For Sale:
Schlumpf High Speed Drive with accessories.
This is a two speed bottom bracket, it gives you 2.5X the chainring in
high gear.
Very little use, I tried this but went back to a Speed Drive. It
currently has the integral 27T chainring with trouser guard.

I also have the splined High-speed-drive flange for 30- and
34t.-chainring or adapter for BCD130 chainrings.
This allows you to use the Schlumpf 30 or 34 Chainrings or they also
have an adapter to mount 130mm chainrings.
So it can be set up to suit almost any gearing need. Silver 170mm crank
arms included.
I also have an assortment of various thickness steel & aluminum cones
and will supply the cone of your choice.
This is a later drive, it uses the cones with 18 milled grooves.

Current Chainring size is 27 in low, works out to 67.5 in high. This
will give you a tremendous gear range with little or no overlap.
Would trade for Speed Drive or sell outright. Asking $425 (plus
shipping) for drive, chainring adapter, arms & cone.
I have a Schlumpf cutting tool I could loan to the purchaser (in USA)
with refundable deposit if requested. Please contact me off list for info.

Thanks, Bobbie Martin
Jacksonville, Florida USA

I've uploaded a photo to give you an idea what the problem is. Check album
"Nexus 8 axle assembly".

Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what kind?

I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.

Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most dangerous
types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and other danger
warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a poor choice as
most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external sounds.

I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of
listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.

Rich Wood

I tried it a few times, I think with earbuds, and I really didn't like it.
It wasn't that I was isolated from warning sounds, it was more than I was
isolated from all the ambient sounds that I depend on for orientation on the
bike.
And this was on a bike trail, not even in traffic.

David


On 2012-05-08, at 1:15 PM, Rich W wrote:

> Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
>
> I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
>
> Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
>
> I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of
listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
>
> Rich Wood

Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.  Unless you are
listening to emergency broadcasts about tsunamis, volcanoes or tornadoes,
listening to anything distracting or that could keep you from hearing a nearby
car, is dangerous.  You do not need traffic reports, you can easily get around
most jams.  You should not need weather reports, you can get them before you
leave.  Use the headphones when they will not endanger your life, or others'.

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@...> wrote:
>
> Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
>
> I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
>
> Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
>
> I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of
listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
>
> Rich Wood
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Rich W

To: Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 6:15 PM

Subject: [SPAM][Geared_hub_bikes] Do You Use Headphones When Riding?

 

Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what kind?

I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with wearing a helmet.

Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external sounds.

I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for pedestrians.

Rich Wood

Frank;

Probably good advice.  Too bad it is so widely ignored by so many automobile
drivers who pay attention to everything but their driving.

Rich Wood

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frankroskind@...> wrote:
>
> Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.  Unless you are
listening to emergency broadcasts about tsunamis, volcanoes or tornadoes,
listening to anything distracting or that could keep you from hearing a nearby
car, is dangerous.  You do not need traffic reports, you can easily get around
most jams.  You should not need weather reports, you can get them before you
leave.  Use the headphones when they will not endanger your life, or others'.
>
> --- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@> wrote:
> >
> > Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
> >
> > I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> > type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
> >
> > Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
> >
> > I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice
of listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
> >
> > Rich Wood
> >
>

Did a bit more digging, here is a system that I like and might consider spending
the money on if I were in the market for it.
http://www.geekalerts.com/cycle-speaker/

Aaron


--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@...> wrote:
>
> Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
>
> I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
>
> Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
>
> I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of
listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
>
> Rich Wood
>

I use standard ear buds. But only when I ride on
trails or Iowa's many gravel roads where I can
ride 50 miles and never see any other
vehicles.  I don't often listen to music, mostly
talk radio (NPR) so there isn't the constant
sound level that would drown out traffic
noises.  I've tried some noise canceling
earphones/buds but they sure didn't work
well.  Okay they weren't Bose, some off brand
copycats.  The background hiss was very
annoying.  Where I ride, external noise isn't an
issue to fight.  I've had multiple ear surgeries
so I'm pretty careful about loud noises.  I use
Nascar level blocking headphones when I use the
yard power equipment.  No Honda or not even a
Leaf will sneak up on you on a gravel road.

