Watch out for those dips in the road
Bike commuting fashion tips 52
-
Posted 10:45 AM on 22 Mar 2007
by Biodiversivist -
Posted in
-
Read More About
My real name is Russ Finley. I live in Seattle, married with children. Suffice it to say that although I am trained and educated as an engineer, my passion is nature. I very much want my grandchildren to live on a planet where lions, tigers, and bears have not joined the long and growing list of creatures that used to be. In an attempt to minimize the workload on Grist editors responsible for turning my submissions into intelligible articles, I will also be posting on a seperate blog called Biodiversivist, which will contain articles in addition to those submitted to Grist.
Related Stories
Gucci Group commits to saving Indonesia’s rainforests
Highs and lows from the world of green fashion
Climate Riders use pedal power to raise awareness
Add a Comment
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
Comments
View as Threaded
mihan Posted 3:05 am
22 Mar 2007
I have a comment and a question:
For super-cold weather, only gloves-plus-mittens will do. I have lightweight gloves and fairly heavy-duty mittens, and I was fine even when the temperature was in the negative double digits (before wind chill). You do have to make sure to put them on before you leave the apartment, otherwise you'll be cold.
What I really need is a waterproof raincoat that will also fit my backpack. Like a pregnancy raincoat, but for a backpack. I don't mind biking in the rain, but I don't want my backpack to get soaked. Does such a thing exist? If so, I haven't found it yet.
Permalink
mihan Posted 3:06 am
22 Mar 2007
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 3:25 am
22 Mar 2007
And on another matter: I agree with both you and Mihan regarding spandex. Only someone with the body of that angelic biker could get away with wearing spandex; and even then it would be a stretch (so to speak).
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:36 am
22 Mar 2007
The other is a bike cape or poncho. I've been told that everybody in China uses them but I have not tried one out yet. Can't find any in Seattle. Sounds like it might be a good idea for warmer weather.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
atreyger Posted 3:50 am
22 Mar 2007
http://www.ems.com/catalog/subcategory_simple.jsp?FOLDER% ...
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:52 am
22 Mar 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 5:42 am
22 Mar 2007
My main clothing problems with biking to work: 1. I can't wear skirts anymore, just slacks. 2. With shoes, the problem isn't laces or rain, its heels. So they live in a drawer at work, and I wear flats or sneaks in and then change as necessary. 3. Getting my nice slacks caught up in the chain because either I forgot my little reflective velcro straps, or they slipped off the fabric.
As for the last, I keep wondering if theres something bigger I can use, that is as wide as a shin guard - I have about $200 worth of slacks in my drawer with tiny tears and oil stains. on the inside right ankle. - that can be quickly removed, won't velcro to wool, and can also be stored on the bike so I never forget it at home or work.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 7:37 am
22 Mar 2007
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:19 pm
22 Mar 2007
Gar,
I have given that idea a lot of thought. I think we will see them if and when lithium battery and maybe capacitor costs come down. Sounds like a version of the Twike.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Nucbuddy Posted 9:56 pm
22 Mar 2007
This stuff fixes potholes, and lasts a long time:
kuraray-am.com/pvaf/pva-ecc.php
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 2:13 am
23 Mar 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 2:44 am
23 Mar 2007
understanding that she is there, to fly to the rescue, in her shiny red Prius, in case he should get into trouble.
The masculinity of men of a certain age is oftentimes a delicate and fragile flower. One remembers that old cartoon in The New Yorker, in which the thirteen-year-old daughter asks her not-so-young-anymore father, as if out of the blue, "So, like, when did you stop being studly?"
Anyway, now that my eye was drawn unwillingly back to this BioD-descends-into-a-pothole epistle, I noticed this paragraph, chock-full of irony:
<<
Sunglasses are a must for daytime riding and the main criteria is that they are cool-looking. There are some nice ones available in hardware stores that also double as safety glasses and as such are durable. They are popular with people who actually work for a living and want to look cool while doing it. Put a strap on them so they can hang around your neck when you take them off or inadvertently flip your bike upside down.
>>
Gristmill writers have a responsibility that they perhaps do not always appreciate, that since there are countless fourth-grade teachers out there constructing lessons on the basis of their written contributions, they owe it to all those little fourth-graders not to stray too far from the rules.
With regard to this paragraph, we should observe that "criteria" is a plural form. The singular is "criterion," and would seem to be what the author wants here.
And since we are dealing with what is hypothetical but not necessarily actual, we need the subjunctive mood, not the indicative mood.
Therefore, the first sentence should be rewritten: "Sunglasses are a must for daytime riding and the main criterion [for selecting a pair] is that they be cool-looking."
On the other hand, it is not impossible that our author intends something not hypothetical at all -- and after months of experience, I have some insight into how our author thinks. If I can truly look into his soul and discover his meaning, he may very well want to tell us that sunglasses are by their very nature "cool-looking." In that case, he does not want "criterion" at all, but simply "reason": "Sunglasses are a must for daytime riding and the main reason [for why they are a must] is that they are cool-looking."
So, the issue is, Does our author believe that all sunglasses by their very nature are cool-looking?; or, are some cool-looking, and others dorky-looking? While he runs off to ask the Woman In Charge what he really thinks, I should share my suspicion that he has a collection of cowboy-themed sunglasses, with little silver pistols up by the hinges, or sheriff's badges, or prancing ponies, and so forth, and he wears them on different days of the week.
OK, he is back now.
As for the aesthetics of faux-working-class chic, it would be better to leave that for the Marxists to deconstruct.
But as for the strap, I can personally testify that eye-glasses cords are terrific, and very very cool. My husband recently gave me a cord, to keep my reading glasses with me all day. There are all kinds, apparently; mine has little brown beads interspersed with even littler glass beads. True, there is a bit of a resemblance to Miss Henderson (or whatever her name was), the classic old-maid librarian, with her gray cardigan and wool skirt and white blouse with a Peter-Pan collar, hovering around the card catalogue and whispering "Shooosh!" But really, I love my eye-glasses cord, it is one of the most practical gifts I have ever received, and it is WAY COOL. Not "cool-looking," but truly essentially cool.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
cyclelicious Posted 3:17 am
23 Mar 2007
Why stop at an electric bike if you want to reduce effort? Here's an innovation: A completely enclosed metal cage with glass "windshields" so you don't even need a helmet to muss your hair. And use a gasoline engine so you can get to work even faster. Install air conditioning and music for greater comfort. And a heater so you don't even need gloves or mittens or headbands. (Not that Seattle ever gets cold enough for mittens, sheez.)
Seriously, if you don't want to sweat, just slow down. If you don't want grease stains on your clothes, roll up your pants or get a proper commuting bike with a chainguard. Where I now ride in California, women cycle in skirts all the time.
And don't ride your bike into potholes, water filled or otherwise. If you don't know how to dodge these without getting smacked by traffic, figure it out or take a class, after reporting the pothole to the city, of course.
Permalink
cyclelicious Posted 3:22 am
23 Mar 2007
Permalink
mihan Posted 3:33 am
23 Mar 2007
Girl-bike-commuting: Yeah, it does limit the skirt options, but you can ride in most skirts (that are safe-for-work). I have the girliest of all girly bikes (it's a "step-through" frame), and it's great with skirts and has a chain guard, so my flowy pants and skirts are fine and I don't need to velcro them up. I imagine you could get a chain guard for your regular bike and it would have the same effect.
I just ride in with whatever shoes and have a couple pairs of shoes at the office I change in to. It works fine, and you need to do that anyway in the winter.
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 3:53 am
23 Mar 2007
www.grist.org
Permalink
PBrazelton Posted 4:13 am
23 Mar 2007
But seriously, terrain and environment means a lot. When I was a bike commuter here in Minneapolis my rides would range from a delightful hour of fresh air to hellish treks across a hostile tundra. The former required nothing special, but I sure loved my 'special gear' in the latter cases.
After all, we can't all live in Amsterdam. Or Cal-ee-forn-ee-ah.
Permalink
TariffDude Posted 6:38 am
23 Mar 2007
Permalink
Roz Cummins Posted 1:23 pm
23 Mar 2007
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 5:00 am
24 Mar 2007
cyclelicious
And don't ride your bike into potholes, water filled or otherwise. If you don't know how to dodge these without getting smacked by traffic, figure it out or take a class, after reporting the pothole to the city, of course
There were literally, thousands of puddles between me and my destination. I could not feasibly avoid them all without riding in heavy traffic in heavy rain, which just isn't a smart thing to do on a bike, no matter how many classes you take. Most potholes and even cracks are big enough to bring harm to a bike but not a car, especially along the edges where the cars don't go. You can't report them all, and they wouldn't bother to fix them anyway. The city just imposed extra taxes to try to get a handle on the situation and it is going to take years to fix.
TariffDude.
"Seriously, if you don't want to sweat, just slow down."
With an electric hybrid, you don't have to do either, seriously. That's the beauty. Slowing down to avoid sweating works to a point but Seattle is also full of long hills and it is real hard not to break a sweat on them. With an electric hybrid you pass other bikers going up these hills and avoid the sweat.
I have to agree with cyclelicious, you guys are on a slippery slope toward electric motorcycles. You wouldn't have to worry about dodging into traffic if you were in traffic in the first place.
