published helmet research - not troll



Bill Z. wrote:

> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>Why someone would make that claim, then refuse to answer the obvious
>>question, is beyond me and everyone _else_ reading this thread!

>
>
> Because the claim was not about my particular helmet.


As I recall, the claim was "My helmet reduces drag over that of a bare
head." (Feel free to double check and correct me.) Sounds to me like
it was about your particular helmet!

If you made that claim in error, just say so; all will be forgiven.

If you pretent that claim is still true, tell us what your helmet is, so
we can verify.

If you'll do neither... well, it'll be just another example of the Bill
Zaumen we know and love! ;-)


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

>> Hmmm. What brand of helmet you wear is scarcely personal information,
>> Bill. Unless it's lined with aluminium foiul to deflect the mind
>> control rays and you're worried about the feds finding out.
>> It is, however, a material fact in the argument.


>As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
>none of our business. My personal helmet is not either, since the
>statement was about any similarly shaped one (slightly teardrop
>shaped like many helmets you'll see people using.)


Similar to what? You won't tell us. I can look at my own helmets,
and the ones in the shops, and the word "teardrop" does not describe
them at all. I was in the bike shop today buying a new front light
for my commuter. They sell head fairings and also have lots of ANSI
certified helmets, and they are totally different in every important
respect. They don't cover the ears, they don't cover the nape of the
neck, their surface is punctured by many vents rather than being
smooth. I can see why they have totally different aerodynamic
performance, considerably worse than the unhelmeted head.

>I'll snip the rest of your helmet rants - you are obviously in
>idiot-mode today, trying to turn the discussion into yet another
>infantile personal attack (as your baby talk above shows.)


Translation: "Laa laa, I'm not listening".

To characterise a post pointing out that your own evidence proves you
wrong on aerodynmaics could only be described as a "helmet rant" by an
unreasoning zealot.

Oh, wait...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
>
> > Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >>Why someone would make that claim, then refuse to answer the obvious
> >>question, is beyond me and everyone _else_ reading this thread!

> > Because the claim was not about my particular helmet.

>
> As I recall, the claim was "My helmet reduces drag over that of a bare
> head." (Feel free to double check and correct me.) Sounds to me like
> it was about your particular helmet!


> If you made that claim in error, just say so; all will be forgiven.


No, it wasn't in error - I was just using informal language. Mine is
typical of what a lot of people use, and I just mentioned it as an
example of an instance of a much broader class of helmets, all of
which do better than the helmet I had previously, a completely
symmetric helmet purchased in the 1980s.

I described it for you - slightly teardrop shaped. Go down to a store
and look for typical helmets like that (nothing extreme designed
specifically for racing.) I'm sure you've seen them.

> If you pretent that claim is still true, tell us what your helmet is,
> so we can verify.


Do you have a wind tunnel? Do you expect me to mail the helmet to you?
If so, I've got a bridge for sale ...


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
>
> >> Hmmm. What brand of helmet you wear is scarcely personal information,
> >> Bill. Unless it's lined with aluminium foiul to deflect the mind
> >> control rays and you're worried about the feds finding out.
> >> It is, however, a material fact in the argument.

>
> >As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
> >none of our business. My personal helmet is not either, since the
> >statement was about any similarly shaped one (slightly teardrop
> >shaped like many helmets you'll see people using.)

>
> Similar to what? You won't tell us.


I did tell you. It's not my fault that you are too dense to understand
simple English.

<back into the timeout for Guy - he's still engaging in baby talk and
he's still trolling.>

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

>> >As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
>> >none of our business. My personal helmet is not either, since the
>> >statement was about any similarly shaped one (slightly teardrop
>> >shaped like many helmets you'll see people using.)


>> Similar to what? You won't tell us.


No, Bill, you told us about "teardrop helmets like you see people
wearing" and you told us about your helmet, but since these
descriptions ring no bells with us (and we, unlike you, are not only
regular cyclists but regular customers of bike shops), so we need some
kind of hint. Like a model name.

><back into the timeout for Guy - he's still engaging in baby talk and
>he's still trolling.>


Translation: "Laa laa, I'm not listening"

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:39:56 GMT, [email protected] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>I described it for you - slightly teardrop shaped. Go down to a store
>and look for typical helmets like that (nothing extreme designed
>specifically for racing.) I'm sure you've seen them.


