Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Something You Can Do For Bicycle Safety, and Even Possibly Make a Dollar or Two

0 views
Skip to first unread message

javawizard

unread,
Jan 25, 2007, 9:42:05 PM1/25/07
to
I've written up a good idea about how you can help people with bicycle
safety at www.safebikes.com - Enjoy!
- Jeff
www.creativelistener.com

John Forrest Tomlinson

unread,
Jan 25, 2007, 9:50:56 PM1/25/07
to
On 25 Jan 2007 18:42:05 -0800, "javawizard" <javaw...@aol.com>
wrote:

>I've written up a good idea about how you can help people with bicycle
>safety at www.safebikes.com - Enjoy!

From the site: "If you always do what you've always done, you'll
always get what you always got"

Yeah -- that works for me.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

jo...@phred.org

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 1:07:19 AM1/26/07
to
In article <1169779325....@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
javaw...@aol.com says...

> I've written up a good idea about how you can help people with bicycle
> safety at www.safebikes.com - Enjoy!

Not to be an alarmist, but your site makes no mention of liability or
insurance.

Years after you work on a bike, you can still be sued for something you
did or didn't do, or for installing a part that failed through no fault
of yours. Years after you sell a used bike, you can be sued for an
aftermarket part that was already there when you got the bike, or an OEM
part that someone before you removed.

If you live in judgement-proof poverty with no home to lose and no
income to worry about, then your only liability concern is a moral one:
will you be able to live with yourself if you make a mistake and cripple
someone?

But if you do have assets or income that would be worth the time of a
plaintiff's attorney, you should make sure you have insurance for your
liability exposure.

--
jo...@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>

Jim Higson

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 7:00:36 AM1/26/07
to
javawizard wrote:

From the page:

> Except for serious off-road riding, the tires should be inflated to the
> maximum amount imprinted on the sides of the tires. Low pressures are
> generally more of a maintenance issue than a safety issue, or are they?
> When pressures are low, there is greater risk of puncture, or blow-out
> when hitting a curb or pothole, and therefore losing control. Furthermore,
> with low pressures, rims can become kinked when hitting potholes and so
> on, which causes caliper (rim-squeezing) brakes to work poorly.

I'd say this is a bit of an over-simplification.

Lower than maximum pressure is more comfortable, and it depends on the
weight of the rider. You can still get enough pressure to avoid pinch flats
without getting up to the maximum.

Aeek

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 8:53:31 AM1/26/07
to
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:00:36 +0000, Jim Higson <j...@333.org> wrote:

>I'd say this is a bit of an over-simplification.
>
>Lower than maximum pressure is more comfortable, and it depends on the
>weight of the rider. You can still get enough pressure to avoid pinch flats
>without getting up to the maximum.

My tires were quickly getting punctures and cuts at their 120psi max.
Dropping to 110 psi fixed that. Soft race tires and I'm 85 kg.
I'd say it depends.

carl...@comcast.net

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 1:37:39 PM1/26/07
to
On Jan 26, 6:53 am, Aeek <aeeee...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:00:36 +0000, Jim Higson <j...@333.org> wrote:
> >I'd say this is a bit of an over-simplification.
>
> >Lower than maximum pressure is more comfortable, and it depends on the
> >weight of the rider. You can still get enough pressure to avoid pinch flats
> >without getting up to the maximum.My tires were quickly getting punctures and cuts at their 120psi max.

> Dropping to 110 psi fixed that. Soft race tires and I'm 85 kg.
> I'd say it depends.

Dear Aeek,

Testing shows that higher pressure does indeed lead to more cuts and
punctures:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/df3cb7fe3a3eb450

With more pressure, the tire presses down harder locally on sharp
debris.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dan...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 4:10:02 PM1/26/07
to

On Jan 26, 1:07 am, <j...@phred.org> wrote:
> Years after you work on a bike, you can still be sued for something you
> did or didn't do, or for installing a part that failed through no fault
> of yours. Years after you sell a used bike, you can be sued for an
> aftermarket part that was already there when you got the bike, or an OEM
> part that someone before you removed.


BAH. I'm now going to worry about losing the house every time I touch
one of the neighborhood kids' bike for them. Last time I went to fix
one, both wheels were on hand tight. An elementry schoolers hand tight
at that. Still, I don't know that I'll be able to turn them away when
they're standing there with a minor break or flat that's going to keep
them from riding around with the rest of their friends.

jo...@phred.org

unread,
Jan 26, 2007, 8:11:30 PM1/26/07
to
In article <1169845802.4...@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dan...@gmail.com says...

If you're just occasionally helping the neighbor kids for free, you're
at a very small risk. First, you aren't presenting yourself as a
professional bicycle mechanic, you're just a friendly neighbor. Second,
the chances are good that your friendly amateur assistance is covered by
the personal liability coverage of your homeowners or renters insurance.
(Read your own policy for its liability coverage and exclusions.)

What concerned me about the original posting is that the site goes to
some lengths describing aspects of running a bicycle repair *business*,
without ever mentioning the liability aspects of owning a business.

Once you present yourself as an expert and charge money for the work,
you're in an entirely different legal environment than when you're being
a friendly neighbor.

Mark

unread,
Mar 4, 2007, 4:28:27 PM3/4/07
to
I know this is a little late in the conversation, but isn't this the
same guy who tried to sell a cycling website for something on the order
of $50,000 some time back?

G.T.

unread,
Mar 4, 2007, 4:52:31 PM3/4/07
to
Mark wrote:
> In article <1169779325....@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> javaw...@aol.com says...
>> I've written up a good idea about how you can help people with bicycle
>> safety at www.googlewhore.com - Enjoy!
>> - Jeff
>> www.googlewhore.com

>>
>>
> I know this is a little late in the conversation, but isn't this the
> same guy who tried to sell a cycling website for something on the order
> of $50,000 some time back?

Yes. And now he's a desperate lameass googlewhore. And from my email
conversations with him he thinks he's providing something worthwhile
rather than spam.

Greg

--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html

frkr...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 4, 2007, 8:17:23 PM3/4/07
to
On Jan 26, 1:37 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>
> Testing shows that higher pressure does indeed lead to more cuts and
> punctures:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/df3cb7fe3a3eb450
>
> With more pressure, the tire presses down harder locally on sharp
> debris.

??

That link gave me a Carl Fogel post about Subaru cables.

- Frank Krygowski

carl...@comcast.net

unread,
Mar 4, 2007, 10:04:31 PM3/4/07
to

Dear Frank,

The link could be just a typo.

But it might be an example of the problem of the lost Google posts
noticed earlier by Ron Ruff and Ben C. from October 2006 through
January 2007:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/3e30dc3d0e41731f

I was able to see more posts than Ron and Ben could, but I'm beginning
to suspect that I can't see everything.

When I click on my profile for the posts for October 2006, for
example, Google claims 276 posts for the month:

http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=8VM0RBUAAAAlJSplIBlJGj2ISiKndyyx_IeqdT84RXyMhuizDAk-CQ

But when you click on the 276 for October, the search finds only 127
posts:

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?scoring=d&filter=0&enc_author=8VM0RBUAAAAlJSplIBlJGj2ISiKndyyx_IeqdT84RXyMhuizDAk-CQ&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=10&as_miny=2006&as_maxd=31&as_maxm=10&as_maxy=2006

And if you try to browse through the 127 "found" posts, only 45 posts
are actually available:

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=&start=120&sa=N&scoring=d&enc_author=8VM0RBUAAAAlJSplIBlJGj2ISiKndyyx_IeqdT84RXyMhuizDAk-CQ&filter=0&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=10&as_miny=2006&as_maxd=31&as_maxm=10&as_maxy=2006&

I can't find the thread by searching, and my raw list of October posts
simply vanish long before that date.

Anyway, the test consisted of pumping a tire up to 30 psi and rolling
it back and forth with heavy pressure on a nail sticking up a little
from a vise, looking for punctures, and then repeating after raising
the pressure 10 psi.

Obviously, the tire will "tent" over the nail-point until the pressure
is high enough to puncture the tire.

Looking through my files, I found the pictures, dated 10-26-2007 and
10-27-2007.

At 100 psi, as I recall, there were sounds and the nail finally made
holes in the tire tread, but the holes didn't go through. Probably the
nail broke through the outer rubber tread, but then was stopped by the
internal Kevlar belt.

At 110 psi, there were sounds again and the nail broke all the way
through the tire, leaving a hole on the inside.

When the nail broke through the tire at 110 psi, the inner tube
"tented" and the nail left a faint but visible dent in the tube.

Here's the setup, with a nail in the vise with a spoke ruler, a Presta
valve cap, and an identical nail showing the point:

http://i11.tinypic.com/2hp6136.jpg

In the next two pictures, a third toothpick points to the very faint
dent where the inner tube "tented" over nail point.

Here, toothpicks show holes in the tire tread at 100 and 110 psi:

http://i1.tinypic.com/2n08xlg.jpg

But only the 110 psi hole goes all the way through the tire to dent
the inner tube:

http://i11.tinypic.com/4dg3jg1.jpg

The faint dent in the inner tube is clearer in the first picture.

Left-click on the lower right corner in Explorer to see the enlarged
pictures.

If the original posts are lost, I console myself that half of
Shakespeare's plays only appeared in print seven year years after his
death when his friends collected them in the First Folio of 1623.

If it turns out that I just made a typo that leads to the wrong post,
I console myself that (among many other typos) page 399 of the First
Folio was mistakenly set as page 993:

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=firstfolio&PagePosition=906

Left-click on the upper right corner of the scan to see the infamous
typo.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

0 new messages