Advocacy & Safety - Bicycling Safety Ideas

Hi everyone I am a third year student in Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University and am on a design team this semester with the task of helping to solve the problem of preventing injuries caused from cycling.

It is a pretty general problem statement right now, but I am wondering what are some of the most pressing safety issues with cycling?

I have looked at knee injuries from overriding and injuries sustained from accidents and still can't decide what a better problem to solve would be.

If you guys have any tips or suggestions, even ideas you would like to see made into a functional design let me know. We will be working with CAD so I can even post final products on here when the semester is over.

Thanks,
Sam

Design me something to keep rain, fog, and snow from building up on my lenses, both on the outside and the inside. I can decently clear the outside now with my gloved fingers but short of stopping to remove my glasses, the inside continues to be a problem. Seeing through wet spots at night in the rain with bright oncoming headlights is no fun either. Make them for ~$100 and I'll buy a pair :)

Well, good luck to you.

Knee injuries tend to result from fit issues, so designing a good fit system that doesn't require "an expert" might be useful. I'm not sure that's really possible though. I suspect that what fit actually needs is a viable business plan. There seem to be good solutions for people who barely ride: They set your seat height and get you the right size bike. And pro-racers who get everything for free, or nearly free. For those of us who see $200 as a lot of money to give a guy who may screw up our fit, or just tell us we're already doing well, or fix two tiny things ... well I could get a new pair of carbon shoes... Especially if you have several bikes to be fit on and a fit is seen as a per bike purchase.

As for safety with respect to collisions? I think clipless pedals (versus straps) and our crappy helmets are pretty decent little steps. I think most of the work to be done is behavioral: For bicyclists and motorists.

I'm sure you realize that when you have a builtin limit of a 200 watt engine there's not much you can do to engineer in safety features.

I'm sure you realize that when you have a builtin limit of a 200 watt engine there's not much you can do to engineer in safety features.

Genetic Engineering

If you make doof-free people, they will crash less.

crhilton~
I think you raised some good issues with fitment being a problem for knee injuries. I noticed sites like www.bikefitkit.com sell some specialty equipment, but I can see how the cost adds up in comparison with wanting other things. Thanks for the input

The only cycling related injuries I've had for over a decade involved scratching my legs on toothy platform pedals and chainrings. Clipless pedals are comparably toothless but require special shoes, which is sometimes inconvenient, and I want a pedal that isn't slippery when I use causal shoes. A chainring guard could protect my calves and pants, but I haven't found suitable aftermarket hardware for my existing bikes.

My biggest wish would be for standardized, welded-on mounting points and metal brackets for rear headlamps and rear reflectors on seat stays, seat tubes and rear racks. The plastic clamp-on hardware that comes with tail lamps always seems to rotate out of proper alignment or snap off with significant use. I've broken several when hitting potholes in cold weather or when my bike tipped over at a bike rack. For a night commuter, a reliable rear lamp mount is a life and death issue.

most pressing issue for cyclist safety is the motorists.

design something that makes interacting with motorists safer.

spring loaded clearance slo motion triangles...... jut kidding.

but if you're interested in cyclists safety, look at the interaction bicyclists have with with motorists.

turning conflicts, right of way violations, right hooks, left cross.....

if its for a design class, you could make a better handlebar grip. :rolleyes:

Tough assignment, because bikes are already pretty optimal ;). Over-use injuries are not really a problem for the vast majority of bicyclists, despite horrendous fits, and for those who do get over-use injuries, they also know how to get the problem solved. No-fog glasses (especially in really cold temps)... that's a good one.

