Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Why does John Forester have to pass a beauty contest?

It's pretty obvious that John Forester is here posting because some of us have made some stark accusations publicly, and if shots were being fired at me, I'd like to be close enough so I could shoot back a little.

I've said before I don't always like Mr. Forester's sometimes abrasive style of communication, but I've also said that this trait has it's benefits. He's a fighter, and that may be what it takes to stand up to people who want to brush cyclists aside, off into the gutter.

Now this part of his personality is not politically-correct enough for some of us. But it's exactly what was needed at one time, and probably still is. He's a hammer, and you don't want to use a hammer on a screw, but try hammering a nail with something else.

Frankly, his straight-forward style worked well in getting me out on the road, and I surely haven't been sorry. If he isn't a perfect angel, I won't be disappointed.

It's pretty obvious that John Forester is here posting because some of us have made some stark accusations publicly, and if shots were being fired at me, I'd like to be close enough so I could shoot back a little.

I've said before I don't always like Mr. Forester's sometimes abrasive style of communication, but I've also said that this trait has it's benefits. He's a fighter, and that may be what it takes to stand up to people who want to brush cyclists aside, off into the gutter.
'fraid that don't wash, LittleBigMan. Forester is not defending cyclists in this forum, he's defending his previous work by shooting the same blanks (of faulty and misleading risk analysis, sophistic arguments and psycho babble), he's been firing for the last 30 years. Smokescreens of obfuscation, straw men/ad hominem arguments, stereotypes, exaggerated enemies, etc won't make those blanks anymore effective at shooting down righteous criticism.

I think part of the issue on how others feel about him is because they themselves are the same way or similar. When this happens there is conflict. Either because we do not like seeing ourselves in other people or because 2 people with the same personallity because 2 of the same type can clash. Those with an aggressive unrelenting personality prefere to associate with people who are more subdued & not as aggressive.

Who IS John Forrester? I hear lots about him but dont have any idea who he is!

'fraid that don't wash, LittleBigMan. Forester is not defending cyclists in this forum, he's defending his previous work by shooting the same blanks (of faulty and misleading risk analysis, sophistic arguments and psycho babble), he's been firing for the last 30 years. Smokescreens of obfuscation, straw men/ad hominem arguments, stereotypes, exaggerated enemies, etc won't make those blanks anymore effective at shooting down righteous criticism.
You're entitled to your opinion.

I can only go by personal experience on this. Everyone else will too, I'm sure.

When I started riding my bike to work years ago, only one strategy made it practical: those put forth as part of vehicular cycling. Bike facilities were either non-existant or totally impractical for my needs--there is one path/route that goes from Stone Mountain to Atlanta, but it's almost 20 miles long, very slow, and has many tricky or blind intersections.

Principles put forth by John Forester (the curmudgeon) were almost solely responsible for enabling me to discover the great joys of bike commuting at a time when all the "advocates" were still saying I couldn't do that in Atlanta because we still needed more bike facilities. In fact, 10 years later, the "advocates" are still saying that.

With all the negative publicity he's gotten on these forums, I'd like to say publicly, thanks John.

You're entitled to your opinion.

I can only go by personal experience on this. Everyone else will too, I'm sure.
Personal opinion and personal experience are the best reference for reporting your personal opinion and experience; and personal anecdotes, too.

Personal opinion and personal experience (and personal agendas) are not a very "scientific basis" for recording/evaluating "evidence" about cyclist behavior or safety records, reaching conclusions about comparative risk, and making psychological evaluations of the entire population of cyclists, would be cyclists, and never were cyclists.

Personal opinion and personal experience are the best reference for reporting your personal opinion and experience; and personal anecdotes, too.

Personal opinion and personal experience (and personal agendas) are not a very "scientific basis" for recording/evaluating "evidence" about cyclist behavior or safety records, reaching conclusions about comparative risk, and making psychological evaluations of the entire population of cyclists, would be cyclists, and never were cyclists.
This has zero to do with my contention that John Forester's vehicular cycling techniques, and his insistance that roads without bike lanes can be ridden safely, were responsible for releasing me from the fear of traffic and motivated me to ride to work, for which I am happy to express my gratitude publicly.

