BikeSnobNYC's Blog, page 49
February 27, 2017
The end of road racing.
Thank you for indulging my absence during the Winter Reese's:
(Explanation: focus groups did not like "Chrismas Turd" so packaging was changed.)
As you may know we're experiencing an unseasonably warm February this year, so over the past week I was able to indulge in some family-style cycling:
Some solo mixed-terrain #whatpressuryourunning cycling:
And even some Category 6 Citi-Biking:
That's the new sumptuous two-way bicycle lane on Chrystie Street, and the green thing being projected onto it is the new Blaze light with which the oncoming Citi Bike is equipped:
Citi Bike + Blaze from Citi Bike on Vimeo.
If I'd fallen asleep back in the year 2000 and woken up today like some kind of Fred Van Winkle...
...the sight of a public bank-branded laser-firing futuristic space bike traveling along a two-way bike lane would completely blow my mind. Then when I learned who the president was I'd probably beat myself back into a state of long-term unconsciousness, waking up 20 years hence only to discover that the planets in the Trappist-1 system are not only inhabited by humans but linked by bridges and ruined by Teslas:
(Humanity desperately needs more places to drive.)
Speaking of the future, the future is now, which is why some of the pro roadies are using disc brakes. However, they're still not without controversy, and one rider complains a disc rotor almost severed his foot recently during an interview he conducted while wearing nothing but a towel:
In fact, he was so frightened he apparently wet himself while discussing it:
Subsequent to this, the cycling media and Fred-dom at large seem to taken umbrage at this claim, and have gone to great lengths to discredit it. There's been Zapruder film-like analysis:
Based on this video, it appears that Doull caused the crash, pinched against the left-side barriers. Kittel is on the Brit’s right shoulder, and is taken out shortly thereafter. You can see the German’s disc brake-equipped Specialized S-Works Venge Vias flying through the air while he slides face-first on his stomach. The disc bike lands some distance ahead of both Kittel and Doull.
There is a brief moment in which foot-on-rotor contact would have been possible. As Doull falls left, the inside of his left foot, which is where he was cut, would have needed to go under his own bike and hit the left side of Kittel’s bike, where the disc rotors are located. That doesn’t look likely based on the footage (Kittel appears to be launched forward when Doull’s own bike slides under Kittel’s bike), but stranger things have happened in high-speed crashes.
As well as half-assed testing:
The reason for this skepticism is obvious: the entire Fred economy depends on a wholesale shift to road bikes with disc brakes. If, however, the professional Freds refuse to accept this shift, then the whole crabon gravy train grinds to a halt like a low spoke-count wheelset with a broken spoke in a rim brake frame. Why? Because amateur Freds are completely unable to think for themselves and must ride whatever the pros do period full stop the end etc. Even if Freds objectively like disc brakes better, they won't use them if the pros don't, because someone might see them and figure out that they're not pros too. (Though the fact that they completely suck is usually enough of a giveaway.)
Therefore, the Fred Media must dismiss any criticism of discs on the part of the pro peloton as the Fredly equivalent of "fake news," or else the amateur Freds won't buy new disc brake bikes.
This is too bad.
Indeed, while I'm perfectly content with my primitive rim brake bikes, I've begun to realize that, with the advent of discs, American Fred-dom is now on the cusp of a great opportunity:
To finally divorce itself from the influence of stupid Euro UCI road racing once and for all.
Really, it's enough already. Why in 2017 after innumerable scandals is any amateur cyclist still taking cues from this idiotic sport in any way? It's time to say adieu! After all, even Freds are able to get rid of their stupid hang-ups eventually. Remember criteriums?
A cliterium (or "clit" for short) was a particularly boring form of bike racing in which a bunch of Freds rode up and down the main street of some hick town, and the last person without a broken collarbone was eventually declared the winner and given a free inner tube and a $10 gift certificate to the local hardware store. Crazy as it may seem, this was once a popular form of Fred-dom. But eventually people wised up, and realized that when it comes to racing around in circles, cyclocross (Americanized cyclocross, you know, with irony and stuff) is not only safer but a lot more fun:
(Incredibly, despite my poor remounting technique, I still managed to reproduce.)
And criteriums are way more entertaining when you hold them in cool cities and force people to ride fixies:
Now I think we're finally at the same point of realization with Euro-style road racing, since we've got a replacement all ready to go in the form of this whole "gravel" thing:
(It's "Handjob," but the "b" is silent.)
Oh, sure, the gravel thing is certainly silly. Basically the bike industry sat around and said: "Let's take a Rivendell or a Surly Cross Check, swap the serviceable components for proprietary ones, make it out of plastic, and market it to Freds." Even so, at least it's based on riding bikes in a fun way, whereas the best anybody could do with the whole traditional Euro-style road thing was Rapha's whole "exquisite suffering" take, which is already dated and over:
In case you're just joining bikes, this was actually cool for a few years. I know it's hard to believe now that Rapha has become the default attire for people on brand new Treks with the pie plate still on, but I can assure you it was the case.
Anyway, all of this is to say that we've finally built ourselves a sound foundation, and have a whole range of weenie-ism to indulge in: cyclocross, fixed-gear criteriums, plus-sized mountain biking, bikepacking, gravel grinding... It's time for the media and the consumers to say goodbye to UCI road racing once and for all and let it ride off into obscurity into the middle east, where a bunch of depilated Euros riding around in circles make perfect playthings for oil-rich royal families but generate nothing but boredom interspersed with periods of scandal for everyone else.
Because come on: if you still need to be that big a weenie in 2017, there's always triathlon.
(Explanation: focus groups did not like "Chrismas Turd" so packaging was changed.)
As you may know we're experiencing an unseasonably warm February this year, so over the past week I was able to indulge in some family-style cycling:
Some solo mixed-terrain #whatpressuryourunning cycling:
And even some Category 6 Citi-Biking:
That's the new sumptuous two-way bicycle lane on Chrystie Street, and the green thing being projected onto it is the new Blaze light with which the oncoming Citi Bike is equipped:
Citi Bike + Blaze from Citi Bike on Vimeo.
If I'd fallen asleep back in the year 2000 and woken up today like some kind of Fred Van Winkle...
...the sight of a public bank-branded laser-firing futuristic space bike traveling along a two-way bike lane would completely blow my mind. Then when I learned who the president was I'd probably beat myself back into a state of long-term unconsciousness, waking up 20 years hence only to discover that the planets in the Trappist-1 system are not only inhabited by humans but linked by bridges and ruined by Teslas:
(Humanity desperately needs more places to drive.)
Speaking of the future, the future is now, which is why some of the pro roadies are using disc brakes. However, they're still not without controversy, and one rider complains a disc rotor almost severed his foot recently during an interview he conducted while wearing nothing but a towel:
In fact, he was so frightened he apparently wet himself while discussing it:
Subsequent to this, the cycling media and Fred-dom at large seem to taken umbrage at this claim, and have gone to great lengths to discredit it. There's been Zapruder film-like analysis:
Based on this video, it appears that Doull caused the crash, pinched against the left-side barriers. Kittel is on the Brit’s right shoulder, and is taken out shortly thereafter. You can see the German’s disc brake-equipped Specialized S-Works Venge Vias flying through the air while he slides face-first on his stomach. The disc bike lands some distance ahead of both Kittel and Doull.
There is a brief moment in which foot-on-rotor contact would have been possible. As Doull falls left, the inside of his left foot, which is where he was cut, would have needed to go under his own bike and hit the left side of Kittel’s bike, where the disc rotors are located. That doesn’t look likely based on the footage (Kittel appears to be launched forward when Doull’s own bike slides under Kittel’s bike), but stranger things have happened in high-speed crashes.
As well as half-assed testing:
The reason for this skepticism is obvious: the entire Fred economy depends on a wholesale shift to road bikes with disc brakes. If, however, the professional Freds refuse to accept this shift, then the whole crabon gravy train grinds to a halt like a low spoke-count wheelset with a broken spoke in a rim brake frame. Why? Because amateur Freds are completely unable to think for themselves and must ride whatever the pros do period full stop the end etc. Even if Freds objectively like disc brakes better, they won't use them if the pros don't, because someone might see them and figure out that they're not pros too. (Though the fact that they completely suck is usually enough of a giveaway.)
Therefore, the Fred Media must dismiss any criticism of discs on the part of the pro peloton as the Fredly equivalent of "fake news," or else the amateur Freds won't buy new disc brake bikes.
This is too bad.
Indeed, while I'm perfectly content with my primitive rim brake bikes, I've begun to realize that, with the advent of discs, American Fred-dom is now on the cusp of a great opportunity:
To finally divorce itself from the influence of stupid Euro UCI road racing once and for all.
Really, it's enough already. Why in 2017 after innumerable scandals is any amateur cyclist still taking cues from this idiotic sport in any way? It's time to say adieu! After all, even Freds are able to get rid of their stupid hang-ups eventually. Remember criteriums?
A cliterium (or "clit" for short) was a particularly boring form of bike racing in which a bunch of Freds rode up and down the main street of some hick town, and the last person without a broken collarbone was eventually declared the winner and given a free inner tube and a $10 gift certificate to the local hardware store. Crazy as it may seem, this was once a popular form of Fred-dom. But eventually people wised up, and realized that when it comes to racing around in circles, cyclocross (Americanized cyclocross, you know, with irony and stuff) is not only safer but a lot more fun:
(Incredibly, despite my poor remounting technique, I still managed to reproduce.)
And criteriums are way more entertaining when you hold them in cool cities and force people to ride fixies:
Now I think we're finally at the same point of realization with Euro-style road racing, since we've got a replacement all ready to go in the form of this whole "gravel" thing:
(It's "Handjob," but the "b" is silent.)
Oh, sure, the gravel thing is certainly silly. Basically the bike industry sat around and said: "Let's take a Rivendell or a Surly Cross Check, swap the serviceable components for proprietary ones, make it out of plastic, and market it to Freds." Even so, at least it's based on riding bikes in a fun way, whereas the best anybody could do with the whole traditional Euro-style road thing was Rapha's whole "exquisite suffering" take, which is already dated and over:
In case you're just joining bikes, this was actually cool for a few years. I know it's hard to believe now that Rapha has become the default attire for people on brand new Treks with the pie plate still on, but I can assure you it was the case.
Anyway, all of this is to say that we've finally built ourselves a sound foundation, and have a whole range of weenie-ism to indulge in: cyclocross, fixed-gear criteriums, plus-sized mountain biking, bikepacking, gravel grinding... It's time for the media and the consumers to say goodbye to UCI road racing once and for all and let it ride off into obscurity into the middle east, where a bunch of depilated Euros riding around in circles make perfect playthings for oil-rich royal families but generate nothing but boredom interspersed with periods of scandal for everyone else.
Because come on: if you still need to be that big a weenie in 2017, there's always triathlon.
February 17, 2017
This Just In: Winter Recess!
(We're gonna need a bigger monument.)
As you know by now, as a curator of human children I am at the mercy of the schedule of the New York City Department of Education, at least until such time as: A) My human children finish or leave school and start earning their goddamn keep; or II) Betsy DeVos abolishes the public school system and instead provides families with vouchers that are redeemable at Chuck E. Cheese's:
The point is it's winter recess for the school kids next week:
(Mmmm...winter Reese's.)
Which means I'll be taking leave of this blog in order to "parent." Unless something really exciting happens before then I'll be back on Monday, February 27th, at which point I will resume regular updates. So mark your calendars...
...with blood.In other news, Freds of New York rejoice! The George Washington Bridge restoration will now include additional improvements to the bike and pedestrian path:
The authority announced and approved a new proposal on Thursday to extend the narrow sidewalk as it winds around the bridge’s two towers. The “wedges,” as they’re called, will allow for cyclists to navigate the towers comfortably, without dismounting from their bikes, according to the Port Authority.
The agency added the plans to the project after receiving feedback from the cycling community. The George Washington Bridge rehabilitation already includes designs to improve cycling and pedestrian access to the bridge. Narrow staircases leading to the bridge will be replaced with ADA-compliant ramps. And the existing access ramps will be widened and redesigned with gentler curves.
