Re: OT: joining the ranks of two wheelers again

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Nate Nagel wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jul 20, 10:22 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T.
>> Russotto) wrote:
>>
>>> In article <tpadnei4LsraPz3bnZ2dnUVZ_o6kn...@comcast.com>,
>>> Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Speed "humps" don't present problems for bikes. Bumps are usually used
>>>> in parking lots, humps on streets.
>>>
>>> I've run across plenty of bumps in streets.
>>
>>
>> _Speed_ bumps? In streets? I've _never_ seen one. Can you provide a
>> photo?
>
> We've had this discussion before. If you really want to see some, I
> remember there being quite a few in Silver Spring, MD at least toward
> Wheaton. I can give you exact directions to the neighborhood I used to
> live in, if you want to see them.

We should be able to find it via Google satellite shots, easy to spot
with all the auto wreckage scattered about. Heh.

Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>
> But everyone's too timid to honk or yell, because god forbid you exhibit
> any signs of the tewwible Woad Wage, no matter how warranted.

No, go ahead, *you've* got the *right* kind of road rage (or is that
*self* right, I can never keep that straight).

Rage on, MFFY!

Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> In article <1184988135.122946.64560@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>> By golly, you're right. Despite my long experience with mechanical
>> engineering, and with car repair and maintenance, and my youthful time
>> wasted doing performance modifications to cars, etc., I find that
>> there are _many_ things that are far more interesting than the bottom
>> of my car. I just don't care about the bottom side of my car!
>
> While the bottom of the car is not all that interesting, I've found
> that many of the things you see there are important to the operation
> of the car, and may malfunction if slammed against asphalt.
>
> Structural members, driveshaft, exhaust, drains, suspension parts,
> differential, etc.
>

Yessir, there's some delicate shit down there, wish I knew the technical
names for all those whatchamacallits.

You guys are a riot.

Arif Khokar wrote:
> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>> In article <lkf2a3lcrobtsrt70bqv49ggos669ilv9i@4ax.com>, Zoot Katz
>> <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Car culture and its adherents are the have created this MFFY society.
>
>> Then why is it you who typifies it?
>
> Perhaps it's 'roid rage.

Drivers get 'roids from sitting on their fat butts for hours.

Brent P wrote:
> In article <1184988135.122946.64560@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> That can be true. So we should look at the quality of a person's
>> work, their use of data, their technical knowledge, their respect
>> among others with technical knowledge, etc. From what I can see, Dan
>> Burden's got you beat hands down on all counts.
>
> You think so because you agree with him. To me, he's just another activist
> control freak.

Yeah, a "control freak", like somebody who would run somebody else off
the road because they couldn't stand to be passed. What a weirdo!


> And as far as caring about our machines, you never answered my question.
> How about you let me smash the bottom bracket or one of the lower tubes of
> your bicycle into a concrete curb? I am sure it will still ride 'ok'
> afterwards, and nobody really cares what the bottom of your bicycle looks
> like. And while I am at it, let me drive your car over some nice high
> square curbs or give it a few wacks under there with a sledge hammer. I am
> sure it will still be 'drivable'.
>

Why don't you go pound that speed hump with your sledge hammer? You
might feel better. You've got no respect for Frank's property do you?

Peter Cole wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jul 20, 10:22 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T.
>>> Russotto) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <tpadnei4LsraPz3bnZ2dnUVZ_o6kn...@comcast.com>,
>>>> Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Speed "humps" don't present problems for bikes. Bumps are usually
>>>>> used in parking lots, humps on streets.
>>>>
>>>> I've run across plenty of bumps in streets.
>>>
>>>
>>> _Speed_ bumps? In streets? I've _never_ seen one. Can you
>>> provide a photo?
>>
>> We've had this discussion before. If you really want to see some, I
>> remember there being quite a few in Silver Spring, MD at least toward
>> Wheaton. I can give you exact directions to the neighborhood I used
>> to live in, if you want to see them.
>
> We should be able to find it via Google satellite shots, easy to spot
> with all the auto wreckage scattered about. Heh.

FWIW, many residential streets in San Diego have speed bumps. My very
street has them, although not on the block I live.

Bill "from Silver Spring MD BTW" S.

Brent P wrote:

> That's not an 'if'. I've successfully blocked or at least impeded (and seen
> others do the same) the first couple of shoulder passers and the hordes
> didn't come. When nobody stopped the first couple of em, good night nurse.
>

That's great, because if they didn't stop, you'd have to round up a
posse and go after them. If it was a horde, you'd have to raise an army.
What an inconvenience!

What a (bad) trip.

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 20, 7:43 pm, r15...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Personally I can agree that MUP riding may be more likely to result in
>> minor injury, but I find it in many cases to be worth the extra
>> (shudder) risk to use an MUP that is completely void of intersections.
>
> Hmm. "Completely"? Sounds like another absolute. I suppose, to
> access an MUP that's completely devoid of intersections, one carries
> their bike down some stairs, or perhaps takes an elevator?
>
> But to get serious: The worst accidents at MUPs tend to occur at
> intersections. Motorists are often unaware that the path crosses the
> road; many path-road intersections are horribly designed; many MUP
> users are not sufficiently alert when entering intersections.
>
> But contrary to public perception, there are plenty of non-
> intersection serious crashes on MUPs. I've personally known several
> people who broke bones, etc. on MUPs (more than from road riding,
> despite the vastly smaller number of miles my friends do on MUPs).
> And I can easily recall a couple fatalities I read about.

I believe there was a fatal bicycle/rollerblader collision earlier this
year in Vancouver on a MUP. Ryan posted about it.

Message-ID: <rcousine-A94AF9.23551921062007@news.telus.net>

"The investigation so far has revealed a 24-year-old North Vancouver
woman was rollerblading on the wrong side of the path when a cyclist
travelling at a high speed came around a blind corner and collided with
her."

--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"I'm in Pittsburgh. Why am I here?"
-- Harold Urey, Nobel Laureate

Dane Buson wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jul 20, 7:43 pm, r15...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> Personally I can agree that MUP riding may be more likely to result in
>>> minor injury, but I find it in many cases to be worth the extra
>>> (shudder) risk to use an MUP that is completely void of intersections.
>> Hmm. "Completely"? Sounds like another absolute. I suppose, to
>> access an MUP that's completely devoid of intersections, one carries
>> their bike down some stairs, or perhaps takes an elevator?
>>
>> But to get serious: The worst accidents at MUPs tend to occur at
>> intersections. Motorists are often unaware that the path crosses the
>> road; many path-road intersections are horribly designed; many MUP
>> users are not sufficiently alert when entering intersections.
>>
>> But contrary to public perception, there are plenty of non-
>> intersection serious crashes on MUPs. I've personally known several
>> people who broke bones, etc. on MUPs (more than from road riding,
>> despite the vastly smaller number of miles my friends do on MUPs).
>> And I can easily recall a couple fatalities I read about.
>
> I believe there was a fatal bicycle/rollerblader collision earlier this
> year in Vancouver on a MUP. Ryan posted about it.
>
> Message-ID: <rcousine-A94AF9.23551921062007@news.telus.net>
>
> "The investigation so far has revealed a 24-year-old North Vancouver
> woman was rollerblading on the wrong side of the path when a cyclist
> travelling at a high speed came around a blind corner and collided with
> her."

According to "He Who Must Not Be Named", this death was due to the
cyclist being a mountain biker.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jul 21, 9:41 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 20, 11:10 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T.
>
> Russotto) wrote:
> > In article <1184986886.562554.224...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On Jul 20, 10:22 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T.
> > >Russotto) wrote:
>
> > >> I've run across plenty of bumps in streets.
>
> > >_Speed_ bumps? In streets? I've _never_ seen one. Can you provide a
> > >photo?
>
> > I could, but I'd be wasting my time. You'd come up with some excuse,
> > then you'd continue to repeat your assertion.
>
> My assertion is that I've never seen a speed _bump_ in a street - that
> is, a purposely-installed, transverse, raised object or section of
> pavement that required a speed of less than ten miles per hour with an
> ordinary car like, say, a stock Taurus or Civic.

Well, I have. so you either have to accept that they exist or call me
a liar, it's that simple. (I actually drive an Impala now, but I
assume that you're not going to argue that that's significantly
different from a Taurus for purposes of this discussion.)

nate

On Jul 21, 9:50 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 20, 11:14 pm, Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net> wrote:
>
> > frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > _Speed_ bumps? In streets? I've _never_ seen one. Can you provide a
> > > photo?
>
> > We've had this discussion before. If you really want to see some, I
> > remember there being quite a few in Silver Spring, MD at least toward
> > Wheaton. I can give you exact directions to the neighborhood I used to
> > live in, if you want to see them.
>
> I doubt many people will make a cross-country trip to see what you
> claim. That's why I asked for a photo.
>
> > > On a bike, I find a speed hump to
> > > be kind of fun. In a car, I find it to be no problem at all.
>
> > Sure, if you don't care about your car.
>
> :-) For some people, their car is their religion. They worship it
> with semi-weekly washing and waxing, they spend big money on cute
> accessories like fancy wheels or weird lighting schemes, they
> "invest" in performance hardware so they can exceed the speed limit by
> even more. And, apparently, they mock those who do not worship their
> car-god.
>
> I'm not a member of that religion. I care about my car as a
> transportation tool. If it runs reliably and lasts long enough, it's
> doing its job.
>
> And in all the years I've been driving, I've never ever had any damage
> to any of my cars caused by even the most radical speed bump, let
> alone a well-designed speed hump.
>
> I maintain that, if you have, you've made some sort of mistake while
> driving - most probably, you've gone too fast for conditions.
>
> Slow down. Protect your dear car.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Wrong. The mistake made, if you can call it that, is driving down the
street with speed bumps on it. There are some that will cause some
scraping at any non-zero speed.

nate

On Jul 21, 12:19 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> > In article <1184988135.122946.64...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> > <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> By golly, you're right. Despite my long experience with mechanical
> >> engineering, and with car repair and maintenance, and my youthful time
> >> wasted doing performance modifications to cars, etc., I find that
> >> there are _many_ things that are far more interesting than the bottom
> >> of my car. I just don't care about the bottom side of my car!
>
> > While the bottom of the car is not all that interesting, I've found
> > that many of the things you see there are important to the operation
> > of the car, and may malfunction if slammed against asphalt.
>
> > Structural members, driveshaft, exhaust, drains, suspension parts,
> > differential, etc.
>
> Yessir, there's some delicate shit down there, wish I knew the technical
> names for all those whatchamacallits.
>
> You guys are a riot.

Yeah, a dented or bent driveshaft is entirely inconsequential, and
won't cause any vibration at all, which certainly wouldn't lead to
early U-joint failure, which has no dangerous or life-threatening
consequences.

Sounds like you should stick to bikes, since you're apparently a
complete idiot when it comes to motorized transport.

nate

N8N <njnagel@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 9:41 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> My assertion is that I've never seen a speed _bump_ in a street - that
>> is, a purposely-installed, transverse, raised object or section of
>> pavement that required a speed of less than ten miles per hour with an
>> ordinary car like, say, a stock Taurus or Civic.
>
> Well, I have. so you either have to accept that they exist or call me
> a liar, it's that simple. (I actually drive an Impala now, but I
> assume that you're not going to argue that that's significantly
> different from a Taurus for purposes of this discussion.)

Or, alternately, you could take a photo and post it. That would
constitute to most reasonable people proof *and* then you could have the
warm glow of saying "Ha ha, I told you so!"

--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"What I gained by being in France was learning to be better
satisfied with my own country." -Samual Johnson

N8N wrote:
> On Jul 21, 12:19 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>>> In article <1184988135.122946.64...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>>> <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> By golly, you're right. Despite my long experience with mechanical
>>>> engineering, and with car repair and maintenance, and my youthful time
>>>> wasted doing performance modifications to cars, etc., I find that
>>>> there are _many_ things that are far more interesting than the bottom
>>>> of my car. I just don't care about the bottom side of my car!
>>> While the bottom of the car is not all that interesting, I've found
>>> that many of the things you see there are important to the operation
>>> of the car, and may malfunction if slammed against asphalt.
>>> Structural members, driveshaft, exhaust, drains, suspension parts,
>>> differential, etc.
>> Yessir, there's some delicate shit down there, wish I knew the technical
>> names for all those whatchamacallits.
>>
>> You guys are a riot.
>
> Yeah, a dented or bent driveshaft is entirely inconsequential, and
> won't cause any vibration at all, which certainly wouldn't lead to
> early U-joint failure, which has no dangerous or life-threatening
> consequences.
>
> Sounds like you should stick to bikes, since you're apparently a
> complete idiot when it comes to motorized transport.
>
> nate
>

OK, I'm all ears, which part of the drive shaft did you strike? The part
that goes up and down with the axle and is above the differential
housing bottom or the part that's inside the transmission tunnel? Ever
work on a car, son? "Early u-joint failure = death" hee hee

You guys are a riot.

On Jul 21, 2:45 pm, Dane Buson <d...@unseen.edu> wrote:
> N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 9:41 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> My assertion is that I've never seen a speed _bump_ in a street - that
> >> is, a purposely-installed, transverse, raised object or section of
> >> pavement that required a speed of less than ten miles per hour with an
> >> ordinary car like, say, a stock Taurus or Civic.
>
> > Well, I have. so you either have to accept that they exist or call me
> > a liar, it's that simple. (I actually drive an Impala now, but I
> > assume that you're not going to argue that that's significantly
> > different from a Taurus for purposes of this discussion.)
>
> Or, alternately, you could take a photo and post it. That would
> constitute to most reasonable people proof *and* then you could have the
> warm glow of saying "Ha ha, I told you so!"

