Re: Drop bar replacements?

Alan Braggins said:

Without glasses I can tell the difference between green verge and
black tarmac. Just about.

Bus lanes must be a bit of an problem, then. :-)

R.

"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote in

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

But they're absolutely perfect and
totally beyond criticism - apparently.

No, but the compromises are not "nasty nasty". They're great.

For a certain set of requirements, I agree with you. For another set the
comment stands.

Quoted message said:

You were not just criticising the bars, you were rubbishing them, and
rubbishing happy users too! As if anyone who claims they find them
comfortable is just pretending.

We have covered this before.

Quoted message said:

Please do us a favour by not reviving this thread if it has been left in
peace for some weeks or months. I don't think any argument is going to
be "won" in this thread but it would be nice if it could be left to fade
away. You could start a new thread and say what you like without
directly quoting anything from this thread. (Maybe I would resist
replying to that at all!). Thank you.

Some of you are your own worst enemies. For example, in a response to 10 of
my words, Jon decided to write 340 and had to wipe the spittle off his
monitor for his trouble.

Alan Braggins said:

Back to the subject line, what can I do about soggy snow sticking on my
glasses? Stick a section of wiper blade on the back of my gloves?
Go back to contact lenses and blink?

Try prevention rather than cure, and wear a cycling cap withh the
peak down. If there's snow you'll probably want that as well as a
fleecy hat, but it may well improve matters.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

DavidR said:

For a certain set of requirements, I agree with you.

Is that the sort of agreement you characterise as "mooing of sacred
cows"? If you can't see you're changing tune on a post by post
basis you're kidding yourself.

Quoted message said:

For another set the comment stands.

As has been acknowledges by everyone else from the word go. If I
thought drop bars were perfect I'd use a drop bar tourer rather
than an ergobar recumbent tourer.

Quoted message said:

We have covered this before.

Translation: "I have not listened to a word anybody has been saying
about this so far, and I'm not going to start now".

Quoted message said:

Some of you are your own worst enemies. For example, in a response to 10 of
my words, Jon decided to write 340 and had to wipe the spittle off his
monitor for his trouble.

Given the amount of times you've repeated yourself and got ruder
and ruder and still got nowhere we're in PKB territory here, Big Time.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

DavidR said:

We have covered this before.

You only just noticed?

Quoted message said:

Some of you are your own worst enemies. For example, in a response to 10 of
my words, Jon decided to write 340 and had to wipe the spittle off his
monitor for his trouble.

I did indeed write a great many words. I feel that I reasonably
summarised the general feeling of the debate as propogated largely by
yourself over numerous threads. Can I presume that you accept the
summary as is, since you haven't seen fit to disagree with it. If so,
it would appear that we have finally reached the dizzy heights of
understanding, although neither "side" has changed their basic
position. If so, and you feel it necessary to bring the topic up again
in the future, perhaps you will allow me to be less wordy and simple
offer a reference to my previous post.

Jon

"Jon is Away!" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I did indeed write a great many words. I feel that I reasonably
summarised the general feeling of the debate as propogated largely by
yourself over numerous threads. Can I presume that you accept the
summary as is, since you haven't seen fit to disagree with it.

No. I disagree.

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

For a certain set of requirements, I agree with you.

Is that the sort of agreement you characterise as "mooing of sacred
cows"? If you can't see you're changing tune on a post by post basis
you're kidding yourself.

No. Everytime someone said "racers require..." I have dismissed it as not
applicable. (Just to be certain there is no confusion here - it means that
racing isn't applicable to people that potter around the lanes; it does not
mean that drop bars are not applicable for racing.)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

For another set the comment stands.

As has been acknowledges by everyone else from the word go. If I thought
drop bars were perfect I'd use a drop bar tourer rather than an ergobar
recumbent tourer.

Indeed, but most people don't use recumbents. I am sure they're wonderful
but at the moment I don't have an itch that needs scratching.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We have covered this before.

Translation: "I have not listened to a word anybody has been saying about
this so far, and I'm not going to start now".

Yes, you have told me repeatedly that weight is the problem and riders
should shuffle their hands around; only drop bars allow this.

This says nothing new. What I am I supposed to do - bow down at the altar
of the sacred cow and beg forgiveness that I should ever have doubted it?