My biggest safety concerns/injuries
-ninja cyclists, sidewalk cyclists, and bike salmon... you can't fix the behavior, maybe reflective frame paint to help visibility?
-A good air horn... "Air Zound" is loud, easy to recharge with an air pump, but cheaply made (mount bracket easily broken), and takes up valuable water bottle cage space... How about a smaller one, maybe only good for one emergency honk, but mounted entirely on the handlebars. Very important safety tool for anyone who rides in heavy traffic.
-A mirror that regular (non-enthusiast) bike riders would actually use... I don't know why the ones already on the market aren't used by everyone! Maybe because they are only sold at bike shops? Maybe you could integrate a mirror into the helmet (on the visor?), instead of the glue-on/clip-on/handlebar ones currently available..
-For what it's worth, my injuries have all been behavioural: stupid slip and falls (cornering too fast on sand, cornering too fast with inside pedal down, pedalling too many rpms without foot rentention and putting my foot into the front wheel, riding on ice without studded tires, riding no-hands and going up a small curb), and then once I got into cycling for fun, playing on my mountain bike and learning how to use it, an over-use injury (tendonitis) from being too ethusiastic about my road bike, and the inevitable bangs and bumps that come with racing.

Safety is mostly behavioural. Seeing and being seen (or heard) is probably the most important thing you can actually work on fixing.

Other than injuries brought on by motorists, cyclists may suffer from balance related injuries... so making bikes into trikes as a safety feature?

Design a better seat and the world will beat a path to Purdue.

-A mirror that regular (non-enthusiast) bike riders would actually use... I don't know why the ones already on the market aren't used by everyone! Maybe because they are only sold at bike shops? Maybe you could integrate a mirror into the helmet (on the visor?), instead of the glue-on/clip-on/handlebar ones currently available..


+1

I would love to find a decent mirror that works, and works for my uses. So far I've looked at:
* Bar end mirrors - nice that it's on the bike, doesn't stick out, and works pretty well. Not nice that I have to adjust it everytime I get on the bike, it'd be perfect if I could lock it into place once I've adjusted it.
* Eye glass mirrors - might be nice for long recreational rides. Useless for commuting. I'm not putting one of those on twice a day every day.
* Helmet mirrors - Junk. You can't see crap. If you could make one that works, make it quickly detachable too so I can take it off for races.
* Lens mirrors - useless for me, I require the prescription to see.

I'd be happy to have one mirror for commuting and one for recreational uses. I don't like attaching them to my bike, in general, but if it doesn't stick out it could be okay. If it sticks out to the side I won't even consider it. And if it takes away a hand position I won't consider it.

I'd be happy to not need a mirror... think about it. We use mirrors to keep an eye on those behind us... seems to me that those behind us should probably be able to see us far better... what with not having to look at backward images or turning your head to look over a shoulder and the like... One might think that seeing an object right in front of you would be pretty simple.

So here is my suggestion... make something that allows motorists to see what is right in front of them. Maybe a bracket that holds their head upright and straight, along with little braces to hold their eyes open. After all, you'd think drivers would want to see where they are going, eh?

Mirrors, blah, who needs to see where you've been.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Note, sarcasm intended... what is it with all these college professors assigning tasks to "make bicycles safe..." seems like this sort of thing comes around every semester. Bikes are plenty safe... trying to make bikes safer is like trying to make walking safer. It isn't bikes or walking that is unsafe, it is the darn cars that are the threat to both pedestrians, cyclists and even other motorists... figure out how to make cars (ie drivers) safer and you will have a gold mine at your fingertips.


Here, check this out... take this back to your classroom... hey professor, I know how to save over 40,000 lives... just eliminate cars! Bingo!

Genetic Engineering

If you make doof-free people, they will crash less.

^^^ bingo!

Design a better seat and the world will beat a path to Purdue.

That's why most of us use saddles, not seats. :p

remove the engine from a car. there's your project solution.

most pressing issue for cyclist safety is the motorists.

design something that makes interacting with motorists safer.

It would be cool to have a handlebar mounted device that sends out some kind of electromagnetic pulse to disrupt electronic ignitions within 100 meters or something like that. Clear a path.

That's why most of us use saddles, not seats. :p

I usually place my *seat* on the *saddle*.:p

Design a better seat and the world will beat a path to Purdue.Recumbents ... (not all, mind you, but many do have that better seat you're looking for.)