Once again, if I had listened to the other bicycling advocates in Atlanta years ago, I would have believed that it was impossible to ride my bike to work in Atlanta.

So, comparing the results in my individual case (not the entire population of cyclists, as you put it,) Forester's vehicular cycling technique achieved results for me that our local bike facility advocates still cannot, not a decade later.

I judge my own case by results.

This has zero to do with my contention that John Forester's vehicular cycling techniques, and his insistance that roads without bike lanes can be ridden safely, were responsible for releasing me from the fear of traffic and motivated me to ride to work, for which I am happy to express my gratitude publicly.

Once again, if I had listened to the other bicycling advocates in Atlanta years ago, I would have believed that it was impossible to ride my bike to work in Atlanta.

So, comparing the results in my individual case (not the entire population of cyclists, as you put it,) Forester's vehicular cycling technique achieved results for me that our local bike facility advocates still cannot, not a decade later.

I judge my own case by results.
Your case appears to be that reading Forester's insistence that roads can be be ridden without bike lanes was the catalyst for your cycling freedom. Most people can recognize that fact by opening their eyes. In fact, who documents that they can't?
Preferences and desirability are another story.

Your case appears to be that reading Forester's insistence that roads can be be ridden without bike lanes was the catalyst for your cycling freedom. Most people can recognize that fact by opening their eyes. In fact, who documents that they can't?
Preferences and desirability are another story.
Having ridding a bicycle for transportation for much longer than I, perhaps you take for granted that which you are accustomed to. In my case, it took more than just "opening my eyes" to get me to understand that I could use the same road to ride my bike that I used to drive my car. For you to minimize that only shows that your frame of reference is limited to people like you who already mastered cycling techniques and conquered any fear of motor traffic (perhaps you never had any fear to begin with.)

So your case is different, I'm glad for you. I truly am, and I having seen some of the routes you are forced to use to get to work on your bike, I understand why you feel bike paths would not limit you, but rather expand your freedoms. I'm not closed-minded on this subject.

Please don't take my gratitude for what I believe Forester did for me as taking sides in some great cosmic debate over bike facilities around the world. I can only speak for myself, and I have done so honestly.

Your case appears to be that reading Forester's insistence that roads can be be ridden without bike lanes was the catalyst for your cycling freedom. Most people can recognize that fact by opening their eyes. In fact, who documents that they can't?
Preferences and desirability are another story.

Search for the word "suicide" or "suicidal" in this forum and you will find many BF posters using those words to refer to riding on arterial roads without bike lanes. I would take that as evidence that people, even those who already ride bikes in traffic, believe that those roads can NOT be used by a cyclist. Now, look at the rest of the population who believe cycling in any amount of traffic is suicide and take a guess at what their opinion of riding arterials would be.

Please don't take my gratitude for what I believe Forester did for me as taking sides in some great cosmic debate over bike facilities around the world. I can only speak for myself, and I have done so honestly.
If Forester's book helped you out and prompted further enjoyment of your bicycling experiences, then indeed your gratitude is justified. I really don't feel as if I'm in any cosmic debate about "bike facilities." Only exposing (for what they are,) the bogus and sophistic "Scientific Processes" being referenced as "evidence" of the "Scientific Basis" for many, most, and perhaps all of Forester & Associates quantitative claims and statements about cycling risk and cyclists' motivations.

Removed the (funny) off topic posts. moderator Rev.Chuck

Removed the (funny) off topic posts. moderator Rev.Chuck
I'm sure you guys are still laughing at them even now. :D

You probably loaded them onto your hard drive. ;)

I'm sure you guys are still laughing at them even now. :D

You probably loaded them onto your hard drive. ;)
I've got my hard drive filled with better stuff than that. No room for Chipcom Man porn.

Man, we can't even have fun in here. Did someone whine to the mods. about this? I don't imagine Chipcom did. I'm beginning to think the mods. eat coal & produce diamonds. That or it is the thin skins in here that do.

Man, we can't even have fun in here. Did someone whine to the mods. about this? I don't imagine Chipcom did. I'm beginning to think the mods. eat coal & produce diamonds. That or it is the thin skins in here that do.
I reported it to the mods. Not being thin-skinned, just practical. Sort of like closing the door when you want to have a serious discussion.

