Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Commuting
Reload this Page >

ChipSeal needs our support

Notices
Commuting Bicycle commuting is easier than you think, before you know it, you'll be hooked. Learn the tips, hints, equipment, safety requirements for safely riding your bike to work.

ChipSeal needs our support

Old 04-03-10, 09:27 AM
  #51  
HardyWeinberg
GATC
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: south Puget Sound
Posts: 8,728
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 463 Post(s)
Liked 48 Times in 26 Posts
Originally Posted by gerv View Post
This is all very interesting, but I don't see anything particularly unusual in what he is doing. "Less than the normal speed". This is a qualifier that intrigues me. Mos of the streets I travel on have the majority of traffic moving at 10+ miles over the maximum. I bet that's the same in Ennis. If the police in Ennis were busy applying that law, they probably wouldn't give Chipseal a second look.
There are laws in the PNW against obstructing traffic, which is defined purely has having 5 or more cars (vehicles) stacked up behind you. If you have that, you are obligated to pull over. I've never seen it enforced, and it's aimed at logging trucks and RVs but it is independent of the speed of the cars stacked up behind you, the way it's written.

Of course, cars don't stack behind bikes, they do whatever they want to pass in or outside the lane.

Does language like 'left wheel track of right travel lane' exist outside the vehicular cycling world? Do motorcycles use that terminology?
HardyWeinberg is offline  
Old 04-03-10, 10:30 AM
  #52  
Hot Potato
Senior Member
 
Hot Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Western Chicagoland
Posts: 1,824
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I quoted my Illinois law to show the ambiguity. I must ride to the right. Except when its not safe. Who decides? The auto driver? The cop? The judge? The cyclist? How close is äs close as practible?" The bicycle law brochure put out by the Illinois secretary of state says you "should" ride all the way to the right, and doesn't mention exceptions. They want the cyclist obligated to make room, and only recently made it mandatory for the cars to make room with a "3-feet" law.

Perhaps I need to wander back and forth between the right and left part of the lane. Move right, see a possible hazard, move left. Repeat. It would bolster my claim to the left tire track while increasing my chances of being pulled over for a DUI. LOL.
Hot Potato is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 08:05 AM
  #53  
riddei
Needing more power Scotty
 
riddei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern New England (USA)
Posts: 588

Bikes: 2006 Trek T-80 (commuter) 1982 Bianchi SS (classic 12 speed)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well I thought I would revive this thread rather than start a new one. ChipSeal (Reed Bates) was CONVICTED of Reckless Endangerment on 8/17/2010. The judge reportedly stated:
"you may be right that it was safer for you to ride in the roadway, but what about other people?"
I am blown away at the lack of attention this decision has commanded on this and other forums. There seems to be an obscure amount of information regarding this. There should be an OUTCRY. Are you kidding me? The arrest went from "riding a bike in the road" (totally bogus), to "obstructing traffic" (which has been defeated in other cases), to "Reckless Endangerment". ChipSeal can't speak for himself because he is in jail.

I haven't posted here in a long time, but am I the only one that is saying WTF?
riddei is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 08:10 AM
  #54  
dynodonn 
Out on Parole
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1258 Post(s)
Liked 46 Times in 41 Posts
I was searching the internet just last week for news on Chipseal, and was finding only news from several months ago. Anyone have an idea on Chipseal's length of stay in the slammer?
dynodonn is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 08:17 AM
  #55  
HardyWeinberg
GATC
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: south Puget Sound
Posts: 8,728
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 463 Post(s)
Liked 48 Times in 26 Posts
reckless endangerment because cars have no choice but to avoid him in whatever path is available to them while maintaining their previously selected speed?
HardyWeinberg is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 08:38 AM
  #56  
Jtgyk
Senior Member
 
Jtgyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Richardson TX
Posts: 1,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Let's see some of the car drivers charged with reckless endangerment for flouting the speed limits and cruising 10 - 20mph over the posted maximum.
Seems pretty dangerous to me...
Sounds as if the Judge (elected position) didn't have much choice with the sheer number of 911 calls that had come in. (how many drivers called this in while driving?)
Maybe we should sit by the side of the road and put in a 911 for all the speeding motorists endangering law abiding cyclists and drivers.
It's shameful that they can keep changing the charge from the original citation when they see that it won't stick.

Notes on the trial on DFW Point-to Point
__________________
Hey, I'm just this GUY...you know?
>>>Team Critical Mess<<< (You mean it's not SUPPOSE to hurt?)

My nice new Nashbar Touring Build AKA "The Flying Avocadooooooooo!"
1998(?) Trek 700 Multitrack
1995 Trek 1220 AKA "Jimi"
Older Non-suspension Specialized Hardrock
Jtgyk is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 08:44 AM
  #57  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You are not the only one saying WTF.

A couple of updates:
https://cycledallas.blogspot.com/2010...-reckless.html
https://dfwptp.blogspot.com/2010/08/p...sus-bates.html

Originally Posted by DG
So it's "reckless" to ride in the road because he had the option of riding in the shoulder, and he chose not to ride there. What if there was no shoulder? Would it still be "reckless"?

Either the existence of a shoulder is what makes the behavior "reckless", because with the shoulder it was "reckless" to choose the less safe optio...n (never mind the alleged danger to others would be identical with or without a shoulder), or it's reckless and therefore unlawful to ride a bicycle on a road without a shoulder. Either way, it's absurd.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
https://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 09:09 AM
  #58  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,506
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2876 Post(s)
Liked 543 Times in 380 Posts
Originally Posted by Hot Potato View Post
I quoted my Illinois law to show the ambiguity. I must ride to the right. Except when its not safe. Who decides? The auto driver? The cop? The judge? The cyclist? How close is äs close as practible?"
It isn't that hard. Many, many, many cyclists manage just fine and don't get tickets.

You (the cyclist) decides but what you do has to seem reasonable to other people (ie, a jury).
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 09:14 AM
  #59  
acidfast7
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England / CPH
Posts: 8,543

Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid / 2013 Mango FGSS

Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1053 Post(s)
Liked 37 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by no motor? View Post
Wow, I'm really really glad I moved out of Texas years ago.
I moved to Europe after doing a PhD in Texas. Don't plan on moving back stateside ever.
acidfast7 is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 10:47 AM
  #60  
riddei
Needing more power Scotty
 
riddei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern New England (USA)
Posts: 588

Bikes: 2006 Trek T-80 (commuter) 1982 Bianchi SS (classic 12 speed)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
There are a number of Blogs that have stated that the League of American Bicyclists has been completely silent on this issue (crickets). I contacted the LAB and asked them why they were not stepping up to the plate to support someone with an issue of defending their right to the road. I received a reply within 24 hours from the president, Andy Clarke. Here is a paraphrase of his E-mail:
Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisors chose [ANOTHER APPROACH]. That approach took the issue beyond a strict legal argument as to where one is legally allowed to ride to where one should ride... As the situation has developed, Bates (and the people advising him) has unfortunately chosen to follow a strategy that our board and legal advisors did not think was in the best interests of all cyclists – from the initial trial by jury preference to a failure to show up for court dates and hearings to the pursuit of his position...
riddei is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 11:44 AM
  #61  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,506
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2876 Post(s)
Liked 543 Times in 380 Posts
Originally Posted by riddei View Post
There are a number of Blogs that have stated that the League of American Bicyclists has been completely silent on this issue (crickets). I contacted the LAB and asked them why they were not stepping up to the plate to support someone with an issue of defending their right to the road. I received a reply within 24 hours from the president, Andy Clarke. Here is a paraphrase of his E-mail:
Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisors chose [ANOTHER APPROACH]. That approach took the issue beyond a strict legal argument as to where one is legally allowed to ride to where one should ride... As the situation has developed, Bates (and the people advising him) has unfortunately chosen to follow a strategy that our board and legal advisors did not think was in the best interests of all cyclists – from the initial trial by jury preference to a failure to show up for court dates and hearings to the pursuit of his position...
Very interesting!
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 01:06 PM
  #62  
Mr IGH
afraid of whales
 
Mr IGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
18 days served and a $100 fine, could have been worse, the prosecutor was asking for an even stiffer sentance...I would have backed down when the cop pulled me over the first time.
Mr IGH is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 01:16 PM
  #63  
Aeneas
Clyde that Rides
 
Aeneas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 311

Bikes: 2008 Jamis Aurora,1988 Specialized Hardrock, 1980? Kuwahara Carrera

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
https://cycledallas.blogspot.com/2010...-reckless.html

From a VC POV, I can't see where he broke the law, nor do I see how failure to follow the instructions of a LEO to act in an illegal way should have resulted in a conviction in any way, but then again, I've never understood Texas. From my personal POV, depending on the condition and width of the available shoulder, I may have used that or ridden in the lane as conditions would dictate.
Aeneas is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 01:27 PM
  #64  
riddei
Needing more power Scotty
 
riddei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern New England (USA)
Posts: 588

Bikes: 2006 Trek T-80 (commuter) 1982 Bianchi SS (classic 12 speed)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Whether agreeing with the merits of this case or not, the outcome of this is very important for all cyclists (Texas and beyond). In this case, there was arguably an improved shoulder where he could have ridden. If the case was "does he have the right to ride in the travel lane", then yes, the decision should be decided that he did have the right. However, IF the case was "should every cyclist use the travel lane when there is an adequate shoulder", then you get the results of the decision found here.

However, we are now on a slippery slope. If there was a similar road without an adequate shoulder, and the cyclist is in the travel lane, can that cyclist be sited? This is really scary!

If a bike lane puts a cyclist in the door zone, and the cyclist chooses to travel outside of a bike lane, will they be charged? I ride decidedly outside of the door zone, bike lane or not. Citizen motorist says: "my taxes pay for a bike lane here, and this guy isn't using it, I'm dialing 911". The cop responds and says "I'm citing you for your own safety".

Not good.
riddei is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 03:07 PM
  #65  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,506
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2876 Post(s)
Liked 543 Times in 380 Posts
Originally Posted by riddei View Post
If a bike lane puts a cyclist in the door zone, and the cyclist chooses to travel outside of a bike lane, will they be charged
I think that the "door zone" issue is reasonably established as a "safety" issue (ie, it's suffices as a legal reason not to ride FRAP). "Must use" bicycle lane laws should have the "if it's safe to do so" exception.
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 04:19 PM
  #66  
trekker pete
pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ellington, ct
Posts: 1,034

Bikes: trek 1200, 520, Giant ATX 970, Raleigh Talon

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i understand there are pics on one of these blogs showing the area he was pulled over and that said area had a wide clean shoulder.

Could someone post a link to it as I haven't had much luck finding it.

Assuming there was a wide, clean shoulder (at least 8 ft or so) with no parked cars, I have little sympathy for him.

Cyclists should use common sense and a bit of consideration. The attitude of "F them, I have the right to a lane" is going to cause more bad feelings among cagers towards cyclists. We have enough all ready.

Not saying we need to cower in the gutter or on the sidewalk. There definitely are times where taking the lane is the smart thing to do. This doesn't sound like one of them.

But, then again, I haven't seen the pics, so who knows.
trekker pete is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 05:00 PM
  #67  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 22,035
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1,640 Times in 1,175 Posts
Originally Posted by trekker pete View Post
i understand there are pics on one of these blogs showing the area he was pulled over and that said area had a wide clean shoulder.
are you talking about this link? The shoulder is problematic in that you probably have to switch back and forth, and there are rumble strips. As more road departments are indiscriminately putting in rumble strips, we will be forced to ride in the road more. I'm not riding down a 1' strip of filthy rocky shoulder just so some motorist doesn't have to strain their brain trying to figure out how to pass without slowing.
unterhausen is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 05:09 PM
  #68  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
https://www.bikeleague.org/blog/2010/...ed-bates-case/

Picking Your Battles: The League & The Reed Bates Case

We have been following the Reed Bates’ case since pretty much the day the saga began. At the very outset, I called a couple of the people closely involved with Mr. Bates and offered the League’s help; it did appear that the charges were inappropriate, that Bates had a legal right to ride where he was riding, and that the jury that Bates chose to be heard by was incorrectly instructed by the first judge involved. On that basis, we would have been happy to help defend his right to ride on the road.

Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisers chose to assert that not only was Bates legally allowed to ride where he was riding, but that’s where he and everyone else should be riding, even in the presence of a perfectly rideable shoulder. That approach took the issue beyond a strict legal argument as to where one is legally allowed to ride to where one should ride, and a rural Texas courtroom may not be the best place to have that call made on our behalf. As the situation has developed, Bates (and the people advising him) has unfortunately chosen to follow a strategy that our board and legal advisers did not think was in the best interests of all cyclists – from the initial trial by jury preference to a failure to show up for court dates and hearings to the pursuit of a position that is simply not reasonable and could easily backfire.

We have remained in touch with the issue with local Dallas-area advocates, Bike Texas and our board of directors. It is instructive that none of us have chosen to get involved. I think we all regret that the way the case has been played by Bates and his advisers has precluded us from constructively intervening to help him and defend our collective rights to the road.

Andy Clarke
President, League of American Bicyclists
__________________
Cycling Advocate
https://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 05:13 PM
  #69  
10 Wheels
Galveston County Texas
 
10 Wheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In The Wind
Posts: 32,084

Bikes: 02 GTO, 2011 Magnum

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked 588 Times in 297 Posts
Texas has some crappy shoulders:
This one has mucho debris to the right of the rumble strip



And then there at these everywhere:

__________________
Fred "The Real Fred"

10 Wheels is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 06:17 PM
  #70  
riddei
Needing more power Scotty
 
riddei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern New England (USA)
Posts: 588

Bikes: 2006 Trek T-80 (commuter) 1982 Bianchi SS (classic 12 speed)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
https://www.bikeleague.org/blog/2010/...ed-bates-case/

Picking Your Battles: The League & The Reed Bates Case

We have been following the Reed Bates’ case since pretty much the day the saga began. At the very outset, I called a couple of the people closely involved with Mr. Bates and offered the League’s help; it did appear that the charges were inappropriate, that Bates had a legal right to ride where he was riding, and that the jury that Bates chose to be heard by was incorrectly instructed by the first judge involved. On that basis, we would have been happy to help defend his right to ride on the road.

Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisers chose to assert that not only was Bates legally allowed to ride where he was riding, but that’s where he and everyone else should be riding, even in the presence of a perfectly rideable shoulder. That approach took the issue beyond a strict legal argument as to where one is legally allowed to ride to where one should ride, and a rural Texas courtroom may not be the best place to have that call made on our behalf. As the situation has developed, Bates (and the people advising him) has unfortunately chosen to follow a strategy that our board and legal advisers did not think was in the best interests of all cyclists – from the initial trial by jury preference to a failure to show up for court dates and hearings to the pursuit of a position that is simply not reasonable and could easily backfire.

We have remained in touch with the issue with local Dallas-area advocates, Bike Texas and our board of directors. It is instructive that none of us have chosen to get involved. I think we all regret that the way the case has been played by Bates and his advisers has precluded us from constructively intervening to help him and defend our collective rights to the road.

Andy Clarke
President, League of American Bicyclists
This is the E-mail Andy sent to me. I paraphrased it in my post above because this case will be going to appeal. I hope that the LAB continues to offer support, because like it or not this outcome is going to set a bad precedent beyond Texas if it stands.
riddei is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 07:07 PM
  #71  
trekker pete
pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ellington, ct
Posts: 1,034

Bikes: trek 1200, 520, Giant ATX 970, Raleigh Talon

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
thanks for the link.

i would probably ride that shoulder, but, i can see why others would chose not to. i think this guy has been railroaded. i think he definitely could have handled it better, but being a little pigheaded should not result in a prison sentence.
trekker pete is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 11:52 PM
  #72  
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,025

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
yes, a poor legal strategy ,this case was lost on appeal. screwed the pooch in the name of the virtues of vehicular cycling. i've become convinced the furtive goal of the vc is to get us kicked off the roadways or constrained at the edge.

this is the type of case that leads in that direction due directly to the unwavering militant dogmatism of the supreme vehicular cyclists and their specious vision of road rights.

Ride safely right to share the road, not at the inside lane line of a state highway just because the law says you can if the lane isn't 14 feet wide!

poorly done, chipseal.

Last edited by Bekologist; 08-20-10 at 12:02 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 04:57 AM
  #73  
slcbob
bored of "Senior Member"
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: MD / metro DC
Posts: 2,164

Bikes: Cross-Check/Nexus commuter. Several others for various forms of play.

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 424 Post(s)
Liked 225 Times in 181 Posts
Thanks, riddei, that's very good info.
Originally Posted by riddei View Post
There are a number of Blogs that have stated that the League of American Bicyclists has been completely silent on this issue (crickets). I contacted the LAB and asked them why they were not stepping up to the plate to support someone with an issue of defending their right to the road. I received a reply within 24 hours from the president, Andy Clarke. Here is a paraphrase of his E-mail:
Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisors chose [ANOTHER APPROACH]. That approach took the issue beyond a strict legal argument as to where one is legally allowed to ride to where one should ride... As the situation has developed, Bates (and the people advising him) has unfortunately chosen to follow a strategy that our board and legal advisors did not think was in the best interests of all cyclists – from the initial trial by jury preference to a failure to show up for court dates and hearings to the pursuit of his position...
I looked into this case a while ago with the same knee-jerk outrage and sympathy I believe many here are predisposed to feel. From what is still admittedly only a cursory scan, I can see ChipSeal may be getting a bit of a good ol' boy going over (e.g. Brian Dennehy as Oregon sheriff) but for God's sake he seems absolutely intent on his own self-destruction and soap box advocacy beyond the realm of reason. He is no Rosa Parks and he is no poster child for riders' rights. He has been begging for this, and he's got it. I think he needs help, but not only of the legal support kind.

Again my cursory opinion. Just a drive-by, but I've circled the block twice and it looked like the same intentional train wreck each time.
slcbob is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 05:10 AM
  #74  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10719 Post(s)
Liked 2,738 Times in 1,880 Posts
Originally Posted by LAB
Our offer to assist was not accepted; instead, he and his advisers chose to assert that not only was Bates legally allowed to ride where he was riding, but that’s where he and everyone else should be riding, even in the presence of a perfectly rideable shoulder.
This is where it becomes interesting... the LAB seems to be saying that shoulder riding is acceptable, and Bates seems to think it is not and he is asserting this aspect.

Apparently this is where the LAB and the strict VC part company.
genec is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 05:48 AM
  #75  
tarwheel 
Senior Member
 
tarwheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 8,900

Bikes: Waterford RST-22, Bob Jackson World Tour, Ritchey Breakaway Cross, Soma Saga, De Bernardi SL, Specialized Sequoia

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 196 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Interesting case. I certainly would have taken the LAB's advice. Personally, if there's a good shoulder, I will ride it. However, I'll take the lane if there are rumble strips, glass, gravel, potholes, etc. in the shoulder.
tarwheel is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.