Rick
Livin in the middle of the great corn desert.




At 12:15 PM 5/8/2012, you wrote:
>
>
>Possibly off subject but do you use headphones
>when riding and if so what kind?
>
>I note that several makers including Sony,
>Philips and Sennheiser make some headphones
>which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at
>the ear canal without actually blocking or
>covering it. As these do not block external
>noises they appear to me to be the safest
>headphones to use for riding as long as the
>volume is kept to a reasonable level. Many of
>these are made with a behind-the-neck
>type band or a very thin over the head type band
>which do not interfere with wearing a helmet.
>
>Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones
>seem to me to be the most dangerous types as
>they isolate the rider from the sound of horns,
>sirens and other danger warning sounds. Full
>size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
>poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as
>well as blocking external sounds.
>
>I would like to get other members thoughts on
>this as I consider the choice of listening
>devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for pedestrians.
>
>Rich Wood
>
>

I've used this handlebar mounted radio in the past.

http://www.conrad-uk.com/ce/en/product/841414/

Which is fine for really quiet roads, but gets drowned out as soon as
there's much passing traffic (probably just as well - I want to be
concentrating on the traffic not the radio).

Seeing at the antenna for this is internal, it's not great at picking
up anything but the strongest radio signals.  It doesn't pick up my
favourite station well enough on my commute to work though so I've not
used it for a while.  I'll probably dig it out of the drawer when a do
a long tour later this year.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rich W

To: Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 6:51 PM

Subject: [SPAM][Geared_hub_bikes] Re: Do You Use Headphones When Riding?

 

Frank;

Probably good advice. Too bad it is so widely ignored by so many automobile drivers who pay attention to everything but their driving.

Rich Wood

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frankroskind@...> wrote:
>
> Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive. Unless you are listening to emergency broadcasts about tsunamis, volcanoes or tornadoes, listening to anything distracting or that could keep you from hearing a nearby car, is dangerous. You do not need traffic reports, you can easily get around most jams. You should not need weather reports, you can get them before you leave. Use the headphones when they will not endanger your life, or others'.
>
> --- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@> wrote:
> >
> > Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what kind?
> >
> > I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> > type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with wearing a helmet.
> >
> > Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external sounds.
> >
> > I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for pedestrians.
> >
> > Rich Wood
> >
>

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "nznmantas" <main32@...> wrote:
>
> I've uploaded a photo to give you an idea what the problem is. Check album
"Nexus 8 axle assembly".
>


Maybe this can help you a bit

http://www.hubstripping.com/shimano-inter8/shimano-nexus-inter-8-service-manual-\
SG-8C20-coaster-brake-en.pdf

good luck

noha

Even though I agree with your conclusion, I don't like your premise.
Riding a bicycle is not that dangerous; if it were, mortality rates would not be
LOWER for bicycle commuters than they are for auto commuters (even after
adjusting for risk factors).

Or rather, my main task when riding my bicycle is to stay alive, but that has 9%
to do with avoiding crashes, and 90% to do with choosing to ride the bicycle in
the first place.

That remaining 9%, is not a risk that is intrinsic to the bicycle, but is
instead imposed on me by crappy infrastructure and careless people operating
heavy machinery in public, at or beyond their cognitive abilities.  In the short
term the most effective way to deal with it might be to not wear headphones
while cycling, but long-term, perhaps we could do a better job with road design
and driver training.

Sorry to digress like this, but when I read things implying that "BICYCLE RIDING
IS DANGEROUS!!!!!" I cannot help but note that this is false, and researchers
have scads of data to prove this.  Driving cars to excess is what is dangerous
-- and we have the mortality data to prove that, too.

On 2012-05-08, at 1:37 PM, Frank wrote:

> Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.

IMO almost any speaker arrangement is likely to be drowned out on a bicycle as
low power speakers are not that effective in a open air situation.  I can
remember trying to listen to the radio in a convertible with the top down and
that did not work very well either as I recall.