In any case it isn't what Pete meant.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some of you are your own worst enemies. For example, in a response to 10
of my words, Jon decided to write 340 and had to wipe the spittle off
his monitor for his trouble.

Given the amount of times you've repeated yourself and got ruder and
ruder and still got nowhere we're in PKB territory here, Big Time.

I have never made personal attacks.

I take it you don't want to close the thread because you seem interested
only in cheap point scoring. You must expect me to reply to provocation.

DavidR said:

No. Everytime someone said "racers require..." I have dismissed it as not
applicable.

But you've done it more than that since:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/search?group=uk.rec.cycling&q=%22racers+require%22+drop&qt_g=1

shows only one match. Your post in this thread!

Quoted message said:

(Just to be certain there is no confusion here - it means that
racing isn't applicable to people that potter around the lanes; it does not
mean that drop bars are not applicable for racing.)

Quite right. I don't recall anyone actually saying otherwise (although
I admit it may have happened).

Quoted message said:

Indeed, but most people don't use recumbents. I am sure they're wonderful
but at the moment I don't have an itch that needs scratching.

But you did have one since you felt it necessary to change the bars on
one of your bikes. The "obvious" and more expensive solution would have
been to change the bike for one designed with comfort as a primary
criteria.

Quoted message said:

Yes, you have told me repeatedly that weight is the problem and riders
should shuffle their hands around; only drop bars allow this.

This says nothing new. What I am I supposed to do - bow down at the altar
of the sacred cow and beg forgiveness that I should ever have doubted it?

But it's still not a sacred cow. For the majority of riders with drop
bars, drop bars are sufficient and appropriate. The ratio of posts from
satisfied drop users to unsatisfied drop users in this NG alone should
be enough to demonstrate that to you, before we take into account those
riders who merrily ride event after event with drops.

What you are supposed to do is nothing more than you've been asked all
along. Stop rubbishing a product which works for the majority of it's
users on the basis that you dislike it.

Quoted message said:

I have never made personal attacks.

Only by inference. Although your position does appear (from a brief
review of your posts) to have changed slightly, since initially you
seemed ill-prepared to accept that anyone could like drop bars. Your
initial commentry on them continuely used disparaging terms, which
naturally were read by those of us that like them, to be disparaging
towards us.

Jon

DavidR said:

No. Everytime someone said "racers require..." I have dismissed it as not
applicable.

And it has been pointed out more than once that racers aren't the only
people favouring drop bars. The Canonical Touring Bike, the Dawes
Galaxy and relatives, use drops for in part for comfort, but I don't see
any out in the Chain Gangs or in races. Drops are very popular on
touring bikes, and one of the most fundamental aspects of touring is
long term comfort. Braking control is very important too, as they're
expected to be carrying 4 panniers and a rack full of luggage and
tackling big hills both ways with that. Same goes for the tandem
versions, only braking control is even more important there.

Quoted message said:

Indeed, but most people don't use recumbents. I am sure they're wonderful
but at the moment I don't have an itch that needs scratching.

Most people don't, but I was using it as a very clear and obvious
illustration that *I* don't think drops are perfect. If I thought and
said they were perfect I'd use them, and the only person that doesn't
have to use them to demonstrate I don't think that is me.

Quoted message said:

Yes, you have told me repeatedly that weight is the problem and riders
should shuffle their hands around; only drop bars allow this.

I have told you repeatedly that it is *a* (as opposed to *the*) good
solution in practice, as evidenced by lots of experienced and happy uses
selecting drops for long distance touring and not racing. You have
refused to accept that.

Quoted message said:

This says nothing new. What I am I supposed to do - bow down at the altar
of the sacred cow and beg forgiveness that I should ever have doubted it?

Nobody has said you should. What people have said is that you shouldn't
go on about any use of drop bars (aside from racing) as being behoven
to sacred cows rather than based on their actual usefulness. It's been
said over and over and over and over and over and over again and then
said some more, but you're /still/ banging on about them being "sacred
cows".

Quoted message said:

I have never made personal attacks.

