Re: Disc brake maintenance tips

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 07:49:36 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 6/27/2024 4:01 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 23:26:59 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 

On 6/26/2024 7:01 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 6/25/2024 4:48 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>
I'm sure Youngstown's bike mode share is minuscule, just like almost all
U.S. cities. Remember, the national average is far below one percent.
And despite all the "innovative" segregated infrastructure, it's falling.
>

Again national mode share particularly the US with a significant rural
population is not a useful metric.
>
Cities are where it’s at, and probably 5 mile or less journeys.

>
That may be true. But data for U.S. cities is not much better. I
frequent four or five medium to large U.S. cities. Only one has a
noticeable amount of bike use, and the great bulk of that is connected
with several inner-city colleges. Two others have extensive bike lanes
that are always empty of bikes.
>

That is one of the reasons london and other places have automatic counters
as they knew darn well that taxi etc would say “I never see a bike!” This
said clearly london is doing rather better and more than US cities let
alone number of European cities.
>
Essentially bikes don’t clump up in the same way as cars etc do.

>
This is not some visual deception. A couple years ago my wife and I did
a multi-day vacation in a large Ohio city, visiting museums, shopping
centers, bike shops, etc. We saw miles and miles of bike lanes, but
almost zero bikes using them. Near the very center of the downtown we
saw some electric scooters in bike lanes, but no bikes.
>
Fundamentally, very few Americans bike for utility.
>

Why is it falling? I suspect one factor is the constant propaganda
claiming everyone NEEDS a barrier-segregated facility to be safe on a
bike. That tells almost everybody "You can't ride a bike until that
stuff gets built." IOW, never.
>

>
That’s clutching at straws really is! don’t think the massive increase in
car sizes/volumes car centric infrastructure? To name but a few over the
last 70 so years?

>
You can't deny that there have also been massive increases in
"innovative" bike facilities! And car size is largely irrelevant.

>
Car size absolutely has its issues mainly width, and blocking views.
>
Most of the cycle lanes have been some bike symbols or painted lanes or
possibly some disjointed shared paths. Only segregated stuff seems to have
been alongside major roads which only exist as they need to keep access see
my old 1959 cycleway as example.
>
And very little if anything innovative, more box ticking.

>
"Innovative" doesn't impress me. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's the
"innovative" stuff that includes collision hazards or wheel deflection
hazards for the cyclists. It's the "innovative" stuff that sends
cyclists wrong-way into intersections.
>
And as I've said before, the "Paint & Path" fans have been moving the
goalposts for decades. "Bike lane stripes will get people out of their
cars!" But when that didn't happen, "Buffered bike lanes will get people
out of their cars!" When that didn't happen "Green paint will get people
out of their cars!" When that didn't happen, "Flex post barriers will
get people out of their cars!" When that didn't happen "Concrete
barriers will get people out of their cars!"
>
Innovation after innovation has been provided, as demanded. People are
still massively preferring cars to bikes.
>
And despite ever more lanes, paths, green paint, barriers, etc. bike
mode share is falling. See
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/27/biking-to-work-isn-t-gaining-any-ground-in-the-us/67b4a9e2-5d32-11ee-b961-94e18b27be28_story.html
>
Or see
https://data.bikeleague.org/data/national-rates-of-biking-and-walking/
>
Or see
https://activetrans.org/busreports/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/2020regionalmodesharereport.pdf
>

It really isn’t because someone said it’s dangerous to ride a bike or they
should wear a helmet.

>
So you say. But people regularly report that they think bicycling is too
dangerous. And they are frequently told that without special facilities,
bicycling is too dangerous. I'm surprised you don't admit the
possibility of a causative link.

 
People believe riding in vehicle traffic is dangerous because they can
see for themselves that it is, not because of someone telling them
that it is. There are thousands of non-injury, vehicle fender bender
accidents every day that would result in serious injury if it involved
a bicyclist.
 

What's your alternate explanation for decreasing mode share despite
increasing miles of bike facilities?

 
Krygowski is stumbling over his "facts." If, as he says, people don't
commute unless they can use special facilities, then there would be
increased commuting with the ever increasing miles of bike facilities.
 
Clearly, people are not shunning bicycle commuting simply because they
believe it's dangerous.

>
OK that's considered.  But recreational cyclists (you, for
example) can choose routes wherever they prefer and you
prefer cycle/pedestrian only. Which is fine.
>
Commuter/utility cyclists don't have that luxury of choice
and either learn to ride in a real world of 3000lb hurtling
missiles piloted by distracted/high/homicidal killers or
suffer from 'frisson de voiture' events.

I understand and respect those who ride in those conditions. I also
understand why so many don't.

But as I and others have said, building the bike lanes and MUPs don't
seem to be increasing the numbers of commuter/utility cyclists. There
are reasons other than the obvious dangers that people shun those
cycling activities.

Whether you appreciate Mr Forester's work or not, that
behavior in traffic is eventually picked up to some greater
or lesser extent by cyclists amid auto traffic everywhere.
Reifying Mr Forester as an outlier is a weak argument IMHO.

Forester argued against bicycle infrastructure. Thank goodness his
agenda failed and thus recreational bicycling has grown as had the
manufacture and sales of bicycles.

Forester encouraged already known, common sense cyclist behavior for
people who choose to ride amongst vehicles. I don't understand why so
many people pay him homage.