One reason for the use of something in the way of headphones.  Below are links
to some samples of some headphones which do not block the ear canal and thus
allow ambient noise in if the volume level is kept reasonable.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0034L3G8U/ref=oh_details_o00_s01_i00

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005N6KG/ref=oh_details_o02_s00_i00

Rich Wood


--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, Jim Avery <jim@...> wrote:
>
> I've used this handlebar mounted radio in the past.
>
> http://www.conrad-uk.com/ce/en/product/841414/
>
> Which is fine for really quiet roads, but gets drowned out as soon as
> there's much passing traffic (probably just as well - I want to be
> concentrating on the traffic not the radio).
>
> Seeing at the antenna for this is internal, it's not great at picking
> up anything but the strongest radio signals.  It doesn't pick up my
> favourite station well enough on my commute to work though so I've not
> used it for a while.  I'll probably dig it out of the drawer when a do
> a long tour later this year.
>

Definitely off topic for this list, as is any discussion of cycling helmet
requirements/interface.

I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over
music or other forms of audio entertainment.  I challenge anyone to substantiate
a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a
reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror
provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the
rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.

I prefer to listen to audio books on my headphones while cycling; I have
listened to hundreds of books in the last 10 years of cycle commuting in traffic
with an mp3 player and headphones.

If others prefer to listen to tire and bad muffler noise, engines roaring,
passenger/pedestrian catcalls etc., good for them, to each their own.

I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."

Stan
--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@...> wrote:
>
> Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
>
> I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
>
> Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
>
> I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice of
listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
>
> Rich Wood
>

On 2012-05-09, at 10:22 AM, stanley_bike wrote:
> I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over
music or other forms of audio entertainment. I challenge anyone to substantiate
a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a
reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror
provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the
rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.

Mirrors don't work for everyone.  I've tried multiple times, never got
comfortable with them.  They get banged out of alignment, then either they're
useless, or I get distracted trying to fix them.  It may have something to do
with potholes and curbs.  Any advice about making mirrors work?

Second, what I get from traffic noise is that I can hear around corners, and I
can continuously monitor the cars near me without taking my eyes off what is in
front me.

> I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."

  There are other approaches to riding a bicycle in traffic besides your One True
Way.

Certainly deaf vehicle operators accident record, better than for hearing
drivers, is rvidence that hearing is not necessary for safe driving/riding.  The
top American female motocross racer is deaf IIRC.  So if you learn to compensate
for lack of hearing the evidence indicates that you can be a safe vehicle
operator.

Listening to music, audible books and radio is different however as the brain is
trying to process the audio input which I suspect can be a distraction from the
primary activity and situational awareness.

Rich Wood

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, David Chase <dr2chase@...> wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-05-09, at 10:22 AM, stanley_bike wrote:
> > I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over
music or other forms of audio entertainment. I challenge anyone to substantiate
a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a
reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror
provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the
rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.
>
> Mirrors don't work for everyone.  I've tried multiple times, never got
comfortable with them.  They get banged out of alignment, then either they're
useless, or I get distracted trying to fix them.  It may have something to do
with potholes and curbs.  Any advice about making mirrors work?
>
> Second, what I get from traffic noise is that I can hear around corners, and I
can continuously monitor the cars near me without taking my eyes off what is in
front me.
>
> > I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."
>
>  There are other approaches to riding a bicycle in traffic besides your One
True Way.
>

Here's my reasoning for not wearing headphones while riding.
http://tinyurl.com/7aqxjmz
It happened in a rural area with more cows than cars. I was acquainted with the
young man. I also work in the railroad industry and am very aware how quite a
train can be on CWR (Continuously Welded Rail)or Joint Free Rail.

That said, however, if he couldn't hear the horn blasting.......


Mike

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, David Chase <dr2chase@...> wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-05-09, at 10:22 AM, stanley_bike wrote:
> > I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over
music or other forms of audio entertainment. I challenge anyone to substantiate
a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a
reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror
provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the
rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.
>
> Mirrors don't work for everyone.  I've tried multiple times, never got
comfortable with them.  They get banged out of alignment, then either they're
useless, or I get distracted trying to fix them.  It may have something to do
with potholes and curbs.  Any advice about making mirrors work?
>
> Second, what I get from traffic noise is that I can hear around corners, and I
can continuously monitor the cars near me without taking my eyes off what is in
front me.
>
> > I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."
>
>  There are other approaches to riding a bicycle in traffic besides your One
True Way.
>

Your post seems to suggest that you are incredibly alert, hugely intelligent and
skilled beyond the abilities of most people. Such an distinctive individual
certainly deserves the right to be arrogant, condescending, and dismissive of
those of us who find that using all of our senses to provide clues in piloting
bicycling safely along roads crowded by by motor vehicles.  Congratulations on
your genetic superiority. I think you actually survive on good fortune and luck.
MB on MV

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "stanley_bike" <stanley_bike@...>
wrote:
>
> Definitely off topic for this list, as is any discussion of cycling helmet
requirements/interface.
>
> I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over
music or other forms of audio entertainment.  I challenge anyone to substantiate
a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a
reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror
provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the
rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.
>
> I prefer to listen to audio books on my headphones while cycling; I have
listened to hundreds of books in the last 10 years of cycle commuting in traffic
with an mp3 player and headphones.
>
> If others prefer to listen to tire and bad muffler noise, engines roaring,
passenger/pedestrian catcalls etc., good for them, to each their own.
>
> I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."
>
> Stan
> --- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "Rich W" <astronut1001@> wrote:
> >
> > Possibly off subject but do you use headphones when riding and if so what
kind?
> >
> > I note that several makers including Sony, Philips and Sennheiser make some
headphones which sit in the outer ear and aim the sound at the ear canal without
actually blocking or covering it. As these do not block external noises they
appear to me to be the safest headphones to use for riding as long as the volume
is kept to a reasonable level. Many of these are made with a behind-the-neck
> > type band or a very thin over the head type band which do not interfere with
wearing a helmet.
> >
> > Noise cancelling or in-ear-canal type phones seem to me to be the most
dangerous types as they isolate the rider from the sound of horns, sirens and
other danger warning sounds. Full size over-the-ear phones also appear to be a
poor choice as most prevent wearing a helmet as well as blocking external
sounds.
> >
> > I would like to get other members thoughts on this as I consider the choice
of listening devices, if used, to be a safety concern both when riding and for
pedestrians.
> >
> > Rich Wood
> >
>

An excellent illustration of why it is worthwhile LOOKING at all street and
railroad crossings.  Until they trenched it the railroad ran on the surface
through the center of Reno.  Outside of the trench area it still does.  This is
the main UP east-west line with LOTS of traffic.  Train and vehicle collisions
are all too common.

Rich Wood



--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "workinonitstill" <workinonitstill@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Here's my reasoning for not wearing headphones while riding.
> http://tinyurl.com/7aqxjmz
> It happened in a rural area with more cows than cars. I was acquainted with
the young man. I also work in the railroad industry and am very aware how quite
a train can be on CWR (Continuously Welded Rail)or Joint Free Rail.
>
> That said, however, if he couldn't hear the horn blasting.......
>
>
> Mike
>
> --- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, David Chase <dr2chase@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2012-05-09, at 10:22 AM, stanley_bike wrote:
> > > I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE
over music or other forms of audio entertainment. I challenge anyone to
substantiate a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that
might require a reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My
handlebar mirror provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic
situation to the rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic
awareness.
> >
> > Mirrors don't work for everyone.  I've tried multiple times, never got
comfortable with them.  They get banged out of alignment, then either they're
useless, or I get distracted trying to fix them.  It may have something to do
with potholes and curbs.  Any advice about making mirrors work?
> >
> > Second, what I get from traffic noise is that I can hear around corners, and
I can continuously monitor the cars near me without taking my eyes off what is
in front me.
> >
> > > I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their
situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling
techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues
about their cycling "situation."
> >
> >  There are other approaches to riding a bicycle in traffic besides your One
True Way.
> >
>

 

On 2012-05-09, at 10:22 AM, stanley_bike wrote:
> I can only wonder about cyclists who prefer to listen to traffic NOISE over music or other forms of audio entertainment. I challenge anyone to substantiate a claim that headphones mask actual emergency audio signals that might require a reaction from a cyclist such as vehicle horns or sirens. My handlebar mirror provides all the awareness I need to know about the traffic situation to the rear. My unaided eyesight takes care of the rest of traffic awareness.

Mirrors don't work for everyone. I've tried multiple times, never got comfortable with them. They get banged out of alignment, then either they're useless, or I get distracted trying to fix them. It may have something to do with potholes and curbs. Any advice about making mirrors work?

Second, what I get from traffic noise is that I can hear around corners, and I can continuously monitor the cars near me without taking my eyes off what is in front me.

> I recommend that those cyclists requiring audio clues to provide their situational awareness in traffic should think twice about their cycling techniques, if they actually depend on their hearing to provide important clues about their cycling "situation."

There are other approaches to riding a bicycle in traffic besides your One True Way.

I'm trying to find out what the various spindle lengths are for the Mark
(colour) indicators.
  Specifically, I need to know which indicator will work with a XRF5 (pre wide
range) when using the short guide nut.
  The stock indicator with this hub is Mark Blue which measures 70mm from pin to
the tip of the threads. Ideally, it should be about 8 mm shorter to work
properly with the short nut.
  They make it simple for the wide range models. Stock indicator is Mark Yellow,
Mark Navy Blue for the short guide nut.
  The choices I've been able to identify are Mark Blue, Green, Navy Blue, Orange,
Orange II, Purple, Red, White, White II, and yellow.
  Thanks.
  Dan

I totally agree!  Riding a bike really didn't get dangerous until they started
selling helmets in the 1980s.  All the helmet makers said it was dangerous and
everyone needed one.  The funny thing to me is that all early quality helmets in
the USA were Snell certified.  You couldn't sell a non-Snell helmet, hardly. 
Bike clubs required Snell certified helmets.  The funny thing is: William 'Pete'
Snell, who died of head injuries in a car crash in 1956 while wearing a leather
helmet!  So why aren't all car drivers and passengers forced to wear helmets? 
When moms come into my shop asking about the safety of their kids on bikes, I
tell them they are safer than being in a car.  You should never put a loved on
in one of those metal boxes!  (well not that often). And they should all ride
IGH equipped bikes.

--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, David Chase <dr2chase@...> wrote:
>
>
> Even though I agree with your conclusion, I don't like your premise.
> Riding a bicycle is not that dangerous; if it were, mortality rates would not
be LOWER for bicycle commuters than they are for auto commuters (even after
adjusting for risk factors).
>
> Or rather, my main task when riding my bicycle is to stay alive, but that has
9% to do with avoiding crashes, and 90% to do with choosing to ride the bicycle
in the first place.
>
> That remaining 9%, is not a risk that is intrinsic to the bicycle, but is
instead imposed on me by crappy infrastructure and careless people operating
heavy machinery in public, at or beyond their cognitive abilities.  In the short
term the most effective way to deal with it might be to not wear headphones
while cycling, but long-term, perhaps we could do a better job with road design
and driver training.
>
> Sorry to digress like this, but when I read things implying that "BICYCLE
RIDING IS DANGEROUS!!!!!" I cannot help but note that this is false, and
researchers have scads of data to prove this.  Driving cars to excess is what is
dangerous -- and we have the mortality data to prove that, too.
>
> On 2012-05-08, at 1:37 PM, Frank wrote:
>
> > Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.
>

Per my understanding the western countries with the highest cycle usage,
Holland, Germany and Denmark; have the lowest cycle accident rates and lowest
helmet usage.  They have invested in cycle friendly infrastructure and much
tougher training for motor vehicle drivers.  Hitting a cyclist or pedestrian in
Holland is a major driving offense.  Anyone know if headphone usage is common in
those countries?

An interesting point Aaron raises.  I am not sure of current law but it used to
be in CA that driving a car on public roads while wearing a safety helmet was
ILLEGAL!!!!!  Required for some cyclists and all motorcyclists but verboten for
car drivers.  Now of course the airbags and safety harnesses in autos raise the
price of a car by anything up to a couple of thousand dollars and the cost of
replacing a full set of airbags is outrageous.

As far as Snell approval goes the Snell foundation developed safety helmet
standards long before there were any American government standards for them. 
Thus many racing organizations went with approval by the only real approval body
around.  IIRC the SCCA was the first to mandate Snell approved helmets.  The
last I knew the only Snell approved bicycle helmets available in the USA are
those from Specialized.  Snell test requirements are still tougher than
government ones.

Nevada is one of the few states left that does not require safety helmets for
any age bicycle riders except on some Indian reservations.

Rich Wood


--- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, "aarons_bicycle_repair" <aaron@...>
wrote:
>
> I totally agree!  Riding a bike really didn't get dangerous until they started
selling helmets in the 1980s.  All the helmet makers said it was dangerous and
everyone needed one.  The funny thing to me is that all early quality helmets in
the USA were Snell certified.  You couldn't sell a non-Snell helmet, hardly. 
Bike clubs required Snell certified helmets.  The funny thing is: William 'Pete'
Snell, who died of head injuries in a car crash in 1956 while wearing a leather
helmet!  So why aren't all car drivers and passengers forced to wear helmets? 
When moms come into my shop asking about the safety of their kids on bikes, I
tell them they are safer than being in a car.  You should never put a loved on
in one of those metal boxes!  (well not that often). And they should all ride
IGH equipped bikes.
>
> --- In Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com, David Chase <dr2chase@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Even though I agree with your conclusion, I don't like your premise.
> > Riding a bicycle is not that dangerous; if it were, mortality rates would
not be LOWER for bicycle commuters than they are for auto commuters (even after
adjusting for risk factors).
> >
> > Or rather, my main task when riding my bicycle is to stay alive, but that
has 9% to do with avoiding crashes, and 90% to do with choosing to ride the
bicycle in the first place.
> >
> > That remaining 9%, is not a risk that is intrinsic to the bicycle, but is
instead imposed on me by crappy infrastructure and careless people operating
heavy machinery in public, at or beyond their cognitive abilities.  In the short
term the most effective way to deal with it might be to not wear headphones
while cycling, but long-term, perhaps we could do a better job with road design
and driver training.
> >
> > Sorry to digress like this, but when I read things implying that "BICYCLE
RIDING IS DANGEROUS!!!!!" I cannot help but note that this is false, and
researchers have scads of data to prove this.  Driving cars to excess is what is
dangerous -- and we have the mortality data to prove that, too.
> >
> > On 2012-05-08, at 1:37 PM, Frank wrote:
> >
> > > Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.
> >
>

I took my helmet with me when I went cycling in
and around Amsterdam. Got lots of snide comments
from the locals.  Yeah, one of the highest
bicycle usage rates yet the only cyclists I saw
wearing helmets were racers out training in groups outside the city.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickpaulos/7167469956/

Here is a photo of the bikes we rented there for
our 100km rides out of town.  An urban IGH with
every option on the planet.  Fenders, rack, bunge
cords, kickstand, generator, built in wheel lock,
extra chain lock, lights, nearly full chain
guard, sign on the front in the native language
that I think translated to "watch out, clueless foreigner comin' at yah".
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rickpaulos/7167470076/

I talked to a former Trek drone who was in charge
of helmets at one time and got the lecture about
them. The packaging costs as much as the straps
which is about the same as the styrofoam shell
which is about the same as the product liability
insurance.  Yeah, about $4 total.  Snell wanted
$1 per approved helmet manufactured for their
seal of approval.  Adding the snell label
increased their cost by 25%.  He said it didn't
make any difference if it was a $20 box mart
helmet or a $150 race helmet, the cost of
manufacturing and the amount of protection was
about the same. The CPSC testing doesn't charge
by the helmet manufactured so it's any easy
decision to drop the now redundant Snell certification.

As to Snell being tougher, each test is different
and updated periodically and none will never
match your crashes.  The latest Snell bicycle
helmet standard is nearly 15 years old which
corresponds to the introduction of the CPSC
requirement that all helmets sold in the USA be
CPSC approved.  I've yet to own a helmet since
1970 that held up much more than 5 or 6
years.  Some of the materials just seem to
dissolve by design.  Most any helmet is dirt
cheap compared to just 1 trip to the local emergency room.

Rick




At 04:43 PM 5/9/2012, you wrote:
>
>
>Per my understanding the western countries with
>the highest cycle usage, Holland, Germany and
>Denmark; have the lowest cycle accident rates
>and lowest helmet usage. They have invested in
>cycle friendly infrastructure and much tougher
>training for motor vehicle drivers. Hitting a
>cyclist or pedestrian in Holland is a major
>driving offense. Anyone know if headphone usage is common in those countries?
>
>An interesting point Aaron raises. I am not sure
>of current law but it used to be in CA that
>driving a car on public roads while wearing a
>safety helmet was ILLEGAL!!!!! Required for some
>cyclists and all motorcyclists but verboten for
>car drivers. Now of course the airbags and
>safety harnesses in autos raise the price of a
>car by anything up to a couple of thousand
>dollars and the cost of replacing a full set of airbags is outrageous.
>
>As far as Snell approval goes the Snell
>foundation developed safety helmet standards
>long before there were any American government
>standards for them. Thus many racing
>organizations went with approval by the only
>real approval body around. IIRC the SCCA was the
>first to mandate Snell approved helmets. The
>last I knew the only Snell approved bicycle
>helmets available in the USA are those from
>Specialized. Snell test requirements are still tougher than government ones.
>
>Nevada is one of the few states left that does
>not require safety helmets for any age bicycle
>riders except on some Indian reservations.
>
>Rich Wood
>
>--- In
><mailto:Geared_hub_bikes%40yahoogroups.com>Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com,
>"aarons_bicycle_repair" <aaron@...> wrote:
> >
> > I totally agree! Riding a bike really didn't
> get dangerous until they started selling
> helmets in the 1980s. All the helmet makers
> said it was dangerous and everyone needed one.
> The funny thing to me is that all early quality
> helmets in the USA were Snell certified. You
> couldn't sell a non-Snell helmet, hardly. Bike
> clubs required Snell certified helmets. The
> funny thing is: William 'Pete' Snell, who died
> of head injuries in a car crash in 1956 while
> wearing a leather helmet! So why aren't all car
> drivers and passengers forced to wear helmets?
> When moms come into my shop asking about the
> safety of their kids on bikes, I tell them they
> are safer than being in a car. You should never
> put a loved on in one of those metal boxes!
> (well not that often). And they should all ride IGH equipped bikes.
> >
> > --- In
> <mailto:Geared_hub_bikes%40yahoogroups.com>Geared_hub_bikes@yahoogroups.com,
> David Chase <dr2chase@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Even though I agree with your conclusion, I don't like your premise.
> > > Riding a bicycle is not that dangerous; if
> it were, mortality rates would not be LOWER for
> bicycle commuters than they are for auto
> commuters (even after adjusting for risk factors).
> > >
> > > Or rather, my main task when riding my
> bicycle is to stay alive, but that has 9% to do
> with avoiding crashes, and 90% to do with
> choosing to ride the bicycle in the first place.
> > >
> > > That remaining 9%, is not a risk that is
> intrinsic to the bicycle, but is instead
> imposed on me by crappy infrastructure and
> careless people operating heavy machinery in
> public, at or beyond their cognitive abilities.
> In the short term the most effective way to
> deal with it might be to not wear headphones
> while cycling, but long-term, perhaps we could
> do a better job with road design and driver training.
> > >
> > > Sorry to digress like this, but when I read
> things implying that "BICYCLE RIDING IS
> DANGEROUS!!!!!" I cannot help but note that
> this is false, and researchers have scads of
> data to prove this. Driving cars to excess is
> what is dangerous -- and we have the mortality data to prove that, too.
> > >
> > > On 2012-05-08, at 1:37 PM, Frank wrote:
> > >
> > > > Your main task when riding in traffic is to stay alive.
> > >
> >
>
>