email protected] | Racing | 8 | May 25th 06 07:23 PM |
Racks | Sam Salt | UK | 17 | January 24th 04 05:55 PM |
Racks? | gravelmuncher | Australia | 10 | November 19th 03 03:40 AM |