Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why no fenders, lights etcetera on bicycles from factory?
132 views
Skip to first unread message
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 14, 2015, 6:15:35 PM11/14/15
to
Just found the article that explains why many bicycles don't have eylets, fenders, lights or room for wider tires than 25mm. It's on page 60 in the April 1982 BICYCLING magazine and reads in part:
"The reappearance of the proper touring bicycle is a curious thing. A decade ago this type had a brief run in American shops. Usually of French origin, it arrived in a near complete state of touring readiness, with racks, fenders, lights and wide-range 15-speed gearset mounted on a frame of moderate angles, long wheelbase, and straight-gauge tubing. The only concession to American taste, as compared to the home-market European version, was the fitting of 27 x 1 1/4-inch tires and wheels in place of the fatter 650B jobs.
Put panniers on one of these tourers, and it was ready to go. With a price tag comfortably less than $150, these 30 poud bikes should have sold like hot-cakes.
They didn't. they went about as well as slugs at a flower sale.
Americans preferred their bikes stripped, without the clutter of fenders, lights, and racks. However useful, these made the bike weigh more, and everybody knew extra weight made you slower than Eddy merckx's grandmother.
So American bike shops learned to sell stripped bikes, very light. And when customers wanted to go touring, they went back to thr dealers and bought touring gear: racks, wide-range gearsets, and lights."
More in the article.
Thus it seems that Americans didn't want the things that made a bicycle versatile and the dealers and then the manufacturers changed to accomodate that.
Cheers
"The reappearance of the proper touring bicycle is a curious thing. A decade ago this type had a brief run in American shops. Usually of French origin, it arrived in a near complete state of touring readiness, with racks, fenders, lights and wide-range 15-speed gearset mounted on a frame of moderate angles, long wheelbase, and straight-gauge tubing. The only concession to American taste, as compared to the home-market European version, was the fitting of 27 x 1 1/4-inch tires and wheels in place of the fatter 650B jobs.
Put panniers on one of these tourers, and it was ready to go. With a price tag comfortably less than $150, these 30 poud bikes should have sold like hot-cakes.
They didn't. they went about as well as slugs at a flower sale.
Americans preferred their bikes stripped, without the clutter of fenders, lights, and racks. However useful, these made the bike weigh more, and everybody knew extra weight made you slower than Eddy merckx's grandmother.
So American bike shops learned to sell stripped bikes, very light. And when customers wanted to go touring, they went back to thr dealers and bought touring gear: racks, wide-range gearsets, and lights."
More in the article.
Thus it seems that Americans didn't want the things that made a bicycle versatile and the dealers and then the manufacturers changed to accomodate that.
Cheers
Joerg
Nov 14, 2015, 6:39:38 PM11/14/15
to
are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
http://www.schwinnbikes.com/usa/bikes/cruisers/classic-deluxe-14#/specs
However, all the people I met who recently bought a cruiser only tool
around the neighborhood or cart them to a bike path parking lot on the
weekend. No long trips, no commuting, not even a grocery run.
I never liked these bikes much but the stretch cruiser with chopper
handlebars I saw the other day sure looked cool.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Frank Krygowski
Nov 15, 2015, 12:18:02 AM11/15/15
to
is influenced by the different histories, plus different geographies.
Europe is older, so it's much more dense, and in much of the 20th
century, was much less prosperous. Those factors led to compact cities
where a bike was very useful and cars were less necessary. That, plus
the greater difficulty in buying a car, put bikes in the homes and on
the streets. Closely spaced towns made it reasonable to ride from town
to town on bikes. And following the World Wars, bikes were for most
people the only way to see the countryside.
In the U.S., mass transit was rare, and the early availability of
inexpensive Fords meant more people could buy cars. As a result, the
relatively young cities began spreading out in the 1930s. And anyone
wanting to ride to the next town had a long haul in front of him. Bikes
just weren't as useful for travel or utility.
When American adults took to bikes in the early 1970s, it was more a fad
with a heavy sporting component. And when American cycling went through
one of its periodic surges, it was for sporting reasons - to emulate
Greg LeMond or Lance Armstrong, or to tear up the woods on a mountain
bike. It didn't much involve travel or even grocery runs; because
"that's what cars are for."
Those of us who enjoy travel by bike or using a bike for utility just
have to deal with things as best we can. (Really, I doubt most
Americans even consider the idea that fenders might be useful!)
--
- Frank Krygowski
Tosspot
Nov 15, 2015, 3:27:57 AM11/15/15
to
On 15/11/15 00:40, Joerg wrote:
<snip>
> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
>
> http://www.schwinnbikes.com/usa/bikes/cruisers/classic-deluxe-14#/specs
>
> However, all the people I met who recently bought a cruiser only tool
> around the neighborhood or cart them to a bike path parking lot on the
> weekend. No long trips, no commuting, not even a grocery run.
>
> I never liked these bikes much but the stretch cruiser with chopper
> handlebars I saw the other day sure looked cool.
Imho, Your 14 year inner self thought it looked cool, your adult self
thought it was a back street abortion!
<snip>
> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
>
> http://www.schwinnbikes.com/usa/bikes/cruisers/classic-deluxe-14#/specs
>
> However, all the people I met who recently bought a cruiser only tool
> around the neighborhood or cart them to a bike path parking lot on the
> weekend. No long trips, no commuting, not even a grocery run.
>
> I never liked these bikes much but the stretch cruiser with chopper
> handlebars I saw the other day sure looked cool.
thought it was a back street abortion!
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 15, 2015, 4:36:07 AM11/15/15
to
On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 12:18:02 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Snipped
Cheers
Snipped
> In the U.S., mass transit was rare, and the early availability of
> inexpensive Fords meant more people could buy cars. As a result, the
> relatively young cities began spreading out in the 1930s. And anyone
> wanting to ride to the next town had a long haul in front of him. Bikes
> just weren't as useful for travel or utility.
>
> When American adults took to bikes in the early 1970s, it was more a fad
> with a heavy sporting component. And when American cycling went through
> one of its periodic surges, it was for sporting reasons - to emulate
> Greg LeMond or Lance Armstrong, or to tear up the woods on a mountain
> bike. It didn't much involve travel or even grocery runs; because
> "that's what cars are for."
>
> Those of us who enjoy travel by bike or using a bike for utility just
> have to deal with things as best we can. (Really, I doubt most
> Americans even consider the idea that fenders might be useful!)
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
In many posts you've lamented the lack of accomodation for wider tires, for fenders etcetera. Seems from your statements above that you knew all slong why that is. ;<)
> inexpensive Fords meant more people could buy cars. As a result, the
> relatively young cities began spreading out in the 1930s. And anyone
> wanting to ride to the next town had a long haul in front of him. Bikes
> just weren't as useful for travel or utility.
>
> When American adults took to bikes in the early 1970s, it was more a fad
> with a heavy sporting component. And when American cycling went through
> one of its periodic surges, it was for sporting reasons - to emulate
> Greg LeMond or Lance Armstrong, or to tear up the woods on a mountain
> bike. It didn't much involve travel or even grocery runs; because
> "that's what cars are for."
>
> Those of us who enjoy travel by bike or using a bike for utility just
> have to deal with things as best we can. (Really, I doubt most
> Americans even consider the idea that fenders might be useful!)
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
Cheers
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 15, 2015, 10:11:42 AM11/15/15
to
the SMY group will find touring equipment an unwanted cost and before that, mentally confusing with their self image. Not knowing what touring is in action...soon after a few SMY's will uncover touring.
Remember what the Canadian is essaying occurred before internet info access in an era where LBS were medieval guild like in hording information for profit.
Chevy/Ford would offer a basic package then sell options thru sales based on what sales saw in your approach.
Further, that deal is like SMS and Google Shoppings list of LED equipment. dealing with the volume of specs with Lieb's years of experience is impossible for us, its disabling.
so the seller goes to a basic package then adds what you can understand - very little for a first time bike buyer in the beginning.
Canada sports a 45 day summer. What bike perspective that generates ?
SR rides 24 hrs/day .... the GNW riders do this with a short summer. Therefore we should see more touring equipment in Canada than Miami ?
Tour de Clearcut !
AMuzi
Nov 15, 2015, 10:40:58 AM11/15/15
to
The referenced early machines (Gitane Hosteler etc) did not
sell all that well but between 1971 and 1982 we built a
steady stream of Holdsworth Mistral, Woodrup, Bob Jackson,
Jack Taylor and other touring models fully equipped with
long distance touring equipment. 'Less popular' doesn't
equal 'none whatsoever'.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Andrew Chaplin
Nov 15, 2015, 11:22:25 AM11/15/15
to
avag...@gmail.com wrote in news:0f5e7998-00eb-4650-a74f-f76c3e42a424
@googlegroups.com:
> Canada sports a 45 day summer.
Perhaps, but the cycling is safe from 1 April to 30 November. Outside of
that period, you pays yer money and takes yer chances.
> What bike perspective that generates ?
Well, as a former tourer and current bicycling commuter in the
aforementioned eight months, I tried a good bike in 1973 (a friend let me
ride his Colnago with a Nuovo Record groupo) and decided never to ride a
long-wheelbased tourer again if I could help it. I still ride a Colombus
road frame with a 99cm wheelbase and no mudguards rain or shine. The only
equipmeent of any weight I have attached is lighting and a framefit pump,
otherwise it's bare.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
@googlegroups.com:
> Canada sports a 45 day summer.
that period, you pays yer money and takes yer chances.
> What bike perspective that generates ?
aforementioned eight months, I tried a good bike in 1973 (a friend let me
ride his Colnago with a Nuovo Record groupo) and decided never to ride a
long-wheelbased tourer again if I could help it. I still ride a Colombus
road frame with a 99cm wheelbase and no mudguards rain or shine. The only
equipmeent of any weight I have attached is lighting and a framefit pump,
otherwise it's bare.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
Frank Krygowski
Nov 15, 2015, 11:24:22 AM11/15/15
to
--
- Frank Krygowski
sms
Nov 15, 2015, 11:28:23 AM11/15/15
to
On 11/14/2015 3:40 PM, Joerg wrote:
<snip>
> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
I was in Target yesterday and was surprised to see one of these types of
bicycles. Metal fenders too.
But I wonder if the LBS was not also in favor of selling stripped
bicycles so they could sell the high-margin accessories rather then
having them included on a low-margin complete bicycle. That $50 rear
rack they sell cost the manufacturer only a few dollars to make and if
it was on the complete bicycle it might raise the cost by $5, and the
bicycle shop would be getting only 35-40% of $5 instead of 50% of $50.
<snip>
> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
bicycles. Metal fenders too.
But I wonder if the LBS was not also in favor of selling stripped
bicycles so they could sell the high-margin accessories rather then
having them included on a low-margin complete bicycle. That $50 rear
rack they sell cost the manufacturer only a few dollars to make and if
it was on the complete bicycle it might raise the cost by $5, and the
bicycle shop would be getting only 35-40% of $5 instead of 50% of $50.
Joerg
Nov 15, 2015, 12:47:02 PM11/15/15
to
On 2015-11-15 08:28, sms wrote:
> On 11/14/2015 3:40 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
>> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
>> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
>> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
>
> I was in Target yesterday and was surprised to see one of these types of
> bicycles. Metal fenders too.
>
It's all the rage right now. But you have to wear the right outfit. At
> On 11/14/2015 3:40 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Tastes are changing all the time. In our area (California) cruiser bikes
>> are making a big comeback. It's the hip thing to ride. They often come
>> complete with retro-look fenders, lights and luggage racks. Instead of
>> grandpa's old cruiser they now come in 7-speed.
>
> I was in Target yesterday and was surprised to see one of these types of
> bicycles. Metal fenders too.
>
the minimum some cool shades and absolutely positively no loud-colored
Lycra clothes.
Like Frank wrote it's the kid in me that finds these cool. Cruiser bikes
are totally impractical for any of the riding I do yet maybe they catch
my attention because as a kid I could never have one of those chopper
bikes that a few rich kids rode:
https://bonanzarad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/goebel.jpg?w=300&h=223
Even more cool were the Kettler pedal cars and I am puzzled that I never
see any on our bike paths:
http://medien.markt.de/bilder/2012/09/16/11/19655454/medium_image/0/kettcar.jpg
> But I wonder if the LBS was not also in favor of selling stripped
> bicycles so they could sell the high-margin accessories rather then
> having them included on a low-margin complete bicycle. That $50 rear
> rack they sell cost the manufacturer only a few dollars to make and if
> it was on the complete bicycle it might raise the cost by $5, and the
> bicycle shop would be getting only 35-40% of $5 instead of 50% of $50.