People who have never ridden one don't understand how they work or feel. They are not motorcycles. The best analogy for a hybrid bike is a tandem bike. You have replaced the 180-pound rider in back with a 16-pound motor and, in my case, an eight-pound battery. You have to pedal, the motor isn't strong enough to take you up a hill or even down a level street at a decent speed. It lets you get places fast without breaking a sweat. The main advantage of a hybrid bike is that it retains all of the advantages of a bike, giving you more options to stay out of harms way than you have with a motorcycle. It also lets you blow past spandexed dudes on fixies while pulling a kid trailer and chatting on your blue tooth.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 5:08 am
24 Mar 2007
The streets are too narrow and the traffic too heavy for anyone to have a safe biking experience. Yes, there are the "bike highways" and they do encircle the whole area, but to get to those trails requires a lot of riding in very heavy street traffic, including very busy limited access roads.
I gave up on biking in Seattle and I'm about to do the same here in Kent (because of a near lethal car accident last summer). The real issue is not biking, but getting rid of the overpopulation, the 800,000 new residents who came to live here in the last decade without a corresponding increase in infrastructure leading to decline in the livability of this region.
The Texeme Construct offers international text memetics construction and textcasting services. http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 5:30 am
24 Mar 2007
>> Heels and skirts are outside my experience and willingness to experiment. Good luck.
Well.. I was polite the first time, but come on. Women work, and business casual for women invariably involves skirts and heels. If you aren't willing to address womens business-wear in an article about bike commuting, then what are you good for? Men bike commuters?
I am perfectly happy to deal with snobbishness, from the bike boys at the bike store, because I'm not a boy, or a groupie, or a tomboy, I'm not a courier, I don't troll the internet for bike-porn, I don't have a fixy, I don't go down mountains, I don't slide down handrails. Whatever.
But I refuse to be marginalized one bit in the bike commuter scene. As far as I'm concerned, I'm at the heart of it. If you're want to write for bike commuters, I'm your audience. When you sit down to write, picture me: a woman in Georgia who cares about the environment and her health and shops at Talbots and Ann Taylor for the crap she has to wear M-F.
That said, fight on my brother.
- Mimi
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:31 am
24 Mar 2007
As for the general sexist snobbishness and marginalization for which many more men than BioD are responsible, it should be remembered that there are at least a few guys who have no time for that death-defying nonsense, and who are just mild-mannered bike commuters. To be sure, it is not impossible that occasionally, they feel that ridiculous competitive urge to go faster than other bikers whom they meet on the road, but that is a matter for them to ponder in their consciences ...
On heels, etc., I would assume that it is true for male and female bicycle commuters alike, that they must carry bags, to contain shoes and other articles of clothing, if their jobs require them to dress in formal business attire. Surely most men would prefer not to wear a suit jacket while riding a bicycle. And even if they are already wearing their tie, it is hard to believe that they are comfortable with it tied tightly, and the top shirt button buttoned.
Even among commuters on the NYC subways, I have seen plenty of women, and a few men, dressed up for work, but wearing sneakers, or some other kind of comfortable footwear, which they presumably intended to change out of once they got to the office.
As for the "do you think I need a shower?" issue: My guess is that in a seasonally hot and humid region, e.g. Georgia, even if your route is relatively flat, and even if you do not go fast, once you are pedaling in the sun, you are going to work up a sweat. As an experiment, BioD should take his miracle-vehicle to Atlanta, or Dallas, or DC, or even a less humid place such as Albuquerque, for a summer, and see how he likes it. What a fine test of his manhood that would be!
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
TariffDude Posted 7:55 am
24 Mar 2007
Permalink
Nucbuddy Posted 8:31 am
24 Mar 2007
The Arctic Heat body-cooling vest ($175):
http://www.arcticheatusa.com
That company also makes cooling tubes ($13), cooling caps ($60), and cooling neck-wraps ($33).
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 8:35 am
24 Mar 2007
I like the idea of the electric/hybrid bike. I'm not sure whether it would really be the cure-all for bike commuters though. I (deliberately) live up hill from work, and theres basically no physical exertion for me to get to the office - I just coast for 2 miles from my front door to the office, lock my bike and I'm in the front door. In essence, thats your hybrid bike - pedal power + a little boost. If I had to live downhill from work, I would look into making a hybrid bike.
But the easy, seamless, bike ride to my desk only works when weather permits. Bikes, hybrid or not, don't offer protection from the elements. Rain, sun, cold, puddles... are incompatible with a work attire. Gear and stuff helps but when the weather is extreme, you're gonna get soaked, splattered, sweaty, windswept, and chilly. You've got to either change clothes, or not bike.