It would be cool to have a handlebar mounted device that sends out some kind of electromagnetic pulse to disrupt electronic ignitions within 100 meters or something like that. Clear a path.
That might backfire if electronically controlled steering or brakes (or something) fail as a result.

Better cyclist safety can be achieved by putting governors on all motor vehicles to max their speed at the posted limit.

Recumbents ... (not all, mind you, but many do have that better seat you're looking for.)

Yeah, but a lousy view.

Better cyclist safety can be achieved by putting governors on all motor vehicles to max their speed at the posted limit.If your idea of "bicycle safety" involves massive inconveniences for 99% of the vehicles on the road to benefit 1% of the vehicles on the road (i.e. bikes) -- expect it to fail.

If you want to improve bicycle safety, start with bicycles. Anything that applies only to motor vehicles and only benefits cyclists is doomed to failure in most cases, though you might be able to squeeze something in as long as it doesn't really inconvenience motorists at all. Mandating the installation of a governor on every car is so very far from that ...

If your idea of "bicycle safety" involves massive inconveniences for 99% of the vehicles on the road to benefit 1% of the vehicles on the road (i.e. bikes) -- expect it to fail.

If you want to improve bicycle safety, start with bicycles. Anything that applies only to motor vehicles and only benefits cyclists is doomed to failure in most cases, though you might be able to squeeze something in as long as it doesn't really inconvenience motorists at all. Mandating the installation of a governor on every car is so very far from that ...

So the convenience of motorists is above all else?

Did you notice that the poster indicated that the governor should only hold cars to the posted limit... in other words he merely wants motorists to obey the law. Hope that's not too inconvenient for those drivers.

So the convenience of motorists is above all else?To a degree, yes. Of course, many motorists will have other reasons for opposing such legislation, but I'm sure many will say it's just about the convenience of motorists (and yet few motorists will make such a claim.)


Did you notice that the poster indicated that the governor should only hold cars to the posted limit... in other words he merely wants motorists to obey the law. Hope that's not too inconvenient for those drivers.That's what the police are for.

Governors are expensive. And people will argue that their privacy is violated. And they'll argue that the system can't possibly always know the speed limit, and they'll argue that they need to exceed the speed limit in some situations. And no matter how weak these arguments may seem ... nobody will want to pass such legislation, as it would mean the end of their political careers.

I guess the next step is a device that forces all bicycles to stop at all red lights and stop signs and not continue until it's legal to do so?

To a degree, yes. Of course, many motorists will have other reasons for opposing such legislation, but I'm sure many will say it's just about the convenience of motorists (and yet few motorists will make such a claim.)

That's what the police are for.

Governors are expensive. And people will argue that their privacy is violated. And they'll argue that the system can't possibly always know the speed limit, and they'll argue that they need to exceed the speed limit in some situations. And no matter how weak these arguments may seem ... nobody will want to pass such legislation, as it would mean the end of their political careers.

I guess the next step is a device that forces all bicycles to stop at all red lights and stop signs and not continue until it's legal to do so?

Ever notice that there are no police around when you really need them?

As far as the "next step," we'll force cyclists to stop at all red lights and stop signs as soon as motorists do so also.

I guess the next step is a device that forces all bicycles to stop at all red lights and stop signs and not continue until it's legal to do so?

I would have no problem with stopping at red lights, if those same lights would actually turn green for a cyclist.

We're supposed to be getting a bunch of freezing rain in the coming days. How are those zero-fog glasses coming along?

It would be cool to have a handlebar mounted device that sends out some kind of electromagnetic pulse to disrupt electronic ignitions within 100 meters or something like that. Clear a path.

We seriously tried to create something like that almost 30 years ago, using parts from the ECM and fire control systems of an F4J. Getting it to work was easy...making it weigh less than a couple hundred pounds, not so much. Maybe with today's technology we can satisfy the weight weenies. :D

We seriously tried to create something like that almost 30 years ago, using parts from the ECM and fire control systems of an F4J. Getting it to work was easy...making it weigh less than a couple hundred pounds, not so much. Maybe with today's technology we can satisfy the weight weenies. :D

I repeat: ZERO FOG GLASSES, you fools!

