Today's "responsible" cyclists.



N

Nate Nagel

Guest
On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.

I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
 
On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists.  One
> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
> was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
> that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
> illegal.)  The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)  Both
> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> after sunset) when I saw them.  I did not see them pass a stop-sign
> controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
> gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
>
> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> nate


I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?

Regards,
Cullen
 
On Mar 3, 7:36 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists.  One
> > appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
> > was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
> > that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
> > illegal.)  The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> > way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
> > (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)  Both
> > riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> > after sunset) when I saw them.  I did not see them pass a stop-sign
> > controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
> > gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.

>
> > I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> > did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.

>
> > nate

>
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
>
> Regards,
> Cullen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Given the law of proportions, it's about equal to operators of
motorized vehicles. It reminds me of the proverbial tobacco-chewing
pickup driver passing people at 60 in a 35 with an exhaust sound
resembling a bad case of flatulence pointed at a microphone connected
to a system of wall-to-wall Marshalls.
 

> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
>> was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
>> that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
>> illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>> after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
>> controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
>> gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
>>
>> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.



[email protected] wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?


Yes. Yes he is. Sad, eh?

\\paul
--
Paul M. Hobson
..:change the f to ph to reply:.
 

> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> nate


Come to Texas and you'd see about 90% of the motorists rolling through stop
signs on their way to turning right. Also, it is a law that car lights have
to be on at dusk but I'd bet at least half of them don't turn their lights
on until it is flat out black outside.

You see, if you want to pick a cyclist and say, "He's not following the
law!" We could also tell you about car drivers who don't follow the law.
Just don't be one of those idiots who acts as if car drivers always follow
every law....so, get off your high horse.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;


I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
a lot in those days... I got tired of throwing money into the bike)

> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> after sunset) when I saw them.


Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking. The
last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the normal
riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my bicycle, but
worse... deer decide to run left or right after a pause... stupid humans
keep coming right at me.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
>>was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
>>that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
>>illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>>way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>>(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>>after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
>>controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
>>gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
>>
>>I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>>did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>>nate

>
>
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
>
> Regards,
> Cullen


My point is that today is not unusual in terms of cyclist behavior
observed, despite the protestations of certain people posting to RAD
apparently from rec.bicycles.misc. In fact, today's observations are
EXACTLY what I expect on any given day.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
 
Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> nate
>


I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
exceeding the speed limit and i do not observe 20% using a cell.
 
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>>did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>>nate
>>

>
>
> I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
> exceeding the speed limit and i do not observe 20% using a cell.


I've actually seen a cyclist using a cell phone. must have had a
special death wish.

nate

(yes, I KNOW it's a troll.)

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
 
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:13:43 -0000, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>> nate
>>

>
>I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
>exceeding the speed limit


Moron. The average cyclist is not even capable of attaining such
speeds.

> d i do not observe 20% using a cell.


And I've never seen a cyclist with sandpaper threaded tires or
inoperative brakes - two things you have admitted to doing with your
scud.


Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS (a.k.a. SFB) admits to being
a deadly speeder, psychopath and criminal coddler:

"> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit?

Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5
years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in
cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open
stretch could be 25, i thought."

Pride of America (c.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/Speeders And Drunk Drivers
Are Murderers (SADDAM)), 10/3/2002
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg

Proof that POA is LBMHB/lbVH/SADDAM:
See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj
 
Brent P wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;

>
>
> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
> jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
> the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
> serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
> beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
> looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
> raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
> a lot in those days... I got tired of throwing money into the bike)


I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
now have a Raleigh.

But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
"Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
mile upon mile over the course of a year.

>>The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>>way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>>(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>>after sunset) when I saw them.

>
> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking. The
> last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the normal
> riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my bicycle, but
> worse... deer decide to run left or right after a pause... stupid humans
> keep coming right at me.


Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.


SMH
 
[email protected] wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <[email protected]> wrote:


{all non-troll material left intact}

> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?


Plonked troll was trolling, which is why the plonked troll is a plonked
troll.

Bill "take the hint?" S.
 
Stephen Harding wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;

>>
>>
>>
>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys
>> who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my
>> money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear
>> and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every
>> time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a
>> college student and I rode a lot in those days... I got tired of
>> throwing money into the bike)

>
>
> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
> now have a Raleigh.
>
> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>
>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down a
>>> busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or the
>>> front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g.
>>> well after sunset) when I saw them.

>>
>>
>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.

>
>
> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.


And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
per-encounter basis.

Let's face it. the people that are going to bother to search out a
newsgroup with "bicycles" in the title are not the same people that are
making up their own rules as they ride out there one the roads. Just
like the vast majority of people driving could give two ***** about
actually driving, and would be astounded that anyone would care enough
about it to find a Usenet group about it.

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
 
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Stephen Harding wrote:
>> Brent P wrote:
>>
>>> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys
>>> who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my
>>> money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear
>>> and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every
>>> time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a
>>> college student and I rode a lot in those days... I got tired of
>>> throwing money into the bike)

>>
>>
>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>> now have a Raleigh.
>>
>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>
>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g.
>>>> well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.

>>
>>
>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.

>
> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
> to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
> per-encounter basis.[...]
>

Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
you.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
 
On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:33:39 -0600,
[email protected] (Brent P) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;

>
>I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
>jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
>the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
>serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
>beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
>looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
>raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
>a lot in those days...



Weekend Warriors are no match for a dedicated commuter over their
regular route. Harmless racing between commuters occurs but is tacky.

Commuting and utility cyclists are serious cyclists. Serious cyclists
can most often be recognised by their compliance with vehicle code
regulations and other practical accessories. They generally ride in a
vehicular manner which means they too will do rolling stops,
unsignalled turns and take the occasional counter-flow convenience
just like automobile drivers. However, they'll often employ their
vehicles' superior maneuverability to confound the caged commuters
left stewing in the gridlocked clusterfuk they made for themselves.


>( I got tired of throwing money into the bike)


Throwing money into a bike? A person can spend more annually just
maintaining their tennis racquet.

Two chains, two tires and four brake pads usually does me for a year
of daily transportation. Occasional cog, rim and chain ring
replacement is interspersed over five years.

I have more than one bike so that spreads the wear. Some days, some
destinations and some whims demand different bikes. Maintaining
eleven bikes for a year probably costs me less than two months of
insurance on only one of your cars.
--
zk
 
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>
>>> Brent P wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat
>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>>> now have a Raleigh.
>>>
>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>>
>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)
>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.

>>
>>
>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on
>> a per-encounter basis.[...]
>>

> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
> you.
>


No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her. That's the whole
point. Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that
scares me more. The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seen a
Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably
need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
may be.)

It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
 
In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brent P wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
>>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
>>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
>>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat
>>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
>>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
>>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>>>> now have a Raleigh.
>>>>
>>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>>>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>>>
>>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)
>>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
>>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
>>>
>>>
>>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
>>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on
>>> a per-encounter basis.[...]
>>>

>> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
>> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
>> you.
>>

>
> No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her. That's the whole
> point. Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that
> scares me more. The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seen a
> Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably
> need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
> may be.)
>
> It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
> Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
> Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
> before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.


They don't understand that when mr. wrong way does something really
stupid and ends up hitting the windshield and bending an A pillar or the
roof, practically anything older than 'just left the dealer lot' is
totalled.
 
On Mar 4, 8:09 am, [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Nate Nagel wrote:

>
> >>> Stephen Harding wrote:

>
> >>>> Brent P wrote:

>
> >>>>> In article <[email protected]>, Nate Nagel wrote:

>
> >>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists.  One
> >>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;

>
> >>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
> >>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
> >>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
> >>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
> >>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
> >>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat
> >>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
> >>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
> >>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)

>
> >>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
> >>>> now have a Raleigh.

>
> >>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!!  I don't go much
> >>>> with the jersey stuff.  The real high powered bicyclists are often
> >>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
> >>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.

>
> >>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
> >>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
> >>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)  
> >>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
> >>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.

>
> >>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
> >>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
> >>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
> >>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
> >>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.  

>
> >>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.

>
> >>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
> >>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on
> >>> a per-encounter basis.[...]

>
> >> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
> >> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
> >> you.

>
> > No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her.  That's the whole
> > point.  Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that
> > scares me more.  The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seena
> > Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably
> > need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
> > may be.)

>
> > It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
> > Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
> > Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
> > before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.

>
> They don't understand that when mr. wrong way does something really
> stupid and ends up hitting the windshield and bending an A pillar or the
> roof, practically anything older than 'just left the dealer lot' is
> totalled.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


It depends a lot on the make and value of the car as well. They'll
scrap an easily repairable civic in a heartbeat, but they'll go to
crazy extents to "save" a caddy that has about had it.
 
Nate Nagel wrote:

> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>
>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.

>
> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
> to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
> per-encounter basis.


I think it's wasted worry. Just not significant enough to bother with.

> Let's face it. the people that are going to bother to search out a
> newsgroup with "bicycles" in the title are not the same people that are
> making up their own rules as they ride out there one the roads. Just
> like the vast majority of people driving could give two ***** about
> actually driving, and would be astounded that anyone would care enough
> about it to find a Usenet group about it.


I think people who actually use a bike for transport (in place of a car)
are probably going to be far better in traffic than even experienced
motorists simply because the penalties are too high not to be better.

Then one has the kids and who knows what they'll do.

And an intermediate group that are adult or enthusiasts, but regard
the bike as the best of both the motoring and pedaling worlds. They
can ride on the road, pedal past jammed traffic, yet pass through
intersections like a pedestrian, travel on a sidewalk or wrong way on
a road, or make a "quick trip" to the convenience store at night without
lighting.

I believe statistics predict if you ride the wrong side of the road
or at night without lighting, you're probably headed for the fatality
column of some government accident report at some point in your future.


SMH
 
Zoot Katz wrote:

> [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>( I got tired of throwing money into the bike)

>
> Throwing money into a bike? A person can spend more annually just
> maintaining their tennis racquet.
>
> Two chains, two tires and four brake pads usually does me for a year
> of daily transportation. Occasional cog, rim and chain ring
> replacement is interspersed over five years.
>
> I have more than one bike so that spreads the wear. Some days, some
> destinations and some whims demand different bikes. Maintaining
> eleven bikes for a year probably costs me less than two months of
> insurance on only one of your cars.


I actually "got tired" of fixes for my beloved Mongoose.

It recently broke a rear axle and rear deraileur. I could
always put a $30 new deraileur and another $35 (6-speed freewheel)
wheel on it but I've done that three times now over the past 6 years.

Six speed cogs are getting harder to find (that start lower than 14t)
and upgrading means a cascade of related replacements (shifter,
perhaps cable, perhaps brake as well since the two were combined and
maybe more).

Heck with it! Nearly $500 got me an 8-speed cogset Raleigh MTB with
front shocks and disk brakes. Very smooth Alivio shifting compared
with what I was used to, and a larger frame that makes the bike much
more comfortable to ride.

Every bike has its season!


SMH