Rear Luggage Rack Web Site Update

[jim beam]

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> jim beam <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>> Jim Beam is concerned about lateral stiffness.
>>>
>>> To which I say: tandem frames get by okay.
>>>
>>> Maybe a lontail bike is basically a tandem with
>>> inanimate cargo instead of an animate stoker.
>>
>> yes, except that with tandems, stiffness is a known issue and addressed
>> as well as possible given the constraints. with this frame design,
>> there's more latitude to address the problem, so to ignore it is just
>> stupid.
>
> Looking at the side-view pix of the Yuba Mondo,
> it appears to me that the problem /has/ been addressed,

not adequately imo. the main lateral loading is via the flex induced at
the bb, and this has none. yes, it has some through the quasi "mixte"
seat stays, but i have trouble believing that'll be adequate once you
get the vehicle out of the parking lot.

> similarly to the way the problem has been addressed in
> tandems. The Yuba Mondo is certainly not just a mixte
> with a too-long rear triangle. Again, note that extra
> seatpost, a la tandem.
>
> But that's only looking at pix, and not subjecting the
> vehicle to the real world.
>
> As far as "triangulation" goes, to me that's just a
> Pythagorean surveyor's technique for measuring distances.
> Engineeringly, I figure using three (or maybe more) points
> to secure a structure against itself is more a matter of
> cantilevering. But I'm not an engineer. I'm just a
> sometimes smartass.

"triangulation" can also be used as a term to describe bracing.

>
> Again I ask: how important is lateral stiffness in a
> cargo bike? I have no ulterior motives in this question;
> I'm earnestly interested and curious. It seems to me a
> cargo bike should have some measured degree of flexibility.
>
> I don't mean to argue with you. I'd just like to gain
> some understanding via discussion and subsequent
> thinking-about, and I appreciate your (or anybody else's)
> inputs.
>
> I'm also biased -- I do like the /idea/ of purpose-built
> cargo bikes.

me too. provided they're adequately designed.

> I must continue to bear my own bias in mind
> so as to discuss this matter intelligently. Maybe these
> longtail bikes are total ****. Maybe we should carry on
> with our Pletscher racks & Wald baskets and Serratus
> panniers, and give-up any hope for anything better.
>
> Incidentally -- Zoot extolls the various virtues of the
> XtraCycle.

that chick rocks! talking the talk means nothing - it's walking the
walk that matters. and she's right there.

> But we have yet to hear any first-hand reviews
> about the Yuba Mondo, or other stock, purpose-built longtails.
>
>
> sincere cheers,
> Tom
>
>

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
jim beam <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> Incidentally -- Zoot extolls the various virtues of the
>> XtraCycle.
>
> that chick rocks! talking the talk means nothing - it's walking the
> walk that matters. and she's right there.

Well, ermmm ...
Zoot's a guy, like you 'n me.

And a nice guy, to boot.

I like to think I am too, and on the
side of my fellow riders.

But all that's neither here nor there.

The main thing is: while some people let their bikes
make them do work, it's only fair that other people
make their bikes (like the Uuba Mondo) work for them.

As I'm writing this, I'm groovin' to Chris Squire's
"Fish Out Of Water" (Silently Falling), and indulging
in some stuff that a guy at work gave me.

Gawd, I love people, and I love life!!
It makes my heart feel full. Heh
Many blessing upon yez.

Maybe check out the Perseid meteor shower.
Throw-on Syd Barrett's Astronomie Dominie
on the music machine.


cheers,
Tom

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

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> jim beam <[email protected]> writes:
>>> Incidentally -- Zoot extolls the various virtues of the
>>> XtraCycle.
>> that chick rocks! talking the talk means nothing - it's walking the
>> walk that matters. and she's right there.
>
> Well, ermmm ...
> Zoot's a guy, like you 'n me....

And all this time I thought Zoot was a dinosaur!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition!"