MTB seat post rack for around $20 from Amazon. Even has pannier "wings".
Those need some serious additional trail-proofing but you can't buy that
stuff at most LBS.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51lFTqIUVVL._SX522_.jpg
It's a challenge to affix panniers in a way that they won't slosh around
on really rough turf. If it keeps raining hard that's what I am going to
do in the garage this afternoon, for Nashbar Daytrekker panniers. Did it
for the road bike months ago and I find it very liberating not to have
to wear a hydration pack any longer. Much less sweat on my back and no
harness rashes.
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 15, 2015, 2:04:41 PM11/15/15
to
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 00:17:57 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>When American adults took to bikes in the early 1970s, it was more a fad
>with a heavy sporting component. And when American cycling went through
>one of its periodic surges, it was for sporting reasons - to emulate
>Greg LeMond or Lance Armstrong, or to tear up the woods on a mountain
>bike. It didn't much involve travel or even grocery runs; because
>"that's what cars are for."
(...)
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>When American adults took to bikes in the early 1970s, it was more a fad
>with a heavy sporting component. And when American cycling went through
>one of its periodic surges, it was for sporting reasons - to emulate
>Greg LeMond or Lance Armstrong, or to tear up the woods on a mountain
>bike. It didn't much involve travel or even grocery runs; because
>"that's what cars are for."
Good analysis. I generally agree with your history but I'm not sure
about the fender details. When I was presented with my first bicycle
(that I can remember) it came with metal fenders. I left them
attached because as a new young rider, I didn't know that they were
not suppose to be cool or fashionable. They lasted maybe a month or
two before I bent both front and rear fenders into unrecognizable
scrap metal. Same with the metal chain guard, kickstand, and tire
driven wheel dynamo. As a vaguely recall, they were all crude junk
and rather flimsy.
Fast forward half a century, and the metal fenders are now flexible
plastic, but still appear to be designed as an afterthought. I can no
longer bend them into unrecognizable scrap metal, and resign myself to
mangling the wire fender stays. Clip-on fenders are even more
frustrating. All the current designs vary between unsightly and ugly.
I don't have any great ideas to solve the fender problem. However, I
suspect that if the mounting arrangements were designed into the
frame, and the fender made somewhat stronger, it might be more
acceptable and look like part of the bicycle.
As for lighting, the problem was the ugly wires running along the
frame. The bicycle computer manufacturers found the solution with
wireless sensors, but that's not going to work with lighting. That
problem is that few buyers are going to buy a bicycle with bolt-on
accessories, that look like bolt-on accessories. They may add them
later, when nobody is looking, but not at the time of sale. The
bicycle has to look like the buyers illusions of a perfect bicycle,
not a practical machine full of bolt-on, hang-on, screw-on, stick-on,
and clip-on contrivances. Perhaps an experienced cyclist will
recognize and accept such things as external wiring, but not a first
time buyer or casual cyclist.
There's another reason that bicycles lack fenders and lights. Bear
with me here. Long ago, the cake mix and frozen food industries
discovered an odd problem. When they included everything pre-mixed
into the package, it wouldn't sell. The packages sold only when they
left something out, such as adding butter or requiring mixing. That's
because the average housewife did not consider "heat and serve" to be
cooking and needed something extra to convince themselves that they
are really cooking the meal.
It's much the same in bicycle sales. In an LBS, most machines are
sold with some accessories along with the sale. Usually it's high
margin bolt-on devices. The counters and displays are full of such
accessories. Fenders, tool bags, lighting, helmets, clothing, shoes,
air pumps, patch kits, etc. I once looked at several months of sales
of an LBS and found that only small number of high end machines were
NOT sold with some kind of bolt-on accessory. It's the same as the
cake mix. Buyers want to "build" a bicycle and without the bolt-on
accessories, it was as if they were buying an unacceptable "ready to
ride" (heat and serve) instant bicycle.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Frank Krygowski
Nov 15, 2015, 2:37:10 PM11/15/15
to
accessory design one favors. My fenders are plastic, but a friend of
mine sprung for hammered aluminum ones. Some people want only a "be
seen" headlight for inner city riding, others want one with optics that
light the road as evenly as a car headlight, and some want kilolumens of
glare. As Andrew would say, choice is good.
My beef is that most high end bikes now forbid decent fenders (i.e.
non-clip-on, full coverage). Many high end bikes allow headlights only
on handlebars, not at the fork crown. Fitting a rack is problematic on
many plastic bikes. In a quest for negligible improvements in weight or
aerodynamics or whatever, practicality has been tossed out.
Jay will say there are plenty of choices, which is true; but one has to
be fairly expert to find them. In a typical shop, the higher you go up
the price range, the less practical the bikes become. And if you ask
for "the best," it's going to be useful only for racing or "training."
--
- Frank Krygowski
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 15, 2015, 2:40:23 PM11/15/15
to
On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 2:04:41 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Fast forward half a century, and the metal fenders are now flexible
> plastic, but still appear to be designed as an afterthought. I can no
> longer bend them into unrecognizable scrap metal, and resign myself to
> mangling the wire fender stays. Clip-on fenders are even more
> frustrating. All the current designs vary between unsightly and ugly.
> I don't have any great ideas to solve the fender problem. However, I
> suspect that if the mounting arrangements were designed into the
> frame, and the fender made somewhat stronger, it might be more
> acceptable and look like part of the bicycle.
Many bolt on fenders today are designed to break away instead of crumpling if something gets stuck in one. it's yet another "safety feature" to protect us.
> Fast forward half a century, and the metal fenders are now flexible
> plastic, but still appear to be designed as an afterthought. I can no
> longer bend them into unrecognizable scrap metal, and resign myself to
> mangling the wire fender stays. Clip-on fenders are even more
> frustrating. All the current designs vary between unsightly and ugly.
> I don't have any great ideas to solve the fender problem. However, I
> suspect that if the mounting arrangements were designed into the
> frame, and the fender made somewhat stronger, it might be more
> acceptable and look like part of the bicycle.
Cheers
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 15, 2015, 2:46:54 PM11/15/15
to
On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 2:37:10 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> I suppose there's benefit in being able to choose exactly which
> accessory design one favors. My fenders are plastic, but a friend of
> mine sprung for hammered aluminum ones. Some people want only a "be
> seen" headlight for inner city riding, others want one with optics that
> light the road as evenly as a car headlight, and some want kilolumens of
> glare. As Andrew would say, choice is good.
>
> My beef is that most high end bikes now forbid decent fenders (i.e.
> non-clip-on, full coverage). Many high end bikes allow headlights only
> on handlebars, not at the fork crown. Fitting a rack is problematic on
> many plastic bikes. In a quest for negligible improvements in weight or
> aerodynamics or whatever, practicality has been tossed out.
>
> Jay will say there are plenty of choices, which is true; but one has to
> be fairly expert to find them. In a typical shop, the higher you go up
> the price range, the less practical the bikes become. And if you ask
> for "the best," it's going to be useful only for racing or "training."
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
The answer is simple and is reflected in the article I posted part of.
>
> I suppose there's benefit in being able to choose exactly which
> accessory design one favors. My fenders are plastic, but a friend of
> mine sprung for hammered aluminum ones. Some people want only a "be
> seen" headlight for inner city riding, others want one with optics that
> light the road as evenly as a car headlight, and some want kilolumens of
> glare. As Andrew would say, choice is good.
>
> My beef is that most high end bikes now forbid decent fenders (i.e.
> non-clip-on, full coverage). Many high end bikes allow headlights only
> on handlebars, not at the fork crown. Fitting a rack is problematic on
> many plastic bikes. In a quest for negligible improvements in weight or
> aerodynamics or whatever, practicality has been tossed out.
>
> Jay will say there are plenty of choices, which is true; but one has to
> be fairly expert to find them. In a typical shop, the higher you go up
> the price range, the less practical the bikes become. And if you ask
> for "the best," it's going to be useful only for racing or "training."
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
People didn't want the bikes that were already kitted out with fenders etcetera. Then the manufacturers built special purpose "racing bikes" that didn't need those mounts or clearances. Now we have bikes specially built for special purposes but most are still of the racing type. Once again it's a case of knowing what you need for your purposes and then researching and finding the bicycle that meets YUR needs. You can't really lament that a bicycle built for racing like a Lambourghini, doesn't have the ability to carry a huge load or take off-road tires.
Cheers
DougC
Nov 15, 2015, 3:05:03 PM11/15/15
to
Some years back Schwinn had a special anniversary model. It was MSRP at
$1500 as I recall. The press release pictures looked fantastic (probably
CGI, in hindsight...). The ad copy claimed it would be built "to the
same quality standards as the classic models". The main question was how
would the frame be constructed? Would they return to using internal lugs
again, at least for this one model? Or would they use some other
upper-end method? Lots of people said that even if it was merely a good
frame with cheap parts on it, they would still want one.
When they got into shops and people posted pictures online, it was a
turd. The price tag should have been $150. It was built to roughly the
same quality standards as department-store kids' bikes. People began
posting pictures of the same locations on vintage Schwinn bikes, and it
was built nothing like them.
I am not a bike company CEO and I would suppose they made a bunch of
money selling those bikes, but it became a sad commentary on why people
collect the old ones and not the new ones. They gave themselves the
freedom of a monstrous price tag and still could not get a well-built
product to the dealer floors.
sms
Nov 15, 2015, 3:12:00 PM11/15/15
to
On 11/15/2015 11:04 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> It's much the same in bicycle sales. In an LBS, most machines are
> sold with some accessories along with the sale. Usually it's high
> margin bolt-on devices. The counters and displays are full of such
> accessories. Fenders, tool bags, lighting, helmets, clothing, shoes,
> air pumps, patch kits, etc. I once looked at several months of sales
> of an LBS and found that only small number of high end machines were
> NOT sold with some kind of bolt-on accessory. It's the same as the
> cake mix. Buyers want to "build" a bicycle and without the bolt-on
> accessories, it was as if they were buying an unacceptable "ready to
> ride" (heat and serve) instant bicycle.
It's not that at all. It's the same reason that car makers decide to
> It's much the same in bicycle sales. In an LBS, most machines are
> sold with some accessories along with the sale. Usually it's high
> margin bolt-on devices. The counters and displays are full of such
> accessories. Fenders, tool bags, lighting, helmets, clothing, shoes,
> air pumps, patch kits, etc. I once looked at several months of sales
> of an LBS and found that only small number of high end machines were
> NOT sold with some kind of bolt-on accessory. It's the same as the
> cake mix. Buyers want to "build" a bicycle and without the bolt-on
> accessories, it was as if they were buying an unacceptable "ready to
> ride" (heat and serve) instant bicycle.
leave off fog lights, alarms, mud flaps, hitches, etc.. Few buyers want
them, and they can't increase their manufacturing costs to the point
where they have to raise the retail cost because the retail cost is
based on what the competition is charging, not on the cost of manufacturing.
Few bicycle buyers in the U.S. want fenders, kick stands, lights, racks,
mirrors, chain guards, etc. so no manufacturer is going to make them
standard.
AMuzi
Nov 15, 2015, 3:20:01 PM11/15/15
to
fully equipped touring audax and expedition models for those
who prefer them. When you decry models lacking one feature
or another you may as well go on to lament nice 650B tourers
with the 'wrong' size wheels or the 'wrong' chainring format
or a lack of hydraulic disc brakes:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/wfd13sr4.jpg
It doesn't matter in the larger sense if the owner actually
rides it. That's a standard I can promote above all others.
Jakob Krieger
Nov 15, 2015, 3:24:25 PM11/15/15
to
- Joerg / Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:46:58 +0100
> Like Frank wrote it's the kid in me that finds these cool. Cruiser bikes
> are totally impractical for any of the riding I do yet maybe they catch
> my attention because as a kid I could never have one of those chopper
> bikes that a few rich kids rode:
>
> https://bonanzarad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/goebel.jpg?w=300&h=223
They looked fashionable but were a pain to ride.
High weight (more than an old grandpa bike), 20" wheels,
bad weight distribution (almost nothing on the front wheel,
tended to flip-over to the rear).
Some had fake springs on a rigid fork
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg#/media/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg>
As a kid, I had a 20" folder with no gear-shift - it was
easy to overtake these low-rider things.
The kids who owned such stuff were the first to by a
light motorbike as soon as possible.
