Where "Safety Inflation" leads

On 10/15/2019 9:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:

snip

I don't doubt your report but since there are more pickups sold than
sedans, it wouldn't surprise me that truck driver behavior spans the
full range from inexplicable to abhorrent, just like every other vehicle
with 2 or more wheels.

https://autoalliance.org/wp-content/...parison_v2.png

The truck part includes SUVs.

On Tuesday, 15 October 2019 11:22:55 UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 10/15/2019 7:20 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Don't make it political. All of us make pronouncements based on our personal experience, and Frank is fundamentally right that on most paved streets, branches are rarely a problem.

Sorry, but when most of us make pronouncements we don't try to
extrapolate our own personal experience onto the rest of the world
unless there's no doubt that it's applicable. And if we happen to make a
mistake and do that, we don't double-down, we gracefully admit the error
and move on.

Some of us may see exceptions to the rule more often than others -- maybe a lot more often. Those people would benefit from a non-StVZO light. Having used a StVZO Luxos B -- a well respected dyno light with reportedly good light output -- it falls short for me in many places, but then again, I often commute on trail or narrow roads with trees and really bad pavement. Most urban riders on MUPs and flat, well paved streets would be well served by a dyno light with cut-off. The people I see on the super-colossal bicycle facility through the South Waterfront with mega lights should be shot -- in a humane fashion, of course. Dynos are perfect for that facility, particularly with all the traffic.

OMG, I would dispute that part about "flat, well paved streets." Are you
familiar with "PCI" Pavement Condition Index? It varies wildly between
cities, even adjacent cities. Ride from Cupertino, where I believe our
average is about 85 now, with only a handful of streets in poor
condition across the border into San Jose which has many streets with a
PCI of 49 or less, and an average of about 70.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/05/02/nearly-400-miles-of-san-jose-road-are-in-bad-shape/

San Francisco is so bad that I stopped using my Brompton there because
the potholes are so big that it could be swallowed up whole.

Well you sure are NOT a good example of that with your Guerrilla Marketing that you do or used to do. I remember vividly your stance on flashlights adapted to be bicycle lights and also your ongoing stance on the use of Rivnuts by the average non-professional.

Cheers

On Tuesday, 15 October 2019 12:07:37 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/15/2019 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 23:19:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/14/2019 10:48 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:23:51 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

Although low hanging branches are very rare in most urban settings and certainly not a justification for retina burning mega lights on city streets and in bicycle facilities. What is needed is a true low-beam/high-beam for bikes used in urban settings -- and maybe even a pulsing secondary light or something to distinguish the bike from cars or fixed light sources on buildings. I would/do use the high beam on the trail sections of my commute or particularly dark sections where tree attacks might be expected.

-- Jay Beattie.

So mount two lamps on the front of the bike somewhere with a small
switch on the handle bars.

Back in the halogen bulb days, I had two headlights mounted on my
commuting bike, for purposes of comparison and other experiments. These
were driven by an ancient Soubitez roller dynamo that's still in use on
another bike.

I had two switches on the handlebar. One could select either headlamp or
both. (They were wired in series.) The other switch controlled the
taillight, so I could see the effect on the headlight(s) of turning it
on and off.

Once headlights like the Cyo were developed, I stopped that
experimenting. I judged the problem solved.

But I suppose if I lived in a town whose mayor couldn't keep the streets
clear of very low branches, I might repeat that experiment.

Well, why not. The new LED lights are so small and light that one
could have several mounted on the handle bars. High beam, low beam,
beam in the middle beam, flash his eyes beam, watch out for the branch
beam. The mind boggles.

There's chatter about new technology for auto headlight beams. Instead
of the currently common scheme of one light source (whether tungsten,
LED or whatever) there would be an array of light sources each focused
on a small area forward of the car. This would be coupled with a vision
system that would instantaneously dim only that portion of the forward
beam that would dazzle an oncoming driver. You'd have high beams
everywhere except where they'd blind motorists.

I haven't read anything about that system mentioning bicyclists or
pedestrians, so I don't know if it would blind them. This would be an
even worse problem in those areas where bike paths and sidewalks have
bicyclists traveling contraflow and close to oncoming cars.

The other night, I did have a problem with a motorist (driving a pickup
truck, naturally) on a quiet, dark residential street. He kept his high
beams and his auxiliary lights on while driving toward me.

I'm sure his bilateral optical system detected our tandem. I'm sure his
jelly-like CPU recognized it as an oncoming bicycle. But his software
lacked the "elementary courtesy" module that should have dimmed his lights.


