Request For Comments

Not Responding said:

While the matter of headgear occasionally gives rise to extended
debate, I don't it qualifies as FAQ. How often does someone pop up and
ask "should I wear a helmet?"

But the question of whether they are a good thing, does tend to crop up.

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

Sandy Morton said:

But we all look at bikes in a different way - most on this ng want a
bike - I want to make a living!

's a fair point :-)

Perhaps we should have Mr Morton's Indestructible Bike List?

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

in message <[email hidden]>, Pyromancer

(') said:

Btw, while we're here, what is the correct height for a saddle on an
upright - is it that both feet should be just flat on the ground with
the legs fully extended,

No, that's *far* to low. On my mountain bikes (which have high bottom
brackets) I can't even get both tiptoes on the ground at the same time;
on my road bikes, I can get both down but it's tiptoes only.

Quoted message said:

or is it supposed to be feet at bottom of
pedal travel with legs extended?

Sit on your bike leaning against a wall. Set your pedals so they're in
line with the seat tube. With your leg straight you should be able to
get your heel on the pedal without lifting yourself off the saddle.

Quoted message said:

I have a feeling my saddle has gradually
sunk, as I now have more or less the first option, and while I can
still
ride uphill, and the bike is a lot more comfortable this way, I'm
wondering if I'm wasting energy with the upper legs being almost
horizontal.

You're not only wasting energy, you're damaging your knees.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Wise man with foot in mouth use opportunity to clean toes.
;; the Worlock

in message <[email hidden]>, Just zis Guy, you know?

(') said:

Pete Biggs wrote:

And, of course, h*lm*ts.

If we combine the faq suggestions of the regulars, we'd almost
certainly get what we wanted quicker :-)

OK, I've now drafted a draft 'Do I need a helmet' FAQ answer here:

<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:8180/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?CycleHelmets>

Feel free to edit and ammend; please use your own name if you do.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Do not sail on uphill water.
- Bill Lee

In article <[email hidden]>,

Not Responding said:

While the matter of headgear occasionally gives rise to extended
debate, I don't it qualifies as FAQ.

It definitely does. It's a very-frequently-argued subject.

Any answer needs to me neutral in tone, and point to relevant information,
preferably not that prepared by active participants in this newsgroup.
The CTC (cyclists) and the Scottish Parliament (a coherent view from
politicians) spring to mind.

--
Nick Kew

Nick Kew said:

It definitely does. It's a very-frequently-argued subject.

Quite so.

Quoted message said:

Any answer needs to me neutral in tone, and point to relevant information,
preferably not that prepared by active participants in this newsgroup.
The CTC (cyclists) and the Scottish Parliament (a coherent view from
politicians) spring to mind.

Or just point out it's been done to death enough times already and you
can use a search of the Google group archive to revisit all the
arguments (including the bits of them with the information sources)
before deciding to start them up all over again...

That way nobody can reasonably claim a bias in the information presented.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Ian said:

I've seen various posts in this NG asking for an FAQ.

Are FAQs for newsgroups that useful anymore? In the days before
dejanews/google, I suppose so but with all our collected wisdom now
archived, do we need a FAQ?

Not Responding said:

Ian said:

I've seen various posts in this NG asking for an FAQ.

Are FAQs for newsgroups that useful anymore? In the days before
dejanews/google, I suppose so but with all our collected wisdom now
archived, do we need a FAQ?

I can count a several of times recently when I've written the same
post on the subject of "why you don't want suspension for £70" which
has to be delicately put. Being able to give someone a link is easier
even if it still needs to be tactfully done. (i.e. not saying "you
have to spend £1000"😉

A

in message <[email hidden]>, Nick Kew

(') said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Not Responding said:

While the matter of headgear occasionally gives rise to extended
debate, I don't it qualifies as FAQ.

It definitely does. It's a very-frequently-argued subject.

Any answer needs to me neutral in tone, and point to relevant
information, preferably not that prepared by active participants in
this newsgroup. The CTC (cyclists) and the Scottish Parliament (a
coherent view from politicians) spring to mind.

I have drafted (and David Martin has added to) such a hopefully neutral
response here:
<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:8180/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?CycleHelmets>

Feel free to modify it further, as you feel appropriate.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Tony Blair's epitaph, #1: Here lies Tony Blair.
Tony Blair's epitaph, #2: Trust me.

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Nick Kew

(') said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Not Responding said:

While the matter of headgear occasionally gives rise to extended
debate, I don't it qualifies as FAQ.

It definitely does. It's a very-frequently-argued subject.

I have drafted (and David Martin has added to) such a hopefully neutral
response here:
<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:8180/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?CycleHelmets>

Feel free to modify it further, as you feel appropriate.

But it is part of NecessaryKit - in my eyes it is UnnecessaryKit :-).
As most of the kit mentioned isn't really necessary but nice-to-have
maybe that topic ought to be renamed.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

On 17 Sep 2004 16:04:41 GMT, Andy Leighton <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:35:26 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Feel free to modify it further, as you feel appropriate.

But it is part of NecessaryKit - in my eyes it is UnnecessaryKit :-).
As most of the kit mentioned isn't really necessary but nice-to-have
maybe that topic ought to be renamed.

It probably belongs there as it's on many other lists of necessary
kit, even if it's to explain why it may not be as necessary as other
bits of kit. Also, a helmet is a necessary bit of kit for most forms
of competitive cycling.

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain

in message <[email hidden]>, Andy Leighton

(') said:

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:35:26 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Nick Kew

(') said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"[Not Responding]" <[email hidden]> writes:

> While the matter of headgear occasionally gives rise to extended
> debate, I don't it qualifies as FAQ.

It definitely does. It's a very-frequently-argued subject.

I have drafted (and David Martin has added to) such a hopefully
neutral response here:
<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:8180/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?CycleHelmets>

Feel free to modify it further, as you feel appropriate.

But it is part of NecessaryKit - in my eyes it is UnnecessaryKit :-).
As most of the kit mentioned isn't really necessary but nice-to-have
maybe that topic ought to be renamed.

On you go then!

The reason I put it up as a Wiki is so that people could mess with it.
If you don't think it's right, fix it!

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

'Victories are not solutions.'
;; John Hume, Northern Irish politician, on Radio Scotland 1/2/95
;; Nobel Peace Prize laureate 1998; few have deserved it so much

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Simon
Brooke <[email hidden]> gently breathed:

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Pyromancer
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Btw, while we're here, what is the correct height for a saddle on an
upright - is it that both feet should be just flat on the ground with
the legs fully extended,

Quoted message said:

No, that's *far* to low. On my mountain bikes (which have high bottom
brackets) I can't even get both tiptoes on the ground at the same time;
on my road bikes, I can get both down but it's tiptoes only.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

or is it supposed to be feet at bottom of
pedal travel with legs extended?

Quoted message said:

Sit on your bike leaning against a wall. Set your pedals so they're in
line with the seat tube. With your leg straight you should be able to
get your heel on the pedal without lifting yourself off the saddle.

Right, thanks! I adjusted it at lunch time today and what a difference!
mu commute home (with the steady uphill at the end) used to take 30 to
35 minutes, today I did it in under 25, in fact I think it was about 20!
The whole bike felt totally different, I could feel I was working harder
yet at the same time seemed to get less tired, and I was going at a hell
of a rate compared to before, and in a higher gear than usual
throughout. Can't wait to get back on the bike on Monday and see how
fast I can get to the office. :-)

This kind of thing, esp your simple but clear paragraph above, should
definitely be in the FAQ, methinks.

[ previous too-low setting ]

Quoted message said:

You're not only wasting energy, you're damaging your knees.

Can you give me some more info (or a pointer) on that? I'm interested
to learn more.

--
- Pyromancer Stormshadow.
http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.

in message <[email hidden]>, Pyromancer

(') said:

Right, thanks! I adjusted it at lunch time today and what a
difference! mu commute home (with the steady uphill at the end) used
to take 30 to 35 minutes, today I did it in under 25, in fact I think
it was about 20! The whole bike felt totally different, I could feel I
was working harder yet at the same time seemed to get less tired, and
I was going at a hell of a rate compared to before, and in a higher
gear than usual
throughout. Can't wait to get back on the bike on Monday and see how
fast I can get to the office. :-)

This kind of thing, esp your simple but clear paragraph above, should
definitely be in the FAQ, methinks.

OK, done:
<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk:8180/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?SaddleHeight>

Quoted message said:

[ previous too-low setting ]

Quoted message said:

You're not only wasting energy, you're damaging your knees.

Can you give me some more info (or a pointer) on that? I'm interested
to learn more.

Any medics care to comment?

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; single speed mountain bikes: for people who cycle on flat mountains.