Helmet Advice

Discussion in 'rec.bicycles.soc archive' started by Ddeckerslyke, Aug 31, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ddeckerslyke

    Ddeckerslyke Guest

    This seems to be a largely US ng but I couldn't find a UK equivalent so here goes:

    Just got back on a bike after a few years. Never previously worn a helmet but having three kids
    changed my perspective. Anyway in my price range - up to GBP30 or so - there are a couple of
    alternatives on offer at the local store Specialized Chamonix and Met MaxTrack II (I'm sure I could
    order another if there is a standout model). One of the reasons I'm asking is that five years ago
    'Which', a consumer magazine in the UK, did a survey of bike helmets and a majority were not
    suitable for their intended purpose, ie they did not adequately protect your head. So what would
    you recommend as a suitable helmet for someone commuting 4 or 5 miles a day to work and back on
    city roads?

    cheers

    dd
     
    Tags:


  2. Rick

    Rick Guest

    DD,

    I won't open the discussion of whether helmets are effective or not. There are times when they may
    possibly be (just like there are times when the small bible in the shirt pocket can stop a bullet),
    and there are times when they certainly are not (probably those situations where adults are most
    likely to experience).

    That said, certified helmets are all essentially the same. If you must have one, select one (if you
    can find it) that conforms to whatever standards organization tests helmets in Europe. Helmets that
    lack labels from a standards organization are useless (or worse). In the US, for example, most
    helmets, possibly all that are certified, are ANSI certified. The last time I looked at helmets, I
    could not find any that conformed to the more stringent Snell standard. It would seem that once
    helmets were mandated in most states, there was no longer any benefit in marketing a such a helmet.
    Yet another example of style over substance.

    Rick

    "DDEckerslyke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > This seems to be a largely US ng but I couldn't find a UK equivalent so
    here
    > goes:
    >
    > Just got back on a bike after a few years. Never previously worn a helmet but having three kids
    > changed my perspective. Anyway in my price range -
    up
    > to GBP30 or so - there are a couple of alternatives on offer at the local store Specialized
    > Chamonix and Met MaxTrack II (I'm sure I could order another if there is a standout model). One of
    > the reasons I'm asking is
    that
    > five years ago 'Which', a consumer magazine in the UK, did a survey of
    bike
    > helmets and a majority were not suitable for their intended purpose, ie
    they
    > did not adequately protect your head. So what would you recommend as a suitable helmet for someone
    > commuting 4 or 5 miles a day to work and back
    on
    > city roads?
    >
    > cheers
    >
    > dd
     
  3. Raptor

    Raptor Guest

    DDEckerslyke wrote:
    > This seems to be a largely US ng but I couldn't find a UK equivalent so here goes:
    >
    > Just got back on a bike after a few years. Never previously worn a helmet but having three kids
    > changed my perspective. Anyway in my price range - up to GBP30 or so - there are a couple of
    > alternatives on offer at the local store Specialized Chamonix and Met MaxTrack II (I'm sure I
    > could order another if there is a standout model). One of the reasons I'm asking is that five
    > years ago 'Which', a consumer magazine in the UK, did a survey of bike helmets and a majority were
    > not suitable for their intended purpose, ie they did not adequately protect your head. So what
    > would you recommend as a suitable helmet for someone commuting 4 or 5 miles a day to work and back
    > on city roads?
    >
    > cheers
    >
    > dd

    Make sure it's certified and fits your head. If there is more than one helmet that meets those
    standards, go for the one with the best ventillation.

    --
    --
    Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
    could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
    charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.
     
  4. Ddeckerslyke

    Ddeckerslyke Guest

    "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > DD,
    >
    > I won't open the discussion of whether helmets are effective or not. There are times when they may
    > possibly be (just like there are times when the small bible in the shirt pocket can stop a
    > bullet), and there are times
    when
    > they certainly are not (probably those situations where adults are most likely to experience).

    AFAICS this seems to be an ongoing debate in this ng. Is there any one place where I can see both
    sides of the argument? FWIW the one major crash I had where I was knocked unconscious a helmet would
    have made no difference but IIRC Chris Boardman crashed in the TdF one year and said his helmet
    saved him from a lot of damage.

    > That said, certified helmets are all essentially the same. If you must
    have
    > one, select one (if you can find it) that conforms to whatever standards organization tests
    > helmets in Europe.

    This was part of the problem in the survey I mentioned. The magazine dropped helmets on to three
    different shaped anvils and analysed the results. Many of the helmets did next to nothing to absorb
    the impact despite the fact that all conformed to one or other of the two main standards. I wondered
    if there were helmets that are known to be effective.

    cheers

    dd
     
  5. Rick

    Rick Guest

    ...stuff deleted

    > AFAICS this seems to be an ongoing debate in this ng. Is there any one
    place
    > where I can see both sides of the argument? FWIW the one major crash I had where I was knocked
    > unconscious a helmet would have made no difference but IIRC Chris Boardman crashed in the TdF one
    > year and said his helmet saved him from a lot of damage.
    >

    DD,

    Frankly, I haven't archived most of same, nor do I track the websites that discuss the issue. Deja
    News will give you the stuff and links that were posted on the topic. You can also search for
    information on the web, particularly the Aussie study that was done a few years back.

    > > That said, certified helmets are all essentially the same. If you must
    > have
    > > one, select one (if you can find it) that conforms to whatever standards organization tests
    > > helmets in Europe.
    >
    > This was part of the problem in the survey I mentioned. The magazine
    dropped
    > helmets on to three different shaped anvils and analysed the results. Many of the helmets did next
    > to nothing to absorb the impact despite the fact that all conformed to one or other of the two
    > main standards. I wondered
    if
    > there were helmets that are known to be effective.

    The Snell standard helmets were, IMO, most likely to provide some protection. The essential problem
    with helmets is, according to the anti-helmet crowd (I don't particularly align with either camp),
    is that the helmet essentially enlarges the skull, adding rotational torque to any impact. This
    torque on the neck/skull produces more severe injuries than a direct impact (which the skull is
    designed to handle reasonably well). Additionally, the type of impact helmets were designed to
    mitigate are rarely encountered in cycling accidents. Most blows to the skull will be oblique, not
    direct, hence the torque issue. Worse, most will exceed the design specifications of the helmet in
    the first place leading to catastrophic failure (hence the quote you cite above "Many of the helmets
    did next to nothing to absorb the impact..."

    Frankly, I am leaning toward the wear a good hat and shades attitude. It keeps you warmer in winter
    and protects from the sun in summer.

    Rick
     
  6. Ddeckerslyke

    Ddeckerslyke Guest

  7. "DDEckerslyke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    > AFAICS this seems to be an ongoing debate in this ng. Is there any one place where I can see both
    > sides of the argument?

    I don't know of one place that is "neutral," if that's what you mean. Think about it: most "neutral"
    people will lack the motivation to publish on the issue. But this is normal for almost all
    contentious issues. It simply means you must weigh the evidence provided by both sides and decide
    which is more sensible.

    I can attempt to summarize some of the major points of the helmet fans and the non-fans, at risk of
    being called biased.

    Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you." Non-fans say "Same for any fall off _anything_.
    But bike head injuries are less than 1% of the US totals. Falls around the home are 40%, injuries
    inside cars are 50%. Don't single out cyclists."

    Helmet fans say "It's not just fatalities. Helmets prevent smaller injuries too, and you certainly
    don't want even a minor injury." Non-fans say "Minor injuries, like fatalities, occur in all sorts
    of activities. Again, don't single out cycling."

    Helmet fans say "But over 500,000 Americans visit emergency rooms each year due to bike crashes."
    Non-fans say "Over 400,000 visit ERs due to accidents involving their beds! Big numbers prove only
    that America is a big place."

    Helmet fans say "But helmets prevent up to 85% of head injuries." Non-fans say "That 85% claim came
    from only one tiny, poorly-constructed study. It's never stood up in any examination of the effects
    of widespread helmet use. For example, no jurisdiction has seen anything close to that benefit after
    imposing a mandatory helmet law."

    Helmet fans say "But many other studies predict some benefit, even if not as great." Non-fans say
    "Case-control studies of small, self-selected populations generally predict benefit. Large studies
    of general populations (after imposition of helmet laws) find little or no benefit, and they are
    more 'real world'."