--
- Frank Krygowski

I detest those newer blue automobile lights as they are so bright they blind bicyclists riding towards them even on a two lane road. I've had it happen so often here in town that I bought a pair of yellow lenses night-driving glasses to wear at night when bicycling.

Cheers

On 10/15/2019 2:47 PM, sms wrote:
On 10/15/2019 9:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:

snip

I don't doubt your report but since there are more pickups
sold than sedans, it wouldn't surprise me that truck
driver behavior spans the full range from inexplicable to
abhorrent, just like every other vehicle with 2 or more
wheels.

https://autoalliance.org/wp-content/...parison_v2.png


The truck part includes SUVs.


Yes, I was looking for a quick simple graphic.

For the last 40 years or so the #1 new vehicle every year
has been either a Chevrolet or a Ford pickup. This is not news.

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

On 10/15/2019 2:47 PM, sms wrote:
On 10/15/2019 9:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:

snip

I don't doubt your report but since there are more pickups
sold than sedans, it wouldn't surprise me that truck
driver behavior spans the full range from inexplicable to
abhorrent, just like every other vehicle with 2 or more
wheels.

https://autoalliance.org/wp-content/...parison_v2.png


The truck part includes SUVs.


actual numbers, typical of any recent year, with either a
Ford or a Chevrolet pickup at #1 and the other one at #2:

https://www.businessinsider.com/best...p-233539-67-18

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

On 10/15/2019 2:55 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2019 11:22:55 UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 10/15/2019 7:20 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Don't make it political. All of us make pronouncements based on our personal experience, and Frank is fundamentally right that on most paved streets, branches are rarely a problem.

Sorry, but when most of us make pronouncements we don't try to
extrapolate our own personal experience onto the rest of the world
unless there's no doubt that it's applicable. And if we happen to make a
mistake and do that, we don't double-down, we gracefully admit the error
and move on.

Some of us may see exceptions to the rule more often than others -- maybe a lot more often. Those people would benefit from a non-StVZO light. Having used a StVZO Luxos B -- a well respected dyno light with reportedly good light output -- it falls short for me in many places, but then again, I often commute on trail or narrow roads with trees and really bad pavement. Most urban riders on MUPs and flat, well paved streets would be well served by a dyno light with cut-off. The people I see on the super-colossal bicycle facility through the South Waterfront with mega lights should be shot -- in a humane fashion, of course. Dynos are perfect for that facility, particularly with all the traffic.

OMG, I would dispute that part about "flat, well paved streets." Are you
familiar with "PCI" Pavement Condition Index? It varies wildly between
cities, even adjacent cities. Ride from Cupertino, where I believe our
average is about 85 now, with only a handful of streets in poor
condition across the border into San Jose which has many streets with a
PCI of 49 or less, and an average of about 70.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/05/02/nearly-400-miles-of-san-jose-road-are-in-bad-shape/

San Francisco is so bad that I stopped using my Brompton there because
the potholes are so big that it could be swallowed up whole.

Well you sure are NOT a good example of that with your Guerrilla Marketing that you do or used to do. I remember vividly your stance on flashlights adapted to be bicycle lights and also your ongoing stance on the use of Rivnuts by the average non-professional.

Cheers


Perhaps your piercing arguments have changed his mind.

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

On 10/15/2019 3:03 AM, sms wrote:

snip

Jay: please buy this and report back.

One thing I didn't notice which is a great feature "it can be topped up
itself while in use." So you can use an external battery pack, or you
can charge it from a dynamo using an AC/DC to DC Step Down Converter
such as https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00DF4JOIM. You could actually
build one of these for about $10 but for those not up to that kind of
task this isn't outrageously expensive.

On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 2:14:59 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/15/2019 2:47 PM, sms wrote:
On 10/15/2019 9:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:

snip

I don't doubt your report but since there are more pickups
sold than sedans, it wouldn't surprise me that truck
driver behavior spans the full range from inexplicable to
abhorrent, just like every other vehicle with 2 or more
wheels.

https://autoalliance.org/wp-content/...parison_v2.png


The truck part includes SUVs.


actual numbers, typical of any recent year, with either a
Ford or a Chevrolet pickup at #1 and the other one at #2:

https://www.businessinsider.com/best...p-233539-67-18

O.T.: What boggles my mind about all these SUVs and macho-mobiles is that they go over speed humps -- humps, not bumps -- at 2mph. Massive suspension, and they can't handle a hump. I about slammed into the back of an Outback this morning that basically stopped at at a succession of speed humps. The road was too narrow to go around, so I blew him off on the downhill. https://tinyurl.com/y3zwnblp Spin that around -- its 16%. I took the lane to the left. https://tinyurl.com/y5ky92p7 I gave the stop sign a liberal interpretation as a suggestion rather than a command -- which will be legal Jan 1. https://bikeportland.org/2019/06/25/...-yields-301829 I'm a forward thinking individual. I didn't want to get stuck behind the guy over the succession of humps down the road. https://tinyurl.com/yyegh7gu

-- Jay Beattie.

