cycling Sierra Nevadas

[AMuzi]

http://ktla.com/2016/06/20/mountain-biker-slams-into-bear-in-freak-collision-caught-on-video/

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-21 06:20, AMuzi wrote:
> http://ktla.com/2016/06/20/mountain-biker-slams-into-bear-in-freak-collision-caught-on-video/
>

A literal case of hit and run :-)

There are some people in this NG who won't believe things like that. I
never saw a bear on my MTB but had a close call with a buck (of the mule
deer species). He rudely cut me off from behind at a 45 degree angle,
didn't even look at me and then just kept running. If it weren't for
hydraulic disc brakes we'd have crashed into each other.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[avag...@gmail.com]

https://goo.gl/ZyQCtf

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-21 07:30, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> https://goo.gl/ZyQCtf
>

Yeah, it's almost paradise out here. There aren't many places where you
get to enjoy vistas like this on the trail from Lotus to Folsom and they
can only be reached via MTB, hiking or some on horseback:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/CronanTrail.JPG

Thinking about whether moving to the St.George area (Utah) would make
sense. A friend with similar ideas just scoped that out last week and
I'll get to ask him about it on a ride this week. Their MTB trails are
better but AFAICT roads have little to no bicycle infrastructure and I
wouldn't like that.

[avag...@gmail.com]

ahhhhh swinging St George UT


https://www.google.com/#q=36+hours+in+St+George+ut


https://goo.gl/hvDDFT

[jbeattie]

Most roads have little to no bicycle infrastructure -- at least the roads in rural America. I don't know why you think St. George would be any different.
It's not the Netherlands.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

In our area (near Sacramento, CA) many roads do have a bicycle
infrastructure and this includes rural ones. Whenever a road section is
widened or restored from the ground up they put in bike lanes. Must be
some kind of law. For example, I use this road a lot and since they
provided wide enough shoulders and bike lanes the number of cyclists
there has substantially increased, including longhaul commuters:

https://goo.gl/maps/zL1zGuAvTwN2

This is also the road where, further down towards Folsom, a cyclist was
killed in the lane. Now there are bike lanes at that four-lane stretch
and she would still be alive had they been in back then.

Unfortunately that sometimes leads to a row of orphaned bike lanes but
that is still better than nothing.

Long story short I prefer areas that are not a step back WRT ease and
safety of bicycling versus where we live now. For me that's not just MTB
trails but I also want to be able to handle errands by bike like I do
now. I prefer not to have to ride in the lane a lot for that.

[jbeattie]

Dude, get a spine. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/St_George_Utah_city_limits_1.jpg

In town: http://tinyurl.com/ze7kz6g This could be you: https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2014/05/15/cycling-commuters-rise-bike-work-day/#.V2mJ-NJrhD8

If those in-town roads are too daunting, you need to be in assisted living. Or Amsterdam, your choice.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

Piece of cake, that sort of road I'd take any day and I do that a lot
here. This, OTOH, is absolutely not cool:

https://goo.gl/maps/tDXgBjBivPn

AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado City. I
would not want to live in a big city like St.George but rather in
Hurricane next door.

> In town: http://tinyurl.com/ze7kz6g This could be you:
> https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2014/05/15/cycling-commuters-rise-bike-work-day/#.V2mJ-NJrhD8
>

Quote "I usually see three or four cyclists on my four-mile journey to
work. My vision for the community is to see hundreds".

Three or four cyclist over four miles is nothing. Folsom has shown how
that's done. By building bicycle infrastructure.

> If those in-town roads are too daunting, you need to be in assisted
> living. Or Amsterdam, your choice.
>

In town it's fine. The connectors between towns out there often are not.
Now if there is an alternate route via singletrack I am all ok with
that. This is how it is between here and Placerville, all singletrack
until you get to the outskirts of town. Then paved bike paths and in the
center of town those end, it spills you onto Main Street. Which is ok, I
ride that all the time.

What I absolutely can't stand are 55mph highways with no shoulder but
several saloons at either end.

[jbeattie]

Why would you ever be on UT-59 or go to Colorado City? Are you FLDS?

> AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado City. I
> would not want to live in a big city like St.George but rather in
> Hurricane next door.

If you move to Hur-a-kin, you are in for some serious culture shock (although not as much as Colorado City). Don't go looking for any brew pubs or growler stations -- and don't expect any sympathy about the lack of bike lanes. Once off the main drag and away from the tourist traffic headed to Zion, life in small-town southern Utah is, well, unique. Rent before you buy.

-- Jay Beattie.

[avag...@gmail.com]

https://www.google.com/#q=best+mountain+biking+towns+in+america

if into MTB MTB MTB, an RV north south north south seasonal...is best for a few years.

one would notice J is presently in a highly rated MTB area.

a lot can be written abt Utah...mostly negating the desire to live there.

[Joerg]

No, I am a Lutheran. I want to have the freedom to go places without
having to use the car. For example, to give classes at the Mohave
College there or whatever. In the same way you could ask me "Why do you
need to ride to Placerville?" which is only possible with an MTB and
hard on the bike. Answer: Because I want to.

>
>> AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado
>> City. I would not want to live in a big city like St.George but
>> rather in Hurricane next door.
>
> If you move to Hur-a-kin, you are in for some serious culture shock
> (although not as much as Colorado City). Don't go looking for any
> brew pubs or growler stations -- and don't expect any sympathy about
> the lack of bike lanes. Once off the main drag and away from the
> tourist traffic headed to Zion, life in small-town southern Utah is,
> well, unique. Rent before you buy.
>

My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't
comin'. Other than that there's breweries:

http://www.zionbrewery.com/

Not much farther than our local breweries here. The problem is the
roads. Green Valley Road out here now has wide enough shoulders and
sometimes bike lanes. Zion Park Road in Utah mostly does not. If there
is an alternate MTB route that would be perfectly ok no matter how rough
but I don't know that (yet). This is why I have a stainless steel growler.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 6/22/2016 10:38 AM, Joerg wrote:
>
>
> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't
> comin'.

Then, in my experience, you're missing almost all of the best bicycling
territory in the U.S.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

Everyone has a different opinion about what "best" means. I have never
enjoyed and likely will never enjoy cycling on roads where there is the
constant din and smell of internal combustion engines. For me, a
combination of nice MTB trails and good cycling infrastructure is
"best". Our region comes very close to that ideal, with the exception of
a lack of bike paths and lanes in the immediate vicinity but 10mi east
that all changes for the better.

Not surprisingly the vast majority (almost all) cyclists I know think
the same way. Actually more extreme because they often try to convince
me to truck the MTBs to a trail access point while I try to convince
them to ride to those places on the MTBs. I don't mind having to swallow
a few miles of road as long as there is a reward later in the form of a
nice trail. Plus, of course, ideally also a brewpub.

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-22 09:28, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-06-22 08:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 6/22/2016 10:38 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't
>>> comin'.
>>
>> Then, in my experience, you're missing almost all of the best bicycling
>> territory in the U.S.
>>
>
> Everyone has a different opinion about what "best" means. I have never
> enjoyed and likely will never enjoy cycling on roads where there is the
> constant din and smell of internal combustion engines. For me, a
> combination of nice MTB trails and good cycling infrastructure is
> "best". Our region comes very close to that ideal, with the exception of
> a lack of bike paths and lanes in the immediate vicinity but 10mi east
> that all changes for the better.
>

I meant 10mi west.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

I was riding down a downhill road near a county park. There was a dirt parking area and a cross-walk painted on the street. There were no people visible so I was on it pretty hard and hitting 40 mph. Suddenly a herd of deer ran across and as I approached the very large Mule Deer buck turned towards me and dropped his horns apparently to protect his does.

There was no way I was going to stop in time but luckily the last deer crossed behind the buck and I passed to the right of them all.