    Helmet fans say "Think of the public health cost of the injuries." Non-fans say "Overpromoting or
    mandating helmets reduces cycling, which causes more, not less, public health cost. Cycling has been
    shown to have benefits far greater than its tiny risks."

    Helmet fans say "I was saved from serious injury or death by my helmet." Non-fans say "That's
    absolutely unprovable. People have survived bike crashes of every type for a hundred years. Dented
    styrofoam proves only that styrofoam can be dented."

    Helmet fans say "If everyone wore a helmet every time they rode, fatalities or head injuries would
    drop tremendously." Non-fans say "Helmet use has greatly increased, yet there is no good evidence of
    any corresponding reduction in head injuries - instead, head injuries per rider seem to have
    actually increased."

    Helmet fans say "It's such an easy thing to do." Non-fans say "It's ineffective. It would be much
    better to put the energy into teaching proper riding, and into enforcing existing traffic laws."

    Helmet fans say "Promoting helmets can only help." Non-fans say "It's more likely to scare people
    away from cycling, and that hurts."

    Obviously, you can tell which side I'm on! But if you want a site that disagrees with me, the most
    popular one is the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (actually, a mostly one-man operation) at
    http://www.bhsi.org

    One site that disagrees with the BHSI is http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/ ... and be sure to click on the
    "Helmet FAQ" link at the left.

    Another site, a new one (somewhat under construction) concentrates on British data.
    http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

    > > That said, certified helmets are all essentially the same. ...
    >
    > This was part of the problem in the survey I mentioned. The magazine dropped helmets on to three
    > different shaped anvils and analysed the results. Many of the helmets did next to nothing to
    > absorb the impact despite the fact that all conformed to one or other of the two main standards. I
    > wondered if there were helmets that are known to be effective.

    Present bike helmets offer only low levels of protection, and future ones will doubless be little
    better. This is simple physics. To increase protection from a straight-on impact, you'll need
    thicker material, since it takes more distance to stop something (e.g. your head) more gently.

    But thicker material means more weight, less ventilation, and (most seriously) more chance that the
    helmet will actually receive an impact. (If a bare head misses collision by 1/2 inch, a helmet will
    hit. Larger helmets will be hit harder and more frequently. Furthermore, larger helmets offer more
    "lever arm" for tangential impacts, and would thus be expected to increase the particularly damaging
    rotational accelerations of the brain.

    Incidentally, the pro-helmet American magazine Consumer Reports has tested bike helmets several
    times. Although they do not give numerical values for impact protection (nobody seems to tell the
    American public how low the protection levels really are!) they've given comparative, non-numerical
    bar graphs. In each test, the most expensive helmets have been the _least_ protective!

    When you think about it, that's logical. To get minimum weight and maximum ventilation, you need
    to skim as close to the minimum impact standard as possible. And this razor's edge design time
    costs money!

    - Frank Krygowski
     
  8. Rick

    Rick Guest

  9. In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Frank
    Krygowski) wrote:

    [snip]

    > Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you."

    [snip]

    Not necessarily. I fell off mine but good today--but despite being badly scraped up, was nowhere
    near being killed. For one thing, I fell sideways, as a result of having attempted too sharp a turn
    on a piece of road with way too much construction gravel on it (and that after having traveled a
    long way down a road with all the smoothness of a pitted washboard--ugh) and skidding on the gravel,
    but my head was not involved at all. For another, I was lucky enough to fall just OUT of the line of
    traffic, which meant that the car behind me was able to stop without really being in danger of
    hitting me, and ask if I was all right. (Yes, there are still some nice drivers out there.)

    It was not fun. My chain had come off the spokes and I had to put it back on (did I have wipes handy
    for the grease? No). And I was scraped up and bruised unpleasantly, although fortunately nothing
    bled. And continuing to my destination, and having idiots in another car honk and yell "LEARN TO
    DRIVE!" at me just because I had the audacity to make a left turn in an intersection across from
    them, in front of them--and I was in the proper lane and signaling and everything--really put me in
    a foul mood. (Sheesh, learn to drive yourselves, jerks. Learn to share the road. Learn that a bike
    making a left turn has a right to make a left turn, in the proper lane, and if it beats you to the
    intersection, it will do so, and you will have to wait for it. It does not have to wait for you.)