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 08:29:31 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 10/14/2019 9:42 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 06:04:54 -0700 (PDT), Zen Cycle
wrote:

On Sunday, October 13, 2019 at 8:13:56 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 05:39:46 -0700 (PDT), Zen Cycle
wrote:

On Saturday, October 12, 2019 at 7:25:52 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:

The City also does tree trimming, in fact I need to call about a tree
that's hanging low over the shoulder of a road I ride on frequently and
that I have to duck to get under. Sadly, we don't have panel trucks
driving right next to the curb to knock down low-hanging branches
(someone on r.b.t. once insisted that there was no need for lights to
illuminate a little up so a cyclists could see low-hanging branches
because trucks would knock such branches down, writing "Many small
trucks exceed seven feet. One or two trucks driving down a lane will
take out any branches hazardous to any cyclist").

On the narrow,winding secondary roads in new england that were once merely cow paths or logging roads, low branches and overgrown vegetation are a very common occurrence. Most local towns seem content to let large trucks do the 'trimming', and it's a rare occurrence when I see any DPW vehicles out trimming branches. The only exceptions are blind corners and intersections where visibility for cars to see oncoming traffic is a problem, and even that goes for a couple of years without maintenance sometimes. I'm sure Frank and John B's experience of their municipalities performing regular maintenance is true, but that doesn't happen everywhere.


Gee, I grew up in New England and I don't remember any secondary roads
that were cow paths or even logging roads :-)

I doubt that you would remember them as such, unless you have a memory that predates your existence.

Tell me more about the cow paths that grew into roads and highways? I
really can't imagine why in the world anyone would want to have a road
from the South Pasture to the back of the barn. As for logging roads,
well that were usually sort of single ended. From the paved road to
somewhere up in the woods. Maybe well enough to drive a few yards off
the highway if you wanted to "have it off" with your girlfriend in
the back seat but hardly a means to get anywhere.

As for memory, well one can recount things that they saw with their
own eyes with a certain amount of veracity. But perhaps I should have
specified that my memory also included things that were told to me by
others. My maternal grandfather was born in 1875 and I would assume
that by the time he was ten he probably was reasonably alert and in
later years he made his fortune in the lumber business and he never
told any stories about logging roads and cow paths turning into roads.
So we are back to, say, 1885.

No, I think that you exaggerate :-)


Quite the apposite and
some of the roads must have dated back to the late 1700's for sure
(the town was chartered in 1761). In fact we lived on a dirt,
secondary road, and there wasn't any low branches and overhanging
vegetation. Big tall maple and elm trees, yes, but no bushes.
http://www.happyvermont.com/2015/10/...ds-to-explore/
Although the road pictured is actually in the next state it is typical
of the "secondary" roads I grew up on. Note the lack of overhanging
branches.

All I can tell you john, is that avoiding low branches and bushes is a daily occurrence on my rides. Like frank, just because it isn't your experience doesn't mean it's no one's experience.

I wouldn't argue that where you go there are overhanging limbs and
bushes. Mostly I'm arguing that New England roads did not evolve from
cow paths and logging roads, although I will admit that saying so does
add a bit of color to one's otherwise rather drab tales.
--
cheers,

John B.


It's unclear but not certainly wrong:
http://www.celebrateboston.com/strange/cow-paths.htm

Well, some of it is wrong. The idea that narrow roads and houses with
an upper story overhanging the road was done to defeat Indian attacks
is ludicrous. Read up on London in the 17th and 18th centuries and the
same conditions existed and it is extremely doubtful if Londoners even
knew what an Indian was :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Monday, October 14, 2019 at 6:51:33 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 10/14/2019 9:18 AM, wrote:

snip

Frank has trouble empathizing with someone else's situation and needs. That the reason he getting on the nerves of some of us including me.

Has he ever said, "Oh, I didn't realize that others had an issue with
xyz, I've never experienced it. I stand corrected?"

I suppose not. Since he knows everything about everything, how everyone
else should live their lives, and every issue to do with bicycling in
the entire world, there's never been a need to make such a statement.

That has been his entire work product on this site. He isn't mechanically inclined so he thinks that a 1948 steel bicycle is the same as a 2008. And he will argue all day long that there's no difference. He is obviously a really tiny person - 5'4 or smaller and it has never crossed his mind that most Americans are midgets like himself.