Normally, I joke around quite a bit, too. :)

I reported it to the mods. Not being thin-skinned, just practical. Sort of like closing the door when you want to have a serious discussion.

Normally, I joke around quite a bit, too. :)

You should have left well enough alone dude. It will probably be the only funny thing that happens to this thread. Now it is back to the regular boring ass programming the mods. created for us in this sub-forum dedicated to & created for JF & his disciples.

You should have left well enough alone dude. It will probably be the only funny thing that happens to this thread. Now it is back to the regular boring ass programming the mods. created for us in this sub-forum dedicated to & created for JF & his disciples.

It's his thread and now you are disrupting it even further...just mind your business, k?

It's his thread and now you are disrupting it even further...just mind your business, k?

Please tell me this is satire.

You should have left well enough alone dude. It will probably be the only funny thing that happens to this thread. Now it is back to the regular boring ass programming the mods. created for us in this sub-forum dedicated to & created for JF & his disciples.
Just change the channel, dude. :)

Yes, please---another thread about arguing over the argument over the big thread with the big argument.

You're entitled to your opinion.

I can only go by personal experience on this. Everyone else will too, I'm sure.

When I started riding my bike to work years ago, only one strategy made it practical: those put forth as part of vehicular cycling. Bike facilities were either non-existant or totally impractical for my needs--there is one path/route that goes from Stone Mountain to Atlanta, but it's almost 20 miles long, very slow, and has many tricky or blind intersections.

Principles put forth by John Forester (the curmudgeon) were almost solely responsible for enabling me to discover the great joys of bike commuting at a time when all the "advocates" were still saying I couldn't do that in Atlanta because we still needed more bike facilities. In fact, 10 years later, the "advocates" are still saying that.

With all the negative publicity he's gotten on these forums, I'd like to say publicly, thanks John.
I have to agree with you, based also on my personal experience.

Other than VC, there is no other effective system for riding on roads with cars. Systems that present street cycling as an "art" imply that only those with natural talent can master it, and all others are forced to ride in the bike lanes.

OTOH, turning cycling into a concrete system (like Forester did with VC) implies that anybody can learn to do ride with the cars. When I started riding, JF's book was the first one I read, and it's still the best. It gave me the courage and the skills set to hit the road, and it's served me well now for many thousands of miles of riding.

I think the best course is to pick and choose from Forester's writings. Clearly, most modern cyclists would reject a lot of his outdated advice on bicycle mechanics. Likewise, a lot of cyclists will reject his ideas about bike facilities and advocacy. But when it comes to the nuts and bolts of how to ride a bicycle with cars, Forester be beat.

I have to agree with you, based also on my personal experience.

Other than VC, there is no other effective system for riding on roads with cars. Systems that present street cycling as an "art" imply that only those with natural talent can master it, and all others are forced to ride in the bike lanes.

OTOH, turning cycling into a concrete system (like Forester did with VC) implies that anybody can learn to do ride with the cars. When I started riding, JF's book was the first one I read, and it's still the best. It gave me the courage and the skills set to hit the road, and it's served me well now for many thousands of miles of riding.

I think the best course is to pick and choose from Forester's writings. Clearly, most modern cyclists would reject a lot of his outdated advice on bicycle mechanics. Likewise, a lot of cyclists will reject his ideas about bike facilities and advocacy. But when it comes to the nuts and bolts of how to ride a bicycle with cars, Forester be beat.

Thank you. Finally, some common ground. All you people out there: pick up Effective Cycling; read chapters 4 and 5. Avoid chapter 6. Chapter 4: indispensable and got me into being a better cyclist. Chapter 5: entertaining at least. Chapter 6: all the controversial social commentary. All the rest of the book: pretty much obsolete.

If a transportational cyclist reads chapter 4 and nothing else, he or she will get most of what is necessary to know to practice vehicular cycling in traffic.

I am simply amazed that people need/needed a book or a need/needed some instructional course to enable them to ride a bicycle on the road.
Did you just throw yourself out there and hope for the best, learning from you mistakes?