    But, I will acknowledge, I wasn't anywhere near death.
    --
    Trudi "Closed Due to Blackout. Pray for the Chocolate!" --sign in Cleveland store, 8/14/03
    ____
    Say NO to secret judging and corruption in skating -- support SkateFAIR! http://www.skatefair.org
     
  10. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    [email protected] (Frank Krygowski) writes:

    > I can attempt to summarize some of the major points of the helmet fans and the non-fans, at risk
    > of being called biased.
    >
    > Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you." Non-fans say "Same for any fall off
    > _anything_. But bike head injuries are less than 1% of the US totals. Falls around the home are
    > 40%, injuries inside cars are 50%. Don't single out cyclists."
    >
    > Helmet fans say "It's not just fatalities. Helmets prevent smaller injuries too, and you certainly
    > don't want even a minor injury." Non-fans say "Minor injuries, like fatalities, occur in all sorts
    > of activities. Again, don't single out cycling."
    <snip>

    This is a typical polemic, misrepresenting one side of the dicussion repeatedly. The anti-helmet
    group, which Frank is a charter member of, has been putting up strawmen for years and this is just
    another strawman. Go back and read the previously threads on the subject to get the full story. It
    is really not necessary to have yearly argument on this one more time.

    Bill

    --
    My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
     
  11. Mitch Haley

    Mitch Haley Guest

    Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
    >
    > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Frank
    > Krygowski) wrote:
    >
    > > Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you."
    >
    > Not necessarily. I fell off mine but good today--but despite being badly scraped up, was nowhere
    > near being killed. For one thing, I fell sideways,

    Sounds like you know how to fall. (a skill worth more than any bike helmet, as falling without
    bashing your head negates any need for the helmet)

    I know of at least one young woman who died after a club ride. She rode into the parking lot, and
    tipped over onto flat pavement. Hit headfirst and died. I don't know if she was wearing a helmet.

    Another example, somebody I knew: Elderly couple (~80 yrs) on tandem. Dog took out front wheel. Fell
    over sideways, stoker pretty much had her skull shattered, spent weeks in the hospital. Was promoted
    as a "helmet saved a life" incident in the club we were in at the time. The helmet was, IIRC, a Bell
    Tourlight. You simply can't find anything as effective as that helmet marketed for road cycling
    today. I can't see where it did her any noticeable good, a fall without it would have broken her
    skull, as did a fall with
    it. Mitch.
     
  12. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    Mitch Haley <[email protected]> writes:

    > Another example, somebody I knew: Elderly couple (~80 yrs) on tandem. Dog took out front wheel.
    > Fell over sideways, stoker pretty much had her skull shattered, spent weeks in the hospital. Was
    > promoted as a "helmet saved a life" incident in the club we were in at the time. The helmet was,
    > IIRC, a Bell Tourlight. You simply can't find anything as effective as that helmet marketed for
    > road cycling today. I can't see where it did her any noticeable good, a fall without it would have
    > broken her skull, as did a fall with it.

    Since the injury was serious enough for her to spend weeks in the hospital, it is believable that
    you wouldn't have to increase the damage by very much for it to be fatal. So, the helmet could very
    well have made a difference as to whether she survived, or at least might have shortened her
    hospital stay. Just cutting a day off of her stay in a hospital would probably more than pay for all
    the helmets she would have bought over a lifetime.

    Bill

    --
    My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
     
  13. Marika

    Marika Guest

    [email protected] (Frank Krygowski) wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > "DDEckerslyke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    > Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you." Non-fans say "Same for any fall off
    > _anything_. But bike head injuries are less than 1% of the US totals. Falls around the home are
    > 40%, injuries inside cars are 50%. Don't single out cyclists."
    >
    > Helmet fans say "It's not just fatalities. Helmets prevent smaller injuries too, and you certainly
    > don't want even a minor injury." Non-fans say "Minor injuries, like fatalities, occur in all sorts
    > of activities. Again, don't single out cycling."
    >
    > Helmet fans say "But over 500,000 Americans visit emergency rooms each year due to bike crashes."
    > Non-fans say "Over 400,000 visit ERs due to accidents involving their beds! Big numbers prove only
    > that America is a big place."

