Lawyer lips and John Forester
Serge Issakov
I had no idea lawyer lips were your fault, I mean triumph!
Lawyer lips or lawyer tabs (a type of positive retention device) are tabs fitted to the fork ends on the front fork of bicycles sold in some countries (particularly the U.S.) to prevent a wheel from leaving the fork if the quick release skewer comes undone. They were introduced in response to lawsuits supported by experts including John Forester, in cases where incorrectly adjusted quick release wheels came out of the forks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_end#Lawyer_lips
Judy Frankel
John Howard told me they were his fault and he was an expert witness in the case. My bike doesn’t have them
Judy
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Judy Frankel
No.. John Howard told me he was the expert.. That was the story I heard
From: Serge Issakov [mailto:serge....@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6:32 PM
To: Judy Frankel
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
So it was John Howard's case and Forester was the expert?
Judy Frankel
The wiki says they were the fault of experts.. John Howard was an “expert” witness in the lawsuit against the bike company
Gary Cziko
The wiki says they were the fault of experts.. John Howard was an “expert” witness in the lawsuit against the bike company
From: Serge Issakov [mailto:serge.issakov@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6:32 PM
To: Judy Frankel
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
So it was John Howard's case and Forester was the expert?
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Judy Frankel <jud...@gmail.com> wrote:
John Howard told me they were his fault and he was an expert witness in the case. My bike doesn’t have them
Judy
From: cabo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:caboforum@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Serge Issakov
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6:22 PM
To: John Forester; Cabo Forum
Subject: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
John, if the account below is accurate, please share the history!
I had no idea lawyer lips were your fault, I mean triumph!
Serge
Lawyer lips or lawyer tabs (a type of positive retention device) are tabs fitted to the fork ends on the front fork of bicycles sold in some countries (particularly the U.S.) to prevent a wheel from leaving the fork if the quick release skewer comes undone. They were introduced in response to lawsuits supported by experts including John Forester, in cases where incorrectly adjusted quick release wheels came out of the forks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_end#Lawyer_lips
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Gary Cziko ("ZEE-ko"), PhD
Professor Emeritus, Educational Psychology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
CyclingSavvy Instructor (CSI)
Pete van Nuys
| From: jud...@gmail.com Sent: April 25, 2017 6:28 PM Reply-to: jud...@gmail.com Subject: RE: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester |
John Howard told me they were his fault and he was an expert witness in the case. My bike doesn’t have them
Judy
From: cabo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:cabo...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Serge Issakov
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6:22 PM
To: John Forester; Cabo Forum
Subject: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
John, if the account below is accurate, please share the history!
I had no idea lawyer lips were your fault, I mean triumph!
Serge
Lawyer lips or lawyer tabs (a type of positive retention device) are tabs fitted to the fork ends on the front fork of bicycles sold in some countries (particularly the U.S.) to prevent a wheel from leaving the fork if the quick release skewer comes undone. They were introduced in response to lawsuits supported by experts including John Forester, in cases where incorrectly adjusted quick release wheels came out of the forks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_end#Lawyer_lips
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
Jim Baross
The wiki says they were the fault of experts.. John Howard was an “expert” witness in the lawsuit against the bike company
From: Serge Issakov [mailto:serge.issakov@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 6:32 PM
To: Judy Frankel
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
So it was John Howard's case and Forester was the expert?
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Judy Frankel <jud...@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul Wendt
>But not so nice when it does so when you don't want the front wheel released (hasn't happened to me yet).
Paul Wendt
--
John Eldon
From: Paul Wendt <cycl...@gmail.com>
To: Jim Baross <jimb...@cox.net>
Cc: Cabo Forum <cabo...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: [CABOforum] Lawyer lips and John Forester
John Forester
The wikipedia account is completely inaccurate. As I remember the
situation, the initial CPSC regulation was designed around what I
called toy bicycles, the typical bicycles sold in America for
decades, bought by parents for use by children. All of these used
nutted axles, front and rear. The CPSC worried about front wheels
falling off if the nuts loosened, and therefore required auxiliary
retention devices. I remember two designs of these. One was
thickened areas of the fork end below the axle. The other was a
washer with an extended, bent-over, tab that fitted into a slot in
the fork end above the axle. The purpose of each of these was to
retain the axle in the fork end until the nuts had become greatly
loosened. That is, it simply delayed the time before the front
wheel disconnected, in the hope that, before this occurred,
someone would retighten the nuts. This requirement is still in
effect for nutted front axles. The idea that the CPSC regulation
required toy bicycles and thereby prohibited real bicycles, which
I publicized in several articles in the cycling press, raised
merry hell. The CPSC received a flood of letters, some of them
suggesting that the CPSC regulators perform unnatural and obscene
acts with their bicycles. This produced a movement, led by Fred
DeLong, who had been advising Schwinn Bicycle Company, to modify
the regulation so that it permitted real bicycles. That occurred.
Under those revisions, bicycles equipped with cam-lock quick
release mechanisms did not need auxiliary front wheel retention
devices. Therefore, they were not so equipped. QRs had been used
only on expensive bicycles; but they soon became offered on
cheaper bicycles bought by the general public, who did not know
how to use them. There were cases of front wheel disconnection.
John Howard, a racer whose leg power exceeded his brain power,
testified as an expert that QRs came loose, and therefore bicycles
with QRs ought to have auxiliary retention devices, just as did
bicycles with nutted axles.
Howard was wrong. QRs are made so that the use of the cam to grip
the fork ends goes through a point of maximum tightness before
completing the cam movement. Therefore, a QR that is
hypothetically loosening itself has to get tighter still before
becoming able to loosen itself. Therefore, it cannot do that of
itself; it can be loosened only by use of the cam lever. I
testified once that the instructions for using the QR, required by
the CPSC for all the equipment on each particular bicycle, were
defective, so that the user could think he had operated it
properly but had not done so. I testified in another case about
how a QR, once properly installed, could not come loose of itself.
I do not know how Wikipedia got its information about me and QRs.
It could be that it read that I was an expert in one or more QR
cases, without recognizing that I was defending the QR. Or, more
likely, it read of my suit against the CPSC bicycle regulation.
That regulation started out when the CPSC adopted the Bicycle
Manufacturers' standard BMA/6 as the first version of the CPSC
regulation. BMA/6 was not a safety standard; it was written to
assure parents that American bicycles built according to BMA/6
were good durable machines, able to withstand the kind of use that
children would apply to them. For example, BMA/6 had a front fork
bending resistance test, designed to show that its front forks
would withstand being ridden up curbs. The CPSC wrote that
requirement into its regulation. But, by law, every requirement in
the regulation had to be there for safety. The CPSC had the choice
of either abandoning the front fork bending resistance test or
inventing a safety reason for its existence. Rather than giving up
the front fork bending resistance test, the CPSC invented the
argument that the front fork bending resistance test prevented the
cyclist from flying forward when the front wheel hit a wall or a
parked car. Any first-year student in physics or engineering ought
to know better than that, but lawyers argued that since the CPSC
advanced that argument it had to be held valid. The CPSC
regulation was littered with errors like that; it was not at all a
safety regulation. I sued the CPSC to try to get these errors
straightened out. I managed for only four of them. Lawyers have a
rather different view of the physical universe than do scientists.
-- John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer 7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945 619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com
Paul Wendt
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
judyf...@att.net
-- John Forester, MS, PEBicycle Transportation Engineer7585 Church St, Lemon Grove, CA 91945619-644-5481, fore...@johnforester.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cabo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/caboforum.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.