If I still lived there, I would. However, I've chosen to live
currently in an area where they aren't in the habit of wasting my tax
dollars on such bullshit, feel-good yet ineffective "safety" measures.

nate

On Jul 21, 4:05 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> N8N wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 12:19 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> >>> In article <1184988135.122946.64...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> By golly, you're right. Despite my long experience with mechanical
> >>>> engineering, and with car repair and maintenance, and my youthful time
> >>>> wasted doing performance modifications to cars, etc., I find that
> >>>> there are _many_ things that are far more interesting than the bottom
> >>>> of my car. I just don't care about the bottom side of my car!
> >>> While the bottom of the car is not all that interesting, I've found
> >>> that many of the things you see there are important to the operation
> >>> of the car, and may malfunction if slammed against asphalt.
> >>> Structural members, driveshaft, exhaust, drains, suspension parts,
> >>> differential, etc.
> >> Yessir, there's some delicate shit down there, wish I knew the technical
> >> names for all those whatchamacallits.
>
> >> You guys are a riot.
>
> > Yeah, a dented or bent driveshaft is entirely inconsequential, and
> > won't cause any vibration at all, which certainly wouldn't lead to
> > early U-joint failure, which has no dangerous or life-threatening
> > consequences.
>
> > Sounds like you should stick to bikes, since you're apparently a
> > complete idiot when it comes to motorized transport.
>
> > nate
>
> OK, I'm all ears, which part of the drive shaft did you strike? The part
> that goes up and down with the axle and is above the differential
> housing bottom or the part that's inside the transmission tunnel? Ever
> work on a car, son? "Early u-joint failure = death" hee hee
>
> You guys are a riot.

The part in front of the diff, of course. And do you deny that a
failed U-joint can cause a car to pole-vault? I've probably done more
work on cars than just about anyone who's not a professional.

BTW, I'm not your son, and I'm glad of that.

nate

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 19:53:58 -0400, Nate Nagel <njnagel@roosters.net>
wrote:

>Zoot Katz wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:10:43 -0400, Nate Nagel <njnagel@roosters.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>A bill from the body shop IS trivial compared life in a wheel chair.
>>>>Ask people what they'd pay to be able to walk again and the prices
>>>>they name are certainly more than any old cheby is worth.
>>>
>>>The point is YOU don't get to choose what it's worth or trivilaize
>>>someone else's loss. I am not trying in any way to minimize the tragic
>>>impact of bodily injury, simply pointing out that the callous disregard
>>>of private property displayed by you, Mr. Cole, and others is appalling,
>>>although not expected in today's rude, MFFY society.
>>
>>
>> Car culture and its adherents are the have created this MFFY society.
>
>No, no they haven't. I don't remember it being like this as a kid, and
>yet cars were a firmly entrenched part of our society by then. When I
>was a kid, I remember being expected to be polite, take my turn, follow
>the rules, and take responsbility for my actions if I messed up. I
>don't see that now, and I see you attempting to help that change along.
>
Yeah, as a kid I learned what was expected of me in polite society.
Those lessons stuck. That's partly why I have no criminal record and
a clean driving record. It's allowed me opportunities not open to
slobs and jerks.

But, I also remember my grandfather taking the "streetcar" to work.
Actually it was a bus but he still called it a streetcar. I also
remember riding in back of his pre-war coupe and sometimes feeling
the stress and general mood being less than pleasant. My grandfather
would use words like, jerk and yahoo inside the car. Words he never
used at home. Riding with my father was worse so that my sister and I
could end up crying which never helped matters.

I think the MFFY attitude toward other road users is learned at an
early age in car centric societies.

Sure there are other factors like media and language contributing to
the general decline of politeness in our society but our obsession
with driving everywhere is the largest contributor.
\
>>
>> They've taken over forty percent of our built environment with the
>> infrastructure requirements for their habitual voluntary befoulment
>> of that same environment.
>> Then they ask for more roads and more parking.
>>
>
>Which you seem to find very convenient. Were it not for cars, do you
>think you'd have the same infrastructure to ride on that you use every day?
>
Nope, we'd have a suitable network of smaller, safer, cleaner,
quieter, more interesting, better cared for and less expensive human
scaled roads. Banning cars would go a long way toward making our
older cities livable again.

The scale of our modern built environment is wrong. The physical
proportions of the sprawl is based on the needs of cars. Most of what
we see is telling us we don't belong there. I'm afraid it's always
going to be an unwelcoming place for human habitation.
>
\
>> They cut each other off or refuse to yield. They consciously and
>> maliciously impede each other with their cars.
>
>Just like cyclists.

Sounds like you don't encounter many cyclists when you're out on your
bicycle. Since riding probably isn't a daily occurrence for you I'll
venture you're speaking from ignorance.
>
>>
\
>> It's a sickness
>
>yes, and you have it too. Time to look in the mirror and realize that
>your irrational hatred of the automobile is warping your judgement.
>
My disdain for cars and our car centric society stems from my
observations, experience and reflections. My condemnation of the
entire phenomenon will be borne out by history. War is the only
greater folly of our species.
--
zk

N8N wrote:
> On Jul 21, 4:05 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> N8N wrote:
>>> On Jul 21, 12:19 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>>>>> In article <1184988135.122946.64...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> By golly, you're right. Despite my long experience with mechanical
>>>>>> engineering, and with car repair and maintenance, and my youthful time
>>>>>> wasted doing performance modifications to cars, etc., I find that
>>>>>> there are _many_ things that are far more interesting than the bottom
>>>>>> of my car. I just don't care about the bottom side of my car!
>>>>> While the bottom of the car is not all that interesting, I've found
>>>>> that many of the things you see there are important to the operation
>>>>> of the car, and may malfunction if slammed against asphalt.
>>>>> Structural members, driveshaft, exhaust, drains, suspension parts,
>>>>> differential, etc.
>>>> Yessir, there's some delicate shit down there, wish I knew the technical
>>>> names for all those whatchamacallits.
>>>> You guys are a riot.
>>> Yeah, a dented or bent driveshaft is entirely inconsequential, and
>>> won't cause any vibration at all, which certainly wouldn't lead to
>>> early U-joint failure, which has no dangerous or life-threatening
>>> consequences.
>>> Sounds like you should stick to bikes, since you're apparently a
>>> complete idiot when it comes to motorized transport.
>>> nate
>> OK, I'm all ears, which part of the drive shaft did you strike? The part
>> that goes up and down with the axle and is above the differential
>> housing bottom or the part that's inside the transmission tunnel? Ever
>> work on a car, son? "Early u-joint failure = death" hee hee
>>
>> You guys are a riot.
>
> The part in front of the diff, of course.

How do you whack that? It goes up & down with the axle (hint: that's why
you need u-joints).


> And do you deny that a
> failed U-joint can cause a car to pole-vault?

Only if it's snapped off at the tranny, and that doesn't happen from
normal wear & tear. Certainly not from speed humps.


> I've probably done more
> work on cars than just about anyone who's not a professional.

Could've fooled me, Obviously not GM's, or you'd be a u-joint expert.

> BTW, I'm not your son, and I'm glad of that.

Aw, don't be like that, you might learn something.

On Jul 21, 2:20 pm, N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 9:41 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > My assertion is that I've never seen a speed _bump_ in a street - that
> > is, a purposely-installed, transverse, raised object or section of
> > pavement that required a speed of less than ten miles per hour with an
> > ordinary car like, say, a stock Taurus or Civic.
>
> Well, I have. so you either have to accept that they exist or call me
> a liar, it's that simple.

Not quite that simple. Alternately, I could propose that you're
remembering wrong, or misunderstanding the definitions. People really
do make mistakes.

But instead, I'll just ask for details. Tell us the approximate
dimensions, describe the street where it was installed, and perhaps
most important, tell us why it was there - because such a thing is at
best, extremely unusual. A photo would be great, if you can manage
it.

And keep in mind, I'm not advocating speed bumps in streets. I don't
think I know anyone who is.

Still, give us details.

- Frank Krygowski

On Jul 21, 2:21 pm, N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 9:50 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > And in all the years I've been driving, I've never ever had any damage
> > to any of my cars caused by even the most radical speed bump, let
> > alone a well-designed speed hump.
>
> > I maintain that, if you have, you've made some sort of mistake while
> > driving - most probably, you've gone too fast for conditions.
>
> > Slow down. Protect your dear car.
>
> > - Frank Krygowski
>
> Wrong. The mistake made, if you can call it that, is driving down the
> street with speed bumps on it. There are some that will cause some
> scraping at any non-zero speed.

For a car of standard design?

Show us one. Give us details.

- Frank Krygowski