RaleighSport

I see you live in the perfect conditions for a long john (I also now see it was mentioned why you'd be so pro long john earlier in the thread). If you'd like to take a flight to California and try one of my touring rigs loaded front heavily and try going up some hills or steering in general, I'll be glad to show you, but yes this really is your schtick "In common usage, the word shtick has also come to mean any talent, style, habit, or other eccentricity for which a person is particularly well-known, even if not intended for comedic purposes. For example, a person who is known locally for his or her ability to eat dozens of hot dogs quickly might say that it was their shtick". I do believe you misunderstood the context I was using it in which is fine. And thanks for answering about where the gravity is centered, is actually centered and how so, makes a lot more sense than older iterations I've seen.

SmallFront

You seem to be more than willing to ignore what I say in order to make your point.

Anything with the weight in between the load points will have its weight shared between those points. I already explained ad nauseum why having weight around one of those points will change that. If you don't want to understand this, there is very little I can do. It's basic physics, and it doesn't matter how much you dislike it or try out red herrings, you cannot change the laws of nature merely because you convince yourself that those laws only exist where I live.

No, I understood it perfectly and I am well aware of why you used it.

In older posts I also talked about it being centered between the two wheels, but even if I hadn't, it should be obvious to anyone who knows how a long-john looks. It is also funny how you thank me for restating that factoid, yet - as is evident earlier on in your post - you're still not acknowledging it.

RaleighSport

Interesting, actually I did pay attention to what you said and I thanked you for explaining it in greater detail rather than simply stating centered between wheels is more balanced.. I guess I'll make this into a pictorial we seem to be having issues here.
This is a bilenky long john, note where the load is centered

This is also the style I most commonly see, which seems to lend itself to the aforementioned issues of front load.

This is a traditional freight bicycle.

More akin to what you describe a long john being, however with the load design and height of the center of gravity I don't think you could pay me money to willingly climb a decent hill with it fully loaded.

Extreme example but this is what I get the impression of you're talking about.

(Photo: ebay.de user bionorika)

This design to my eyes anyhow seems more practical than the first two for a bicycle on the road in less than ideal conditions.

Now I must ask, if you knew the context I meant it in and not as derision, what exactly was the stink about?

SmallFront

The first one isn't a real long-john.
And unless you don't count the person riding the bikes in the next two pictures, they are not front heavy. I would have to carry more than my own weight on the platform to make it heavy on the front relative to the rear.

As for commenting on you "schtick" comment, I did so, because it is based in physics, not unfounded opinion.

My modern long john:

RaleighSport

In your opinion that first one isn't, but the builder built it as one.

Can you compare the relative handling of your long john to an xtracycle or plain bicycle as well? I suspect there are major differences dues to the where the load area itself is.

SmallFront

I am aware that he has co-opted the name, but that one is more like an elongated short john, in that the load, just like the short-john is above the front wheel. The long john is a bike where the steering is behind a platform, and the platform behind the front wheel.

https://www.google.dk/search?q=short...w=1280&bih=720

I already did while explaining the physics.
Fully loaded, I take it: The physics are the same, so take some of the explanation from the extracycle explanations, and just shorten the distance between the two load points.

Yes, as I have already explained several times by now.

RaleighSport

Welp, you're not listening to me and you seem to feel the same about me. I don't see this as having any point in continuing. Best of luck to you in your endeavors my fellow cyclist.

SmallFront

Er, a low centre of gravity is a good thing when climbing, you know.

SmallFront

Well, at least I don't ignore it when the other person posts facts. I like how you once again avoid backing up anything and everything.
Not even acknowledging that what you had was an elongated short john. Yes, I am glad I don't have to continously point to places where I already explained things.

Did you even click the link?

RaleighSport

Alright, I'll bite at your bait here.

A low center of gravity is a wonderful thing when moving around large loads on a fairly flat smoothish surface (I never disagreed with this). But now if we take into consideration the points of gravity in the "balance triangle" and the distances between them, we get uneven weighting at different points in the bike (this will vary from long john design bike to bike, and even in load differences). At a certain point, depending how slick your tires are, width etc, as well as rider weight going uphill you run into issues such as losing traction with your rear tire, factor in mud and once you have a forward weight (and yes long johns despite a low center of gravity and great balance for flat road applications do indeed have a FORWARD center of gravity).

Now with a few key points already laid out in basic english, let's move on to real world applications.
Let's take into account rider environment,

In your case Copenhagen: IE flat, well paved and designed for cycling traffic, very ideal for a long john.

In my case Northern California: If I only rode south of where I live, sure flat well paved mostly and probably no issues. But I do ride north, areas such as the Geysers Rd, or out along Skaggs springs etc, even just going southwest up my road itself (which is another major cycling route here) there is broken pavement, treacherous hills and bad drivers.. I'd much rather tow a load than push one.

I did click your link, and the design difference between the common "short john" as you called it in those pictures and the bilenky are radical enough that I chose to simply not drag out a your opinion vs mine on something so trivial.

fietsbob

SF bought one of the aluminum framed Bullitts, they were made in Taiwan,
because there is where the best prices are available for fabricators and heat treatment facilities now.

then shipped back on seagoing container ships ..

jawnn

I like the short bikes more than the long ones, because they are more maneuverable.
But I am going to build myself a long one because they are reportedly easy to balance at slow speeds.



https://bicycledesign.net/2010/10/cam...stophe-machet/



https://www.tokyobybike.com/2014/02/f...rom-japan.html

There is going to be some major whining when this hits the fan:

jawnn

This one is about how to design a custom bicycle for people with carpel tunnel syndrome.

How to build an Ergonomic Cycle Truck

https://commutercycling.blogspot.com/2014/04/ergonomics-of-carpel-tunnel-syndrome.html

jawnn

SmallFront
Senior Member:

Am I the only who thinks that if you can't be bothered to do more than posting a couple of links to videos, rather than actually write, then why should we be bothered watching those videos?

Or, let me put it this way: Since you "don't live on the internet" and therefore can't find the time to write a response, why should we find the time to watch your videos?


I wonder why you do!