I have to say though, when people ask, "how do you do it," I always tell them having OPTIONS is key. A bike is not a magic bullet and neither is a hybrid bike. A hybrid bike + a bus pass + emergency change of clothes + emergency cab fare + a flexcar + walking shoes... now that will get you
work on time, every single day no matter your energy level, the weather, or daily circumstances.
ciao,
- Mimi
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 8:41 am
24 Mar 2007
I was hoping women commenters would address your concerns about dresses and heels since they really are beyond my experience and willingness to experiment with (I was trying to make a joke about my wearing them to test out).../:(
TarriffDude,
Points well taken. I will be more bold in the future about claiming the road in the name of safety. It is a good safety tactic, but in a downpour, you have to be really careful.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:58 am
24 Mar 2007
It is not very helpful of Puccini's librettists, I must observe, that they say not a word about how people with terminal TB manage their bike commute.
On avoiding potholes, and meeting death: An ancient memory resurfaced, prompted by the comments of Cyclelicious and TariffDude. Many many years ago, I was riding my bike on the narrow, gravel shoulder of a poorly maintained, 45-mph, single-lane highway (i.e., one lane in either direction), leading into the seaside resort town of North Wildwood, NJ, really mostly a causeway between the island and the mainland, with intermittent rows of houses alongside. Vehicles were parked along that shoulder, in front of the houses. At the moment which might very well have been the moment just preceding my death, a huge pothole came into view a couple of meters in front of me, right between a parked car on the right and the highway on the left. There was no on-coming car immediately behind me, so I tried to swerve onto the highway, to avoid the pothole. But the surface of the highway was a few inches higher than the level of the shoulder, and I failed to turn my wheel hard enough into it, with the result that I completely and utterly fell into the lane of traffic. By then, there was indeed an on-coming car bearing down on me, and the poor driver had to swerve into the lane of opposing traffic to avoid me. Thank God, no one was just then driving that way. But it all could have turned out very different, and either I or others might easily have been killed.
Afterwards, I checked out one of those maps that bicyclists' associations publish, marking roads that are relatively safer or more dangerous for bikers. Sure enough, the road where I nearly lost my life was considered extremely dangerous.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 9:14 am
24 Mar 2007
As for you Canis, consider getting a Toto model wicker basket on the front of your bike to put Little Dog in:
http://www.dropshots.com/photos/95189/20060823/085018.jpg
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 9:29 am
24 Mar 2007
You're right... you can bike in a skirt. But can you wear a work skirt on a bike? I would say only on casual Fridays.
Why? Well... basically, it has to do with womens' fashion... and being able to move your legs.
Mini skirts. If you're not modest (and who is these days), or find yourself in Black Rock City, you can wear a miniskirt and bike - a mini does not prevent your legs from pedaling. But no one except Ally McBeal ever wore a mini to work.
Full skirts . You can bike in a knee-length skirt only if its really loose and flowy. Right now they are selling a lot of these flowery, flowy, full skirts with blazers to wear to work. But.. they are more 'fashion' skirts in my mind. They make you look pretty, not neat and clean and smart. I wear them on Fridays, but more often on weekends or out at night. I bike in them no problem.
Work skirts should cover the knee and are usually some version of a pencil skirt. Maybe they have pleats or an A-line, but a formal skirt is never... flowy. That is, at the hem, they do not have a large enough circumference to allow your legs to move far apart enough to run or bike without ripping. No biking!
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 10:23 am
24 Mar 2007
Bitter, feminist, marginalized, Mmimika is leaving the online west coast bike boy scene and going to a crunk-drag-king show to get drunk.
Have a good weekend...
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:32 pm
24 Mar 2007
Thanks for the photo of the Toto basket. (And by the way, not that it means anything, but "Toto" and "Mimi" have precisely the same pattern of consonants and vowels. A coincidence, not a synchronicity, I am thinking.) If I arranged a nest of her favorite towels inside such a basket, I am sure Little Dog would ride along very happily. But while that would work fine in an idyllic village with cottages and shops and shade trees and flower-lined paths, and maybe even in Provincetown, MA, where Little Dog is already a big hit, I would never take her out in such a contraption on Broadway, here in NYC, or on Riverside Drive. I am too dangerously unsteady a bicyclist, for one thing.
But possibly for long rides in Riverside Park it might work ... Hmmm, I shall consider this.
FYI, I love bikes, and have ridden them often, significantly and happily, at a few periods of my life; but at present, alas, no.
Now: We "friends of Dorothy" generally love references to that 1939 classic, "The Wizard of Oz." And so, in that light, I am grateful for the Toto reference. But in fact, I am not sure that the bicycle-fitting basket that you have shown deserves to be called a "Toto basket."
