safety standards on kids bikes

[Tamyka Bell]

Bleve wrote:
>
> flyingdutch wrote:
> > all semantics anyhow as it still dont make kids brakes any betterrrrr...
>
> Dutchy, you want something for nothing. You can't have it. PI will
> continue to be 3.141.... no matter how much you complain about it
>
> The physics are simple enough - a brake lever trades throw length for
> force required, in order to get sufficient braking force at the
> brakepads. The compromise is either a long throw, which is no good for
> small hands, or reduced leverage, requiring more hand strength to
> operate. Hydraulics aren't an answer either, they do the same thing
> (trade throw for pressure, P = F/A, they're just hydraulic levers, no
> magic here, move along).
>
> Coaster brakes are good for little kids. Handbrakes are not, until
> they have both the hand strength and the hand size to operate them.
> The only other alternative is drum brakes, but they have their own set
> of problems, although they are "assisted" they have problems with
> complexity and adjustment.

Skinnier handgrips would be a start, surely? It would allow the kids
more effective reach and the brake lever a greater arc of motion.

Tam

 

[flyingdutch]

Dutchy, you want something for nothing.

Damn straight! common sense don't cost a cent.
unless consultatns get involved
but then you lose the commonsense component and even more of the cents

 

[Bleve]

Tamyka Bell wrote:

> Skinnier handgrips would be a start, surely? It would allow the kids
> more effective reach and the brake lever a greater arc of motion.

Draw a diagram, and see that it cannot change the throw of the levers.
It *can* make a small difference for hand reach, maybe 2-3mm? But at
the expense of hand comfort when riding.

Repeat after me : coaster brakes for little kids

 

[Tamyka Bell]

Bleve wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
>
> > Skinnier handgrips would be a start, surely? It would allow the kids
> > more effective reach and the brake lever a greater arc of motion.
>
> Draw a diagram, and see that it cannot change the throw of the levers.
> It *can* make a small difference for hand reach, maybe 2-3mm? But at
> the expense of hand comfort when riding.
>
> Repeat after me : coaster brakes for little kids

I wouldn't dream of anything else. Oh except maybe a track bike...

Tam

 

[Parbs]

Tamyka Bell wrote:
> Bleve wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>> Repeat after me : coaster brakes for little kids
>
> I wouldn't dream of anything else. Oh except maybe a track bike...
>
Which reminds me of an old 12" wheel fixed gear kids bike that hopefully
is still under my 'rents house. Could be perfect for the crits at the
SS Nats...

Parbs

 

[sinus]

Bleve wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
>
> > Skinnier handgrips would be a start, surely? It would allow the kids
> > more effective reach and the brake lever a greater arc of motion.
>
> Draw a diagram, and see that it cannot change the throw of the levers.
> It *can* make a small difference for hand reach, maybe 2-3mm? But at
> the expense of hand comfort when riding.
>
> Repeat after me : coaster brakes for little kids

I wouldn't dream of anything else. Oh except maybe a track bike...

Tam

brakeless fixed gears for little kids

 

[Bleve]

sinus wrote:

> brakeless fixed gears for little kids

Most 2-5 y/o kids trikes fit this description, the brakes are the
rolling resistance on carpet and grass, and walls

 

[Gemma_k]

"Bleve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
>
> > Skinnier handgrips would be a start, surely? It would allow the kids
> > more effective reach and the brake lever a greater arc of motion.
>
> Draw a diagram, and see that it cannot change the throw of the levers.
> It *can* make a small difference for hand reach, maybe 2-3mm? But at
> the expense of hand comfort when riding.
>
> Repeat after me : coaster brakes for little kids

Which is why I think the Standard covers it pretty well!
Kids need coaster brakes to be able to stop. The hand brake is there for
then they get the strength and coordination to be able to use it - and when
they are big enough to be able then they are probably ready to move to a
small adult's bike.
Kids are not little adults - they're kids

Gemm

 

[Gemma_k]

"suzyj" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Gemma wrote:
>
> > My 'Reach' is therefore about 125mm. (Yes I have
> > big hands for a girly!)
>
> Yeah, ya do. I thought my hands were enormous, but my reach is only
> 120mm... Your hands must be _huge_!
>
> Suzy (beaten again)

Cheer up, you beat Tam! ;-)

slightly off-topic...
Reminds me of an ad for Triumph Motorcycles my dad has in his shed. It says
"Are you man enough for a Triumph?"
Given the stiffness and reach of the clutch and brakes, I am only just 'man
enough' ;-)

 

[Gags]

"TimC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> A unicycle sounds a bit overboard. It has bearings that will wear
> away when the dirt and rain gets in!
>
> Shirley a plain wheel with just an axle jutting out is all that's
> necessary for a rain bike?
>

You mean like this? http://tinyurl.com/j922q

 

[TimC]

On 2006-05-11, Gags (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> "TimC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> A unicycle sounds a bit overboard. It has bearings that will wear
>> away when the dirt and rain gets in!
>>
>> Shirley a plain wheel with just an axle jutting out is all that's
>> necessary for a rain bike?
>
> You mean like this? http://tinyurl.com/j922q

Oooh! But still, it's got bearings in the pedals. They should just
be smooth pegs. Hmmm, maybe not such a good idea for a rain bike...

--
TimC
HANDLE WITH EXTREME CARE: This Product Contains Minute Electrically
Charged Particles Moving at Velocities in Excess of Five Hundred
Million Miles Per Hour. --unknown

 

[Peter Signorini]

"TimC" wrote:
> On 2006-05-11, Gags (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

>> You mean like this? http://tinyurl.com/j922q
>
> Oooh! But still, it's got bearings in the pedals. They should just
> be smooth pegs. Hmmm, maybe not such a good idea for a rain bike...

Yeah, it's got no mudguards. Any decent rain bike has to have mudguards, so
how are you going to fit them?

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

 

[flyingdutch]

Which is why I think the Standard covers it pretty well!
Kids need coaster brakes to be able to stop. The hand brake is there for
then they get the strength and coordination to be able to use it - and when
they are big enough to be able then they are probably ready to move to a
small adult's bike.
Kids are not little adults - they're kids

Gemm

No, IMHO the standard is nothing more than a token gesture to allow 'the authorities' some cold comfort that they are 'doing the right thing for safety'.
If the hand brake is there for when they get the strength and coordination to be able to use it, this by it's very logic is when the kid is bigger than the kid who can ride these smaller bikes! IE the standard does not apply to most kids.

Even when they make the transition to the 'bigger' bike, the standard may not work as their hands still may not be big or strong enuff to operate said brake.

So i would suggest the standard be removed for smaller bikes up to a certain size and specify coaster brakes only, and at some (yet to decide on actual size/age/whatever scale) stage the standard that now exists can be applied.
You didnt write this standard, did you Gemma?
your doing an awful lot of defending something that doesnt work?

 

[Theo Bekkers]

"Gemma_k" wrote
> Another way of looking at it is this.
> make an "L" with your thumb and index finger. Jam a ruler at the
base of
> the "L" and measure to the end of your index finger. My 'Reach' is
> therefore about 125mm. (Yes I have big hands for a girly!)

155. Max span thumb to ring-finger is 275.

Theo

 

[Gemma_k]

"flyingdutch" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>
> No, IMHO the standard is nothing more than a token gesture to allow
> 'the authorities' some cold comfort that they are 'doing the right
> thing for safety'.

Ah, you smell a conspiracy! How 'advocacy' of you! Poor, downtrodden
cyclist, everyone is out to get you eh?
All australian standards are driven by INDUSTRY. Not 'the authorities'.
Whoever they are....

> You didnt write this standard, did you Gemma?
> your doing an awful lot of defending something that doesnt work?

Nope. I just feel that personally a bicycle with a coaster brake is perfect
for children. Having a working front brake is a bonus.... Because I don't
think there's a hand brake that is anywhere near suitable for a child's
bike, given the small rim dimensions, the lack of lever throw and associated
cable actuated brakes. I've tried fixing a few for the kids in the street
and like someone else has said, you can't have a small reach (and resulting
small throw) and powerful calipers, the equation doesn't add up <scotty's
voice> 'Ye cannut break the laws of physics'

Go talk to the BFA or CPF or the manufacturers or someone similar if you
don't like the standard....
And don't buy bikes that don't fit or work for your child!?

Gemm

 

[BrettS]

Theo Bekkers wrote:
> "Gemma_k" wrote
>
>>Another way of looking at it is this.
>>make an "L" with your thumb and index finger. Jam a ruler at the
>
> base of
>
>>the "L" and measure to the end of your index finger. My 'Reach' is
>>therefore about 125mm. (Yes I have big hands for a girly!)
>
>
> 155. Max span thumb to ring-finger is 275.
>

Holy ****!

Note to self, don't upset Theo face-to-face...
;-)

--
Brett"130 & 225"S

 

[Donga]

slaw wrote:
> We bought a Raleigh Sugar 24" girly style MTB for about $260. The Giant
> was a bit over $300, a bit lighter, as the Raleigh has a suspension
> fork.
>
> I really can't believe how good a bike it is for that price:
> hydroformed frame, v-brakes, indexed gears, one year's service etc.
> Sure it's a bit heavier than my dual susp mtb, but my yearly
> maintenance costs on that bike (chain, cassette, brake pads, suspension
> maintenance, etc) is more than the cost of the girl's whole bike.

I did the deed last night and picked up a 20" thing from Apollo called
"Reckless" - chosen by said 9 y.o. son, who is not at all reckless but
must fancy himself as such! I brought it home as a surprise and he just
jumped out of his skin! Ended up riding it all around the inside of the
house, then parked it next to his bed, kissed it and went to bed.

The bling factor appears to have turned a non-rider into a rider. Why
didn't I think of it before? The bike was $310 and as Slaw says, it is
amazing what you get for your money now - a really good bike for this
application. Mind you, I've no doubt it will be good for nothing in 3-4
years, but for now, we couldn't be happier.

Donga