Many drivers take courses and/or read to learn how to drive a motorvehicle more safely in traffic, why not somthing similar for a bicycle?

Al

Did you just throw yourself out there and hope for the best, learning from you mistakes?


Yup, that pretty much covers what happened the day after Dad took the training wheels off. For those who started riding as adults, they usually already had some kind of driver training and experience driving, so were far from being ignorant of the rules of the road or at any major risk by learning how to apply them to riding a bicycle. They also have places off-road to practice, like empty parking lots, parks, trails and those nasty bike paths and MUPs. ;)

Nice hyperbole.

I merely road my bicycle sensibly, asserting myself when necessary, as most cyclists seem to do.

Isn't it amazing that so many folks are able to ride their bikes on the road without having to take a class or study a book before venturing out there?




Many driving courses are prep courses for getting a driver's license
Cars require a unique skillset that needs to be taught while many bicyclists have been riding since a very young age.
Vehicle dynamics are more complicated that bicycle dynamics.
The potential harm that can be caused by a motor vehicle is much greater than the potential harm that can be caused by a bicycle.


Those a few reasons for motor vehicle courses.

I never wrote that books and courses shouldn't be available for cyclists.

I'm just amazed that people actually feel that they need them in order to venture onto pavement.

Depends on "the pavement..." a nice small town with wide streets and 25-35MPH light traffic probably doesn't call for much... except basic knowledge of traffic laws.

Learning how to ride in dense 45-60MPH traffic with mutiple lanes and including negotiating left turns might take more skill. Whether one learns in a class, or by reading a book, or by riding with more learned friends doesn't really matter... but there are some skills that one should aquire before attempting some tasks.

As a younger kid my dad taught be some basic traffic and bike rules before I ventured far from home (to the playground 2mi away)
Basically: Ride on right, don't weave between parked cars, don't ride to close to shoulder so I can be seen, look back before turning and other stuff. He rode with us to make sure we could ride in low to moderate traffic. A class basically.
More recently before riding in heavy traffic, I looked up laws, read a bit on the net. Reading.
Of course I could have ridden without the classes or reading, but it sure helped me learn a bit and think about what I was doing - the rest is experience which was most valuable.
Al

I used "trial and error" to learn how to share roads with motorists over a 40 year period. Then I started reading books about cycling, of which one of the best is Mr. Forester's Effective Cycling". As I read the book, I started thinking about things that would have been different if I had read his book FIRST, and practiced the techniques Mr. Forester suggests.

Just one example. Mr. Forester suggests practicing panic stops. On Pages 205 to 207 of his book, he describes in detail the technique for making the shortest possible stop, and insists a cyclist practice that technique in a safe place.

Because I have been riding a bike for five decades, NOBODY needs to tell me how to brake, or that I need practice. Of course, there was the day I had just bought a new mountain bike with a new braking system that was different than any of my prior bikes. As I entered an intersection, a car ran a stop sign at around 30 mph. I squeezed hard on the brakes, locked up the front wheel, and went flying over the bars into the middle of the intersection. Luckily, I landed behind the speeding car, and not in front of it.

Two boys, around age eight or ten were standing on the corner. As I stood up, I heard one boy say to the other: "You think an old guy would know how to ride a bike better than that". And, indeed he was correct.

I now follow Mr. Forester's advice. On each of my bikes, I practice both emergency "evasion" drills and panic stops in empty parking lots. Each of my bikes has different handling characterics and different braking characterics. With practice, I can easily avoid dime-sized bits of metal on the road without going more than an inch or two off my original line of travel. With practice, I can stop each of my bikes smoothly, without locking the brakes.

I also insist that my nephew and his friends practice such techniques in parking lots before I will allow them to ride with me in the streets. That practice has greatly improved their ability to deal with hazards in traffic.

His book has dozens of specific ideas for safer riding, especially when riding in and among heavy motor traffic. I watch other cyclists closely, and it is clear from their behavior that it would be a rare cyclist that understands even 10% of what they need to know and do to ride safely in motor traffic. The fact that these guys have been riding for ten, twenty, or thirty years has given them a false sense of confidence. Riding poorly for thirty years is "experience", but it is not helpful experience.

More recently before riding in heavy traffic, I looked up laws, read a bit on the net. Reading.
Of course I could have ridden without the classes or reading, but it sure helped me learn a bit and think about what I was doing - the rest is experience which was most valuable.
Al

Sometimes it's that experience that helps you to understand and apply what you read. I remember how transistor theory kicked my butt when learning it the first few times in various schools, but when I went back to school after working as a technician for a while, everything snapped into place.

They ***** when you mod. But they ***** even more when you don't.

I just ride as well, mostly two lane blacktop 45-55mph. Personally I would love a little quiet greenway.

You want a bike to teach you about brakes? Try a recumbent tricycle. No front and rear brakes. Instead you have left and right brakes. DO NOT panic when stopping a trike!

Some people need a book to tell them to learn about their new bike's limits, others respond a lot better to spoken words, and others learn best by doing.

P.S. I'm sad our pics were remove. I got a good laugh.

Nope, I did not read a book on the trike, except for the owner's manual.

Back on the subject...

Don't you think it matters if you are going to ascribe to someone an status of exalted "bicycle advocate" that they actually advocate for bicyclists?

I mean, what do you think about a man who will come and speak for an organization that now is filing police complaints about cyclists riding in the streets and slowing motorists down.

If I give him the benefit of the doubt, he's just careless about the organizations that hire him, not doing his homework or whatever. If I'm feeling suspicious, I see a conspiracy to dupe real bicyclists into advocating for pro-motoring groups while accusing real bicycle advocates of advocating for pro-motoring groups when they actually advocate for the rights of bicyclists.

Since I've observed the "JF takes on BF" topic, the way that JF dodges and avoids answering any straight on questions about things like this raises my suspicions that he's not an honest person, and that he's aware of his duplicitousness, that he's aware he's a pro-car advocate in disguise. My suspicious side is winning over my benefit of the doubt side.

In short (too late), John Forester needs to pass a beauty contest because so many people around here believe he's some kind of bicycle advocate god. Before anyone puts that much faith in someone, they should check him out, don't you think?

No thanks. I learned how to brake by riding normal bikes.

BTW, did you have to read a book/take a course and get a merit badge/certificate of completion to ride that contraption?


WTF is your problem with recumbents? I ride one too. You want to take someone on for riding a recumbent take me on, leave that sweet heart of a woman, Diane aka sbhikes, alone bubba! I don't ride a trike, but it is a 'bent. So what the hell is your issue with them?

I am so sick & tired of jackasses who ride wedgies thinking their all high & mighty & believe all the myths they hear about recumbents. You do know a recumbent is a normal bike too, right? There's one myth dispelled for you, anymore questions?

If anything is abnormal it is riding on something with an wedge shaped object stuck up your ass. Maybe that is your problem. Unless get some kind of perverse pleasure from it.

This still amazes me. I've ridden those types of streets a great deal, for many years. I also see many other cyclists riding those same streets.

Are you suggesting that I, and the other folks who are riding those same type of streets sans indoctrination, should have read a book or taken a class before turning the cranks on pavement?

The posts that imply that someone needs to pass some kind of uber-fredly test by virtue of reading a book or taking a class to learn the secret handshakes of riding a bicycle on the road strike me as very odd.

I think that some people get wrapped up in an affected "mystique" of something that is quite ordinary and that is easily accomplished by thousands of the "uninitiated" folks on a daily basis. That something is simply riding a bicycle on the road.
You must be a very rare breed, Peter, because I hardly ever encounter cyclists who can manage fast/dense traffic very effectively. It's just not expected in our culture.

Who IS John Forrester? I hear lots about him but dont have any idea who he is!

Google him.

Maybe you suffer from some strange Forester-esque phobia?

Not rare at all. I see many people handling traffic just fine.

Would you mind sharing your technique with us? It sounds like you were born with the confidence that some of us only managed after years/thousands of miles of cycling.

My "problem" with recumbents is that I am unable to grow an enormous scraggly grey beard, nor do I have a comb-over, nor am I comfortable with constantly having a food-stained shirt, even if it has a pocket protector full of enough markers to make a rainbow at a moments notice (you can never be too prepared).

BTW, sweet "wedgie = ****" reference. Projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection), perhaps?

One real issue that I have with recumbents is that they absolutely, positively suck off-road, despite frequently sporting such cute little flags to let normal people know that there's someone lying on their back trying to ride a bike down the street.

Wedgie has nothing to do with any kind of **** reference. A wedgie bike is a diamond frame with the wedge shape saddle, which most if not all diamond frame bikes have.

Not all 'bent rdiers on on their back when riding. Do some research before you open your mouth on this dude. Mine is a Vision R40. That style & model is not a low racer.

When you say off road do you mean single track, etc.? If you do off course you can't take a 'bent off road, I never said you could. But then again you can't take a road bike on a single track either. Unless you don't care about the wheels, rims, etc. BTW I think it was Cannondale who made an single track recumbent. Don't know how easy it is to ride it on single track but I believe they were the ones who built one. Do not know if they still do.

You can how ever ride a recumbent on a lime stone & even a cinder surface trail, I have & had no problem with it. On dirt or gravel roads it depends on the condition of it. Wider tires with more agressive tread can be purchased for a recumbent.

Nice of you to stereotype recumbent riders. Yet another myth. I'm 35 jackass, still have all of my hair & do not grow a beard. A majority of 'bent riders I've seen do not fit the profile you think they do.

Of all the 'bent riders I've encountered only a handfull have the flag. So there is another myth dispelled.

So let's see that is 6 myths dispelled now. They are the single track/off road, wedgie, tires, all recumbent riders lay on their back when riding, flag & rider profile. Anymore questions?

You know it is better to keep your mouth shut & be thought a fool then open it & remove all doubt when you're talking about a subject you may know nothing about.

The answer to the question in the thread title is, quite simply, that John Forester doesn't have to pass a beauty contest. John Forester chose to take on bikeforum posters on his website and he chose to respond in the "John Forester taks on BF Posters" thread. I don't think he's accomplished much besides fanning the flames a little and, perhaps, confirming some of the things that have been said about his personality and his work. He might sell a few more books to people who want to see what all the fuss is about.

By the way, John Forester is a public figure. His public personna is fair game. I've seen much worse said about other public figures. It happens fairly frequently on another forum I frequent. Hardly ever does anyone bother to respond (and probably just make things worse if they do). One person, even more controversial than JF, was asked about some comments made about them and they just laughed. It comes with the territory.

If JF is concerned about what gets said on an interenet message board, that's his problem.

Welcome to hell, Rev_Chuck.

I don't like the way john forester speaks for and to a pro-sprawl, auto-centric advocacy group that encourages suburban sprawl and little to no bike infrastructure. john loves it;

He fails the 'bike advocate' litmus test of advocating for more bicycling thru the use of community enhancements.

john forester failed a crucial segment of the beauty contesy when he expressed apologist allegiance to "near perfect" drivers in the "forester takes on BF" thread.

Taking a stance drivers are "near perfect" is a ludicrous misstatement of todays' road conditions, indicates john forester doesn't ride in traffic much anymore, and fails to see the growing, widespread problem of dangerous, distracted, cellphone talking texting, manovelent, agressive or plain out anti-bicyclist drivers on the roads today.

john forester needs to meet scrutiny of a much higher standard as he is considered 'expert' in his field; his platform gets him downright disqualified by this judge at the beuaty contest.

Does riding a road bike make me gay? Maybe it's the long blonde wig I wear to keep drivers from hitting me. hm. at least I finally stopped wearing the stilletto heels. they kept getting caught in my drive train.

Rando, I've said it before and I'll say it again. The best way to ride with heels is to use PowerGrips on your pedals. :p ;) When will you guys ever listen? :rolleyes:

Does riding a road bike make me gay? Maybe it's the long blonde wig I wear to keep drivers from hitting me. hm. at least I finally stopped wearing the stilletto heels. they kept getting caught in my drive train.

I'd probably be a lot more stylish and neat if I were gay. O, well.

I know very well what the term "wedgie bike" means.

If you didn't intend for "wedge shaped object stuck up your ass...Unless get some kind of perverse pleasure from it" to be some homophobic crack, what did you mean instead?



NEWSFLASH: It was a stereotype, just like the rest of the post. It was tongue-in-cheek and unfortunately you apparently have a simply enormous inferiority complex about the type of bike that you ride and couldn't understand the absolute over-the-top nature of my post. BTW, I've seen rigs like your as well. I would describe your rig (sweet air horn and pepper spray BTW!) as something that you would see at the circus, being ridden by a costumed spider monkey on a high wire.



Of course you didn't. However, you did ask me what my "problem" was with recumbents. That was the answer John.



Guess again Captain Low Racer!

http://www.paradigmhosting.net/images/hakkalugi.jpg

That bike has been ridden extensively on singletrack and the "wheels, rims, etc." are doing just fine. Side note from the redundancy department--> the rim is part of a wheel.




No way! That sounds absolutely thrilling! How do you cope with the rush that you get as you tootle along those trails, with the cinders spraying from your itsy-bitsy tires and the wind languidly blowing the locks of your beard to and fro?



Sage advice. Perhaps you should follow it.

You seem to have a great deal of your self-worth tied up in the type of bicycle that you ride. Just an observation.

You obviously have issues with people who ride recumbents. Too bad for you, kind fo feel sorry for ya. You believe the myths about them & stereo type, again that is so sad.

Argueing with you about this is like argueing with a pig, it goes no where & annoys the pig. So until you get your head out of your ass about recumbents I'm done for now. I'm not conceding, unless you feel you have to win this one, if you do, fine I concede, you won, I could care less.

Hase makes a recumbent delta trike for offroading if you are interested. http://www.hasebikes.com/ens/mtbkett/index.php It looks fun. KMX also makes BMX-influenced trikes. http://www.kmxus.com/experiencecenter.php

I have a recumbent bike and trike and an ordinary mountain bike which I've set up for commuting. A bike is a bike, but each kind has its benefits and negatives. It makes no sense to call anyone names for the bikes they ride because you have no idea what else may be in that person's stable.

It does make sense, however, to judge a man by his actions.

I don't see how (continuing) to insulting someone with stereotypes and beyond is considered humor especially if the recipient doesn't think its funny.

(I'll step away now, stupid of me to get involved between a playground name calling game)

I don't see how (continuing) to insulting someone with stereotypes and beyond is considered humor especially if the recipient doesn't think its funny.

(I'll step away now, stupid of me to get involved between a playground name calling game)

You're a gay doo-doo head :p

You're a gay doo-doo head
No you are:p

If I have to get out of this chair, someone's gonna get it!:p

Wedgie has nothing to do with any kind of **** reference. A wedgie bike is a diamond frame with the wedge shape saddle, which most if not all diamond frame bikes have.

Not all 'bent rdiers on on their back when riding. Do some research before you open your mouth on this dude. Mine is a Vision R40. That style & model is not a low racer.

When you say off road do you mean single track, etc.? If you do off course you can't take a 'bent off road, I never said you could. But then again you can't take a road bike on a single track either. Unless you don't care about the wheels, rims, etc. BTW I think it was Cannondale who made an single track recumbent. Don't know how easy it is to ride it on single track but I believe they were the ones who built one. Do not know if they still do.

You can how ever ride a recumbent on a lime stone & even a cinder surface trail, I have & had no problem with it. On dirt or gravel roads it depends on the condition of it. Wider tires with more agressive tread can be purchased for a recumbent.

Nice of you to stereotype recumbent riders. Yet another myth. I'm 35 jackass, still have all of my hair & do not grow a beard. A majority of 'bent riders I've seen do not fit the profile you think they do.

Of all the 'bent riders I've encountered only a handfull have the flag. So there is another myth dispelled.

So let's see that is 6 myths dispelled now. They are the single track/off road, wedgie, tires, all recumbent riders lay on their back when riding, flag & rider profile. Anymore questions?

You know it is better to keep your mouth shut & be thought a fool then open it & remove all doubt when you're talking about a subject you may know nothing about.
I'm surprised that you of all people would fail to recognize a troll.
;)