But every single time I come down that way you can be sure I'm ultra watchful though I've never seen another deer there let alone a herd. And the asphalt is in such condition there now that doing 25 is pushing it.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:59:51 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-06-21 09:20, jbeattie wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:38:22 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> >> On 2016-06-21 07:30, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> https://goo.gl/ZyQCtf
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yeah, it's almost paradise out here. There aren't many places where
> >> you get to enjoy vistas like this on the trail from Lotus to Folsom
> >> and they can only be reached via MTB, hiking or some on horseback:
> >>
> >> http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/CronanTrail.JPG
> >>
> >> Thinking about whether moving to the St.George area (Utah) would
> >> make sense. A friend with similar ideas just scoped that out last
> >> week and I'll get to ask him about it on a ride this week. Their
> >> MTB trails are better but AFAICT roads have little to no bicycle
> >> infrastructure and I wouldn't like that.
> >
> > Most roads have little to no bicycle infrastructure -- at least the
> > roads in rural America. I don't know why you think St. George would
> > be any different. It's not the Netherlands.
> >
>
> In our area (near Sacramento, CA) many roads do have a bicycle
> infrastructure and this includes rural ones. Whenever a road section is
> widened or restored from the ground up they put in bike lanes. Must be
> some kind of law. For example, I use this road a lot and since they
> provided wide enough shoulders and bike lanes the number of cyclists
> there has substantially increased, including longhaul commuters:

The Federal government supplies funding for road work if they include bicycle facilities. That's why they're showing up even in dumpy little towns that you'd never expect.

[cycl...@gmail.com]

The cost of homes in St. George is high as is the property taxes.

[jbeattie]

UT-59 is rideable. It is not a restricted, car-only road. https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=200404201454221 It may not be to your taste, but that's another matter.

>
> >
> >> AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado
> >> City. I would not want to live in a big city like St.George but
> >> rather in Hurricane next door.
> >
> > If you move to Hur-a-kin, you are in for some serious culture shock
> > (although not as much as Colorado City). Don't go looking for any
> > brew pubs or growler stations -- and don't expect any sympathy about
> > the lack of bike lanes. Once off the main drag and away from the
> > tourist traffic headed to Zion, life in small-town southern Utah is,
> > well, unique. Rent before you buy.
> >
>
> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't
> comin'. Other than that there's breweries:
>
> http://www.zionbrewery.com/
>
> Not much farther than our local breweries here. The problem is the
> roads. Green Valley Road out here now has wide enough shoulders and
> sometimes bike lanes. Zion Park Road in Utah mostly does not. If there
> is an alternate MTB route that would be perfectly ok no matter how rough
> but I don't know that (yet). This is why I have a stainless steel growler.

Really? It's quite a way from St. George and still a hop from Hur-a-kin (my son makes fun of the local pronunciation -- that and "Tooele.") Long way to ride for a beer, and you assume they can fill growlers -- a wrong assumption for any beer over 4 percent ABV. Above that limit, you have to purchase the beer "pre-packaged," viz., not in your own growler -- and must be beer made onsite. That's my understand, but I'll confirm it when I'm in SLC in August -- getting my ass kicked up a bunch of 5-6,000 foot climbs in 100 degree heat. Time to start doping.

I've ridden on Zion Park Road and all through Zion, mostly. Beware of the shuttle buses and not being able to ride through the Zion-Mt. Carmel Tunnel. There are some tough grades, too. I didn't see any bicycles with skeletons by the side of the road. No mountain lions. You'll live. You might want to consider changing your name to "Elder Joerg" if you relocate to any seriously small town in southern Utah.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 6/22/2016 12:28 PM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-06-22 08:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 6/22/2016 10:38 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't
>>> comin'.
>>
>> Then, in my experience, you're missing almost all of the best bicycling
>> territory in the U.S.
>>
>
> Everyone has a different opinion about what "best" means. I have never
> enjoyed and likely will never enjoy cycling on roads where there is the
> constant din and smell of internal combustion engines. For me, a
> combination of nice MTB trails and good cycling infrastructure is
> "best". Our region comes very close to that ideal, with the exception of
> a lack of bike paths and lanes in the immediate vicinity but 10mi east
> that all changes for the better.
>
> Not surprisingly the vast majority (almost all) cyclists I know think
> the same way.

If your only choices are between trails (MTB or MUP) and roads with
constant traffic, perhaps you live in the wrong area.

In the rural areas of the midwest, there are hundreds of small two-lane
roads, with alternative choices frequently closer than a mile apart.
The state highways among those will have some traffic, but even those
are often far quieter than your "constant din and smell."

Example: I led a 40 mile club ride Saturday despite being sick. Since
I wasn't feeling well, I re-routed from five miles on a very quiet but
hilly road to a flat, parallel state route. I'd estimate we got passed
by maybe 30 cars. Oh, and two big trucks, with both truckers waiting
patiently until there was room to pass in the opposing lane.

Most of the rest of the ride was on beautiful, small-scale roads,
including two that passed through the middle of farm yards. On some
roads, there might be one car passing us every three miles or so.

It's not all that way, of course; and I'm competent and comfortable on
busier roads. But I wander and seek out such quiet roads for recreation
rides, and there are literally hundreds in my riding territory.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[avag...@gmail.com]

on the map looks like St G is a burb of LVN.

My forays into UT were to Capitol Reef and environs ..... absorbing for a poss film script.

I was continuously attacked. Prostitutes ran campgrounds controlled hiking. No dough no camping.

Attacked at Walmart. Walmart cheered the attack. Walmart(s)

Witnessed for an auto accident, the cops hooted jeered and threatened.

Of the people, families claimed X acres. Over time land was divided, subdivided...until the process forced the next generation flight to South America for genocide and national theft.

Heavy going.

I have not seen any bicycles in UT. and not in Zion fersure.

But never been near Moab which is in Colorado

[Joerg]

My MTB buddy was just there on his motorcycle and he said that you can
get a decent home for <$200k, just like what my own research showed.
However, one has to watch out that it is really a main residence, else
they sock it to you. Read the 12-13-2010 post here about a guy whose
taxes dropped way down by simply moving from San Diego to St.George:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/st-george/1118586-wow-received-my-property-tax-bill-2.html

There is much less union cronyism and probably also less corruption
which keeps costs down.

[Joerg]

It is most certainly not my taste. This is my taste, more or less
parallels Hwy 50 into the hills, rode it yesterday:

http://s31.photobucket.com/user/otbp_nocal/media/Train%20Track%20Ride/DSC01972Medium.jpg.html

>>
>>>
>>>> AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado
>>>> City. I would not want to live in a big city like St.George
>>>> but rather in Hurricane next door.
>>>
>>> If you move to Hur-a-kin, you are in for some serious culture
>>> shock (although not as much as Colorado City). Don't go looking
>>> for any brew pubs or growler stations -- and don't expect any
>>> sympathy about the lack of bike lanes. Once off the main drag
>>> and away from the tourist traffic headed to Zion, life in
>>> small-town southern Utah is, well, unique. Rent before you buy.
>>>
>>
>> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I
>> ain't comin'. Other than that there's breweries:
>>
>> http://www.zionbrewery.com/
>>
>> Not much farther than our local breweries here. The problem is the
>> roads. Green Valley Road out here now has wide enough shoulders
>> and sometimes bike lanes. Zion Park Road in Utah mostly does not.
>> If there is an alternate MTB route that would be perfectly ok no
>> matter how rough but I don't know that (yet). This is why I have a
>> stainless steel growler.
>
> Really? It's quite a way from St. George and still a hop from
> Hur-a-kin (my son makes fun of the local pronunciation -- that and
> "Tooele.") Long way to ride for a beer, and you assume they can fill
> growlers -- a wrong assumption for any beer over 4 percent ABV.
> Above that limit, you have to purchase the beer "pre-packaged," viz.,
> not in your own growler -- and must be beer made onsite.

They do fill growlers:

http://www.zionbrewery.com/zion-canyon-brewpub/


> ... That's my

> understand, but I'll confirm it when I'm in SLC in August --

Each county and city can have their own laws as well so what you find in
SLC may not apply in St.George. Many such ordinances border on
meshugginah, as explained to me yesterday by a brewpub owner. I almost
could not believe what he told me. IMNSHO opinion we need smaller
government. Way smaller.


> ... getting

> my ass kicked up a bunch of 5-6,000 foot climbs in 100 degree heat.

