Recumbent Hill Climbing ??

[Freewheeling]

On 17 Jan 2004 15:29:39 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

>If you want me to respond to your post, then learn how to post. Your post is all about my original
>statement where I advise you to keep reading it over and over - and you have not included that
>statement in your post. I cannot be wasting my time on those who do not know how to post. By the
>way, you are never saying much of anything either, so I think we are on the same page there.

It just amaz...

Allah is watching. Shhh.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Freewheeling]

On 17 Jan 2004 15:29:39 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

>If and when you quote "volumes of irrelevant material" I shall not bother to read any of it as I am
>a world class expert on irrelevancies and can spot it from a mile off. On the other hand, there is
>wisdom that often relates to what you are blathering about and I include that in the hope that it
>may educate you. I know it is a forlorn hope but it (hope) springs eternal in the human breast.

OK Ed, you insisted. You're killfiled. Life's just too damn short.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Freewheeling]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:27:33 GMT, Howard <bishop(1199<<1)@yazhooz.com>
wrote:

>If you two are going to fight like this in public again maybe you should figure out a way to become
>brothers in law or seek some counseling or something.

Sorry I just couldn't help commenting on Tom's statement, since elections are my field. I was
probably low on blood sugar too, but have since eaten a couple of bowls of black beans and had two
glasses of wine so I can talk about any ol' darn thing. Very flexible.

Just don't get me started about the counter-enlightenment...

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Freewheeling]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:27:33 GMT, Howard <bishop(1199<<1)@yazhooz.com>
wrote:

>Please. Now.

And I should add that I've killfiled Ed, so he could be singing the praises of NAMBLA and I wouldn't
know. Forte Agent is great.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Howard]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
(Like I'm going to perpetuate this)

If you two are going to fight like this in public again maybe you should figure out a way to become
brothers in law or seek some counseling or something. Anything. Thorazine maybe or at least some
benedril. Take it to another group. Please. Now.

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> ... All this abbreviation that goes on here on ARBR is just plain rude. Write it out for Heaven's
> sake....

Mr. Dolan abbreviates "alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent" to "ARBR" in a statement complaining about the
use of abbreviations. Now that is funny!

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:58:44 -0600, Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>We could discuss gun control, mandatory bicycle helmet use/effectiveness, the ecological impact of
>>mountain biking, Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge pickup trucks, Campagnolo vs. Shimano, and the relative
>>merits of mass transit vs. personal motor vehicle usage.
>
>
> Phuque it. I'd rather discuss war.

I would rather discuss Presta vs. Schrader, the correct end of a soft-boiled egg to break, the
correct end to eat a banana from, the proper hanging orientation of toilet paper, and how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Stay away from this moron Mr. Sherman! Anyone who is alluding to "Copperheads" and McClellan on
> ARBR is a bona fide idiot. He knows nothing of context and fancies himself an intellectual. These
> are absolutely the worse sorts in the entire world. And they are invariably know-nothings to boot!
> Believe me, I know these jerks backwards and forwards.

Mr. Dolan,

I had a long discussion (okay, off-topic flame war) with Mr. Talkington about a subject that I will
not mention, during which he complained about my debating tactics.

I do not wish to engage in off-topic flame wars on alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent, but I also do not
wish to have to see postings expressing views on off-topic subjects that I find abhorrent. I believe
you feel the same way. However, as you well know (remember "OT and Flammable") I am willing to argue
until everyone is sick of the argument and gives up if I have to. However, I believe we would all be
happier if I keep the sheep suit on (Hi $kip) and stick to recumbents and smart-ass comments.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Stay away from this moron Mr. Sherman! Anyone who is alluding to "Copperheads" and McClellan on
> ARBR is a bona fide idiot. He knows nothing of context and fancies himself an intellectual. These
> are absolutely the worse sorts in the entire world. And they are invariably know-nothings to boot!
> Believe me, I know these jerks backwards and forwards.

Mr. Talkington is an academic in the field of political science, so Mr. Dolan in his time as a
university librarian has likely encountered similar people. Whether or not they are "idiots",
"know-nothings" and "jerks" I will refrain from commenting on (for the moment at least).

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Rush Limbaugh is always right on everything....

Mr. Dolan,

You will get no argument from me that Rush Limbaugh is to the right (as commonly defined) on all
political issues.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Well for Heaven's sake, it is the arm and chest muscles that are enabling you to maintain that
> bent over posture on an upright. And if it won't shock you all the way to hell and back, I do
> agree with you that ultimately it is the back and abs that force you to eventually to give up on
> an upright....

For me, the discomfort on an upright was related to saddle pressure, carrying too much weight on my
wrists, and finger numbness. Back pain was never an issue (surprising, since I have back problems
from doing repetitive manual labor in a factory job I worked at 12 years ago).

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:

> ...I daresay if I make a big enough thing of the fact that I'm a Bush supporter...

What politician you support is your choice, but please discuss it in a more appropriate forum than
alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. Everyone will thank you for doing so.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Tom Sherman]

Freewheeling wrote:

> What else is there besides aerodynamics, when it comes to speed on flat to rolling terrain?
> Rolling resistance, I guess. But DFs have no advantage there. So there's really only one advantage
> on flat to rolling ground, and it belongs entirely to recumbents....

Most standard uprights will have a rolling resistance advantage over most recumbents [1], and the
same is true for drivetrain friction.

Weight will also have an effect on acceleration (the importance of which is highly course dependent)
and rolling resistance (usually of minimal significance). Recumbents will typically have a weight
penalty to uprights of equivalent frame materials and component quality.

[1] This will of course vary not only with tire construction, inflation pressure and diameter but
also with the road surface.