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg#/media/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg>
(could be operated from age 15 on with no license until 1980,
top-speed 25 km/h ~ 15 mph)
<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg#/media/File:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg>
(small license, aged 16, 40 km/h ~ 25 mph;
some like the Kreidler Florett could be tuned
to run 100 km/h ~ 60 mph or more -- illegally)
Neverless, kids that could afford such light
motorbikes were the first to buy a car ...
jk
--
no sig
> Like Frank wrote it's the kid in me that finds these cool. Cruiser bikes
> are totally impractical for any of the riding I do yet maybe they catch
> my attention because as a kid I could never have one of those chopper
> bikes that a few rich kids rode:
>
> https://bonanzarad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/goebel.jpg?w=300&h=223
High weight (more than an old grandpa bike), 20" wheels,
bad weight distribution (almost nothing on the front wheel,
tended to flip-over to the rear).
Some had fake springs on a rigid fork
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg#/media/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg>
As a kid, I had a 20" folder with no gear-shift - it was
easy to overtake these low-rider things.
The kids who owned such stuff were the first to by a
light motorbike as soon as possible.
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg#/media/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg>
(could be operated from age 15 on with no license until 1980,
top-speed 25 km/h ~ 15 mph)
<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg#/media/File:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg>
(small license, aged 16, 40 km/h ~ 25 mph;
some like the Kreidler Florett could be tuned
to run 100 km/h ~ 60 mph or more -- illegally)
Neverless, kids that could afford such light
motorbikes were the first to buy a car ...
jk
--
no sig
sms
Nov 15, 2015, 3:51:08 PM11/15/15
to
On 11/15/2015 12:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
<snip>
> http://www.yellowjersey.org/wfd13sr4.jpg
>
> It doesn't matter in the larger sense if the owner actually rides it.
> That's a standard I can promote above all others.
I see more "transportational" bicycles than ever before. Obviously these
are not the 3-4K carbon fiber racing bicycles. Often you have to look
beyond the traditional LBS to find them because the LBS is just not
interested in selling those types of bicycles (with a few exceptions).
For example, REI has the Barrow
<http://www.rei.com/product/888332/novara-barrow-bike-2016> and the
Gotham <http://www.rei.com/product/857590/novara-gotham-bike-2015>.
<snip>
> http://www.yellowjersey.org/wfd13sr4.jpg
>
> It doesn't matter in the larger sense if the owner actually rides it.
> That's a standard I can promote above all others.
are not the 3-4K carbon fiber racing bicycles. Often you have to look
beyond the traditional LBS to find them because the LBS is just not
interested in selling those types of bicycles (with a few exceptions).
For example, REI has the Barrow
<http://www.rei.com/product/888332/novara-barrow-bike-2016> and the
Gotham <http://www.rei.com/product/857590/novara-gotham-bike-2015>.
jbeattie
Nov 15, 2015, 4:26:19 PM11/15/15
to
I don't lament the lack of eyelets on real racing bikes. What I don't understand are the lack of eyelets on disc equipped "endurance" bikes with enough clearance to run 28mm tires and fenders. Prime offenders are the Cannondale Synapse and the Giant Defy carbon frames. The alloy versions do have eyelets. The Specialized Roubaix disc has eyelets in the Comp range but not when you move into the more expensive FACT 10 frame and more expensive components. The Domane has eyeles. The Diverge, GT Grade and other gravel grinders have eyelets.
I figure "endurance" riders are going to endure bad weather and would probably like fenders. I went for a ride in the rain this morning (of course, it cleared-off just when I got home). I didn't take my racing bike because even with fenders, it is getting the rims ground and taking too much of a beating. I went on my CX disc commuter bike with all the lights, fat tires, fenders, etc. What a pig, and strangely, my sale-table Bontrager all weather tires didn't feel that positive, but then again, nothing feels that positive in piles of wet maple leaves.
-- Jay Beattie.
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 15, 2015, 9:07:06 PM11/15/15
to
GACK GACK
749 ? get back.....
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 15, 2015, 9:08:39 PM11/15/15
to
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 12:11:58 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>On 11/15/2015 11:04 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> It's much the same in bicycle sales. In an LBS, most machines are
>> sold with some accessories along with the sale. Usually it's high
>> margin bolt-on devices. The counters and displays are full of such
>> accessories. Fenders, tool bags, lighting, helmets, clothing, shoes,
>> air pumps, patch kits, etc. I once looked at several months of sales
>> of an LBS and found that only small number of high end machines were
>> NOT sold with some kind of bolt-on accessory. It's the same as the
>> cake mix. Buyers want to "build" a bicycle and without the bolt-on
>> accessories, it was as if they were buying an unacceptable "ready to
>> ride" (heat and serve) instant bicycle.
>It's not that at all. It's the same reason that car makers decide to
>leave off fog lights, alarms, mud flaps, hitches, etc.. Few buyers want
>them, and they can't increase their manufacturing costs to the point
>where they have to raise the retail cost because the retail cost is
>based on what the competition is charging, not on the cost of manufacturing.
Sigh. In the bad old days of 1972, I bought an International
Harvester 1210 3/4 ton 4wd service truck. For the honor of buying a
fully customized vehicle, I spent a week slogging through what I would
guess was 500 assorted options, many of which were mutually exclusive.
I then had the factory go through my selection (for a small fee) as a
sanity check. It was quite an ordeal and involved considerable
research on my part.
Today, things are different. Instead of a menu of 500 items, the
manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
packages.
There's not much of that in the bicycling biz. The closest
approximations are "touring package", "triathlon package", "fitness
package" or "bad ass assault bicycle package". The problem is that
there aren't 500 choices to be made. Maybe about 30 with about half
of them mutually exclusive. Since it is amazingly easy to build a
machine that is uncomfortable, unrideable, or unsafe, the manufactures
take care of the important stuff that has to be done at the factory,
and leave the bolt-on options decisions to the LBS and customer.
>Few bicycle buyers in the U.S. want fenders, kick stands, lights, racks,
>mirrors, chain guards, etc. so no manufacturer is going to make them
>standard.
Oddly, I've found that many buyers do want the fog lights, alarms, mud
flaps, hitches(?), etc. The aftermarket bolt-on business would be
dead without such buyers. The problem is that they don't want them
when they purchase the bicycle. They want them later. My best guess
is that they are trying to cut costs on the initial purchase of the
bicycle, and are delaying the purchase of accessories until they can
accumulate more cash. There's also some psychology, but I don't want
to bore you with that.
That might be a bit hard to swallow, so I'll offer an anecdote closer
to home. HP sold test equipment for many years that had an IEEE-488
HPIB option, that allowed connections to other HPIB equipment to
produce a computah controlled automatic test system. HP noticed that
very few buyers purchased the HPIB option, so the removed it from a
few models to cut costs. Sales were abysmal. After interrogating few
customers, HP discovered that they didn't consider it to be a proper
piece of test equipment unless it had an HPIB interface, even if they
didn't use that interface.
The moral here is that you don't have to supply fenders, mud flaps,
lights, chain guard, panniers, and towing kits with the bicycle. You
do have to supply the hardware to mount these and a not so subtle hint
to the buyer where and how these bolt-ons are attached.
wrote:
>On 11/15/2015 11:04 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> It's much the same in bicycle sales. In an LBS, most machines are
>> sold with some accessories along with the sale. Usually it's high
>> margin bolt-on devices. The counters and displays are full of such
>> accessories. Fenders, tool bags, lighting, helmets, clothing, shoes,
>> air pumps, patch kits, etc. I once looked at several months of sales
>> of an LBS and found that only small number of high end machines were
>> NOT sold with some kind of bolt-on accessory. It's the same as the
>> cake mix. Buyers want to "build" a bicycle and without the bolt-on
>> accessories, it was as if they were buying an unacceptable "ready to
>> ride" (heat and serve) instant bicycle.
>It's not that at all. It's the same reason that car makers decide to
>leave off fog lights, alarms, mud flaps, hitches, etc.. Few buyers want
>them, and they can't increase their manufacturing costs to the point
>where they have to raise the retail cost because the retail cost is
>based on what the competition is charging, not on the cost of manufacturing.
Harvester 1210 3/4 ton 4wd service truck. For the honor of buying a
fully customized vehicle, I spent a week slogging through what I would
guess was 500 assorted options, many of which were mutually exclusive.
I then had the factory go through my selection (for a small fee) as a
sanity check. It was quite an ordeal and involved considerable
research on my part.
Today, things are different. Instead of a menu of 500 items, the
manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
packages.
There's not much of that in the bicycling biz. The closest
approximations are "touring package", "triathlon package", "fitness
package" or "bad ass assault bicycle package". The problem is that
there aren't 500 choices to be made. Maybe about 30 with about half
of them mutually exclusive. Since it is amazingly easy to build a
machine that is uncomfortable, unrideable, or unsafe, the manufactures
take care of the important stuff that has to be done at the factory,
and leave the bolt-on options decisions to the LBS and customer.
>Few bicycle buyers in the U.S. want fenders, kick stands, lights, racks,
>mirrors, chain guards, etc. so no manufacturer is going to make them
>standard.
flaps, hitches(?), etc. The aftermarket bolt-on business would be
dead without such buyers. The problem is that they don't want them
when they purchase the bicycle. They want them later. My best guess
is that they are trying to cut costs on the initial purchase of the
bicycle, and are delaying the purchase of accessories until they can
accumulate more cash. There's also some psychology, but I don't want
to bore you with that.
That might be a bit hard to swallow, so I'll offer an anecdote closer
to home. HP sold test equipment for many years that had an IEEE-488
HPIB option, that allowed connections to other HPIB equipment to
produce a computah controlled automatic test system. HP noticed that
very few buyers purchased the HPIB option, so the removed it from a
few models to cut costs. Sales were abysmal. After interrogating few
customers, HP discovered that they didn't consider it to be a proper
piece of test equipment unless it had an HPIB interface, even if they
didn't use that interface.
The moral here is that you don't have to supply fenders, mud flaps,
lights, chain guard, panniers, and towing kits with the bicycle. You
do have to supply the hardware to mount these and a not so subtle hint
to the buyer where and how these bolt-ons are attached.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:42:07 AM11/16/15
to
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 14:37:07 -0500, Frank Krygowski
I'd guess that Frank is an "old fellow" like me and remembers "like it
used to be". But it ain't that a way no more. Now a days people don't
use bicycles for every day transportation - that's the "car" and the
bike is relegated to sports and fitness.
As an example: I had a bloke from New Castle worked for me in the late
1960's who was a time served machinist and immigrated to the U.S. he
told me that after he had been in the U.S. for about a year he took a
vacation back to England to see his mother and, of course, was down
tha pub in the evenings. When he told the chaps that he had a second
hand car, in America, they called him a liar - "maybe a second hand
motor bike, but not an automobile. Don't be telling porkies".
I was amazed, as I had my own car when I was 16 years old and couldn't
imagine a country where a young fellow didn't have a car.... how could
you find a girl?
But those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
have a bicycle for basic transportation and if you only ride for
recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
carrier and all the fittings?
This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
take the car :-)
And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
--
Cheers,
John B.
used to be". But it ain't that a way no more. Now a days people don't
use bicycles for every day transportation - that's the "car" and the
bike is relegated to sports and fitness.
As an example: I had a bloke from New Castle worked for me in the late
1960's who was a time served machinist and immigrated to the U.S. he
told me that after he had been in the U.S. for about a year he took a
vacation back to England to see his mother and, of course, was down
tha pub in the evenings. When he told the chaps that he had a second
hand car, in America, they called him a liar - "maybe a second hand
motor bike, but not an automobile. Don't be telling porkies".
I was amazed, as I had my own car when I was 16 years old and couldn't
imagine a country where a young fellow didn't have a car.... how could
you find a girl?
But those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
have a bicycle for basic transportation and if you only ride for
recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
carrier and all the fittings?
This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
take the car :-)
And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:42:07 AM11/16/15
to
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:08:39 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
I suggest that is largely due to the maker not wanting the hassle, and
it would be hassle, of fitting out pickup trucks to match the desires
of a guy, in East Overshoe, Texas, who plans on shoeing work horses
and another guy in Bangor, Maine, who is repairing fishing boat
winches, and a third guy in Boston, Mass., who's business is
maintaining and repairing Cathedral Organs.
Better to just offer a "Service Vehicle Package".
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
it would be hassle, of fitting out pickup trucks to match the desires
of a guy, in East Overshoe, Texas, who plans on shoeing work horses
and another guy in Bangor, Maine, who is repairing fishing boat
winches, and a third guy in Boston, Mass., who's business is
maintaining and repairing Cathedral Organs.
Better to just offer a "Service Vehicle Package".
John B.
jbeattie
Nov 16, 2015, 10:05:32 AM11/16/15
to
There are many, many more cyclists in my city today than ever. Typical bicycle commuter traffic: http://tinyurl.com/o5ee4cg It's incredible. Nobody drivers a car, and we all have low cholesterol. We're living the dream, and you could have it, too, if only you wish hard enough.
-- Jay Beattie.
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 16, 2015, 10:17:16 AM11/16/15
to
On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 10:05:32 AM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
Snipped lots:
Cheers
Snipped lots:
> There are many, many more cyclists in my city today than ever. Typical bicycle commuter traffic: http://tinyurl.com/o5ee4cg It's incredible. Nobody drivers a car, and we all have low cholesterol. We're living the dream, and you could have it, too, if only you wish hard enough.
>
> -- Jay Beattie.
Check out the guy pedestrian in the blue shirt in the foreground. He's wearing a helmet!
>
> -- Jay Beattie.
Cheers
Duane
Nov 16, 2015, 10:17:24 AM11/16/15
to
what are all these things clogging up my ride every morning?
Screw mandatory helmet laws. Maybe we should implement mandatory fender
laws and get those numbers back down to what they were in the 50s.
Duane
Nov 16, 2015, 10:20:36 AM11/16/15
to
against the concrete on the right and he's just arrived from the 50s and
is terrified wondering where all the fenders are.
AMuzi
Nov 16, 2015, 10:32:08 AM11/16/15
to
Frank Krygowski
Nov 16, 2015, 10:42:19 AM11/16/15
to
On 11/16/2015 7:41 AM, John B. wrote:
> ... those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
middle-class person couldn't afford a car. But ISTM there are people
saying we shouldn't need to use a car for every trip. And I agree with
them.
If someone said "I don't want to carry a case of beer by bike," I'd say
that's fine. But I think most Americans really do fire up the car if
they want to go two blocks to buy a magazine or a bottle of vitamins.
To me, that's weird! Especially when many of them are also driving to
the health club to "spin" or jog on treadmills.
And it's not that I think bikes with fenders (or fender clearance) will
fix that. The main reasons for the weird behavior are probably laziness
plus "Danger! Danger!" fears. Oh, and simple fashion, as in "People
don't do that because people don't do that."
But I think if bike manufacturers did allow for a little more
versatility in their "go fast" bikes, their customers might actually use
them for something other than garage ornaments on more occasions.
Meanwhile the threaded holes in dropouts and an extra half inch of
clearance won't prevent Walter Mitty from hurtling, arse up, past his
imaginary competitors.
And if the inscrutable world of fashion changes - if people actually do
start using bikes more - those with the versatile bikes will do it more
happily.
--
- Frank Krygowski
> ... those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
> have a bicycle for basic transportation and if you only ride for
> recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
> carrier and all the fittings?
>
> This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
> bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
> raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
> take the car :-)
>
> And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
> in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
> Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
I don't know anyone who's proposing we go back to the days when a
> recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
> carrier and all the fittings?
>
> This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
> bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
> raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
> take the car :-)
>
> And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
> in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
> Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
middle-class person couldn't afford a car. But ISTM there are people
saying we shouldn't need to use a car for every trip. And I agree with
them.
If someone said "I don't want to carry a case of beer by bike," I'd say
that's fine. But I think most Americans really do fire up the car if
they want to go two blocks to buy a magazine or a bottle of vitamins.
To me, that's weird! Especially when many of them are also driving to
the health club to "spin" or jog on treadmills.
And it's not that I think bikes with fenders (or fender clearance) will
fix that. The main reasons for the weird behavior are probably laziness
plus "Danger! Danger!" fears. Oh, and simple fashion, as in "People
don't do that because people don't do that."
But I think if bike manufacturers did allow for a little more
versatility in their "go fast" bikes, their customers might actually use
them for something other than garage ornaments on more occasions.
Meanwhile the threaded holes in dropouts and an extra half inch of
clearance won't prevent Walter Mitty from hurtling, arse up, past his
imaginary competitors.
And if the inscrutable world of fashion changes - if people actually do
start using bikes more - those with the versatile bikes will do it more
happily.
--
- Frank Krygowski
Frank Krygowski
Nov 16, 2015, 10:49:39 AM11/16/15
to
On 11/16/2015 10:31 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
>
> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/bogey.jpg
Speaking of which, seriously:
One of our regular club rides is called the "Bogey's Ride." It starts
and ends at a restaurant/bar with a Humphrey Bogart theme. Lots of
framed posters inside from the guy's films, etc.
I thought we should donate a framed poster of that photo or another
similar one for the bar's wall. But I can't seem to find one that has
resolution sufficient for a 2' x 3' poster (the size of most in the bar).
Suggestions appreciated.
--
- Frank Krygowski
>
>
> http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/bogey.jpg
Speaking of which, seriously:
One of our regular club rides is called the "Bogey's Ride." It starts
and ends at a restaurant/bar with a Humphrey Bogart theme. Lots of
framed posters inside from the guy's films, etc.
I thought we should donate a framed poster of that photo or another
similar one for the bar's wall. But I can't seem to find one that has
resolution sufficient for a 2' x 3' poster (the size of most in the bar).
Suggestions appreciated.
--
- Frank Krygowski
sms
Nov 16, 2015, 11:07:16 AM11/16/15
to
everyday transportation than ever before.
We have three basic groups:
1) Silicon Valley professionals
2) Service workers going to supermarkets and restaurants
3) Senior citizens from China and India that are living with their children.
The one area where you see almost no cyclists anymore is school children
riding to elementary school. When I was in elementary school there were
massive numbers of children riding to school; where I live now, there
are almost none.
For middle school and high school it's pretty common to cycle to school
though every time something bad happens the numbers decrease for a while.
The things that make it bad to ride to school are two-fold, much poorer
drivers than in the past and far more cars going to the schools because
there are almost no school buses around my area.
I am sometimes amazed at the distances that parents drive their kids. My
neighbor two doors east once drove her daughter to a birthday party that
was about seven houses away, less than 1/8 mile. I was walking my
daughter to the same party, and I was about 160 feet further away. I
looked at my neighbor and she said "I know what you're thinking but
Caitlin didn't want to walk." Another person lived one very short block
from the elementary school but always drove his kid even though he could
have walked her there much faster. It isn't really safe for the
elementary school kids to walk by themselves because the drivers are so
bad and don't stop at crosswalks, and because of a lack of crossing
guards and lack of traffic calming measures.
AMuzi
Nov 16, 2015, 11:08:49 AM11/16/15
to
featured item on their web page:
http://www.gettyimages.fr/galleries/photographers/km_archive
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 16, 2015, 11:40:31 AM11/16/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:41:58 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
un-necessary and useless junk just to get the one feature that the
utility truck owner really needed. Still, it's better than slogging
through 500 decision points, even with plenty of help from the
factory. Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
than those, the truck was perfect.
So, let's pretend we could purchase bicycles in the same manner. I go
to the manufactory web pile or LBS kiosk and start with a side view of
a generic bicycle. From various pull down menus, I select the major
styles and sizes. From there, I drill down to component vendors and
models. Of course, a myriad of bolt-on options. For completeness,
the manufactory offers "approved" 3rd party accessories, direct from
various Chinese import sites for only double the price. I could
probably build some really interesting machines, but also some really
useless and difficult to ride machines. It might be fun to write the
code to deal with mutually exclusive options and incompatibilities (AI
or fuzzy logic). The results will probably be very similar to my
truck buying experience. After a few failures, I suspect convenient
and workable "packages" will replace over-choice.
So, how did we get here? During the 1950's and 60's, a big fear among
the GUM (great unwashed masses) was conformity. The Beatniks
expressed this best, but it appeared at all levels. Mass production
and automation was beginning to benefit from standardization and it
was assumed that this would dramatically reduce our choices. Tract
houses and cars began to look very much identical. Collectivism
versus individualism. Etc...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Organization_Man>
To a teenager like me, it read like a horror story. What few realized
was that the increased levels of automation made customization easier,
rather than more difficult. That's where we are today. The same
system that threatend to force all of us to ride identical bicycles,
now offers so many choices and options, that instead of rigid
conformity, we have so many choices that we need standards committees
and "packages" to prevent incompatibilities and overchoice.
The pendulum swings in both directions.
>>Today, things are different. Instead of a menu of 500 items, the
>>manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
>>purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
>>might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
>>also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
>>packages.
>I suggest that is largely due to the maker not wanting the hassle, and
>it would be hassle, of fitting out pickup trucks to match the desires
>of a guy, in East Overshoe, Texas, who plans on shoeing work horses
>and another guy in Bangor, Maine, who is repairing fishing boat
>winches, and a third guy in Boston, Mass., who's business is
>maintaining and repairing Cathedral Organs.
>
>Better to just offer a "Service Vehicle Package".
Sure, which allows the manufacturer to require adding all kinds of
>>manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
>>purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
>>might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
>>also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
>>packages.
>I suggest that is largely due to the maker not wanting the hassle, and
>it would be hassle, of fitting out pickup trucks to match the desires
>of a guy, in East Overshoe, Texas, who plans on shoeing work horses
>and another guy in Bangor, Maine, who is repairing fishing boat
>winches, and a third guy in Boston, Mass., who's business is
>maintaining and repairing Cathedral Organs.
>
>Better to just offer a "Service Vehicle Package".
un-necessary and useless junk just to get the one feature that the
utility truck owner really needed. Still, it's better than slogging
through 500 decision points, even with plenty of help from the
factory. Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
than those, the truck was perfect.
So, let's pretend we could purchase bicycles in the same manner. I go
to the manufactory web pile or LBS kiosk and start with a side view of
a generic bicycle. From various pull down menus, I select the major
styles and sizes. From there, I drill down to component vendors and
models. Of course, a myriad of bolt-on options. For completeness,
the manufactory offers "approved" 3rd party accessories, direct from
various Chinese import sites for only double the price. I could
probably build some really interesting machines, but also some really
useless and difficult to ride machines. It might be fun to write the
code to deal with mutually exclusive options and incompatibilities (AI
or fuzzy logic). The results will probably be very similar to my
truck buying experience. After a few failures, I suspect convenient
and workable "packages" will replace over-choice.
So, how did we get here? During the 1950's and 60's, a big fear among
the GUM (great unwashed masses) was conformity. The Beatniks
expressed this best, but it appeared at all levels. Mass production
and automation was beginning to benefit from standardization and it
was assumed that this would dramatically reduce our choices. Tract
houses and cars began to look very much identical. Collectivism
versus individualism. Etc...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Organization_Man>
To a teenager like me, it read like a horror story. What few realized
was that the increased levels of automation made customization easier,
rather than more difficult. That's where we are today. The same
system that threatend to force all of us to ride identical bicycles,
now offers so many choices and options, that instead of rigid
conformity, we have so many choices that we need standards committees
and "packages" to prevent incompatibilities and overchoice.
The pendulum swings in both directions.
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 16, 2015, 12:43:11 PM11/16/15
to
Doug Landau
Nov 16, 2015, 1:11:03 PM11/16/15
to
Joerg
Nov 16, 2015, 1:49:54 PM11/16/15
to
On 2015-11-15 12:24, Jakob Krieger wrote:
> - Joerg / Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:46:58 +0100
>
>
>> Like Frank wrote it's the kid in me that finds these cool. Cruiser bikes
>> are totally impractical for any of the riding I do yet maybe they catch
>> my attention because as a kid I could never have one of those chopper
>> bikes that a few rich kids rode:
>>
>> https://bonanzarad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/goebel.jpg?w=300&h=223
>
> They looked fashionable but were a pain to ride.
>
I know. Same with cruiser bikes. However, back in the days of our youth
> - Joerg / Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:46:58 +0100
>
>
>> Like Frank wrote it's the kid in me that finds these cool. Cruiser bikes
>> are totally impractical for any of the riding I do yet maybe they catch
>> my attention because as a kid I could never have one of those chopper
>> bikes that a few rich kids rode:
>>
>> https://bonanzarad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/goebel.jpg?w=300&h=223
>
> They looked fashionable but were a pain to ride.
>
it was all about one thing: To look cool and impress the girls :-)
> High weight (more than an old grandpa bike), 20" wheels,
> bad weight distribution (almost nothing on the front wheel,
> tended to flip-over to the rear).
> Some had fake springs on a rigid fork
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg#/media/File:Bonanzarad_von_vorn.jpg>
>
>
> As a kid, I had a 20" folder with no gear-shift - it was
> easy to overtake these low-rider things.
>
>
> The kids who owned such stuff were the first to by a
> light motorbike as soon as possible.
>
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg#/media/File:Babetta_207.300.jpg>
>
>
> (could be operated from age 15 on with no license until 1980,
> top-speed 25 km/h ~ 15 mph)
>
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg#/media/File:Kreidler-moped-1959.jpg>
>
10hp out of the little 50ccm engine.
>
> (small license, aged 16, 40 km/h ~ 25 mph;
> some like the Kreidler Florett could be tuned
> to run 100 km/h ~ 60 mph or more -- illegally)
>
>
> Neverless, kids that could afford such light
> motorbikes were the first to buy a car ...
>
and grows, the doctor says they should do something about it and then
they head to the bike shop again. After a few tens of miles the bike
ends up in the garage for good because it's too dangerous out on the
roads to ride or they run out of breath.
A good trend I am starting to see out here is BMX. Unfortunately they
often do it without helmets so some of them end up in the emergency room.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EZw5ag-Rjss/UPpc7XGPrkI/AAAAAAAAEJs/Rxm0641M1J8/s1600/BMX+Freestyle+Wallpaper+HD+14.jpg
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
Doug Landau
Nov 16, 2015, 1:57:31 PM11/16/15
to
>The only adult I knew in the '60s that rode a bike was my fifth grade teacher, but he was national road champion, and somewhat of an outlier.
Bob Tetzlaff?
Doug Landau
Nov 16, 2015, 2:12:47 PM11/16/15
to
> https://www.google.com/#q=types+of+bicycles
Wow! Has anyone here ridden one of those firefighter bikes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bicycle_types#/media/File:Firefighter_bicycle.jpg
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 16, 2015, 2:35:41 PM11/16/15
to
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 16, 2015, 2:40:38 PM11/16/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 11:12:44 -0800 (PST), Doug Landau
<doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Wow! Has anyone here ridden one of those firefighter bikes?
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bicycle_types#/media/File:Firefighter_bicycle.jpg
No, but such things are not unique:
<doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Wow! Has anyone here ridden one of those firefighter bikes?
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bicycle_types#/media/File:Firefighter_bicycle.jpg
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/oddities/slides/firecycle.html>
However, it's usually a motorcycle:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_bike>
More oddities:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/oddities/>
Jakob Krieger
Nov 16, 2015, 3:15:09 PM11/16/15
to
- Joerg / Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:49:50 +0100
[»Bonanza« bike (German brand-name)]
>> They looked fashionable but were a pain to ride.
> I know. Same with cruiser bikes. However, back in the days of our youth
> it was all about one thing: To look cool and impress the girls :-)
A short period of impressing ... it ends when the girls see
their little sisters driving faster with their pink 16"
kiddy-bikes.
>> As a kid, I had a 20" folder with no gear-shift - it was
>> easy to overtake these low-rider things.
> But you can't impress the girls on a foldable bike.
If I had known then that is really hard to impress girls
(unless you supply them with free weed, pot, and c),
I had kept this bike. It had a good tramsmission (big
chain blade) and the frame wasn't wobbly like most other
folders. So it was given to my little cousin who trashed
it right away (he still has this habit, now with cars).
[Kreidler Florett]
> Oh yes, I remember those. Many people souped them up and got more than
> 10hp out of the little 50ccm engine.
The younger kids next door (we named them »the missing links«)
had a lot of very fast pimped mopeds. Luckily, they were on repair
most of the time, not on the road, so most kids survived.
>> Neverless, kids that could afford such light
>> motorbikes were the first to buy a car ...
> It always goes that way. Until the kids become adults, a potbelly forms
> and grows, the doctor says they should do something about it and then
> they head to the bike shop again. After a few tens of miles the bike
> ends up in the garage for good because it's too dangerous out on the
> roads to ride or they run out of breath.
... and when they turn 70, they re-discover their
puberty feelings and buy Harleys ...
> A good trend I am starting to see out here is BMX. Unfortunately they
> often do it without helmets so some of them end up in the emergency room.
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EZw5ag-Rjss/UPpc7XGPrkI/AAAAAAAAEJs/Rxm0641M1J8/s1600/BMX+Freestyle+Wallpaper+HD+14.jpg
Pro BMX guys wear a lot of protectors plus an integral helmet.
At least the ones who already know that such things don't really
impress girls anyways ...
jk
--
no sig
[»Bonanza« bike (German brand-name)]
>> They looked fashionable but were a pain to ride.
> I know. Same with cruiser bikes. However, back in the days of our youth
> it was all about one thing: To look cool and impress the girls :-)
their little sisters driving faster with their pink 16"
kiddy-bikes.
>> As a kid, I had a 20" folder with no gear-shift - it was
>> easy to overtake these low-rider things.
> But you can't impress the girls on a foldable bike.
(unless you supply them with free weed, pot, and c),
I had kept this bike. It had a good tramsmission (big
chain blade) and the frame wasn't wobbly like most other
folders. So it was given to my little cousin who trashed
it right away (he still has this habit, now with cars).
[Kreidler Florett]
> Oh yes, I remember those. Many people souped them up and got more than
> 10hp out of the little 50ccm engine.
had a lot of very fast pimped mopeds. Luckily, they were on repair
most of the time, not on the road, so most kids survived.
>> Neverless, kids that could afford such light
>> motorbikes were the first to buy a car ...
> It always goes that way. Until the kids become adults, a potbelly forms
> and grows, the doctor says they should do something about it and then
> they head to the bike shop again. After a few tens of miles the bike
> ends up in the garage for good because it's too dangerous out on the
> roads to ride or they run out of breath.
puberty feelings and buy Harleys ...
> A good trend I am starting to see out here is BMX. Unfortunately they
> often do it without helmets so some of them end up in the emergency room.
>
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EZw5ag-Rjss/UPpc7XGPrkI/AAAAAAAAEJs/Rxm0641M1J8/s1600/BMX+Freestyle+Wallpaper+HD+14.jpg
At least the ones who already know that such things don't really
impress girls anyways ...
jk
--
no sig
sms
Nov 16, 2015, 3:44:23 PM11/16/15
to
On 11/15/2015 6:08 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Today, things are different. Instead of a menu of 500 items, the
> manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
> purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
> might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
> also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
> packages.
For Toyotas, of which we now have four, their are factory options, port
> Today, things are different. Instead of a menu of 500 items, the
> manufacturers offer "packages" of compatible items. The same truck
> purchased today would come with a "service/utility" package which
> might include everything a mobile repair shop might need. There are
> also hauling, camping, towing, Levi Jeans, low rider, racing, etc
> packages.
options, and dealer options.
Factory options are things like sunroofs, stuff that has to be built
into the car at the factory. Port options are things like towing
packages (a hitch and wiring) and floor mats. Dealer options are things
like mud flaps and wheel locks. Then of course there are the el-crappo
after-market stuff that the dealer pushes.
Many of the vehicles come to the dealer with port options with the cost
added on. You can get the cost down to the "invoice" price for these
options. The dealer options are the biggest ripoff. When I bought my SUV
I offered the dealer the online price (which was the invoice price) for
the dealer options I wanted, which was about 40% less than their list
price. They said okay, but not installed, which was fine with me.
I also found that many of the options for my wife's Prius Plug-In were
better ordered from a third party that was importing Toyota's European
accessories which were better designed.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:01:29 PM11/16/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 08:40:31 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
But your mistakes were simply the result of ignorance - you didn't
know what you actually needed.
Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
small, a frame :-)
>So, let's pretend we could purchase bicycles in the same manner. I go
>to the manufactory web pile or LBS kiosk and start with a side view of
>a generic bicycle. From various pull down menus, I select the major
>styles and sizes. From there, I drill down to component vendors and
>models. Of course, a myriad of bolt-on options. For completeness,
>the manufactory offers "approved" 3rd party accessories, direct from
>various Chinese import sites for only double the price. I could
>probably build some really interesting machines, but also some really
>useless and difficult to ride machines. It might be fun to write the
>code to deal with mutually exclusive options and incompatibilities (AI
>or fuzzy logic). The results will probably be very similar to my
>truck buying experience. After a few failures, I suspect convenient
>and workable "packages" will replace over-choice.
But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
might not get the "right" bike.
>So, how did we get here? During the 1950's and 60's, a big fear among
>the GUM (great unwashed masses) was conformity. The Beatniks
>expressed this best, but it appeared at all levels. Mass production
>and automation was beginning to benefit from standardization and it
>was assumed that this would dramatically reduce our choices. Tract
>houses and cars began to look very much identical. Collectivism
>versus individualism. Etc...
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Organization_Man>
>To a teenager like me, it read like a horror story. What few realized
>was that the increased levels of automation made customization easier,
>rather than more difficult. That's where we are today. The same
>system that threatend to force all of us to ride identical bicycles,
>now offers so many choices and options, that instead of rigid
>conformity, we have so many choices that we need standards committees
>and "packages" to prevent incompatibilities and overchoice.
>
>The pendulum swings in both directions.
--
Cheers,
John B.
know what you actually needed.
Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
small, a frame :-)
>So, let's pretend we could purchase bicycles in the same manner. I go
>to the manufactory web pile or LBS kiosk and start with a side view of
>a generic bicycle. From various pull down menus, I select the major
>styles and sizes. From there, I drill down to component vendors and
>models. Of course, a myriad of bolt-on options. For completeness,
>the manufactory offers "approved" 3rd party accessories, direct from
>various Chinese import sites for only double the price. I could
>probably build some really interesting machines, but also some really
>useless and difficult to ride machines. It might be fun to write the
>code to deal with mutually exclusive options and incompatibilities (AI
>or fuzzy logic). The results will probably be very similar to my
>truck buying experience. After a few failures, I suspect convenient
>and workable "packages" will replace over-choice.
might not get the "right" bike.
>So, how did we get here? During the 1950's and 60's, a big fear among
>the GUM (great unwashed masses) was conformity. The Beatniks
>expressed this best, but it appeared at all levels. Mass production
>and automation was beginning to benefit from standardization and it
>was assumed that this would dramatically reduce our choices. Tract
>houses and cars began to look very much identical. Collectivism
>versus individualism. Etc...
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Organization_Man>
>To a teenager like me, it read like a horror story. What few realized
>was that the increased levels of automation made customization easier,
>rather than more difficult. That's where we are today. The same
>system that threatend to force all of us to ride identical bicycles,
>now offers so many choices and options, that instead of rigid
>conformity, we have so many choices that we need standards committees
>and "packages" to prevent incompatibilities and overchoice.
>
>The pendulum swings in both directions.
--
John B.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:01:31 PM11/16/15
to
see here are very much the same - Fat.
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:01:33 PM11/16/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 08:07:12 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
I see, and none of these Silicon Valley professionals own a car, or
rent a car, or call a taxi when it is raining?
And the back lot of Macdonald or Walmart is full of bicycles?
>3) Senior citizens from China and India that are living with their children.
What about Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Burma and Indonesia? Don't they
have any bicycles?
--
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
rent a car, or call a taxi when it is raining?
And the back lot of Macdonald or Walmart is full of bicycles?
>3) Senior citizens from China and India that are living with their children.
have any bicycles?
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
Nov 16, 2015, 7:01:33 PM11/16/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:42:15 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On 11/16/2015 7:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>> ... those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
>> have a bicycle for basic transportation and if you only ride for
>> recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
>> carrier and all the fittings?
>>
>> This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
>> bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
>> raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
>> take the car :-)
>>
>> And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
>> in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
>> Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
>
>I don't know anyone who's proposing we go back to the days when a
>middle-class person couldn't afford a car. But ISTM there are people
>saying we shouldn't need to use a car for every trip. And I agree with
>them.
>
When I was much younger people walked. In general most of the families
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On 11/16/2015 7:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>> ... those days are long gone and really, there isn't any reason to
>> have a bicycle for basic transportation and if you only ride for
>> recreation and sport why do you need the full fenders, front and rear
>> carrier and all the fittings?
>>
>> This is not to say that one can't carry a case of beer home "on the
>> bike" but it isn't a necessity any more and I suspect that it is
>> raining torrents or the midst of a hurricane even the "beer bikers"
>> take the car :-)
>>
>> And who wouldn't rather be the Hurtling Hero, nose down and arse up,
>> in the lead of the (virtual) World's Cup, rather than Irvine the Iron
>> Worker wearily pedaling home after a long day in the Mill?
>
>I don't know anyone who's proposing we go back to the days when a
>middle-class person couldn't afford a car. But ISTM there are people
>saying we shouldn't need to use a car for every trip. And I agree with
>them.
>
in the neighborhood we lived in had a car in the garage but those that
lived in a reasonable distance, say a mile or less, from their
workplace walked to work. One didn't "waste money" by driving when one
could walk perfectly well.
>If someone said "I don't want to carry a case of beer by bike," I'd say
>that's fine. But I think most Americans really do fire up the car if
>they want to go two blocks to buy a magazine or a bottle of vitamins.
>To me, that's weird! Especially when many of them are also driving to
>the health club to "spin" or jog on treadmills.
>
>And it's not that I think bikes with fenders (or fender clearance) will
>fix that. The main reasons for the weird behavior are probably laziness
>plus "Danger! Danger!" fears. Oh, and simple fashion, as in "People
>don't do that because people don't do that."
>
>But I think if bike manufacturers did allow for a little more
>versatility in their "go fast" bikes, their customers might actually use
>them for something other than garage ornaments on more occasions.
>Meanwhile the threaded holes in dropouts and an extra half inch of
>clearance won't prevent Walter Mitty from hurtling, arse up, past his
>imaginary competitors.
see, all the old folks riding slowly down the street with the shopping
basket have fenders, on their single speed bike, but amount the folks
with the tight pants and helmets, fenders are extremely rare. Last
Sunday I came upon a bloke riding a lugged steel frame bike with down
tube shifters and fenders. That's one I've seen so far. If I look in
the mirror, that's two.
>And if the inscrutable world of fashion changes - if people actually do
>start using bikes more - those with the versatile bikes will do it more
>happily.
--
John B.
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 16, 2015, 9:56:25 PM11/16/15
to
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:01:23 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
>>end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
>>didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
>>than those, the truck was perfect.
>But your mistakes were simply the result of ignorance - you didn't
>know what you actually needed.
Nope. It was dumber than simple ignorance or stupidity. I specified
the rear end ratio based on the ability of the truck to climb hills
and operate on the city streets. I didn't think it would spend much
time on the freeways at high speeds, but it did. 10 mpg on any
terrain or speed was the result. The aftermarket air conditioner was
my attempt to cut some costs. The paint problem was a bad batch of
paint at service box factory. Years later, I found others that were
painted the same color with the same paint problem. The company died
before I could arrange to have it repainted. By then, I because used
to the primer gray and metallic blue camouflage pattern. Meanwhile, I
put about 150,000 miles on it, much of it on dirt roads, before I sold
it. The appliance dealer added another 80,000 miles before his son
rolled it.
>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>small, a frame :-)
Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
wrong frame size certainly would.
>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>might not get the "right" bike.
Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
subsequent decisions should be better.
wrote:
>>Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
>>end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
>>didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
>>than those, the truck was perfect.
>But your mistakes were simply the result of ignorance - you didn't
>know what you actually needed.
the rear end ratio based on the ability of the truck to climb hills
and operate on the city streets. I didn't think it would spend much
time on the freeways at high speeds, but it did. 10 mpg on any
terrain or speed was the result. The aftermarket air conditioner was
my attempt to cut some costs. The paint problem was a bad batch of
paint at service box factory. Years later, I found others that were
painted the same color with the same paint problem. The company died
before I could arrange to have it repainted. By then, I because used
to the primer gray and metallic blue camouflage pattern. Meanwhile, I
put about 150,000 miles on it, much of it on dirt roads, before I sold
it. The appliance dealer added another 80,000 miles before his son
rolled it.
>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>small, a frame :-)
lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
wrong frame size certainly would.
>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>might not get the "right" bike.
expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
subsequent decisions should be better.
jbeattie
Nov 17, 2015, 12:11:40 AM11/17/15
to
On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 10:57:31 AM UTC-8, Doug Landau wrote:
> >The only adult I knew in the '60s that rode a bike was my fifth grade teacher, but he was national road champion, and somewhat of an outlier.
>
> Bob Tetzlaff?
Yes. I'm a proud graduate of Daves Avenue School and was in his fifth grade class at the end of his reign as national champion. Barry Wood -- Phil's son -- was in the class with me, IIRC. Fast Freddy Markham showed up the next year in Ms. Addy's sixth grade class at R.J. Fisher. We got kicked out for screwing off. It was the golden era of cycling, almost.
> >The only adult I knew in the '60s that rode a bike was my fifth grade teacher, but he was national road champion, and somewhat of an outlier.
>
> Bob Tetzlaff?
-- Jay Beattie.
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 17, 2015, 2:38:14 AM11/17/15
to
geeee whiz Beattie ... when did you first ride on what ?
John B.
Nov 17, 2015, 6:43:38 AM11/17/15
to
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 18:56:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:01:23 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
>>>end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
>>>didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
>>>than those, the truck was perfect.
>
>>But your mistakes were simply the result of ignorance - you didn't
>>know what you actually needed.
>
>Nope. It was dumber than simple ignorance or stupidity. I specified
>the rear end ratio based on the ability of the truck to climb hills
>and operate on the city streets. I didn't think it would spend much
>time on the freeways at high speeds, but it did. 10 mpg on any
>terrain or speed was the result. The aftermarket air conditioner was
>my attempt to cut some costs. The paint problem was a bad batch of
>paint at service box factory. Years later, I found others that were
>painted the same color with the same paint problem. The company died
>before I could arrange to have it repainted. By then, I because used
>to the primer gray and metallic blue camouflage pattern. Meanwhile, I
>put about 150,000 miles on it, much of it on dirt roads, before I sold
>it. The appliance dealer added another 80,000 miles before his son
>rolled it.
But the 4.1 rear axle would be just the thing for dirt roads so
apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
of your driving".
>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>small, a frame :-)
>
>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>wrong frame size certainly would.
I remember, back in the day... when I drove a non air conditioned
pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
conditioning :-)
>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>might not get the "right" bike.
>
>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>subsequent decisions should be better.
Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn. Imagine
the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
--
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:01:23 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>Still, I managed to make 2 big mistakes. Too high a rear
>>>end ratio (4.10) for freeway speeds, aftermarket air conditioner that
>>>didn't quite work, and lousy paint job on the service boxes. Other
>>>than those, the truck was perfect.
>
>>But your mistakes were simply the result of ignorance - you didn't
>>know what you actually needed.
>
>Nope. It was dumber than simple ignorance or stupidity. I specified
>the rear end ratio based on the ability of the truck to climb hills
>and operate on the city streets. I didn't think it would spend much
>time on the freeways at high speeds, but it did. 10 mpg on any
>terrain or speed was the result. The aftermarket air conditioner was
>my attempt to cut some costs. The paint problem was a bad batch of
>paint at service box factory. Years later, I found others that were
>painted the same color with the same paint problem. The company died
>before I could arrange to have it repainted. By then, I because used
>to the primer gray and metallic blue camouflage pattern. Meanwhile, I
>put about 150,000 miles on it, much of it on dirt roads, before I sold
>it. The appliance dealer added another 80,000 miles before his son
>rolled it.
apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
of your driving".
>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>small, a frame :-)
>
>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>wrong frame size certainly would.
pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
conditioning :-)
>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>might not get the "right" bike.
>
>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>subsequent decisions should be better.
the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
--
Cheers,
John B.
nkr...@gmail.com
Nov 17, 2015, 10:29:41 AM11/17/15
to
On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 6:43:38 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>
>
> Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn. Imagine
> the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
> collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1986/11/26
>
>
> Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn. Imagine
> the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
> collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
- Frank Krygowski
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 17, 2015, 11:24:30 AM11/17/15
to
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:43:30 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>But the 4.1 rear axle would be just the thing for dirt roads so
>apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
>of your driving".
Warning: Non-bicycling content ahead:
That's 4.11 ratio. The original plan was for the truck to be used
mostly for servicing mountain top radio sites. The plan was to have a
truck that could carry literally everything that might be needed. That
part worked. The rest was suppose to be some freeway travel between
the shop and various sites. It was NOT suppose to be used for
commuting, shopping, vacations, etc. Unfortunately, the company was
about to implode owing me some serious back pay. Instead of the cash,
I settled for ownership of the truck. When I left to form my own
service company, I took the truck. Since it was my only vehicle, I
found my self driving around and commuting in a serious gas hog just
in time for the 1973-74 energy crisis. Price controlled gas was 33.9
cents/gallon at the time so the cost per mile was not a major problem.
>>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>>small, a frame :-)
>>
>>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>>wrong frame size certainly would.
>I remember, back in the day... when I drove a non air conditioned
>pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
>air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
>takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
>conditioning :-)
I think my gas mileage probably dropped from 10 mpg to 9.99 mpg when I
turned on the A/C. There were plenty other inefficiencies that were
more significant than the A/C.
>>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>>might not get the "right" bike.
>>
>>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>>subsequent decisions should be better.
>Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn.
Ummm... I believe said that. However, you may not see the
implications. When teaching someone a new skill, I usually arrange to
have them fail miserably and fall flat on their face before explaining
how things are suppose to work. By failing early in the game, further
instruction tends to be more appreciated and the student more
attentive. This may be an "expensive" way to learn, but it's quite
effective and amazingly efficient.
Learn By Destroying(tm).
That means if you haven't broken and fix it, you don't understand it.
That's somewhat of a variation on trial and error.
>Imagine
>the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
>collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
There's a big difference between public safety and personal
convenience. An un-rideable bicycle design is not a major tragedy and
is still usable. In some circles, it's actually a benefit:
<https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=unrideable+bicycle>
Except for gawkers, a badly specified bicycle should not constitute a
hazard to public safety. The same cannot be said about collapsing
bridges, which tend to create traffic jams and attract litigation.
However, if we design bridges the way we design bicycles, I'm sure
there will be problems.
wrote:
>But the 4.1 rear axle would be just the thing for dirt roads so
>apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
>of your driving".
That's 4.11 ratio. The original plan was for the truck to be used
mostly for servicing mountain top radio sites. The plan was to have a
truck that could carry literally everything that might be needed. That
part worked. The rest was suppose to be some freeway travel between
the shop and various sites. It was NOT suppose to be used for
commuting, shopping, vacations, etc. Unfortunately, the company was
about to implode owing me some serious back pay. Instead of the cash,
I settled for ownership of the truck. When I left to form my own
service company, I took the truck. Since it was my only vehicle, I
found my self driving around and commuting in a serious gas hog just
in time for the 1973-74 energy crisis. Price controlled gas was 33.9
cents/gallon at the time so the cost per mile was not a major problem.
>>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>>small, a frame :-)
>>
>>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>>wrong frame size certainly would.
>I remember, back in the day... when I drove a non air conditioned
>pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
>air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
>takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
>conditioning :-)
turned on the A/C. There were plenty other inefficiencies that were
more significant than the A/C.
>>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>>might not get the "right" bike.
>>
>>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>>subsequent decisions should be better.
>Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn.
implications. When teaching someone a new skill, I usually arrange to
have them fail miserably and fall flat on their face before explaining
how things are suppose to work. By failing early in the game, further
instruction tends to be more appreciated and the student more
attentive. This may be an "expensive" way to learn, but it's quite
effective and amazingly efficient.
Learn By Destroying(tm).
That means if you haven't broken and fix it, you don't understand it.
That's somewhat of a variation on trial and error.
>Imagine
>the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
>collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
convenience. An un-rideable bicycle design is not a major tragedy and
is still usable. In some circles, it's actually a benefit:
<https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=unrideable+bicycle>
Except for gawkers, a badly specified bicycle should not constitute a
hazard to public safety. The same cannot be said about collapsing
bridges, which tend to create traffic jams and attract litigation.
However, if we design bridges the way we design bicycles, I'm sure
there will be problems.
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 17, 2015, 11:43:46 AM11/17/15
to
trial". In the cartoon, the driver suggests that repetitive errors
will eventually yield to a successful bridge. Such iterative load
testing is quite useful, but unless those involved understand the
underlying mechanics, materials, tolerances, wind load, safety
factors, etc, they're just going to repeat their previous mistakes
with a different point of failure.
Actually, there is a good example of what can go wrong with such "test
and tweak" iterative design. The Roman roads were really built to
last, or so it seemed. The Roman engineers built roads all over the
empire so that their armies would be more effective. However, if you
look at how they are built, they are largely the same no matter what
part of Europe they are found. The Romans didn't want to do "trial
and error" design every time they ran into a different type of ground.
They also didn't have the skills and technology to do the calculations
necessary to optimize the road design for local conditions. So, they
found the worst possible ground conditions, added a huge safety
factor, maybe tweaked a few things to help with supply problems, and
preceded to duplicate the basic design throughout the empire.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=roman+road&tbm=isch>
So, they learned how to build a massive and expensive overkill road,
and not an optimum solution for the immediate problem.
AMuzi
Nov 17, 2015, 11:51:57 AM11/17/15
to
engineering license would build anything to last 2000+
years. Always cheaper to buy the inspector than to build it
right.
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 2:44:00 PM11/17/15
to
On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 3:15:35 PM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> Just found the article that explains why many bicycles don't have eylets, fenders, lights or room for wider tires than 25mm. It's on page 60 in the April 1982 BICYCLING magazine and reads in part:
>
> "The reappearance of the proper touring bicycle is a curious thing. A decade ago this type had a brief run in American shops. Usually of French origin, it arrived in a near complete state of touring readiness, with racks, fenders, lights and wide-range 15-speed gearset mounted on a frame of moderate angles, long wheelbase, and straight-gauge tubing. The only concession to American taste, as compared to the home-market European version, was the fitting of 27 x 1 1/4-inch tires and wheels in place of the fatter 650B jobs.
>
> Put panniers on one of these tourers, and it was ready to go. With a price tag comfortably less than $150, these 30 poud bikes should have sold like hot-cakes.
>
> They didn't. they went about as well as slugs at a flower sale.
>
> Americans preferred their bikes stripped, without the clutter of fenders, lights, and racks. However useful, these made the bike weigh more, and everybody knew extra weight made you slower than Eddy merckx's grandmother.
>
> So American bike shops learned to sell stripped bikes, very light. And when customers wanted to go touring, they went back to thr dealers and bought touring gear: racks, wide-range gearsets, and lights."
>
> More in the article.
>
> Thus it seems that Americans didn't want the things that made a bicycle versatile and the dealers and then the manufacturers changed to accomodate that.
>
> Cheers
Why are there no front eyelets on the fork of this baby?
https://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/bik/5317346542.html
If there were I'd snap it up
> Just found the article that explains why many bicycles don't have eylets, fenders, lights or room for wider tires than 25mm. It's on page 60 in the April 1982 BICYCLING magazine and reads in part:
>
> "The reappearance of the proper touring bicycle is a curious thing. A decade ago this type had a brief run in American shops. Usually of French origin, it arrived in a near complete state of touring readiness, with racks, fenders, lights and wide-range 15-speed gearset mounted on a frame of moderate angles, long wheelbase, and straight-gauge tubing. The only concession to American taste, as compared to the home-market European version, was the fitting of 27 x 1 1/4-inch tires and wheels in place of the fatter 650B jobs.
>
> Put panniers on one of these tourers, and it was ready to go. With a price tag comfortably less than $150, these 30 poud bikes should have sold like hot-cakes.
>
> They didn't. they went about as well as slugs at a flower sale.
>
> Americans preferred their bikes stripped, without the clutter of fenders, lights, and racks. However useful, these made the bike weigh more, and everybody knew extra weight made you slower than Eddy merckx's grandmother.
>
> So American bike shops learned to sell stripped bikes, very light. And when customers wanted to go touring, they went back to thr dealers and bought touring gear: racks, wide-range gearsets, and lights."
>
> More in the article.
>
> Thus it seems that Americans didn't want the things that made a bicycle versatile and the dealers and then the manufacturers changed to accomodate that.
>
> Cheers
Why are there no front eyelets on the fork of this baby?
https://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/bik/5317346542.html
If there were I'd snap it up
AMuzi
Nov 17, 2015, 2:53:20 PM11/17/15
to
clarification but if I recall Fuji S10S has eyelets front
and rear.
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 3:00:01 PM11/17/15
to
Thx
Duane
Nov 17, 2015, 3:19:50 PM11/17/15
to
AMuzi
Nov 17, 2015, 3:30:12 PM11/17/15
to
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 17, 2015, 3:30:43 PM11/17/15
to
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:51:46 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>Right. No one in his right mind with a 2015 US civil
>engineering license would build anything to last 2000+
>years. Always cheaper to buy the inspector than to build it
>right.
I don't know about bridges, but the foundations of many houses are
>Right. No one in his right mind with a 2015 US civil
>engineering license would build anything to last 2000+
>years. Always cheaper to buy the inspector than to build it
>right.
likely to last several hundred years, while the building would be
lucky to last 50 years. Plenty of other examples of overbuilding due
to paranoi, fear of litigation, and vested interests in increasing
consumption of some building material. Locally, a retired developer
was successfully sued because one of his buildings failed to comply
with code requirements enacted 30 years AFTER it was built. In a past
life, I collected product liability horror stories until I got sick of
it. Off the top of my head, a successful lawsuit claiming that GE
built unsafe well head pumps because someone might stick their hand
into the motor while it was running. The judge "ordered" GE to
retrofit all the pumps in the field with safety interlocks. More
sories if you really want them.
What we should have in cycling is something like what is happening in
the electronics business. Design and simulation tools have become
good enough that they can predict the life of a component or
sub-system. The idea is mostly to control the lifetime of a product
so they can sell you a replacement. When an appliance has some parts
fail just after the warranty expires, while other parts last much
longer, the designer is expected to cheapen the long lasting component
because excessive life is a waste of money. Ideally, all the parts
should all fail simultaneously, just after the warranty or service
contract expires. I know of a few products where this is already the
case.
So, did the Romans design roads that will last forever? Yes, but not
intentionally. They did it because that was the only way they knew
how to design and build roads. If they had a better understanding of
construction principles and more aggressive bean counters, they would
certainly have economized to the point where the road would only last
as long as the current emperor.
I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
noodle, but it be rather fast.
sms
Nov 17, 2015, 3:35:56 PM11/17/15
to
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 3:55:59 PM11/17/15
to
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 4:19:09 PM11/17/15
to
However, from reading the fuji catalogs from '76 and '83, I conclude that the difference is in the tubing. In '76 it was Hi-Ten vs CrMo, in '83 it was double-butted (331) vs straight (441).
dkl
AMuzi
Nov 17, 2015, 4:21:47 PM11/17/15
to
i.e., two chainrings. Nothing keeps you from adding a triple
crank & changers if desired.
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 4:47:42 PM11/17/15
to
http://nihonmaru.blogspot.com/2008/07/fuji-catalog-edition-no-13-ca-1983.html
Perhaps the one in the ad is one of those.
AMuzi
Nov 17, 2015, 5:44:51 PM11/17/15
to
before 1983.
jbeattie
Nov 17, 2015, 6:26:56 PM11/17/15
to
On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 11:38:14 PM UTC-8, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> geeee whiz Beattie ... when did you first ride on what ?
Like most kids of the day, I was riding a beater Schwinn in the fifth grade. I saved up for a Varsity, which I bought in the sixth or seventh grade. That bike had an unmistakable new car smell -- probably the plastic bar tape. I also recall the smell of the touch-up paint that I bought at the Schwinn store. If you dinged up your Varsity, you could dab it with the OE color metal flake touch up paint. http://bikecatalogs.org/SCHWINN/1970/Catalog/FULL/1970_41.jpg
> geeee whiz Beattie ... when did you first ride on what ?
$.99 seems cheap, but then again, the Varsity was only $87 WITH FENDERS! http://bikecatalogs.org/SCHWINN/1970/Catalog/FULL/1970_09.jpg
Those were the days.
-- Jay Beattie.
sms
Nov 17, 2015, 7:17:17 PM11/17/15
to
Center-Pull brakes.
Sir Ridesalot
Nov 17, 2015, 7:24:01 PM11/17/15
to
On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Snipped
Cheers
Snipped
> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs) rode them.
> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
Cheers
John B.
Nov 17, 2015, 7:42:58 PM11/17/15
to
rOn Tue, 17 Nov 2015 08:43:46 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
I think that you are, at least partially, wrong. Given the materials
and equipment available to them, how could the Roman's road building
have been different?
To a great extent road building is much the same no matter where they
are built. (1) build a sufficiently strong foundation, (2) build an
adequate drainage system, (3) install a surface that will support the
traffic.
--
Cheers,
John B.
and equipment available to them, how could the Roman's road building
have been different?
To a great extent road building is much the same no matter where they
are built. (1) build a sufficiently strong foundation, (2) build an
adequate drainage system, (3) install a surface that will support the
traffic.
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
Nov 17, 2015, 7:43:04 PM11/17/15
to
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 08:24:30 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:43:30 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>But the 4.1 rear axle would be just the thing for dirt roads so
>>apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
>>of your driving".
>
>Warning: Non-bicycling content ahead:
>
>That's 4.11 ratio. The original plan was for the truck to be used
>mostly for servicing mountain top radio sites. The plan was to have a
>truck that could carry literally everything that might be needed. That
>part worked. The rest was suppose to be some freeway travel between
>the shop and various sites. It was NOT suppose to be used for
>commuting, shopping, vacations, etc. Unfortunately, the company was
>about to implode owing me some serious back pay. Instead of the cash,
>I settled for ownership of the truck. When I left to form my own
>service company, I took the truck. Since it was my only vehicle, I
>found my self driving around and commuting in a serious gas hog just
>in time for the 1973-74 energy crisis. Price controlled gas was 33.9
>cents/gallon at the time so the cost per mile was not a major problem.
>
4.1 to 1 is not radically different to 4.11 to 1 :-) And probably
results primarily due to the physical space available to fit the ring
and pinion gears.
>>>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>>>small, a frame :-)
>>>
>>>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>>>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>>>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>>>wrong frame size certainly would.
>
>>I remember, back in the day... when I drove a non air conditioned
>>pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
>>air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
>>takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
>>conditioning :-)
>
>I think my gas mileage probably dropped from 10 mpg to 9.99 mpg when I
>turned on the A/C. There were plenty other inefficiencies that were
>more significant than the A/C.
Really? My experience has been quite different. I can't quantify it
now as being old and frail I just run the "air" all the time but the
additional load on the engine is certainly sufficient to require an
automatic throttle advance to keep the engine running if the air con
is switched on when the engine is idling.
>
>>>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>>>might not get the "right" bike.
>>>
>>>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>>>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>>>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>>>subsequent decisions should be better.
>
>>Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn.
>
>Ummm... I believe said that. However, you may not see the
>implications. When teaching someone a new skill, I usually arrange to
>have them fail miserably and fall flat on their face before explaining
>how things are suppose to work. By failing early in the game, further
>instruction tends to be more appreciated and the student more
>attentive. This may be an "expensive" way to learn, but it's quite
>effective and amazingly efficient.
True, a catastrophic failure does impress on the student (if he
survives it) that the instructor actually does know what he is talking
about. But it can, in some eases, result in a rather high "student
turnover".
>Learn By Destroying(tm).
>That means if you haven't broken and fix it, you don't understand it.
>That's somewhat of a variation on trial and error.
>
>>Imagine
>>the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
>>collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
>
>There's a big difference between public safety and personal
>convenience. An un-rideable bicycle design is not a major tragedy and
>is still usable. In some circles, it's actually a benefit:
><https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=unrideable+bicycle>
>Except for gawkers, a badly specified bicycle should not constitute a
>hazard to public safety. The same cannot be said about collapsing
>bridges, which tend to create traffic jams and attract litigation.
>However, if we design bridges the way we design bicycles, I'm sure
>there will be problems.
Ah but, litigation is a relatively new phenomena :-)
And bridges were designed by trial and error, just as much of modern
engineering depends on past failures, or inadequacies of past designs.
The "Comet" (is that the name?) Airliner is a recent example.
--
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:43:30 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>But the 4.1 rear axle would be just the thing for dirt roads so
>>apparently you guessed right, at least for what you refer to as "much
>>of your driving".
>
>Warning: Non-bicycling content ahead:
>
>That's 4.11 ratio. The original plan was for the truck to be used
>mostly for servicing mountain top radio sites. The plan was to have a
>truck that could carry literally everything that might be needed. That
>part worked. The rest was suppose to be some freeway travel between
>the shop and various sites. It was NOT suppose to be used for
>commuting, shopping, vacations, etc. Unfortunately, the company was
>about to implode owing me some serious back pay. Instead of the cash,
>I settled for ownership of the truck. When I left to form my own
>service company, I took the truck. Since it was my only vehicle, I
>found my self driving around and commuting in a serious gas hog just
>in time for the 1973-74 energy crisis. Price controlled gas was 33.9
>cents/gallon at the time so the cost per mile was not a major problem.
>
results primarily due to the physical space available to fit the ring
and pinion gears.
>>>>Just like the bicycle rider who selects the bike with too large, or
>>>>small, a frame :-)
>>>
>>>Nope. That's a major problem. Lousy gas mileage, lousy A/C, and
>>>lousy paint are not major problems. Transplanted to a bicycle, these
>>>problem would not prevent anyone from riding the bicycle while the
>>>wrong frame size certainly would.
>
>>I remember, back in the day... when I drove a non air conditioned
>>pickup in the Mojave Desert. And got better gas mileage then a mate's
>>air conditioned rig. As the saying goes, you pays your money and you
>>takes your choice" if you want great mileage don't use air
>>conditioning :-)
>
>I think my gas mileage probably dropped from 10 mpg to 9.99 mpg when I
>turned on the A/C. There were plenty other inefficiencies that were
>more significant than the A/C.
now as being old and frail I just run the "air" all the time but the
additional load on the engine is certainly sufficient to require an
automatic throttle advance to keep the engine running if the air con
is switched on when the engine is idling.
>
>>>>But again, the buyer that wasn't positive of exactly what he wanted
>>>>might not get the "right" bike.
>>>
>>>Yep. Indecision is the key to flexibility. Trial and error is an
>>>expensive way to gain experience, but it usually works well. The
>>>clueless bicycle buyer might mis-specify his first machine, but
>>>subsequent decisions should be better.
>
>>Unfortunately "trial and error" is an expensive way to learn.
>
>Ummm... I believe said that. However, you may not see the
>implications. When teaching someone a new skill, I usually arrange to
>have them fail miserably and fall flat on their face before explaining
>how things are suppose to work. By failing early in the game, further
>instruction tends to be more appreciated and the student more
>attentive. This may be an "expensive" way to learn, but it's quite
>effective and amazingly efficient.
survives it) that the instructor actually does know what he is talking
about. But it can, in some eases, result in a rather high "student
turnover".
>Learn By Destroying(tm).
>That means if you haven't broken and fix it, you don't understand it.
>That's somewhat of a variation on trial and error.
>
>>Imagine
>>the embryo Civil Engineer endlessly building bridges only to see them
>>collapse.... each for a different reason :-(
>
>There's a big difference between public safety and personal
>convenience. An un-rideable bicycle design is not a major tragedy and
>is still usable. In some circles, it's actually a benefit:
><https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=unrideable+bicycle>
>Except for gawkers, a badly specified bicycle should not constitute a
>hazard to public safety. The same cannot be said about collapsing
>bridges, which tend to create traffic jams and attract litigation.
>However, if we design bridges the way we design bicycles, I'm sure
>there will be problems.
And bridges were designed by trial and error, just as much of modern
engineering depends on past failures, or inadequacies of past designs.
The "Comet" (is that the name?) Airliner is a recent example.
--
Cheers,
John B.
Doug Landau
Nov 17, 2015, 8:01:55 PM11/17/15
to
Changing the subject, to the "there is no vertical compliance in any diamond frame" crowd, how do we know that this sideways movement isn't what riders who say they can discern between frame materials are feeling?
dkl
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 17, 2015, 9:33:15 PM11/17/15
to
have been a worthwhile experiment.
I was kinda thinking drillium components are a closer fit. The idea
is to take a component with maybe a 3x design safety margin, and
reduce it until it just barely holds together.
Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
jbeattie
Nov 17, 2015, 10:24:30 PM11/17/15
to
On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 6:33:15 PM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >Snipped
> >> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
> >> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
> >> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
> >> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
> >> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
> >> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
> >> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
> >> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
> >That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
> >frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
> >rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
Sean Kelley won many races on a Vitus. http://www.stickybottle.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/sean-kelly-vitus.jpg
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >Snipped
> >> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
> >> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
> >> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
> >> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
> >> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
> >> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
> >> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
> >> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
> >That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
> >frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
> >rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
Not my cup of tea, but Vitus and Alan had their fan-boys -- and still do.
-- Jay Beattie.
James
Nov 18, 2015, 12:21:17 AM11/18/15
to
On 18/11/15 12:33, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Snipped
>>> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
>>> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
>>> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
>>> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
>>> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
>>> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
>>> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
>>> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
>> frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
>> rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
>
> I was kinda thinking drillium components are a closer fit. The idea
> is to take a component with maybe a 3x design safety margin, and
> reduce it until it just barely holds together.
>
> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>
I'll wait for the ceramic version. Ceramic bits are always faster.
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Snipped
>>> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
>>> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
>>> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
>>> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
>>> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
>>> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
>>> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
>>> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
>> frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
>> rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
>
> I was kinda thinking drillium components are a closer fit. The idea
> is to take a component with maybe a 3x design safety margin, and
> reduce it until it just barely holds together.
>
> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>
--
JS
AMuzi
Nov 18, 2015, 8:24:59 AM11/18/15
to
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a1/fd/6a/a1fd6a9fab5d4e4d4e4761eea5a4968f.jpg
Not polka dot validation on that!
AMuzi
Nov 18, 2015, 8:35:39 AM11/18/15
to
On 11/17/2015 8:33 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Snipped
>>> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
>>> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
>>> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
>>> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
>>> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
>>> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
>>> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
>>> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
>> frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
>> rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
>
> I was kinda thinking drillium components are a closer fit. The idea
> is to take a component with maybe a 3x design safety margin, and
> reduce it until it just barely holds together.
>
> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>
Colin Abarth Chapman noted that the properly designed racing
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:23:52 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
> <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 3:30:43 PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Snipped
>>> I'm rather surprised that I don't see more product life control in
>>> bicycle design and construction. For example, a racing bicycle should
>>> not be expected to last longer than the current race. When the race
>>> is over, it can be sold for souvenirs and scrap. No need to build a
>>> bicycle with 3x or larger safety factor. Just build it 1x for the
>>> race terrain, hope for the best, and you have the lightest, fastest,
>>> and most unsafe bicycle available. It will probably ride like a wet
>>> noodle, but it be rather fast.
>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium
>> frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs)
>> rode them.
>
> Did anyone riding such a Vitus frame win any races? If so, it might
> have been a worthwhile experiment.
>
> I was kinda thinking drillium components are a closer fit. The idea
> is to take a component with maybe a 3x design safety margin, and
> reduce it until it just barely holds together.
>
> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>
car falls apart as it crosses the finish line first.
No need to reinvent polymer chain:
https://precisionparts.wmberg.com/timingBeltsChains
Frank Krygowski
Nov 18, 2015, 11:21:41 AM11/18/15
to
On 11/17/2015 8:01 PM, Doug Landau wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 4:24:01 PM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>>
>>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs) rode them.
>
> On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 4:24:01 PM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>>
>>
>> That souunds an awful lot like the early VITUS small tube aluminium frame bikes if anyone other than a very lightweight rider (@150 lbs) rode them.
>
> I had one of those for a few weeks just for the experience. It would shift under power because, I think, the BB moved to the left.
A good friend of mine had a similar Alan. Back in those days, in a
sprint, I could scrape the chainwheel on both sides of the front
derailleur cage. But he liked it, and rode tremendous distances on it,
including his annual solo hilly double century.
He's since passed on, but he gave the bike to my most weight-weenie
friend, who seems to like it.
> Changing the subject, to the "there is no vertical compliance in any diamond frame" crowd, how do we know that this sideways movement isn't what riders who say they can discern between frame materials are feeling?
not evidence of significant vertical compliance.
--
- Frank Krygowski
Frank Krygowski
Nov 18, 2015, 11:25:06 AM11/18/15
to
On 11/18/2015 8:35 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
>
> No need to reinvent polymer chain:
> https://precisionparts.wmberg.com/timingBeltsChains
Whaddya mean? Bicycle technology has a long and proud history of
>
>
> No need to reinvent polymer chain:
> https://precisionparts.wmberg.com/timingBeltsChains
reinventing things! It's high time someone repeats this experiment.
It just has to be modernized - IOW, done via Kickstarter.
--
- Frank Krygowski
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 18, 2015, 12:07:04 PM11/18/15
to
down hill to the Ipswich was challenging but a few seconds later I was on the back porch...
next up a '58 Schwine Columbia with chrome fenders....no find Columbia ?
Columbia is a NYC Corvette ?
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 18, 2015, 12:07:59 PM11/18/15
to
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:21:13 +1000, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Why wait? There are plenty of ceramic bearing vendors. For example:
<http://www.ceramicspeed.com/sport/>
However, I'm talking about the gears and chain, not the bearings. Or
maybe just get rid of the chain:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=chainless+bicycle&tbm=isch>
wrote:
<http://www.ceramicspeed.com/sport/>
However, I'm talking about the gears and chain, not the bearings. Or
maybe just get rid of the chain:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=chainless+bicycle&tbm=isch>
avag...@gmail.com
Nov 18, 2015, 12:08:46 PM11/18/15
to
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 18, 2015, 12:13:35 PM11/18/15
to
Yep. We've had this discussion before:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/Berg/>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!original/rec.bicycles.tech/Gu7wHkTbqEg/6-usGLXKahUJ>
James
Nov 18, 2015, 3:09:24 PM11/18/15
to
On 19/11/15 03:07, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:21:13 +1000, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18/11/15 12:33, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
>>> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
>>> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>> I'll wait for the ceramic version. Ceramic bits are always faster.
>
> Why wait? There are plenty of ceramic bearing vendors. For example:
> <http://www.ceramicspeed.com/sport/>
> However, I'm talking about the gears and chain, not the bearings. Or
> maybe just get rid of the chain:
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=chainless+bicycle&tbm=isch>
>
I know what you were talking about. I know about ceramic bearings as
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:21:13 +1000, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18/11/15 12:33, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> Also, I'm still tinkering with wire rope and plastic drive chains. The
>>> wear on the plastic parts can be horrendous, but I think I can make
>>> something that will last a race, ride, or tour.
>
>> I'll wait for the ceramic version. Ceramic bits are always faster.
>
> Why wait? There are plenty of ceramic bearing vendors. For example:
> <http://www.ceramicspeed.com/sport/>
> However, I'm talking about the gears and chain, not the bearings. Or
> maybe just get rid of the chain:
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=chainless+bicycle&tbm=isch>
>
well. When you have replaced the plastic bits on the wire rope with
ceramic bits, I might take interest.
--
JS
Jeff Liebermann
Nov 18, 2015, 10:10:26 PM11/18/15
to
On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:09:20 +1000, James <james.e...@gmail.com>
Well, I tried the molded plastic beads on a stainless wire rope
variety and had the plastic beads slip. In order to get a better grip
on the wire rope cable, I went to brass, iron, and zinc beads that
were crimped onto the cable. Crimping deformed the bead excessively,
so I'm playing with the design of a stamping arrangement to literally
shrink the diameter of the bead. That's where I'm currently stuck due
to lack of time. Too many other (paying) projects. Bug me in about a
year.
Using my pull test, I'm finding that the softer metals work best for
the beads because they cover a larger surface area of the cable. I
don't think ceramic will work unless I mold it to the cable, and then
bake it in a kiln. It's also rather brittle and might crack when the
cable is bent. I don't see ceramic as a good solution for a cable
drive.
variety and had the plastic beads slip. In order to get a better grip
on the wire rope cable, I went to brass, iron, and zinc beads that
were crimped onto the cable. Crimping deformed the bead excessively,
so I'm playing with the design of a stamping arrangement to literally
shrink the diameter of the bead. That's where I'm currently stuck due
to lack of time. Too many other (paying) projects. Bug me in about a
year.
Using my pull test, I'm finding that the softer metals work best for
the beads because they cover a larger surface area of the cable. I
don't think ceramic will work unless I mold it to the cable, and then
bake it in a kiln. It's also rather brittle and might crack when the
cable is bent. I don't see ceramic as a good solution for a cable
drive.
John B.
Nov 19, 2015, 6:33:45 AM11/19/15
to
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 19:10:27 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
Somewhere I've seen round stainless balls swedged onto a cable which
would likely work.
But steel cable has internal friction and most cables require
lubricating to improve longevity. And I suspect that the radius of any
sheaves will also have to be considered.
--
Cheers,
John B.
wrote:
would likely work.
But steel cable has internal friction and most cables require
lubricating to improve longevity. And I suspect that the radius of any
sheaves will also have to be considered.
--
Cheers,
John B.
0 new messages