BikeSnobNYC's Blog, page 50
February 6, 2017
I'm back and things have only gotten worse.
The George Washington Bridge:
Famous for Chris Christie's cockblocking antics, it is also the world's busiest motor vehicle bridge, carrying well over 100 million car- and truckloads of schmucks annually between New York and New Jersey.
Additionally, the George Washington Bridge carries all of New York City's Freds and tridorks out of the city every weekend, and if the United States of America were a giant Mad Fold-in you could easily connect the Golden Gate and George Washington Bridges without anybody noticing the difference:
Alas, there are two (2) major problems with the bike path on the George Washington Bridge. The first problem is that it's a two-way bridge, which means that unfortunately all those Freds and tridorks eventually manage to find their way back to New York City instead of staying in Jersey where they belong. The second problem is that the path is very narrow, yet even though the Port Authority is embarking upon a restructuring process they're only going to renovate it in a half-assed way. So a movement is afoot to address this:
Complete the George Washington Bridge
Between 2017 and 2024, the Port Authority will rip out and restore the 1931-era paths on the George Washington Bridge as part of a $1.9 billion recabling and restoration project.
The GWB is the sole bike-able connector between North Jersey and New York City. Its 7’ paths are dangerously overcrowded at 3700 cyclists per day and that use is growing 10% per year. If that sustains, we’ll see 9,000 cyclists per day by the time the paths re-open in 2024.
The PA should seize this once-in-a-lifespan opportunity to widen the paths to comply with national standards for a high use bicycle-pedestrian facility, but their plan is to restore them as sidewalks. Which means sooner rather than later, cyclists will have to walk.
This will thwart efforts to establish a regional bike read for decades, along with durable enhancements to competitiveness, sustainability, resilience, tourism and public health.
Given that the George Washington Bridge is arguably the crown jewel of New York City-area recreational cycling, it would make sense for the Port Authority to grace it with a world-class bike path, which is why you can be absolutely sure that they won't.
In other words, should my children become road cyclists one day (which is not allowed under my roof, but once they grow up and move out what can I do?), it's comforting to know they'll be dodging wobbly tridorks on a ridiculously narrow path just like their old man once did.
(Though all of this is probably moot since Mexico won't pay for the wall so our shitbag president will probably start tearing down the bridge and using it for building materials any day now.)
Speaking of the George Washington Bridge, there was a time I rode over it multiple times a week, but now that I'm a recovering Fred I only venture over it once in awhile. As such, I now notice changes in Fredly style and equipment much more acutely, thanks to the "boiling frog" effect. Indeed, yesterday I found myself on the dreaded Route 9W corridor, and I noticed two (2) things:
1) Crabon downtubes have reached absolutely stupendous proportions which means you can see which brand of stupid plastic bike Fred overpaid for from a distance of at least a mile;
2) Thanks to the preponderance of Giro Air Attack helmets the transformation of Freds into giant rolling spermatozoa is officially complete:
Of course I realize I'm somewhat prejudiced by age and retrogrouchery, but I maintain that Freds look more ridiculous today than at any other point in human history, including this one:
This is partly why my George Washington Bridge rides are now few and far between, and why I prefer to scurry about on some of the less-traveled trails of the lower Hudson Valley where I can look ridiculous in private:
I was very wise to move to my current abode, for if I point my bike north I can ride for hours without subjecting myself to the indignity of pavement, yet if if I point my bike south I can still revel in all the indignities of urban cycling, such as people using bike lanes as loading zones:
People using bike lanes to wash cement trucks:
People using bike lanes to repair automobiles:
People using bike lanes to deliver corn chips covered in disgusting flavored Trump-colored chemical powder:
And of course people using bike lanes to just hang out in cars with tinted windows and Pennsylvania plates:
Pretty sure the way it works is when your New York State driver's license is revoked the state of Pennsylvania just sends you a license plate and vehicle registration automatically.
They should call it the "second chance" state.
After that you just work your way down the eastern seaboard, which is why the absolute worst New York City drivers have these warning signs on their cars:
If you see a car in New York City with one of these on it just save yourself the trouble and ride right into the nearest lamppost.
Anyway, I make sure to take plenty of urban forays, if only to hone my survival instincts. For example, not too long ago I tested my bike-locking skills by leaving my Surly in Midtown for a few hours:
I wouldn't normally do this (the Ironic Orange Julius Bike is my "lock-up bike"), and I'd also have been better off using my heavy chain, but I didn't feel like carrying my heavy chain that day and sometimes you've got to live dangerously.
The main lock is a u-lock securing the bike Sheldon-style, then there's a second cable lock on the frame and the front wheel as well as a third (!) cable lock for the saddle:
Naturally when I tweeted this picture someone questioned the Sheldon technique and posted this:
Though I maintain if a thief wants the bike they're getting it and the amount of time they'd need to do so in either scenario is pretty much a wash. If anything my real concern was that someone might steal my cockpit again:
(And yes, if someone wanted the front end of a Surly bad enough they could certainly have opened the S&S couplers, which would have been worth it for the post-theft photos alone.)
Fortunately nobody did, and I found the bicycle unmolested upon my return. I also had a new neighbor:
That's one u-lock Sheldoning the rear wheel and another u-lock securing the front wheel to the pedal, which was a new one for me, and while I suppose it could be defeated with a few tools I suppose it's more than enough to discourage the opportunist.
Speaking of the indignity of urban cycling, the other day I was riding home under the elevated subway (yes, the New York City Subway is still the subway when it's above ground, just like an airplane is still an airplane after it lands, duh) when this car service driver blew by me:
Riding under subway tracks is a sub-discipline of New York City cycling that comes with its own unique set of challenges and frustrations. Specifically, positioning yourself optimally in relation to the columns can be difficult, and while you may be tempted to stay to the right of them and ride next to the parked cars you're liable to get trapped in the "door zone" or blocked by a double-parker.
Anyway, this driver had no such compunctions, and was using the little strip of roadway between the parked cars and the columns to bypass sluggish traffic. He was doing so at very high speed, and in fact clipped at least two or three rear-view mirrors in the process, which was kind of funny given his Vision Zero bumper sticker:
And yes, in case you're wondering, he's clearly racking up those fines:
This system only reflects camera and parking violations, by the way. Moving violations is a whole other thing not reflected here. But yes, clearly this is someone overqualified to be driving people around for a living.
Yet incredibly we still treat driver incompetence like harmless whimsy:
There I was, a middle-aged woman who had just sideswiped a New York City bus. The bus veered to the curb, and the passengers were discharged, shaking their heads.
Usually selfish drivers inconvenience entire busloads of people by double-parking or blocking bus stops, but sure, sometimes they go the extra mile by ending the bus ride altogether.
I waited for the driver to glare at me, but his face was impassive.
As I wended my way to his side, I burst into tears.
“I’m so sorry,” I said. “It was all my fault, and I don’t know how it happened. Of course I’ll pay for all the damages.”
This is right out of the driver handbook which states quite clearly that in the event of a collision you should profess your total incompetence and attempt to throw money at the problem.
“There doesn’t seem to be any damage, ma’am,” he said, his gentle manner eliciting a fresh round of sobs. “Let’s be very thankful no one was hurt, and even the bus was undamaged, so please don’t cry. This happens all the time. I’m going to call my supervisor — that’s the protocol — and he’ll come inspect the bus and write a report. Why don’t you sit in your car while we wait?”
Yeah, he wasn't trying to make you feel better, he's probably happy because now he gets to claim disability for the rest of the year.
Here's a crazy thought: if you can't drive around without hitting a goddamn city bus then you shouldn't be allowed to drive at all.
Same thing goes for people who can't park or comprehend basic signage:
Act II
I notice that although the sign says one-hour parking, it’s from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. That won’t work for my 6 p.m. dinner date.
I have to get out of the spot, but the FedEx truck is still there. I try to back out, hit the curb, almost hit the truck and cannot get out. Another guy starts to direct me: Turn the wheel, up on the curb, straighten out. He gets me out of the space.
Thank you!
YOU CLEARLY CAN'T DRIVE. Surrender your keys and license immediately. And why the hell are you driving to a dinner date on the Upper West Side anyway? If nothing else, you're liable to run into Ben Bowman and his Tire Iron of Justice.
I give up on Broadway and head to 104th Street. I find a spot right away, and then I see some other spots. This looks suspicious — is it a no-standing zone?
I get out of my car, looking for a sign. Yet another guy asks if I need something. When I explain that I don’t know whether I can park there, he says he’ll find out.
He runs down the street, looks at the sign and runs back.
“It’s fine, lady,” he says.
Thank you, New York!
You know how to tell if it's a no-standing zone? Look for a fucking sign that says "no standing." As someone who drives a car sometimes I have absolutely no patience for other drivers who can't interpret signage. I've often been stopped while walking by drivers who can't figure out the street signs and who ask me, "Am I allowed to park here?" You might as well ask me to help you tie your shoes or wipe your ass for you. Figure it out your damn self. Not only do you create traffic, take up space, and occasionally hit buses, but you can't even be bothered to read a goddamn sign before you take up all that public space?
Cyclists get a lot of crap for being smug but there is absolutely no lazier or more self-entitled creature than a New York City driver.
Speaking of which, remember John Cassidy's classic New Yorker anti-bike lane story? Well he's doing an AMA today:
Someone should ask him if he's still got that Jaguar.
Famous for Chris Christie's cockblocking antics, it is also the world's busiest motor vehicle bridge, carrying well over 100 million car- and truckloads of schmucks annually between New York and New Jersey.
Additionally, the George Washington Bridge carries all of New York City's Freds and tridorks out of the city every weekend, and if the United States of America were a giant Mad Fold-in you could easily connect the Golden Gate and George Washington Bridges without anybody noticing the difference:
Alas, there are two (2) major problems with the bike path on the George Washington Bridge. The first problem is that it's a two-way bridge, which means that unfortunately all those Freds and tridorks eventually manage to find their way back to New York City instead of staying in Jersey where they belong. The second problem is that the path is very narrow, yet even though the Port Authority is embarking upon a restructuring process they're only going to renovate it in a half-assed way. So a movement is afoot to address this:
Complete the George Washington Bridge
Between 2017 and 2024, the Port Authority will rip out and restore the 1931-era paths on the George Washington Bridge as part of a $1.9 billion recabling and restoration project.
The GWB is the sole bike-able connector between North Jersey and New York City. Its 7’ paths are dangerously overcrowded at 3700 cyclists per day and that use is growing 10% per year. If that sustains, we’ll see 9,000 cyclists per day by the time the paths re-open in 2024.
The PA should seize this once-in-a-lifespan opportunity to widen the paths to comply with national standards for a high use bicycle-pedestrian facility, but their plan is to restore them as sidewalks. Which means sooner rather than later, cyclists will have to walk.
This will thwart efforts to establish a regional bike read for decades, along with durable enhancements to competitiveness, sustainability, resilience, tourism and public health.
Given that the George Washington Bridge is arguably the crown jewel of New York City-area recreational cycling, it would make sense for the Port Authority to grace it with a world-class bike path, which is why you can be absolutely sure that they won't.
In other words, should my children become road cyclists one day (which is not allowed under my roof, but once they grow up and move out what can I do?), it's comforting to know they'll be dodging wobbly tridorks on a ridiculously narrow path just like their old man once did.
(Though all of this is probably moot since Mexico won't pay for the wall so our shitbag president will probably start tearing down the bridge and using it for building materials any day now.)
Speaking of the George Washington Bridge, there was a time I rode over it multiple times a week, but now that I'm a recovering Fred I only venture over it once in awhile. As such, I now notice changes in Fredly style and equipment much more acutely, thanks to the "boiling frog" effect. Indeed, yesterday I found myself on the dreaded Route 9W corridor, and I noticed two (2) things:
1) Crabon downtubes have reached absolutely stupendous proportions which means you can see which brand of stupid plastic bike Fred overpaid for from a distance of at least a mile;
2) Thanks to the preponderance of Giro Air Attack helmets the transformation of Freds into giant rolling spermatozoa is officially complete:
Of course I realize I'm somewhat prejudiced by age and retrogrouchery, but I maintain that Freds look more ridiculous today than at any other point in human history, including this one:
This is partly why my George Washington Bridge rides are now few and far between, and why I prefer to scurry about on some of the less-traveled trails of the lower Hudson Valley where I can look ridiculous in private:
I was very wise to move to my current abode, for if I point my bike north I can ride for hours without subjecting myself to the indignity of pavement, yet if if I point my bike south I can still revel in all the indignities of urban cycling, such as people using bike lanes as loading zones:
People using bike lanes to wash cement trucks:
People using bike lanes to repair automobiles:
People using bike lanes to deliver corn chips covered in disgusting flavored Trump-colored chemical powder:
And of course people using bike lanes to just hang out in cars with tinted windows and Pennsylvania plates:
Pretty sure the way it works is when your New York State driver's license is revoked the state of Pennsylvania just sends you a license plate and vehicle registration automatically.
They should call it the "second chance" state.
After that you just work your way down the eastern seaboard, which is why the absolute worst New York City drivers have these warning signs on their cars:
If you see a car in New York City with one of these on it just save yourself the trouble and ride right into the nearest lamppost.
Anyway, I make sure to take plenty of urban forays, if only to hone my survival instincts. For example, not too long ago I tested my bike-locking skills by leaving my Surly in Midtown for a few hours:
I wouldn't normally do this (the Ironic Orange Julius Bike is my "lock-up bike"), and I'd also have been better off using my heavy chain, but I didn't feel like carrying my heavy chain that day and sometimes you've got to live dangerously.
The main lock is a u-lock securing the bike Sheldon-style, then there's a second cable lock on the frame and the front wheel as well as a third (!) cable lock for the saddle:
Naturally when I tweeted this picture someone questioned the Sheldon technique and posted this:
Though I maintain if a thief wants the bike they're getting it and the amount of time they'd need to do so in either scenario is pretty much a wash. If anything my real concern was that someone might steal my cockpit again:
(And yes, if someone wanted the front end of a Surly bad enough they could certainly have opened the S&S couplers, which would have been worth it for the post-theft photos alone.)
