Originally Posted by sudo bike
(Post 15823501)
Look, there's nothing wrong with Dutch city bikes. I love them to death, and I think they're really cool.
In areas with little elevation differences, they're probably ideal, but on commutes like mine where everyday is a 400 ft climb to home, one can only guess at how long the "cool" factor would last. |
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 15823738)
Perhaps you should look at what kinds of bikes that most other cyclists ride beyond what is posted on the pages of Bike Forums (or other enthusiast media), and without your provincial blinders.
It would NOT be so clear to you about the popularity of drop bar bikes, outside of the relatively few weekend club riders and/or high speed enthusiasts such as yourself. Even less popular for most cyclists, including those who have drop bar equipped bikes, is actually riding with hands in the drops, especially within urban traffic. Without falling into this trap of stating yet another personal view of how one individual chooses to live their own life, I believe the following are fairly universal truths about human endeavors:
|
Originally Posted by seafood
(Post 15823799)
What is the purpose of such a statement? It seems this thread has gone from one Dutchman's perspective on American cycling to how to improve American cycling state of affairs to what the optimum mode of cycling is or should be. Who cares, frankly?
[Snip] I believe the following are fairly universal truths about human endeavors:
Your biased view of universal bicycling truth gets further perverted by others who view that only road bikes demonstrate that the owner has developed sufficient bicycling skill, advanced mastery, and continued conscious improvement to ride a bicycle "properly" or "efficiently" no matter how appropriate/inappropriate road bike selection is for the cycling situation. Perhaps some cyclists just want to get on their bikes and ride without trying to emulate the enthusiast's objective of advanced mastery and continued conscious improvement. |
Originally Posted by northernlights
(Post 15823088)
What Jaywalk3r said is indeed true. Spinal discs are gel-like materials in your spine that makes it bendable and flexible. They act like shock absorbers for your spine whenever you're running around, biking, jumping up and down or whatever. Without these flexible discs in your back you wouldn't be able to walk around or do much of anything.
http://www.spine-health.com/conditio...y/spinal-discs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interve...disc#Structure But seriously, I take issue with the condescending nature of the speaker on the video regarding road bikes, lycra, racing, all completely off topic to what he was commenting on, which is infrastructure, (and his ridiculous need to see people actually commuting, rather than just out riding for enjoyment). Personally, I'd like to see more people on bikes, whether it's a $$$ carbon fiber racing bike, or a BSO from the local big box. I also don't care what people wear (although I throw on the lycra pretty much every time). I don't get the same feeling from the speaker in the video. IMO, the tone of the video is at a minimum divisive, and without much of a stretch can be seen as downright hostile to certain riders. |
Originally Posted by RobertHurst
(Post 15822804)
...standing out of the saddle, a technique that most cyclists would benefit from using a lot more often, even in the city.
|
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 15823855)
Your "universal truths" in points 2-4, represent your own bias that developing bicycling skill, advanced mastery, and continued conscious improvement are the primary considerations of transportation cyclists ( cyclists with a goal of getting from one place to another destination by bicycle).
Your biased view of universal bicycling truth gets further perverted by others who view that only road bikes demonstrate that the owner has developed sufficient bicycling skill, advanced mastery, and continued conscious improvement to ride a bicycle "properly" or "efficiently" no matter how appropriate/inappropriate road bike selection is for the cycling situation. Perhaps some cyclists just want to get on their bikes and ride without trying to emulate the enthusiast's objective of advanced mastery and continued conscious improvement.
|
WTF is a FLAT bar ??? Other than a totally useless derogatory term invented by some lazy LBS bozo who only likes drop bars. Brake levers as far from the rider as possible ?? Goofy. Turkey levers ?? Dorky Ever see grocery bags hanging on racetoy bike drops ??? ha It is correct to say that palms FLAT down MTB bars are the fastest way to numb hands, and Ergons don't solve the problem. I have no problem with my swept back 70d Raleigh bars at seat height and angled down about 20d. I can grab the bends just fine for going up hills or into a wind. Sure, sometimes I could have used aerobars. On the highway doing centuries, most of my miles are One handed which are also some with my other hand behind my back for aero. Only exception is with a wind close to head on. Your weight needs to be on the heel of your hand to avoid numbness.
Blue jeans are tighter and slower, but I've never had chaffing problems on 80/90 mile rides. I usually will be wearing them on non-Hawaii weather days. Lots of those here and in Europe. Load bikes are NOT Road bikes. Those are Clubman bikes. |
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 15822069)
Your "obvious commuter" comment is just prejudice. WTH is an "obvious commuter"?
|
Originally Posted by B. Carfree
(Post 15822206)
That's nice, but not applicable in my state.
814.420 Failure to use bicycle lane or path; exceptions; penalty. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person commits the offense of failure to use a bicycle lane or path if the person operates a bicycle on any portion of a roadway that is not a bicycle lane or bicycle path when a bicycle lane or bicycle path is adjacent to or near the roadway. I've underlined the relevant passage. It's the equivalent of a "when practicable" clause. Paragraph (2) also provides an exception that may or may not be relevant to bike lanes in your area.(2) A person is not required to comply with this section unless the state or local authority with jurisdiction over the roadway finds, after public hearing, that the bicycle lane or bicycle path is suitable for safe bicycle use at reasonable rates of speed. (3) A person is not in violation of the offense under this section if the person is able to safely move out of the bicycle lane or path for the purpose of: (a) Overtaking and passing another bicycle, a vehicle or a pedestrian that is in the bicycle lane or path and passage cannot safely be made in the lane or path. (b) Preparing to execute a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (c) Avoiding debris or other hazardous conditions. (d) Preparing to execute a right turn where a right turn is authorized. (e) Continuing straight at an intersection where the bicycle lane or path is to the right of a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right. (4) The offense described in this section, failure to use a bicycle lane or path, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §700; 1985 c.16 §338; 2005 c.316 §3] |
Originally Posted by RobertHurst
(Post 15822400)
So it was the "bike shop people" who told you that you're more aero with your arms wide, and that your seat should be perfectly level?
Do you realize that you can put wide handlebars on a road bike and that it would still be a road bike? I can't respond to this stuff. |
Originally Posted by RobertHurst
(Post 15822424)
The natural shock absorbers you want to use are your arms and legs.
|
Originally Posted by Jaywalk3r
(Post 15823992)
Sure it is. It's right there in your state's statutes, freely available for you to read:
814.420 Failure to use bicycle lane or path; exceptions; penalty. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person commits the offense of failure to use a bicycle lane or path if the person operates a bicycle on any portion of a roadway that is not a bicycle lane or bicycle path when a bicycle lane or bicycle path is adjacent to or near the roadway. I've underlined the relevant passage. It's the equivalent of a "when practicable" clause. Paragraph (2) also provides an exception that may or may not be relevant to bike lanes in your area.(2) A person is not required to comply with this section unless the state or local authority with jurisdiction over the roadway finds, after public hearing, that the bicycle lane or bicycle path is suitable for safe bicycle use at reasonable rates of speed. (3) A person is not in violation of the offense under this section if the person is able to safely move out of the bicycle lane or path for the purpose of: (a) Overtaking and passing another bicycle, a vehicle or a pedestrian that is in the bicycle lane or path and passage cannot safely be made in the lane or path. (b) Preparing to execute a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (c) Avoiding debris or other hazardous conditions. (d) Preparing to execute a right turn where a right turn is authorized. (e) Continuing straight at an intersection where the bicycle lane or path is to the right of a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right. (4) The offense described in this section, failure to use a bicycle lane or path, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §700; 1985 c.16 §338; 2005 c.316 §3] All nicely said, but you forgot to realize with a mandatory bike lane law, an LEO can still issue you a citation, then you have to take the time and energy to fight it out in court. |
Originally Posted by RobertHurst
(Post 15822804)
A comfortable long-distance position does not somehow become uncomfortable for short rides, although it may be inappropriate for other reasons.
Originally Posted by RobertHurst
(Post 15822804)
For control purposes it helps to be off the saddle, sort of floating over the bike with the ability to shift the weight forward or back. In fact there is really no other way to maneuver a bike well when it comes to 'panic stops' or quick turns.
|
Originally Posted by CB HI
(Post 15822895)
And if we had Wikipedia at the time Einstein proposed his theory of E=mc2, there would be guys like you calling him non-sensical.
Calling you non-sensical, on the other hand, would be perfectly justified! |
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 15823738)
It would NOT be so clear to you about the popularity of drop bar bikes, outside of the relatively few weekend club riders and/or high speed enthusiasts such as yourself.
|
Originally Posted by Jaywalk3r
(Post 15823938)
Someone riding with zero cargo is not an obvious commuter.
|
Originally Posted by sudo bike
(Post 15823501)
Look, there's nothing wrong with Dutch city bikes. I love them to death, and I think they're really cool. But I think you are unfairly dismissing another kind of cycling you have very little experience with. There is nothing about a road-style frame that makes them any less competent for commuting. I'm not sure why you seem to be insisting on covering everyone else with the same blanket that covers you instead of just chalking it up to people being, ya know, different, and having different needs. You don't do any long-distance riding, so a city bike works for you. Great! I want to do city riding as well as being able to, say, go bike-camping, and I can't afford 2 bikes, so it makes more sense to me to get a bike that does both well.
Currently, my only bike is a steel singlespeed 29er. I'm car-free, so it's my commuter, as well as my recreational ride. Don't get me wrong, the bike is more fun than any other bike I've ever owned. I love it. However, had I realized that it would be my primary transportation when I bought it, I would have purchased something completely different. It certainly works as a commuter, in conjunction with a big backpack, but it isn't ideal by any stretch of the imagination. (I would argue that it's far better suited to the task than a road bike, but that isn't saying much.) Since my primary use for a bike is commuting, my next bike will be a purpose built commuter. That will allow me to use my singlespeed for only recreational riding, which in turn will allow me to make small adjustments that make it even better at the stuff that it's good at. If I'm buying a bike for a specific task, I'm not going to make any compromises with it. It won't have derailer gears or rim brakes, its chain will be fully enclosed, it will have plenty of cargo capacity, it will have plenty of clearance for wide tires and fenders, it will have a dynamo hub, and it won't require stretching out over the bike to ride. In other words, it will be optimized for commuting and utility riding. I'm under no illusions that such a bike is ideal for other kinds of riding. Would it work? Absolutely, but other bikes would be better suited. But those other kinds of riding aren't why I'm interested in that kind of bike. I'm interested in that kind of bike because, after a few years of being car-free, I recognize that those features are quite desirable for a commuter/utility bike, something the Dutch figured out long ago. |
Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53
(Post 15823937)
WTF is a FLAT bar ??? Other than a totally useless derogatory term invented by some lazy LBS bozo who only likes drop bars. Brake levers as far from the rider as possible ?? Goofy. Turkey levers ?? Dorky Ever see grocery bags hanging on racetoy bike drops ??? ha It is correct to say that palms FLAT down MTB bars are the fastest way to numb hands, and Ergons don't solve the problem. I have no problem with my swept back 70d Raleigh bars at seat height and angled down about 20d. I can grab the bends just fine for going up hills or into a wind. Sure, sometimes I could have used aerobars. On the highway doing centuries, most of my miles are One handed which are also some with my other hand behind my back for aero. Only exception is with a wind close to head on. Your weight needs to be on the heel of your hand to avoid numbness.
Blue jeans are tighter and slower, but I've never had chaffing problems on 80/90 mile rides. I usually will be wearing them on non-Hawaii weather days. Lots of those here and in Europe. Load bikes are NOT Road bikes. Those are Clubman bikes. |
Originally Posted by dynodonn
(Post 15823781)
In areas with little elevation differences, they're probably ideal, but on commutes like mine where everyday is a 400 ft climb to home, one can only guess at how long the "cool" factor would last.
|
Originally Posted by Jaywalk3r
(Post 15824127)
you don't assert that a Dutch city bike is too heavy to be ridden in the USA
|
Originally Posted by dynodonn
(Post 15824011)
All nicely said, but you forgot to realize with a mandatory bike lane law, an LEO can still issue you a citation, then you have to take the time and energy to fight it out in court.
|
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 15824143)
nice strawman.
|
Originally Posted by Jaywalk3r
(Post 15824195)
claim that city bikes are too heavy to be practical.
|
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
(Post 15824261)
Bollocks. No one has argued this.
The argument is bollocks, but that hasn't stopped people from making it. |
Originally Posted by Jaywalk3r
(Post 15824141)
If you can't make a 400 foot climb on a heavy bike, you won't be able to do it on a light bike, either. It's the engine, not the bike, that matters. My daily load often varies by as more than the difference between a light and heavy commuter, and makes no noticeable difference in my commute.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.