I repeat: ZERO FOG GLASSES, you fools!

your practicality is depressing me, Igor.

Bikes are VERY safe already, when operated properly. The risk of injury is mostly for those operating the bike in an unsafe manner against traffic/without lights. Even then, they are safer than driving.

But if you HAVE to build something, design integrated dynamo safety lights as original equipment that is super-cheap and can be used as a part of a ultra-low-end bicycle.

Some great ideas on here: integrated safety lights, mirrors, zero fog glasses.

I notice a lot of you are contempt of motorists, but haven't heard so much about strains and injuries due to riding. Is one issue bigger than the other?

Like the biggest mechanical issue with cars -- the loose nut behind the wheel -- the biggest issue is the crank that attaches to the handlebar.

A mechanical solution to a social problem is doomed to fail; airbags, ABS, traction control, the new 'warning devices' -- all are designed to make up for an increasingly inept operator. None have had an appreciable impact on deaths and injuries for motorists.

The apathy of the public is the biggest issue facing us. NOTHING is important unless it puts dollars in the person's pocket. For an average person to actually put forth an EFFORT to do what's right is like scaling the Eiffel Tower in bare feet. (Yes, I'm cynical; see the end of my post for insight into that.)

When people can be persuaded to do the right thing JUST BECAUSE IT IS THE RIGHT THING, many engineers will be looking for work, because their mechanical solutions will be irrelevant.

(I learned the ugly truth of this many years ago...
An optimist is a father who will let his teenager use the car.
A pessimist is a father who won't.
A cynic is a father who DID.)

Lighting: Attach piezoelectric films with LED circuits to tire sidewalls to create glowing wheels. Attach them to spokes or any other moving part, with a small weight (the led itself) to generate motion and power.

Integrated solar powered or battery powered blinky in a helmet (probably already exists).

Protection: A bicycle jersey with kevlar fibres to prevent road rash.

Safety: Some sort of Doppler radar for road bikes that can pick up pot holes and debris ahead. Also maybe for telling you the distance from the wheel in front of you.

Mount an accelerometer and potentiometer to the headset of a bike. This data combined with tachometer data should be enough to tell you when you are losing traction. Acceleration is equal to v^2/r or something along those lines where v is known from the wheel sensor and r is known by the handlebar angle as measured by potentiometer. If the accelerometer is reading less than the calculated acceleration, your wheel is probably sliding. At the start of traction loss, it is still possible to correct. A clutch somewhere between the handlebars and fork could return traction by reducing steer. Alternatively, a braking clutch could reduce speed slightly although this might increase slip as well. I am sure racers would hate these things, but it would be a really cool demo to have a bike that couldn't slip. There might also be simpler means of detecting slip.

Another one is a bike that can't endo. What you would want is a front brake that has its braking force limited based on velocity aka wheel revolution speed on a very specific ratio that is conservatively below the boundary for flipping an average sized rider over the handlebars. Or somehow link it to rear wheel traction. I bet there are some clever mechanical ways to achieve this.

Other Ideas: An LED display on the riders back or somewhere on the bicycle that tells cars how close they are passing. This is more of a safety stunt than a regular safety idea.

A light on the edge of car doors that flashes when someone pulls the door handle lever.Yeah right, but it would be nice.

New cars could have a start-up message from a nice sounding Arab, thanking them for supporting OPEC, buying imported Arab oil, and inviting them to convert to Islam and visit Mecca for the Hajj. It wouldn't make drivers treat bicycle riders better, but it might make some drivers a bit more conscious of where their gasoline comes from.