Fortunately nobody did, and I found the bicycle unmolested upon my return. I also had a new neighbor:
That's one u-lock Sheldoning the rear wheel and another u-lock securing the front wheel to the pedal, which was a new one for me, and while I suppose it could be defeated with a few tools I suppose it's more than enough to discourage the opportunist.
Speaking of the indignity of urban cycling, the other day I was riding home under the elevated subway (yes, the New York City Subway is still the subway when it's above ground, just like an airplane is still an airplane after it lands, duh) when this car service driver blew by me:
Riding under subway tracks is a sub-discipline of New York City cycling that comes with its own unique set of challenges and frustrations. Specifically, positioning yourself optimally in relation to the columns can be difficult, and while you may be tempted to stay to the right of them and ride next to the parked cars you're liable to get trapped in the "door zone" or blocked by a double-parker.
Anyway, this driver had no such compunctions, and was using the little strip of roadway between the parked cars and the columns to bypass sluggish traffic. He was doing so at very high speed, and in fact clipped at least two or three rear-view mirrors in the process, which was kind of funny given his Vision Zero bumper sticker:
And yes, in case you're wondering, he's clearly racking up those fines:
This system only reflects camera and parking violations, by the way. Moving violations is a whole other thing not reflected here. But yes, clearly this is someone overqualified to be driving people around for a living.
Yet incredibly we still treat driver incompetence like harmless whimsy:
A driver collides with a bus and is taken aback by the reaction the accident elicits. https://t.co/mHv4iqQ66Z— NYT Metro Desk (@NYTMetro) February 3, 2017Dear Diary:
There I was, a middle-aged woman who had just sideswiped a New York City bus. The bus veered to the curb, and the passengers were discharged, shaking their heads.
Usually selfish drivers inconvenience entire busloads of people by double-parking or blocking bus stops, but sure, sometimes they go the extra mile by ending the bus ride altogether.
I waited for the driver to glare at me, but his face was impassive.
As I wended my way to his side, I burst into tears.
“I’m so sorry,” I said. “It was all my fault, and I don’t know how it happened. Of course I’ll pay for all the damages.”
This is right out of the driver handbook which states quite clearly that in the event of a collision you should profess your total incompetence and attempt to throw money at the problem.
“There doesn’t seem to be any damage, ma’am,” he said, his gentle manner eliciting a fresh round of sobs. “Let’s be very thankful no one was hurt, and even the bus was undamaged, so please don’t cry. This happens all the time. I’m going to call my supervisor — that’s the protocol — and he’ll come inspect the bus and write a report. Why don’t you sit in your car while we wait?”
Yeah, he wasn't trying to make you feel better, he's probably happy because now he gets to claim disability for the rest of the year.
Here's a crazy thought: if you can't drive around without hitting a goddamn city bus then you shouldn't be allowed to drive at all.
Same thing goes for people who can't park or comprehend basic signage:
It takes a village to help someone park a car.https://t.co/HcmX2DKpJb— Bike Snob NYC (@bikesnobnyc) February 2, 2017
Act II
I notice that although the sign says one-hour parking, it’s from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. That won’t work for my 6 p.m. dinner date.
I have to get out of the spot, but the FedEx truck is still there. I try to back out, hit the curb, almost hit the truck and cannot get out. Another guy starts to direct me: Turn the wheel, up on the curb, straighten out. He gets me out of the space.
Thank you!
YOU CLEARLY CAN'T DRIVE. Surrender your keys and license immediately. And why the hell are you driving to a dinner date on the Upper West Side anyway? If nothing else, you're liable to run into Ben Bowman and his Tire Iron of Justice.
I give up on Broadway and head to 104th Street. I find a spot right away, and then I see some other spots. This looks suspicious — is it a no-standing zone?
I get out of my car, looking for a sign. Yet another guy asks if I need something. When I explain that I don’t know whether I can park there, he says he’ll find out.
He runs down the street, looks at the sign and runs back.
“It’s fine, lady,” he says.
Thank you, New York!
You know how to tell if it's a no-standing zone? Look for a fucking sign that says "no standing." As someone who drives a car sometimes I have absolutely no patience for other drivers who can't interpret signage. I've often been stopped while walking by drivers who can't figure out the street signs and who ask me, "Am I allowed to park here?" You might as well ask me to help you tie your shoes or wipe your ass for you. Figure it out your damn self. Not only do you create traffic, take up space, and occasionally hit buses, but you can't even be bothered to read a goddamn sign before you take up all that public space?
Cyclists get a lot of crap for being smug but there is absolutely no lazier or more self-entitled creature than a New York City driver.
Speaking of which, remember John Cassidy's classic New Yorker anti-bike lane story? Well he's doing an AMA today:
Ask @JohnCassidy your questions. pic.twitter.com/XEFsfTs3Mn— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) February 6, 2017
Someone should ask him if he's still got that Jaguar.
January 31, 2017
Sorry, but I couldn't let this one go.
I realize I said I was out of the office until Monday, February 6th, but that was before I saw this story on NY1:
Before I begin, I should say that I enjoy NY1, and like many households in this city we begin our weekday mornings with anchorperson and affable Canadian (is there any other kind?) Pat Kiernan. However, this particular story is just...oy. [Winces and massages temples.] And it begins with this guy:
For 13 years, Ben Bowman has taken part in a ritual all too familiar to city car owners who park on the street. Twice a week, he moves his Jeep from one side of West 68th St. to the other to make way for street cleaners.
W. 68th Street is in the vicinity of Lincoln Center and numerous other cultural institutions, educational facilities, and famous landmarks. If you live on W. 68th Street you can walk to everything from the Metropolitan Opera to the Dakota to an Imax movie theater to a Lowe's Home Improvement to a Trader fucking Joe's. It is also extremely well served by public transit should you need to leave the neighborhood. Given this, it probably won't surprise you to learn that free street parking is at a premium. Yet, despite all this, Ben Bowman opts to deal with the hassle of keeping not just any car but this dumbass Jeep with a fucking light bar on the roof because you need that in the middle of Manhattan:
Hey, I'm sure Ben Bowman has his reasons for wasting two days a week amid this embarrassment of cultural riches in order to move a soccer mom car on steroids from one side of the street to the other. Maybe he's an avid outdoorsman who makes frequent trips to the country. Maybe his job requires him to haul lots of equipment at a moment's notice. Or maybe he just likes the damn thing. And I wouldn't care, either, except that it's turning him into a raving fucking lunatic:
With space at a premium, things can get ugly, such as the time another driver snuck into a spot Bowman had been waiting to take.
"I went to my truck and pulled out my tire iron and stood by his door, and I said 'You can have this spot, but you're taking a beating when you get out."
Yes, here's Ben Bowman, Upper West Side resident, inhabitant of one of the most rarefied and privileged bubbles in the United States and therefore the world, explaining to a TV camera that he threatened to assault somebody with a tire iron for taking the parking space that he doesn't even fucking own.
Yet incredibly this is not a news story about mental illness, or even about how Ben Bowman should just move the hell upstate already. It's a story about how hard it is for unfortunate souls such as Ben Bowman to find free car storage on a small island with excellent 24-hour mass transit that also happens to be the most densely populated county in the United States:
Drivers say tensions and the time it takes to find a space have been increasing since the city began eliminating parking spaces to install Citi Bike stations and dedicated bike lanes.
Here, let me fix that for you:
Drivers say tensions and the time it takes to find a space have been increasing since the city began eliminating parking spaces to install Citi Bike stations and dedicated bike lanes.
That's better.
In Manhattan alone, the city has eliminated at least 2,330 parking spaces south of 125th St. to accommodate bike lanes and bike-sharing stations, according to city records obtained by NY1 nine months after filing a request under the Freedom of Information Law.
I like how they make it sound as though they've uncovered a massive conspiracy and not simply the city's well-documented efforts to keep its citizens safe and make it easier for people to get around.
Gone, for example, are 340 spots along 1st Ave, 300 spots along 2nd Ave., and 140 on Columbus Ave. just for bike lanes.
What a tragedy! 2,330 parking spaces gone, never to return! Lost in the mists of time, like the Lenape Indians and the verdant forests and sparkling streams that once covered this isle! Yeah, it does sound like a lot of parking spaces--until you consider that the population of Manhattan below 125th Street is approximately 1,039,000, which means this represents a loss of approximately .002 parking spots per person.
Big fucking deal.
But if you don't feel bad for people like Ben Bowman, perhaps you'll feel bad for the people who deliver their appliances:
Car owners aren't alone in suffering. The growth of bike lanes has made delivery work even more challenging. These guys had to double-park on Columbus and walk a half-block to deliver a stove and refrigerator.
Okay, wait a minute: if the bike lane has made this job more challenging then why did they end up parking on Columbus, which is the street with the bike lane on it? Why didn't they just park in front of the delivery address? Oh, I dunno, maybe because of the giant truck unloading a Dumpster?!?
Nice try blaming the bike lane though.
Officials say that with the population growing, it's essential to get people out of cars and onto bikes. The city's transportation commissioner, Polly Trottenberg, says cars still rule the streets.
"We dedicate about 95 percent of (the streets) to automobiles," Trottenberg said, "and actually only about 5 percent to buses and cycles. And yet buses and cycles are the way we are going to carry the most people."
That's right. And check out the Smugerati. See how they're smiling as they roll over the graves of all those dead parking spaces? (Actually the parking spaces are still there and have just been moved over a bit but we're not supposed to know that.) They don't look like they want to bash anybody with a tire iron, do they?
No they don't. But it's important to remember that in New York City anybody who rides a bike is a wealthy elitist (except for food delivery people, but they don't count), whereas anybody who drives a car is "middle class:"
That's little solace to middle class residents like Valerie Perez who need a car and can't afford garage space.
She walks with a cane and has parked in the East 80s since 1970.
Yeah, in 1970 there was only one area code for the whole city too, and you could smoke at the doctor's office while eating fondue in the waiting room. But you know what? Things have a way of changing over the course of forty-seven years. Speaking of change, someone should tell Ms. Perez tha they just opened up a brand new subway line right in her neighborhood. In fact, between all the trains and the buses I don't think there's a more accessible neighborhood than the East 80s in the entire country:
And I don't mean to be hard on Ms. Perez, who is undoubtedly a lovely person who is simply used to doing things her own way in her own neighborhood. But to blame bike lanes because it's harder to park on the Upper East Side in 2017 than it was in 1970 is more than a little unfair:
"It's worse than ever. It's been worse since they put the bike lanes in."
Is it because of the bike lanes? Or is it because there are over 140,000 more registered vehicles in New York City in 2015 than there were in 2007, and about 380,000 more than there were in 1970?
I'm gong to go ahead and say it's the latter, and that we need the bike lanes because it's the only mode of private surface transportation left that's got any long-term viability.
I mean really, there were over 40,000 more registered vehicles in New York City in 2015 than there were in 2014. Should the city have added 40,000 more parkings spaces in a single year?
Of course not:
"It's a hindrance to expect that's it your constitutional right to park for free on every street in New York City. That can't happen."
Unfortunately, Americans have a poor understanding on their constitutional rights, which explains everything from our willingness to bludgeon our neighbors with tire irons over public street space to our current president. Also, good, honest, salt-of-the-earth middle-class people who drive cars in Manhattan resent being reminded of this by jet-setting bicycling advocates with swashbuckling mustaches.
And finally, the article goes out in a crescendo of irony:
"This Citi Bike station on Columbus Avenue extends an entire block. It holds 67 bikes but at the expense of about nine cars."
Nine cars. Nine measly cars! Cars owned by crowbar-wielding psychopaths like Ben Bowman who only drive them back and forth across the street! Actually, that's not even true. It's metered parking on Columbus, which means it wasn't even long-term parking for those decent hard-working middle-class New Yorkers, it was just a little extra coin for the city from the unlucky schmucks who couldn't find free parking. Meanwhile, the Citi Bike station now holds sixty-seven bikes that anybody can use--and they are using them, judging from the fact that the station is at that moment almost completely empty.
Seems to me the city's not losing parking spaces, it's gaining them.
I really hope he addresses that in Part Two, but I ain't exactly holding my breath.
And with that, I resume my absence, and I'll see you back here on Monday, February 6th with regular updates.
Your's Truely,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
Before I begin, I should say that I enjoy NY1, and like many households in this city we begin our weekday mornings with anchorperson and affable Canadian (is there any other kind?) Pat Kiernan. However, this particular story is just...oy. [Winces and massages temples.] And it begins with this guy:
For 13 years, Ben Bowman has taken part in a ritual all too familiar to city car owners who park on the street. Twice a week, he moves his Jeep from one side of West 68th St. to the other to make way for street cleaners.
W. 68th Street is in the vicinity of Lincoln Center and numerous other cultural institutions, educational facilities, and famous landmarks. If you live on W. 68th Street you can walk to everything from the Metropolitan Opera to the Dakota to an Imax movie theater to a Lowe's Home Improvement to a Trader fucking Joe's. It is also extremely well served by public transit should you need to leave the neighborhood. Given this, it probably won't surprise you to learn that free street parking is at a premium. Yet, despite all this, Ben Bowman opts to deal with the hassle of keeping not just any car but this dumbass Jeep with a fucking light bar on the roof because you need that in the middle of Manhattan:
Hey, I'm sure Ben Bowman has his reasons for wasting two days a week amid this embarrassment of cultural riches in order to move a soccer mom car on steroids from one side of the street to the other. Maybe he's an avid outdoorsman who makes frequent trips to the country. Maybe his job requires him to haul lots of equipment at a moment's notice. Or maybe he just likes the damn thing. And I wouldn't care, either, except that it's turning him into a raving fucking lunatic:
With space at a premium, things can get ugly, such as the time another driver snuck into a spot Bowman had been waiting to take.
"I went to my truck and pulled out my tire iron and stood by his door, and I said 'You can have this spot, but you're taking a beating when you get out."
Yes, here's Ben Bowman, Upper West Side resident, inhabitant of one of the most rarefied and privileged bubbles in the United States and therefore the world, explaining to a TV camera that he threatened to assault somebody with a tire iron for taking the parking space that he doesn't even fucking own.
Yet incredibly this is not a news story about mental illness, or even about how Ben Bowman should just move the hell upstate already. It's a story about how hard it is for unfortunate souls such as Ben Bowman to find free car storage on a small island with excellent 24-hour mass transit that also happens to be the most densely populated county in the United States:
Drivers say tensions and the time it takes to find a space have been increasing since the city began eliminating parking spaces to install Citi Bike stations and dedicated bike lanes.