It has been a while since I saw "TWoOz," and anyway I was never so devoted fan as to remember all the details. Nevertheless, I am pretty sure that Margaret Hamilton, in the role of the unspeakably mean Miss Gulch during the initial black-and-white episode in Kansas (who of course re-appears, in full greenish color, post-tornado, as the Wicked Witch of the West), tries to ride off on her bicycle with the captive Toto in a panier, a classic picnic-basket with lids. The basket is somehow attached over the rear wheel, behind the seat. That way, when Toto pops open the hindward lid, and peeks, and jumps out, and runs back to Dorothy, the unspeakably mean and monstrously obsessed Miss Gulch does not notice.
And so, all that considered, I wonder why that front-fitting lidless bicycle-basket should be referred to as a "Toto basket."
The following is frivolous and unnecessary, and only the strong-hearted are advised to look:
Here is a complex question, in response to which a dissertation might be written, in culture studies: Has the image of Miss Gulch produced a prejudice against women on bicycles, to a degree similar to the prejudice against women wearing furs produced by the image of Cruella De Vil? And, inasmuch as women riding bicycles are doing nothing essentially morally significant, while women wearing furs are definitely doing something which is morally significant, what might this tell us about how we form prejudices against certain "classes" of women?
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 1:50 am
25 Mar 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
willa Posted 2:49 am
25 Mar 2007
These boots are da bomb. They're warm, waterproof, comfy, have good traction on ice, etc (not so good on softer stuff like deep slush b/c they're not lug-soled, but since lug soles get caught on bike pedals anyway...). The best part? The tops are stretchy foam stuff, so that they stretch over your pants legs, even if you have freakishly large calves like I do. If you fold your trouser leg relatively carefully by holding it at the crease and turning it back at an angle around your ankle as you slip the boot over it, I would think you could avoid much wrinkling, and you'd definitely avoid splatter and bike-chain issues.
As for skirts, suit skirts are definitely not an option on a bike, but they're also easy to change into. Couldn't you just carefully fold it in your bag, then put pantyhose on underneath biking pants and change in the restroom? I realize the idea is not to have to change, but if you did, it seems like the skirt is less of a problem than the jacket/blazer. I think even most offices these days are ok with a suit-like skirt and a cardigan instead of a suit jacket, though, no?
Oh, and I have to say, the links above to women biking are pretty lame as far as actual practical considerations go. One is wearing a fluffy white miniskirt--a no-no for me and my imperfect, blindingly-white legs in any circumstances, and a work no-no for any woman who doesn't work at the local Hooters knockoff--and the other doesn't appear to be wearing a skirt at all. I can see the bike seat protruding, but the ruffle at the bottom of the garment is hanging straight, so i don't think she has a skirt tucked up and over (not to mention what a PITA it is to get a skirt tucked up like that for modesty's sake--also likely to rip the skirt). I think she's wearing ruffled shorts. But anyway. The point is, for those of us who don't like to expose ourselves in public, don't have the legs of a teenage swimsuit model, and have to appear in public not looking like a cheerleader, skirts on bikes remain nearly as problematic as spandex.
Oh, and I have a super-dumb question: Is there some reason why adult-sized tricycles are not the answer? I get that they're completely uncool, but wouldn't they lessen your odds of falling over into traffic because of a pothole? I've never ridden one, but I've seen them, and they seem a lot safer for the moderately unskilled rider, not to mention they'd make it way easier to carry a day's worth of clothing, shoes, lunch, books, laptop, etc, etc. Or am I just too big a dork to see that this would be totally unacceptable?
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 1:39 pm
25 Mar 2007
Don't ride a bike in traffic if you are not comfortable doing so and willing to accept the risks. I don't want to talk people onto bikes and see them get hurt. I am glad my wife and kids don't bike commute, as patriarchal as that sounds, or is.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:33 pm
25 Mar 2007
I think what Willa is getting around to asking (and isn't it lovely, when Willa can pop in again and visit!), is, Is there hope for a new!/improved! efficient, practical design for an adult-sized tricycle?
Now that my memories of North Wildwood have been stirred and set to float upwardly, if they can manage it -- and the cruel ones will, never fear --- , from the murky muddy depths of unimaginably distant time, I recall some aged retired woman (i.e., like me in many respects), riding a tricycle. She never went more than a few short blocks. Her trike was just about the most ungainly, sluggish, inagile vehicle ever invented. (Well, there was that pedal-boat on Lake Como, with my mother as co-pilot no less, which turned out to be a long season in Purgatory, but that is another story.) This woman would ride her huge trike regularly to the local small grocery store. There was no need to chain it up outside -- fancy that! There was a tall, voluminous basket between the rear wheels, and she would put the bags with her purchases there.