Little old ladies ride bikes every day in Europe and they don't wear helmets. Injuries from falling off a bike are usually minimal, especially at low speed, especially from bikes that are styled like city bikes. Most German bicycles are sold with lights built-in, with either a hub dynamo (Nabendynamo) or standard tire-friction generator (Seitenläufer). Why do they have lights? It's the law there, and, frankly, it makes excellent sense too given the short days in winter. I don't endorse this shop, but this may give you some pictures: http://www.fahrrad.de/citybikes-city-bike-damen-herren-alu-shop.html?f3[]=32-137-291

I would recommend scrapping engineering and look to economic theory to support installation of an ugly spike on steering wheels. Look up the Peltzman Effect, The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulation by Sam Peltzman The Journal of Political Economy Vol. 83, No. 4 (Aug., 1975), pp. 677-726. Basically, safer cars allow drivers to make rational choices about risk taking. The safer the car, the less likely you are to die, the more risks you are going to take, and the more you can play with your cell phone.

Another one is a bike that can't endo. What you would want is a front brake that has its braking force limited based on velocity aka wheel revolution speed on a very specific ratio that is conservatively below the boundary for flipping an average sized rider over the handlebars. Or somehow link it to rear wheel traction. I bet there are some clever mechanical ways to achieve this.The braking force really isn't related to the wheel velocity at all. Ultimately, for a specific rider on a specific bike in a specific position, if a specific amount of squeezing force on the front brake causes an endo at 10 mph, it would require approximately the same amount of squeezing force to endo at 30 mph.

But the idea is sound -- just a lot simpler than it might sound. If the deceleration exceeds 0.6 gs or so, reduce the braking force until it's less than 0.6 gs -- that would require only one accelerometer and a microcontroller, but the part on the brake could be complicated. Though it can be done even simpler than that -- you just put a spring on your front brake that starts reducing braking force above a certain threshold. It'll take a little adjustment to get right, and this will need further adjusting as your pads and rims wear, but brakes like this already exist, and some bikes come with them installed. (My Bike-E has brakes like this, thought I'm not sure that they're standard or not. Though ironically, the Bike-E is one bike that really is not capable of doing an endo ...)

Unfortunately, any sort of bike with an anti-endo system of any sort and two brakes will not be able to stop as quickly as the same bike without the same system and a skilled rider. So it's likely that only newbies will want such a system.

Actually, your light on the car door idea is an excellent idea. Tie it to the turn signal that's found on the outside of the mirrors. Of course, it has the downside of requiring changes to cars to benefit cyclists, but it's a fairly simple change with few downsides.

As for the anti fog glasses that others have brought up ... can't you buy anti fogging coatings? Rain-X perhaps? I wear glasses but have never found it to be a big enough problem that I needed to solve it -- only once, when I tried caving (100% humidity!) did it really become a problem.

[On the design of a braking system that can't endo.]
But the idea is sound -- just a lot simpler than it might sound. If the deceleration exceeds 0.6 gs or so, reduce the braking force until it's less than 0.6 gs -- that would require only one accelerometer and a microcontroller, but the part on the brake could be complicated. Though it can be done even simpler than that -- you just put a spring on your front brake that starts reducing braking force above a certain threshold. It'll take a little adjustment to get right, and this will need further adjusting as your pads and rims wear, but brakes like this already exist, and some bikes come with them installed.
Actually it can be done much more simply with a purely mechanical system and provides stopping distances that are better than normal brakes. Look up the Calderazzo brake in the book 'Bicycling Science.' Basically the rider activates the rear brake but it not only acts to slow the rear wheel but also uses the reaction force against the wheel to pull a cable that operates the front brake. The reaction force is much stronger, so this multiplies the force used by the rider and applies the front brake quite strongly. But the moment the bike starts to flip the traction of the rear wheel is reduced and it starts to skid thereby automatically dropping the reaction force on the back brake and reducing the pull on the front brake. The bike is brought to a stop right at the maximum braking force possible without lifting the rear wheel off the ground. According to the book it worked well but eventually the bike's fork broke due to the stress of all the sudden stops performed during the testing. Note that this design also automatically compensates for the position of the rider - if he moves his weight back to prevent flipping then the brake will be applied harder.

The design shown in the book used a rear caliper brake spring-mounted on a curved rod so it could move forward and pull the front brake cable. An even simpler design would be to use a rear internal hub brake (drum or coaster) and attach the torque arm to the front brake cable.

