A few new products have come on the market recently. One really nice
product for commuting and leisurely rides is the Bell "Cruisin joe to
go" cup holder which is sold at Target for $5.99 (I have not seen them
for sale on-line anywhere). It's a more secure design in terms of
mounting than the other bicycle cup holders I've seen on the market from
Soma Fabrications or Electra (besides being much cheaper). I've bought
12 of them so far because any time a friend, colleague, or relative sees
it on one of my bikes they want one.
Thermos-Nissan has come out with four new double-wall, vacuum insulated,
stainless steel tumblers and mugs (sold in many places, though the
cheapest place I saw them was at Target). These are good companions for
the Bell cup holder.
"http://bicyclecoffeesystems.com" or simply Google "bicycle coffee" and
click on "I'm Feeling Lucky".
Bell is pro big box store, but anti-cyclist. They actively lobby in
favor of restricting cyclists' rights all over the world, in the
interest of a short-term boost in sales of their products. If other
manufacturers offer comparable products, I suggest looking
Bell also sells merchandise under the Vistalite, Easton, Giro,
Blackburn, and CoPilot brands. All are to be avoided by cyclists who
value their own rights.
If Bell Sports should come to dominate the sector of bicycle borne
coffee-carrying vessels, be alert for proposed legislation in your
area requiring all bicyclists to carry coffee under penalty of law.
LOL, there is no cite, it's the ranting of a lunatic AHZ.
I'm with Chalo. I hate FUD and related hysteria. Bicycling should be
seen as a normal extension of human movin' around--not as an
unapproachable X-games activity. The only statistic that their
lobbying has positively affected is their own bottom line.
Might want to get that telephone pole out of your eye and come to
terms with your own religious hysteria. You consistently lie about
bicycles to serve your own fetishistic agenda.
Bicycling is safe and shouldn't be terribly complicated. You're not
helping with your own FUD.
That's great, because apparently Bell has hired someone in product
management that agrees with you. In the past couple of years they have
brought to market some extremely useful accessories that make that
extension more practical. The "Cruisin joe to go" cup holder is the most
recent, but they've also come out with the best water bottle cage that
adjusts to carry even very large bottles, a bottle cage that mounts on
the handlebars (essentially combining the Minoura handlebar mount with a
cage at a good price), two very good bells, pants legs straps, and a
line of panniers, seat bags, and handlebar bags.
Even when there were similar items available, you usually had to order
them on-line because no bicycle shop or mass market retailer would carry
them because they weren't marketing to "practical" cyclists.
The fact that you are unable to accept the enormous body of evidence
that proves that helmets reduce injuries and fatalities, especially in
children is not the problem of Bell. True, they promote helmet laws for
kids, but they are not alone in terms of corporations that promote or
oppose safety laws for their own financial advantage.
That Bell boycott site is hilarious. All the completely discredited lies
of the AHZs collected in one place, and it's by the "Committee to
Boycott Bell Helmets" which apparently is one person in Berkeley who is
echoing all of Guy Chapman's misinformation. Must be a tea party person.
BTW, they aren't even saying to boycott Bell, just Bell helmets. Alas,
Bell has also apparently hired some good product designers for their
bicycle helmet division as they have come up with the best adjustment
system for helmets and are using it even on some of their lower cost lines.
Remember to boycott Giro, Blackburn, and Easton as well. Geez, what a
bunch of lunatics.
> lunatic AHZ
I though they wouldn't be posting here any more because they are too
busy attending tea party rallies and researching Obama's birth
certificate. Every time I read one of the lies of the tea party people I
think of the AHZs because it's clear that either a) they are so dumb
that they actually believe the propaganda, or b) they are intentionally
lying to further their own perverted agenda. Neither is a flattering
image of them.
Dude, you're way off the mark.
A) Most AHZs are leftists. That's not to say that most left-wingers are
AHZs, however; they're not.
B) Tea Party people are mostly conservatives, libertarians and
independents -- the very type of people who /question and/or reject/
> Dude, you're way off the mark.
> A) Most AHZs are leftists.
Why do you think that? Not that I know the politics of the AHZs, but
their lack of logic and critical thinking skills would seem to indicate
that they'd be of the tea party type. Like the tea party people, they
create these incredible fictional stories to support their position.
It's amazing how they can take an innocuous post about bicycling and
coffee and turn it into a helmet debate.
Might as well have a look at the whole set of photos, to see how
awesome "conservatives, libertarians and independents" can be.
I love the testimonial:
"Chrissy -- Age 4 Helmet Saved Her Life"
The school bus in the background is a nice touch. They lack seat
The statistics in the ad are intriguing.