We went yesterday. Not 100F but only 98F or so, up and down on the MTB
trail with a friend and his brother from Oregon. Almost all Oregonians
who have visited so far are very skilled and fit when it comes to
mountain biking. The destination was, of course, a brewpub.

I tacked on another five miles when the guys were tired and sure enough
went OTB. A piece of wood was kicked up by the front tire, went into the
spokes, came to an abrupt halt at the fork and ... haven't crashed in
over a year so I guess my number has come up again.

Kind of tough to type when the fingertips are blue and hurt.


> Time to start doping.

:-)

>
> I've ridden on Zion Park Road and all through Zion, mostly. Beware of
> the shuttle buses and not being able to ride through the Zion-Mt.
> Carmel Tunnel. There are some tough grades, too. I didn't see any
> bicycles with skeletons by the side of the road. No mountain lions.
> You'll live. You might want to consider changing your name to "Elder
> Joerg" if you relocate to any seriously small town in southern Utah.
>

If I became an elder at our church first and then move they might take
me :-)

Can I keep riding in T-shirt, jeans and sandals or would they make me
wear a white shirt and tie?

[Joerg]

Finally something the government did right.

[AMuzi]

If such a thing exists, I haven't seen it. I ride out of my
way to avoid kiddie paths.

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-22 13:11, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 6/22/2016 12:28 PM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-06-22 08:08, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 6/22/2016 10:38 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I
>>>> ain't
>>>> comin'.
>>>
>>> Then, in my experience, you're missing almost all of the best bicycling
>>> territory in the U.S.
>>>
>>
>> Everyone has a different opinion about what "best" means. I have never
>> enjoyed and likely will never enjoy cycling on roads where there is the
>> constant din and smell of internal combustion engines. For me, a
>> combination of nice MTB trails and good cycling infrastructure is
>> "best". Our region comes very close to that ideal, with the exception of
>> a lack of bike paths and lanes in the immediate vicinity but 10mi east
>> that all changes for the better.
>>
>> Not surprisingly the vast majority (almost all) cyclists I know think
>> the same way.
>
> If your only choices are between trails (MTB or MUP) and roads with
> constant traffic, perhaps you live in the wrong area.
>

No, because of those MTB trails and MUP I live in a good area. But it is
in a leftist state and, therefore, cost is very high. That makes this
area less attractive.

> In the rural areas of the midwest, there are hundreds of small two-lane
> roads, with alternative choices frequently closer than a mile apart. The
> state highways among those will have some traffic, but even those are
> often far quieter than your "constant din and smell."
>
> Example: I led a 40 mile club ride Saturday despite being sick. Since
> I wasn't feeling well, I re-routed from five miles on a very quiet but
> hilly road to a flat, parallel state route. I'd estimate we got passed
> by maybe 30 cars. Oh, and two big trucks, with both truckers waiting
> patiently until there was room to pass in the opposing lane.
>
> Most of the rest of the ride was on beautiful, small-scale roads,
> including two that passed through the middle of farm yards. On some
> roads, there might be one car passing us every three miles or so.
>
> It's not all that way, of course; and I'm competent and comfortable on
> busier roads. But I wander and seek out such quiet roads for recreation
> rides, and there are literally hundreds in my riding territory.
>

We have quiet roads as well but not that many anymore. Mainly because
some developer bri ... ahm ... "convinced" the politicos that it's a
really good idea to add some 700 homes over yonder. Then you have
yuppies in their sports cars tearing down the formerly quiet rural road.

I prefer an area like where I live now, where there are lots of bike
paths (unfortunately not starting until you get 10mi out of town) and
good MTB trails (starting right in town). Some MTB trails can also be
used for utility rides.

[Frank Krygowski]

Sounds like you'll never be able to travel overnight using your bike. Sad.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

This is not a kiddie path:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/Bikelane1.JPG

That measuring stick is two meters long which is about 6ft. Why would
any cyclist avoid excellent infrastructure like that? It has resulted in
a nice increase in riders out here. Plus new bike shops like the one
where I bought my MTB.

[Joerg]

Huh? As you should know by now I have excellent powerful lighting on my
bikes. The next time I will travel at night will be ... tonight. And
yes, this time all via roads because unfortunately there ain't no
cycling facilities on that route. There definitely should be because I
am the only one riding there at night and others generally say it's a
suicide mission, thus they won't ride. Everyone except me will,
therefore, come by car. You can stick your head in the sand about it but
the fact remains that the vast majority of people will not ride without
cycling infrastructure. Not even at daytime.

[Frank Krygowski]

I was referring to traveling somewhere more than a day's ride away using
your bike. Bike touring. Riding several days for a vacation. Riding
to visit an old friend in a distant city. Exploring the country via
bicycle.

If a person limits themselves to trails, or even avoids any highway with
significant traffic, he can never get that experience.

> Everyone except me will,
> therefore, come by car. You can stick your head in the sand about it but
> the fact remains that the vast majority of people will not ride without
> cycling infrastructure. Not even at daytime.

The vast majority of people will not ride any significant distance no
matter what. MUPs attract a "drive to the bike path" crowd, who will
ride five miles up, then turn around and ride back.

This won't change with any realistic amount of bike infrastructure. In
fact, in America, it won't change without some catastrophic changes in
society.

But in the meantime, those like you yelling "The roads are too
dangerous!!! You MUST have bike lanes and paths to be safe!!!" are not
helping. Your false fear mongering dissuades bicycling here and now.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-23 09:00, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 6/23/2016 11:09 AM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-06-23 07:55, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like you'll never be able to travel overnight using your bike.
>>> Sad.
>>>
>>
>> Huh? As you should know by now I have excellent powerful lighting on my
>> bikes. The next time I will travel at night will be ... tonight. And
>> yes, this time all via roads because unfortunately there ain't no
>> cycling facilities on that route. There definitely should be because I
>> am the only one riding there at night and others generally say it's a
>> suicide mission, thus they won't ride.
>
> I was referring to traveling somewhere more than a day's ride away using
> your bike. Bike touring. Riding several days for a vacation. Riding
> to visit an old friend in a distant city. Exploring the country via
> bicycle.
>
> If a person limits themselves to trails, or even avoids any highway with
> significant traffic, he can never get that experience.
>

You seem to have never hiked or mountain-biked in really remote lands.
Try it. It will make you rethink the above statement.

>> Everyone except me will,
>> therefore, come by car. You can stick your head in the sand about it but
>> the fact remains that the vast majority of people will not ride without
>> cycling infrastructure. Not even at daytime.
>
> The vast majority of people will not ride any significant distance no
> matter what. MUPs attract a "drive to the bike path" crowd, who will
> ride five miles up, then turn around and ride back.
>

The distance I have to ride tonight will be less than five miles yet I
have never seen any other cyclist while riding that stretch at night and
even during the day only precious few. One of the reasons is this:

https://goo.gl/maps/XorzbUHiGVs

What you occasionally see is a cyclist taking the chicken exit and
illegally riding on the pedestrian path on the right.

> This won't change with any realistic amount of bike infrastructure.

Folsom has proven the contrary. So have many other areas. Read up on
Manhattan.


> ... In

> fact, in America, it won't change without some catastrophic changes in
> society.
>

It can change without that and has in areas with smart decision makers.

> But in the meantime, those like you yelling "The roads are too
> dangerous!!! You MUST have bike lanes and paths to be safe!!!" are not
> helping. Your false fear mongering dissuades bicycling here and now.
>

Sorry, but you are wrong about that. Talk to people.

[Frank Krygowski]

>> This won't change with any realistic amount of bike infrastructure.
>
>
> Folsom has proven the contrary. So have many other areas. Read up on
> Manhattan.

Are you really pretending that "the vast majority" of people in Folsom
and Manhattan ride significant distances on bicycles??

Please look up the definition of "vast majority"!


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

So in your eyes anyone who won't ride 100mi every other day is a wuss
and doesn't count?

> Please look up the definition of "vast majority"!
>

A significant distance is a different number of miles to each person. If
a shopper in Folsom rides the 5mi from their home to Home Depot by bike
instead of like usual in their car that is significant. Same for all
those folks who started to commute to Intel since bike paths were built.