In practice you'd also want to install a second independent brake on the rear wheel - both for redundancy and to be able to moderate the front wheel braking on surfaces with poor traction.

Yeah, but a lousy view.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/ent_impact_home/2009/06/large_irondelles.jpg

We seriously tried to create something like that almost 30 years ago, using parts from the ECM and fire control systems of an F4J. Getting it to work was easy...making it weigh less than a couple hundred pounds, not so much. Maybe with today's technology we can satisfy the weight weenies. :D
A Wild Weasel bike?

I heard a story about some USAF CCTers running around Ft Bragg with an active SST-181 beacon in a trailer, frying the circuitry of every radar gun it was near.

Hi everyone I am a third year student in Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University and am on a design team this semester with the task of helping to solve the problem of preventing injuries caused from cycling.

It is a pretty general problem statement right now, but I am wondering what are some of the most pressing safety issues with cycling?

I have looked at knee injuries from overriding and injuries sustained from accidents and still can't decide what a better problem to solve would be.

If you guys have any tips or suggestions, even ideas you would like to see made into a functional design let me know. We will be working with CAD so I can even post final products on here when the semester is over.

Thanks,
Sam

How about considering a look at improving the construction of bike trailers used to transport kids? Help manufacturers with ideas that would enable them to incorporate at least a little impact resistance into trailer construction, over what they're typically built with today.

Another possibility: bike helmet designs developed to somehow incorporate what seems to be the favored helmet light position...atop the helmet...into the helmet's shell. Something with a little contour, so a light located in or on the helmet shell looks beautiful and as if it belongs there rather that just plopped on. If manufacturers are hoped to produce them, a light incorporated design couldn't be allowed to affect the structural, protective capabilities helmets are designed to offer their wearers.

New cars could have a start-up message from a nice sounding Arab, thanking them for supporting OPEC, buying imported Arab oil, and inviting them to convert to Islam and visit Mecca for the Hajj. It wouldn't make drivers treat bicycle riders better, but it might make some drivers a bit more conscious of where their gasoline comes from.

Little old ladies ride bikes every day in Europe and they don't wear helmets. Injuries from falling off a bike are usually minimal, especially at low speed, especially from bikes that are styled like city bikes. Most German bicycles are sold with lights built-in, with either a hub dynamo (Nabendynamo) or standard tire-friction generator (Seitenläufer). Why do they have lights? It's the law there, and, frankly, it makes excellent sense too given the short days in winter. I don't endorse this shop, but this may give you some pictures: http://www.fahrrad.de/citybikes-city-bike-damen-herren-alu-shop.html?f3[]=32-137-291

I would recommend scrapping engineering and look to economic theory to support installation of an ugly spike on steering wheels. Look up the Peltzman Effect, The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulation by Sam Peltzman The Journal of Political Economy Vol. 83, No. 4 (Aug., 1975), pp. 677-726. Basically, safer cars allow drivers to make rational choices about risk taking. The safer the car, the less likely you are to die, the more risks you are going to take, and the more you can play with your cell phone.
We have a winner. Trying to apply an engineering solution to a psycho-social problem is an epic failure.

As for the anti fog glasses that others have brought up ... can't you buy anti fogging coatings? Rain-X perhaps? I wear glasses but have never found it to be a big enough problem that I needed to solve it -- only once, when I tried caving (100% humidity!) did it really become a problem.

It's mainly an issue for me now due to the cold temps which mean I'm wearing a face mask and generating a lot of steam, especially climbing slowly uphill. I've tried anti-fog coatings, dish soap, vented glasses, etc. and I still have problems with fogging my lenses. I would imagine that even the best coating couldn't prevent all my steam from condensing on the lenses especially at a standstill (traffic light). When I get moving again, that steam freezes and becomes impossible to see through (meaning I have to stop, remove my gloves, and really clean my lenses). No glasses isn't a solution. There's way too much salt spray and road debris being kicked up for me to ride without protection in front of my eyes, not to mention that my contacts would dry out in a few minutes.