You have made repeated attacks on drop handlebars as being sacred cows.
Drop bars aren't people, but that doesn't mean you haven't been making
attacks on them, and by inference anyone that chooses to use them, and
your tone basically portrays me, Simon, Jon and Pete as idiots.

Quoted message said:

I take it you don't want to close the thread because you seem interested
only in cheap point scoring. You must expect me to reply to provocation.

To try and paint anyone else as being worse than you here is ridiculous.
That you've managed to repeatedly draw fire from several people,
including Pete Biggs who was recently voted "most helpful poster" over
at Cycling Forums, and have garnered no support whatsoever despite it
being in a place with bright people that aren't afraid to disagree in
public, should be a pretty clear indication of how useful your comments
and approach to making them have been.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

(') said:

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

For a certain set of requirements, I agree with you.

Is that the sort of agreement you characterise as "mooing of sacred
cows"? If you can't see you're changing tune on a post by post basis
you're kidding yourself.

No. Everytime someone said "racers require..." I have dismissed it as
not applicable. (Just to be certain there is no confusion here - it
means that racing isn't applicable to people that potter around the
lanes; it does not mean that drop bars are not applicable for racing.)

Nor does it mean that drop bars are not applicable to people who potter
around lanes. If you go to any audax or CTC event, you'll see that the
majority of serious lane potterers prefer drop bars to any other type.
Why? Because for most people they work better, for lane pottering.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space

In article said:

Alan Braggins said:

Without glasses I can tell the difference between green verge and
black tarmac. Just about.

Bus lanes must be a bit of an problem, then. :-)

Our local bus lanes are black tarmac too. And allow cycles in them.

"Jon is Away!" <[email hidden]> wrote in

Quoted message said:

DavidR wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No. Everytime someone said "racers require..." I have dismissed it as
not
applicable.

But you've done it more than that since:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.cycling/search?group=uk.rec.cycling&q=%22racers+require%22+drop&qt_g=1

shows only one match. Your post in this thread!

1/10/05 It took several messages to dismiss this.
1/11/05

If you must I will hunt them down on Google.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have never made personal attacks.

Only by inference.

But *I* haven't called the people that ran into the back of me daft or
idiotic.

Quoted message said:

Although your position does appear (from a brief
review of your posts) to have changed slightly, since initially you
seemed ill-prepared to accept that anyone could like drop bars. Your
initial commentry on them continuely used disparaging terms, which
naturally were read by those of us that like them, to be disparaging
towards us.

I wrote on 30/1/06
"From the way things are put I am sure that
users are sincere in general but I still feel there is no room for
discussion."

Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Yes, you have told me repeatedly that weight is the problem and riders
should shuffle their hands around; only drop bars allow this.

I have told you repeatedly that it is *a* (as opposed to *the*) good
solution in practice, as evidenced by lots of experienced and happy uses
selecting drops for long distance touring and not racing. You have
refused to accept that.

So ok, there appear to be lots of happy racers and tourists. I know
tourists that are sincere about it.

But if the operative word is *a* not *the* why do you dismiss my
contention that it supports the hands badly? That the tops either miss out
the best weight bearing part of the hands [*] or require a crank in the
wrist to make use of it.

[*] Which is the outer part of the hands, not the soft parts alongside the
thumbs or, even worse, the groove at the base of the hand.

My gripe was and is a belief that some riders are incorrectly equipped
because of an underlying culture that seems to have difficulty recognising
where there is a downside. Throughout I have tried to say where I see a
problem. But lets face it, there has been a lot of stonewalling and
normal newsgroup noise.

Quoted message said:

To try and paint anyone else as being worse than you here is ridiculous.

See my reply to Jon.

Quoted message said:

That you've managed to repeatedly draw fire from several people,
including Pete Biggs

I have a lot of respect for Pete.

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

(') said:

Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Yes, you have told me repeatedly that weight is the problem and
riders should shuffle their hands around; only drop bars allow this.

I have told you repeatedly that it is *a* (as opposed to *the*) good
solution in practice, as evidenced by lots of experienced and happy
uses
selecting drops for long distance touring and not racing. You have
refused to accept that.

So ok, there appear to be lots of happy racers and tourists. I know
tourists that are sincere about it.

But if the operative word is *a* not *the* why do you dismiss my
contention that it supports the hands badly?

