Suicidal squirrels seem to be "fairly common," in my experience.  I've
had two in the last seven years -- one I ran over, the other bonked
his nose into my rim and then skittered away with what I expect was a
very sore nose.  If "unusual wheel configurations" encourage them to
run through and get caught in the spokes, then I'd sure rather be
running 36 spoke wheels :-)

On Mar 9, 7:56 pm, Michael Glaser <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been hesitant to join the fray because I'd really like this
> entire thread to wind down.  We all come to this forum because we
> appreciate the form and function of lugged steel bikes that are built
> with recreational / utility riders in mind.  I personally do not enjoy
> the conflict that seems so pervasive in other on-line communities, and
> it saddens me to see it here.
>
> But a few things are gnawing at me.  I'll preface this by saying that
> Grant is not only entitled to his opinion, but each member of this
> community obviously agrees with and celebrates many (if not most or
> all) of Grant's views.  However, I don't think that we should be
> dogmatic.  Critical thinking is a good thing, and not only when
> questioning conventional wisdom that leads folks to buy racing bikes
> that are uncomfortable for recreational riding and unsuitable for day-
> to-day tasks.  Here's are my personal heresies:  First, I don't agree
> that carbon is an inherently dangerous or inferior to steel.  Second,
> I don't agree that the weight savings associated with MCRBs are
> irrelevant for recreational riding.
>
> For what it's worth I recall seeing a number of spectacular failures
> from the early days of carbon (esp. forks) in the late 80s / early
> 90s.  Memories of those failures kept me off of carbon for a long
> time.  And to be fair, the mode of failure for carbon can be quick and
> dramatic.  However, the rate of "just riding along" failures is
> extremely low.  Pebbles kicked up while riding do not cause stress
> risers that lead to catastrophic failure, period.  That is just
> patently false.  Stress risers are caused by serious crashes (inspect,
> inspect, inspect after a crash, regardless of what you are riding), or
> by seriously improper installation (it's wise to use a torque wrench
> when installing parts on any bike, but it's especially important with
> carbon  . . . and if you wrench something until it literally crunches,
> you ought to realize that you've broken it).
>
> If you do a non-partisan review of thewww.bustedcarbon.comsite,
> you'll notice that many if not most of the broken bikes are attributed
> either to very serious crashes (e.g., tangling with a car) or non-
> riding incidents (e.g., roof rack vs. garage door, spouse backing over
> bike on floor of garage, etc.).  Steel, aluminum and titanium frames
> do not generally fare any better under these circumstances.  I have
> seen steel head tubes detached from front triangles.  I have also seen
> steel fork blades detached from lugged steel crowns.  A car /
> boulder / cast iron bollard can mangle any bike beyond recognition --
> as well as your body.  That doesn't mean that the materials are
> unsafe; it means that cycling itself can be dangerous.  And even if
> the bike survives, when a cast iron bollard sends you over the bars
> head first, there's a risk that you will end up with a spinal cord
> injury.  I'm not an accident investigator, and I don't know the
> individuals involved, but I think it's possible that this unfortunate
> bike shop owner that Grant mentioned might have been seriously injured
> on any bike.
>
> I think that using the photo at the beginning of this thread to
> demonstrate the inherent vulnerability of carbon is unfair.  First,
> I'd submit that it's pretty rare for squirrels to jump into moving
> wheels.  Second, take a look at the wheel -- it's one of those
> Bontrager models with a proprietary spoking pattern that leaves huge
> voids between pairs of spokes.  Third, even with those huge voids, the
> wheel must have been rotating pretty slowly in order for the squirrel
> to make it half-way through in the time that it took to do less than a
> single full rotation.  So, suicidal squirrel plus very unusual wheel
> design at rotational speed low enough for squirrel to pass through the
> wheel equals crash.  As someone pointed out, this would have caused a
> crash even with a steel fork (perhaps damaging it beyond rideability),
> but if there's any design flaw to blame here, it's the wheel not the
> fork.  Were it not for that very unusual wheel design, I think the
> squirrel probably would have bounced off of the moving spokes.
>
> Some thoughts about weight.  It does matter.  Especially for
> recreational riders who ride at relatively lower speeds on hilly
> terrain and do not produce gobs of power.  This isn't subjective, and
> it isn't about being a racer (I am not, never have been, and don't
> aspire to be).  It's simple physics.  The less you and your bike
> weigh, the easier it is to pedal up hills.  If you'd like to translate
> that into statistics, check out the Analytical Cycling 
> sitehttp://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html.  If you're
> turned off by the fact that the site is populated by a bunch of Type A
> wanna-be (or actual) racers, then look into the whole lightweight
> backpacking movement.  The pioneers of that movement are not cardio-
> monsters, they're Appalachian Trail through-hikers like Emma "Grandma"
> Gatewood.  Smell-the-roses type people who have much more in common
> with Grant Petersen at Rivendell than Gerard Vroomen at Cervelo.  All
> things being equal, you can go cover more ground in a shorter span of
> time with less weight, particularly if you're not a paragon of
> physical fitness.
>
> But it's not all about being faster.  My Hilsen weighs about 30lbs,
> fully-dressed.  My MCRB weighs about half that with the small kit that
> I carry.  Would you rather hike up Half Dome with a 30 pounds of gear
> or 15 pounds of gear?  I guess it depends on what you plan to do at
> the top of Half Dome.  On a day with good weather when you're just
> going to turn around and go back to camp in time for dinner, it's a no
> brainer.  It's also a no brainer to reach the opposite conclusion if
> I'm planning to have an elaborate picnic and possibly stay the night.
> For me I ride my Hilsen when it makes sense to ride my Hilsen, and my
> MCRB when it makes sense to ride my MCRB.  I love them both for
> different reasons.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Reply via email to