It's mainly an issue for me now due to the cold temps which mean I'm wearing a face mask and generating a lot of steam, especially climbing slowly uphill. I've tried anti-fog coatings, dish soap, vented glasses, etc. and I still have problems with fogging my lenses. I would imagine that even the best coating couldn't prevent all my steam from condensing on the lenses especially at a standstill (traffic light). When I get moving again, that steam freezes and becomes impossible to see through (meaning I have to stop, remove my gloves, and really clean my lenses). No glasses isn't a solution. There's way too much salt spray and road debris being kicked up for me to ride without protection in front of my eyes, not to mention that my contacts would dry out in a few minutes.

I've had good luck with shaving cream

A Wild Weasel bike?

I heard a story about some USAF CCTers running around Ft Bragg with an active SST-181 beacon in a trailer, frying the circuitry of every radar gun it was near.

"Wild Weasel bike".:roflmao2:

I knew a guy who worked on electronics in B-52's at Carswell AFB in the 80's who claimed to have deliberately fried detectors in cars rolling down the Interstate in FW, TX.
I couldn't verify the story, so I took it with a small grain of salt.

The only cycling injuries that have severely impacted me have been to my knees. Once was about four years a go and once was late last year; my knee is still hurting form that one.

A knee pad that is not hot or obtrusive, that does not create any pedaling inefficiency is something I have looked for and would have great interest in. Ideally it would be something that I would be able to wear under a pair of khakis.

The braking force really isn't related to the wheel velocity at all. Ultimately, for a specific rider on a specific bike in a specific position, if a specific amount of squeezing force on the front brake causes an endo at 10 mph, it would require approximately the same amount of squeezing force to endo at 30 mph.

But the idea is sound -- just a lot simpler than it might sound. If the deceleration exceeds 0.6 gs or so, reduce the braking force until it's less than 0.6 gs ...

I don't think reducing the maximum deceleration of my bike by roughly 25% would be very good for my safety, or anyone's. That idea gets the gameshow buzzer.

I've had good luck with shaving cream

Seriously? Applied how?

Seriously? Applied how?

rub it into the lenses with a cloth...if you don't believe me, try it on your bathroom mirror first.

"Wild Weasel bike".:roflmao2:

I knew a guy who worked on electronics in B-52's at Carswell AFB in the 80's who claimed to have deliberately fried detectors in cars rolling down the Interstate in FW, TX.
I couldn't verify the story, so I took it with a small grain of salt.

We made the mistake of locking on to a taxiing BUFF on Guam once...it wasn't pretty what their ECM did to our front end receiver. :eek:

Some great ideas on here: integrated safety lights, mirrors, zero fog glasses.

I notice a lot of you are contempt of motorists, but haven't heard so much about strains and injuries due to riding. Is one issue bigger than the other?

I think that may be because:

1) every moment of a road ride means interacting with motorists, so that's always front and center versus the potential for an injury due to other causes.

2) motorists can kill you... falling off your bike or straining a tendon is relatively minor

3) we can control the risks we choose to take that might cause us to fall down, but we have no control over what risks a motorist might decide take with our lives. Influence, yes, but not control. For example, I was taking a lane a few hours ago. This caused most traffic to choose to move to the other lane to overtake me. However, I saw one motorist rapidly approaching from behind, not moving over, because there was traffic beside him. He wasn't slowing, so I decided to move to the far right. Did he see me? Would he have slowed? Did my mirror save my life? I'll never know. However, being basically run off the road means that I'm remembering that guy, not the other 500 or so motorists that I interacted with today who cared enough to pass me safely. Someone just about killing you tends to have more emotional impact than skinning your knee.

4) also, maybe we're a bit jealous of motorists for having all their transportation needs taken care of so well, while cyclists either have to fight for a space on the roadway, or make do with hard-won yet often woefully inadequate and sometimes dangerous bikeways. Not that we want to drive a car, but it can make a person cynical. Especially when I think about how much of my taxes go to pay for all those roads (with a pitance to nothing going to cycle faciliities), and how unwelcome I sometimes am on them.