Because you're simply flat wrong (at least for me, and my hands are not
unusual, although rather small). I know this, because I use drop bars
regularly. I also use other types of bars regularly. None of the
straight bar systems are as good as drops, even with anatomical bar
ends. Tribars are considerably more comfortable than drops (because the
weight is on your elbows not on your hands) but with a substantial
control deficit.

You're right that the hood position, which places weight on the web of
the thumb, does support the hands badly because it places weight on key
nerves. Nevertheless many cyclists (including me) find this a preferred
and comfortable position.

Quoted message said:

My gripe was and is a belief that some riders are incorrectly equipped
because of an underlying culture that seems to have difficulty
recognising where there is a downside. Throughout I have tried to say
where I see a problem. But lets face it, there has been a lot of
stonewalling and normal newsgroup noise.

Cyclists are not incorrectly equipped. Given the 'safety bicycle' - the
diamond frame mandated by the UCI - drop bars are, for most riders, the
best available compromise. To achieve an aerodynamic position on such a
bike you need to take some weight on your arms. If you take that weight
on your elbows (tribars) then you sacrifice control. The problem is not
drop bars: the problem is the diamond frame. In the long term, I believe
that recumbents will replace diamond frames in a natural darwinian
process because they are simply better for most things that most people
want bicycles for (although perhaps the UCI and racers will hang on to
the obsolete type for traditional reasons).

Your argument is based on false premises, which is why everything else
you argue is wrong, too.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; all in all you're just another click in the call
;; -- Minke Bouyed

DavidR said:

1/10/05 It took several messages to dismiss this.
1/11/05

If you must I will hunt them down on Google.

A quick check of the reference leads to one comment from Pete Biggs in
which he highlighted that pro racers provide an example of the many
different ways that drop bars can be used. Specifically that some pros
move around a lot while others always use the same position. That's not
even close to "racers require". The time taken to "dismiss" that claim
may stem from the fact that you introduced it.

Quoted message said:

But *I* haven't called the people that ran into the back of me daft or
idiotic.

Although they arguably were. Regardless of your choice of bar, if you
are unable to safely and quickly control your bike, you shouldn't ride
so close to someone that it becomes an issue.

Quoted message said:

I wrote on 30/1/06
"From the way things are put I am sure that
users are sincere in general but I still feel there is no room for
discussion."

In all; You started (or appeared to start) from the premise that there
was a major failing in drop bars for a given class of user
(Specifically - you) and that you considered this to be a consequence
of some form of (unintentional?) conspiracy amongst drop bar users and
bike sales folk.

If you feel you are being maligned here then I apologise, but my
responses have been based on the impression I have formed of you over a
number of threads on this topic. My issue is not with your bar design,
nor with your personal preference of bars, but with the manner in which
you rephrase your dislikes into an attack on drop bars which
(intentionally or otherwise) becomes an attack on anyone who prefers
them. If you still can't see why this is, then I see no hope of ever
demonstrating this to you, and I suspect that you are unlikely to
convert many people to your cause because your attitude will put them
off before they have time to consider what you are proposing.

And here endeth my words on the topic, since this provides a
distraction from what I should be doing. Namely learning to argue like
this in French! ;-)

A bientôt,

Jon

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My gripe was and is a belief that some riders are incorrectly equipped

Cyclists are not incorrectly equipped.

Please do not exclude the word 'some'.

DavidR said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, DavidR

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My gripe was and is a belief that some riders are incorrectly equipped

Cyclists are not incorrectly equipped.

Please do not exclude the word 'some'.

Please do not assume that "some" is completely inclusive of "all those
not racing, but using drop handlebars".

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article said:

Throughout I have tried to say where I see a
problem. But lets face it, there has been a lot of stonewalling and
normal newsgroup noise.

Hasn't there just? Maybe you should just give it up.

But back to the now not so lovely weather, does anyone know of a UK supplier
of red EverLEDs, and /or have other suggestions for a rear fog light?

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

> My gripe was and is a belief that some riders are incorrectly equipped
Cyclists are not incorrectly equipped.

Please do not exclude the word 'some'.

Please do not assume that "some" is completely inclusive of "all those
not racing, but using drop handlebars".

Of course.
Normal convention is some < many < most.