Now all the Port Authority needs to do is implement an aerobar ban and we'll really be getting somewhere. After all, if you can't use them in a mass-start event why should you be able to use them out on the open road?
(Bret goes full Pee-Wee.)
I'm sure the triathlete community would fight this bitterly, but hopefully in the end we can settle and allow aerobars for Jersey-bound trips but ban them for New York-bound trips.
And if you don't like my travel ban I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT.
Speaking of justice, what's the greatest offense you can possibly commit here in the United States of Canada's FUPA? Why, impeding the flow of motor vehicle traffic, of course:
A Michigan State Trooper ticketed a bicyclist for allegedly impeding traffic. The bicyclist fought the ticket with the help of Bike Law attorney Bryan Waldman. The bicyclist prevailed at Circuit Court.
This is not a recent video, but it's the first time I've seen it, and it's worth watching because as an American cyclist it's important to know where you stand. ("In the way," according to pretty much everybody.)
Lastly, further to yesterday's post there was some spirited (tedious?) discussion about lighting, and as it happens it looks like the NYPD was cracking down on lightless riding last week:
#BikeNYC beware: NYPD ticketing people riding lightless bicycles on 9th Ave at 41st. pic.twitter.com/sOTpkJJ632— E. B. Lefferts (@EBLefferts) February 16, 2017Something tells me they weren't checking for shaped beams.
And with that, I'm outta here. Thanks for reading, ride safe, and I'll see you back here on Monday, February 27th.
--Wildcat Rock Machine
February 16, 2017
Come On Baby Light My Blinkie
Blinky lights have come a long way since the "hipster cysts" of yore:
For those of you too young to remember these things were groundbreaking at the time. (Also, for those of you too young to remember, what the hell are you doing here? You should not be reading content authored by old fusspots.) "Hipster cysts" clung to oddly-shaped bicycle tubes, they were virtually impervious to the elements, and they were available in an assortment of colors. For the first time, city cyclists actually wanted to put lights on their bikes.
At the same time, they had their drawbacks. Firstly, they provided about as much light as the "ready" light on a Mr. Coffee. Secondly, they used little watch batteries, and whether it's a bike light, or a thermometer, or even an actual watch, no human in the history of the world has ever replaced one of those little watch batteries. Instead, the accessory in question winds up in a junk drawer somewhere until you get around to buying new batteries for it, which is precisely never. This explains why you will never see a "hipster cyst" still in operation today. It also explains why Swatch is still in business. Instead of replacing the batteries, you just buy a new Swatch.
(Trust me, I know from Swatches.)
Fortunately, bike lights evolved. They kept their mount-anywhere versatility (that sounds dirty), but they also got brighter, and best of all they became easily rechargeable thanks to the ubiquity of USB ports:
Now you could just stick them in your computer all day while you pretended to work and they'd be ready to fire for the ride home.
The blinky light had reached its apotheosis.
But like everything else bikey, it wasn't long before things started going too far. Blinkies evolved into giant light cannons:
And finally came the tragic fate that befalls all bike components sooner or later, which is pointless integration with your smart phone:
Nevertheless, in a world of promotional videos, this one does stand out. First of all, it features a cheesy soundtrack and comes via a company called "Bang Good:"
Who seem to have borrowed Amazon's phallic underscore:
I was ready to dismiss the suggestive nature of the name "Bang Good" as merely something that comes across differently in translation, but then I saw the picture on the box:
Oh come on.
If Mario Cipollini were to debut a bike light this would be it.
Anyway, a quick examination of the box reveals that the device contained therein is good for a staggering 10 hours of use, which frankly sounds a bit much:
But then again I'm no Cipo:
("Ten hours? Is a quickie only.")
Next the disembodied hands open the box, at which point you brace yourself for whatever's going to come next:
Dear lord, it's some kind of strap-on!
And it's going on the bike!!!
HOLY CRAP HE'S GOING TO HAVE SEX WITH THE BIKE!!!
As he switched on the device and it started whirring I was certain I was about to watch a flagrant and shocking violation of the YouTube terms of service:
But instead it turned out this was just an overwrought bike light that makes pictures:
Because everybody knows there are times when it's crucially important to convey the image of a strawberry to the driver behind you:
Best of all, it's backwards-compatible with your pennyfarthing:
So there you go.
Lastly, the only thing going up faster than the stock market in this country is the automobile death rate:
Over the last decade, new cars have gotten electronic stability control systems to prevent skids, rearview cameras to prevent fender benders and more airbags to protect occupants in collisions. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on campaigns to remind the public of the dangers of drunken driving, failing to buckle up and texting while on the go.
Despite all that, more Americans are dying on roads and highways than in years, and the sudden and sharp increase has alarmed safety advocates.
Reading this you'd almost be forgiven for concluding that a nation of smartphone-addled opioid addicts should probably be working to reduce its dependency on private automobile travel.
Fortunately, when confronted with the specter of over 40,000 people dying every year, the current administration is working to stop the carnage by banning immigration from a small handful of countries.
Of course tech companies could always make their products safer for drivers, but why short-change themselves when they can just dangle the idea of self-driving cars in front of us for the next 50 years instead? As for using technology to augment law enforcement, that's a clear violation of the privacy we already completely surrender while using the apps that distract us while we drive in the first place.
Alas, if only there were some sort of transit mode that not only required no active involvement on the part of the passenger but also used on electricity and was capable of transporting large numbers of people at once on a dedicated right of way:
Yeah, keep dreaming.
For those of you too young to remember these things were groundbreaking at the time. (Also, for those of you too young to remember, what the hell are you doing here? You should not be reading content authored by old fusspots.) "Hipster cysts" clung to oddly-shaped bicycle tubes, they were virtually impervious to the elements, and they were available in an assortment of colors. For the first time, city cyclists actually wanted to put lights on their bikes.
At the same time, they had their drawbacks. Firstly, they provided about as much light as the "ready" light on a Mr. Coffee. Secondly, they used little watch batteries, and whether it's a bike light, or a thermometer, or even an actual watch, no human in the history of the world has ever replaced one of those little watch batteries. Instead, the accessory in question winds up in a junk drawer somewhere until you get around to buying new batteries for it, which is precisely never. This explains why you will never see a "hipster cyst" still in operation today. It also explains why Swatch is still in business. Instead of replacing the batteries, you just buy a new Swatch.
(Trust me, I know from Swatches.)
Fortunately, bike lights evolved. They kept their mount-anywhere versatility (that sounds dirty), but they also got brighter, and best of all they became easily rechargeable thanks to the ubiquity of USB ports:
Now you could just stick them in your computer all day while you pretended to work and they'd be ready to fire for the ride home.
The blinky light had reached its apotheosis.
But like everything else bikey, it wasn't long before things started going too far. Blinkies evolved into giant light cannons:
And finally came the tragic fate that befalls all bike components sooner or later, which is pointless integration with your smart phone:
Nevertheless, in a world of promotional videos, this one does stand out. First of all, it features a cheesy soundtrack and comes via a company called "Bang Good:"
Who seem to have borrowed Amazon's phallic underscore:
I was ready to dismiss the suggestive nature of the name "Bang Good" as merely something that comes across differently in translation, but then I saw the picture on the box:
Oh come on.
If Mario Cipollini were to debut a bike light this would be it.
Anyway, a quick examination of the box reveals that the device contained therein is good for a staggering 10 hours of use, which frankly sounds a bit much:
But then again I'm no Cipo:
("Ten hours? Is a quickie only.")
Next the disembodied hands open the box, at which point you brace yourself for whatever's going to come next:
Dear lord, it's some kind of strap-on!
And it's going on the bike!!!
HOLY CRAP HE'S GOING TO HAVE SEX WITH THE BIKE!!!
As he switched on the device and it started whirring I was certain I was about to watch a flagrant and shocking violation of the YouTube terms of service:
But instead it turned out this was just an overwrought bike light that makes pictures:
Because everybody knows there are times when it's crucially important to convey the image of a strawberry to the driver behind you:
Best of all, it's backwards-compatible with your pennyfarthing:
So there you go.
Lastly, the only thing going up faster than the stock market in this country is the automobile death rate:
Over the last decade, new cars have gotten electronic stability control systems to prevent skids, rearview cameras to prevent fender benders and more airbags to protect occupants in collisions. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on campaigns to remind the public of the dangers of drunken driving, failing to buckle up and texting while on the go.Despite all that, more Americans are dying on roads and highways than in years, and the sudden and sharp increase has alarmed safety advocates.
Reading this you'd almost be forgiven for concluding that a nation of smartphone-addled opioid addicts should probably be working to reduce its dependency on private automobile travel.
Fortunately, when confronted with the specter of over 40,000 people dying every year, the current administration is working to stop the carnage by banning immigration from a small handful of countries.
Of course tech companies could always make their products safer for drivers, but why short-change themselves when they can just dangle the idea of self-driving cars in front of us for the next 50 years instead? As for using technology to augment law enforcement, that's a clear violation of the privacy we already completely surrender while using the apps that distract us while we drive in the first place.
Alas, if only there were some sort of transit mode that not only required no active involvement on the part of the passenger but also used on electricity and was capable of transporting large numbers of people at once on a dedicated right of way:
Yeah, keep dreaming.
February 15, 2017
Wednesday!
Have you ever thought to yourself, "You know, I love the Bike Snob blog, but I really wish that instead of reading his brilliant insights I could hear them intoned to me in a whiny, nasal voice."
Well, wish no more, because I'm a guest on a podcast!
The only thing better than listening to me prattle on is listening to me prattle on about helmets.
Hey, they asked me.
In other news, the anti-cyclist screed is a time-honored journalistic tradition, and it harkens back to a simpler time when racists were still closeted and "fake news" was simply called "bullshit." Of course here in Canada's uvula such screeds appear less frequently now that the media is preoccupied with the imminent collapse of our "democracy," but a positively exquisite example of the genre recently appeared across the Atlantic in the Daily Mail. Now I should point out that it completely failed to incense me, which could be because: a) it's from another country and we Americans find Britishisms endearing, even the ones that are supposed to be insults; or b) because everything seems quaint now given the imminent collapse of our "democracy." Nevertheless, this does not diminish the piece's deft execution, so let's begin:
(Via @EricMBurgeson)
First of all, when excoriating cyclists, it's crucial to evoke both Lycra and smugness, and this particular article does not disappoint:
Forget road-clogging Chelsea Mums on the school run in their 4x4s. Never mind fist-shaking, foul-mouthed road ragers. Don’t fret about the old lady in a Skoda you inevitably get stuck behind.
There’s a force on the road far worse than all those —- and more likely to send your blood pressure soaring: the smug cyclist.
These Lycra-clad darters between cars, these self-styled saints in the saddle, are clogging up our roads with self-satisfaction.
Of course, what the authors of these screeds fail to realize is that Lycra and smugness are, for the most park, mutually exclusive. For example, smug cyclists who are members of food co-ops and who move residences by bike tend not to wear Lycra, whereas the plastic bike-wearing Fred set who do wear Lycra are often the sorts of people who drive their bikes to rides.
Nevertheless, it's crucial to marry these two concepts in the mind of the typical bike-hater, much in the same way our current administration constantly conflates immigrants and crime.
Another crucial tactic in gaining support for your bike-hating article is to concede some small point in advance to make yourself seem gracious and level-headed, and the writer employs this device too:
This is not to say that there are no cavalier or dangerous drivers on the road — of course there are.
But you can't leave this offering out on the table for too long, lest it begin to occur to people that drivers kill left and right whereas cyclists kill virtually never. So be sure to snatch it back quickly before your reader has time to think, and then go back to beating up on the cyclists:
It’s just that they don’t make such a song and dance about their chosen mode of transport.
It's true, drivers are very understated about their enthusiasm for cars. This is especially true of the British, which explains why they created the world's most popular car show:
Cyclists, on the other hand, are entitled egomaniacs:
The holier-than-thou attitude among many riders is exacerbated by officialdom’s flattery of cyclists, its stroking of their already swollen egos.