    There has been near my apt, a bicycle chained to a post for like a good 3 weeks. It is completely,
    entirely encased and swathed in duct tape. Pedals, bars, wheels, seat, all of it. It has been
    sitting there untouched for weeks and just now, it has started to get abuse - the front wheel has
    been taken.

    mk5000

    'I'll replace them tomorrow and will place my results. I replaced all the rams on this board and put
    in sockets. I wouldn't get the video to come on I suppose if the ram was bad in any of these
    sockets. Since the game play and video is the problem"--baraka
     
  14. Rick

    Rick Guest

    ...stuff deleted

    > It was not fun. My chain had come off the spokes and I had to put it back on (did I have wipes
    > handy for the grease? No). And I was scraped up and bruised unpleasantly, although fortunately
    > nothing bled.

    Must be that time of year (i.e. hard riding in summer means tune-ups in fall). I threw a chain
    yesterday as well. I've learned to remount them using the toe of my shoe. I have some godawfully
    ugly shoes, but clean handlebar tape (grin). Fortunately for me, I was sitting at the time, not
    standing on the pegs and came off with only the routine calf bruise. I've let the maintenance lag a
    little too long, for once.

    Sounds like a long sit in a hot tub will help a lot Trudy. Mend quickly.

    Rick
     
  15. Well, all helmets meet the same standards, and I don't think those standards have changed since the
    "Which" article was written.

    The Which article noted a tendency for helmets that meet the European std not to meet the American
    standard, and vice versa, but some did meet both.

    The best rule is NOT to get a "good one". What makes a helmet "good" is usually being lighter and
    cooler than a cheap helmet. This is achieved by using as little styrofoam as possible, so an
    expensive helmet is probably even less protective than a cheap helmet, even though both meet the
    same stds.

    There is some question about whether it really is necessary to replace a helmet every x years as
    some people recommend. In practice the styrofoam is unlikely to degrade from UV radiation. However,
    one current theory about why helmets are so ineffective in practice is that they are not kept
    tightly enough in position. It might be, so the theory goes, that putting on and taking off a helmet
    over and over again gradually compresses the material inside, thus making the helmet loose.

    The same theory emphasizes that the chin strap MUST be kept tight. If you can open your mouth to
    talk, the strap is probably too loose.

    Adding a helmet to your head makes it larger and heavier than normal, thus upsetting your reflexes
    that move your head out of the way of impacts. Thus you will hit your head more with a helmet than
    you would without. This doesn't matter though, because of that very helmet. Don't assume, though,
    that in the impacts you are now having the helmet is saving your life.

    Jeremy Parker
     
  16. In article <[email protected]>, Mitch Haley <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
    > >
    > > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Frank
    > > Krygowski) wrote:
    > >
    > > > Helmet fans say "Any fall off a bike can kill you."
    > >
    > > Not necessarily. I fell off mine but good today--but despite being badly scraped up, was nowhere
    > > near being killed. For one thing, I fell sideways,
    >
    > Sounds like you know how to fall. (a skill worth more than any bike helmet, as falling without
    > bashing your head negates any need for the helmet)

    Well, I don't realy recall having time to think about how to fall, but maybe something about how I
    positioned myself instictively when I fell made a difference. I did learn "how to fall" when
    skating, and what you learn about that is that a) going limp is the best way to resist injury and b)
    it is better to fall on your butt, if at all possible, than to fall on anything else. In this case,
    I couldn't fall on my butt, and I did instictively put my hands out and that could have resulted in
    bad things for my arms and wrists, but in the end all I got was some light hand abrasions, and as a
    result my head was nowhere near any sort of impact.

    > I know of at least one young woman who died after a club ride. She rode
    into the
    > parking lot, and tipped over onto flat pavement. Hit headfirst and died.
    I don't
    > know if she was wearing a helmet.

    How awful. Maybe she didn't have time to react at all when she went down.

    > Another example, somebody I knew: Elderly couple (~80 yrs) on tandem. Dog took out front wheel.
    > Fell over
    sideways,
    > stoker pretty much had her skull shattered, spent weeks in the hospital. Was promoted as a "helmet
    > saved a life" incident in the club we were in at
    the time.
    > The helmet was, IIRC, a Bell Tourlight. You simply can't find anything
    as effective
    > as that helmet marketed for road cycling today. I can't see where it did
    her any
    > noticeable good, a fall without it would have broken her skull, as did a
    fall with
    > it. Mitch.

    This stuff is frightening. I guess I was luckier than I thought.
    --
    Trudi "Closed Due to Blackout. Pray for the Chocolate!" --sign in Cleveland store, 8/14/03
    ____
    Say NO to secret judging and corruption in skating -- support SkateFAIR! http://www.skatefair.org
     
  17. In article <[email protected]>, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > ...stuff deleted
    >
    > > It was not fun. My chain had come off the spokes and I had to put it back on (did I have wipes
    > > handy for the grease? No). And I was scraped up and bruised unpleasantly, although fortunately
    > > nothing bled.
    >
    > Must be that time of year (i.e. hard riding in summer means tune-ups in fall).

    Not to mention which, my bike is frankly rather cheap. I've been told that unless I invest in a
    pricier bike, this will probably happen quite a bit.

    > I threw a chain yesterday as well. I've learned to remount them using the toe of my shoe. I have
    > some godawfully ugly shoes, but clean handlebar tape (grin).

    Can you teach the technique? There must be an art to it. I'd love to know; chain grease has to be
    one of THE toughest things to get off hands (not to mention what it does to your handlebars).

    > Fortunately for me, I was sitting at the time, not standing on the pegs and came off with only the
    > routine calf bruise. I've let the maintenance lag a little too long, for once.
    >
    > Sounds like a long sit in a hot tub will help a lot Trudy. Mend quickly.
    >
    > Rick

    Thanks. I plan to give it a try. Right leg looks like hell today!
    --
    Trudi "Closed Due to Blackout. Pray for the Chocolate!" --sign in Cleveland store, 8/14/03
    ____
    Say NO to secret judging and corruption in skating -- support SkateFAIR! http://www.skatefair.org
     
  18. Mitch Haley

    Mitch Haley Guest

    Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
    >
    > How awful. Maybe she didn't have time to react at all when she went down.

    I just assumed she was the typical young American who had such a protected childhood that she never
    really learned how to fall. I'd like to see all the little couch potatoes enrolled in karate or
    gymnastics classes somewhere around 6-10 years of age. Another possibility is that she was busy
    trying to unclip her shoe all the way down.

    > This stuff is frightening. I guess I was luckier than I thought.

    Well, people have been falling down for thousands of years without often dying, but there is a fair
    amount of energy involved. I think both the examples I mentioned were mentionable because of their
    rarity. I suspect that Emily's bones were old enough to be a lot more fragile than they once were,
    and you do seem to go down hard and fast when a dog takes out the front wheel. The other incident
    was described to me as a new rider who forgot to unclip when stopping. I've done the same, but both
    times it happened to me I mainly landed on my hip and shoulder, although I lost some skin on my knee
    and elbow the time I did it on tarmac. Mitch.
     
  19. Rick

    Rick Guest

    ...stuff deleted
    >
    > Can you teach the technique? There must be an art to it. I'd love to know; chain grease has to be
    > one of THE toughest things to get off hands (not to mention what it does to your handlebars).
    >

    It isn't hard, but it takes a little patience to learn. Put the toe of the shoe on the underside of
    the chain and pull the chain toward the front of the bike. As the chain reaches the apex of the
    smallest sprocket, lower it so that it engages on the top. The tricky part follows in that you have
    to release the chain from the toe of the shoe without dislodging the chain from the sprocket. At
    this point, the chain is usually half-on (though in rare instances, it works perfectly) and needs a
    spin to completely engage the chain. Took a few tries to get it down and always takes 2 or 3
    attempts as I often bump the crank and dislodge the chain, but it does work.

    Rick
     
  20. [email protected] (Trudi Marrapodi) wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >
    > This stuff is frightening. I guess I was luckier than I thought.

    Not at all, Trudi. There are probably tens of thousands of minor falls off bikes for every fatality.
    Sure, a fall is no fun, but the idea that every fall is a near-death experience is absolute
    nonsense. A minor fall is just a minor fall.

    Don't let the rare horror stories worry you. Just exercise reasonable caution, and get on with
    enjoying life and cycling.

    - Frank Krygowski
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...