Cannondale: ³It's a better quality, nicer weld, with more patents.²

[[email protected]]

On May 29, 12:57 pm, N8N <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 9:47 am, N8N <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >At least in my area (metro DC area) most
> > >drivers are incompetent and should not be on the road.
>
> > Driving on the Capital Beltway = Death Wish
>
> > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> > It helps if your are basically nuts...
>
> So I'm all good then.  If you can just help me get over my misanthropy
> I'll be set.
>
> BTW if you think the Beltway is bad, try driving the Anacostia Freeway
> when traffic is heavy but still moving quickly.  It's an experience
> not to be missed.
>
> nate

The old "It'll-Cost-Ya" Freeway...been there, done that...ain't goin'
back for more.

These days, I'm up and down MD Route 4 a lot....heading into the MD
"countryside". Also, a death trap. One of those old winding, hilly
country roads designed for about a tenth of the traffic they are
carrying and at half the speed. Ironically, parts of it would make a
great road for cycling-- semi-hilly, nice scenery, fairly wide
shoulders with "Share The Road" signs But, man, all it takes is one
idiot on his cell phone drinking a big gulp at 90 mph to cross the
line...

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On May 29, 11:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish

I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.

Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Nate Nagel]

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>>Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
>
> I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.
>
> Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Actually based on my observations, most of them DO have a death wish.

Based on your posts to rec.autos.driving, I have no problem believing
that the morons on bikes I see every day *are* your friends. Arrogand,
rude, and consistently in flagrant violation of the law.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

 

[[email protected]]

On May 29, 5:41 pm, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.

They may be competent cyclists and totally macho-less...but they are,
indeed, risk-takers. No big deal, really...I count myself in all 3
categories as well.

>
> Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.

More useless insult-laden advice that will be totally ignored. Not
even original or very entertaining. Well done.

> - Frank Krygowski

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <Eue%[email protected]>,
SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> Not to defend cyclehelmets.org, it represents the worst kind of fake
> neo-con science, right up there with intelligent design and the denial
> of the human impact on global warming, but the emphasis by the media on
> helmets and the lack of reporting on other aspects of safe cycling can
> be annoying. Accidents where a helmet saved the cyclists life, or
> prevented serious injury, as well as stories where the lack of a helmet
> resulted in serious injury or death are popular newspaper stories. Just
> Google News "bicycle helmet saves life" and look at some of the results:
[...]
> Wearing a helmet is a good idea, but it's become a substitute for safe
> riding, especially by children and teens.

Not to be peevish Steven, but to use some medical jargon, what's the
Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for helmets?

I'll accept prevention of hospitalization or a substantial mitigation of
any injury serious enough to require hospitalization as therapeutic
benefits for this question.

The question is sincere inasmuch as I don't know the answer, but I'd
like to. However, I'm prepared to guess at the correct magnitude.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<[email protected]>,
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 26, 3:38 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bc0feec9-ae62-4680-810e-3631dedef...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> > Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone who advocates a mandatory helmet law MUST believe that it's
> > > better for a person to not cycle, than for a person to cycle without a
> > > helmet. They MUST believe that cycling is very dangerous. Surely you
> > > can't disagree with that?
> >
> > Frank, I categorically oppose MHLs, but even I can disagree with that.
> > It's entirely possible (however ill-informed) to believe that helmets
> > transform a hazardous activity into a safe and healthy one.
>
> I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. If, as you say, they
> believe cycling is "a hazardous activity," then you're confirming what
> I said - that they believe cycling is very dangerous. No?
>
> If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
> must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
> without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?

I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
could save just one life..."

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <rcousine-8DFF37.02095631052008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> writes:
> In article <Eue%[email protected]>,
> SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Not to defend cyclehelmets.org, it represents the worst kind of fake
>> neo-con science, right up there with intelligent design and the denial
>> of the human impact on global warming, but the emphasis by the media on
>> helmets and the lack of reporting on other aspects of safe cycling can
>> be annoying. Accidents where a helmet saved the cyclists life, or
>> prevented serious injury, as well as stories where the lack of a helmet
>> resulted in serious injury or death are popular newspaper stories. Just
>> Google News "bicycle helmet saves life" and look at some of the results:
> [...]
>> Wearing a helmet is a good idea, but it's become a substitute for safe
>> riding, especially by children and teens.
>
> Not to be peevish Steven,

It seems to me, /everybody's/ peevish about bicycle helmets.

Anyways, did you see the infomercial in the Friday May 30
Metro newspaper (pg 20) (metronews.ca) about the Adams Run Bike[tm]?