So, it worked, within very special conditions: little traffic, unchallenging street surfaces, short distances.
Now, let us build on what I infer is present in Willa's question. There are all sorts of advantages to trikes for grown-ups (TFGUs) which you are not taking into account.
Throw out that 40%-friction figure. That is based on an old-fashioned design anyway, and the point is to come up with something better for the TFGUs of the 21st century. A new-improved design should be encouraged, not poo-pooed.
And keep throwing out that 40%-friction figure. There are ways to save energy that you have not even imagined, let alone fit into your calculation.
The basket. Terrific energy savings there. Has anyone calculated the difference between having to balance a backpack while riding a bike, and riding along whle the same load is tucked away in a basket?
Width. Presumably there is an optimal length (i.e., "bike width") for the rear axle, neither too wide which would result in awkwardness, nor too narrow which would approach bicycle-ness. The objects of discovering "optimality" primarily include basket-carrying capacity, and three-point stability.
Turnability. (Gewalt!, mein Gott!, Existiert ein solches Wort?!) (Don't sweat it, sweetheart, in English we can do anything. Why do you think we always win the wars we get into?) (Ha ha! Und evwy vun in der orchestra ist a wirgin! Ha ha ha!) Funny, why tricycles should have such a hard time turning. But four-wheeled vehicles, e.g. cars, seem to manage, most of the time. Should more counter-balancing weight be placed up front? Surely you all-American physicists can figure out something ... (Helga!! Ha ha ha!)
La psychologie. How in the world can you mechanicist energy quantifiers look yourselves in the face, knowing you have not taken into account all sorts of energy-relevant data? You need to quantify, energy-expenditure-wise, the physical mechanical bodily strength put into securing a bicycle so as to keep it upright, plus the mental attention required for the same purpose, plus the psychological insecurity inevitably included in committing oneself to the propulsion of a by-definition unstable vehicle.
"Asseyez-vous!" (Really, this is 6A.) "Faites-vous chez vous! You take tea, no? How many lumps of sugar? Or, preferez-vous un cognac?" It is impossible to sit, truly to sit, on a bicycle. The commonly used term, "bicycle seat," is a disgraceful euphemism. Whatever one is doing by resting one's buns and crotch (and hopefully as little as possible of the genitals) on that Picasso-ish bull-faced padded triangle, it is not what we usually consider "sitting." By contrast, one sits fairly easily on a trike. Again, it should be accounted for, the energy expended in dealing with a two-point bike, versus the energy saved in relaxing with a three-point trike.
Sidecars; catamarans. My heroine is Mrs. Bayle, housekeeper for Rocky and Madge, and now Rocky's son Lionel Hardcastle and his wife Jean Pargetter, somewhere in Sussex or thereabouts. (I am talking of course about a much-loved Brit-com, "As Time Goes By," which a number of PBS channels have been showing.) Mrs. Bayle regularly rides a motorcycle with a sidecar, and puts her groceries in the seat if she does not have a passenger. So, why can't the new, Willa-modeled trikes be basically bikes with sidecars? Three-point stability, what what? The Polynesians seem to have gone huge distances in boats with a balancing out-board, no? Turnability has not been a problem for Mrs. Bayle, nor apparently was it a problem for the folks who sailed from Tahiti to Hawaii.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 2:02 am
26 Mar 2007
As a consequence modern-day Samoans will often travel by hobie-cat, but no self-respecting tama or teine will ever step into a sidecar.
Manuia le aso!
- Mimi Kavale
Permalink
TariffDude Posted 4:53 am
26 Mar 2007
Permalink
mihan Posted 1:23 am
27 Mar 2007
But I do wear skirts and dresses to work quite often. I only have one work skirt that doesn't work well on the bike; if I want to wear that one I just walk. In the winter (and I mean Winter, since I live in Minnesota), I wear long underwear under the skirt and take it off when I take off my jacket and heavy boots. I just don't see what the problem is.
Permalink
willa Posted 2:35 am
27 Mar 2007
That said, I personally still have scar from my last bad bike crash, which was over ten years ago (mostly because I don't ride a bike much anymore). I took so much skin off my leg I had to ride my horse in shorts for weeks, then with major bandaging under my breeches for another several weeks. It was on a dirt road without traffic, fortunately, but the point is that no amount of balance on my part could have kept the tire from sliding out from under me, I don't think.