Ridiculous. Everybody knows if you attempt to stroke the ego of a British cyclist you'll get rug burn from all the tweed:
By the way, they're not even dressed up, that's just a typical day.
Yep, that's what all that flattery from officialdom will get you. And worst of all, they don't even appreciate it:
(Johnson took revenge with Brexit, so who's laughing now?)
Anyway, once you've established that cyclists are a bunch of spoiled children, it's crucial that you explain how encouraging people to ride bicycles results in a dystopian society that, to anybody with half a brain, actually sounds like a utopia:
We all know about the endless miles of cycles lanes that have been built across the country. But now, it seems, cyclists can get away with the kind of rule-breaking for which the rest of us would likely be cuffed and carted away.
Wait, endless cycling lanes (miles even, and not those stupid kilometer things), national health care, and you can get arrested for hitting someone with your car? I'll gladly trade places with any disgruntled British motorist. You'll love it here! Not only can you pretty much kill whoever you want (car or gun, choose your weapon), but we've got a fantastic president who's turning things around bigly.
Meanwhile, what kind of sick society treats riding a bike on the sidewalk less severely than robbery or assault?
One North London borough has just said it will no longer issue fixed £50 penalties to people who cycle on the pavement. Officers in Camden say they’ll no longer enforce this law ‘without good reason’. They’ll have a little chat with the cyclist instead.
Would they extend the same courtesy to other people who broke the law? To the bloke who nicked a hundred quid from the tills at Aldi or the woman in the grip of drink who punched a total stranger? ‘My dear, why did you feel the need to do this?’ No, of course not.
Yes, the writer would be a lot more happy here in America, where doing things "without good reason" is now national policy.
And finally, always be sure to point out how discouraging driving somehow results in more pollution:
In London, hundreds of millions of pounds are being pumped into getting more people on bikes. This has included turning ever more road space into cycling lanes.
As a result, the space for cars has shrunk dramatically, so they’re more likely to get stuck in traffic jams and to pump out fumes.
The irony is almost too much to handle: air quality in London has suffered as cyclists have become kings of the road, because demonised motorists now find themselves stationary for longer times in longer jams, their cars coughing out smog as cyclists speed by.
Fast-forward to the year 2030, when the headline on the front page of the Daily Mail reads: LAST REMAINING MOTORIST IN LONDON STARVES TO DEATH AFTER BEING TRAPPED IN HIS CAR FOR WEEKS BY A SEA OF CYCLISTS.
Lastly, while we're on the subject of literary forms, yesterday I mentioned Bicycling editor Bill Strickland's approach to bike reviews, which included such criteria as this:
Who needs this bike? Who imagines they do with enough ardor that it might as well be true need? Why did the bicycle and I do that through that corner, or go fast there, and how much was bike and how much was me and how much was that (silly to say but real so here it is) mystical mixing of the two of us?
And this:
Changing any element changes things but that means all things, the entire bike, the whole ride and, because you are as necessary to the ride as the bike is, changes you while you are with that bike.
Offhandedly I mentioned that I think I prefer the VeloNews approach, but after checking out their recent review of the $10,660 Cannondale Whatever I take that back:
Here's why:
That’s primarily because the SuperSix can adapt. A day in the mountains? No problem. Weekend crit? It’s got you covered. It’s all about the balance of stiffness and comfort that makes it a jack of all trades, not just in name, but in performance. Our stiffness testing reveals the SuperSix is solid in both the bottom bracket (0.8mm of deflection) and head tube (0.6mm of deflection), but not nearly as unyielding as an aero bike like the Trek Madone (0.41mm of deflection in both the head tube and bottom bracket). That little bit of flex gives the bike a more lively feel, a certain something that connects to the curves and is just malleable enough when you’re throwing your weight around on climbs.
Okay, so the differences in deflection between the Cannondale and the Trek are as follows:
A .39mm difference at the bottom bracket (that's the thickness of about four pieces of copy paper);
A .19mm difference at the headtube (that's the thickness of about two pieces of copy paper).
Are you fucking kidding me? This makes the Cannondale "not nearly as unyielding" as the Trek? At least the Strickland approach can confuse you into believing it, whereas when they start showing numbers you can actually quantify how meaningless as it. They're gonna give the whole scam away! Come on, you've got to figure there's more than a .39mm deflection difference in your foot from day to day due the thickness of your calluses, not to mention all the other crap between your foot and the frame. In fact, I bet if they threw two different Cannondale (or Trek, or whatever) samples on VeloNews Deflekt-O-Matic™they'd find a similar variation. But sure, that "little bit of flex gives the bike a more lively feel," and "is just malleable enough" to notice "when you're throwing your weight around on climbs."
In other words, if your bottom bracket isn't stick enough, put four pieces of copy paper in your shoe. That ought to cover it.
Well, wish no more, because I'm a guest on a podcast!
The only thing better than listening to me prattle on is listening to me prattle on about helmets.
Hey, they asked me.
In other news, the anti-cyclist screed is a time-honored journalistic tradition, and it harkens back to a simpler time when racists were still closeted and "fake news" was simply called "bullshit." Of course here in Canada's uvula such screeds appear less frequently now that the media is preoccupied with the imminent collapse of our "democracy," but a positively exquisite example of the genre recently appeared across the Atlantic in the Daily Mail. Now I should point out that it completely failed to incense me, which could be because: a) it's from another country and we Americans find Britishisms endearing, even the ones that are supposed to be insults; or b) because everything seems quaint now given the imminent collapse of our "democracy." Nevertheless, this does not diminish the piece's deft execution, so let's begin:
(Via @EricMBurgeson)
First of all, when excoriating cyclists, it's crucial to evoke both Lycra and smugness, and this particular article does not disappoint:
Forget road-clogging Chelsea Mums on the school run in their 4x4s. Never mind fist-shaking, foul-mouthed road ragers. Don’t fret about the old lady in a Skoda you inevitably get stuck behind.
There’s a force on the road far worse than all those —- and more likely to send your blood pressure soaring: the smug cyclist.
These Lycra-clad darters between cars, these self-styled saints in the saddle, are clogging up our roads with self-satisfaction.
Of course, what the authors of these screeds fail to realize is that Lycra and smugness are, for the most park, mutually exclusive. For example, smug cyclists who are members of food co-ops and who move residences by bike tend not to wear Lycra, whereas the plastic bike-wearing Fred set who do wear Lycra are often the sorts of people who drive their bikes to rides.
Nevertheless, it's crucial to marry these two concepts in the mind of the typical bike-hater, much in the same way our current administration constantly conflates immigrants and crime.
Another crucial tactic in gaining support for your bike-hating article is to concede some small point in advance to make yourself seem gracious and level-headed, and the writer employs this device too:
This is not to say that there are no cavalier or dangerous drivers on the road — of course there are.
But you can't leave this offering out on the table for too long, lest it begin to occur to people that drivers kill left and right whereas cyclists kill virtually never. So be sure to snatch it back quickly before your reader has time to think, and then go back to beating up on the cyclists:
It’s just that they don’t make such a song and dance about their chosen mode of transport.
It's true, drivers are very understated about their enthusiasm for cars. This is especially true of the British, which explains why they created the world's most popular car show:
Cyclists, on the other hand, are entitled egomaniacs:
The holier-than-thou attitude among many riders is exacerbated by officialdom’s flattery of cyclists, its stroking of their already swollen egos.
Ridiculous. Everybody knows if you attempt to stroke the ego of a British cyclist you'll get rug burn from all the tweed:
By the way, they're not even dressed up, that's just a typical day.
Yep, that's what all that flattery from officialdom will get you. And worst of all, they don't even appreciate it:
(Johnson took revenge with Brexit, so who's laughing now?)
Anyway, once you've established that cyclists are a bunch of spoiled children, it's crucial that you explain how encouraging people to ride bicycles results in a dystopian society that, to anybody with half a brain, actually sounds like a utopia:
We all know about the endless miles of cycles lanes that have been built across the country. But now, it seems, cyclists can get away with the kind of rule-breaking for which the rest of us would likely be cuffed and carted away.
Wait, endless cycling lanes (miles even, and not those stupid kilometer things), national health care, and you can get arrested for hitting someone with your car? I'll gladly trade places with any disgruntled British motorist. You'll love it here! Not only can you pretty much kill whoever you want (car or gun, choose your weapon), but we've got a fantastic president who's turning things around bigly.
Meanwhile, what kind of sick society treats riding a bike on the sidewalk less severely than robbery or assault?
One North London borough has just said it will no longer issue fixed £50 penalties to people who cycle on the pavement. Officers in Camden say they’ll no longer enforce this law ‘without good reason’. They’ll have a little chat with the cyclist instead.
Would they extend the same courtesy to other people who broke the law? To the bloke who nicked a hundred quid from the tills at Aldi or the woman in the grip of drink who punched a total stranger? ‘My dear, why did you feel the need to do this?’ No, of course not.
Yes, the writer would be a lot more happy here in America, where doing things "without good reason" is now national policy.
And finally, always be sure to point out how discouraging driving somehow results in more pollution:
In London, hundreds of millions of pounds are being pumped into getting more people on bikes. This has included turning ever more road space into cycling lanes.
As a result, the space for cars has shrunk dramatically, so they’re more likely to get stuck in traffic jams and to pump out fumes.
The irony is almost too much to handle: air quality in London has suffered as cyclists have become kings of the road, because demonised motorists now find themselves stationary for longer times in longer jams, their cars coughing out smog as cyclists speed by.
Fast-forward to the year 2030, when the headline on the front page of the Daily Mail reads: LAST REMAINING MOTORIST IN LONDON STARVES TO DEATH AFTER BEING TRAPPED IN HIS CAR FOR WEEKS BY A SEA OF CYCLISTS.
Lastly, while we're on the subject of literary forms, yesterday I mentioned Bicycling editor Bill Strickland's approach to bike reviews, which included such criteria as this:
Who needs this bike? Who imagines they do with enough ardor that it might as well be true need? Why did the bicycle and I do that through that corner, or go fast there, and how much was bike and how much was me and how much was that (silly to say but real so here it is) mystical mixing of the two of us?
And this:
Changing any element changes things but that means all things, the entire bike, the whole ride and, because you are as necessary to the ride as the bike is, changes you while you are with that bike.
Offhandedly I mentioned that I think I prefer the VeloNews approach, but after checking out their recent review of the $10,660 Cannondale Whatever I take that back:
Here's why:
That’s primarily because the SuperSix can adapt. A day in the mountains? No problem. Weekend crit? It’s got you covered. It’s all about the balance of stiffness and comfort that makes it a jack of all trades, not just in name, but in performance. Our stiffness testing reveals the SuperSix is solid in both the bottom bracket (0.8mm of deflection) and head tube (0.6mm of deflection), but not nearly as unyielding as an aero bike like the Trek Madone (0.41mm of deflection in both the head tube and bottom bracket). That little bit of flex gives the bike a more lively feel, a certain something that connects to the curves and is just malleable enough when you’re throwing your weight around on climbs.
Okay, so the differences in deflection between the Cannondale and the Trek are as follows:
A .39mm difference at the bottom bracket (that's the thickness of about four pieces of copy paper);
A .19mm difference at the headtube (that's the thickness of about two pieces of copy paper).
Are you fucking kidding me? This makes the Cannondale "not nearly as unyielding" as the Trek? At least the Strickland approach can confuse you into believing it, whereas when they start showing numbers you can actually quantify how meaningless as it. They're gonna give the whole scam away! Come on, you've got to figure there's more than a .39mm deflection difference in your foot from day to day due the thickness of your calluses, not to mention all the other crap between your foot and the frame. In fact, I bet if they threw two different Cannondale (or Trek, or whatever) samples on VeloNews Deflekt-O-Matic™they'd find a similar variation. But sure, that "little bit of flex gives the bike a more lively feel," and "is just malleable enough" to notice "when you're throwing your weight around on climbs."