It's basically a pedalless bicycle-shaped scooter (juvenile
hobby horse,) so youngsters can get the feel of balancing and
directing a bike without the added complication of powering it.

If I had kids that I knew about, I just might be inclined to
set 'em up with this thing. But I'd sure supervise the heck
outa them.

I think it should certainly deprecate those stupid training
wheel thingies.

> but to use some medical jargon, what's the
> Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for helmets?
>
> I'll accept prevention of hospitalization or a substantial mitigation of
> any injury serious enough to require hospitalization as therapeutic
> benefits for this question.
>
> The question is sincere inasmuch as I don't know the answer, but I'd
> like to. However, I'm prepared to guess at the correct magnitude.

People associate bicycling with horseback riding.
It's pretty easy to fall off a horse and land on
yer head. But a bike ain't a horse (thank Goodness.)
In fact, unlike horseback riders, we cyclists generally
don't fall /off/ our mounts, we fall /with/ them.

Those rodeo bronco busters need helmets.
A Stetson just doesn't cut it.

Yeah, everybody's peeved about helmets.
At least the folks who make points one
way or another about 'em. Including myself.

I guess it's just one of those issues, like
abortion, and whatever Diet Coke is really
good for, besides making it explode w/ Mentos.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

 

[Nate Nagel]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>On May 26, 3:38 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><bc0feec9-ae62-4680-810e-3631dedef...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anyone who advocates a mandatory helmet law MUST believe that it's
>>>>better for a person to not cycle, than for a person to cycle without a
>>>>helmet. They MUST believe that cycling is very dangerous. Surely you
>>>>can't disagree with that?
>>>
>>>Frank, I categorically oppose MHLs, but even I can disagree with that.
>>>It's entirely possible (however ill-informed) to believe that helmets
>>>transform a hazardous activity into a safe and healthy one.
>>
>>I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. If, as you say, they
>>believe cycling is "a hazardous activity," then you're confirming what
>>I said - that they believe cycling is very dangerous. No?
>>
>>If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
>>must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
>>without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?
>
>
> I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
> social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
> could save just one life..."
>

AKA "it's for the chiiiiiillllldrun." Having worked briefly in the
automotive industry I'm all too familiar with it.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On May 29, 10:09 pm, the anonymous [email protected] wrote:
> On May 29, 5:41 pm, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 11:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> > I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> > time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> > risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.
>
> They may be competent cyclists and totally macho-less...but they are,
> indeed, risk-takers. No big deal, really...I count myself in all 3
> categories as well.

Everybody is a risk taker. Obviously, living invariably involves
risk. Deal with it.

> > Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> > skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.
>
> More useless insult-laden advice that will be totally ignored. Not
> even original or very entertaining. Well done.

May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
original or entertaining one.

My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
have it, you can learn. Start here: http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.htm

Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
understand. And don't belittle your betters.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On May 31, 5:17 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
> > must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
> > without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?
>
> I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
> social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
> could save just one life..."

Perhaps I do underestimate the enthusiasm - but I see that as a
separate question. Again: Those with this enthusiasm must think it's
better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle without a helmet.
That's exactly what they're trying to pass into law.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On May 31, 11:23 am, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> blew hard:
> On May 29, 10:09 pm, the anonymous [email protected] wrote:

<much snippage of Krygo-Krap>

> And don't belittle your betters.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

If you take your own advice, you won't be doing much belittling, will
you, Franky? And, since belittling is your major Usenet stock-in-
trade, you won't have much to say. eh?

 

[[email protected]]

On May 31, 12:23 pm, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:


> May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
> others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
> original or entertaining one.

Nobody called you or your friends anything. You don't really have to
work so hard to invent insults. I'm betting you probably earn plenty
all day long without even breaking a sweat.

>
> My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
> requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
> have it, you can learn. Start here:http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.ht

Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
included. So you can cycle comptently in DC, BFD. Tell that to the
paramedics after an Escalade doing 90 mph deposits your sorry ass in
the gutter.

> Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
> understand. And don't belittle your betters.

The only thing you seem to be "better" at than anybody is being a
certified asshole. Nobody will stand in your way of that prize.

>
> - Frank Krygowski

 

[[email protected]]

On May 31, 6:17 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On May 31, 12:23 pm, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
> > others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
> > original or entertaining one.

> Nobody called you or your friends anything. You don't really have to
> work so hard to invent insults. I'm betting you probably earn plenty
> all day long without even breaking a sweat.

Yeah, you did call him something. And me too. And everyone that rides
a bike in the DC area. You called us all insane. I don't really care
but others may not be so forgiving. If you call someone something
derogatory, at least have the decency to not try and weasel out of it
later.