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Christopher Jor]

I figured the hillclimbing post went way off course, but I noticed Ford vs. Chevy. Maybe another
thread can answer the fantastic question: will any trikes fit in the '04 Chevy Nomad? My Catrike
outgrew my full-size El Camino.

Chris Jordan Santa Cruz, CA.

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]
berlin.de>...
> Freewheeling wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:58:44 -0600, Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>We could discuss gun control, mandatory bicycle helmet use/effectiveness, the ecological impact
> >>of mountain biking, Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge pickup trucks, Campagnolo vs. Shimano, and the
> >>relative merits of mass transit vs. personal motor vehicle usage.
> >
> >
> > Phuque it. I'd rather discuss war.
>
> I would rather discuss Presta vs. Schrader, the correct end of a soft-boiled egg to break, the
> correct end to eat a banana from, the proper hanging orientation of toilet paper, and how many
> angels can dance on the head of a pin.
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

 

[Freewheeling]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 01:02:03 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Whether or not they are "idiots", "know-nothings" and "jerks" I will refrain from commenting on
>(for the moment at least).

I'll attempt to keep the same open mind about you.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Freewheeling]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 01:14:43 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>What politician you support is your choice, but please discuss it in a more appropriate forum than
>alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent. Everyone will thank you for doing so.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Freewheeling]

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 01:23:30 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Most standard uprights will have a rolling resistance advantage over most recumbents [1], and the
>same is true for drivetrain friction.
>

Pretty doubtful, actually. Especially if you factor in MTB and Crossbikes, which is fair if you're
going to include all recumbents and not just the "speedy" Bachetta/Aero designs.

>Weight will also have an effect on acceleration (the importance of which is highly course
>dependent) and rolling resistance (usually of minimal significance).

No problem with the acceleration effect of weight, but it's probably very very minimal and provided
the grades are moderate what you sacrifice in the upslope is recovered by momentum on the downslope,
further minimizing the effect. We've already covered RR.

>Recumbents will typically have a weight penalty to uprights of equivalent frame materials and
>component quality.
>

Already covered.

>[1] This will of course vary not only with tire construction, inflation pressure and diameter but
> also with the road surface.

But population mean to population mean is probably not much different between recumbents and DFs.

The single most important disadvantage of recumbents is their weight and the rider position on long
steep grades.

No sense passing up the opportunity to beat a dead horse into a heap of its component molecules.

http://www.demosophia.com

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Stay away from this moron Mr. Sherman! Anyone who is alluding to "Copperheads" and McClellan on
> > ARBR is a bona fide idiot. He knows nothing of context and fancies himself an intellectual.
> > These are absolutely the worse sorts in the entire world. And they are invariably know-nothings
> > to boot! Believe me, I know these jerks backwards and forwards.
>
> Mr. Talkington is an academic in the field of political science, so Mr. Dolan in his time as a
> university librarian has likely encountered similar people. Whether or not they are "idiots",
> "know-nothings" and "jerks" I will refrain from commenting on (for the moment at least).
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

Caution is one of Mr. Sherman's chief virtues besides his penchant for making exacting statements
of fact. These virtues do not move me much although I have noted that others are greatly
impressed by them.

I am more than disenchanted with academics. They proved themselves to be world class cowards in the
60's when the radicalized students were taking over the college campuses with nary a word of protest
from the professors. My contempt for them is boundless! What good does it do to have brains and
knowledge of a subject if you are lacking the most elementary courage.

Churchill was right. Courage is the greatest of all the virtues because it makes all the other
virtues possible.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Rush Limbaugh is always right on everything....
>
> Mr. Dolan,
>
> You will get no argument from me that Rush Limbaugh is to the right (as commonly defined) on all
> political issues.
>
> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities

Rush of course is a political commentator and not a reporter of the news. The New York Times, among
many others, are contemptible because they are reporters of the news and yet can't keep their
liberal biases off their reporting. Analysis and commentary is one thing, reporting and journalism
is quite another. For a reporter of the news to have an agenda other than a truthful statement of
the facts is an abomination.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]
> > berlin.de>...
> >
> >
> >>Edward Dolan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Yeah, but you can't fool all the people all of the time. The Dems are going to lose big time in
> >>>2004 because they are permanently out to lunch on national defense and security issues. If they
> >>>could get their heads screwed on straight on these issues they might have a chance.
> >>
> >>You can fool a lot of them if you have electronic voting machines that record "Bush" when the
> >>voter chooses the Democratic candidate.
> >>
> >>Tom Sherman - Quad Cities
> >
> >
> > The ignorant Democratic voters have got to get up to speed on how to vote, whatever the method.
> > This is not rocket science, but it probably does require that you have at least a high school
> > education. Those who are too ignorant to know how to vote properly should not be voting at all.
> > If that is your main argument for why the Dems are in such dire straits, you might as well throw
> > in the towel now and be done with it.
>
> Mr. Dolan,
>
> This has nothing to do with individual voters learning to use a voting machine and everything to
> do with electronic ballot tampering, and you are being disingenuous to try to claim otherwise. Of
> course, since you rely on Faux News for your information, you probably do not realize the
> potential for voting fraud if there is no printed backup to electronic voting machine tabulations,
> and in addition do not care since the electronic voting machines are made by Republican supporting
> corporations.

Mr. Sherman,

Both political parties monitor the voting process. If there is something amiss it will be noted and
a mighty ruckus will be raised. Ballots can be tampered with regardless of the state of the
technology. Voting fraud cuts in all directions, but if the monitors are doing their job it will not
be easy for anyone to get away with anything. You are worrying about something that doesn't exist.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota