Habanero shows up curved stays

On Fri, 07 Apr 2017 20:21:58 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/7/2017 7:42 PM, John B. wrote:
Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-06 19:38, wrote:
On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 5:56:33 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-04 22:48, John B. wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 8:14:16 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped
snip snip snip

And even a "do it yourself" to help you build your very own bullet
proof bicycle:
http://tinyurl.com/l7axkab


Every once in a while, it's nice to see a guy crazier than
the reader (me).
Thank you.

But just think. A lifetime guarantee would be nothing to worry about
and they would make a perfect lawn ornament :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2017-04-07 17:42, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 07 Apr 2017 07:56:18 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 19:38, wrote:
On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 5:56:33 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:51:23 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-04 22:48, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 17:52:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 8:14:16 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped

Actually disassembling a bottom bracket isn't difficult at all.... if
you have the proper tools :-) Unfortunately the "proper tools" may be
a bit exotic and may extend to "things to hold it all together while I
bang on it with a hammer" :-)


Ah, actually it is if the bottom bracket is well and truly seized. rWe had one on a bike in the shop I worked at that was so seized due to neglect of the bicycle by the ex owner that we ended up salvaging what we could off the bike for the co-op. The frame was shot so we cut the bottom bracket shell in order to get the bottom bracket out.

Cheers

I've never seen a BB that couldn't be removed, although that isn't
proof that it never happens. But I've seen them that have apparently
been installed for 20 years or more that were rather defiant :-)

What I've done is to make clamps that ensure that the wrench/spanned
cannot possibly slip off the BB and than after firmly clamping the
wrench in place just give it a lick with a hammer.


I have done that as well but on a lighter weight frame you can easily
end up with a cracked weld or otherwise damaged frame.

Strange how you have all these problems, That no one else seems to
have.


Who said so? That is how the Merckx frame of a cycling friend came to
grief. As an engineer I tend to learn from things that happened. Not
just things that happened to me but also to others.



Well, perhaps I should have said, You and Your Mates, rather than you.

I was just at a swap-meet where there were three Eddy Merckx bicycles,
two of them old enough to originally had down-tube shifters, and other
than minor paint damage looked just like new. Not a broken frame in
the lot.


I doubt that anyone in their right mind or with at least a modicum of
ethical behavior would sell a cracked frame at a swap-meet.


According your comment above one of your friends had a cracked frame
and I find three, two of which likely [pre-dated your friend's, that
weren't cracked....


"But ma, Joey jumped off that cliff too an didn't brake his arm!"


By the way, I've found the solution to all your bike problems.
http://tinyurl.com/mcbvrqe

And even a "do it yourself" to help you build your very own bullet
proof bicycle:
http://tinyurl.com/l7axkab


The rear end of my MTB will soon look non-standard. And then hopefully
last. Once it's done I can snap a photo. However, a client just dashed
my partial retirement plans for a while and then I also need to brew
some more beer.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Sat, 08 Apr 2017 08:38:17 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-07 17:42, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 07 Apr 2017 07:56:18 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 19:38, wrote:
On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 5:56:33 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:51:23 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-04 22:48, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 17:52:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 8:14:16 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped

Actually disassembling a bottom bracket isn't difficult at all.... if
you have the proper tools :-) Unfortunately the "proper tools" may be
a bit exotic and may extend to "things to hold it all together while I
bang on it with a hammer" :-)


Ah, actually it is if the bottom bracket is well and truly seized. rWe had one on a bike in the shop I worked at that was so seized due to neglect of the bicycle by the ex owner that we ended up salvaging what we could off the bike for the co-op. The frame was shot so we cut the bottom bracket shell in order to get the bottom bracket out.

Cheers

I've never seen a BB that couldn't be removed, although that isn't
proof that it never happens. But I've seen them that have apparently
been installed for 20 years or more that were rather defiant :-)

What I've done is to make clamps that ensure that the wrench/spanned
cannot possibly slip off the BB and than after firmly clamping the
wrench in place just give it a lick with a hammer.


I have done that as well but on a lighter weight frame you can easily
end up with a cracked weld or otherwise damaged frame.

Strange how you have all these problems, That no one else seems to
have.


Who said so? That is how the Merckx frame of a cycling friend came to
grief. As an engineer I tend to learn from things that happened. Not
just things that happened to me but also to others.



Well, perhaps I should have said, You and Your Mates, rather than you.

I was just at a swap-meet where there were three Eddy Merckx bicycles,
two of them old enough to originally had down-tube shifters, and other
than minor paint damage looked just like new. Not a broken frame in
the lot.


I doubt that anyone in their right mind or with at least a modicum of
ethical behavior would sell a cracked frame at a swap-meet.


Why not? After all at a swap meet the seller lays it out and the
potential buyer picks it up and looks at it. If he likes it he then
embarks on a discussion of price, etc. I've never been to a swap meet
where someone is standing on a beer crate shouting, "Get it NOW! Hot
Stuff! Buy, Buy, Buy!"



According your comment above one of your friends had a cracked frame
and I find three, two of which likely [pre-dated your friend's, that
weren't cracked....


"But ma, Joey jumped off that cliff too an didn't brake his arm!"

You don't get it do you. 14 million cheerful bicyclests in the U.S.
1,000 of them die, and you shout Danger! Danger! That is about 1 out
of 14,000.

Or perhaps more in context. A whole mob of kids, maybe 50 or 60,
playing in a school yard and one kid falls off the swing and breaks
his arm. Danger!, Danger!

By the way, I've found the solution to all your bike problems.
http://tinyurl.com/mcbvrqe

And even a "do it yourself" to help you build your very own bullet
proof bicycle:
http://tinyurl.com/l7axkab

The rear end of my MTB will soon look non-standard. And then hopefully
last. Once it's done I can snap a photo. However, a client just dashed
my partial retirement plans for a while and then I also need to brew
some more beer.

What is "non standard" on a bicycle? I remember when any form of
suspension was enough to label the rider as some form of panty-waist.

On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.

Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.

On 2017-04-09 04:17, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.


Key is how hard that crash will be. That can make the difference between
a short visit to a clinic and a year of rehab to get back into the
saddle (happened to a local guy on Green Valley Road out here). Two
seconds can make a huge difference WRT impact forces.


Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.


No, you are not.

http://www.bikesafer.com/detail/braketime.html

Of course, this assumes disc brakes. With rim brakes it'll be worse. Way
worse if due to rain there is two seconds of nothing and you smack into
the car at almost full speed. Now imagine this would be the side of a
tractor-trailer rig pulling out, the guy didn't see you at all and keeps
on going ...

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 8:12:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-09 04:17, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.


Key is how hard that crash will be. That can make the difference between
a short visit to a clinic and a year of rehab to get back into the
saddle (happened to a local guy on Green Valley Road out here). Two
seconds can make a huge difference WRT impact forces.


Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.


No, you are not.

http://www.bikesafer.com/detail/braketime.html

Of course, this assumes disc brakes. With rim brakes it'll be worse. Way
worse if due to rain there is two seconds of nothing and you smack into
the car at almost full speed. Now imagine this would be the side of a
tractor-trailer rig pulling out, the guy didn't see you at all and keeps
on going ...

Joerg, assuming you ride like I do, you'd be doing 15 mph and your chart shows that you'd be stopping directly in front of this theoretical car who would be stopping directly over the top of you.

That pretty much demonstrates that your criteria for is rediculous - in the case of another two seconds before the brakes engage you'd be well clear of the car.

On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 08:13:03 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-09 04:17, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.


Key is how hard that crash will be. That can make the difference between
a short visit to a clinic and a year of rehab to get back into the
saddle (happened to a local guy on Green Valley Road out here). Two
seconds can make a huge difference WRT impact forces.


I believe that if you do some research you will discover that a very
large number of the cyclists that hit or are hit by automobiles end up
in pretty poor condition.

Along those lines there was a very brief news item the other day. Four
cyclists in an organized race in Germany (I believe) crashed into the
rear of a stationary automobile. The results? One dead upon arrival at
the hospital and the other three with "severe" injuries.

Think of that. They hit a car that isn't even moving and Bingo! One
dead.


Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.


No, you are not.

http://www.bikesafer.com/detail/braketime.html


Yup. amazing.

But they ignore the amount of time that it takes an individual to
recognize that a situation requires some action. They ignore the
coefficient of friction between the tires and the pavement. they
neglect to mention whether this was with one wheel braking or two.
And, And, And.

What next? The Proof that a bumblebee cannot possible fly?

Of course, this assumes disc brakes. With rim brakes it'll be worse. Way
worse if due to rain there is two seconds of nothing and you smack into
the car at almost full speed. Now imagine this would be the side of a
tractor-trailer rig pulling out, the guy didn't see you at all and keeps
on going ...

I see.

My experience with any sort of wheel-brake combination is that the
ultimate limit of braking ability was the coefficient of friction
between the tires and the road.

But apparently your magic disk brakes don't depend on the friction
between the tires and the road.

Amazing!

On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:25:30 AM UTC-4, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 08:13:03 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-09 04:17, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.


Key is how hard that crash will be. That can make the difference between
a short visit to a clinic and a year of rehab to get back into the
saddle (happened to a local guy on Green Valley Road out here). Two
seconds can make a huge difference WRT impact forces.


I believe that if you do some research you will discover that a very
large number of the cyclists that hit or are hit by automobiles end up
in pretty poor condition.

Along those lines there was a very brief news item the other day. Four
cyclists in an organized race in Germany (I believe) crashed into the
rear of a stationary automobile. The results? One dead upon arrival at
the hospital and the other three with "severe" injuries.

Think of that. They hit a car that isn't even moving and Bingo! One
dead.


Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.


No, you are not.

http://www.bikesafer.com/detail/braketime.html


Yup. amazing.

But they ignore the amount of time that it takes an individual to
recognize that a situation requires some action. They ignore the
coefficient of friction between the tires and the pavement. they
neglect to mention whether this was with one wheel braking or two.
And, And, And.

What next? The Proof that a bumblebee cannot possible fly?

Of course, this assumes disc brakes. With rim brakes it'll be worse. Way
worse if due to rain there is two seconds of nothing and you smack into
the car at almost full speed. Now imagine this would be the side of a
tractor-trailer rig pulling out, the guy didn't see you at all and keeps
on going ...

I see.

My experience with any sort of wheel-brake combination is that the
ultimate limit of braking ability was the coefficient of friction
between the tires and the road.

But apparently your magic disk brakes don't depend on the friction
between the tires and the road.

Amazing!

Nor does his braking depend on the friction between his tires and the dirt trails. I can lock up my wheels on wet roads or on tails and I can do that with good ole cantilever brakes. But then again Joerg lives in an alternative reality where nothing off the shelf works and has to be modified before it`s acceptable for Joerg despite thousands of others using the same stuff with anary a problem.

Cheers

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 02:07:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:25:30 AM UTC-4, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 08:13:03 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-09 04:17, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:51:35 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-04-06 13:12, wrote:
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 3:18:43 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:12, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


I've toured many many times on logging/mining roads in Northern
Ontario in Canada and have yet to use disc brakes. Some of those
so called roads haven't been used by motor vehicles in many years
and the surfaces are very rough with lots of rocks. Some of the
roads have deep sand in places and some of them are flooded in
places. My lond term touring gear for two weeks or so of
completely unsupported touring weighs between 40 and 50 pounds.
I've riddden a lot of those roads at speed and surprisingly I
have not broken anything on that bicycle including a spoke. Thus
I do not need disc brakes even though I do often ride in the
rain.


Then keep the Flintstonian brake system :-)

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg, surely you can plan your course more than one or two seconds
in the future in rain.


Not if some inattentive driver suddenly shoots out from behind a thick
hedge or from behind a building without looking whether anyone is
coming. Or if someone turns in front of you without using a turn signal
"Honey, there on the left, that's the shop!". You often do not have two
seconds then. Not even one.


The problem with your example is that you'll hit the guy or he will
hit you. If two vehicles are on a collision course and don't see each
other until 2 seconds before impact neither of them will have reacted
sufficiently to avoid the crash.


Key is how hard that crash will be. That can make the difference between
a short visit to a clinic and a year of rehab to get back into the
saddle (happened to a local guy on Green Valley Road out here). Two
seconds can make a huge difference WRT impact forces.


I believe that if you do some research you will discover that a very
large number of the cyclists that hit or are hit by automobiles end up
in pretty poor condition.

Along those lines there was a very brief news item the other day. Four
cyclists in an organized race in Germany (I believe) crashed into the
rear of a stationary automobile. The results? One dead upon arrival at
the hospital and the other three with "severe" injuries.

Think of that. They hit a car that isn't even moving and Bingo! One
dead.


Years ago I attended a defensive driving course put on by the State
police who had all kinds of fancy attachments on the demonstration
cars.

One of the examples was you driving one of the "course cars" on a
straight dry road at 25 miles per hour. As you passed the instructors
standing beside tier road one of them would fire a blank loaded with
chalk. A second chalk gun was mounted in the auto and fired by any
movement of the brake pedal. This demonstrated the amount of distance
a vehicle traveling slowly will travel in the length of time it takes
a driver to (1) recognize a problem exists, (2) figure out what to do
about it, and (3) actually react.

In your 2 second scenario you are a dead duck.


No, you are not.

http://www.bikesafer.com/detail/braketime.html


Yup. amazing.

But they ignore the amount of time that it takes an individual to
recognize that a situation requires some action. They ignore the
coefficient of friction between the tires and the pavement. they
neglect to mention whether this was with one wheel braking or two.
And, And, And.

What next? The Proof that a bumblebee cannot possible fly?

Of course, this assumes disc brakes. With rim brakes it'll be worse. Way
worse if due to rain there is two seconds of nothing and you smack into
the car at almost full speed. Now imagine this would be the side of a
tractor-trailer rig pulling out, the guy didn't see you at all and keeps
on going ...

I see.

My experience with any sort of wheel-brake combination is that the
ultimate limit of braking ability was the coefficient of friction
between the tires and the road.

But apparently your magic disk brakes don't depend on the friction
between the tires and the road.

Amazing!

Nor does his braking depend on the friction between his tires and the
dirt trails. I can lock up my wheels on wet roads or on tails and I
can do that with good ole cantilever brakes. But then again Joerg
lives in an alternative reality where nothing off the shelf works and
has to be modified before it`s acceptable for Joerg despite thousands
of others using the same stuff with anary a problem.

Cheers

I told him that some time ago. With my "utility bike" which has cheap
old Vee brakes on it I can skid either wheel on dry or wet pavement.
As for rim brakes failing in the wet, I've not noticed it and over
here it does rain! When you see the rain drops coming down so hard
that they are bouncing a foot off the pavement you can sense that it
is raining :-)

I'm trying to figure out how a disk brake is going to improve the
braking ability.

But then, my bikes don't break. I think I've had two broken spokes in
the last two or three years and in neither case did the wheel get so
wobbly that I couldn't finish the ride. And, I'd admit that the broken
spokes were all my fault as I laced the drive side with spokes that
were too light for the job. But only a little tiny bit too light as
the remaining 16 drive side spokes are still happily going round and
round :-)

On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 7:29:03 AM UTC-4, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 02:07:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 3:25:30 AM UTC-4, John B Slocomb wrote:
Snipped
Nor does his braking depend on the friction between his tires and the
dirt trails. I can lock up my wheels on wet roads or on tails and I
can do that with good ole cantilever brakes. But then again Joerg
lives in an alternative reality where nothing off the shelf works and
has to be modified before it`s acceptable for Joerg despite thousands
of others using the same stuff with anary a problem.

Cheers

I told him that some time ago. With my "utility bike" which has cheap
old Vee brakes on it I can skid either wheel on dry or wet pavement.
As for rim brakes failing in the wet, I've not noticed it and over
here it does rain! When you see the rain drops coming down so hard
that they are bouncing a foot off the pavement you can sense that it
is raining :-)

I'm trying to figure out how a disk brake is going to improve the
braking ability.

But then, my bikes don't break. I think I've had two broken spokes in
the last two or three years and in neither case did the wheel get so
wobbly that I couldn't finish the ride. And, I'd admit that the broken
spokes were all my fault as I laced the drive side with spokes that
were too light for the job. But only a little tiny bit too light as
the remaining 16 drive side spokes are still happily going round and
round :-)

I only had one bicycle where anything on it broke a few times and that was a Velo Sport aero frameset that I bought used with a complete Dura Ace AX groupset on it. I broke a few spokes on the rear wheel over the course of a few weeks commuting. Because the spokes were breaking so often (less than 4 spokes over a few weeks) I changed my riding style and stopped commuting on that bike with my HEAVY tool box on a rear rack. The fault was mine not the product. After that I NEVER broke a spoke on that rear wheel again.

With Joerg having so much trouble breaking stuff on his bicycles and so many close calls then perhaps rather than blaming his gear perhaps he should change his riding style and stop abusing his equipment.

Or he could get a used dirt-motorcycle and adapt it to pedal power and not have any more trouble.

Cheers