First, they claim one child killed every day, plus 50 more suffering
permanent brain injuries, all from bicycle accidents.
Then they claim that helmets will prevent one death every day and one
brain injury every 4 minutes. (The 85% protection rate must come from
the ridiculous Thompson-Rivara study.)
Hmmm . . . one brain injury every 4 minutes is 15 injuries per hour,
24 hours per day.
24 x 15 = 360
That's 360 brain injuries per day, not the 50 claimed at the start.
So helmets will prevent an extra 310 brain injuries per day that never
happened in the first place?
That's even better than their ability to reduce leg injuries by ~70%
in the Rivara-Thompson study.
Think of the roaster of AHZs posting here. Frank, Chalo, whoever the hell
else I probably have plonked -- all lean well to the left politically. Can
you name even one conservative (American politics) who's a vehement or even
> that they'd be of the tea party type. Like the tea party
> people, they create these incredible fictional stories to support
> their position.
There you go again. Conservatives, libertarians and independents generally
believe in personal responsibility, limited government intrustion in lives,
common sense over hysteria, etc. The kind of people who /choose/ to wear
helmets because they can limit and lessen injury, but do NOT advocate making
them mandatory. They may even opt to not wear a lid, but only because it's
a personal decision and not some radical "cause".
> It's amazing how they can take an innocuous post about bicycling and
> coffee and turn it into a helmet debate.
With that I'll agree.
Bill "you're just way off base with the tea party rants" S.
> A) Most AHZs are leftists.
> B) Tea Party people are mostly conservatives, libertarians and
> independents -- the very type of people who /question and/or reject/
Right wing authoritarians are experts at meme-ery and repetition. Why
do you think that every single screaming white person from the right
has to frame the health care debate within the parameters of virtual
S&M "throat shoving"? It's either infectious propagandistic language--
or every single screaming angry right wing white person has the exact
same analogy ready to deploy because of personal experience with the
It's all part of the evil plot to enslave our heads! I am also
boycotting Pearl Izumi for their misleading glove advertisements --
and those nut-slot saddles, too. And those mucus people in the
Mucinex commercials -- they don't exist! It's all a lie. There is no
party in my chest! -- Jay Beattie.
> It's all part of the evil plot to enslave our heads! I am also
> boycotting Pearl Izumi for their misleading glove advertisements --
> and those nut-slot saddles, too. And those mucus people in the
> Mucinex commercials -- they don't exist! It's all a lie. There is no
> party in my chest!
There is a party, but you aren't invited. Now go look for the
Ty-Dee-Bowl man in your toilet.
Actually I'm using a Contigo Auto Seal mug too. Got it at Costco. It
fits into the Bell cup holder quite nicely. But geez, it's a pain to
clean. I have some tiny brushes that I use to get down into the crevices.
I've added it to the site.
The new Thermos-Nissan mugs I mention on the site let you disassemble
the lid for cleaning which is a big plus.
What is the X Cage? I'll add it if it makes sense.
acute herpes zoster?
You're no Pamela Anderson, that's why.
Have you ever met Jay?
I admit it. I am no Pamela Anderson -- but then neither is Pamela
Anderson. -- Jay Beattie.
Who *is* working her avatar these days?
How many busloads of SEIU goons does it take to paint fake signs (when
they're not too busy throwing eggs or beating up wheelchair-bound black
guys, that is)?
This about helmets or air bags?
I would make the case that Bell Sports and Specialized have done more to
scare people away from cycling than the worst motorists. Bell spent a lot of
$$$ lobbying for mandatory helmet laws all across the country, and they made
a fortune in return. Look, I won't ride around the block without a helmet,
but cycling without a helmet is a whole lot better for you (and the
community) than not cycling at all, and mandatory helmets laws get passed by
waging a campaign of fear, convincing people that cycyling is a terribly
Specialized did what they could to get people to believe that cycling with
the wrong seat causes impotence, and went so far as to get coverage on
national TV, magazines, everywhere they could... so they could sell *their*
saddle which, amazingly, would protect your sex life. No mention, ever, of
how much improper fit on the bike is the major issue here, not saddles. Or
that a healthy male who happens to ride is a whole lot better off, in terms
of certain capabilities, than a couch potato.
The cycling industry is full of examples of eating its young, and Bell is
undeniably one of the early and frequent offenders.
Chain Reaction Bicycles
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Mike, you're right on the target. Luckily most bicyclists can't read......
"AHZ" may be as mythical as a flying pig.
Among those who are skeptical of the hype and doubt the
utility and effectiveness of 'certified safe' cycling
helmets, go ahead and try to link Frank & me, politically.
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Are you anti-helmet, Andy? Do you advise customers to not wear them? (And
thus not sell them?)
