Tour De Cure ride

[Just A User]

Has anyone ever ridden this on a recumbent? Do they let 'bents ride? I
know lots of events are anti-recumbent. I would ride at least the 35
mile ride on my recumbent, but if they don't like recumbents, I will
only ride the 15 mile ride on my road (yuk) bike. I checked the website
and couldn't find anything that stated anything about types of bicycles
allowed.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 7, 7:47 am, Just A User <[email protected]> wrote:
> Has anyone ever ridden this on a recumbent? Do they let 'bents ride? I
> know lots of events are anti-recumbent. I would ride at least the 35
> mile ride on my recumbent, but if they don't like recumbents, I will
> only ride the 15 mile ride on my road (yuk) bike. I checked the website
> and couldn't find anything that stated anything about types of bicycles
> allowed.

I have seen recumbents used on the local TdC. Just don't expect much
support from the route mechanics, most (all?) couldn't spell
"recumbent", let alone work on one. Bring your own spare tubes, too.

 

[sally]

Just A User <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Has anyone ever ridden this on a recumbent? Do they let 'bents ride? I
> know lots of events are anti-recumbent.

What events are anti-recumbent?

 

[Roger Zoul]

"Just A User" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Has anyone ever ridden this on a recumbent? Do they let 'bents ride? I
> know lots of events are anti-recumbent. I would ride at least the 35 mile
> ride on my recumbent, but if they don't like recumbents, I will only ride
> the 15 mile ride on my road (yuk) bike. I checked the website and couldn't
> find anything that stated anything about types of bicycles allowed.

I've never had any event around here tell me I could not ride my
recumbent...and why would they? It's a bike. Just bring your helmet,
tubes, tools, etc. If they have no stated policy against it, then assume
there is no issue.

 

[nmp]

Roger Zoul wrote:

> Just bring your helmet,

Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 7, 6:25 pm, nmp <[email protected]> wrote:
> Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Just bring your helmet,
>
> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?

Lest one conjure up one or more of the obsessive, agenda-wielding,
anti-helmet zealots, Gasbags or psychopaths?

 

[Tom Sherman]

sally who? wrote:
> Just A User <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Has anyone ever ridden this on a recumbent? Do they let 'bents ride? I
>> know lots of events are anti-recumbent.
>
> What events are anti-recumbent?

Anything sanctioned by the UCI.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Tom Sherman]

nmp wrote:
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> Just bring your helmet,
>
> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?

Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Roger Zoul]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> nmp wrote:
>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>>> Just bring your helmet,
>>
>> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?
>
> Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".
>

I admit that I think of it has a foam hat, but I bring them because most of
the group rides do require them and I don't want insurance / jury hassles if
I get in an accident.

Let's just face upto this: if you get hit by a drunk, cell-phone talking 4x4
driver without your foam hat while riding a bike, everyone will assume
you're an idiot and deserved your fate. There really is no other
consideration worth discussion.

 

[Tom Sherman]

Roger Zoul wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> nmp wrote:
>>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just bring your helmet,
>>> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?
>> Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".
>>
>
> I admit that I think of it has a foam hat, but I bring them because most of
> the group rides do require them and I don't want insurance / jury hassles if
> I get in an accident.
>
> Let's just face upto this: if you get hit by a drunk, cell-phone talking 4x4
> driver without your foam hat while riding a bike, everyone will assume
> you're an idiot and deserved your fate. There really is no other
> consideration worth discussion.

I believe I posted that same argument just a few days ago.

The influence of the helmet advocates can be seen in the press - almost
every newspaper article concerning an accident involving a cyclist
mentions whether he/she was wearing a bicycle foam hat or not.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Roger Zoul]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> nmp wrote:
>>>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just bring your helmet,
>>>> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?
>>> Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".
>>>
>>
>> I admit that I think of it has a foam hat, but I bring them because most
>> of the group rides do require them and I don't want insurance / jury
>> hassles if I get in an accident.
>>
>> Let's just face upto this: if you get hit by a drunk, cell-phone talking
>> 4x4 driver without your foam hat while riding a bike, everyone will
>> assume you're an idiot and deserved your fate. There really is no other
>> consideration worth discussion.
>
> I believe I posted that same argument just a few days ago.
>

You did. I believe it and think it bears repeating. Moreover, I think
debates are moot because of this reason.

> The influence of the helmet advocates can be seen in the press - almost
> every newspaper article concerning an accident involving a cyclist
> mentions whether he/she was wearing a bicycle foam hat or not.
>

That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth my
effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable even
though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I don't take
it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".

 

[Tom Sherman]

Roger Zoul wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> nmp wrote:
>>>>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just bring your helmet,
>>>>> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?
>>>> Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".
>>>>
>>> I admit that I think of it has a foam hat, but I bring them because most
>>> of the group rides do require them and I don't want insurance / jury
>>> hassles if I get in an accident.
>>>
>>> Let's just face upto this: if you get hit by a drunk, cell-phone talking
>>> 4x4 driver without your foam hat while riding a bike, everyone will
>>> assume you're an idiot and deserved your fate. There really is no other
>>> consideration worth discussion.
>> I believe I posted that same argument just a few days ago.
>>
>
> You did. I believe it and think it bears repeating. Moreover, I think
> debates are moot because of this reason.
>
>> The influence of the helmet advocates can be seen in the press - almost
>> every newspaper article concerning an accident involving a cyclist
>> mentions whether he/she was wearing a bicycle foam hat or not.
>>
>
> That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
> whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth my
> effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable even
> though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I don't take
> it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".
>
One lesson I learned during summer riding is to NEVER push back on the
helmet while wearing it. This squeezes sweat out of the cloth headband,
and the sweat stings and makes it hard to see when it runs into my eyes.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[John Kane]

On Dec 8, 9:42 am, Tom Sherman <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Roger Zoul wrote:
> > "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> Roger Zoul wrote:
> >>> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>> nmp wrote:
> >>>>> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Just bring your helmet,
> >>>>> Shouldn't that be properly spelt like "h*lm*t"?
> >>>> Try "b i c y c l e f o a m h a t".
>
> >>> I admit that I think of it has a foam hat, but I bring them because most
> >>> of the group rides do require them and I don't want insurance / jury
> >>> hassles if I get in an accident.
>
> >>> Let's just face upto this: if you get hit by a drunk, cell-phone talking
> >>> 4x4 driver without your foam hat while riding a bike, everyone will
> >>> assume you're an idiot and deserved your fate. There really is no other
> >>> consideration worth discussion.
> >> I believe I posted that same argument just a few days ago.
>
> > You did. I believe it and think it bears repeating. Moreover, I think
> > debates are moot because of this reason.
>
> >> The influence of the helmet advocates can be seen in the press - almost
> >> every newspaper article concerning an accident involving a cyclist
> >> mentions whether he/she was wearing a bicycle foam hat or not.
>
> > That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
> > whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth my
> > effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable even
> > though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I don't take
> > it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".
>
> One lesson I learned during summer riding is to NEVER push back on the
> helmet while wearing it. This squeezes sweat out of the cloth headband,
> and the sweat stings and makes it hard to see when it runs into my eyes.

I twice was temporarily blinded by sweat running from the helmet pads
when I went to the drops. This was a major reason for giving up
helmets: They're too dangerous.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

 

[SMS 斯蒂文• 夏]

Roger Zoul wrote:

> That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
> whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth my
> effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable even
> though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I don't take
> it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".

I leave the foam bumpers on my car, and I use the foam packing material
when shipping something fragile, and I leave the foam insulation in the
refrigerator sides.

If there is _one_ thing that the AHZ's could do to gain some
credibility, it would to drop the "foam hat" schtick. It so clearly
demonstrates their anti-science, anti-think-for-yourself movement. There
are many valid reasons to oppose helmet laws, but the material that they
are constructed from is not one of them. Foam is a light, single use,
impact absorbing material, which is why it is widely used in safety
applications. Attempting to deride helmet effectiveness with the "foam
hat" schtick doesn't convince anyone.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Dec 8, 11:10 am, SMS $B;[h\J8(B* $B2F(B <[email protected]> wrote:
> Roger Zoul wrote:
> > That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
> > whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth my
> > effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable even
> > though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I don't take
> > it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".
>
> I leave the foam bumpers on my car, and I use the foam packing material
> when shipping something fragile, and I leave the foam insulation in the
> refrigerator sides.
>
> If there is _one_ thing that the AHZ's could do to gain some
> credibility, it would to drop the "foam hat" schtick. It so clearly
> demonstrates their anti-science, anti-think-for-yourself movement. There
> are many valid reasons to oppose helmet laws, but the material that they
> are constructed from is not one of them. Foam is a light, single use,
> impact absorbing material, which is why it is widely used in safety
> applications. Attempting to deride helmet effectiveness with the "foam
> hat" schtick doesn't convince anyone.



And, the "helmets make cycling more dangerous" schtick doesn't
convince anyone with the ability to think for themselves, either.

I suppose this is why the AHZs feel compelled to repeat the same
bogus, boilerplate BS over and over and over and over.....

 

[Tom Sherman]

SMS aka Steven "World's Foremost Expert" M. Scharf wrote:
> Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> That's right. The anti-science / anti-think-for-yourself /
>> whatever-you-want-to-call-it movement is very strong. It's not worth
>> my effort to fight it. Fortunately, my form hat is very comfortable
>> even though it does, IMO, contribute to increased wind noise. Also, I
>> don't take it off on rides due to "foam-hat hair".
>
> I leave the foam bumpers on my car, and I use the foam packing material
> when shipping something fragile, and I leave the foam insulation in the
> refrigerator sides.

How many times has this referenced foam prevented serious head injury or
death?

> If there is _one_ thing that the AHZ's could do to gain some
> credibility, it would to drop the "foam hat" schtick. It so clearly
> demonstrates their anti-science, anti-think-for-yourself movement. There
> are many valid reasons to oppose helmet laws, but the material that they
> are constructed from is not one of them. Foam is a light, single use,
> impact absorbing material, which is why it is widely used in safety
> applications. Attempting to deride helmet effectiveness with the "foam
> hat" schtick doesn't convince anyone.

"Foam" is merely descriptive of the primary material (since the demise
of such helmets as the Bell Biker and Kiwi, true hard-shells are not to
be found among the commonly sold headgear).

"Bicycle" describes the vehicle the headgear is intended to be used with.

"Hat" is merely descriptive of the amount of actual protection the
headgear provides, based on all the CREDIBLE population studies.

Hope this helps,

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 12:40:17 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Foam" is merely descriptive of the primary material (since the demise
>of such helmets as the Bell Biker and Kiwi, true hard-shells are not to
>be found among the commonly sold headgear).

I bought a skate pot because it has a thicker shell than the swooped
foam offerings for cyclists. It's still okay after ~5 years service
but I'm getting tired of it. The foam sizing pads have been replaced
a couple times.

I replaced the rotted foam parts in my ~1975 Romer kayaking helmet
and started wearing it again. It's unusual and draws complimentary
remarks from other cyclists. It has a six-point suspension system
inside thick well ventilated shell. Bees can find their way out again
without stinging you.

It always looked to me like it would work better than molded brittle
foam covered with shrink wrap in the event it may be needed.

I'm sure it's outlived any of the foam hats available at the time. I
wore it daily for 12 years and pretty consistently for the past two.

I'm going to have to examine this Deerstalker style when considering
a replacement: Looks like it would be great for this rainy climate.
"Shred Ready Sherlock Paddling Helmet"
http://tinyurl.com/2zheke
--
zk

 

[Tom Sherman]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 12:40:17 -0600, Tom Sherman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Foam" is merely descriptive of the primary material (since the demise
>> of such helmets as the Bell Biker and Kiwi, true hard-shells are not to
>> be found among the commonly sold headgear).
>
> I bought a skate pot because it has a thicker shell than the swooped
> foam offerings for cyclists. It's still okay after ~5 years service
> but I'm getting tired of it. The foam sizing pads have been replaced
> a couple times.
>
> I replaced the rotted foam parts in my ~1975 Romer kayaking helmet
> and started wearing it again. It's unusual and draws complimentary
> remarks from other cyclists. It has a six-point suspension system
> inside thick well ventilated shell. Bees can find their way out again
> without stinging you.
>
> It always looked to me like it would work better than molded brittle
> foam covered with shrink wrap in the event it may be needed.
>
> I'm sure it's outlived any of the foam hats available at the time. I
> wore it daily for 12 years and pretty consistently for the past two.
>
> I'm going to have to examine this Deerstalker style when considering
> a replacement: Looks like it would be great for this rainy climate.
> "Shred Ready Sherlock Paddling Helmet"
> http://tinyurl.com/2zheke

Zoot's choice of headgear would seem to be influenced by the relatively
cool Pacific Northwest climate. A full hardshell would be unbearable in
hot and humid conditions.

Does the Liddite Law in BC (or just Vancouver?) specify a certain
certification level, or do the police just not bother anyone who appears
to be wearing some type of helmet?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Bill Sornson]

John Kane wrote:

> I twice was temporarily blinded by sweat running from the helmet pads
> when I went to the drops. This was a major reason for giving up
> helmets: They're too dangerous.

Yeah, I threw away my hammer after banging my thumb, too! Damn thing was an
accident waiting to happen!

LOL

 

[Zoot Katz]

On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:33:40 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Does the Liddite Law in BC (or just Vancouver?) specify a certain
>certification level, or do the police just not bother anyone who appears
>to be wearing some type of helmet?

The MHL is Province wide. Some jurisdictions, particularly the
capital area, are more proactive in its enforcement. The Vancouver
police stop people and give out warnings usually the first week of
June. They'll write you a ticket for not wearing one if they also had
reasons to stop you for something else.

The law is vague regarding the prescribed certification. AFAICT,
there is none but there may be if The Lieutenant Governor in Council
ever decides there is.
http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/M/96318_05.htm#section184

I've seen people riding in construction hard hats, hockey,
equestrian, climbing and kayak helmets. People have even been know to
wear chrome kettles, of all things.
--
zk