A two-wheeled vehicle is inherently unstable on lateral slopes or at slow speeds. A three-wheeled one isn't. Most people (me, for one) aren't going to ride a bike in crazy circumstances anyway--places where width is that much of an issue, places with huge potholes, up and down enormous hills--so what's a much bigger issue is, can I ride along casually and not invest 100% of my concentration and effort into simply not falling? If I want to focus on my balance, I'll go ride my horse. If I want to get a workout, ditto. If I want to ride a couple of miles to the barn to feed said horse without using fossil fuels? Well, then I'm not really wanting to get exercise or a balance drill.
Most people have to concentrate, to some degree, on simply not parting comany with the bike. A vehicle with more than two wheels might help, is all I'm saying.
Oh, and btw, regular modern bike seats are horrendously uncomfortable for me. I'm entirely at home with the concept of balancing on my seatbones and pubic arch (the bony part in front--it forms a tripod-like arrangement with the seatbones and together they bear your weight and allow you to balance when you sit in/on a saddle, as on a horse or a bike), but if I have to put 100% of my weight on those three, it hurts. Older bike seats--the wide triangular ones with springs--are okay. It's not just a matter of fit, though. It's a matter of gender, weight, and one's own specific conformation. It's incredibly condescending to say they "just look uncomfortable". No, guess what, I've tried! They ARE uncomfortable!
Sounds to me like Canis is right (as usual), this is a matter of engineers not wanting to bother/not wanting to look like dorks (no comment necessary, right?).
Permalink
willa Posted 2:48 am
27 Mar 2007
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 2:51 am
27 Mar 2007
TariffDude, just to be clear, it was Willa who was inquiring about tricycles; and as a good attorney would, I tried to construct a case in their defense. I am aware that the matter of their limited speed and maneuverability is a problem. There are two kinds of solution, so far as I can see. First, speed is not a high priority to the hypothetical user. (Willa has apparently not had time to return to the subject, so we are rather in the dark regarding her own intentions.) (Oops, correct that. I notice she has indeed written something, but I cannot read it while proof-reading this.) Secondly, there may be a better design waiting to be discovered, inspired by more or less successful precursors in the history of vehicle construction, such as motorcycles with sidecars, and canoes with outriggers.
(Thanks, Mimi, for that charming bit of Samoan mythology. You will have to tell us more some time.)
I have no problem with bicycles myself, and have always enjoyed riding them (well, that unreliable piece of crap that I had in Santa Fe could be pretty exasperating at times). And the gyroscope principle makes perfect sense. But they are stable, or rather stabilizable, only when they are in motion, and that is disconcerting to some people. Given that the optimal distance between the top of the seat to the pedal at the lowest point in its cycle is the full length of the rider's leg, that means that the rider cannot remain seated, with both feet on the pedals, when the bicycle is stationery -- unless the rider wishes to fall to the ground.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
willa Posted 3:00 am
27 Mar 2007
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 5:17 am
27 Mar 2007
re: wrists... I assume you have straight handlebars. There are various cheap attachments that allow you to shift weight off your rear and wrist and into your forearm and shoulder. Just having a couple of different spots to grip prevents overuse of any one muscle group.
RE: balance - maybe try a mountain bike tires for more traction and stability, so potholes, drains, rocks, hills are less destabilizing. You sacrifice performance, sure - but you won't fall.
I am actually surprised to see all this talk about balance and falling... I never fall and never think about it. In my mind, unless you've got your seat racheted up to the sky, you're wearing toe clips, and you've got razor thin tires, balancing on a bike should come as naturally as running and walking.
As for trikes, I see them on the road from time to time. They seem roadworthy, reach appropriate speeds, take corners relatively well. And they look comfortable. My main worry about them is actually safety - not falling, but visibility. They are so low to the ground you can't see the road ahead of you, and you're below eye level for other drivers.
Ciao,
- mimi
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 7:01 am
27 Mar 2007
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
willa Posted 1:20 pm
27 Mar 2007
Bicycling is an inherently physical activity. Driving a car anyone can do, but riding a bike makes physical differences and wardrobe differences much more of an issue. If BioD and others want to encourage everyone to ride bikes, then they'll just have to be men about the boob and crotch talk. :)
Mimi, I'm glad you never fall. Possibly you never ride on dirt/gravel roads with deep ruts? When I fell off my bike and removed the skin from my leg, i was actually supposedly getting in shape for ski racing, so I was up in the mountains--on a mountain bike--on a road that's not maintained. So conditions were surely worse than they would be on a normal commute. That said, I'm surprised that you never find yourself in a situation--wet road, going a little too fast, and suddenly there's a choice between the car to your left, the curb to your right, or the rim-bending pothole in front of you--where it's actually dangerous. Maybe it's just a matter of experience, and/or innate skill.
