Classic & Vintage - A rookie meets the "Widowmaker"

A had a friend ask a favor last week... her husband wants to try out cycling, but she wanted to borrow one of my bikes for him to test out before they go drop the bucks on a new ride for him. So I said "OK"... and decided that I'd let him use my mountain bike for a couple of weeks.

So last Sunday afternoon I loaded it into the van and took it over to their house. The bike is a 1995 Trek 950... I rebuilt everything on it myself and it's a sweet ride. I figured he'd enjoy toodling around his neighborhood on it, and the big tires would eliminate worries about pinch flats or potholes. What could possibly go wrong?

I explained the shifters and such... and he climbed aboard for a quick spin. I expressed my dismay that he was riding it in flip flops... and told him to be careful not to hurt his bare feet on the toe clips. He pedaled down the driveway and back... and zoomed toward where his wife and I stood. He approached us and grabbed a heaping fist full of front brakes.

As he flew over the handlebars, I realized that I prolly shoulda warned him that the brakes actually WORK. He ended up with road rash on both knees and elbows... he also cut his toes when his naked feet got tangled up in the toe clips. He got blood on my shiny new MKS toe clips...

So my friend called me this morning and told me that her hubby was ready to return my bicycle... now dubbed "The Widowmaker"... apparently he is still sore from the crash and doesn't want to ride any more.

Oh well... he's a big sissy anyways.

So the lesson is: When you loan a bike to a rookie rider, you need to tech them how the bike shifts and goes forward. But don't forget to teach them how to stop too.

He pedaled down the driveway and back... and zoomed toward where his wife and I stood. He approached us and grabbed a heaping fist full of front brakes.oh wow If this was one of my buddies I would be laughing too hard to even help them up. :lol:

"Smooth Move, Ex-Lax" :lol:

If you had loaned him an old road bike instead, he could have grabbed a fist full of brakes, but the outcome might have been quite different as he hurtled back to where you were standing. :eek:

Hilarious.. I have friends just like that.

Most novice riders are used to an improperly adjusted bike where the brake lever must travel 1" before the pads touch the rim. My rim is true to within +/-0.003" under normal use. Therefore, the gap between the pad and the rim is only 0.02" to 0.03". A light tap on the level is sufficient to bleed-off speed.

On my mule I have short reach brake levers and canti brakes that are adjusted properly and have fresh shoes. The front brake is so strong that if applying even when walking the bike, unless the rear brake is applied as well, the rear wheel gets off the ground (even at 1 mph). I use this as a show and tell to people whom either let ride my bikes or sell bikes to. What I tell them is: always use only the rear brake if you want to slow down and if you want to use the front brake, like to come to a complete stop, you always have to use the rear brake as well... I think that the little demo I give makes them understand.

Most novice riders are

...a menace to anything around them.

-Kurt

it's not like you gave this guy a bike with road brake levers and downtube shifters. the only thing easier would be a single speed and coaster brake.

I had a friend ask a favor last week... her husband wants to try out cycling, but she wanted to borrow one of my bikes for him to test out before they go drop the bucks on a new ride for him. ...

So my friend called me this morning and told me that her hubby was ready to return my bicycle... now dubbed "The Widowmaker"... apparently he is still sore from the crash and doesn't want to ride any more.


Your story makes it sound like the guy's an idiot, but you know, I suspect it was your friend who wanted him riding the bike, and he wasn't that interested. So this happened, much to everyone's surprise, and in terms of marital collateral, he's earned pretty well; and he doesn't have to worry about this subject coming up for a while. So... big sissy yes; complete fool, not so much.

“It's just like riding a bike, you never _______”

“It's just like riding a bike, you never _______”

....learned in the first place

What a sissy boy.

Everyone let's practice:
Can I borrow your bike to learn on?
NO.
But it's just for a little while.
NO.
I promise to return it as I found it.
NO.
But I'm your friend.
NO.

and your situation is why.

...a menace to anything around them.

-Kurt

Now THAT'S bike snobbish...EVERYONE was a novice rider once.

Now THAT'S bike snobbish...EVERYONE was a novice rider once.

And we were all menaces to those around us too!

I just picked up a Trek 400 for a friend who has been wanting to ride. Got it mostly set up ("You need to buy new tires because these are ready to explode and you need to buy handlebar tape so your hands don't just slide off") and left it with her. First day she takes it out (without new tires or bar tape) and goes cruising down our town's biggest hill... on the sidewalk... forgetting that there are stairs for pedestrians.