In other words, if your bottom bracket isn't stick enough, put four pieces of copy paper in your shoe. That ought to cover it.
February 14, 2017
Hold your head high!
Happy Valentine's Day!
Just remember not to be taken in by cute depictions of tandem bicycles:
Seems lovely, right?
Hardly.
While ostensibly a symbol of love and togetherness, the tandem is nothing but a sordid ruse, and an invitation to pilot one is merely a pretense for turning you into the object of salacious leering:
Never trust a stoker.
Speaking of ruses, the pro Freds want the UCI to ban disc brakes again:
Here's why they say they don't want them:
Cyclingnews has seen a copy of a letter sent by the riders' association to the governing body on Sunday in which it formally sets out its opposition to the reintroduction of disc brakes this season. Chief among its concerns is the danger posed by having different braking systems – and therefore different braking times – in the same peloton.
The letter, signed by CPA president Gianni Bugno and addressed to Mark Barfield, head of the UC's technical commission, with UCI president Brian Cookson copied in, criticises the UCI for failing to take into account the safety concerns expressed by a majority of professional riders.
Hmmm, I don't remember ever hearing this argument in the context of single-vs.-dual pivot calipers, or carbon vs. aluminum braking surfaces, or anything else that makes a difference in braking time. Yeah, I think we all know the real reason they don't want them, which is that no team wants to spend a bunch of money outfitting a whole new fleet of bicycles with hidden motors.
Come on, these people will ride anything you put under them. There's a team riding around with chain oilers attached to their bikes for chrissakes!
Yet here's a braking system that might actually help them descend Grand Tour mountain passes on crabon rims in the rain and they're not only resistant to it but insisting it be banned outright?
As Shakespeare famously wrote, "The Freddies doth protest too much, methinks."
Meanwhile, the amateur Freds, the vast majority of whom have absolutely nothing to gain from these things, can't upgrade soon enough.
Go figure.
Of course, the Golden Age of EPO set loves the whole mötödöping thing because it gives them something to feel smug about:
See, it's funny because they only regular-doped.
Frankly I don't buy the argument that an artificial tailwind provided by a motor that's either on or off is any worse than transfusing your blood or permanently altering your physiology through use of banned substances. In fact I think it's even more ethically defensible, not to mention quite a bit safer. Imagine your kid became a pro cyclist. (Lob forbid!) Would you rather them ride a bike with a motor or let some Belgian soigneur who never finished high school fill them with blood in the bathroom of a team bus? I know which one I'd choose: vroom, vroom! Pro cycling needle doping is barely a notch above letting someone shoot heroin between your toes under a highway overpass.
But hey, whatever makes these feel better about their careers.
In other news, meet the Lancelock, which is a new titanium bike lock on Kickstarter and not what Floyd Landis has Lance Armstrong in now:
It's a classic American tale: guy has 12 - yes, 12 - bikes stolen, gets mad as heck, and becomes obsessed with solving the problem and ending the decades-long, worldwide bicycle theft epidemic once and for all.
Yeah, I'm not sure I'd buy a bicycle security product from someone who's lost twelve (12) bicycles.
I mean sure, maybe this thing really does work, but you'd never know it from the video. I was waiting for them to break out the heavy equipment, but all they proved was that it can resist gentle tapping with a hammer:
And that, like a calloused nipple, it's also resolute in the face of gentle twisting:
As for power tools, they don't even entertain that as a possibility:
Oh, sure. Sometimes, but not always:
Meanwhile, remember the fixie periscope?
Well it's been reinvented for the older set by a couple of guys in Florida:
Okay, so apparently the cycling equivalent of the elderly driver who can't see over the dashboard of a Buick is an aging Fred who can't look up from his aerobars. And of course the solution to this problem is this:
Instead of, you know, sitting up:
So what's the opposite of "Eureka" anyway? Well as far as I know there's not a single word, but this phrase comes pretty darn close:
"So then we came up with this device to allow us to see what's in front of us while we don't necessarily have our head up."
Holy crap that looks dangerous.
Also, the inventors' total obliviousness to the world around them is clearly not limited to when they're riding with aerobars:
"It's very hard to find any accessory for a bicycle that makes you safer, faster, and more comfortable."
No it isn't.
In fact there's a bike designed to do just that, and it's called a Rivendell:
At a certain point you're a lot faster on a comfortable bike than you are bent over a plastic Fred bike like you're getting a prostate exam:
Who wants to ride around viewing the world through a series of strategically-placed mirrors anyway? You might as well just ride with an endoscope up your ass.
Speaking of looking at everything from an oblique angle, this hurt my brain:
I never thought I'd say this, but I think I prefer that ridiculous VeloNews numbering system.
Just remember not to be taken in by cute depictions of tandem bicycles:
Seems lovely, right?
Hardly.
While ostensibly a symbol of love and togetherness, the tandem is nothing but a sordid ruse, and an invitation to pilot one is merely a pretense for turning you into the object of salacious leering:
Never trust a stoker.
Speaking of ruses, the pro Freds want the UCI to ban disc brakes again:
Here's why they say they don't want them:
Cyclingnews has seen a copy of a letter sent by the riders' association to the governing body on Sunday in which it formally sets out its opposition to the reintroduction of disc brakes this season. Chief among its concerns is the danger posed by having different braking systems – and therefore different braking times – in the same peloton.
The letter, signed by CPA president Gianni Bugno and addressed to Mark Barfield, head of the UC's technical commission, with UCI president Brian Cookson copied in, criticises the UCI for failing to take into account the safety concerns expressed by a majority of professional riders.
Hmmm, I don't remember ever hearing this argument in the context of single-vs.-dual pivot calipers, or carbon vs. aluminum braking surfaces, or anything else that makes a difference in braking time. Yeah, I think we all know the real reason they don't want them, which is that no team wants to spend a bunch of money outfitting a whole new fleet of bicycles with hidden motors.
Come on, these people will ride anything you put under them. There's a team riding around with chain oilers attached to their bikes for chrissakes!
Yet here's a braking system that might actually help them descend Grand Tour mountain passes on crabon rims in the rain and they're not only resistant to it but insisting it be banned outright?
As Shakespeare famously wrote, "The Freddies doth protest too much, methinks."
Meanwhile, the amateur Freds, the vast majority of whom have absolutely nothing to gain from these things, can't upgrade soon enough.
Go figure.
Of course, the Golden Age of EPO set loves the whole mötödöping thing because it gives them something to feel smug about:
Still looking for a motor......I even rode it today and dropped @ghincapie but that doesn't say much....... pic.twitter.com/jhv4tFO4Pa— VandeVelde,Christian (@ChristianVDV) February 3, 2017El-oh-el.
See, it's funny because they only regular-doped.
Frankly I don't buy the argument that an artificial tailwind provided by a motor that's either on or off is any worse than transfusing your blood or permanently altering your physiology through use of banned substances. In fact I think it's even more ethically defensible, not to mention quite a bit safer. Imagine your kid became a pro cyclist. (Lob forbid!) Would you rather them ride a bike with a motor or let some Belgian soigneur who never finished high school fill them with blood in the bathroom of a team bus? I know which one I'd choose: vroom, vroom! Pro cycling needle doping is barely a notch above letting someone shoot heroin between your toes under a highway overpass.
But hey, whatever makes these feel better about their careers.
In other news, meet the Lancelock, which is a new titanium bike lock on Kickstarter and not what Floyd Landis has Lance Armstrong in now:
It's a classic American tale: guy has 12 - yes, 12 - bikes stolen, gets mad as heck, and becomes obsessed with solving the problem and ending the decades-long, worldwide bicycle theft epidemic once and for all.
Yeah, I'm not sure I'd buy a bicycle security product from someone who's lost twelve (12) bicycles.
I mean sure, maybe this thing really does work, but you'd never know it from the video. I was waiting for them to break out the heavy equipment, but all they proved was that it can resist gentle tapping with a hammer:
And that, like a calloused nipple, it's also resolute in the face of gentle twisting:
As for power tools, they don't even entertain that as a possibility:
Oh, sure. Sometimes, but not always:
Meanwhile, remember the fixie periscope?
Well it's been reinvented for the older set by a couple of guys in Florida:
Okay, so apparently the cycling equivalent of the elderly driver who can't see over the dashboard of a Buick is an aging Fred who can't look up from his aerobars. And of course the solution to this problem is this:
Instead of, you know, sitting up:
So what's the opposite of "Eureka" anyway? Well as far as I know there's not a single word, but this phrase comes pretty darn close:
"So then we came up with this device to allow us to see what's in front of us while we don't necessarily have our head up."
Holy crap that looks dangerous.
Also, the inventors' total obliviousness to the world around them is clearly not limited to when they're riding with aerobars:
"It's very hard to find any accessory for a bicycle that makes you safer, faster, and more comfortable."
No it isn't.
In fact there's a bike designed to do just that, and it's called a Rivendell:
At a certain point you're a lot faster on a comfortable bike than you are bent over a plastic Fred bike like you're getting a prostate exam:
Who wants to ride around viewing the world through a series of strategically-placed mirrors anyway? You might as well just ride with an endoscope up your ass.
Speaking of looking at everything from an oblique angle, this hurt my brain:
It's mostly sensory to me, trying to be with a bike enough to review it, which to me means to understand it: What it is built to achieve, what it shares with others with the same ambition and all other bicycles in general, how it might in some way differ from all the others (alike and not), how well and how much and in what ways it fulfills or sometimes exceeds its ambitions, who it is made for me and who not, and who might like it whether made for them or not. Who needs this bike? Who imagines they do with enough ardor that it might as well be true need? Why did the bicycle and I do that through that corner, or go fast there, and how much was bike and how much was me and how much was that (silly to say but real so here it is) mystical mixing of the two of us? . Secondly, it is holistic. Nothing happens because the chainstays are longer or the bottom bracket is stouter or this is that-er, but those are an ineluctable part of why the whole bike does this or that or feels yes or no. Changing any element changes things but that means all things, the entire bike, the whole ride and, because you are as necessary to the ride as the bike is, changes you while you are with that bike. Express the ride (the bike) without trying to diagnose it. . And godammit, have some fun while you're doing it or what's the point? . . . #edchoice17 #bicyclingmag #biketesting #bikereviewing #healdsburg #bicycles #bicyclette #bicycling #bike #bikelife #bikes #cycling #cyclinglife #cyclist #mybikelife #ridelife #thebikelifeA post shared by Bill Strickland (@truebs) on Feb 14, 2017 at 8:14am PST
I never thought I'd say this, but I think I prefer that ridiculous VeloNews numbering system.
February 13, 2017
I'm beginning to suspect a lot of people have no idea what they're talking about.
Remember my new tires that aren't for fat bikes and yet are apparently for fat biking, provided you do it in summer?
[image error]
Well Friday I risked life, limb, and warranty by using them in the winter:
It was slow going at first and I was about to turn back, but eventually I got a little rhythm going and made it to the city line:
Emboldened, I pressed on, where footprints indicated only a few intrepid souls had ventured here before me:
And ultimately made it to this mighty waterfall, located far, far upstate in a quaint little rural enclave called "Yonkers:"
Then I cut a hole in the ice, fished for my dinner, spent the night under a bivouac, and undertook the roughly three-mile return trip the next morning.
In all, the entire ride was a little over six miles, and I was gone for a mere fourteen (14) days.
Meanwhile, remember awhile back I mentioned this building?
Well, when I did a reader who is involved with it was kind enough to send me some passes to the Sugar Hill Children's Museum of Art and Storytelling, which is located therein:
(Pic from here.)
I'm pleased to report we marched all seventeen (17) children onto the subway this past weekend for a visit, and it was great. If you too are the parent of small human children in this city I should not have to tell you the importance of indoor activities located close to subway stations (especially in winter), and as such I would strongly recommend that you add this wonderful institution to your inventory of weekend activities. (You can read more on my other blog, Parenting Snob NYC.)
Who says bike blogging doesn't pay?
Indeed, later in the day I was still brimming with good cheer, and so I headed back out for an afternoon ride. I didn't feel like trudging through the snow again, and you never know what road conditions are going to be like outside of the city after a snowstorm, so instead of riding north I headed down to Central Park for a leisurely spin. The streets were perfectly passable, but of course the shoulders and bike lanes were clear in some places and a mess in others:
I was in no particular hurry, nor was I particularly eager to slip and fall in a puddle of slush, so I rode slowly and savored the brief respite from the twin tumults of weather and parenthood. Heading south on St. Nicholas, I turned left onto W. 120th Street, from whence I intended to make a right onto Adam Clayton Powell, which would then deposit me right into the park:
Anyway, there I was heading east on 120th. Traffic ahead of me was moving slowly due to a double-parked vehicle (shocker!) and the cars were shifted over to the left. As I mentioned, I was in no particular hurry, and the road shoulders were variably messy. It's also a short block owing to the fact that St. Nicholas cuts across it diagonally, so I made no attempt to pass anybody and instead took my place in the traffic queue in anticipation of making the right.
Meanwhile, the driver behind me starts honking. I can't see any reason he'd be honking at me, since there are cars up ahead of me and I'm certainly not holding him up in any way. So I figure he's just one of these assholes who honks whenever traffic's not moving as quickly as he'd like, which a lot of idiots do when driving in the city.
I'm still blissed out from the familial activities earlier in the day, and I'm also still really happy to be out on my bike on a Saturday afternoon, and so I choose to ignore this minor blemish on an otherwise lovely day.
Unfortunately, as I make the right onto Adam Clayton Powell, the honking driver pulls up to me and starts berating me for not riding in the bike lane. He's very insistent. I have to ride in the bike lane.
So let's look at W. 120th Street between St. Nicholas and Adam Clayton Powell:
There is indeed a bike lane on the left side of it. However:
1) I'm preparing to make a right;
2) The road shoulders are slushy;
3) Traffic is shifted over to the left due to a double-parked car, just like in the streetview, so you wouldn't know there's a bike lane anyway:
In fact the streetview scenario is pretty much the same scenario as when I was there, with the addition of the slush, and so I was positioned accordingly, directly following the vehicles ahead of me:
And once again, I'm moving at the same speed of the rest of the traffic, so you can't even say I'm holding anybody up.
Given all of this I have no obligation to be in the bike lane. First of all, there's snow in it. Sure, it's not an Obama 2009 amount of snow:
More like a Trump 2017 smattering:
So it's patchy and intermittent, but it's there.
And even if there had been no snow and instead puffs of pink clouds in the bike lane spelling out "Ride me!," I'm preparing for a turn at an intersection, so given all of these factors there's no reason for me to be in the bike lane according to state law:
Whenever a usable path or lane for bicycles has been provided, bicycle riders shall use such path or lane only except under any of the following situations: (i) When preparing for a turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (ii) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards) that make it unsafe to continue within such bicycle path or lane.
The New York City Department of Transportation puts it even more succinctly:
On top of all that, you can use either side of a 40-foot wide one-way roadway, and I think Manhattan cross streets are 60 feet wide. (Though I might be wrong there.)
In short, there's absolutely no fucking reason, legal or practical, for me to be in that goddamn bike lane.
Yet here's some asshole in a 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe with New Jersey plates (the special ones with the lighthouse on them he probably paid extra for) not only honking at me but also telling me off for not riding in it. Furthermore, this dimwitted shitbag has the audacity to tell me that I need to learn how to ride a bike, and that he rides everywhere, all the time. From the driver's seat of a fucking Hyundai he says this.
Holy motherfucking shit.
I actually took video of the ensuing interaction and was looking forward to posting it today, but having cooled down over the past couple of days I've decided it would do a disservice to my valuable brand to appear on the Internet looking any way other than utterly composed. So I've shelved it.
Righteous indignity, however warranted, is never a good look.
Nevertheless, I remain stunned by this fuckwit's audacity. I'm Wildcat Rock Machine, dammit! I make it my business to know where I can and can't be when I'm on my bike. And this guy's gonna drive his Hyundai shitbox into my town and start fucking with me on a Saturday afternoon? What goes through his head as he drives? "Here's a guy on a bike. He isn't holding me up or anything, but he's not in a bike lane! I, on the other hand, ride my beach cruiser on the boardwalk in Jersey sometimes. So I think I'll rub my dick and balls all over his face."
I am of course an inveterate "woosie" who would never embroil himself in a physical altercation, but if this guy usually behaves this way I can't believe he doesn't get u-locks put through his windshield on a regular basis.
Here's a related question: this is not the first time I've told a person with New Jersey plates to "Go back to Jersey," nor is it the first time they've replied with "I don't live in Jersey." Why is this? Surely there must be people who actually live in Jersey. Are they all committing insurance fraud, or are they just embarrassed? Or is it some combination of the two?
In any case, when you use a Citi Bike you have to agree to terms of use, and I think the same thing should apply when you drive a car into Manhattan. Oh, sure, in theory there are laws you're supposed to follow, but we all know how that goes. So I think in order to operate a motor vehicle in Manhattan every driver should agree to the following:
TERMS OF USE FOR DRIVING IN MANHATTAN
I hereby acknowledge the following;
1) I am choosing to drive a large heavy motorized box into the most densely populated county in the United States;
2) This choice endangers people's lives;
3) This county has an extensive public transit network and is well-served by taxis, livery, ride-hailing apps, as well as a comprehensive bike share program;
4) While I may get lucky, neither deity nor US Constitution entitles me to immunity from traffic delays, nor does it guarantee me the right to store my large heavy motorized box anywhere for free;
5) Bike lanes do not cause traffic congestion. My large heavy motorized box, however, does;
6) I understand that people actually live in Manhattan as well as the rest of New York City. It is not a theme park or a sitcom. Therefore, any expectation that my car is the "It's a Small World" ride or that my windshield is a TV screen across which life will unfold according to my own whims or expectations is pathologically unreasonable;
a. Should I forget the above and elect to communicate my displeasure to any other road user by means of car horn or verbal haranguing, I acknowledge that I or my personal property may be subject to physical damage;
b. In the event of such damage, I shall not hold the other party responsible, nor shall I be entitled to any claims of loss, damage, or legal liability for anything that happens to me as a result of my being a complete douchebag;
7) If I don't like any of the above, I can feel free to shove a Bruce Springsteen box set up my ass.
I think this would go a long way towards obviating a lot of potential misunderstandings.
Anyway, apart from my exchange with Captain Fucknuts in the Hyundai, the rest of the ride was lovely.
Lastly, here you go:
[image error]
Well Friday I risked life, limb, and warranty by using them in the winter:
It was slow going at first and I was about to turn back, but eventually I got a little rhythm going and made it to the city line:
Emboldened, I pressed on, where footprints indicated only a few intrepid souls had ventured here before me:
And ultimately made it to this mighty waterfall, located far, far upstate in a quaint little rural enclave called "Yonkers:"
Then I cut a hole in the ice, fished for my dinner, spent the night under a bivouac, and undertook the roughly three-mile return trip the next morning.
In all, the entire ride was a little over six miles, and I was gone for a mere fourteen (14) days.
Meanwhile, remember awhile back I mentioned this building?
Well, when I did a reader who is involved with it was kind enough to send me some passes to the Sugar Hill Children's Museum of Art and Storytelling, which is located therein:
(Pic from here.)
I'm pleased to report we marched all seventeen (17) children onto the subway this past weekend for a visit, and it was great. If you too are the parent of small human children in this city I should not have to tell you the importance of indoor activities located close to subway stations (especially in winter), and as such I would strongly recommend that you add this wonderful institution to your inventory of weekend activities. (You can read more on my other blog, Parenting Snob NYC.)
Who says bike blogging doesn't pay?
Indeed, later in the day I was still brimming with good cheer, and so I headed back out for an afternoon ride. I didn't feel like trudging through the snow again, and you never know what road conditions are going to be like outside of the city after a snowstorm, so instead of riding north I headed down to Central Park for a leisurely spin. The streets were perfectly passable, but of course the shoulders and bike lanes were clear in some places and a mess in others:
I was in no particular hurry, nor was I particularly eager to slip and fall in a puddle of slush, so I rode slowly and savored the brief respite from the twin tumults of weather and parenthood. Heading south on St. Nicholas, I turned left onto W. 120th Street, from whence I intended to make a right onto Adam Clayton Powell, which would then deposit me right into the park:
Anyway, there I was heading east on 120th. Traffic ahead of me was moving slowly due to a double-parked vehicle (shocker!) and the cars were shifted over to the left. As I mentioned, I was in no particular hurry, and the road shoulders were variably messy. It's also a short block owing to the fact that St. Nicholas cuts across it diagonally, so I made no attempt to pass anybody and instead took my place in the traffic queue in anticipation of making the right.
Meanwhile, the driver behind me starts honking. I can't see any reason he'd be honking at me, since there are cars up ahead of me and I'm certainly not holding him up in any way. So I figure he's just one of these assholes who honks whenever traffic's not moving as quickly as he'd like, which a lot of idiots do when driving in the city.
I'm still blissed out from the familial activities earlier in the day, and I'm also still really happy to be out on my bike on a Saturday afternoon, and so I choose to ignore this minor blemish on an otherwise lovely day.
Unfortunately, as I make the right onto Adam Clayton Powell, the honking driver pulls up to me and starts berating me for not riding in the bike lane. He's very insistent. I have to ride in the bike lane.
So let's look at W. 120th Street between St. Nicholas and Adam Clayton Powell:
There is indeed a bike lane on the left side of it. However:
1) I'm preparing to make a right;
2) The road shoulders are slushy;
3) Traffic is shifted over to the left due to a double-parked car, just like in the streetview, so you wouldn't know there's a bike lane anyway:
In fact the streetview scenario is pretty much the same scenario as when I was there, with the addition of the slush, and so I was positioned accordingly, directly following the vehicles ahead of me:
And once again, I'm moving at the same speed of the rest of the traffic, so you can't even say I'm holding anybody up.
Given all of this I have no obligation to be in the bike lane. First of all, there's snow in it. Sure, it's not an Obama 2009 amount of snow:
More like a Trump 2017 smattering:
So it's patchy and intermittent, but it's there.
And even if there had been no snow and instead puffs of pink clouds in the bike lane spelling out "Ride me!," I'm preparing for a turn at an intersection, so given all of these factors there's no reason for me to be in the bike lane according to state law:
Whenever a usable path or lane for bicycles has been provided, bicycle riders shall use such path or lane only except under any of the following situations: (i) When preparing for a turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (ii) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards) that make it unsafe to continue within such bicycle path or lane.
The New York City Department of Transportation puts it even more succinctly:
On top of all that, you can use either side of a 40-foot wide one-way roadway, and I think Manhattan cross streets are 60 feet wide. (Though I might be wrong there.)In short, there's absolutely no fucking reason, legal or practical, for me to be in that goddamn bike lane.
Yet here's some asshole in a 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe with New Jersey plates (the special ones with the lighthouse on them he probably paid extra for) not only honking at me but also telling me off for not riding in it. Furthermore, this dimwitted shitbag has the audacity to tell me that I need to learn how to ride a bike, and that he rides everywhere, all the time. From the driver's seat of a fucking Hyundai he says this.
Holy motherfucking shit.
I actually took video of the ensuing interaction and was looking forward to posting it today, but having cooled down over the past couple of days I've decided it would do a disservice to my valuable brand to appear on the Internet looking any way other than utterly composed. So I've shelved it.
Righteous indignity, however warranted, is never a good look.
Nevertheless, I remain stunned by this fuckwit's audacity. I'm Wildcat Rock Machine, dammit! I make it my business to know where I can and can't be when I'm on my bike. And this guy's gonna drive his Hyundai shitbox into my town and start fucking with me on a Saturday afternoon? What goes through his head as he drives? "Here's a guy on a bike. He isn't holding me up or anything, but he's not in a bike lane! I, on the other hand, ride my beach cruiser on the boardwalk in Jersey sometimes. So I think I'll rub my dick and balls all over his face."