Bill "hmmm..." S.
> I would make the case that Bell Sports and Specialized have done more to
> scare people away from cycling than the worst motorists. Bell spent a
> lot of $$$ lobbying for mandatory helmet laws all across the country,
> and they made a fortune in return. Look, I won't ride around the block
> without a helmet, but cycling without a helmet is a whole lot better for
> you (and the community) than not cycling at all, and mandatory helmets
> laws get passed by waging a campaign of fear, convincing people that
> cycyling is a terribly dangerous activity.
Yet cycling is more popular than ever. So you're saying it would be even
_more_ popular without all the child helmet laws (yes, there are a few
scattered adult helmet laws in the U.S., but not many).
Actually, the reality is that the child helmet laws give parents enough
of a false sense of security that helmets will protect their kids that
they are willing to let them ride their bicycles at all, often badly.
While I'd rather have the kids ride properly without helmets, than
dangerously with them, that's not a realistic goal.
I can't speak for the whole country of course, but at the schools in my
area, it's overflow parking only for kids bicycling to school. It
exceeded the expectations of the school by a huge margin and they rushed
to construct a second bicycle parking area to accommodate the large
numbers. I was surprised too, especially with the loads the kids carry
to school, including often carrying large musical instruments on
specially constructed rear racks. Maybe it helps that there are almost
no school buses in the districts. The instances of over-protective
parents insisting on chauffeuring their child from their garage to the
drop-off circle was far less of a problem than anyone expected.
So you think that Bell is trying to discourage cycling so they can sell
fewer accessories?! They sell a lot more than just helmets. Of course
you are well aware that even in countries with all-ages helmet laws no
one has _ever_ shown a resulting decline in cycling that resulted from
such laws. Cycling rates go up and down to be sure, for various reasons,
but helmet laws have never been shown to be a cause.
> Specialized did what they could to get people to believe that cycling
> with the wrong seat causes impotence, and went so far as to get coverage
> on national TV, magazines, everywhere they could... so they could sell
> *their* saddle which, amazingly, would protect your sex life. No
> mention, ever, of how much improper fit on the bike is the major issue
> here, not saddles. Or that a healthy male who happens to ride is a whole
> lot better off, in terms of certain capabilities, than a couch potato.
It was not just Specialized that did the research on bicycle seats and
impotence, and certainly not Specialized that sold all the new style seats.
> The cycling industry is full of examples of eating its young, and Bell
> is undeniably one of the early and frequent offenders.
Somehow I think that much of your position comes from the fact that Bell
costs you a lot of lost business in terms of extremely profitable
accessory and helmet sales. When someone goes to Costco or Target or
Wal-Mart or OSH and buys a $20 Bell or Schwinn helmet, that's $40-100 in
revenue that some bike shop somewhere is not getting. Ironically, many
of the most well designed Bell accessories have no equivalent at all
available at an LBS, so clearly there is little market among "serious
cyclists" for such products.
Why would Andrew advise folks not to wear them? The reasonable
position to take is to let the customer do what they want. Sell them a
helmet if they want one--and dial it in to work as well as it can, or
if they want a nice wool cap--sell them that.
I lead noob rides and tell them that it's none of my business what
they wear on their heads--but it is my business that they ride well--
as I do have to share the road with them.
As a skeptic, I remain unconvinced that they are magic or
indispensable or necessary for riding a bicycle. Mike's post
was I think clear and much in keeping with my own views.
Are they completely useless in every case? Probably not.
Will you absolutely survive a car-induced head trauma with
one? Maybe, maybe not. You want to ride with a helmet? Fine
with me. You want to legislate helmet use on public roads?
I'll fight that. Scare parents and children and imply
cycling is dangerous? Despicable. The data shows otherwise.
p.s. I sell orange flippy flags and plenty of other things
found neither on me nor on my bicycle.
Nice position and one with which I heartily agree
But you're not a /zealot/ about these things. People like Crank 'n Flailor
Bill "and thus not 'as mythical as a flying pig' HTH" S.
Regarding politics, Andrew - you and I certainly disagree on certain
points. But I'm sure you and I agree strongly on others.
As I've noted before, my liberal friends seem to think I'm very
conservative, and my conservative friends seem to think I'm way too
liberal. My view is, if a person's buying into one political platform
lock, stock & barrel, he's not using his brain.
On helmets, my present views are different from what my views once
were. I believed the hype about their effectiveness, and believed
that the risk was great enough that wearing one was a good idea. I
now know both of those are false. The change happened when I began
looking at actual evidence, actual data.
Libraries and an open mind can do wonders for learning, if a person's
only willing to work.
- Frank Krygowski