She got some pretty gnarly road rash and knocked her seat and stem/bars off of alignment, but luckily both escaped without permanent injury. Bless her heart, she still wants to ride and we decided that perhaps a group ride would be in order so she can get used to riding a bike again and learn the rules of the road.

You never forget how to ride a bike... but if haven't ridden in 10 years, you don't exactly get better at it either...


(ETA: I did have a scary moment when I borrowed my girlfriend's old mountain bike for the first time. Either V-Brakes are more powerful than I had originally thought or I'm just used to riding on 25 year old brake pads, but the first time I hit the front brake on that I performed an absolutely perfect stoppie. If any BMX kids had been around, they would have applauded, but it took me a few moments to get my heart out of my stomach.)

This happened to me when I loaned my uncle my roller blades on a camping trip about 20 years ago. He took them down a steep, paved hill and wiped out horrendously at the bottom of the hill. Somehow, my age caused me to be more concerned with my scuffed roller blades than my uncle who nearly left his wife and two kids without a father figure...

-Collin-

As he flew over the handlebars...

Brilliantly narrated. I LMFAO.

That reminds me of the idiot I had to deal with several years ago....

60-ish man wants to buy a new bike; buys a Next Avalon (comfort bike, 7-speed, V-brakes), walks it out the door.

Ten minutes later, he's back with a complaint:

"I tested this bike in the parking lot, and when I grabbed the brakes, it almost threw me over the bars! Can you fix them?"

When I explained that V-brakes are stronger than the sidepulls he's used to, and that he doesn't need to "grab" the brakes, one or two fingers will do fine, he says indignantly, "I've had three bikes in my life, and I've NEVER had this problem before!"

Bottom line, he left with the bike, as it was. I DID, however, toy with the levers' barrel adjusters, just for show.

Three bikes in 60 years, and you're an expert...oooo-KKAAAAAAAYYYYY.....................

When I explained that V-brakes are stronger than the sidepulls he's used to, and that he doesn't need to "grab" the brakes, one or two fingers will do fine, he says indignantly, "I've had three bikes in my life, and I've NEVER had this problem before!"

"That's because you've owned three pieces of $h!t."

-Kurt

I think part of the misconception comes from a drivers perspective. They're used to brakes being easy to modulate, and that comes from the sheet weight of the vehicle. I know in my car when it was brand new 15 years ago, it could stop in less than 130 feet from 60 - hella fast - And it still feels almost as fast (haven't tried). But you almost never brake that way. That's with slamming the pedal to the floor. But you don't do that, you apply pressure to the pedals slowly and get good progressive resistance as you do so.
With bikes, because the weight isn't there, the inexperienced rider is looking for the progressive resistance, and when they pull it's usually much harder and much faster than they're used to. So, for a similar application of brakes on a car, you put probably 1/8 of the same lever travel. And since there's much less weight, and much less speed the brakes are effective much faster, not really giving them a chance to find that progressiveness.
Or maybe they're all just idiots riding on BSO's, Iuhno.
-Gene-

Less toe clips and more BMX style pedals is what I say!! Getting onto a bike in flip flops is the best!

On my mule I have short reach brake levers and canti brakes that are adjusted properly and have fresh shoes. The front brake is so strong that if applying even when walking the bike, unless the rear brake is applied as well, the rear wheel gets off the ground (even at 1 mph). I use this as a show and tell to people whom either let ride my bikes or sell bikes to. What I tell them is: always use only the rear brake if you want to slow down and if you want to use the front brake, like to come to a complete stop, you always have to use the rear brake as well... I think that the little demo I give makes them understand.

Using the rear brake will do nothing to keep the rear wheel of the bike on the ground. Rear wheel traction is completely dependent on how hard the front brake is applied. Apply the front brake hard enough and the rear brake will simply lock as there will be no weight left on the rear tire. Learning how to modulate a front brake is not that hard and eventually you'll get used to using it all the time as it provides so much more stopping power than the rear brake. Rear brakes are good when traction is low and you don't want to risk a front wheel washout though.

When I went back to a flat bar on the Uni, I decided it was time to upgrade to a set of V brakes. Holy crap. From the "you might stop...if you're lucky" power of the cantilevers to the "oh, you're thinking about stopping? *flip*" of the V brakes, it took some time before I wasn't popping the back wheel off the ground inadvertently from time to time.

Less toe clips and more BMX style pedals is what I say!! Getting onto a bike in flip flops is the best!
The last two summers, I rode my Ron Cooper the 6 miles to work in flip-flops daily. There's nothing quite like the feel of a Binda on the top of your bare foot, and chrome scraping down your big toenail! Plus I got awesome tan lines.

no good deed goes unpunished. I try not to get involved and often suggest people rent a bike on their own.

I follow the unspoken rules that those A&S fellows often go by: Don't get anyone into cycling, and don't talk to anyone about cycling.

Most people don't understand it - nor care to - and would rather start an argument about it if the topic comes up. Either that, or irritate you.

-Kurt

P.S.: Another thing - the fewer local people know about your collection, than there is less of a chance for someone to steal it.

the fewer local people know about your collection, than there is less of a chance for someone to steal it.

:innocent: :lol:

Many years ago, when I was at UGa, I had a good friend, let's call him "Paul". Paul was very taken with my motorcycling activities and I encouraged this viewpoint, being a young hep cat and all. Despite the dire warnings of family, girl friends, etc, he eventually bought a new Kawasaki GPz 550 (this tells you how many years ago....) to much cheerleading by me.

Several months later, Paul's motorcycling activities came to an abrupt end out on the Atlanta highway. After all these years, I'm a little vague on the details of how the accident started, something about maniacs and left turns, but I can never forget that it ended up with Paul pinned against the tire on a front wheel of a semi truck as it skidded to a halt. Had the truck driver let up on the brake allowing the wheels to roll (over Paul), he would have been instantly crushed. Fortunately, he escaped with non-permanent injuries. But he easily could have been dead and that weighed on me for a long, long time.

Since that long ago lesson, I never escort/mentor/encourage/introduce anyone into any activity - sporting, financial, relationship, etc - where they might get seriously hurt. I will offer non-committal advice about where to get the information to make their own informed decisions but that is about it.

Using the rear brake will do nothing to keep the rear wheel of the bike on the ground. Rear wheel traction is completely dependent on how hard the front brake is applied. Apply the front brake hard enough and the rear brake will simply lock as there will be no weight left on the rear tire. Learning how to modulate a front brake is not that hard and eventually you'll get used to using it all the time as it provides so much more stopping power than the rear brake. Rear brakes are good when traction is low and you don't want to risk a front wheel washout though.

OK, y'all. I'm sure many of you have read about how front brake only is the most efficient braking method there is. I've read it all and at times thought "that makes sense". But, I just ran some tests and I'm here to tell you that it's total BS.

Tests were run on my KHS with Michelin Country Rock tires inflated to 35 front, 40 rear. Blackburn rack with small Nashbar panniers (Day Trekkers, IIRC) with a couple of bungees on the right and a Ulock on the left.

My results were that hard braking prior to the point of lockup on the rear only actually seemed to sit the bike down a bit. I presume this to be the result of the rotational forces of braking against the bosses pushing the bike downward a bit, just a bit aft of the frame's center of gravity.

As I applied more front brake, the bike wanted to pitch forward, as the braking forces on the fork bosses, WELL fore of the COG wanted to make the back end of the bike rotate up and forward.

My conclusion is that, on that bike, it's best to apply front and rear brakes in proper proportion so as to not induce a forward pitch (edit: and not to induce sliding on the rear) and still get good braking action from both tires.

I follow the unspoken rules that those A&S fellows often go by: Don't get anyone into cycling, and don't talk to anyone about cycling.

Most people don't understand it - nor care to - and would rather start an argument about it if the topic comes up. Either that, or irritate you.

-Kurt

P.S.: Another thing - the fewer local people know about your collection, than there is less of a chance for someone to steal it.

I believe I've come to the conclusion, Kurt, that you're the biggest cynic here...anyone want to claim the prize instead? :)

Around here in MN, especially in the spring, I always apply rear first lightly, then front. Thought is, again, especially in the spring before we get lots of rain, that with all the sand and crap used on snowy roads here I'd rather find out about a loose surface with the rear brake rather than the front. Once I feel the rear begin to grab I modulate the front.

I believe I've come to the conclusion, Kurt, that you're the biggest cynic here...anyone want to claim the prize instead? :)

I'll take the award. Reading A&S every day is enough to sour anyone (hence why I've spent some time there giving them a bit of their own medicine).

-Kurt

I'll take the award.

So given...

http://home.comcast.net/~khatfull/images/cudak888award.jpg

OK, y'all. I'm sure many of you have read about how front brake only is the most efficient braking method there is. I've read it all and at times thought "that makes sense". But, I just ran some tests and I'm here to tell you that it's total BS.

Tests were run on my KHS with Michelin Country Rock tires inflated to 35 front, 40 rear. Blackburn rack with small Nashbar panniers (Day Trekkers, IIRC) with a couple of bungees on the right and a Ulock on the left.

My results were that hard braking prior to the point of lockup on the rear only actually seemed to sit the bike down a bit. I presume this to be the result of the rotational forces of braking against the bosses pushing the bike downward a bit, just a bit aft of the frame's center of gravity.

As I applied more front brake, the bike wanted to pitch forward, as the braking forces on the fork bosses, WELL fore of the COG wanted to make the back end of the bike rotate up and forward.

My conclusion is that, on that bike, it's best to apply front and rear brakes in proper proportion so as to not induce a forward pitch (edit: and not to induce sliding on the rear) and still get good braking action from both tires.

If the front brake lacks sufficient grip to lift the rear tire 1/2 second into braking, then the use of a rear brake will decrease stopping distance. Note that as you quickly bleed off speed (emergency stop), the weight will shift to the front tire, so you must quickly reduce rear braking force.

My results were that hard braking prior to the point of lockup on the rear only actually seemed to sit the bike down a bit. I presume this to be the result of the rotational forces of braking against the bosses pushing the bike downward a bit, just a bit aft of the frame's center of gravity.

That's impossible. The feeling of the bike sitting down when rear wheel lock up occurs is due to the reduction in braking force being generated by the rear wheel (coefficient of sliding friction being less than that of static friction). Because you lose all braking force as soon as the rear wheel starts to come off the ground, it's not possible to flip the bike over using just the rear brake. But the forces generated from braking with the rear wheel apply torque in the same direction about the COG as the the forces from the front brake. Draw the free body diagram. Both forces are acting parallel to the road at the road surface well under the COG.


As I applied more front brake, the bike wanted to pitch forward, as the braking forces on the fork bosses, WELL fore of the COG wanted to make the back end of the bike rotate up and forward.

The bike wanted to pitch forward because you could generate so much more braking force with the front brake as the front wheel gets weight transferred to it during braking as opposed to the rear wheel which loses weight as braking forces increase.


My conclusion is that, on that bike, it's best to apply front and rear brakes in proper proportion so as to not induce a forward pitch (edit: and not to induce sliding on the rear) and still get good braking action from both tires.

The only reason to use a rear brake in conjunction with the front is to reduce the chances of a front wheel washout in slippery conditions, or for those with weaker hands/brakes, to ease the force required to stop the bike with just the front brake.

If you find the rear tire lifting, lean back.

That's impossible. The feeling of the bike sitting down when rear wheel lock up occurs is due to the reduction in braking force being generated by the rear wheel (coefficient of sliding friction being less than that of static friction). Because you lose all braking force as soon as the rear wheel starts to come off the ground, it's not possible to flip the bike over using just the rear brake. But the forces generated from braking with the rear wheel apply torque in the same direction about the COG as the the forces from the front brake. Draw the free body diagram. Both forces are acting parallel to the road at the road surface well under the COG.

I'm talking about prior to rear wheel sliding. There is a downward force on the bike frame generated by using the rear brake. Actually, on most diamond frame bikes with cantis, vbrakes or calipers mounted on the seatstays, the force I'm describing will have a vector perpendicular to the seatstays. On my KHS this vector intersects the ground just fore of the BB. On my Pinarello this vector intersects the ground well fore of the front axle. (edit: once you lock up your rear wheel, this force goes bye-bye)

The forces you mention at the end of your post also exist.

Hell with the friend! Is the bike going to be O.K.?

One can draw free body diagrams to analyze the forces acting on the bike. The problem is in an emergency 15 mph stop, you've got about 1 sec to bring the bike (about 180 lbs combined weight) to 0 mph if properly executed. That's not a lot of time to modulate the brakes and shift your weight around. The best-practice braking technique must be quick, simple, and instinctive.

I do a fair amount of mtn. biking (though not as much as I used to). I think it has helped me with both my braking instincts and handling on the road bike. Shifting weight fore and aft, standing and unweighting, bunny hopping, slow motion maneuvering, etc., are all parts of most every mtn. bike ride.

Hell with the friend! Is the bike going to be O.K.?

I was wondering when someone was going to start worrying about the IMPORTANT stuff!

And yes... Widowmaker is fine... she's bulletproof.

He should climb right back up on that horse, because that's one mistake he will never make again ;-)

Oh well... it sounds like he was determined to hurt himself. Just imagine if he had decided to charge down a highly technical mt. bike trail wearing his flip-flops!

I'm talking about prior to rear wheel sliding. There is a downward force on the bike frame generated by using the rear brake. Actually, on most diamond frame bikes with cantis, vbrakes or calipers mounted on the seatstays, the force I'm describing will have a vector perpendicular to the seatstays. On my KHS this vector intersects the ground just fore of the BB. On my Pinarello this vector intersects the ground well fore of the front axle. (edit: once you lock up your rear wheel, this force goes bye-bye)

The forces you mention at the end of your post also exist.

The reaction force at the frame is meaningless in terms of the actual acceleration of the bike/rider system. The only force that matters is the reaction force at the road because that is the only force that can affect the speed of the system. Think about it, the frame is not moving relative to the brake caliper (if it were you'd have problems). The frame is pushing back on the brake caliper with the same force that the caliper is pushing on the frame. The forces cancel each other out.

I believe I've come to the conclusion, Kurt, that you're the biggest cynic here...anyone want to claim the prize instead? :)

He may be the biggest now but he'd better keep pedaling 'cause I'm right behind him.

I agree with everything that he said. I've been riding my bike for over 20 years and there are MANY people that don't even know I have a bike.

And along with never lending my bikes out to anyone is I NEVER offer/ask to ride with anyone and NEVER ask anyone to ride with me.

The reaction force at the frame is meaningless in terms of the actual acceleration of the bike/rider system. The only force that matters is the reaction force at the road because that is the only force that can affect the speed of the system. Think about it, the frame is not moving relative to the brake caliper (if it were you'd have problems). The frame is pushing back on the brake caliper with the same force that the caliper is pushing on the frame. The forces cancel each other out.

I tend to think that the ground is pushing back on the tires, which push back against the rims {a buncha other steps that eventually make their way through the frame and to the brake bosses, canti arms and...** which push against the brake pads which push against the rim. Net effect is a down force on the bike, which will aid in keeping the tires from letting go the tarmac. The lessor the seatstay angle , the greater the effect. I wish I'd scored the GT with the chainstay mounted U-Brake I saw at a garage sale the other day, I'd like to see the effect on such a bike. I was feeling for the effect on my roadbike and it's not even noticeable on 23s with 100/110 psi in 'em and the more steeply angled seat stays and considerably lighter wheels.

Perhaps it's easier to visualize the effect of braking by taking the ground out of the equation. Watch a lot of motorcycle jumping and you'll notice that they frequently brake the rear wheel to adjust attitude in mid air.

A had a friend ask a favor last week... her husband wants to try out cycling, but she wanted to borrow one of my bikes for him to test out before they go drop the bucks on a new ride for him. So I said "OK"... As you write, my Paramount is on loan to a runner.....





So the lesson is: When you loan a bike to a rookie rider, you need to tech them how the bike shifts and goes forward. But don't forget to teach them how to stop, too.Where's the fun in THAT?

So given...

http://home.comcast.net/~khatfull/images/cudak888award.jpg
Whut? No podium girls for Cudak888?

We ARE family friendly here right? :)

Whut? No podium girls for Cudak888?

The blonde is a jerk, and the brunette is a gold digger.

-Kurt

P.S.: Do I get the Lifetime Cynic's Achievement Award for this one?

I tend to think that the ground is pushing back on the tires, which push back against the rims {a buncha other steps that eventually make their way through the frame and to the brake bosses, canti arms and...** which push against the brake pads which push against the rim. Net effect is a down force on the bike, which will aid in keeping the tires from letting go the tarmac. The lessor the seatstay angle , the greater the effect. I wish I'd scored the GT with the chainstay mounted U-Brake I saw at a garage sale the other day, I'd like to see the effect on such a bike. I was feeling for the effect on my roadbike and it's not even noticeable on 23s with 100/110 psi in 'em and the more steeply angled seat stays and considerably lighter wheels.

The ground is exerting an equal and opposite vertical force against the tires, otherwise you would sink into the ground. Horizontally, the tires are moving with respect to the ground. Friction between the ground and tires is required to move forward (imagine trying to ride slicks on black ice). In order to slow down, you need friction there too. The only way you generate the force to slow down is by having weight pushing down on the tires (weight from the bike and yourself). Without having something above you to push against, you can't push any harder against the ground than the weight of your bike and you. Gravity is the only force acting in the downward direction.


Perhaps it's easier to visualize the effect of braking by taking the ground out of the equation. Watch a lot of motorcycle jumping and you'll notice that they frequently brake the rear wheel to adjust attitude in mid air.

A (relatively) heavy spinning wheel carries with it a lot of inertia. Slowing the wheel or accelerating it can then have a small affect on the bike while it's in the air. A bicycle wheel is way too light to have such an affect and when on the ground, you can't make the same sort of acceleration/deceleration that you can in the air.