> > My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
> > requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
> > have it, you can learn. Start here:http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.ht
>
> Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
> more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
> included. So you can cycle comptently in DC, BFD. Tell that to the
> paramedics after an Escalade doing 90 mph deposits your sorry ass in
> the gutter.

Doubt he is the reason for all the fat-asses driving a sofa instead of
riding. Your wishing him into the gutter is far worse than anything
he wrote to you. Your retort was classless and childish. He may have
been a tad haughty and curt but he did offer you a link to educational
materials which seemed sincere. Try and be more mature.

> > Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
> > understand. And don't belittle your betters.
>
> The only thing you seem to be "better" at than anybody is being a
> certified asshole. Nobody will stand in your way of that prize.

Again, you go right for a childish and uncalled-for response. I will
not be umpiring the certified asshole contest, but I bet you at least
get a podium position yourself.

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 31 May 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), [email protected]
wrote, in part:

>
>Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
>more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
>included.

Bull dadda. If some whimp's skin is too thin for Usenet then they'd
probably have a ****-hemmorage and totally disintegrate if a scud
jockey ever threatened them with expletives or a dirty look let alone
a brush-pass, thrown object, fists or weapon.

If they can't handle that kind of reality then they're better off
staying on the couch.

Frank is a realist. He is always saying, and I paraphrase here,
"Bicycling is not that dangerous. Don't make it out to be."
--
zk

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Tom Keats)
wrote:

> In article <rcousine-8DFF37.02095631052008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> writes:
> > In article <Eue%[email protected]>,
> > SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Wearing a helmet is a good idea, but it's become a substitute for safe
> >> riding, especially by children and teens.
> >
> > Not to be peevish Steven,
>
> It seems to me, /everybody's/ peevish about bicycle helmets.
>
> Anyways, did you see the infomercial in the Friday May 30
> Metro newspaper (pg 20) (metronews.ca) about the Adams Run Bike[tm]?
>
> It's basically a pedalless bicycle-shaped scooter (juvenile
> hobby horse,) so youngsters can get the feel of balancing and
> directing a bike without the added complication of powering it.

I've seen that and similar before.

> If I had kids that I knew about, I just might be inclined to
> set 'em up with this thing. But I'd sure supervise the heck
> outa them.

Well...one trick you can pull is to remove the pedals from a
conventional bike and drop the seat lower. It works quite well.

> I think it should certainly deprecate those stupid training
> wheel thingies.
>
> People associate bicycling with horseback riding.
> It's pretty easy to fall off a horse and land on
> yer head. But a bike ain't a horse (thank Goodness.)
> In fact, unlike horseback riders, we cyclists generally
> don't fall /off/ our mounts, we fall /with/ them.

Horseback riders have a bigger problem, which is that falling off a
horse involves a rather longer trip to the ground. Apparently the injury
statistics for horse-riding are impressively grim:

http://www.nature.com/sc/journal/v40/n6/full/3101280a.html

How does 7x more dangerous than motorcycling (per hour of participant
exposure) grab you?

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Dane Buson]

ZBicyclist <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: [stuff I snipped, but which was pretty good]
>
> I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Mongoose here, which is another
> Pacific/Dorel brand. They've tried to sell at both ends of the
> market with the same brand, which is confusing -- and I wouldn't
> guess works well at the high end of the spectrum.

Semi-OT: The most mind blowing thing I saw this week.

A mongoose with a Rohloff hub. I just sat and stared for a minute. I
do know the fellow who owns it. He makes his own bikes (welding) and
specializes in cargo bikes/trailers and odd bikes. Next time I'm near
and have a camera handy I'll take a snap.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers are for. I only
coded it."
(Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting)

 

[Chalo]

On Jun 3, 4:54 pm, Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Semi-OT: The most mind blowing thing I saw this week.
>
> A mongoose with a Rohloff hub. I just sat and stared for a minute. I
> do know the fellow who owns it. He makes his own bikes (welding) and
> specializes in cargo bikes/trailers and odd bikes. Next time I'm near
> and have a camera handy I'll take a snap.

I know Colin. I gave him that '85 Mongoose ATB frame & fork, in
fact. It was just one of way too many things that I was going to have
to carry back to Austin from Seattle if I kept it. The lucky *******
also got my two buckets of assorted nuts and bolts, which I have
missed many times since then.

Back in the mid-'80s, Mongeese were real bikes. They were welded, but
that was just a matter of their BMX racing lineage rather than a sign
of being cheap and cruddy. They were very fashionable, and even sort
of expensive (like all MTBs at the time). I do love the implied
subversion of putting a Rohloff on a 'goose, though.

Chalo

 

[Dane Buson]

Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 4:54 pm, Dane Buson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Semi-OT: The most mind blowing thing I saw this week.
>>
>> A mongoose with a Rohloff hub. I just sat and stared for a minute. I
>> do know the fellow who owns it. He makes his own bikes (welding) and
>> specializes in cargo bikes/trailers and odd bikes. Next time I'm near
>> and have a camera handy I'll take a snap.
>
> I know Colin. I gave him that '85 Mongoose ATB frame & fork, in
> fact. It was just one of way too many things that I was going to have
> to carry back to Austin from Seattle if I kept it. The lucky *******
> also got my two buckets of assorted nuts and bolts, which I have
> missed many times since then.

The value of a bin of random bolts/nuts/strange shaped scraps of metal
is not to be underestimated. Old parts that make their way to the
recycling bucket tend to get any interesting parts stripped off and
thrown into a bin in my workshop.

I chit-chatted with Colin Saturday at 2020 cycle while I was picking up
a used Freeradical and accessories for a side project. I see him
semi-infrequently around town and at various biking social functions.

> Back in the mid-'80s, Mongeese were real bikes. They were welded, but
> that was just a matter of their BMX racing lineage rather than a sign
> of being cheap and cruddy. They were very fashionable, and even sort
> of expensive (like all MTBs at the time). I do love the implied
> subversion of putting a Rohloff on a 'goose, though.

I do know that not all on them are junk. But still, as you mentioned,
definitely a subversive choice. Speaking of expensive bike parts, I
got buy-in on the concept of electric assist for the Extracycle from the
spouse...well, until I told her the pricetag for the StokeMonkey. [1]

It was the experience of watching me pedal us home from Madrona beach
(all four of us on one bike) that got the conversation started. It
wasn't really that bad (slow on the uphill part of course), but it would
have been nicer if it was cooler.

[1] Though I'm thinking next spring, when my work hands out bonuses
might be a good time to purchase. It's not as if they're selling any at
the moment anyway.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other
invention in human history, with the possible exception of
handguns and tequila." - Mitch Radcliffe

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:16:57 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
wrote, in part:

>Speaking of expensive bike parts, I
>got buy-in on the concept of electric assist for the Extracycle from the
>spouse...well, until I told her the pricetag for the StokeMonkey. [1]
>
>It was the experience of watching me pedal us home from Madrona beach
>(all four of us on one bike) that got the conversation started. It
>wasn't really that bad (slow on the uphill part of course), but it would
>have been nicer if it was cooler.
>
>[1] Though I'm thinking next spring, when my work hands out bonuses
>might be a good time to purchase. It's not as if they're selling any at
>the moment anyway.

This weekend saw car-free streets in six different Vancouver
neighbourhoods. I got to test a Stokemonkey as well as a few other
buzz bike conversions. The tadpole cargo trike with two front hub
motors was surprisingly agile when loaded. Unloaded the handling
wasn't so nice but not as tricky as the sociable tandem ridden solo.

There's now a Crystalyte 5304 rear hub motor with my name on it while
Justin awaits a supply of controllers to match it. The new shipment
of batteries is in town but still undergoing their quality control
testing. My Xtracycle should be rolling on the dark side by mid July
or early August.

http://ebikes.ca/store/
--
zk

 

[Dane Buson]

Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:16:57 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
> wrote, in part:
>
>>[1] Though I'm thinking next spring, when my work hands out bonuses
>>might be a good time to purchase. It's not as if they're selling any at
>>the moment anyway.
>
> This weekend saw car-free streets in six different Vancouver
> neighbourhoods. I got to test a Stokemonkey as well as a few other
> buzz bike conversions. The tadpole cargo trike with two front hub
> motors was surprisingly agile when loaded. Unloaded the handling
> wasn't so nice but not as tricky as the sociable tandem ridden solo.

I never even though about trying to ride one of those solo. It
sounds...interesting.

> There's now a Crystalyte 5304 rear hub motor with my name on it while
> Justin awaits a supply of controllers to match it. The new shipment
> of batteries is in town but still undergoing their quality control
> testing. My Xtracycle should be rolling on the dark side by mid July
> or early August.
>
> http://ebikes.ca/store/

Nifty. I still like the StokeMonkey a little better, mainly I suppose
because I'm attached to my current wheelset. Speaking of which, I can't
find any US suppliers of the Gusset Jury hub. I wanted to build up
another wheel with that and I'm not having any luck. I'll probably have
to concede defeat and get a 48h Spin Doctor hub instead.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"Are you sure you're not an encyclopedia salesman?"
"No, Ma'am. Just a burglar, come to ransack the flat."
-- Monty Python