Here, let me fix that for you:
Drivers say tensions and the time it takes to find a space have been increasing since the city began eliminating parking spaces to install Citi Bike stations and dedicated bike lanes.
That's better.
In Manhattan alone, the city has eliminated at least 2,330 parking spaces south of 125th St. to accommodate bike lanes and bike-sharing stations, according to city records obtained by NY1 nine months after filing a request under the Freedom of Information Law.
I like how they make it sound as though they've uncovered a massive conspiracy and not simply the city's well-documented efforts to keep its citizens safe and make it easier for people to get around.
Gone, for example, are 340 spots along 1st Ave, 300 spots along 2nd Ave., and 140 on Columbus Ave. just for bike lanes.
What a tragedy! 2,330 parking spaces gone, never to return! Lost in the mists of time, like the Lenape Indians and the verdant forests and sparkling streams that once covered this isle! Yeah, it does sound like a lot of parking spaces--until you consider that the population of Manhattan below 125th Street is approximately 1,039,000, which means this represents a loss of approximately .002 parking spots per person.
Big fucking deal.
But if you don't feel bad for people like Ben Bowman, perhaps you'll feel bad for the people who deliver their appliances:
Car owners aren't alone in suffering. The growth of bike lanes has made delivery work even more challenging. These guys had to double-park on Columbus and walk a half-block to deliver a stove and refrigerator.
Okay, wait a minute: if the bike lane has made this job more challenging then why did they end up parking on Columbus, which is the street with the bike lane on it? Why didn't they just park in front of the delivery address? Oh, I dunno, maybe because of the giant truck unloading a Dumpster?!?
Nice try blaming the bike lane though.
Officials say that with the population growing, it's essential to get people out of cars and onto bikes. The city's transportation commissioner, Polly Trottenberg, says cars still rule the streets.
"We dedicate about 95 percent of (the streets) to automobiles," Trottenberg said, "and actually only about 5 percent to buses and cycles. And yet buses and cycles are the way we are going to carry the most people."
That's right. And check out the Smugerati. See how they're smiling as they roll over the graves of all those dead parking spaces? (Actually the parking spaces are still there and have just been moved over a bit but we're not supposed to know that.) They don't look like they want to bash anybody with a tire iron, do they?
No they don't. But it's important to remember that in New York City anybody who rides a bike is a wealthy elitist (except for food delivery people, but they don't count), whereas anybody who drives a car is "middle class:"
That's little solace to middle class residents like Valerie Perez who need a car and can't afford garage space.
She walks with a cane and has parked in the East 80s since 1970.
Yeah, in 1970 there was only one area code for the whole city too, and you could smoke at the doctor's office while eating fondue in the waiting room. But you know what? Things have a way of changing over the course of forty-seven years. Speaking of change, someone should tell Ms. Perez tha they just opened up a brand new subway line right in her neighborhood. In fact, between all the trains and the buses I don't think there's a more accessible neighborhood than the East 80s in the entire country:
And I don't mean to be hard on Ms. Perez, who is undoubtedly a lovely person who is simply used to doing things her own way in her own neighborhood. But to blame bike lanes because it's harder to park on the Upper East Side in 2017 than it was in 1970 is more than a little unfair:
"It's worse than ever. It's been worse since they put the bike lanes in."
Is it because of the bike lanes? Or is it because there are over 140,000 more registered vehicles in New York City in 2015 than there were in 2007, and about 380,000 more than there were in 1970?
I'm gong to go ahead and say it's the latter, and that we need the bike lanes because it's the only mode of private surface transportation left that's got any long-term viability.
I mean really, there were over 40,000 more registered vehicles in New York City in 2015 than there were in 2014. Should the city have added 40,000 more parkings spaces in a single year?
Of course not:
"It's a hindrance to expect that's it your constitutional right to park for free on every street in New York City. That can't happen."
Unfortunately, Americans have a poor understanding on their constitutional rights, which explains everything from our willingness to bludgeon our neighbors with tire irons over public street space to our current president. Also, good, honest, salt-of-the-earth middle-class people who drive cars in Manhattan resent being reminded of this by jet-setting bicycling advocates with swashbuckling mustaches.
And finally, the article goes out in a crescendo of irony:
"This Citi Bike station on Columbus Avenue extends an entire block. It holds 67 bikes but at the expense of about nine cars."
Nine cars. Nine measly cars! Cars owned by crowbar-wielding psychopaths like Ben Bowman who only drive them back and forth across the street! Actually, that's not even true. It's metered parking on Columbus, which means it wasn't even long-term parking for those decent hard-working middle-class New Yorkers, it was just a little extra coin for the city from the unlucky schmucks who couldn't find free parking. Meanwhile, the Citi Bike station now holds sixty-seven bikes that anybody can use--and they are using them, judging from the fact that the station is at that moment almost completely empty.
Seems to me the city's not losing parking spaces, it's gaining them.
I really hope he addresses that in Part Two, but I ain't exactly holding my breath.
And with that, I resume my absence, and I'll see you back here on Monday, February 6th with regular updates.
Your's Truely,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
January 30, 2017
Starting the Week and Ending It All In One Post! Now *That's* Efficiency!
Monday, February 6th, 2017 will forever be remembered as a great day in American history:
That's because it's the day I'll be making my triumphant return from my latest hiatus.
Yes, after today you won't be hearing from me (at least on this blog) until Monday, February 6th, at which point I will return with regular updates.
Deal with it.
Meanwhile, in New South Wales, Australia, visitors to Sydney beaches were baffled by signs requiring runners to wear helmets:
In a climate of lock-out laws and jaywalking fines, it's no wonder signs enforcing jogging restrictions on Sydney beaches have left social media scratching its head.
Sydney journalist Siobhan Moylan was stunned to find the sign - emblazoned with the words 'no helmet = no run' - alongside a patrolling policewoman on Bondi Beach.
The snapshot has been met with mass-confusion on Facebook, where commenters questioned whether the council has reached new heights of nanny state restrictions.
Indeed, the best pranks employ a cunning mix of absurdity and plausibility, and unsurprisingly plenty of people were taken in:
'Sydney's gone TOO FAR this time. This is the nanny police state goose stepping too far off-beat. Pull ur (sic) head in,' one commenter wrote.
'The government website doesn't work so it could be real,' another said.
And at least one cycling group was more than ready to throw their bikeless brethren under the mandatory helmet bus:
("Heroes wear helmets, they never ask why." Just like Nazis! Yeah, I went there. It's 2017, we're supposed to compare everyone to the Nazis now.)
In other news, last night "60 Minutes" did a story on hidden motors in professional bike racing:
Highlights included correspondent Bill Whitaker in full auto-Fred mode:
A vintage US Postal Trek apparently obtained by "60 Minutes" from Craigslist and then retrofitted with a motor by the story's main source for $12,000, which doesn't seem like it would invite a conflict of interest at all:
And, perhaps most entertainingly for us locals, Tyler Hamilton testing said bike on so-called "River Road," which is one of the most popular Fredding routes in the New York City area:
Local Freds will recognize that as the start of the infamous "ranger station climb," and shockingly Hamilton did not take advantage of the bike in order to set a new KOM on Strava:
Cycling pundits were quick to dismiss the report:
Though it's worth noting that the story also acknowledges that such cheating is feasible:
Hidden motors do exist; that is undeniable. And the sources we spoke with acknowledged that it was technologically feasible to create one as far back as the mid-1990s. But feasible is not the same as proof it happened. And for modern pros, none of the ones we spoke with think that motors are being widely used, if they’re used at all.
And moreover quotes Phil Gaimon as saying that he suspects Fabian Cancellara did indeed cheat using a motor:
“As we’ve seen, where there’s a will there’s a way,” said Brent Bookwalter, a longtime pro on BMC Racing. “I have a hard time saying adamantly without doubt that no one has ever used a motor. But I’ve also never seen anything that would lead me to believe that they have.” Phil Gaimon, who raced two years on the WorldTour with Garmin and Cannondale-Drapac, said he suspects Cancellara used a motor “for a few select races” in 2010, but said he’s skeptical of more recent accusations. “Once [the UCI] is searching for it, you can’t do it anymore,” he said.
Which in itself would be a revelation huge enough to warrant all the attention the subject of cheating with motors has attracted over the years.
By the way, watch some of those Cancellara videos and tell me that guy didn't have a battery up his ass:
Please.
And sure, Istvan Varjas, the Hungarian motor expert, is a dubious character who obviously stands to gain financially from stirring these rumors--though when it comes to pro cycling it's usually dubious characters who stand to gain financially from their stories who wind up being the most truthful. [See: Tyler Hamilton, above.] Also, the guy from the French Anti-Doping Agency seems pretty convinced:
Bill Whitaker: Have there been motors used in the Tour de France?
Jean-Pierre Verdy: Yes, of course. It’s been the last three to four years when I was told about the use of the motors. And in 2014, they told me there are motors. And they told me, there’s a problem. By 2015, everyone was complaining and I said, something’s got to be done.
Verdy said he’s been disturbed by how fast some riders are going up the mountains. As a doping investigator, he relied for years on informants among the team managers and racers in the peloton, the word for the pack of riders. These people told Jean-Pierre Verdy that about 12 racers used motors in the 2015 Tour de France.
As does Greg LeMond:
And while he may be a bitter old crank he's also a bitter old crank who's been pretty right-on about everything so far, so why couldn't he be right about this too?
In the 2015 Tour de France, bikes in the peloton were weighed before one of the time trial stages. French authorities told us the British Team Sky was the only team with bikes heavier than the rest—each bike weighed about 800 grams more. A spokesman for Team Sky said that during a time trial stage bikes might be heavier to allow for better aerodynamic performance. He said the team has never used mechanical assistance and that the bikes were checked and cleared by the sports governing body.
A heavy bike doesn’t prove anything on its own but to Greg LeMond the weight difference should have set off alarm bells. In this case, sources told us, the sport’s governing body would not allow French investigators to remove the Team Sky wheels and weigh them separately to determine if the wheels were enhanced. LeMond said not enough is being done by the International Cycling Union to prevent cheating with motors.
I bet Sky could fit a lot of technology in those disc wheels:
And if you really want to indulge in some juicy conspiracy theories, consider Fausto Pinarello's stance on disc brakes:
"I think the only people who need disc brakes are those who are heavy or are scared on long descents. Disc brakes could help them, but pros don't need them. There are 30 riders at Team Sky and if they all come to me and say that they think disc brakes work and that they want then, then okay. But I don't think that's the case. If it rains, they'll simply go a little slower."
Of course Team Sky don't want disc brakes. If I as a middle-aged schlub don't want to upgrade to discs because I'd no longer be able to use my old wheels, why would Team Sky--who are probably invested in hundreds of thousands of dollars of motodoping tech--want new team bikes that won't support it? Indeed, most of the peloton has been pretty resistant to discs, and when you consider that they otherwise don't really seem to give a shit what they ride it kinda makes you think:
Hey, it may be a coincidence, but I still have no doubt they're cheating with motors in the peloton, if only because I don't think there's been a single wild cheating theory that hasn't ultimately turned out to be true.
Of course, this is still America, so expect the media to report on cycling's "notorious culture of cheating" while ignoring the fact that Tom Brady is fucking aging in reverse:
If it wears a helmet I don't trust it.
See you back here on Monday, February 6th!
I love you,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
That's because it's the day I'll be making my triumphant return from my latest hiatus.
Yes, after today you won't be hearing from me (at least on this blog) until Monday, February 6th, at which point I will return with regular updates.
Deal with it.
Meanwhile, in New South Wales, Australia, visitors to Sydney beaches were baffled by signs requiring runners to wear helmets:
In a climate of lock-out laws and jaywalking fines, it's no wonder signs enforcing jogging restrictions on Sydney beaches have left social media scratching its head.
Sydney journalist Siobhan Moylan was stunned to find the sign - emblazoned with the words 'no helmet = no run' - alongside a patrolling policewoman on Bondi Beach.
The snapshot has been met with mass-confusion on Facebook, where commenters questioned whether the council has reached new heights of nanny state restrictions.
Indeed, the best pranks employ a cunning mix of absurdity and plausibility, and unsurprisingly plenty of people were taken in:
'Sydney's gone TOO FAR this time. This is the nanny police state goose stepping too far off-beat. Pull ur (sic) head in,' one commenter wrote.
'The government website doesn't work so it could be real,' another said.
And at least one cycling group was more than ready to throw their bikeless brethren under the mandatory helmet bus:
New rules for #bondibeach joggers.Furthermore, coincidentally--or perhaps not coincidentally--I was in Brooklyn yesterday when I saw an adult man running while wearing a bicycle helmet. Sadly I was unable to produce my smartphone quickly enough to capture a photo, but I know what I saw, and what I saw was an adult man running while wearing a bicycle helmet. Oh, sure, maybe he was in a big rush to grab a Citi Bike and put on the helmet beforehand to save time, but when I see someone wearing workout clothes and running in a helmet with no bicycle in sight the only conclusion I can reasonably draw is that our society has finally reached Peak Helmet.
Helmets are cheap and may save your life...#LogYourJog pic.twitter.com/AUlh43sCNb— Cycle (@AusCycle) January 27, 2017
("Heroes wear helmets, they never ask why." Just like Nazis! Yeah, I went there. It's 2017, we're supposed to compare everyone to the Nazis now.)
In other news, last night "60 Minutes" did a story on hidden motors in professional bike racing:
Highlights included correspondent Bill Whitaker in full auto-Fred mode:
A vintage US Postal Trek apparently obtained by "60 Minutes" from Craigslist and then retrofitted with a motor by the story's main source for $12,000, which doesn't seem like it would invite a conflict of interest at all:
And, perhaps most entertainingly for us locals, Tyler Hamilton testing said bike on so-called "River Road," which is one of the most popular Fredding routes in the New York City area:
Local Freds will recognize that as the start of the infamous "ranger station climb," and shockingly Hamilton did not take advantage of the bike in order to set a new KOM on Strava:
Cycling pundits were quick to dismiss the report:
Man, there was a time when every 60 Minutes piece was great. That motor segment last night was weak. Just wasn't solid/newsworthy.— Peter Flax (@Pflax1) January 30, 2017
the best reporter I regularly work with is ripshit over the wobbliness of the 60 Minutes motor doping piece.— Bill Strickland (@TrueBS) January 30, 2017With Strickland also citing his own magazine's story on the subject, which he described as "balanced and thorough:"
Though it's worth noting that the story also acknowledges that such cheating is feasible:
Hidden motors do exist; that is undeniable. And the sources we spoke with acknowledged that it was technologically feasible to create one as far back as the mid-1990s. But feasible is not the same as proof it happened. And for modern pros, none of the ones we spoke with think that motors are being widely used, if they’re used at all.