For me a significant distance is 20mi, for others it's 5mi. Regardless,
the benefit for health and environment is substantial. Is that so hard
to understand?

Fact is, the vast majority will simply not ride at all unless there is
cycling infrastructure. Not one single mile.

[Frank Krygowski]

I didn't say that. I do say that "the vast majority" (your words) of
people in Folsom or Manhattan do NOT now ride any significant distance
on their bikes. That will remain true for any reasonable definition of
"significant distance" and will remain true whether or not there are
bike facilities nearby.

BTW, we could attempt to work up a definition of "significant distance"
if you like. Personally, I'd accept a distance of (say) one mile,
perhaps three times per week, providing those trips made a difference -
say, by replacing car trips.

> Fact is, the vast majority will simply not ride at all unless there is
> cycling infrastructure. Not one single mile.

And in America, that's also true even if there is cycling infrastructure.

We are _so_ close to agreement!


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-23 11:20, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 6/23/2016 1:06 PM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-06-23 09:57, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 6/23/2016 12:15 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>>> On 2016-06-23 09:00, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 6/23/2016 11:09 AM, Joerg wrote:

[...]

>>>>>> Everyone except me will,
>>>>>> therefore, come by car. You can stick your head in the sand about it
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> the fact remains that the vast majority of people will not ride
>>>>>> without
>>>>>> cycling infrastructure. Not even at daytime.
>>>>>
>>>>> The vast majority of people will not ride any significant distance no
>>>>> matter what. MUPs attract a "drive to the bike path" crowd, who will
>>>>> ride five miles up, then turn around and ride back.
>>>>
>>>>> This won't change with any realistic amount of bike infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Folsom has proven the contrary. So have many other areas. Read up on
>>>> Manhattan.
>>>
>>> Are you really pretending that "the vast majority" of people in Folsom
>>> and Manhattan ride significant distances on bicycles??
>>>
>>
>> So in your eyes anyone who won't ride 100mi every other day is a wuss
>> and doesn't count?
>
> I didn't say that. I do say that "the vast majority" (your words) of
> people in Folsom or Manhattan do NOT now ride any significant distance

> on their bikes. ...


I never said they did. I said they would not ever entertain the thought
without cycling infrastructure. Because that's how it is. Once you have
cycling infrastructure people start feeling safe and use the bike.
Still, most of them will eventually succumb to excuses such as "It's too
hot", "It's too cold", "It could rain soon", "I'll run out of breath"
and so on. That is normal because a bicycle ridden in an expeditious
manner requires fitness which most people do not have and do not have
the patience to attain. Yet the ones who stick with it are well worth
the investment. Luckily more and more decision makers begin to
understand this. In the Netherlands they've understood it more than half
a century ago.


> ... That will remain true for any reasonable definition of

> "significant distance" and will remain true whether or not there are
> bike facilities nearby.
>
> BTW, we could attempt to work up a definition of "significant distance"
> if you like. Personally, I'd accept a distance of (say) one mile,
> perhaps three times per week, providing those trips made a difference -
> say, by replacing car trips.
>

That's what I wrote, replacing car trips. It works in Folsom, it works
in Manhattan, it works almost anywhere they put in cycling
infrastructure. It most definitely works in the Netherlands where I
lived and cycled for over half a decade. I never cycled more miles per
year than during that time, north of 6000mi/year.

Pundits then point to a few places here and there such as Milton-Keynes
where the cycling infrastructure is, to a substantial degree,
"sub-optimal" or even hardcore messed up. And without ever knowing how
it would have been without any infrastructure at all.

>> Fact is, the vast majority will simply not ride at all unless there is
>> cycling infrastructure. Not one single mile.
>
> And in America, that's also true even if there is cycling infrastructure.
>
> We are _so_ close to agreement!
>

We aren't. In America we will never get more than a low single-digit
percentage of people to use a bicycle for utility rides except in very
few cities such as Davis, CA. However, here, even 1-2% is progress. From
there it could go to 3%, then 4%, then ... simply by means of peer
pressure. Cases in point were some people around here. I continuously
nagged them with "You want to use your car for THAT? Seriously?" until
they occasionally used a bike or hoofed it.

[John B.]

Something I've always wondered about is the relationship between "bike
paths" and numbers of cyclists. Does building bike paths result in an
increase in the number of cyclists?

It is probably heresy but a couple of roads I ride over do have "bike
paths", i.e., a wider than usually a side walk, perhaps 10 or 15 feet
wide, with a sign depicting a bicycle, and while the number of
bicycles I see on a Sunday ride has increased in the past few years, I
can't remember ever seeing anyone ride on the Bike Path.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 6/23/2016 7:51 PM, John B. wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:00:40 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
>>
>> The vast majority of people will not ride any significant distance no
>> matter what. MUPs attract a "drive to the bike path" crowd, who will
>> ride five miles up, then turn around and ride back.
>>
>> This won't change with any realistic amount of bike infrastructure. In
>> fact, in America, it won't change without some catastrophic changes in
>> society.
>>
>> But in the meantime, those like you yelling "The roads are too
>> dangerous!!! You MUST have bike lanes and paths to be safe!!!" are not
>> helping. Your false fear mongering dissuades bicycling here and now.
>
> Something I've always wondered about is the relationship between "bike
> paths" and numbers of cyclists. Does building bike paths result in an
> increase in the number of cyclists?
>
> It is probably heresy but a couple of roads I ride over do have "bike
> paths", i.e., a wider than usually a side walk, perhaps 10 or 15 feet
> wide, with a sign depicting a bicycle, and while the number of
> bicycles I see on a Sunday ride has increased in the past few years, I
> can't remember ever seeing anyone ride on the Bike Path.

What you're describing sounds more like what's now termed a "cycle
track" in the U.S. They're all the rage among pie-in-the-sky advocates,
although they're very uncommon here (only about 200 miles of them in the
entire U.S.) Other relevant bike facilities are completely separate
Multi-User Paths (mostly on abandoned railroad beds) and simple
painted-stripe bike lanes in streets, next to the curb.

I think there's generally an observed increase in the number of people
riding on these things compared to on plain streets. That's not always
true, however. (One town I visit weekly has some very nice-looking bike
lanes, in which I've seen a total of about ten bikes in five years.) A
certain percentage of those users may be people who would otherwise have
simply ridden a parallel street, but are attracted to re-route because
of the facility, and so don't represent an actual increase.

But there's almost certainly a goodly number of people attracted to
bicycling by rail-trail MUPs and the like. However, almost all of those
are cyclists of the variety who drive to the path with their bike on
their car, ride out & back, then drive home.

Our club ride the other night passed through a parking lot for one of
those paths. One car inched its way in and clogged things up while the
driver realized there were no parking spaces left. As one of my friends
noted "There's something wrong with America when too many people think
they have to drive to a place so they can ride their bike."

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

I didn't mean people using the "bike path" but rather when bicycle
paths, meaning any special bicycle path, road, byway, etc., are built
do the total number of cyclists in that geographical area increase?

Given what appears to be the present "danger, danger" attitude toward
bicycles one might expect that given a safe highway that bicycle use
would increase dramatically.

Here bicycles don't seem to be considered particularly dangerous, and
I've never seen an article on the news about "bike crash". Not that it
might not have happened but I certainly haven't read about it.

But I think that, perhaps, here people may have a different view of
things. A few years ago a friend of my wife stepped off the bus and
was hit by a motorcycle that was passing the bus on the curb side, and
died the next day. We attended the wake and the comments I heard were
of the "she should have looked", or "why didn't she look" variety.

>Our club ride the other night passed through a parking lot for one of
>those paths. One car inched its way in and clogged things up while the
>driver realized there were no parking spaces left. As one of my friends
>noted "There's something wrong with America when too many people think
>they have to drive to a place so they can ride their bike."

I see that occasionally here although to be honest it usually seems to
be a group hauling four of five bikes somewhere. I once stopped at the
junction of a lane and a main road and a pickup with two mountain
bikes on board stopped in front of me. Two guys jumped out to check
that the bikes were secure and spoke to me, the usual "Morning, how
you doing" sort of conversation. I asked the guys where they were
going and they were driving about 200 km. to ride in a race.

--
cheers,

John B.

[Joerg]

It does increase ridership and reduces accident risk. One example out of
many:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/bicyclists/bikestats.shtml#statistics

Moreover, business also increases:

http://spm.ei.columbia.edu/files/2013/11/6.-Bike-Lanes.sc_.pdf

Quote "For instance, the 9th avenue bike lane is correlated with an
increase in retail sales in local businesses by 49%, while there was
only a 3% growth in other local businesses throughout Manhattan".

> Given what appears to be the present "danger, danger" attitude toward
> bicycles one might expect that given a safe highway that bicycle use
> would increase dramatically.
>
> Here bicycles don't seem to be considered particularly dangerous, and
> I've never seen an article on the news about "bike crash". Not that it
> might not have happened but I certainly haven't read about it.
>

I can't imagine your news outlets being that callous about such accident.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/feb/18/british-cyclists-killed-thailand

> But I think that, perhaps, here people may have a different view of
> things. A few years ago a friend of my wife stepped off the bus and
> was hit by a motorcycle that was passing the bus on the curb side, and
> died the next day. We attended the wake and the comments I heard were
> of the "she should have looked", or "why didn't she look" variety.
>

That is callous :-(

Nobody needs to anticipate a motorcycle roaring along on the sidewalk.

>> Our club ride the other night passed through a parking lot for one of
>> those paths. One car inched its way in and clogged things up while the
>> driver realized there were no parking spaces left. As one of my friends
>> noted "There's something wrong with America when too many people think
>> they have to drive to a place so they can ride their bike."
>
> I see that occasionally here although to be honest it usually seems to
> be a group hauling four of five bikes somewhere. I once stopped at the
> junction of a lane and a main road and a pickup with two mountain
> bikes on board stopped in front of me. Two guys jumped out to check
> that the bikes were secure and spoke to me, the usual "Morning, how
> you doing" sort of conversation. I asked the guys where they were
> going and they were driving about 200 km. to ride in a race.
>

A race is different but the issue of people trucking bikes to a
trailhead can be handled. This is why I adamantly opposed paving a long
rail trail out here to the tune of about $50M. Instead, I suggested to
use that money to first built bike paths to that trail and most of all
along the main thoroughfare through town and into the next towns.

So far that's gone nowhere. Therefore, people keep trucking their bikes.
Commuters often truck theirs to the beginning of the bike path in the
valley and then continue the rest of their commute in the saddle.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

http:www.outsideonline.com/1857186/moab-highline-festival

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:19:46 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
> http://ktla.com/2016/06/20/mountain-biker-slams-into-bear-in-freak-collision-caught-on-video/

>
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

http://www.outsideonline.com/1857186/moab-highline-festival

[avag...@gmail.com]

[cycl...@gmail.com]

More and more in the SF Bay Area the backroads are being covered with traffic that seems to have no real place to go. Even when it would be faster to drive down a wide open road to the freeway and take that you will see people trying to "go places" on these backroads and hence speeding well above a safe speed.

Last week I was on these backroads and had a car passing me every 15 seconds even on blind turns. You would think that the law of averages would catch up with them but so far I haven't seen or more importantly been involved in these insane driving practices.

You HAVE to make drivers afraid to break the law and the police refuse to do that. They shut their eyes to even dramatically bad driving.

[jbeattie]

It all depends. The newest facility near my house is the new Sellwood Bridge: http://www.safdierabines.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Sellwood.jpg (still under construction). I took the lane on the old bridge, and the timid inched along a very narrow sidewalk with runners and walkers and opposite direction bicycle riders. Now the timid have a big bike facility. The bottom line is that IF you wanted to go east/west, you took the bridge -- like it or not. I doubt the new facility will increase bicycle traffic, but it will make life easier for the timid.

The facility on the west side of the bridge is a mile and half climb through a cemetery -- which used to be my secret route (me and the occasional other cyclist). The cemetery agreed to make it an official route (with sharrows) for a little payola, and now its relatively crowded -- and a drag race on a sunny day. It's a great route. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUXgvgWIURY&list=PL6EkoTQ-trsLeLHoPIvA3iDYsfQCgFvIR The section at 1:21 is a steep climb, and you have to hold your line or get whacked by descending cyclists on busy days. I think there is a fair amount of commuter traffic, too.

Some facilities add riders -- the bike boulevards on the east side of town, the big bike lane on N. Williams, the Springwater Corridor. Some or simply novelties and others are hazardous. It seems to me that the simplest facilities that are located in flat areas with dense populations and narrow existing roads produce the greatest gains in cyclists.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

On 2016-06-23 15:40, DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH wrote:
> http:www.outsideonline.com/1857186/moab-highline-festival
>

One guy walking barefoot with beer in hand :-)

[John B.]

On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 07:23:13 +0100, Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk>
wrote:

>John B. <slocom...@gmail.xyz> considered Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:28:43

>Very rarely - the less experienced just change their route to include
>the facilities - although the more experienced (road) cyclists may
>well change their routes to avoid them!

>>
>>Given what appears to be the present "danger, danger" attitude toward
>>bicycles one might expect that given a safe highway that bicycle use
>>would increase dramatically.
>

>It's just become the standard excuse (neatly provided by so many
>existing cyclists) for being lazy.

>>
>>Here bicycles don't seem to be considered particularly dangerous, and
>>I've never seen an article on the news about "bike crash". Not that it
>>might not have happened but I certainly haven't read about it.
>>
>>But I think that, perhaps, here people may have a different view of
>>things. A few years ago a friend of my wife stepped off the bus and
>>was hit by a motorcycle that was passing the bus on the curb side, and
>>died the next day. We attended the wake and the comments I heard were
>>of the "she should have looked", or "why didn't she look" variety.
>

>That I find very strange, if the bus had stopped to allow passengers
>on or off.\

Buses normally stop close to the curb but if there are two buses
stopped at the same stop or maybe if there aren't many passengers
getting on or off, the bus might stop a little way out from the curb,
which is what I expect happened.

>Here, that motorcyclist would have been facing both a criminal
>prosecution for Causing Death by Dangerous Driving (or maybe just
>careless, if there was some extenuating circumstance) and a civil case
>from the dependant relatives.

If they caught him he certainly would be facing a criminal charge,
maybe 10 years in the "gray bar hotel". But irregardless, my wife's
friend is dead.

As for civil charges I'm not sure whether the court would accept that.
I think that if he is found guilty he would go to jail and if found
innocent I don't believe that there could be any further legal claim
available as if "innocent" then how can one sue an innocent man?

>>>Our club ride the other night passed through a parking lot for one of
>>>those paths. One car inched its way in and clogged things up while the
>>>driver realized there were no parking spaces left. As one of my friends
>>>noted "There's something wrong with America when too many people think
>>>they have to drive to a place so they can ride their bike."
>>
>>I see that occasionally here although to be honest it usually seems to
>>be a group hauling four of five bikes somewhere. I once stopped at the
>>junction of a lane and a main road and a pickup with two mountain
>>bikes on board stopped in front of me. Two guys jumped out to check
>>that the bikes were secure and spoke to me, the usual "Morning, how
>>you doing" sort of conversation. I asked the guys where they were
>>going and they were driving about 200 km. to ride in a race.
>>

>That is clearly rather different - I wouldn't expect McLaren, Red
>Bull, Mercedes or Ferrari to drive their F1 cars to races either!

Not so really. You drive 200 Km. to ride your bike in a race, or you
drive 25 km to ride your bike for recreation. the only difference is
the distance.

As for F1 cars, they aren't legal to drive on public roads, No lights
and I doubt greatly whether they can pass a "smog test". And, I
suspect that with their very low ride height they wouldn't be capable
of traveling on the bumpy roads I hear described here :>-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

I am not an attorney but my understanding is that one may be
found either guilty or not guilty. 'Innocent' is not a choice.

The standard for criminal guilt is 'beyond a reasonable
doubt' and examples abound of men found not guilty
criminally who were later found liable in civil court where
the standard is 'preponderance of evidence', a lower bar.

An actual attorney might correct me if I'm mistaken.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

1 April, 1971

I not aware of an actual attorney here giving actual legal advice

but I'll fill in

www.bikepacking.net/tripreports

http://bikepackersmagazine.com/california-sierra-trail/www.bikepacking.net/tripreports

well no….either depends on who you are where you are and if there is a victim, intentional or accidental, one or multiple victims, is the jury friendly, funneled into sentencing, probation, fine plus community service.
One guilty ‘party’ may get 5 years

A second for the same exact offense receive 100 hrs community service with a fine.

The third walks.

The fourth is fatally beaten over a period of several days.

The fifth gets a book n film offer moves to Polynesia.

so whose guilty ?

the innoscent win the case then owe the lawyer .5 mill n is beaten by goons from the loser.

the loser gets a book n film,,,,,

[jbeattie]

You're right -- O.J. being an example.

-- Jay Beattie.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

You're right -- O.J. being an example.

take Whitey B .... when ? after 20 years of wiretaps n bugs ?

or Bin Laden.

expect Al Bagdaddy's termination Nov 1

papers around giving a statistical sweet spot for ideal guilt or not guilt.....outside that fairness rules.

basic English Law, a system we chronically scream against.

Wisconsin ? we expect WI generally having a wide sweetspot. MOOOOOO ....

but there's Warbucks in Milwaukee...

yawl know the electric railroad pre Musk ?

[John B.]

Technically correct. I was speaking the local vernacular where
not-guilty is normally perceived as "he didn't do it".

>The standard for criminal guilt is 'beyond a reasonable
>doubt' and examples abound of men found not guilty
>criminally who were later found liable in civil court where
>the standard is 'preponderance of evidence', a lower bar.

I understand that is true in the U.S., however it is not a universal
truth.

>An actual attorney might correct me if I'm mistaken.
--

cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 06:43:41 +0100, Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk>
wrote:

>John B. <slocom...@gmail.xyz> considered Sat, 25 Jun 2016 14:37:35

>Ask O.J. :)
>Simply put, a civil case is decided on the balance of probability,
>whereas a criminal case has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, at
>least in most places.

>
>>>>>Our club ride the other night passed through a parking lot for one of
>>>>>those paths. One car inched its way in and clogged things up while the
>>>>>driver realized there were no parking spaces left. As one of my friends
>>>>>noted "There's something wrong with America when too many people think
>>>>>they have to drive to a place so they can ride their bike."
>>>>
>>>>I see that occasionally here although to be honest it usually seems to
>>>>be a group hauling four of five bikes somewhere. I once stopped at the
>>>>junction of a lane and a main road and a pickup with two mountain
>>>>bikes on board stopped in front of me. Two guys jumped out to check
>>>>that the bikes were secure and spoke to me, the usual "Morning, how
>>>>you doing" sort of conversation. I asked the guys where they were
>>>>going and they were driving about 200 km. to ride in a race.
>>>>
>>>That is clearly rather different - I wouldn't expect McLaren, Red
>>>Bull, Mercedes or Ferrari to drive their F1 cars to races either!
>>
>>Not so really. You drive 200 Km. to ride your bike in a race, or you
>>drive 25 km to ride your bike for recreation. the only difference is
>>the distance.
>

>But a racer has a better reason - he will be needing that energy for
>the race, and the bike is probably adjusted for speed rather than
>comfort - it may be set up with gearing specific to the course the
>race is on, for example, which could be almost completely useless for
>the ride to & from.

>>
>>As for F1 cars, they aren't legal to drive on public roads, No lights
>>and I doubt greatly whether they can pass a "smog test". And, I
>>suspect that with their very low ride height they wouldn't be capable
>>of traveling on the bumpy roads I hear described here :>-)
>

>They'd almost certainly pass the smog test - they have fuel use limits
>these days, so can't afford to blow the stuff out of the exhaust. And
>they could certainly be fitted with high profile, treaded tyres that
>raised the ride height. And who needs lights in the daytime?

Yes, and, I believe, that their fuel is still a special blend, is it
not?
I read that: "Formula One cars run on petrol, the specification of
which is not significantly removed from that used in regular road
cars".

The comments went on to day it contained no alcohol, although a
gasoline-alcohol mixture is largely what is available at our local
pumps.

I'm not sure if it is today's limits but I read the F-1 engine rules
that specified a 2.4L engine at 18,000 RPM. I suggest that type of
engine will put out far more nasty chemicals than is allowed by
current "smog" laws. After all, without an allowance for expansion of
the exhaust that is 2,596,340 litres an hour :-)

As for lights, I believe you implied that F-1 cars were legal to drive
on the roads, but every country I've been requires working lights to
be registered.
--
cheers,

John B.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

your pissing in the wind

read this

https://www.google.com/#q=wiki+types+of+legal+systems+in+the+world

no, I have a pre Claybrook B18 Volvo ran best on Custom Imperial. Fill it on avgas or pro rally red eye n maybe 10% more Hp than 98 octane ?

https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/08/how-close-is-f1-fuel-to-road-car-fuel/

watch your language .....similar to ...as stuff pumped out of the ground ?

wuhwuhwuhwuh ...

Bernie is such a weasel .....

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

buy gas here

https://goo.gl/YIZDPf

[John B.]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 02:48:07 +0100, Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk>
wrote:

>John B. <slocom...@gmail.xyz> considered Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:55:42

>The tight specification is to ensure conformity at all races around
>the world, and prevent teams shopping around the world for the fuel
>most beneficial to their own performance (like yours which includes
>alcohol).

I read a bit about F-1 fuel and while they weren't specific they did
say something like "unlike U.S. race car fuel, where alcohol is
required..." So I assume that it is 100% gasoline with additional
chemicals, of course.

>>I'm not sure if it is today's limits but I read the F-1 engine rules
>>that specified a 2.4L engine at 18,000 RPM.
>

>Well, that's a bit out of date - they are now 1,600cc 90deg V6 hybrids
>(They even recover waste heat from the exhaust and kinetic energy from
>the brakes, unlike the inefficient road going hybrids) limited to
>15,000rpm, 4 valves per cylinder (two in and two out) and a single
>turbocharger.
>Fuel flow to the engine is limited to 100Kg/hr maximum, but TOTAL fuel
>use for the race is limited to 100Kg
>Race distance is to the end of the lap in which 305km or 2 hours is
>reached (260km for Monaco).
>So they can't use more than 100Kg of fuel for the out lap (to the
>grid), the sighting lap, the whole race, the recovery lap, and have to
>leave a litre (737g) sample in the car for analysis - ok, the 3
>non-racing laps are at a lower speed, so maybe 95Kg available for
>powering racing speeds for over 305km.
>To convert that to volume, multiply by 1/.737 (.737 being the specific
>density of the fuel, i.e. weight in kilogrammes per litre) and you get
>129 litres for 305km - at racing speeds - or 2.366 km per litre or
>6.68mpg (UK), or 5.565mpg (US). I've driven perfectly running road
>cars that can, if thrashed, get less than that, and at far lower
>average speeds!
>
>As average race speeds are around 115mph, you would expect enormous
>savings at road legal speeds, which would be a maximum of about half
>that, so an average of maybe 40mph (and remember, they have energy
>recovery, so don't suffer in start/stop to the same extent as
>conventional engines, which would save even more in start/stop
>traffic)

I think that you are missing a step here. If these engines produce
rated power and speed at, say 18,000 rpm, then what does the power
curve look like? Is the engine useful at, say 3,000 rpm, like my old
pickup truck? I suspect that there is a reason for the 6 or 7 speed
transmission :-)

While you can not equate 2 stroke and 4 stroke engines my old Yamaha
with the modified ports and the Grand Prix exhaust system could barely
get started at what one might call, a"reasonable rpm", and when the
"pipes came in" the front wheel came off the ground in all but the top
gear.