I am of course an inveterate "woosie" who would never embroil himself in a physical altercation, but if this guy usually behaves this way I can't believe he doesn't get u-locks put through his windshield on a regular basis.
Here's a related question: this is not the first time I've told a person with New Jersey plates to "Go back to Jersey," nor is it the first time they've replied with "I don't live in Jersey." Why is this? Surely there must be people who actually live in Jersey. Are they all committing insurance fraud, or are they just embarrassed? Or is it some combination of the two?
In any case, when you use a Citi Bike you have to agree to terms of use, and I think the same thing should apply when you drive a car into Manhattan. Oh, sure, in theory there are laws you're supposed to follow, but we all know how that goes. So I think in order to operate a motor vehicle in Manhattan every driver should agree to the following:
TERMS OF USE FOR DRIVING IN MANHATTAN
I hereby acknowledge the following;
1) I am choosing to drive a large heavy motorized box into the most densely populated county in the United States;
2) This choice endangers people's lives;
3) This county has an extensive public transit network and is well-served by taxis, livery, ride-hailing apps, as well as a comprehensive bike share program;
4) While I may get lucky, neither deity nor US Constitution entitles me to immunity from traffic delays, nor does it guarantee me the right to store my large heavy motorized box anywhere for free;
5) Bike lanes do not cause traffic congestion. My large heavy motorized box, however, does;
6) I understand that people actually live in Manhattan as well as the rest of New York City. It is not a theme park or a sitcom. Therefore, any expectation that my car is the "It's a Small World" ride or that my windshield is a TV screen across which life will unfold according to my own whims or expectations is pathologically unreasonable;
a. Should I forget the above and elect to communicate my displeasure to any other road user by means of car horn or verbal haranguing, I acknowledge that I or my personal property may be subject to physical damage;
b. In the event of such damage, I shall not hold the other party responsible, nor shall I be entitled to any claims of loss, damage, or legal liability for anything that happens to me as a result of my being a complete douchebag;
7) If I don't like any of the above, I can feel free to shove a Bruce Springsteen box set up my ass.
I think this would go a long way towards obviating a lot of potential misunderstandings.
Anyway, apart from my exchange with Captain Fucknuts in the Hyundai, the rest of the ride was lovely.
Lastly, here you go:
Transition practice not always turning out the way you want it to, a good recovery by @Tri_Orca on TDC camp! :-) pic.twitter.com/0Pj0I9fqjr— TEAMDILLON (@Teamdillon) February 10, 2017You're welcome.
February 10, 2017
BSNYC Friday Fun! (Quiz Not Included)
There's nothing like a snowstorm to bring out the best in humanity. "Once more unto the breach!," cry the motorists as they place unwavering faith in their stupid cars and drive heedlessly towards disaster. Inevitably the wind up stuck on the highway, crying "Why hast thous forsaken me?" into the dashboards of their Freedom Machines. But it all works out fine, because here comes Governor Cuomo to the rescue:
Cuomo, in pictures his office posted on Twitter, is seen helping to hook up a tow cable to a Chevrolet Malibu that was stuck in the snow.
The governor came across the stuck vehicle at around 3 p.m. on the northbound Sprain Brook Parkway near the Hawthorne exit as he was surveying road conditions, Cuomo spokesman Richard Azzopardi said.
So why not escort an elderly person down some slippery subway stairs or across a slush-covered intersection? Simple: that kind of photo-op doesn't occur to politicians who travel everywhere via chauffeur-driven SUV. But you can be sure that when they come across some schmuck in a Malibu who ignored every warning for the past 24 hours and made the stupid decision to drive in a snowstorm they'll fall all over themselves extricate said driver from his or her self-dug hole.
Speaking of asking for it, as I mentioned yesterday, I got some new tires for my portly bike:
Which I plan to use all year round even though they're only rated for "Summer Fatbiking:"
I mean sure, I guess I can also use them for "bikepacking," "cross country," "trail," and "enduro"--though it doesn't specify what season, plus apart from "cross country" I don't really know what any of those other things are, so now I'm totally confused.
Even more confusing was that when I finally got a chance to mount them (onto the bike, that is) yesterday evening I noticed that I'm only allowed to ride these tires between 30-45psi, or else presumably I will die:
If you're unfamiliar with today's portly tires, even 30psi is stupendously high #whatpressureyourunning, and a more appropriate #whatpressureyourunning would be roughly half that. Of course, I could probably just assume that this is some vestigial text from the days of primitive 26x1.8 mountain bike tires, and that WTB has forgotten to instruct the factory in Ghina to update it. However, I think the more prudent course of action is to pen a neurotic screed to Lennard Zinn at VeloNews and wait for his reply:
Dear Lennard,
I recently purchased a set of 27.5 x 3.0 WTB Bridger tires. What is the failure mode if I attempt to use them for any other purpose besides summer fatbiking and run them at a lower #whatpressureyourunning than 30psi? Should I expect explosion or implosion?
Sincerely,
--Concerned Mountain Fred
PS: These are not fat bike tires, so how can I use them for "summer fatbiking?" Isn't that like saying I can use a beef patty for a "winter vegan barbecue?"
Until I hear back rest assured I've surrounded the bike with yellow caution tape and don't plan to go anywhere near it.
In the meantime, I guess I'll just keep hitting refresh over at VeloNews, where the technical question du jour is this:
I’ve never quite understood how fork angle, fork offset, and the resulting trail affect the way a road bike feels and steers. In my life, I’ve had three racing bikes with these three very different front ends, and I thought if you could tell me what the numbers mean to you, it might help me and your other readers understand bike geometry a little better.
1. 73-degree fork angle with a 40mm offset and a 110mm stem.
2. 74-degree fork angle with a 45mm offset and a 90mm stem.
3. 72.5-degree fork angle with a 49mm offset and a 90mm stem.
All three felt solid at speed. No. 1 felt good until I got No. 2. With No. 2, I felt like I could just lean the bike and it would turn itself, which No. 1 did not. No. 3, my latest bike, doesn’t feel quite as intuitive going into the turns, but once in the turn, it feels the most rock-solid of them all. (It’s laterally the stiffest by far, which may be factor.) The only other comment I have is that the steering for No. 3, which is rock-solid at high speed, feels surprisingly loose at low speeds. I can’t recall feeling that with my first two bikes.
Zinn gives a lengthy reply which I couldn't read, since the obvious answer is that the rider is experiencing the effects of aging. Consider:
--The first bike "felt good."
--The second bike felt like "could just lean the bike and it would turn itself;"
--The third bike "doesn’t feel quite as intuitive going into the turns, but once in the turn, it feels the most rock-solid of them all."
Right, so over the course of three bikes he went from awkward to overconfident to prudent. Pretty simple really. You're just getting old. This is like asking a sex columnist, "Why does my penis handle differently?"
All three felt solid at speed. No. 1 felt good but it was twitchy and over too quick. No. 2 I felt like I could just lean in and it would go by itself. No. 3 doesn't feel quite as intuitive, but once in the turn it feels the most rock-solid of them all.
You can even use the same diagram:
In other aging Fred news, Johan Bruyneel thinks people still give a shit what he thinks:
"I don't know what it is that's up with LeMond. It's not normal to be so obsessed with Armstrong," said Bruyneel, who is currently serving a 10-year ban for his involvement in doping.
"He has realised that people are less and less outraged by Lance, because it has become clear that he was only one of many who were doping, and that's why LeMond is now looking for something new with which to tarnish his name. But he's not going to manage it. They can keep trying until the year 3000 – they're not going to find mechanical doping.
I dunno, I don't think people are less and less outraged so much as they are less and less interested. It's all really just this century's equivalent of the Tonya Harding scandal. I'd also categorize both Bruyneel and LeMond as people from whom the world could quite contentedly never, ever hear from again.
Anyway, we all know Lance Armstrong was mötödöping after his comeback. Remember how he kept crashing all over the place for no apparent reason? It was because he wasn't used to all that power. Also, he rode for RadioShack, a company that specialized in tiny motors, so he probably had some really glitchy piece of crap Tandy job in his seat tube that was retrofitted from a remote control car:
(There was nothing more exciting than getting a remote control car for Christmas...until you noticed it was from Radio Shack.)
And if you don't think disc brakes and the new wide-tires--and-suspension-on-road-bikes trend is all about needing more traction because of the motor then you're kidding yourself:
One of the biggest benefits about hydraulic discs on road bikes has nothing to do with braking. By eliminating the constraints of a caliper wrapping around the rim, it’s now game on for fun tire options.
It’s funny to think that 25mm tires used to be absurdly large. No one went larger than a 23 for a road bike. Now we’re a bit more open minded — or maybe we’re just older and appreciate the extra cushioning.
In any event, being able to run fat tires opens up your route as well as your traction and suspension capabilities. No, you don’t have to put monster-truck tires on your aero bike — but it’s great to have options.
1) When were 25mm tires "absurdly large?" 2) Someone should tell Fred that 28mm tires work perfectly fine on most old-timey road bikes with short-reach rim brakes.
On second thought, don't tell them, because then we can have their bikes when they throw them in the trash.
Cuomo, in pictures his office posted on Twitter, is seen helping to hook up a tow cable to a Chevrolet Malibu that was stuck in the snow.
The governor came across the stuck vehicle at around 3 p.m. on the northbound Sprain Brook Parkway near the Hawthorne exit as he was surveying road conditions, Cuomo spokesman Richard Azzopardi said.
So why not escort an elderly person down some slippery subway stairs or across a slush-covered intersection? Simple: that kind of photo-op doesn't occur to politicians who travel everywhere via chauffeur-driven SUV. But you can be sure that when they come across some schmuck in a Malibu who ignored every warning for the past 24 hours and made the stupid decision to drive in a snowstorm they'll fall all over themselves extricate said driver from his or her self-dug hole.
Speaking of asking for it, as I mentioned yesterday, I got some new tires for my portly bike:
Which I plan to use all year round even though they're only rated for "Summer Fatbiking:"
I mean sure, I guess I can also use them for "bikepacking," "cross country," "trail," and "enduro"--though it doesn't specify what season, plus apart from "cross country" I don't really know what any of those other things are, so now I'm totally confused.
Even more confusing was that when I finally got a chance to mount them (onto the bike, that is) yesterday evening I noticed that I'm only allowed to ride these tires between 30-45psi, or else presumably I will die:
If you're unfamiliar with today's portly tires, even 30psi is stupendously high #whatpressureyourunning, and a more appropriate #whatpressureyourunning would be roughly half that. Of course, I could probably just assume that this is some vestigial text from the days of primitive 26x1.8 mountain bike tires, and that WTB has forgotten to instruct the factory in Ghina to update it. However, I think the more prudent course of action is to pen a neurotic screed to Lennard Zinn at VeloNews and wait for his reply:
Dear Lennard,
I recently purchased a set of 27.5 x 3.0 WTB Bridger tires. What is the failure mode if I attempt to use them for any other purpose besides summer fatbiking and run them at a lower #whatpressureyourunning than 30psi? Should I expect explosion or implosion?
Sincerely,
--Concerned Mountain Fred
PS: These are not fat bike tires, so how can I use them for "summer fatbiking?" Isn't that like saying I can use a beef patty for a "winter vegan barbecue?"
Until I hear back rest assured I've surrounded the bike with yellow caution tape and don't plan to go anywhere near it.
In the meantime, I guess I'll just keep hitting refresh over at VeloNews, where the technical question du jour is this:
I’ve never quite understood how fork angle, fork offset, and the resulting trail affect the way a road bike feels and steers. In my life, I’ve had three racing bikes with these three very different front ends, and I thought if you could tell me what the numbers mean to you, it might help me and your other readers understand bike geometry a little better.
1. 73-degree fork angle with a 40mm offset and a 110mm stem.
2. 74-degree fork angle with a 45mm offset and a 90mm stem.
3. 72.5-degree fork angle with a 49mm offset and a 90mm stem.
All three felt solid at speed. No. 1 felt good until I got No. 2. With No. 2, I felt like I could just lean the bike and it would turn itself, which No. 1 did not. No. 3, my latest bike, doesn’t feel quite as intuitive going into the turns, but once in the turn, it feels the most rock-solid of them all. (It’s laterally the stiffest by far, which may be factor.) The only other comment I have is that the steering for No. 3, which is rock-solid at high speed, feels surprisingly loose at low speeds. I can’t recall feeling that with my first two bikes.
Zinn gives a lengthy reply which I couldn't read, since the obvious answer is that the rider is experiencing the effects of aging. Consider:
--The first bike "felt good."
--The second bike felt like "could just lean the bike and it would turn itself;"
--The third bike "doesn’t feel quite as intuitive going into the turns, but once in the turn, it feels the most rock-solid of them all."
Right, so over the course of three bikes he went from awkward to overconfident to prudent. Pretty simple really. You're just getting old. This is like asking a sex columnist, "Why does my penis handle differently?"
All three felt solid at speed. No. 1 felt good but it was twitchy and over too quick. No. 2 I felt like I could just lean in and it would go by itself. No. 3 doesn't feel quite as intuitive, but once in the turn it feels the most rock-solid of them all.
You can even use the same diagram:
In other aging Fred news, Johan Bruyneel thinks people still give a shit what he thinks:
"I don't know what it is that's up with LeMond. It's not normal to be so obsessed with Armstrong," said Bruyneel, who is currently serving a 10-year ban for his involvement in doping.
"He has realised that people are less and less outraged by Lance, because it has become clear that he was only one of many who were doping, and that's why LeMond is now looking for something new with which to tarnish his name. But he's not going to manage it. They can keep trying until the year 3000 – they're not going to find mechanical doping.
I dunno, I don't think people are less and less outraged so much as they are less and less interested. It's all really just this century's equivalent of the Tonya Harding scandal. I'd also categorize both Bruyneel and LeMond as people from whom the world could quite contentedly never, ever hear from again.
Anyway, we all know Lance Armstrong was mötödöping after his comeback. Remember how he kept crashing all over the place for no apparent reason? It was because he wasn't used to all that power. Also, he rode for RadioShack, a company that specialized in tiny motors, so he probably had some really glitchy piece of crap Tandy job in his seat tube that was retrofitted from a remote control car:
(There was nothing more exciting than getting a remote control car for Christmas...until you noticed it was from Radio Shack.)
And if you don't think disc brakes and the new wide-tires--and-suspension-on-road-bikes trend is all about needing more traction because of the motor then you're kidding yourself:
One of the biggest benefits about hydraulic discs on road bikes has nothing to do with braking. By eliminating the constraints of a caliper wrapping around the rim, it’s now game on for fun tire options.
It’s funny to think that 25mm tires used to be absurdly large. No one went larger than a 23 for a road bike. Now we’re a bit more open minded — or maybe we’re just older and appreciate the extra cushioning.
In any event, being able to run fat tires opens up your route as well as your traction and suspension capabilities. No, you don’t have to put monster-truck tires on your aero bike — but it’s great to have options.
1) When were 25mm tires "absurdly large?" 2) Someone should tell Fred that 28mm tires work perfectly fine on most old-timey road bikes with short-reach rim brakes.
On second thought, don't tell them, because then we can have their bikes when they throw them in the trash.
February 9, 2017
Snow Day!
Greetings from New York City, where were under siege by our annual Snow-pocalyptic Apoca-lanche of Death!
What a pair! Our team uses a plow followed by a broom to keep the pedestrian/#bikenyc path clear on the #BrooklynBridge this morning
February 8, 2017
Well my goodness would you look at the time.
We're enjoying some eerily delightful springlike weather here in New York City, though there's a snowstorm due for tomorrow so presumably we'll get what's coming to us:
Given this, I made a point of throwing a leg over the old bicycle cycle this morning and basking in the February sun:
:
You know it's warm out when the suburbanites drive in from Jersey in their convertibles:
Between the blazer-clad guy in his Audi on one side of 5th Avenue and the wool-capped semi-professional bike blogger on the other I like to think we represent the entire depressingly narrow spectrum of white middle-age.
Speaking of high performance machines, the World Wide Internet Web has been abuzz recently with speculation that professional cyclocross bike rider Wout "There It is!" Van Aert is secreting a motor in his cyclocrossing bicycle:
Here's the video in question, and the salient bit begins at around 1:43:
(Open it in another window if you want controls, my IT person is on strike.)
When I first watched this I was 99% certain he did in fact have a motor. First, he attacks:
Then his rear wheel loses traction and kind of fishtails:
Causing him to bust into a sick-ass whip-skid that would have gotten the fixie set all hot and bothered back in aught-seven:
Then the rear wheel catches again and he kind of rockets forward, which is where it looks like he has a motor:
Indeed, it almost looks like he's holding onto a runaway bike:
"Somebody stop this thing!," you can almost hear him shouting:
And there it is:
However, after roughly 400 viewings I'm now 99% sure he didn't have a motor and that it was really just a nice save on his part. Of course, this isn't the first time Van Aert has been accused of mötödöping, and there was also this suspicious moment not too long ago:
Which was explained away thusly:
Hmmm. Like a Specialized dealer, I guess I have no choice but to buy it.
But I'll be watching you, Van Aert!*
*[This is 100% not true, I won't be watching you at all. I have no time or inclination to watch bike racing anymore and am only interested in incriminating mötödöping footage and roadie slapfights.]
The above notwithstanding, I have absolutely no doubt pro cyclists are using motors, and I also have no doubt amateur Freds are too. After all, they're ideal for helping you reach your ridiculous mileage goals:
Normal, really? I don't think so:
“When I say I’ll meet a friend, I’ll meet him,” says Melbourne, Australia-based Simon Matheson, who’s on track to cover more than 12,000 miles this year. “If he can’t do it, the impetus isn’t there to get out of bed.” Matheson, 47, rides with groups of 10 to 100 other riders nearly every day and finds the social aspect rewarding. “It’s the camaraderie, the catching up.”
Won't get out of bed if nobody's waiting for you? Only ride your bike in large groups? You may be suffering from Autophobia. Talk to your doctor and find out if Frederol is right for you.
For architect and former triathlete Andy Johnson of Louisville, Colorado, 4am wake-ups are crucial—but it took him a year to adjust. “I have a family with two young kids, so I get up very early and get in two or two-and-a-half hours every morning,” Johnson says. “If I don’t, I probably won’t ride that day. It’s my time. It’s a lifestyle.” He expects at least 10,000 miles this year.
Getting up at 4am every day for any other reason than a job you depend on for your livelihood? Again, not normal. Trust me, I used to get up at 4am on weekends to race my bike, and I wasted some of the best years of my life in the process.
“You have to figure out why you’re riding a bike,” says Tanner, already at nearly 9,000 miles this year. "For me it's a competitive thing. I like knowing when I go to a ride that I'm in control of how fast we're going.”
Wait a minute. I don't get in anywhere near that kind of mileage, yet not only do I know exactly why I'm riding a bike (usually to pick up either beer or diapers) but I'm also totally in control of how fast I'm going (usually not very).
I must be doing something wrong.
Lastly, more bad news for the oppressed drivers of New York City! Some kind of unhinged individual in Marxist clothing is running around Prospect Park with a Smug-ometer:
(Why don't you just make ten smugger and make ten be the top number and make that a little smugger?)
“We want to uncover how bad the problem is and further evidence that the park should be car-free,” said Transportation Alternatives executive director Paul Steely White.
Mayor DeBlasio outlawed driving on the park’s Ditmas Park-bound West Drive in 2015, but stopped short of banning cars from the green space altogether, with Prospect-Heights-bound motorists still allowed on East Drive between 7-9 am on weekdays and holidays.
I could not agree more. Back when I lived in Brooklyn, after a hard day of blogging, I'd throw my human child onto the erstwhile Big Dummy (now lovingly re-homed) and we'd knock around Prospect Park. It was all rather idyllic--until the park opened back up to motorists at 4:00 (if I recall correctly) and suddenly the park was transformed into a complete shitshow. And woe unto the cyclist or runner who was not watching the clock like a student waiting for dismissal, because the very second the park road opened up these asshole drivers would roar into the park and honk relentlessly at any poor schmucks who still happened to be using the car lane.
The fact that keeping cars out of public parks is anything less than a complete no-brainer is depressing. They've got the roads, and they've got Dunkin' Donuts. That should be enough.
Given this, I made a point of throwing a leg over the old bicycle cycle this morning and basking in the February sun:
:You know it's warm out when the suburbanites drive in from Jersey in their convertibles:
Between the blazer-clad guy in his Audi on one side of 5th Avenue and the wool-capped semi-professional bike blogger on the other I like to think we represent the entire depressingly narrow spectrum of white middle-age.
Speaking of high performance machines, the World Wide Internet Web has been abuzz recently with speculation that professional cyclocross bike rider Wout "There It is!" Van Aert is secreting a motor in his cyclocrossing bicycle:
Here's the video in question, and the salient bit begins at around 1:43:
(Open it in another window if you want controls, my IT person is on strike.)
When I first watched this I was 99% certain he did in fact have a motor. First, he attacks:
Then his rear wheel loses traction and kind of fishtails:
Causing him to bust into a sick-ass whip-skid that would have gotten the fixie set all hot and bothered back in aught-seven:
Then the rear wheel catches again and he kind of rockets forward, which is where it looks like he has a motor:
Indeed, it almost looks like he's holding onto a runaway bike:
"Somebody stop this thing!," you can almost hear him shouting:
And there it is:
However, after roughly 400 viewings I'm now 99% sure he didn't have a motor and that it was really just a nice save on his part. Of course, this isn't the first time Van Aert has been accused of mötödöping, and there was also this suspicious moment not too long ago:
Which was explained away thusly:
Hmmm. Like a Specialized dealer, I guess I have no choice but to buy it.
But I'll be watching you, Van Aert!*
*[This is 100% not true, I won't be watching you at all. I have no time or inclination to watch bike racing anymore and am only interested in incriminating mötödöping footage and roadie slapfights.]
The above notwithstanding, I have absolutely no doubt pro cyclists are using motors, and I also have no doubt amateur Freds are too. After all, they're ideal for helping you reach your ridiculous mileage goals:
How to fit 10,000 miles into your year: https://t.co/UTQt7ksggl pic.twitter.com/6a0g60cE0t— Bicycling Magazine (@BicyclingMag) February 8, 2017Riding 10,000 miles in a year is no small feat for the amateur cyclist. If eking out a few lunch rides a week takes a toll on your schedule, clocking an average of nearly 200 miles weekly (roughly 27 miles a day) is an intimidating prospect—but it’s not impossible. We found five riders with families, jobs, and, yes, normal lives who have managed to make significant dents in their cycling computer's memory.
Normal, really? I don't think so:
“When I say I’ll meet a friend, I’ll meet him,” says Melbourne, Australia-based Simon Matheson, who’s on track to cover more than 12,000 miles this year. “If he can’t do it, the impetus isn’t there to get out of bed.” Matheson, 47, rides with groups of 10 to 100 other riders nearly every day and finds the social aspect rewarding. “It’s the camaraderie, the catching up.”
Won't get out of bed if nobody's waiting for you? Only ride your bike in large groups? You may be suffering from Autophobia. Talk to your doctor and find out if Frederol is right for you.
For architect and former triathlete Andy Johnson of Louisville, Colorado, 4am wake-ups are crucial—but it took him a year to adjust. “I have a family with two young kids, so I get up very early and get in two or two-and-a-half hours every morning,” Johnson says. “If I don’t, I probably won’t ride that day. It’s my time. It’s a lifestyle.” He expects at least 10,000 miles this year.
Getting up at 4am every day for any other reason than a job you depend on for your livelihood? Again, not normal. Trust me, I used to get up at 4am on weekends to race my bike, and I wasted some of the best years of my life in the process.
“You have to figure out why you’re riding a bike,” says Tanner, already at nearly 9,000 miles this year. "For me it's a competitive thing. I like knowing when I go to a ride that I'm in control of how fast we're going.”
Wait a minute. I don't get in anywhere near that kind of mileage, yet not only do I know exactly why I'm riding a bike (usually to pick up either beer or diapers) but I'm also totally in control of how fast I'm going (usually not very).
I must be doing something wrong.
Lastly, more bad news for the oppressed drivers of New York City! Some kind of unhinged individual in Marxist clothing is running around Prospect Park with a Smug-ometer:
(Why don't you just make ten smugger and make ten be the top number and make that a little smugger?)“We want to uncover how bad the problem is and further evidence that the park should be car-free,” said Transportation Alternatives executive director Paul Steely White.
Mayor DeBlasio outlawed driving on the park’s Ditmas Park-bound West Drive in 2015, but stopped short of banning cars from the green space altogether, with Prospect-Heights-bound motorists still allowed on East Drive between 7-9 am on weekdays and holidays.
I could not agree more. Back when I lived in Brooklyn, after a hard day of blogging, I'd throw my human child onto the erstwhile Big Dummy (now lovingly re-homed) and we'd knock around Prospect Park. It was all rather idyllic--until the park opened back up to motorists at 4:00 (if I recall correctly) and suddenly the park was transformed into a complete shitshow. And woe unto the cyclist or runner who was not watching the clock like a student waiting for dismissal, because the very second the park road opened up these asshole drivers would roar into the park and honk relentlessly at any poor schmucks who still happened to be using the car lane.
The fact that keeping cars out of public parks is anything less than a complete no-brainer is depressing. They've got the roads, and they've got Dunkin' Donuts. That should be enough.
February 7, 2017
"Common sense," you say? Sorry, it's not ringing a bell.
As a semi-professional bike blogger, you can be sure that when someone offers me free content I take advantage of it:
With the latest acquisition of the US-based test lab Friction Facts, our team has been busy the last months working to release an improved formula of the fastest racing chains in the world - the CeramicSpeed UFO Racing Chains.
The new formula provides 15% less friction than the previous version and the lifetime of the optimisation is now prolonged to a minimum of 600 km/370 miles.
By the way, Friction Facts is a subsidiary of Fake News LLC.
From pro cycling to claims of increased performance due to enhanced bottom bracket stiffness, the bike industry invented fake news and don't you forget it:
(Bike reviews: now with colorful charts!)
It's hard to decide which category is funniest, but I think I've got to go with "pedaling response," because what does that even mean? Isn't that a function of hub engagement? And how do you score that on a scale? Either the hub engages or it doesn't and you destroy your crotch on your top tube. I mean sure, some hubs engage more quickly than others (or at least sound like they do, which is what most Freds base their assessments on), but come on.
I do admit however that the entire scoring system is nothing short of genius. Here's how it works:
1) Pick a vague, subjective ride characteristic;
1) Pick an arbitrary number (oh, I dunno, 15 maybe?) and make it the best;
2) Make sure you use decimal points when scoring the bike so the arbitrary scoring system seems incredibly precise.
And that's how you do pseudoscience.
In other bike tech news, here's yet another complete waste of money, time, and electronics courtesy of Kickstarter:
If you've ever used a bicycle bell, you know they're tiny unobtrusive mechanical devices that last roughly forever. Fortunately, somebody's finally corrected this problem by making one that rings through your phone:
"When you are out riding, all you do is press the Bellio button, and a loud bell sound will come from your phone."
Jesus fucking Christ. When I'm out riding, all I do is ring my bell, and a loud sound comes from my bell. SO WHY CAN'T IT JUST COME FROM THE BELL???
I don't know, but the guy who invented it sure looks smug about his invention, even by Australian standards:
But don't worry, because here's the good news:
"And the good news is, is that the phone can be kept safely stored in your pocket where it already lives."
Yes, if your goal is to project sound to people in your path, I can think of no better place for the source of that sound than buried deep in the pockets of your sweaty club cut cycling jersey just a few inches north of your ass crack.
Just think, until now we've been placing our primitive analog mechanical bells on our handlebars. What were we thinking?
I was also shocked to see that a bike video from Australia featured illicit footage of flagrant helmetlessness:
It was my understanding that this sort of thing was strictly forbidden by the Advertising Standards Bureau, so I've gone ahead and corrected it for them:
We can all rest easier now. After all, had someone seen the original footage they might have been tempted to imitate it and learn the truth the Australian government doesn't want you to know, which is that it's possible to ride a bicycle without wearing a helmet and not die.
Still, there are some undeniable advantages to an electronic smartphone bell that rings from your tramp stamp area. For example, it can bewilder people by making sounds that have nothing to do with bicycles:
"The Bellio bell sound is just like a traditional bell, but to give you some flexibility we have added some stretch goals to our campaign to make the bell sound configurable."
Such sounds include car horn:
Barking dog:
And rooster:
Because when pedestrians in urban areas hear rooster sounds the first thing that comes to mind is an approaching cyclist.
Really, if you want to take advantage of an electronic bell's potential to clear a path for you, why not have it make the sound of a gigantic wet fart?
This would also be highly effective in preventing bear attacks:
"With this feature enabled, the Bellio app will make your phone emit a continuous ringing bell, which is great for warning wildlife that you are approaching."
It's also great for making sure your phone is completely dead when you actually need it.
Incredibly, after all this, the inventor still expects you to give him money:
"Kickstarter, please help me bring the traditional bell into the future."
Absolutely fucking not.
Why don't you bring your look into the future, Captain Cargo Shorts?
Speaking of the future, Freds continue to be infatuated with Zwift:
On any given day, you can find a couple thousand riders pedaling away inside the virtual reality training game of Zwift. While the virtual courses of Watopia, London and Richmond will never compete with riding outside, Zwift can provide effective engagement for cyclists who are stuck riding inside on a trainer.
You're only "stuck riding inside on a trainer" if you're dumb enough to ride a trainer in the first place Sure, in my deep dark days of Fredness I too used to ride a trainer, but then I realized that riding a trainer is stupid. If you're stuck inside, why not do something that's enjoyable to do inside? Read a book. Watch TV. Interact with friends, family, and loved ones. Masturbate. All of these activities are optimized for indoor enjoyment, whereas cycling--even with an avatar and an Ant+ sensor unit stuck to your scranus--is not. Furthermore, there's no reason to attempt to maintain your fitness during spells of bad weather, because you totally suck, and it only takes like three rides outside to regain the meager, pathetic fitness you had before.
Yet instead of learning this important lesson Freds will no doubt pass their ridiculous behavior on to their kids:
If your bike-loving tyke wants to be "just like Mom and Dad"—especially when you're crushing your trainer ride on Zwift Island—then Fisher-Price has a product for you: the SmartCycle, a stationary bike that's designed to help kids learn through educational electronic games.
Horrifying.
With the latest acquisition of the US-based test lab Friction Facts, our team has been busy the last months working to release an improved formula of the fastest racing chains in the world - the CeramicSpeed UFO Racing Chains.
The new formula provides 15% less friction than the previous version and the lifetime of the optimisation is now prolonged to a minimum of 600 km/370 miles.
By the way, Friction Facts is a subsidiary of Fake News LLC.
From pro cycling to claims of increased performance due to enhanced bottom bracket stiffness, the bike industry invented fake news and don't you forget it:
(Bike reviews: now with colorful charts!)
It's hard to decide which category is funniest, but I think I've got to go with "pedaling response," because what does that even mean? Isn't that a function of hub engagement? And how do you score that on a scale? Either the hub engages or it doesn't and you destroy your crotch on your top tube. I mean sure, some hubs engage more quickly than others (or at least sound like they do, which is what most Freds base their assessments on), but come on.
I do admit however that the entire scoring system is nothing short of genius. Here's how it works:
1) Pick a vague, subjective ride characteristic;
1) Pick an arbitrary number (oh, I dunno, 15 maybe?) and make it the best;
2) Make sure you use decimal points when scoring the bike so the arbitrary scoring system seems incredibly precise.
And that's how you do pseudoscience.
In other bike tech news, here's yet another complete waste of money, time, and electronics courtesy of Kickstarter:
If you've ever used a bicycle bell, you know they're tiny unobtrusive mechanical devices that last roughly forever. Fortunately, somebody's finally corrected this problem by making one that rings through your phone:
"When you are out riding, all you do is press the Bellio button, and a loud bell sound will come from your phone."
Jesus fucking Christ. When I'm out riding, all I do is ring my bell, and a loud sound comes from my bell. SO WHY CAN'T IT JUST COME FROM THE BELL???
I don't know, but the guy who invented it sure looks smug about his invention, even by Australian standards:
But don't worry, because here's the good news:
"And the good news is, is that the phone can be kept safely stored in your pocket where it already lives."
Yes, if your goal is to project sound to people in your path, I can think of no better place for the source of that sound than buried deep in the pockets of your sweaty club cut cycling jersey just a few inches north of your ass crack.
Just think, until now we've been placing our primitive analog mechanical bells on our handlebars. What were we thinking?
I was also shocked to see that a bike video from Australia featured illicit footage of flagrant helmetlessness:
It was my understanding that this sort of thing was strictly forbidden by the Advertising Standards Bureau, so I've gone ahead and corrected it for them:
We can all rest easier now. After all, had someone seen the original footage they might have been tempted to imitate it and learn the truth the Australian government doesn't want you to know, which is that it's possible to ride a bicycle without wearing a helmet and not die.
Still, there are some undeniable advantages to an electronic smartphone bell that rings from your tramp stamp area. For example, it can bewilder people by making sounds that have nothing to do with bicycles:
"The Bellio bell sound is just like a traditional bell, but to give you some flexibility we have added some stretch goals to our campaign to make the bell sound configurable."
Such sounds include car horn:
Barking dog:
And rooster:
Because when pedestrians in urban areas hear rooster sounds the first thing that comes to mind is an approaching cyclist.
Really, if you want to take advantage of an electronic bell's potential to clear a path for you, why not have it make the sound of a gigantic wet fart?
This would also be highly effective in preventing bear attacks:
"With this feature enabled, the Bellio app will make your phone emit a continuous ringing bell, which is great for warning wildlife that you are approaching."
It's also great for making sure your phone is completely dead when you actually need it.
Incredibly, after all this, the inventor still expects you to give him money:
"Kickstarter, please help me bring the traditional bell into the future."
Absolutely fucking not.
Why don't you bring your look into the future, Captain Cargo Shorts?
Speaking of the future, Freds continue to be infatuated with Zwift:
On any given day, you can find a couple thousand riders pedaling away inside the virtual reality training game of Zwift. While the virtual courses of Watopia, London and Richmond will never compete with riding outside, Zwift can provide effective engagement for cyclists who are stuck riding inside on a trainer.
You're only "stuck riding inside on a trainer" if you're dumb enough to ride a trainer in the first place Sure, in my deep dark days of Fredness I too used to ride a trainer, but then I realized that riding a trainer is stupid. If you're stuck inside, why not do something that's enjoyable to do inside? Read a book. Watch TV. Interact with friends, family, and loved ones. Masturbate. All of these activities are optimized for indoor enjoyment, whereas cycling--even with an avatar and an Ant+ sensor unit stuck to your scranus--is not. Furthermore, there's no reason to attempt to maintain your fitness during spells of bad weather, because you totally suck, and it only takes like three rides outside to regain the meager, pathetic fitness you had before.
Yet instead of learning this important lesson Freds will no doubt pass their ridiculous behavior on to their kids:
If your bike-loving tyke wants to be "just like Mom and Dad"—especially when you're crushing your trainer ride on Zwift Island—then Fisher-Price has a product for you: the SmartCycle, a stationary bike that's designed to help kids learn through educational electronic games.
Horrifying.
BikeSnobNYC's Blog
- BikeSnobNYC's profile
- 25 followers
BikeSnobNYC isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
![[image error]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--PH60EGvHl8/WKG7lS2gJSI/AAAAAAABMXE/POdMG-H6r5EYOPJiddadrP-PeO1VonjUQCLcB/s1600/summer.jpeg){kind=link}