And moreover quotes Phil Gaimon as saying that he suspects Fabian Cancellara did indeed cheat using a motor:
“As we’ve seen, where there’s a will there’s a way,” said Brent Bookwalter, a longtime pro on BMC Racing. “I have a hard time saying adamantly without doubt that no one has ever used a motor. But I’ve also never seen anything that would lead me to believe that they have.” Phil Gaimon, who raced two years on the WorldTour with Garmin and Cannondale-Drapac, said he suspects Cancellara used a motor “for a few select races” in 2010, but said he’s skeptical of more recent accusations. “Once [the UCI] is searching for it, you can’t do it anymore,” he said.
Which in itself would be a revelation huge enough to warrant all the attention the subject of cheating with motors has attracted over the years.
By the way, watch some of those Cancellara videos and tell me that guy didn't have a battery up his ass:
Please.
And sure, Istvan Varjas, the Hungarian motor expert, is a dubious character who obviously stands to gain financially from stirring these rumors--though when it comes to pro cycling it's usually dubious characters who stand to gain financially from their stories who wind up being the most truthful. [See: Tyler Hamilton, above.] Also, the guy from the French Anti-Doping Agency seems pretty convinced:
Bill Whitaker: Have there been motors used in the Tour de France?
Jean-Pierre Verdy: Yes, of course. It’s been the last three to four years when I was told about the use of the motors. And in 2014, they told me there are motors. And they told me, there’s a problem. By 2015, everyone was complaining and I said, something’s got to be done.
Verdy said he’s been disturbed by how fast some riders are going up the mountains. As a doping investigator, he relied for years on informants among the team managers and racers in the peloton, the word for the pack of riders. These people told Jean-Pierre Verdy that about 12 racers used motors in the 2015 Tour de France.
As does Greg LeMond:
And while he may be a bitter old crank he's also a bitter old crank who's been pretty right-on about everything so far, so why couldn't he be right about this too?
In the 2015 Tour de France, bikes in the peloton were weighed before one of the time trial stages. French authorities told us the British Team Sky was the only team with bikes heavier than the rest—each bike weighed about 800 grams more. A spokesman for Team Sky said that during a time trial stage bikes might be heavier to allow for better aerodynamic performance. He said the team has never used mechanical assistance and that the bikes were checked and cleared by the sports governing body.
A heavy bike doesn’t prove anything on its own but to Greg LeMond the weight difference should have set off alarm bells. In this case, sources told us, the sport’s governing body would not allow French investigators to remove the Team Sky wheels and weigh them separately to determine if the wheels were enhanced. LeMond said not enough is being done by the International Cycling Union to prevent cheating with motors.
I bet Sky could fit a lot of technology in those disc wheels:
And if you really want to indulge in some juicy conspiracy theories, consider Fausto Pinarello's stance on disc brakes:
"I think the only people who need disc brakes are those who are heavy or are scared on long descents. Disc brakes could help them, but pros don't need them. There are 30 riders at Team Sky and if they all come to me and say that they think disc brakes work and that they want then, then okay. But I don't think that's the case. If it rains, they'll simply go a little slower."Of course Team Sky don't want disc brakes. If I as a middle-aged schlub don't want to upgrade to discs because I'd no longer be able to use my old wheels, why would Team Sky--who are probably invested in hundreds of thousands of dollars of motodoping tech--want new team bikes that won't support it? Indeed, most of the peloton has been pretty resistant to discs, and when you consider that they otherwise don't really seem to give a shit what they ride it kinda makes you think:
Hey, it may be a coincidence, but I still have no doubt they're cheating with motors in the peloton, if only because I don't think there's been a single wild cheating theory that hasn't ultimately turned out to be true.
Of course, this is still America, so expect the media to report on cycling's "notorious culture of cheating" while ignoring the fact that Tom Brady is fucking aging in reverse:
At 39, Tom Brady is something of a biological marvel. https://t.co/rOrdyi5sV4 pic.twitter.com/Hjjara3ZeJ— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) January 22, 2017Come on.
If it wears a helmet I don't trust it.
See you back here on Monday, February 6th!
I love you,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
January 27, 2017
America: Dumber Than a Bag of Chips?
Meet Duane Quam:
Quam is a legislator in the state of Minnesota:
And given his political allegiances it probably won't surprise you that he has no "quams" about taking away his constituents' freedoms. Indeed, yesterday a Twitterer informed me that Quam has proposed a bill that would require you to take a safety course, obtain a permit, and be older than 15 years old in order to ride in an "urban bicycle lane:"
(b) The commissioner of public safety must establish an urban bicycle lane use permit.
The permit issued must be in the form of an individual card created by the commissioner
of public safety, or as an endorsement on a driver's license or Minnesota identification card
issued under chapter 171.
(c) In order to receive an urban bicycle lane use permit under this subdivision, a person
must: (1) successfully complete the bicycle safety education program under section 171.336;
(2) be at least 15 years of age; (3) register the bicycle with the commissioner of public
safety; and (4) pay a fee of $5 to the commissioner of public safety.
WOW! This will keep people off bikes, kill bike lanes, give police an excuse to stop anybody and everybody, and help round up those dreaded illegals all in one fell swoop!
A helmet law seems positively quaint in comparison.
As for that "safety education program," it sounds wonderfully onerous:
Sec. 3. [171.336] BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION PROGRAM.
Subdivision 1. Program created. (a) A bicycle safety education program is established,
which shall be administered by the commissioner of public safety. The bicycle safety program
may be based in part on the motorcycle safety education program under section 171.335.
(b) The bicycle safety program must consist of (1) a bicycle safety course; and (2) a
bicycle safety examination.
(c) At a minimum, both the bicycle safety course and the examination must include:
(1) the legal requirements governing operation of a bicycle, including traffic regulations
under chapter 169 that apply to the operation of bicycles;
(2) best practices for the safe operation of a bicycle on public roadways;
(3) recommended and required bicycle safety equipment;
(4) riding skills and collision-avoidance techniques; and
(5) any other information the commissioner deems necessary to ensure the safe operation
of bicycles.
Subd. 2. Bicycle safety examination. (a) At the conclusion of the bicycle safety education
program, the commissioner must administer an examination on the materials covered by
the bicycle safety course. Individuals who, in the commissioner's judgment, demonstrate
sufficient knowledge to safely operate a bicycle on a public roadway are eligible for the
urban bicycle lane use permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12.
(b) A person who attends the bicycle safety program but does not intend to apply for an
urban bicycle lane use permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12, is not required to take
the bicycle safety examination under this subdivision.
Subd. 3. Appropriation. All funds collected from the fee imposed under section 169.222,
subdivision 12, are annually appropriated to the commissioner of public safety to carry out
the purposes of subdivisions 1 and 2, and to pay the administrative costs associated with
issuance of the urban bicycle lane permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12.
That's almost more than you have to do to drive a car! Ironic, since without any sort of training the vast majority of people on bicycles manage perfectly fine--that is until some moron hits them with a car.
Plus, requiring cyclists to be 15 before riding in a bike lane (which is the safest place to ride, so chew on that one for awhile) is a great way to enourage kids in Minnesota to decide: "Eh, fuck that, I'll just wait three more years and get a permit for an assault weapon."
Anyway, Minnesota is home to one of America's most bike-tastic cities (Minneapolis), as well as QBP and who knows how many other bike-related companies. Therefore, Quam should have an even harder time getting this through the legislature than he does getting his own corpulence through the door of his Hyundai.
Nevertheless, as cyclists we must remain eternally vigilant, because if nothing else it's clear that the forces of stupidity and evil recognize the bicycle as a vulnerable entry point in their mission to undermine freedom, self-sufficiency, and common sense. See, the average American is indifferent or slightly suspicious of people who ride bikes, so disguising anti-bike legislation as a "safety initiative" can be an effective ploy. Then, once they pass that, everybody from the smug commie beardo to the poor and undocumented is fair game for harassment.
Meanwhile, in other uplifting news, if some drunk kills you with their car in Chicago they might have to languish for ten whole days in jail:
Two put that in perspective, depending on how the dates fall, he could have to catch up on as many as two entire episodes of whatever his favorite show is by the time he gets out!
Now that's just draconian.
But at least he'll be out in plenty of time for baseball season:
Prosecutors said San Hamel had been drinking with friends after watching a Cubs game on May 29 when he got behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz and headed down Clybourn Avenue toward the Loop. He struck Cann in the 1300 block of North Clybourn around 6:35 p.m.
I'm not familiar with Chicago but I looked up the address where this happened and it looks like he was on a bus route and about a ten minute walk from the nearest El station. Instead, he chose to drive. But that's okay, because he's really sorry now:
San Hamel's blood-alcohol level was .15, nearly twice the legal limit, and he had been traveling 50 to 60 mph in a 30 mph zone, prosecutors said.
Before he was sentenced, San Hamel asked Cann's family to forgive him, according to DNAInfo.
"I wish I could change everything that happened but I can't," San Hamel said, according to the website. "I just hope that you can feel some kind of remorse for me or forgiveness in your heart. ... I live with that moment every day, every minute, every time I lay down and try to sleep."
Judge William J. Hooks said he took San Hamel's remorse into consideration. In addition to the 10 days in jail, he sentenced San Hamel to four years of probation and ordered him to cover all of Cann's funeral costs.
Oh, sorry, he also has to pay for the funeral costs.
If some drunk sports bro takes me out please make sure you throw me a 13 trillion dollar funeral.
Alas, all this could have been averted if only he'd had access to cutting edge snack breathalyzer technology:
The bag, which is outfitted with mini sensors, is able to detect alcohol in the breath of the holder. If the bag is green, go ahead and head home. If it’s red, call an Uber. Not only that, but if the bag turns red, a code for a $10 Uber discount displays as well, although it’s only valid on Super Bowl Sunday.
But let’s just pretend that someone is so intoxicated that calling an Uber is an impossible task. What then? Have the bag call the Uber for you. The bag has been outfitted with near-field communication tech which will order a ride automatically if you tap it with your smartphone.
If it's green, fire up your machine. But if you see the red underpants call an Uber instead:
"But the bag said it was OK to drive!," your killer will explain when the police arrive to peel you off the hood. Then they'll sue Tostitos and use the multi-million dollar settlement to pay for your funeral.
Now that's a win-win.
Indeed, I can only see one potential downside in trusting your safety to a bag of chips, which is this: Will Tostitos be subject to the wall tax?
Quam is a legislator in the state of Minnesota:
And given his political allegiances it probably won't surprise you that he has no "quams" about taking away his constituents' freedoms. Indeed, yesterday a Twitterer informed me that Quam has proposed a bill that would require you to take a safety course, obtain a permit, and be older than 15 years old in order to ride in an "urban bicycle lane:"
(b) The commissioner of public safety must establish an urban bicycle lane use permit.
The permit issued must be in the form of an individual card created by the commissioner
of public safety, or as an endorsement on a driver's license or Minnesota identification card
issued under chapter 171.
(c) In order to receive an urban bicycle lane use permit under this subdivision, a person
must: (1) successfully complete the bicycle safety education program under section 171.336;
(2) be at least 15 years of age; (3) register the bicycle with the commissioner of public
safety; and (4) pay a fee of $5 to the commissioner of public safety.
WOW! This will keep people off bikes, kill bike lanes, give police an excuse to stop anybody and everybody, and help round up those dreaded illegals all in one fell swoop!
A helmet law seems positively quaint in comparison.
As for that "safety education program," it sounds wonderfully onerous:
Sec. 3. [171.336] BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION PROGRAM.
Subdivision 1. Program created. (a) A bicycle safety education program is established,
which shall be administered by the commissioner of public safety. The bicycle safety program
may be based in part on the motorcycle safety education program under section 171.335.
(b) The bicycle safety program must consist of (1) a bicycle safety course; and (2) a
bicycle safety examination.
(c) At a minimum, both the bicycle safety course and the examination must include:
(1) the legal requirements governing operation of a bicycle, including traffic regulations
under chapter 169 that apply to the operation of bicycles;
(2) best practices for the safe operation of a bicycle on public roadways;
(3) recommended and required bicycle safety equipment;
(4) riding skills and collision-avoidance techniques; and
(5) any other information the commissioner deems necessary to ensure the safe operation
of bicycles.
Subd. 2. Bicycle safety examination. (a) At the conclusion of the bicycle safety education
program, the commissioner must administer an examination on the materials covered by
the bicycle safety course. Individuals who, in the commissioner's judgment, demonstrate
sufficient knowledge to safely operate a bicycle on a public roadway are eligible for the
urban bicycle lane use permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12.
(b) A person who attends the bicycle safety program but does not intend to apply for an
urban bicycle lane use permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12, is not required to take
the bicycle safety examination under this subdivision.
Subd. 3. Appropriation. All funds collected from the fee imposed under section 169.222,
subdivision 12, are annually appropriated to the commissioner of public safety to carry out
the purposes of subdivisions 1 and 2, and to pay the administrative costs associated with
issuance of the urban bicycle lane permit under section 169.222, subdivision 12.
That's almost more than you have to do to drive a car! Ironic, since without any sort of training the vast majority of people on bicycles manage perfectly fine--that is until some moron hits them with a car.
Plus, requiring cyclists to be 15 before riding in a bike lane (which is the safest place to ride, so chew on that one for awhile) is a great way to enourage kids in Minnesota to decide: "Eh, fuck that, I'll just wait three more years and get a permit for an assault weapon."
Anyway, Minnesota is home to one of America's most bike-tastic cities (Minneapolis), as well as QBP and who knows how many other bike-related companies. Therefore, Quam should have an even harder time getting this through the legislature than he does getting his own corpulence through the door of his Hyundai.
Nevertheless, as cyclists we must remain eternally vigilant, because if nothing else it's clear that the forces of stupidity and evil recognize the bicycle as a vulnerable entry point in their mission to undermine freedom, self-sufficiency, and common sense. See, the average American is indifferent or slightly suspicious of people who ride bikes, so disguising anti-bike legislation as a "safety initiative" can be an effective ploy. Then, once they pass that, everybody from the smug commie beardo to the poor and undocumented is fair game for harassment.
Meanwhile, in other uplifting news, if some drunk kills you with their car in Chicago they might have to languish for ten whole days in jail:
Two put that in perspective, depending on how the dates fall, he could have to catch up on as many as two entire episodes of whatever his favorite show is by the time he gets out!
Now that's just draconian.
But at least he'll be out in plenty of time for baseball season:
Prosecutors said San Hamel had been drinking with friends after watching a Cubs game on May 29 when he got behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz and headed down Clybourn Avenue toward the Loop. He struck Cann in the 1300 block of North Clybourn around 6:35 p.m.
I'm not familiar with Chicago but I looked up the address where this happened and it looks like he was on a bus route and about a ten minute walk from the nearest El station. Instead, he chose to drive. But that's okay, because he's really sorry now:
San Hamel's blood-alcohol level was .15, nearly twice the legal limit, and he had been traveling 50 to 60 mph in a 30 mph zone, prosecutors said.
Before he was sentenced, San Hamel asked Cann's family to forgive him, according to DNAInfo.
"I wish I could change everything that happened but I can't," San Hamel said, according to the website. "I just hope that you can feel some kind of remorse for me or forgiveness in your heart. ... I live with that moment every day, every minute, every time I lay down and try to sleep."
Judge William J. Hooks said he took San Hamel's remorse into consideration. In addition to the 10 days in jail, he sentenced San Hamel to four years of probation and ordered him to cover all of Cann's funeral costs.
Oh, sorry, he also has to pay for the funeral costs.
If some drunk sports bro takes me out please make sure you throw me a 13 trillion dollar funeral.
Alas, all this could have been averted if only he'd had access to cutting edge snack breathalyzer technology:
Yes, that's right, this Super Bowl Sunday you can blow into a bag of chips for confirmation that it's OK to speed home in your SUV:If you have to blow into a Tostitos bag to know if you're intoxicated, for the love of all that is holy, DO NOT DRIVE https://t.co/gnTcIIL7Oj
— Lawrence Police (@LawrenceKS_PD) January 26, 2017
The bag, which is outfitted with mini sensors, is able to detect alcohol in the breath of the holder. If the bag is green, go ahead and head home. If it’s red, call an Uber. Not only that, but if the bag turns red, a code for a $10 Uber discount displays as well, although it’s only valid on Super Bowl Sunday.
But let’s just pretend that someone is so intoxicated that calling an Uber is an impossible task. What then? Have the bag call the Uber for you. The bag has been outfitted with near-field communication tech which will order a ride automatically if you tap it with your smartphone.
If it's green, fire up your machine. But if you see the red underpants call an Uber instead:
"But the bag said it was OK to drive!," your killer will explain when the police arrive to peel you off the hood. Then they'll sue Tostitos and use the multi-million dollar settlement to pay for your funeral.
Now that's a win-win.
Indeed, I can only see one potential downside in trusting your safety to a bag of chips, which is this: Will Tostitos be subject to the wall tax?
January 26, 2017
This Post Optimized for Use With a VR Mask
Greetings from one of those evil "sanctuary cities" that stands to lose federal funding if we don't cooperate with the new mandate on illegal immigrants:
The defiant officials — from New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and smaller cities, including New Haven; Syracuse; and Austin, Tex., said they were prepared for a protracted fight.
“We’re going to defend all of our people regardless of where they come from, regardless of their immigration status,” Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York said at a news conference with other city officials.
It's very important we rid New York City of illegal immigrants because they take jobs that might otherwise go to hardworking Americans, such as those glamorous and high-paying bicycle food delivery gigs everybody's clamoring for:
I'm sure once the deportation squad finishes its work we'll see two (2) immediate effects: a mass migration of people from Appalachia and other depressed areas ready and willing to take advantage of this lucrative new job market, and of course the end of crime for all eternity.
Welcome to the new prosperity.
Then again, it's pretty unlikely this particular sanctuary city is going to lose out on any federal funding, for obvious reasons:
So there you go.
Meanwhile, further to yesterday's post, here's the crabon dick break failure porn of your wildest fantasies:
.@bikesnobnyc Look! Crabon disk brakes! https://t.co/0QY7UxMLd7— Ralph Angenendt (@lestighaniker) January 26, 2017Disc brakes are of course a great solution to the problem of poor braking with carbon rims, so there's something sublimely delightful about making a rotor out of carbon.
If there's one thing that's true about cyclists it's that they have a strange aversion to metal, even when it's the ideal material for the job. So at this rate you can expect bamboo brake rotors sometime within the next five years.
Speaking of the bicycle as an economic indicator, the New York Times Real Estate section has cast its monocle upon the village of Piermont, NY, one of the most popular destinations for New York City's cyclists:
Piermont is a place that owes its entire existence to bikes (it's not on a train line so the commute sucks) and if it weren't for the legions of Freds and Tridorks who do the same ride every single weekend and stop there to fuel up on coffee and muffins it would be little more than Nyack's pecker track:
Indeed, so intrinsic is the bicycle to Piermont's real estate values that errant Freds even wind up opening businesses there:
On a recent snowy Saturday, Piermont’s pier was deserted, except for anglers setting lines in the rocks and the occasional dog walker. But there was a 20-minute wait for brunch at 14 & Hudson, a two-and-a-half-year-old restaurant at 457 Piermont Avenue owned and managed by Eric Woods and his wife, Paula Clemente Woods. Like many people, Mr. Woods, who was previously the executive chef at Blue Fin in Times Square, discovered Piermont on his bike. (The town is popular with cyclists.) He said he was attracted by the foot traffic, but keeps his guard up: “A lot of transplanted New Yorkers live in Piermont, so they do have expectations.”
It should be clear by now to pretty much everybody that a large bicycle presence is an indicator that you live in a desirable community. After all, when planning a ride, most cyclists don't say to each other, "Hey, let's head to a real shithole this weekend." Nevertheless, Americans hate nothing more than giving the bicycle its due, as was apparent when the Times last visited Piermont for a story called "Boons and Banes of the Picturesque:"
So magnetic is the village today, according to residents, that tourists and bicyclists often arrive in droves on weekends. The bicyclists often pay little heed to the designated bike lanes, said Robert Samuels, a former journalist and author who has lived here since 1982. “They talk loudly and shout back and forth to one another, often waking me out of a sound sleep on a Sunday morning,” said Mr. Samuels, whose book “Blue Water, White Water” (Up the Creek Publishing, 2011) details his struggle with Guillain-Barré syndrome, a muscle disorder.
Hey, I'll admit I'd hate to wake up to the sound of two Freds discussing which chamois cream they slathered on their scranuses that morning, but it beats being roused by a casino bus:
A motor vehicle driving into your home is what's known as a "Queens Wake-Up Call."
Fortunately for Piermont's more ornery residents, it will probably wither on the vine and die thanks to Zwift, which allows Freds to avoid all the trouble of riding their bikes outside. You don't even have to race in the real world anymore, and I recently received an email that there's a big Fredly throwdown happening soon:
This race is sponsored by L’etape and each participant will be awarded with a free pair of L’etape Socks and 3 luck participants will go into a random prize draw for a full L’etape limited print kit. http://www.letape.nl/
POWER UPs: Allowed at all times
BIKES: All allowed
RIDER NAME: YOUR NAME KISS (X) - X = category (see below)
GROUPS: Use your FTP and then divide by your weight in kg then pick the correct group.
A: 4.0 W/kg FTP or higher
B: 3.2 W/kg to 3.99 W/kg FTP
C: 2.5 W/kg to 3.19 W/kg FTP
D: Under 2.49 W/kg FTP
PLEASE NOTE: PLEASE NOTE: Strava data for KISS races must be open (not private or hidden). zPower riders with avg. W/kg over the duration of the race of greater than 3.99W/kg will not be eligible for CAT or Race Wins. Riders producing over 5w/kg average will be DQd. They can be reinstated if real life matching performances can be provided
Apart from the bit about the free socks I didn't understand a single word of any of that. It looks like what happens when my two year-old gets his hands on my iPhone.
Nevertheless, it's clear that virtual reality is the future of cycling--at least as far as Kickstarter entrepreneurs are concerned. Consider the ChessFit bike trainer for example:
Just strap it to your face:
And enjoy riding through exotic settings such as the Brooklyn Bridge:
Though if you really want to feel what it's like to ride across the Brooklyn Bridge just go to Walmart, grab a Mongoose, and attempt to ride it through the check-out area. The two experiences are remarkably similar because: 1) both involve picking your way through crowds; 2) the typical tourist on the Brooklyn Bridge and the typical Walmart customer are one and the same.
Indeed, cycling has definitely entered the Matrix phase, in that you feel like this:
But you look like this:
Oy.
Of course, it won't do to render cycling a completely virtual experience if you can't preserve the crucial element of smugness, hence the need to power a battery while you do it:
This allows you to power devices:
In turn reducing your impact on climate change:
[Disclaimer: to make an impact on climate change during the Trump administration everybody on the world would need to pedal a stationary bike the equivalent of riding to the Sun and back 643 trillion times.]
Which is like removing 16,000 cars from the road or something:
Also a good way to remove cars from the road?
Ride your bike outside to go places.
Crazy, I know, but hey, it could catch on.
January 25, 2017
It's Wednesday and here's an entire post about a bike review that made me angry.
Bicycle helmets and disc brakes for road bikes have a lot in common. For one thing, they both inspire lots of tedious debates. For another, on one side of those debates you have people who may or may not care for them personally but ultimately don't give a shit whether anybody uses them or not, and on the other side you have people who think anybody who doesn't use them is an idiot with a death wish.
Take me for instance. I don't care if you wear a helmet or not, nor do I care if you use disc brakes on your road bike or not. On the other hand you have Outside magazine, who are actually telling people to throw their rim brakes in the trash:
(Via a reader. Thanks reader!)
Okay. Firstly, is that Bret?
Sure looks like him--except Bret somehow manages to defy time and space even with rim brakes.
Secondly:
Each time I write about the proliferation and advantages of disc brakes on road bikes, a litany of naysayers parry. Common criticisms: disc brakes are unreliable and finicky, heavier than rim varieties, hinder aerodynamics, fade because of overheating, prevent fast wheel changes, and are dangerous when ridden together with rim brake–equipped bikes because of the differences in cornering speeds and stopping times. Most of these arguments are refutable.
Yeah yeah yeah. Feather your dick breaks there, Aaron. Let's talk about that headline first.
As someone who wades hip-deep in bicycle reviews day after day I have developed a high tolerance for bullshit over the years, but telling people to "throw your rim brakes in the trash" is downright offensive. For many of us, riding bikes is one of our greatest pleasures in life, and the shit you need in order to do it ain't free. Even I, a world famous semi-professional bike blogger, must proffer legal tender in exchange for consumables such as tires, tubes, cables, and sundries*. Keeping my bikes running well is a commitment of both time and money, and I value every minute of cycling time I'm able to fit in between my many responsibilities. Indeed, I don't just value these minutes, I cherish them. Furthermore, I'm grateful for all the bike stuff I have, and I make sure to get as much use out of it as possible.
*[What's a sundry? Do I need one? How much do they weigh? Do they come in crabon?"--Some Fred somewhere, probably.]
Meanwhile, here comes some guy who reviews bikes for a glossy magazine you flip through at the dentist to tell me I need to "throw my rim brakes in the trash." Really? Which rim brakes? The ones that have been stopping me predictably for years? The ones that require virtually no maintenance safe for the odd two-minute pad change and occasional cable replacement? The ones I can visually inspect for pad wear at a glance? The ones I can adjust with the flick of a finger while riding? The ones that let me change my wheels in seconds before heading out for a ride? The ones that have never, ever failed me? Those rim brakes? You want me to throw them in the trash?
And what happens when I do throw them in the trash? I need a whole new bike, don't I? Not only that, but pretty much all the spare parts I've accumulated over the years are also useless, aren't they? Wow, that's a big and expensive commitment!
But you know what? I'm a person who cherishes his riding experience, and maybe that initial outlay of time and money (thousands of dollars at least) will be worth it. After all, this guy writes for an established magazine that publishes the work of respected authors with integrity whose work means a lot to me. He must know what he's talking about when he tells me to throw what basically amounts to my entire bike in the trash. So maybe I'll hear him out:
The other common argument I hear against discs is that they are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist—rim brakes work fine. (Having descended countless wet mountain roads on carbon wheels with rim brakes, where stopping power all but disappears, I beg to differ.) But rather than simply continue to rail on the subject, this year I decided to put the debate to our test team in Sedona, Arizona, by offering up two comparably spec’d bikes—one disc, the other rim—for comparative feedback.
Ah-ha! There's the problem: "wet mountain roads on carbon wheels." Why are you using carbon wheels? Nobody who is not a sponsored full-time professional bike racer should use carbon wheels. Yes, of course they brake poorly in the wet, and disc brakes on road bikes are mostly a solution to the problem of using carbon wheels. Professional athletes must deal with this problem because they must use bleeding-edge equipment in pursuit of those "marginal gains." (Or, more accurately, to distract from what's really increasing their performance.) The rest of us do not, and if we do anyway we're simply spending extra money for absolutely no reason.
Hey, I readily admit there are reasons to use disc brakes, even on a road bike. Maybe you want that extra clearance. Maybe you're a "modulation queen" who simply can't live knowing that there's another system out there that feels a little bit nicer. Maybe you ride in horrendous weather conditions day in and day out and go through rims like the rest of us go through brake pads. Or maybe you just think they're nifty.
I totally get it.
But while there are reasons to use disc brakes on your road bike (not "throw your rim brakes in the trash" reasons, but sure, reasons), there is not a single valid reason to use carbon wheels. Not one! Aluminum rims are fantastic regardless of which braking system you use. If you ding them you can often bend them right back into shape. They last a long time. They're cheap. They're light. And if you do use aluminum rims and disc brakes your rims will last approximately until the end of time.
On the other hand, carbon rims are...what, lighter? You think that makes a difference? Firstly, you need discs to make them stop predictably so there's a chunk of your weight savings right there. Secondly, you're overweight and you suck, and even if you weren't and you didn't (but let's be honest, you are and you do) that weight difference doesn't mean shit.
Oh, wait, I forgot: you can also make carbon rims into the shape of a whale's scranus or something, so there is that.
What can I say? If that's a structural property you value then you're beyond saving.
Still, as a cyclist looking for the best riding experience I can get my scranus on I'm willing to hear this guy out to the end of his article It's a bold claim after all, and there's still time for him to back it up. (Also the dental hygienist isn't ready for me yet, and the only other magazine is about golf.) So let's hear his rigorous testing protocol:
On one side, we had the Trek Domane SLR 8. Since the new Dura Ace 9100 wasn’t available at test time, this is not a stock build, but a one-off we received earlier this year. It’s equipped with Dura Ace 9000 parts (including rim brakes), upgraded Bontrager carbon Aeolus 3 clinchers, and stock 28-millimeter Bontrager tires. The bike weighed a feathery 15.3 pounds.
On the other side was a stock Trek Domane SLR 7 Disc, which comes with Shimano Ultegra Di2 components, Shimano RS805 hydraulic flat-mount brakes (which were the company’s top model prior to the release of the new Dura Ace 9120 and 9170 models), alloy wheels, and 32-millimeter Bontrager tires. It weigher more than two pounds heavier at 17.6 pounds.
Okay, so the rim brake bike has the carbon wheels and the disc brake bike has alloy wheels. Isn't that backwards? Didn't he already establish carbon wheels don't stop well with rim brakes? OK, here's an idea: switch the wheels. Oh yeah, you can't! The wheels aren't compatible. So let's proceed with a test that's already doomed to failure:
Despite the SLR 8’s clear weight advantage, testers unanimously preferred the SLR 7. “They are both comfortable, quick, and super fun to ride,” one tester said. “But I feel more confident on the disc version.” Testers found the modulation on the discs more nuanced and subtle, with just a slight touch of the brake providing microadjustments, while the rim breaks took much more effort and were less predictable. Most people commented on how much less hand pressure it took to stop with the discs than the rim variety. Several testers even swore that disc brakes made them faster, saying they could hold speed longer into a bend on the SLR 7 because the brakes’ responsiveness and finesse allowed them to slow later, which meant coming out of the turn quicker.
"Clear weight advantage?" The "heavier" bike is still sub-18lbs. Also, I've ridden disc brakes on the road and yes, they do feel nice. Still, the rim brake bike has those carbon wheels. Did you try it with different wheels? Of course you didn't. But you did spell brakes "breaks" at least once, so there's that.
And let's talk about that perception of "confidence." Sure, the discs might have contributed to that. But what about tire size? The rim brake bike had 28s, the disc brake bike had 32s. That's a significant difference, and certainly one that would affect your perception of "confidence." (And I'm not even going to ask #whatpressureyourunning.) For fuck's sake, this "test" has more holes in it than my knee warmers!
But let's press on:
Even though all testing was in a big group, we had no collisions or accidents due to the mix of rim and disc brakes. You simply learn how each performs and adjust your riding accordingly.
Miraculous. A bunch of magazine Freds managed to ride in a group and not crash. Also, I'm shocked that each type of brake does have its differences in feel yet ultimately performs well--even rim brakes on carbon wheels. Too bad I already threw my rim brakes in the trash.
As for durability, the discs have held up fine for four months of testing without a bleed or an adjustment. We also had zero days of inclement weather, which I imagine would have amplified the preferences for the SLR 7 given that the carbon rims on the SLR 8 feel far less confident in the rain. (A fact I discovered subsequent to the test.)
I should damn well hope the discs held up for four months. Only a magazine reviewer would find this worth mentioning. Also, good thing you had those discs so you could experience their superior performance in the foul weather you never experienced. Meanwhile, given that the SLR8 feels less confident in the rain due to those carbon rims, are you ever going to try it with different rims?
Of course not.
While this isn’t a scientific inquiry, it did convince me again of disc brakes’ advantages. They won over our group of testers, too. Even the hardcore road racers in the group preferred discs. On the day we took on Mingus Mountain, a 4,000-foot hill climb west of Sedona, there was a morning scramble for bikes with disc brakes. The only models that weren’t chosen were rim varieties. “A long, winding descent like that? You definitely want disc brakes,” said one avid road racer and tester. And I heard no reports of brake fade on that long descent.
You're damn right it isn't scientific. It's a heap of anecdotes from a bunch of maga-bros, which I guess is pretty much the definition of Outside magazine.
As for that rim brake bike?
That’s not to say that the SLR 8 is a bad bike. I rode it for the better part of six months as my primary road machine, and it is absolutely fantastic. I’m sure I would have made easy work of the Mingus descent on it. As critics say, rim brakes work fine, especially the high-end versions on this model. Discs simply work better.
It was your primary bike for almost six months, which is pretty much an eternity by maga-bro standards? It is "absolutely fantastic?" Well why the hell are you telling people to throw their rim brakes in the trash then? I had a really great meal at a very expensive restaurant not too long ago and you don't hear me telling people to throw away the contents of their refrigerators.
Do I think disc brakes work well? Yes. Do I think eventually most performance bikes will have them? Yes. Do I acknowledge that one day even I will probably have a road bike with disc brakes? Yes. Do I enjoy posing rhetorical questions? Emphatically so.
But come on, this review was even dumber than that New York Times story about the daddies in Montclair who had to look after their own kids.
We should demand an apology from Outside.
Take me for instance. I don't care if you wear a helmet or not, nor do I care if you use disc brakes on your road bike or not. On the other hand you have Outside magazine, who are actually telling people to throw their rim brakes in the trash:
(Via a reader. Thanks reader!)
Okay. Firstly, is that Bret?
Sure looks like him--except Bret somehow manages to defy time and space even with rim brakes.
Secondly:
Each time I write about the proliferation and advantages of disc brakes on road bikes, a litany of naysayers parry. Common criticisms: disc brakes are unreliable and finicky, heavier than rim varieties, hinder aerodynamics, fade because of overheating, prevent fast wheel changes, and are dangerous when ridden together with rim brake–equipped bikes because of the differences in cornering speeds and stopping times. Most of these arguments are refutable.
Yeah yeah yeah. Feather your dick breaks there, Aaron. Let's talk about that headline first.
As someone who wades hip-deep in bicycle reviews day after day I have developed a high tolerance for bullshit over the years, but telling people to "throw your rim brakes in the trash" is downright offensive. For many of us, riding bikes is one of our greatest pleasures in life, and the shit you need in order to do it ain't free. Even I, a world famous semi-professional bike blogger, must proffer legal tender in exchange for consumables such as tires, tubes, cables, and sundries*. Keeping my bikes running well is a commitment of both time and money, and I value every minute of cycling time I'm able to fit in between my many responsibilities. Indeed, I don't just value these minutes, I cherish them. Furthermore, I'm grateful for all the bike stuff I have, and I make sure to get as much use out of it as possible.
*[What's a sundry? Do I need one? How much do they weigh? Do they come in crabon?"--Some Fred somewhere, probably.]
Meanwhile, here comes some guy who reviews bikes for a glossy magazine you flip through at the dentist to tell me I need to "throw my rim brakes in the trash." Really? Which rim brakes? The ones that have been stopping me predictably for years? The ones that require virtually no maintenance safe for the odd two-minute pad change and occasional cable replacement? The ones I can visually inspect for pad wear at a glance? The ones I can adjust with the flick of a finger while riding? The ones that let me change my wheels in seconds before heading out for a ride? The ones that have never, ever failed me? Those rim brakes? You want me to throw them in the trash?
And what happens when I do throw them in the trash? I need a whole new bike, don't I? Not only that, but pretty much all the spare parts I've accumulated over the years are also useless, aren't they? Wow, that's a big and expensive commitment!
But you know what? I'm a person who cherishes his riding experience, and maybe that initial outlay of time and money (thousands of dollars at least) will be worth it. After all, this guy writes for an established magazine that publishes the work of respected authors with integrity whose work means a lot to me. He must know what he's talking about when he tells me to throw what basically amounts to my entire bike in the trash. So maybe I'll hear him out:
The other common argument I hear against discs is that they are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist—rim brakes work fine. (Having descended countless wet mountain roads on carbon wheels with rim brakes, where stopping power all but disappears, I beg to differ.) But rather than simply continue to rail on the subject, this year I decided to put the debate to our test team in Sedona, Arizona, by offering up two comparably spec’d bikes—one disc, the other rim—for comparative feedback.
Ah-ha! There's the problem: "wet mountain roads on carbon wheels." Why are you using carbon wheels? Nobody who is not a sponsored full-time professional bike racer should use carbon wheels. Yes, of course they brake poorly in the wet, and disc brakes on road bikes are mostly a solution to the problem of using carbon wheels. Professional athletes must deal with this problem because they must use bleeding-edge equipment in pursuit of those "marginal gains." (Or, more accurately, to distract from what's really increasing their performance.) The rest of us do not, and if we do anyway we're simply spending extra money for absolutely no reason.
Hey, I readily admit there are reasons to use disc brakes, even on a road bike. Maybe you want that extra clearance. Maybe you're a "modulation queen" who simply can't live knowing that there's another system out there that feels a little bit nicer. Maybe you ride in horrendous weather conditions day in and day out and go through rims like the rest of us go through brake pads. Or maybe you just think they're nifty.
I totally get it.
But while there are reasons to use disc brakes on your road bike (not "throw your rim brakes in the trash" reasons, but sure, reasons), there is not a single valid reason to use carbon wheels. Not one! Aluminum rims are fantastic regardless of which braking system you use. If you ding them you can often bend them right back into shape. They last a long time. They're cheap. They're light. And if you do use aluminum rims and disc brakes your rims will last approximately until the end of time.
On the other hand, carbon rims are...what, lighter? You think that makes a difference? Firstly, you need discs to make them stop predictably so there's a chunk of your weight savings right there. Secondly, you're overweight and you suck, and even if you weren't and you didn't (but let's be honest, you are and you do) that weight difference doesn't mean shit.
Oh, wait, I forgot: you can also make carbon rims into the shape of a whale's scranus or something, so there is that.
What can I say? If that's a structural property you value then you're beyond saving.
Still, as a cyclist looking for the best riding experience I can get my scranus on I'm willing to hear this guy out to the end of his article It's a bold claim after all, and there's still time for him to back it up. (Also the dental hygienist isn't ready for me yet, and the only other magazine is about golf.) So let's hear his rigorous testing protocol:
On one side, we had the Trek Domane SLR 8. Since the new Dura Ace 9100 wasn’t available at test time, this is not a stock build, but a one-off we received earlier this year. It’s equipped with Dura Ace 9000 parts (including rim brakes), upgraded Bontrager carbon Aeolus 3 clinchers, and stock 28-millimeter Bontrager tires. The bike weighed a feathery 15.3 pounds.
On the other side was a stock Trek Domane SLR 7 Disc, which comes with Shimano Ultegra Di2 components, Shimano RS805 hydraulic flat-mount brakes (which were the company’s top model prior to the release of the new Dura Ace 9120 and 9170 models), alloy wheels, and 32-millimeter Bontrager tires. It weigher more than two pounds heavier at 17.6 pounds.
Okay, so the rim brake bike has the carbon wheels and the disc brake bike has alloy wheels. Isn't that backwards? Didn't he already establish carbon wheels don't stop well with rim brakes? OK, here's an idea: switch the wheels. Oh yeah, you can't! The wheels aren't compatible. So let's proceed with a test that's already doomed to failure:
Despite the SLR 8’s clear weight advantage, testers unanimously preferred the SLR 7. “They are both comfortable, quick, and super fun to ride,” one tester said. “But I feel more confident on the disc version.” Testers found the modulation on the discs more nuanced and subtle, with just a slight touch of the brake providing microadjustments, while the rim breaks took much more effort and were less predictable. Most people commented on how much less hand pressure it took to stop with the discs than the rim variety. Several testers even swore that disc brakes made them faster, saying they could hold speed longer into a bend on the SLR 7 because the brakes’ responsiveness and finesse allowed them to slow later, which meant coming out of the turn quicker.
"Clear weight advantage?" The "heavier" bike is still sub-18lbs. Also, I've ridden disc brakes on the road and yes, they do feel nice. Still, the rim brake bike has those carbon wheels. Did you try it with different wheels? Of course you didn't. But you did spell brakes "breaks" at least once, so there's that.
And let's talk about that perception of "confidence." Sure, the discs might have contributed to that. But what about tire size? The rim brake bike had 28s, the disc brake bike had 32s. That's a significant difference, and certainly one that would affect your perception of "confidence." (And I'm not even going to ask #whatpressureyourunning.) For fuck's sake, this "test" has more holes in it than my knee warmers!
But let's press on:
Even though all testing was in a big group, we had no collisions or accidents due to the mix of rim and disc brakes. You simply learn how each performs and adjust your riding accordingly.
Miraculous. A bunch of magazine Freds managed to ride in a group and not crash. Also, I'm shocked that each type of brake does have its differences in feel yet ultimately performs well--even rim brakes on carbon wheels. Too bad I already threw my rim brakes in the trash.
As for durability, the discs have held up fine for four months of testing without a bleed or an adjustment. We also had zero days of inclement weather, which I imagine would have amplified the preferences for the SLR 7 given that the carbon rims on the SLR 8 feel far less confident in the rain. (A fact I discovered subsequent to the test.)
I should damn well hope the discs held up for four months. Only a magazine reviewer would find this worth mentioning. Also, good thing you had those discs so you could experience their superior performance in the foul weather you never experienced. Meanwhile, given that the SLR8 feels less confident in the rain due to those carbon rims, are you ever going to try it with different rims?
Of course not.
While this isn’t a scientific inquiry, it did convince me again of disc brakes’ advantages. They won over our group of testers, too. Even the hardcore road racers in the group preferred discs. On the day we took on Mingus Mountain, a 4,000-foot hill climb west of Sedona, there was a morning scramble for bikes with disc brakes. The only models that weren’t chosen were rim varieties. “A long, winding descent like that? You definitely want disc brakes,” said one avid road racer and tester. And I heard no reports of brake fade on that long descent.
You're damn right it isn't scientific. It's a heap of anecdotes from a bunch of maga-bros, which I guess is pretty much the definition of Outside magazine.
As for that rim brake bike?
That’s not to say that the SLR 8 is a bad bike. I rode it for the better part of six months as my primary road machine, and it is absolutely fantastic. I’m sure I would have made easy work of the Mingus descent on it. As critics say, rim brakes work fine, especially the high-end versions on this model. Discs simply work better.
It was your primary bike for almost six months, which is pretty much an eternity by maga-bro standards? It is "absolutely fantastic?" Well why the hell are you telling people to throw their rim brakes in the trash then? I had a really great meal at a very expensive restaurant not too long ago and you don't hear me telling people to throw away the contents of their refrigerators.
Do I think disc brakes work well? Yes. Do I think eventually most performance bikes will have them? Yes. Do I acknowledge that one day even I will probably have a road bike with disc brakes? Yes. Do I enjoy posing rhetorical questions? Emphatically so.
But come on, this review was even dumber than that New York Times story about the daddies in Montclair who had to look after their own kids.
We should demand an apology from Outside.
January 24, 2017
Thrills, chills, spills, systematic oppression...you know, the usual.
Great news, Action Freds! Sharing your frivolous athletic endeavors just got even easier! Yes, thanks to Shimano, now you can ride with a camera that will auto-record every time you "attack:"
Both models get auto-recording for capturing the most exciting bits of your ride. The Shimano CM-2000 and CM-1100 action cameras can auto-record via ANT+, working with your bike computer and sensors like a power meter, heart rate strap, cadence sensor or speed sensor to detect when you’re moving quickly or working hard. For Di2 users, it’ll even auto-record when you’re in a specified gear range.
Yes, this is just what the cycling world needs: a device to capture the pathetic wet noodle-like flagellations of the few remaining Freds who still ride outside instead of "training" with Zwift:
Given that most Freds can't even ride in the drops (much less turn over the big ring of so much as a compact crankset) this camera should result in the Internet being clogged with thousands upon thousands of hours of truly pathetic video, though I suppose it will be a net benefit to society if it results in more cinematic masterpieces like this one:
I don't know anybody involved in this video but it makes me happy my logo was there to witness it all:
So which is more dangerous: cycling with aerobars, or cycling without a helmet?
That's a rhetorical question of course:
And they're even more dangerous when paired with ludicriously high #whatpressureyourunning:
I uploaded this video as a possible warning as what can happen if you inflate clincher tires to more than 125 psi, I bought Vredestein Tricomp clincher tires for my bike because they have a 175psi rating printed on the sidewall see Vredestein.com , I wanted to experment with higher pressures and hopefully get less rolling resistance. I inflated my tires to 110 psi and rolled down a hill untill the bike coasted to a stop, then tried it again with 140 psi, I went further and faster at the higher pressure. Then at my next race I inflated my tires to 140 psi and near the finish line the rear tire popped off the rim and locked against the frame locking the rear tire and causing me to take a tumble it was my fault because I did not know that all rims have a max pressure rating of 125 psi for clinchers, since I like the higher tire pressures I have switched to Tubular wheels, Zipp recommends 140-145 psi for my Tangente tubular tires, check out my next Video "The 2012 Iowa State Cy-Man Triathlon" and see how well they handle.
I totally admit that back when I was a Cat 5 I made a similar mistake. (I've since upgraded to Cat 6 of course.) Fortunately though my tires didn't blow off the rim and instead what tipped me off to my dangerously high pressure was that IT FELT LIKE MY TEETH WERE GOING TO RATTLE OUT OF MY FUCKING SKULL.
That and somebody who knew better probably told me I was an idiot.
By the way, I realize I've probably featured every one of the above videos at least once before, but they all bear repeated viewing because it's important to learn from other people's mistakes. Just make sure you don't laugh at them at all because they're not funny, not even a little bit. Triathletes falling off bikes is serious business.
Speaking of serious business, we all know that's what driving cars is, and that cyclists just make drivers' important work more difficult. Australians know this better than anybody, which is why they force their cyclists to wear foam dunce caps at all times, and why their car enthusiasts pen insightful satire like this:
(Via @EricMBurgeson)
Yeah, yeah, you know the drill by now. First he starts in with the Lycra:
1. All that Lycra
There's a reason you don't see hordes of helmet-wearing, race suit-clad drivers buzzing around a table piled high with cappuccinos at your local cafe every weekend. And that's because most drivers understand that their vehicle is largely a mode of transport, and that not every trip is an attempt to set a Nurburgring lap record.
Wait a minute. This guy reviews cars and he doesn't think people drive around thinking they're race car drivers? Seriously? Do they really not have people in Australia who drive tuned Honda Civics with carbon fiber hoods and eighty decals on the rear windshield? Does BMW not export cars there there? I find all of this difficult to believe.
And eventually he finishes with the "attitude:"
5. The attitude
There’s just so much that comes under this heading that it’s hard to know where to start, but basically cyclists seem to be furiously angry and put upon people. Cover them in Lycra and they become rage monsters; shaking their fists and screaming expletives at any motorist who dares to use the road (which was designed, let’s not forget, to convey motorised vehicles) anywhere near them.
Wow, this Andrew Chesterton is sublimating a lot of deep-seated resentment for the fact that he's a failed car journalist into a hatred of cyclists. I could devote a lot of my masterful verbiage to explaining why everything he says above is completely moronic, but it would be a waste of my considerable abilities, so instead here's a picture of him slaking his thirst by drinking from a soiled bedpan:
Here's one of him eating out a pig's asshole on an artisanally curated porcine analingus table he had crafted expressly for the occasion:
And here he is a little later on, demonstrating the ample rear seating area of the 2017 Kia Rio by slathering his crotch with Vegemite and tricking a large dog into fellating him:
Putz.
Lastly, here in Canada's bidet, all is not well. (YA THINK???) Indeed, a legislator in Montana has drafted a bill that would ban cyclists and other non-motorized road users from many public roads:
Montana cyclists could see their road ride route options drastically reduced if a draft bill in the Montana House of Representatives moves forward as written. LC2196, sponsored by freshman legislator Barry Usher of district 40, would prohibit cyclists, runners, walkers, and those in wheelchairs from two-lane highways outside of municipalities when no shoulder is present.
Usher claims that the bill was inspired by safety concerns, while opponents contend that the measure is a clear attempt to disenfranchise non-motorized road users.
What a shame. I expect more from the great state of Montana.
Wait, actually that's not entirely true. By no means am I condemning the entire state, but it does happen to be the one Richard Spencer comes from:
The founder of the neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer has announced that the site’s campaign of harassment against Jews in alt-right leader Richard Spencer’s hometown of Whitefish, Montana, will continue with an armed march in January. Andrew Anglin claimed on Thursday that 200 people are already expected to participate in the march “against Jews, Jewish businesses and everyone who supports either,” which will take demonstrators carrying “high-powered rifles” through the center of the town.
Harassing Jews in a town named after one of their most favorite foods? Now that's just rude:
(Whitefish. So good.)
Now I gotta go eat.
Both models get auto-recording for capturing the most exciting bits of your ride. The Shimano CM-2000 and CM-1100 action cameras can auto-record via ANT+, working with your bike computer and sensors like a power meter, heart rate strap, cadence sensor or speed sensor to detect when you’re moving quickly or working hard. For Di2 users, it’ll even auto-record when you’re in a specified gear range.
Yes, this is just what the cycling world needs: a device to capture the pathetic wet noodle-like flagellations of the few remaining Freds who still ride outside instead of "training" with Zwift:
Given that most Freds can't even ride in the drops (much less turn over the big ring of so much as a compact crankset) this camera should result in the Internet being clogged with thousands upon thousands of hours of truly pathetic video, though I suppose it will be a net benefit to society if it results in more cinematic masterpieces like this one:
I don't know anybody involved in this video but it makes me happy my logo was there to witness it all:
So which is more dangerous: cycling with aerobars, or cycling without a helmet?
That's a rhetorical question of course:
And they're even more dangerous when paired with ludicriously high #whatpressureyourunning:
I uploaded this video as a possible warning as what can happen if you inflate clincher tires to more than 125 psi, I bought Vredestein Tricomp clincher tires for my bike because they have a 175psi rating printed on the sidewall see Vredestein.com , I wanted to experment with higher pressures and hopefully get less rolling resistance. I inflated my tires to 110 psi and rolled down a hill untill the bike coasted to a stop, then tried it again with 140 psi, I went further and faster at the higher pressure. Then at my next race I inflated my tires to 140 psi and near the finish line the rear tire popped off the rim and locked against the frame locking the rear tire and causing me to take a tumble it was my fault because I did not know that all rims have a max pressure rating of 125 psi for clinchers, since I like the higher tire pressures I have switched to Tubular wheels, Zipp recommends 140-145 psi for my Tangente tubular tires, check out my next Video "The 2012 Iowa State Cy-Man Triathlon" and see how well they handle.
I totally admit that back when I was a Cat 5 I made a similar mistake. (I've since upgraded to Cat 6 of course.) Fortunately though my tires didn't blow off the rim and instead what tipped me off to my dangerously high pressure was that IT FELT LIKE MY TEETH WERE GOING TO RATTLE OUT OF MY FUCKING SKULL.
That and somebody who knew better probably told me I was an idiot.
By the way, I realize I've probably featured every one of the above videos at least once before, but they all bear repeated viewing because it's important to learn from other people's mistakes. Just make sure you don't laugh at them at all because they're not funny, not even a little bit. Triathletes falling off bikes is serious business.
Speaking of serious business, we all know that's what driving cars is, and that cyclists just make drivers' important work more difficult. Australians know this better than anybody, which is why they force their cyclists to wear foam dunce caps at all times, and why their car enthusiasts pen insightful satire like this:
(Via @EricMBurgeson)Yeah, yeah, you know the drill by now. First he starts in with the Lycra:
1. All that Lycra
There's a reason you don't see hordes of helmet-wearing, race suit-clad drivers buzzing around a table piled high with cappuccinos at your local cafe every weekend. And that's because most drivers understand that their vehicle is largely a mode of transport, and that not every trip is an attempt to set a Nurburgring lap record.
Wait a minute. This guy reviews cars and he doesn't think people drive around thinking they're race car drivers? Seriously? Do they really not have people in Australia who drive tuned Honda Civics with carbon fiber hoods and eighty decals on the rear windshield? Does BMW not export cars there there? I find all of this difficult to believe.
And eventually he finishes with the "attitude:"
5. The attitude
There’s just so much that comes under this heading that it’s hard to know where to start, but basically cyclists seem to be furiously angry and put upon people. Cover them in Lycra and they become rage monsters; shaking their fists and screaming expletives at any motorist who dares to use the road (which was designed, let’s not forget, to convey motorised vehicles) anywhere near them.
Wow, this Andrew Chesterton is sublimating a lot of deep-seated resentment for the fact that he's a failed car journalist into a hatred of cyclists. I could devote a lot of my masterful verbiage to explaining why everything he says above is completely moronic, but it would be a waste of my considerable abilities, so instead here's a picture of him slaking his thirst by drinking from a soiled bedpan:
Here's one of him eating out a pig's asshole on an artisanally curated porcine analingus table he had crafted expressly for the occasion:
And here he is a little later on, demonstrating the ample rear seating area of the 2017 Kia Rio by slathering his crotch with Vegemite and tricking a large dog into fellating him:
Putz.
Lastly, here in Canada's bidet, all is not well. (YA THINK???) Indeed, a legislator in Montana has drafted a bill that would ban cyclists and other non-motorized road users from many public roads:
Montana cyclists could see their road ride route options drastically reduced if a draft bill in the Montana House of Representatives moves forward as written. LC2196, sponsored by freshman legislator Barry Usher of district 40, would prohibit cyclists, runners, walkers, and those in wheelchairs from two-lane highways outside of municipalities when no shoulder is present.
Usher claims that the bill was inspired by safety concerns, while opponents contend that the measure is a clear attempt to disenfranchise non-motorized road users.
What a shame. I expect more from the great state of Montana.
Wait, actually that's not entirely true. By no means am I condemning the entire state, but it does happen to be the one Richard Spencer comes from:
The founder of the neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer has announced that the site’s campaign of harassment against Jews in alt-right leader Richard Spencer’s hometown of Whitefish, Montana, will continue with an armed march in January. Andrew Anglin claimed on Thursday that 200 people are already expected to participate in the march “against Jews, Jewish businesses and everyone who supports either,” which will take demonstrators carrying “high-powered rifles” through the center of the town.
Harassing Jews in a town named after one of their most favorite foods? Now that's just rude:
(Whitefish. So good.)
Now I gotta go eat.
January 23, 2017
Wait, is it Monday already?
In this crazy, topsy-turvy, turvy-topsy world, you can only count on three (3) things: death, taxes (current president excluded), and people losing their goddamn minds when you tell them they don't have to wear a plastic hat in order to ride a bicycle. That last fact would explain why even in the midst of all the inaugural mishegas last week's Gothamist op-ed by Jørs Trüli rode high among the "popular posts" going into the weekend:
Sure, you may have had it up to here [indicates top of helmet] with my incessant screeds on the subject, but I intend to chip away at this country's pathetic bike helmet obsession until it collapses like a bloated world power, and one day when we're finally free you people are gonna thank me for it.
Though of course some people should probably wear them regardless:
Anyway, besides the Inauguration and all the concomitant drama, last week also saw the birthday of melancholy weirdo Edgar Allan Poe:
Which I observed by visiting the High Bridge, one of his most favorite places to pace and sulk:
“In the last melancholy years of his life—’the lonesome latter years’—Poe was accustomed to walk there at all times of the day and night; often pacing the then solitary pathways for hours without meeting a human being,” continued Whitman.
Just think of how much better Poe's life would have been if only he'd had access to Netflix.
Anyway, on an appropriately overcast day I made my way over the Broadway Bridge and into Inwood, where I picked up the Harlem River Greenway at Swindler Cove:
I then continued downtown:
Making sure as always to duck when I reached this treacherous point of reduced vertical clearance:
Whew! That was a close one:
Had I been wearing a helmet I'd no doubt have clipped my noggin due to the extra centimeter of polystyrene.
This water tower marks the Manhattan side of the High Bridge:
And on the Bronx side a number of the original stone archways remain:
Though I kept going under the bridge to the end of the Greenway, where I scoffed at this sign and continued to ride:
It's a quirk of New York City's bike routes that they expect you to get off and walk from time to time. Here's a typical example:
I think it's only fair that drivers should have to get out of their cars and push them occasionally as well. Curb cuts seem like a perfect place to require this. It's kind of crazy you can drive across a busy sidewalk to access a garage or parking lot. Why not require all motorists to push their cars when crossing a pedestrian thoroughfare?
Anyway, the ramp delivers you right into the middle of an entrance ramp to the Harlem River Drive, and if you manage to survive that you have time to collect your wits again in this protected bike lane:
Which ends at W. 155th Street:
Drivers will do their best to kill you here, because it's basically a six-way intersection. Also, W. 155th Street takes you over the Macombs Dam Bridge, and New York City drivers are at their worst (which is saying a lot) in the vicinity of a free bridge crossing.
Here's Hooper Fountain, which was built in 1894 and which is an ideal spot to water your horse:
Here's a building I'm guessing is of a more recent vintage:
And here's the view from Edgecombe Avenue out to the Macombs Dam Bridge and Yankee Stadium beyond:
I think it's where the Mets play or something, I'm really not a baseball fan.
Heading north along Edgecombe Avenue you begin a "climb" by Manhattan standards:
On your right is the lower end of Highbridge Park:
On your left are noteworthy residences such as the Morris-Jumel Mansion, which is the oldest house in Manhattan:
As well as 555 Edgecombe Avenue, which has been home to such personages as Paul Robeson and Count Basie:
Shortly after these abodes a sumptuous two-way bike lane materializes:
But it was at this juncture that I detoured onto the Highbridge Access Trail:
Which begins thusly:
And which, in short order, feels very far away from Manhattan:
Though if you need to charge your phone you're in luck:
Just don't forget your tinfoil hat, because you're being watched:
Once I passed the phone recharger I found myself on the High Bridge:
Here's the view from the span looking towards Manhattan:
Here's the view looking downriver:
Here's Poe as he would have looked while crossing it:
And here's what he'd see from that vantage point today:
Were it not for the safety netting he'd definitely jump.
Anyway, soon I alighted in the Bronx:
Where a sign helpfully points you to the local landmarks:
But where, if you follow the sign, you'll be salmoning, because the two-way bike lane that was once there seems to have disappeared:
Though you can see a hint of green paint remaining under the parked cars:
I was sorry to see this, because last time I was here they were just putting the lane in:
I don't know what happened, but if I had to guess I'd say people freaked out over the loss of parking so the DOT deleted it.
Happy birthday, Edgar!
Sure, you may have had it up to here [indicates top of helmet] with my incessant screeds on the subject, but I intend to chip away at this country's pathetic bike helmet obsession until it collapses like a bloated world power, and one day when we're finally free you people are gonna thank me for it.
Though of course some people should probably wear them regardless:
Anyway, besides the Inauguration and all the concomitant drama, last week also saw the birthday of melancholy weirdo Edgar Allan Poe:
Which I observed by visiting the High Bridge, one of his most favorite places to pace and sulk:
“In the last melancholy years of his life—’the lonesome latter years’—Poe was accustomed to walk there at all times of the day and night; often pacing the then solitary pathways for hours without meeting a human being,” continued Whitman.
Just think of how much better Poe's life would have been if only he'd had access to Netflix.
Anyway, on an appropriately overcast day I made my way over the Broadway Bridge and into Inwood, where I picked up the Harlem River Greenway at Swindler Cove:
I then continued downtown:
Making sure as always to duck when I reached this treacherous point of reduced vertical clearance:
Whew! That was a close one:
Had I been wearing a helmet I'd no doubt have clipped my noggin due to the extra centimeter of polystyrene.
This water tower marks the Manhattan side of the High Bridge:
And on the Bronx side a number of the original stone archways remain:
Though I kept going under the bridge to the end of the Greenway, where I scoffed at this sign and continued to ride:
It's a quirk of New York City's bike routes that they expect you to get off and walk from time to time. Here's a typical example:
I think it's only fair that drivers should have to get out of their cars and push them occasionally as well. Curb cuts seem like a perfect place to require this. It's kind of crazy you can drive across a busy sidewalk to access a garage or parking lot. Why not require all motorists to push their cars when crossing a pedestrian thoroughfare?
Anyway, the ramp delivers you right into the middle of an entrance ramp to the Harlem River Drive, and if you manage to survive that you have time to collect your wits again in this protected bike lane:
Which ends at W. 155th Street:
Drivers will do their best to kill you here, because it's basically a six-way intersection. Also, W. 155th Street takes you over the Macombs Dam Bridge, and New York City drivers are at their worst (which is saying a lot) in the vicinity of a free bridge crossing.
Here's Hooper Fountain, which was built in 1894 and which is an ideal spot to water your horse:
Here's a building I'm guessing is of a more recent vintage:
And here's the view from Edgecombe Avenue out to the Macombs Dam Bridge and Yankee Stadium beyond:
I think it's where the Mets play or something, I'm really not a baseball fan.
Heading north along Edgecombe Avenue you begin a "climb" by Manhattan standards:
On your right is the lower end of Highbridge Park:
On your left are noteworthy residences such as the Morris-Jumel Mansion, which is the oldest house in Manhattan:
As well as 555 Edgecombe Avenue, which has been home to such personages as Paul Robeson and Count Basie:
Shortly after these abodes a sumptuous two-way bike lane materializes:
But it was at this juncture that I detoured onto the Highbridge Access Trail:
Which begins thusly:
And which, in short order, feels very far away from Manhattan:
Though if you need to charge your phone you're in luck:
Just don't forget your tinfoil hat, because you're being watched:
Once I passed the phone recharger I found myself on the High Bridge:
Here's the view from the span looking towards Manhattan:
Here's the view looking downriver:
Here's Poe as he would have looked while crossing it:
And here's what he'd see from that vantage point today:
Were it not for the safety netting he'd definitely jump.
Anyway, soon I alighted in the Bronx:
Where a sign helpfully points you to the local landmarks:
But where, if you follow the sign, you'll be salmoning, because the two-way bike lane that was once there seems to have disappeared:
Though you can see a hint of green paint remaining under the parked cars:
I was sorry to see this, because last time I was here they were just putting the lane in:
I don't know what happened, but if I had to guess I'd say people freaked out over the loss of parking so the DOT deleted it.
Happy birthday, Edgar!
January 19, 2017
I'm NOT HERE, I just popped back in for a minute to tell you something.
While I'm still technically away from this blog until Monday, January 23rd, I just wanted to inform you, my loyal readers, that I've written an op-ed on every cyclist's favorite subject for Gothamist:
As a long-time Gothamist reader I was grateful for the opportunity to write this, and I'm uncharacteristically pleased with the results. Furthermore, as someone who's been writing about bikes on the Internet for 10 years now, believe me when I tell you that last week I typed up what I thought the comments on this post would be, mailed them to myself, and when I opened the envelope just now the contents matched the actual comments on the post word-for-word.
Helmet commentary that predictable.
[I should also point out that my oft-used intentional misspelling of helmet as "helment" indeed has its origins in a Gothamist post, so my blogging career has come full circle yet again, which would explain why I never feel like I'm getting anywhere.]
And now back to your regularly-scheduled hiatus. See you back here on Monday, January 23rd!
Ride safe,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
PS: Notice I didn't even mention once how the inauguration is tomorrow and we're all doomed.
As a long-time Gothamist reader I was grateful for the opportunity to write this, and I'm uncharacteristically pleased with the results. Furthermore, as someone who's been writing about bikes on the Internet for 10 years now, believe me when I tell you that last week I typed up what I thought the comments on this post would be, mailed them to myself, and when I opened the envelope just now the contents matched the actual comments on the post word-for-word.
Helmet commentary that predictable.
[I should also point out that my oft-used intentional misspelling of helmet as "helment" indeed has its origins in a Gothamist post, so my blogging career has come full circle yet again, which would explain why I never feel like I'm getting anywhere.]
And now back to your regularly-scheduled hiatus. See you back here on Monday, January 23rd!
Ride safe,
--Wildcat Rock Machine
PS: Notice I didn't even mention once how the inauguration is tomorrow and we're all doomed.
January 13, 2017
BSNYC Friday No Quiz Instead I'm Like Totally Splitting the Scene, Man
Good morning, or whatever the hell time it is.
Nice day for a ride, isn't it?
Yes it is.
Alas, I regret to inform you that today's post mostly serves as notice that I won't be posting next week. You know, next week. That's the one that starts on Monday with Martin Luther King, Jr. Day:
And ends on Friday with the inauguration of the 45th President of the United States:
(Nuclear blasts and our new president are both orange. Interesting.)
How's that for a pair of bookends?
Anyway, if there even is a Monday, January 23rd, that's the day I'll be back, and if there's not, well hey, we had a good run.
Nobody can take that away from us, though I suppose they can pee on it.
In the meantime, since I can't bear to look forward I've been looking backward instead. As you've no doubt gathered from some of my Brooks blog posts I'm a little bit of a local history Fred. In its way this is even more addicting than bikes, and of course it dovetails right into genealogy, which is a real time-suck. (It's also even more delusional than Strava, because what's more self-absorbed than poring over your family history like you're the goddamn royals?) Indeed, I found out recently that my great-grandfather was apparently a New York City streetcar conductor back in the year nineteen hundred and ten--or at least that's what he told the census taker, who, it should be noted, had pretty bad handwriting:
So naturally after that I spent like the next six hours watching sick trolley edits:
Did you spot the guy on the bike?
These damn dandies in their bowler hats think they're Mile-A-Minute Murphy!
Anyway, as you can see, it was quite a free-for-all out there, and as it happens 1910 is the first year the city started tracking traffic fatalities. Here's how things were when my great-grandfather was plying the streets with one of those change dispensers around his waist:
Clearly, New York City has come a long way in mitigating traffic fatalities. According to an article from the New York Times dated September 2, 1913, the city endured 471 traffic fatalities in 1910. Of those, 112 were caused by automobiles, with another 148 from streetcars and 211 from horse-drawn vehicles. Of those it was estimated that some 95 percent were pedestrians struck in the streets. That's with a population of about 4.7 million — a bit more than half what it is today.
Meanwhile, here's what 2016 looked like:
The overall number of people killed in traffic crashes, including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, drivers and passengers, was 229 last year, down from 234 in 2015, according to preliminary data from the city. Pedestrian deaths, which accounted for the largest share of fatalities, increased last year to 144, from 139 in 2015. Cyclist deaths rose last year to 18, from 14 in 2015.
I suppose 229 is a lot better than 471, especially when you consider the population of New York City was only 4,766,883 in 1910 and it's estimated at around 8.5 million people now. Then again, given all the advancements in traffic control since then (which don't seem to have existed in those days) you'd think we could do a lot better than we are. Either way, I suppose it helps put the present into some kind of perspective.
And with that I'm outta here. I'll see you back here on Monday, January 23rd. Enjoy the week ahead if you can, ride safe, and be sure to dodge those trolleys.
--Wildcat Rock Machine
Nice day for a ride, isn't it?
Yes it is.
Alas, I regret to inform you that today's post mostly serves as notice that I won't be posting next week. You know, next week. That's the one that starts on Monday with Martin Luther King, Jr. Day:
And ends on Friday with the inauguration of the 45th President of the United States:
(Nuclear blasts and our new president are both orange. Interesting.)
How's that for a pair of bookends?
Anyway, if there even is a Monday, January 23rd, that's the day I'll be back, and if there's not, well hey, we had a good run.
Nobody can take that away from us, though I suppose they can pee on it.
In the meantime, since I can't bear to look forward I've been looking backward instead. As you've no doubt gathered from some of my Brooks blog posts I'm a little bit of a local history Fred. In its way this is even more addicting than bikes, and of course it dovetails right into genealogy, which is a real time-suck. (It's also even more delusional than Strava, because what's more self-absorbed than poring over your family history like you're the goddamn royals?) Indeed, I found out recently that my great-grandfather was apparently a New York City streetcar conductor back in the year nineteen hundred and ten--or at least that's what he told the census taker, who, it should be noted, had pretty bad handwriting:
So naturally after that I spent like the next six hours watching sick trolley edits:
Did you spot the guy on the bike?
These damn dandies in their bowler hats think they're Mile-A-Minute Murphy!
Anyway, as you can see, it was quite a free-for-all out there, and as it happens 1910 is the first year the city started tracking traffic fatalities. Here's how things were when my great-grandfather was plying the streets with one of those change dispensers around his waist:
Clearly, New York City has come a long way in mitigating traffic fatalities. According to an article from the New York Times dated September 2, 1913, the city endured 471 traffic fatalities in 1910. Of those, 112 were caused by automobiles, with another 148 from streetcars and 211 from horse-drawn vehicles. Of those it was estimated that some 95 percent were pedestrians struck in the streets. That's with a population of about 4.7 million — a bit more than half what it is today.
Meanwhile, here's what 2016 looked like:
The overall number of people killed in traffic crashes, including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, drivers and passengers, was 229 last year, down from 234 in 2015, according to preliminary data from the city. Pedestrian deaths, which accounted for the largest share of fatalities, increased last year to 144, from 139 in 2015. Cyclist deaths rose last year to 18, from 14 in 2015.
I suppose 229 is a lot better than 471, especially when you consider the population of New York City was only 4,766,883 in 1910 and it's estimated at around 8.5 million people now. Then again, given all the advancements in traffic control since then (which don't seem to have existed in those days) you'd think we could do a lot better than we are. Either way, I suppose it helps put the present into some kind of perspective.
And with that I'm outta here. I'll see you back here on Monday, January 23rd. Enjoy the week ahead if you can, ride safe, and be sure to dodge those trolleys.
--Wildcat Rock Machine
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.