< a tremendous amount deleted >>
--
cheers,

John B.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

https://www.google.com/#q=F1%20drive%20experience%20site%3Ayoutube.com

[jbeattie]

On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 1:53:12 PM UTC-6, jbeattie wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:38:17 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> > On 2016-06-21 13:45, jbeattie wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 1:08:58 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> > >> On 2016-06-21 11:56, jbeattie wrote:
> > >>> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:59:51 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> > >>>> On 2016-06-21 09:20, jbeattie wrote:
> > >>>>> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:38:22 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 2016-06-21 07:30, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> https://goo.gl/ZyQCtf
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Yeah, it's almost paradise out here. There aren't many
> > >>>>>> places where you get to enjoy vistas like this on the trail
> > >>>>>> from Lotus to Folsom and they can only be reached via MTB,
> > >>>>>> hiking or some on horseback:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/CronanTrail.JPG
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thinking about whether moving to the St.George area (Utah)
> > >>>>>> would make sense. A friend with similar ideas just scoped
> > >>>>>> that out last week and I'll get to ask him about it on a
> > >>>>>> ride this week. Their MTB trails are better but AFAICT
> > >>>>>> roads have little to no bicycle infrastructure and I
> > >>>>>> wouldn't like that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Most roads have little to no bicycle infrastructure -- at
> > >>>>> least the roads in rural America. I don't know why you think
> > >>>>> St. George would be any different. It's not the Netherlands.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In our area (near Sacramento, CA) many roads do have a bicycle
> > >>>> infrastructure and this includes rural ones. Whenever a road
> > >>>> section is widened or restored from the ground up they put in
> > >>>> bike lanes. Must be some kind of law. For example, I use this
> > >>>> road a lot and since they provided wide enough shoulders and
> > >>>> bike lanes the number of cyclists there has substantially
> > >>>> increased, including longhaul commuters:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://goo.gl/maps/zL1zGuAvTwN2
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is also the road where, further down towards Folsom, a
> > >>>> cyclist was killed in the lane. Now there are bike lanes at
> > >>>> that four-lane stretch and she would still be alive had they
> > >>>> been in back then.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Unfortunately that sometimes leads to a row of orphaned bike
> > >>>> lanes but that is still better than nothing.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Long story short I prefer areas that are not a step back WRT
> > >>>> ease and safety of bicycling versus where we live now. For me
> > >>>> that's not just MTB trails but I also want to be able to handle
> > >>>> errands by bike like I do now. I prefer not to have to ride in
> > >>>> the lane a lot for that.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Dude, get a spine.
> > >>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/St_George_Utah_city_limits_1.jpg
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > Piece of cake, that sort of road I'd take any day and I do that a lot
> > >> here. This, OTOH, is absolutely not cool:
> > >>
> > >> https://goo.gl/maps/tDXgBjBivPn
> > >>
> > >
> > > Why would you ever be on UT-59 or go to Colorado City? Are you FLDS?
> > >
> >
> > No, I am a Lutheran. I want to have the freedom to go places without
> > having to use the car. For example, to give classes at the Mohave
> > College there or whatever. In the same way you could ask me "Why do you
> > need to ride to Placerville?" which is only possible with an MTB and
> > hard on the bike. Answer: Because I want to.
>
> UT-59 is rideable. It is not a restricted, car-only road. https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=200404201454221 It may not be to your taste, but that's another matter.
>
> >
> > >
> > >> AFAIK it is the only connection between Hurricane and Colorado
> > >> City. I would not want to live in a big city like St.George but
> > >> rather in Hurricane next door.
> > >
> > > If you move to Hur-a-kin, you are in for some serious culture shock
> > > (although not as much as Colorado City). Don't go looking for any
> > > brew pubs or growler stations -- and don't expect any sympathy about
> > > the lack of bike lanes. Once off the main drag and away from the
> > > tourist traffic headed to Zion, life in small-town southern Utah is,
> > > well, unique. Rent before you buy.

> > >
> >
> > My main concern is the bicycle infrastructure. If it ain't there I ain't

> > comin'. Other than that there's breweries:
> >
> > http://www.zionbrewery.com/
> >
> > Not much farther than our local breweries here. The problem is the
> > roads. Green Valley Road out here now has wide enough shoulders and
> > sometimes bike lanes. Zion Park Road in Utah mostly does not. If there
> > is an alternate MTB route that would be perfectly ok no matter how rough
> > but I don't know that (yet). This is why I have a stainless steel growler.
>
> Really? It's quite a way from St. George and still a hop from Hur-a-kin (my son makes fun of the local pronunciation -- that and "Tooele.") Long way to ride for a beer, and you assume they can fill growlers -- a wrong assumption for any beer over 4 percent ABV. Above that limit, you have to purchase the beer "pre-packaged," viz., not in your own growler -- and must be beer made onsite. That's my understand, but I'll confirm it when I'm in SLC in August -- getting my ass kicked up a bunch of 5-6,000 foot climbs in 100 degree heat. Time to start doping.


Big ride tomorrow, but in the beer news for Joerg, I was correct that you cannot get any beer on tap over 4% ABV in Utah. This means that the best you can do is a session IPA on tap, and based on my recent experience, not a great one. The local breweries put their best stuff in bottles. Some will do a growler fill, but it has to be "bottled" by the brew pub -- meaning that they fill and seal daily. You're just buying a giant bottle of beer. I'm not sure how it works, but I think you can bring in your own growler like an empty milk bottle which gets cleaned and re-used by the brew pub, but you can't hand it to the bartender for a quick fill.

-- Jay Beattie.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

https://www.google.com/#q=living+in+utah

https://www.google.com/search?q=utah+cultural+and+economic+structures+map&biw=1323&bih=665&site=imghp&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwisr8ytur_OAhUL1B4KHTecBgMQ_AUIBygA&dpr=1.15#q=economic+social+demographic+structures+of+Utah

JB suffers from Winthrop/Bend Syndrome...send charitable donations in memory of ...

Friend Ranger in San Juans joined the Border Patrol .....

J searches for the ultimate Growler....? prob a true cultural change in Utah from Placerville: extreme anthro... parallel to Harlem.....

[Joerg]

Looks like you are right, that is indeed the procedure for high-alcohol
beer:

http://www.sltrib.com/home/2807263-155/utah-beer-lovers-rejoice-as-epic

That would not work for me as I have to carry a stainless steel growler
at least on the MTB, for obvious reasons.

For non-bike growlers I wouldn't like getting back someone else's
growler. If the pub is smart they'll fill it more or less on demand so
at least you get a fresh growler. Has to be because beer in growlers
only last until the night, or two days at the most. Afterwards the fresh
growler taste ain't that fresh anymore.

We also have rather stupid growler laws in CA and not all grass is
greener on the other side. The other downside of living in Hurricane are
the lack of bike lanes. Mountain biking is great but for errand runs
into St.George there still seems to be nothing.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Apparently a lot of brewmasters believe growlers ruin the taste of beer not consumed withinn at most two days.

http://www.bonappetit.com/columns/the-foodist/article/why-beer-growlers-are-bad-for-your-brew

"Growlers are big right now with beer geeks. The refillable half-gallon bottles let you roll on up to your favorite brewery/fancy beer store/Whole Foods and get a tap-fresh jug o’ suds. They’ve got that back-to-the-basics “artisanal” vibe. Hell, they even have a handle.

Too bad brewers (a.k.a. the pros) can’t stand the things.

The last time I hung out with Garrett Oliver, brewmaster at the Brooklyn Brewery and editor-in-chief of the Oxford Companion to Beer, the touchy subject of growlers came up. In short, he thinks they suck.

“It’s more of a love-hate relationship,” Oliver told me on the phone last week, on tour to promote the Oxford tome. “Brewers love the opportunity to get some beers that are not in bottles in front of a general public, and certainly beer drinkers love them.”

But? “Brewers tend to hate them. Growlers are basically beer destroyers. They’re often unsanitary, and the refilling process mixes in a lot of oxygen–the tiniest amount of oxygen kills beer so quickly. Then, if you walk across the street with say, an IPA, in full sunlight, with a clear growler, the beer will skunk before you get to your car.”

That quickly? “That quickly! For the brewer, this is like if you went to a nice restaurant, ordered something great, and then took the beautifully presented plate of food, scraped it into a bag, put that bag in the fridge for 3 days, microwaved it, and then based your opinion of that restaurant on your bag of old food.”

But what if you drink it the same day? “A brewery will tell you to drink it within a day or two, but plans change. By the time you get around to actually drinking the beer, the chance that the growler will be anywhere close to as perfect as the brewer feels he was able to make it is pretty low.”

Is there no hope? “A few breweries have gone to some quite expensive machinery to basically build a small bottling line for growlers, to keep things clean. But when things are really busy, and some guy’s standing in front of you and just wants to fill up his grubby growler, you’re gonna do it! It’s just one of those things, your child walks out of the door into the traffic, and brewers are reasonably worried about it.”

So growlers might seem all old-timey and legit, but given half a chance, I’ll stick to the best way I know to keep beer brewery-fresh: straight from the tap to my glass, or in a can.
—Andrew Knowlton with Sam Dean
KEYWORDS: Beer, Garrett Oliver, The Foodist"

Cheers

[jbeattie]

I just got back from riding this: https://bbrelje.wordpress.com/2013/08/03/mirror-lake-highway-cycling/ Spectacular Sierra-like scenery at the top. The entire ride (apart from some in-town miles in Kamas) was on the Mirror Lake Highway (Route 150), a shoulderlesss two-lane road.

It is eminently do-able, although unpleasant in places because, as I learned, many Utahans enjoy the out-of-doors in giant trucks and 30 foot travel trailers and love to drive up and down canyons on Sunday at high speeds. Nearing the bottom, it was like a f****** traffic jam of RVs and SUVs and trucks and trailers. We got coal-rolled a few times, but probably no more than in Oregon on similar roads.

After recovering somewhat from hypoxia induced by the high altitude and trying to keep my son in sight, we probably descended in the 50-60mph range, but I wasn't instrumented and my son's computer was munged. I'm estimating the speed based on the fact that we drafted/followed some guy in a truck with a giant travel trailer, and that guy and all his homies were driving like bats out of hell -- up and down hill.

Hey, it's the beautiful out of doors. Get in your truck and floor it!

-- Jay Beattie.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

https://goo.gl/A2s5SV

'Utah is the 13th-largest by area, 31st-most-populous, and 10th-least-densely populated of the 50 United States. Utah has a population of nearly 3 million (Census estimate for July 1, 2015), approximately 80% of whom live along the Wasatch Front, centering on the state capital Salt Lake City.'

//////////////////////////////////////

https://goo.gl/4jOvd9

glorious ! the opportunity to escape several times….Tour de Froce !

maybe that out back cycling increases total affinity for the experience.
And off course you have a good reasons….

I met a transient friend on the Olympic beach escaped from Cal to Seattle spoke of the flight.
https://goo.gl/A2s5SV
Utah is the 13th-largest by area, 31st-most-populous, and 10th-least-densely populated of the 50 United States. Utah has a population of nearly 3 million (Census estimate for July 1, 2015), approximately 80% of whom live along the Wasatch Front, centering on the state capital Salt Lake City.
//////////////////////////////////////
https://goo.gl/4jOvd9
glorious ! the opportunity to escape several times….Tour de Froce !
maybe that out back cycling increases total affinity for the experience.

And off course you have a good reasons….

I met a transient friend on the Olympic beach escaped from Cal to Seattle spoke of the flight.

I’m off to Yellowstone in a few days ….speak with the buffalo…..

find a draft at 65 ...set cruise .....listen to watercolors/spa..... stop to see Jackson's Arm ....

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

need to speak with the mouse.....

[Joerg]

Every seasoned beer connoisseur knows that a growler is no good past two
days and preferably should be consumed the same night. That's what we do
when I bring one home.

> http://www.bonappetit.com/columns/the-foodist/article/why-beer-growlers-are-bad-for-your-brew
>
> "Growlers are big right now with beer geeks. The refillable
> half-gallon bottles let you roll on up to your favorite brewery/fancy
> beer store/Whole Foods and get a tap-fresh jug o’ suds. They’ve got
> that back-to-the-basics “artisanal” vibe. Hell, they even have a
> handle.
>
> Too bad brewers (a.k.a. the pros) can’t stand the things.
>

Real pros love growlers. Because if handled correctly by the customer it
brings very fresh taste home and they come over and over again. On road
and MTB rides I often stop here:

http://mrazbrewingcompany.com/

Late afternoon there is sometimes a beeline of people with growlers in
hand and they come from far places such as Elk Grove or Auburn, only to
pick up one growler of their favorite stuff.

> The last time I hung out with Garrett Oliver, brewmaster at the
> Brooklyn Brewery and editor-in-chief of the Oxford Companion to Beer,
> the touchy subject of growlers came up. In short, he thinks they
> suck.
>
> “It’s more of a love-hate relationship,” Oliver told me on the phone
> last week, on tour to promote the Oxford tome. “Brewers love the
> opportunity to get some beers that are not in bottles in front of a
> general public, and certainly beer drinkers love them.”
>
> But? “Brewers tend to hate them. Growlers are basically beer

> destroyers. They’re often unsanitary, ...


When fools handle them, maybe. Not here.


> ... and the refilling process mixes

> in a lot of oxygen–the tiniest amount of oxygen kills beer so
> quickly.

Does that guy have _any_ clue? My pub first hisses in CO2, _then_ beer.


> ... Then, if you walk across the street with say, an IPA, in

> full sunlight, with a clear growler, the beer will skunk before you
> get to your car.”
>

Has it ever occured to the writer that there could be a reason why
growler glass is brown? Does he know anythuing about that topic? Or
about how to built a well working web page, for that matter ...

> That quickly? “That quickly! For the brewer, this is like if you went
> to a nice restaurant, ordered something great, and then took the
> beautifully presented plate of food, scraped it into a bag, put that
> bag in the fridge for 3 days, microwaved it, and then based your
> opinion of that restaurant on your bag of old food.”
>
> But what if you drink it the same day? “A brewery will tell you to
> drink it within a day or two, but plans change. By the time you get
> around to actually drinking the beer, the chance that the growler
> will be anywhere close to as perfect as the brewer feels he was able
> to make it is pretty low.”
>

That's when the customer has messed up and they know it. Growlers are ok
next day. Just not two days later. People know this.

> Is there no hope? “A few breweries have gone to some quite expensive
> machinery to basically build a small bottling line for growlers, to
> keep things clean. But when things are really busy, and some guy’s
> standing in front of you and just wants to fill up his grubby
> growler, you’re gonna do it! It’s just one of those things, your
> child walks out of the door into the traffic, and brewers are
> reasonably worried about it.”
>
> So growlers might seem all old-timey and legit, but given half a
> chance, I’ll stick to the best way I know to keep beer brewery-fresh:
> straight from the tap to my glass, or in a can. —Andrew Knowlton with
> Sam Dean KEYWORDS: Beer, Garrett Oliver, The Foodist"
>

Yeah, grandpa, and great grandpa, and great-great grandpa and all the
people back then must have been terribly wrong. Because they all hauled
their beer home in large flasks. Crates hadn't been invented yet. Oh
must they have suffered ...

[Joerg]

> Spectacular Sierra-like scenery at the top....


Nice!


> ... The entire ride (apart

> from some in-town miles in Kamas) was on the Mirror Lake Highway
> (Route 150), a shoulderlesss two-lane road.
>

Not so nice.

> It is eminently do-able, although unpleasant in places because, as I
> learned, many Utahans enjoy the out-of-doors in giant trucks and 30
> foot travel trailers and love to drive up and down canyons on Sunday
> at high speeds. Nearing the bottom, it was like a f****** traffic jam
> of RVs and SUVs and trucks and trailers. We got coal-rolled a few
> times, but probably no more than in Oregon on similar roads.
>

What is "coal-rolled"? Bailing into the bush?

> After recovering somewhat from hypoxia induced by the high altitude
> and trying to keep my son in sight, we probably descended in the
> 50-60mph range, but I wasn't instrumented and my son's computer was
> munged. I'm estimating the speed based on the fact that we
> drafted/followed some guy in a truck with a giant travel trailer, and
> that guy and all his homies were driving like bats out of hell -- up
> and down hill.
>
> Hey, it's the beautiful out of doors. Get in your truck and floor
> it!
>

Unfortunately that the way most people see it :-(