Nope. I was in the bike shop today and I looked specifically. They
have about forty or fifty differnet hlemets on display and the only
one which could be described as even vaguely terdrop shaped was a head
faring (non-ANSI). They are out of ANSI TT helmets, since the rules
change took all the lid makers by surprise.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
>
> >> >As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
> >> >none of our business. My personal helmet is not either, since the
> >> >statement was about any similarly shaped one (slightly teardrop
> >> >shaped like many helmets you'll see people using.)

>
> >> Similar to what? You won't tell us.

>
> No, Bill, you told us about "teardrop helmets like you see people
> wearing" and you told us about your helmet, but since these
> descriptions ring no bells with us (and we, unlike you, are not only
> regular cyclists but regular customers of bike shops), so we need some
> kind of hint. Like a model name.


If you've never seen a helmet whose shape is not the same in the back as
in the front, I'd suggest you actually *look* in those shops you claim
to frequent so much. I'll ignore your speculations about how much
cycling I get in - we've never met so you have no way of knowing. but
that ever stopped you nut cases from speculating anyway.

> ><back into the timeout for Guy - he's still engaging in baby talk and
> >he's still trolling.>

>
> Translation: "Laa laa, I'm not listening"


Translation - Guy has the majurity of a two-year-old. Back to the
time out for him.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

>> No, Bill, you told us about "teardrop helmets like you see people
>> wearing" and you told us about your helmet, but since these
>> descriptions ring no bells with us (and we, unlike you, are not only
>> regular cyclists but regular customers of bike shops), so we need some
>> kind of hint. Like a model name.


>If you've never seen a helmet whose shape is not the same in the back as
>in the front, I'd suggest you actually *look* in those shops you claim
>to frequent so much.


Oh the shape is asymmetric enough, but nothing like a teardrop. I
know what an aerodynamic helmet would look like - a head fairing - and
not one of the helmets on show is even vaguely similar. Most of them
are either symmetrical or like the Bell Ghisallo, which has a sort of
shelf at the back. So, what make and model of helmt do you have in
mind?

>I'll ignore your speculations about how much
>cycling I get in - we've never met so you have no way of knowing. but
>that ever stopped you nut cases from speculating anyway.


Oh do tell - do you ride every weekday? Once a week? How many miles
per year? I ride between 4,000 and 5,000 miles per year - you ride
more or less than that? Oh, I forgot - you are allowed to use your
"experience" to contradict those whose knowledge is clearly greater
than yours, but any attempt to quantify that "experience" is an
intolerable intrusion into your personal life. No doubt if you tell
us what helmet you wear you'll start getting spam, just as you would
if you spelled your name forwards in your .sig.

So, which brand of helmet is lined with aluminium foil to deflect the
mind rays? Or was that a custom mod after you bought it?

>> Translation: "Laa laa, I'm not listening"

>Translation - Guy has the majurity of a two-year-old. Back to the
>time out for him.


Translation: "Laa laa, I'm still not listening"

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
>


> >If you've never seen a helmet whose shape is not the same in the back as
> >in the front, I'd suggest you actually *look* in those shops you claim
> >to frequent so much.

>
> Oh the shape is asymmetric enough, but nothing like a teardrop. I
> know what an aerodynamic helmet would look like - a head fairing - and
> not one of the helmets on show is even vaguely similar.


Go back and look again. We were, after all, talking about a very
modest reduction in drag compared to a totally symmetric helmet.

> Most of them are either symmetrical or like the Bell Ghisallo,
> which has a sort of shelf at the back. So, what make and model of
> helmt do you have in mind?


Why don't you look at the assymetric ones and pick something in the
middle of the road in terms of shape and price.

>
> >I'll ignore your speculations about how much
> >cycling I get in - we've never met so you have no way of knowing. but
> >that ever stopped you nut cases from speculating anyway.

>
> Oh do tell - do you ride every weekday? Once a week? How many miles
> per year?


It's really none of your business. I'm not interested in a discussion
about me (your obsession notwithstanding.)

> Translation: "Laa laa, I'm still not listening"


Guy is still acting like a little boy. You'd think an adult would
be embarassed to behave that way.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

>> Oh the shape is asymmetric enough, but nothing like a teardrop. I
>> know what an aerodynamic helmet would look like - a head fairing - and
>> not one of the helmets on show is even vaguely similar.


>Go back and look again. We were, after all, talking about a very
>modest reduction in drag compared to a totally symmetric helmet.


AH, no, Bill, *you* were talking about a modest reduction in drag, but
that would require that any improvement in aerodynamics from the
woefully insufficient "teardrop shape" of your imaginary helmet is not
competely blown away by the effect of vents. Since you have posted,
to date, preciusely zero evidence to support your assertion (the only
evidence you ave posted being directly contradictory) the only
reaosnable conclusion is that you are, as ever, wrong.

>> Most of them are either symmetrical or like the Bell Ghisallo,
>> which has a sort of shelf at the back. So, what make and model of
>> helmt do you have in mind?


>Why don't you look at the assymetric ones and pick something in the
>middle of the road in terms of shape and price.


Which one, Bill? I looked at the whole damn shelf; every single one
was either symmetrical or shaped more or less like the Ghisallo. Oh,
apart form the full-face mountian biking helmets and of course the
head fairings.

>> Oh do tell - do you ride every weekday? Once a week? How many miles
>> per year?


>It's really none of your business. I'm not interested in a discussion
>about me (your obsession notwithstanding.)


Perish the thought that you should ever be required to quantify the
extent of your ignorance.

>> Translation: "Laa laa, I'm still not listening"


>Guy is still acting like a little boy. You'd think an adult would
>be embarassed to behave that way.


You'd think an adult would be embarrassed to hang around these NGs
when everything they post turns out to be ********, but you keep
coming back.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill "Laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:
>
> >> Oh the shape is asymmetric enough, but nothing like a teardrop. I
> >> know what an aerodynamic helmet would look like - a head fairing - and
> >> not one of the helmets on show is even vaguely similar.

>
> >Go back and look again. We were, after all, talking about a very
> >modest reduction in drag compared to a totally symmetric helmet.

>
> AH, no, Bill, *you* were talking about a modest reduction in drag, but
> that would require that any improvement in aerodynamics from the
> woefully insufficient "teardrop shape" of your imaginary helmet is not
> competely blown away by the effect of vents.


Aside from owning a helmet with such a shape, as others do, the Bell V1
Pro, vents and all, is only 1.2% worse than having long hair. Whatever
effect the vents have has already been taken into account.


> >> Oh do tell - do you ride every weekday? Once a week? How many miles
> >> per year?

>
> >It's really none of your business. I'm not interested in a discussion
> >about me (your obsession notwithstanding.)

>
> Perish the thought that you should ever be required to quantify the
> extent of your ignorance.


The discussion is supposed to be about helmets, in case you don't know.

> >Guy is still acting like a little boy. You'd think an adult would
> >be embarassed to behave that way.

>
> You'd think an adult would be embarrassed to hang around these NGs
> when everything they post turns out to be ********, but you keep
> coming back.


The only BS is coming from some anti helmet loons, the current roster
containing (a) A foul-tempered troll named Guy, (b) a propagandist
named Frank, and (c) an abusive, lying one-time jailbird named Tom.
What a crew.

And, if you don't want to see your infantile behavior and your baby
talk insults being pointed out, why don't you start acting like an
adult?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:
> > Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

>
> > > I posted some links *showing* an air-drag reduction.

> >
> > For aero shells used in time trials which bear no relation to standard
> > helmets, yes, and it also showed a net increase in drag for standard
> > helmets.

>
> That's simply not true. It showed a slight net increase for *one*
> helmet with a completely symmetric design that was typical of the
> 1980s.


Firstly, you did nothing of the sort. ALL of the SAFETY helmets showed a
higher aerodynamic drag than a bald head or one wearing a rubber cap as used
to be popular.

Secondly, the Bell helmet which you appear to be discussing WAS NOT TYPICAL
of any other helmet then or now. No one could wear the helmet for more than
a very short TT on a cool day and hence they were rapidly discontinued.
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> > That helmet was not "about the same shape as yours." That helmet
> > shown is the only mass-market helmets with "about that same shape."

>
> The one I was referring to was tear-drop shaped with the part extending
> to the rear not particularly extreme. Eyeballing it, the shape was
> comparable to mine - much closer than the highest performance ones
> and similar to both my helmet and most of the ones I see people use
> in overall shape.


OK, there we have it. Since any nitwit who has seen a Stratos wold know that
there is essentially one quality that is the same between a modern helmet
and a Stratos - that they both are supposed to be used by cyclists - and yet
Bill tells us that his calibrated eye sees little difference.

Bill is taking his idiocy to such heights now that he is closing in on the
world's altitude record. Maybe we can say he's hit the Stratos-sphere?
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> > Yep. As I expected, you're obviously lying about your helmet and its
> > air resistance.

>
> Krygowski, of course, is simply showing his dishonesty. I don't give
> out personal information to people like him and his "friends." I
> wouldn't even tell them the color of my car. It is simply none of
> their business. It's also a distraction from what we are supposedly
> discussing. Krygowski lives on a diet of red herrings, and there is
> no need to feed him.


There we go - Bill tells us that HIS helmet is more aerodynamic that a bare
head. Since we have never seen such a standard helmet and ask WHICH helmet
this could possibly be, he tells us that it is PERSONAL INFORMATION!!!

Ahh, Bill, you could teach lunacy to lunatics.
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> As I said, I wouldn't even tell you guys the color of my car. It's
> none of our business.


Ahh, so in truth you won't even tell YOURSELF the color of your car. Somehow
that doesn't surprise me in the least.
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> If you've never seen a helmet whose shape is not the same in the back as
> in the front, I'd suggest you actually *look* in those shops you claim
> to frequent so much.


Ahh, there, NOW you've made it clear. When you say "teardrop" you don't
really mean "teardrop" but instead "some other shape than a Bell V1".

Tell us Bill, why do you suppose they're building Bell V1 lookalikes again?
 
I must say, now more than ever I'm convinced that the guy out in front of
that bike shop in Cupertino whose said his name was Bill and who wasn't
allowed in the shop is our Bill.
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:
> > > Bill "laa laa I'm not listening" Zaumen wrote:

> >
> > > > I posted some links *showing* an air-drag reduction.
> > >
> > > For aero shells used in time trials which bear no relation to standard
> > > helmets, yes, and it also showed a net increase in drag for standard
> > > helmets.

> >
> > That's simply not true. It showed a slight net increase for *one*
> > helmet with a completely symmetric design that was typical of the
> > 1980s.

>
> Firstly, you did nothing of the sort. ALL of the SAFETY helmets showed a
> higher aerodynamic drag than a bald head or one wearing a rubber cap as used
> to be popular.


Most cyclists do not have a bald head. It was very clear that I was
comparing the drag relative to a full head of hair, and this was
stated multiple times. Neither I nor anyone I know personally will
gets their heads shaved just for the sake of a bike ride.

>
> Secondly, the Bell helmet which you appear to be discussing WAS NOT TYPICAL
> of any other helmet then or now. No one could wear the helmet for more than
> a very short TT on a cool day and hence they were rapidly discontinued.


The Bell V1 Pro was a typical helmet in the 1980s. We can do better
today in terms of aerodynamics. The helmet with the lowest drag is
interesting only for showing the range of reductions that are
possible.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> writes:
> > >
> > > That helmet was not "about the same shape as yours." That helmet
> > > shown is the only mass-market helmets with "about that same shape."

> >
> > The one I was referring to was tear-drop shaped with the part extending
> > to the rear not particularly extreme. Eyeballing it, the shape was
> > comparable to mine - much closer than the highest performance ones
> > and similar to both my helmet and most of the ones I see people use
> > in overall shape.

>
> OK, there we have it. Since any nitwit who has seen a Stratos wold know that
> there is essentially one quality that is the same between a modern helmet
> and a Stratos - that they both are supposed to be used by cyclists - and yet
> Bill tells us that his calibrated eye sees little difference.


Any nitwit, who must be smarter than Kunich, would realize that the
helmets I was refering to were not Bell Stratos helmets, and I don't
own one.

Kunich is lying as usual.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 

Similar threads

J
Replies
0
Views
507
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
436
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
346
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J
J
Replies
0
Views
304
Road Cycling
Just zis Guy, you know?
J