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

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:
> Tom Keats wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> jim beam <[email protected]> writes:
>>>> Incidentally -- Zoot extolls the various virtues of the
>>>> XtraCycle.
>>> that chick rocks! talking the talk means nothing - it's walking the
>>> walk that matters. and she's right there.
>>
>> Well, ermmm ...
>> Zoot's a guy, like you 'n me....
>
> And all this time I thought Zoot was a dinosaur!

If you want dinosaurs, all you've gotta do is look
closer to ...

Nuhh.

Never mind.

I hope you Americans get something like FDR back.
(along with Eleanor.) Heh -- the 2nd (3rd? 4th?
5th?) Coming

Hey, Ike learnt from FDR, after all. In some ways
Ike was more FDR than FDR. Highly-militarily-
backgrounded-one-term-prez's, 'n all. They're the
doves. The civvy suits are the hawks. In the
meantime you're stuck with Herbie Hoover all over
again. I feel for you.


cheers,
Tom


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

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 21:58:43 -0700, jim beam
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Looking at the side-view pix of the Yuba Mondo,
>> it appears to me that the problem /has/ been addressed,
>
>not adequately imo. the main lateral loading is via the flex induced at
>the bb, and this has none. yes, it has some through the quasi "mixte"
>seat stays, but i have trouble believing that'll be adequate once you
>get the vehicle out of the parking lot.

Having owned an Xtracycle for a year during which I rode it as my
daily mount for five months, both light and laden, perhaps too much
is being made of "lateral stiffness".

Sure it flexes and that is perhaps just the nature of the beast. That
and a few other handling issues presents a short learning curve.

The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.

That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
automobile trips. There's bound to be some sorting out of design
issues with the bikes. It's disappointing that Kona didn't include
mounting for side-loaders. I think motorising them will become a
popular modification.
.. . . that and a keg carrying sidecar.
--
zk

 

[A Muzi]

>>> Looking at the side-view pix of the Yuba Mondo,
>>> it appears to me that the problem /has/ been addressed,

> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> not adequately imo. the main lateral loading is via the flex induced at
>> the bb, and this has none. yes, it has some through the quasi "mixte"
>> seat stays, but i have trouble believing that'll be adequate once you
>> get the vehicle out of the parking lot.

Zoot Katz wrote:
> Having owned an Xtracycle for a year during which I rode it as my
> daily mount for five months, both light and laden, perhaps too much
> is being made of "lateral stiffness".
>
> Sure it flexes and that is perhaps just the nature of the beast. That
> and a few other handling issues presents a short learning curve.
>
> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>
> That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
> indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
> people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
> automobile trips. There's bound to be some sorting out of design
> issues with the bikes. It's disappointing that Kona didn't include
> mounting for side-loaders. I think motorising them will become a
> popular modification.
> . . . that and a keg carrying sidecar.

Been done, and nicely, by Phil Van Valkenberg, famous for his "Queen of
Sheba" bike/sidecar/keg often seen leading The Fat Tire Tour of (where
else??) Milkaukee!
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:08:05 -0500, A Muzi <[email protected]>
wrote:
/
>> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
>> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>>
>> That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
>> indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
>> people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
>> automobile trips. There's bound to be some sorting out of design
>> issues with the bikes. It's disappointing that Kona didn't include
>> mounting for side-loaders. I think motorising them will become a
>> popular modification.
>> . . . that and a keg carrying sidecar.
>
>Been done, and nicely, by Phil Van Valkenberg, famous for his "Queen of
>Sheba" bike/sidecar/keg often seen leading The Fat Tire Tour of (where
>else??) Milkaukee!

And no doubt popular

I'd think a tripod is probably best for handling a sloshing load.

Chariot makes a bolt on sidecar for carrying kids that isn't even
rated for a quarter-keg. I've carried more beer than that (in cans)
on the Xtracycle. Despite the weight I never got dropped.
--
zk

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Aug 13, 1:08 am, [email protected] (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Tom Keats wrote:
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> jim beam <[email protected]> writes:
> >>>> Incidentally -- Zoot extolls the various virtues of the
> >>>> XtraCycle.
> >>> that chick rocks! talking the talk means nothing - it's walking the
> >>> walk that matters. and she's right there.
>
> >> Well, ermmm ...
> >> Zoot's a guy, like you 'n me....
>
> > And all this time I thought Zoot was a dinosaur!
>
> If you want dinosaurs, all you've gotta do is look
> closer to ...
>
> Nuhh.
>
> Never mind.
>
> I hope you Americans get something like FDR back.
> (along with Eleanor.) Heh -- the 2nd (3rd? 4th?
> 5th?) Coming
>
> Hey, Ike learnt from FDR, after all. In some ways
> Ike was more FDR than FDR. Highly-militarily-
> backgrounded-one-term-prez's, 'n all.


??? F.D. Roosevelt was Secretary of the Navy but never served in the
military. He was elected to four terms, but died in office; 'Ike'
Eisenhwer was elected to, and served, two terms

> They're the
> doves. The civvy suits are the hawks. In the
> meantime you're stuck with Herbie Hoover all over
> again. I feel for you.

Let's not insult Hoover by equating him with G W BU**SH**.

 

[Jym Dyer]

Hey spammer, this stuff goes to rec.bicycles.marketplace ONLY.

 

[jim beam]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 21:58:43 -0700, jim beam
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Looking at the side-view pix of the Yuba Mondo,
>>> it appears to me that the problem /has/ been addressed,
>> not adequately imo. the main lateral loading is via the flex induced at
>> the bb, and this has none. yes, it has some through the quasi "mixte"
>> seat stays, but i have trouble believing that'll be adequate once you
>> get the vehicle out of the parking lot.
>
> Having owned an Xtracycle for a year during which I rode it as my
> daily mount for five months, both light and laden, perhaps too much
> is being made of "lateral stiffness".
>
> Sure it flexes and that is perhaps just the nature of the beast. That
> and a few other handling issues presents a short learning curve.
>
> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.

but the xtracycle is one of the better designs - it's the others
previously cited that i believe will be much more problem.

>
> That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
> indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
> people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
> automobile trips. There's bound to be some sorting out of design
> issues with the bikes. It's disappointing that Kona didn't include
> mounting for side-loaders. I think motorising them will become a
> popular modification.
> . . . that and a keg carrying sidecar.

 

[SMS]

Jym Dyer wrote:

> Hey spammer, this stuff goes to rec.bicycles.marketplace ONLY.

What are you talking about? No one in this thread posted anything for
sale. There is nothing for sale at the web site either. It's all just
informational.

 

[peter]

On Aug 13, 5:41 pm, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:08:05 -0500, A Muzi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> /
>
> >> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
> >> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>
> >> That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
> >> indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
> >> people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
> >> automobile trips.
> I'd think a tripod is probably best for handling a sloshing load.
>
> Chariot makes a bolt on sidecar for carrying kids that isn't even
> rated for a quarter-keg. I've carried more beer than that (in cans)
> on the Xtracycle. Despite the weight I never got dropped.

What do you see as the advantage of the Xtracycle-type designs vs.
using a regular bike and attaching a trailer when needed for
especially heavy loads? Except for the added drag when climbing I
hardly notice the trailer even when carrying pretty heavy loads. And
it's nice to be able to detach the trailer in a few seconds and then
have a normal bike that's compatible with regular bike racks, mass
transit, etc.

 

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc peter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 13, 5:41 pm, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:08:05 -0500, A Muzi <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> /
>>
>> >> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
>> >> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>>
>> >> That these longtail bikes are beginning to be introduced now
>> >> indicates that the market is ready for them. They're attractive to
>> >> people contemplating going car-free or reducing their number of
>> >> automobile trips.
>> I'd think a tripod is probably best for handling a sloshing load.
>>
>> Chariot makes a bolt on sidecar for carrying kids that isn't even
>> rated for a quarter-keg. I've carried more beer than that (in cans)
>> on the Xtracycle. Despite the weight I never got dropped.
>
> What do you see as the advantage of the Xtracycle-type designs vs.
> using a regular bike and attaching a trailer when needed for
> especially heavy loads? Except for the added drag when climbing I
> hardly notice the trailer even when carrying pretty heavy loads. And
> it's nice to be able to detach the trailer in a few seconds and then
> have a normal bike that's compatible with regular bike racks, mass
> transit, etc.

Let me count the ways:

It handles better
No pushme-pullyou effect
Easier to carry passengers
Less drag (extra trailer wheels add drag)
It's narrower, no hitting bollards or curbs
No worries about having to lock up two things
I'd think of more, but I need to hit the road.

I've never had a problem with bike racks. I admit, I've never tried to
take it on mass transit. Other Xtra riders tell me you can take the
front wheel off and fit in the bus front racks fine.

I used a trailer for a couple years and never really liked it. The
Xtracycle is a lot more fun. It carries quite a lot even when I'm
carrying my daughters.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
One day a student came to Moon and said, "I understand how to make a better
garbage collector. We must keep a reference count of the pointers to each
cons."
Moon patiently told the student the following story -- "One day a student
came to Moon and said, "I understand how to make a better garbage collector..."

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:13:18 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> What do you see as the advantage of the Xtracycle-type designs vs.
>> using a regular bike and attaching a trailer when needed for
>> especially heavy loads? Except for the added drag when climbing I
>> hardly notice the trailer even when carrying pretty heavy loads. And
>> it's nice to be able to detach the trailer in a few seconds and then
>> have a normal bike that's compatible with regular bike racks, mass
>> transit, etc.
>
>Let me count the ways:
>
>It handles better
>No pushme-pullyou effect
>Easier to carry passengers
>Less drag (extra trailer wheels add drag)
>It's narrower, no hitting bollards or curbs
>No worries about having to lock up two things
>I'd think of more, but I need to hit the road.

No need to carry two sizes of spare inner tubes.
Only one trip up or down stairs instead of two.
It fits through doorways and is easier to manage in an elevator.
You can carry the bike with its load still attached.
It can be adapted to carry longer items than most trailers handle.
It's way sexier than a trailer.
And you can still haul a trailer with it if you need to.
--
zk

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:18:15 -0700, jim beam
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Sure it flexes and that is perhaps just the nature of the beast. That
>> and a few other handling issues presents a short learning curve.
>>
>> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
>> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>
>but the xtracycle is one of the better designs - it's the others
>previously cited that i believe will be much more problem.

My friends at Momentum Magazine are getting a Big Dummy and a Ute
later this year. They're planning to do road-tests and a panel
review. I've volunteered to help with that project.
--
zk

 

[jim beam]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:18:15 -0700, jim beam
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Sure it flexes and that is perhaps just the nature of the beast. That
>>> and a few other handling issues presents a short learning curve.
>>>
>>> The way the bike is loaded affects its handling more than could be
>>> compensated by any reasonable amount of truss work, IMO.
>> but the xtracycle is one of the better designs - it's the others
>> previously cited that i believe will be much more problem.
>
> My friends at Momentum Magazine are getting a Big Dummy and a Ute
> later this year. They're planning to do road-tests and a panel
> review. I've volunteered to help with that project.

excellent - looking forward to your report!

 

[peter]

On Aug 14, 6:37 pm, Zoot Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:13:18 -0700, Dane Buson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> What do you see as the advantage of the Xtracycle-type designs vs.
> >> using a regular bike and attaching a trailer when needed for
> >> especially heavy loads? Except for the added drag when climbing I
> >> hardly notice the trailer even when carrying pretty heavy loads. And
> >> it's nice to be able to detach the trailer in a few seconds and then
> >> have a normal bike that's compatible with regular bike racks, mass
> >> transit, etc.
>
> >Let me count the ways:
>
> >It handles better

Really? My bike with trailer handles the same as it does without the
trailer - just slower on the uphills. OTOH, my tandem handles like a
truck even if it doesn't have a load, and adding one does *not* make
the handling improve.

> >No pushme-pullyou effect

Hardly noticeable - and certainly far less objectionable than the side-
to-side force from having lots of weight loaded behind me on an
abnormally long bike.

> >Easier to carry passengers

I've had three in the trailer and it seemed pretty easy. Any more and
weight issues become a problem anyway on uphill stretches.

> >Less drag (extra trailer wheels add drag)

Rather minimal. OTOH, I have no extra weight or drag or inconvenience
on all the trips where the trailer isn't needed.

> >It's narrower, no hitting bollards or curbs

Haven't had a problem. But I have encountered trail entrances with a
deliberate twist that made it very difficult to get through with
anything longer than a regular bike. On a tour with our loaded tandem
we had to dismount a few times and unload all the bags so we could
lift the bike up and around the trail entrance barriers intended to
keep out motorized conveyances.

> >No worries about having to lock up two things

The bike and trailer are easy to lock up. The worry was about how to
lock up the stuff being carried.
>
> No need to carry two sizes of spare inner tubes.

No need in any event. 700c tubes fit just fine in smaller tires.

> Only one trip up or down stairs instead of two.

I'd rather have two easy trips than one difficult one. Negotiating
narrow stairways with a tandem was very difficult with two people -
I'd hate to have to do it with a similar length bike by myself.

> It fits through doorways and is easier to manage in an elevator.

Many of the BART elevators are just the right length for one regular
bicycle and the trailer fits nicely alongside. A longer bike won't
fit (nor is it allowed by BART rules). My trailer fits easily through
doorways.

> You can carry the bike with its load still attached.

You must be stronger than I am. If the load is sufficient to warrant
use of a trailer then I generally can't lift it easily by itself, much
less with a long bike attached.

> It can be adapted to carry longer items than most trailers handle.

I tow my 18' boat just fine using a trailer. How long a load fits on
the XtraCycle?

> It's way sexier than a trailer.
> And you can still haul a trailer with it if you need to.

I suppose I could do that too, but have never seen the need. I did
once see a tandem bike pulling a tandem tag-along with their two older
kids and that in turn was towing a trailer with the two younger kids.
Made for quite a train.

 

[Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604]

peter <[email protected]> writes:

> Many of the BART elevators are just the right length for one regular
> bicycle and the trailer fits nicely alongside. A longer bike won't
> fit (nor is it allowed by BART rules).
>

BZZZT, There are no longer any rules about the maximum size bike
allowed on BART. Tandems and Xtracycles are allowed.

Other places may have such rules, of course.

73, doug

 

[SMS]

Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote:
> peter <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Many of the BART elevators are just the right length for one regular
>> bicycle and the trailer fits nicely alongside. A longer bike won't
>> fit (nor is it allowed by BART rules).
>>
>
> BZZZT, There are no longer any rules about the maximum size bike
> allowed on BART. Tandems and Xtracycles are allowed.
>
> Other places may have such rules, of course.
>
> 73, doug

Wasn't Peter referring to the elevators, not the actual train?

Neither trailers or xtracycles could be taken on CalTrain.

 

[SMS]

peter wrote:

> Really? My bike with trailer handles the same as it does without the
> trailer - just slower on the uphills. OTOH, my tandem handles like a
> truck even if it doesn't have a load, and adding one does *not* make
> the handling improve.

In terms of handling, you're much better off with a trailer than an
Xtracycle. The trailer doesn't really affect handling at all, aa long as
it's mounted down near the rear chainstays. You're better off carrying
the load lower as well.