Growing up, I never rode a bike anywhere roadlike, thanks to living seven miles of mountain away from the nearest town. Leaving my house, you go straight down for a mile, up a moderate and probably bikeable grade for four miles, then up two miles of unbikeably steep and dangerous highway, and down another two miles of the same before you get to even a grocery store or gas station. So there was never any chance for me to ride a bike anywhere but up in the mountains, which when they're as steep and rocky as they are pretty much everywhere around Santa Fe, isn't really conducive to learning to feel comfortable.
For reference, I say this as someone who positively drools over the prospect of doing this, so it's not like I'm just a total wimp who has no balance. (and no, that picture is NOT me, but I'd like it to be!)
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:17 pm
27 Mar 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:13 pm
27 Mar 2007
I mean, really, this is a woman who wants everyone to understand that she has a crotch, and boobs. So, how like a protective, patriarchal man art thou, that you instinctively want to sheathe her in a totally obscuring coccoon!
Send her to Kandahar, why don't you, and have her fitted for a burqah. : )
Willa, I love that photo of that heroic woman diving into the water. Clearly that is a smart horse; you can tell from the perfect landing, and the way he/she is moving his/her eye. I would choose that image as my screensaver, but I love the image that I have right now, a mamma wolf being licked by her pups, plus I would need to know how that lady and her horse voted in the last election ...
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
mihan Posted 3:28 am
28 Mar 2007
You are 100% correct! I had chronic wrist issues when I bought my bike, so I was very finicky about handlebars. Mine are a good foot or so higher than the seat, and curvy. Both features improve the comfort of a girly bike. Riding your bike should not produce tingling sensations in your groin or wrists.
Permalink
Mmimika Posted 3:40 am
28 Mar 2007
No, I never offroad, just bike between work/home/store/bar. As I read your post I remember that in the north you have that chronic pothole problem with the snow eating up the road and such. The roads are pretty smooth here in Atlanta, aside from the occasional rain grate.
I have, however, fallen off the elipsis machine at the gym, so I can see how, when your muscles are shaking from exhaustion, your balance fails.
Permalink
willa Posted 2:19 pm
30 Mar 2007
I think the thing that many here are missing is this: I fundamentally don't want to ride a bike, any more than I want to go to the gym and ride a stationary bike. Today I rode my horse for 20 minutes with no stirrups, because it will improve my position, but tomorrow my inner thigh muscles, abs, and lower back will be screaming at me. I will do this at least a couple of days a week, until I feel capable of doing about ten minutes of posting trot (where one rises off the horse's back every other step so as to make it easier on the horse's back--quite a feat when those inner thigh muscles are all that lifts you up). I don't fall off my horse once I start shaking, though if he decided to turn me into a lawn dart I'd certainly have fewer resources with which to argue.
But the basic fact is, I want to get around, from my house to the barn, the train station, and the grocery store (all within five miles of my house) without either polluting or shaking. I find the emphasis on "this is an adventure, only for the adventurous" extremely counterproductive, because believe me, I am a lot more willing to sacrifice my own ease and comfort than most people are. If you think it's too hardcore for me, then you're giving up on practically everyone else. I think that's dumb, if you want to save the world. If you just want to thump your chest and admit that you're into doing manly things you would be scared to have your wife do, fine, but I don't really think that's what you're about. I encourage you to explore other options. I have already found a kit for an electric-assisted tricycle online, which is good news since I'm not going to be able to improvise this sort of thing on my own, with my meagre electrical skills. While this whole tricycle thing is surely not the be-all, end-all solution, it does go far towards preventing one from unexpectedly falling into the path of a moving car, so if it can also be helped by electricity towards being a way that one can get from point A to point B without having spent all one's energy by the time one arrives, it might bear some investigation. It seems impossible to me that there's not some system you could come up with that would have more than two wheels, be easy for a normal, average person to assemble and operate, and get that normal, average person to his or her normal, average destinations with a minimum of physical and mental effort.
Oh, and Mimi, yeah, our roads in Massachusetts are pretty rough in some places, especially in the winter, but the nasty crash actually happened in the Sangre de Cristo mountains above Santa Fe, New Mexico. On a dirt road, which is what we have a lot of. I will say when I lived in Ireland, I rode a bike everywhere (yes, including to the pub, occasionally riding home with a six-pack of Guinness in the basket :) ), and it certainly didn't seem all that unsafe or otherwise awful, except i was an idiot and didn't have appropriate lights and reflective gear for darkness, which in Ireland in the winter is most of the time.
I guess I ought to take my bike to a shop and have it checked out, make sure the brakes are in good shape and everything, and then try riding the places I normally drive and find out how terrifying it really is. I may still buy a tricycle, partly just because it seems fun. :)
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 11:37 am
02 Apr 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink