Bike Share Bikes Seized In Shanghai

Drivers here in NYC all complain about parking, or the lack thereof.  

Some, it seems, simply don't drive their cars for that very reason.  Or, at least, I came to believe that after seeing cars parked in the same spot for months at a time.  I still recall the Cadillac Seville (the model with the slanted rear end) I saw parked on a Washington Heights street when I moved into the neighborhood. It was still in the exact same spot seven years later!

I've often heard that you "don't have to worry about parking" if you ride your bike to work or school, or for errands.  That's somewhat true:  It's certainly easier to park two motorless wheels than four turbo-powered ones.  Still, there have been times I wasn't able to park my bike:  I arrived at an office, store or other place, only to find that other cyclists had already locked their steeds the signposts, parking meters and other structures to which bicycles could be secured.

Apparently, in China, cyclists have an even harder time parking their bikes.  Residents of Shanghai have complained about that:  They say they can't find places to leave their own bicycles or electric bicycles because parking spaces designated for them are taken by...other cyclists.  

So far, that doesn't sound like much of an emergency.  At least, most people wouldn't see it that way.  The bikes parked in designated spots, however, are taken up with bicycles from bike-sharing programs.  

In Shanghai, there are hundreds of thousands of such bikes. People who use them leave them, not only in the designated spaces for residents' bikes and electric bikes, but also on the streets.  Sometimes they block traffic, especially in older areas of the city, where streets are as narrow as three meters.

So, city authorities have picked up about 4000 illegally-parked bikes--most of them owned by bike-share operator Mobike--and penned up in a public parking area.

Mobike, for its part, says it will cooperate with authorities, in part by paying a management fee to help with the problem.

Into The Rain, In The Pink

Fog dissipated as I rode across the RFK Bridge this morning on my way to work.

The rest of the day has been overcast, if unseasonably warm.  Rain was promised for late in the day; I will probably pedal home in it.

My philosophy about raingear was best summed up by Robert Browning:  Less is more.   When it's warm, I simply wear as little as possible.  When it's a bit cooler, I try to keep at least my extremities dry.  I've learned I have a choice of getting wet from outside or within:  If I am uncovered, I will get drenched in the rain, but if I cover myself up, I'll bathe in my own sweat even when I'm wearing "breathable" raingear.

Now, if I want to be stylish, of course, I'll ride with an umbrella.  Believe it or not, it's something I've actually done:  umbrella in one hand, handlebar in the other.  I also saw it done in England and France.  Of course, pedaling with your parapluie in one hand is best done at slow speeds in places with light vehicular traffic.

But since riding with an umbrella is about style--or, at least, fashion--one's color choices are important.  

Thanks to "Sancycles" of Malabon, Philippines for that image.

A Royal Family Goes Dutch

When people think of "cycling nations", one of the first that comes to mind is the Netherlands.

Indeed, in a country of 16 million inhabitants, there are 18 million bikes.  More important, though, are Dutch attitudes about cycling.  Someone who rides to work or for pleasure is not seen as an outlier or renegade:  Even Prime Minister Mark Rutte rides to work.  Hmm...What kind of a country would the US be if our President rode to his office every day?

Oh, but it gets even better.  You see, although the Dutch royal family--like its counterparts in the UK, Denmark and other European countries--has little actual power, it is still seen as a "face" of the nation.  Their day-to-day activities help to form the image their subjects have of their nation, and the image that nation projects to the world.



So it's no surprise that King Willem-Alexander, who has occupied the throne for nearly four years, cycles--as a Cycling NL video notes, "not only for the annual so-called photo opportunities, but also in private."  He is regularly accompanied by his Argentinian wife--Queen Maxima Zorreguieta-- and their daughters.

It's also not surprising that he inherited his love of cycling from his family.  His mother, Queen Beatrix, did not cycle much while she was queen, but did enough riding before that to warrant a statue of her astride a bike in the Dutch capital. 

 Her mother, Queen Juliana--one of the best-loved monarchs in Dutch history--was an avid cyclist throughout her life.  Here we see her during a visit to the Frisian Islands in 1967:


It's widely reported that her entourage didn't ride behind her merely for appearances or out of courtesy:  the Queen actually could, and did, out-ride all of those men!

On The Streets And The Silkroad

Today I will start with a quiz.

Take a look at this bike:

Now check out this:

What do they have in common?

Now, if you know anything about either of these bikes, you might think it's absolute heresy to posit that they might share any trait besides two wheels.  The first machine, a Schwinn Clairmont, can be purchased in Wal-Mart and other fine stores. ;-)  

The second, on the other hand, is a Silkroad from Tout Terrain.  Somehow I don't expect to see it parked on a street near me, or anywhere else.

So what trait could such disparate bikes share?

Believe it or not, it's in the frame!

All right, I'll tell you:  They both have rear racks that are integral to their frames.  In other words, you can't remove them.

Such an arrangement has been uncommon for a long time.  Interestingly, even it was more common, it was found on bikes at the top and bottom of the price spectrum.  

Once upon a time, British and French custom builders made frames of which the rear carrier--intended to lug loaded panniers and other items for long tours--were constructed as part of the frame.  Of course, those were special-order items and customers would wait months, or even years, for theirs. 

I recall seeing a Jack Taylor tandem and Rene Herse single built in this way.  I tried finding photos of bikes like them, to no avail.  

You won't find such an integrated carrier/frame on anything but a bike dedicated to loaded touring, even from the elite builders I've mentioned.  I'm not sure that any of today's builders construct bikes in that way:  It is an extremely labor-intensive process, and if the height of a stay is off even by a little, the carrier--and possibly the frame--will be misaligned.  

Also, the market for fully-loaded tourers---even during the peak of their popularity (at least here in the US) during the early- and mid-1980s--has always been small.  Not many people want a bike that is so purpose-specific:  Few cyclists go on more than one long tour in their lives.  Most cyclists, understandably, would rather press their racing or trekking bike into touring service and remove the racks and bags once the tour is over.

Of course, loaded touring is not the only purpose for which an integrated rack is useful.  They also make a lot of sense on cargo bikes, or even city bikes that are abused.  I think those purposes are the ones Tout Terrain had in mind when they designed the Silkroad and other models.  

But you have to wonder for what purpose--other than big-box store sales--the Schwinn Clairmont was designed. Perhaps it is meant to evoke balloon-tired kids' bikes sold in the US during the 1940s and 1950s, some of which came with built-in racks.  The funny thing is that on such bikes--from the likes of Columbia, AMF and other low-budget manufacturers--the rear racks were seldom used to carry books, sneakers or anything else besides other kids.

If anyone from Tout Terrain (or Peter White, who seems to be their main dealer here in the US) is reading this, I hope you are not offended by my comparison.  I simply find it ironic that your bikes can have something in common with a bike that just might disintegrate in the very spot where I saw and photographed it (with my cell phone) today--or end up in a landfill in a year or two.

What To Ride On The Streets

It's expensive to live here in New York.  Maybe not London-expensive or Tokyo-expensive, but plenty expensive nonetheless. Probably the only US city where it costs more simply to let the force of gravity hold you in place is San Francisco.

Still, even with our high housing costs and such, there are ways to have a good time for little or no money. Sure, it costs more to go to the movies in The Big Apple than it costs anywhere else.  And it's long been rumored that one needs a winning lottery ticket in order to buy a ticket to a Broadway show.  

But why would you want to spend your money to see 42nd Street?  That's for tourists, as we're fond of saying.  And you didn't move here to go to the movies, now, did you?

There are all kinds of other entertainments available.  Some include poetry readings, art openings and concerts in small spaces.  And you can even get into most museums for little or no cash--as long as the admission price is "suggested" or a donation.  Of course, if you're a student with a valid ID card, you can get into a lot of places for free or not much.

(Once, years ago, I was dating a woman from Italy.  I made it a point of showing her some of our fair city's cultural treasures. One day we went to the American Museum of Folk Art.  I got us both in for free when I told the young man and woman at the counter that we were both students:  I was teaching her English and she was teaching me Italian.)

But the real entertainment in this city is found on its streets.  I guess you could say that about other large cities.  Here in New York, though, you can see things that you never imagined.  Then there are the performers.  The best, to me, are the ones who don't have to rustle a hair on their heads to perform.  I have seen folks made up and costumed as various public statues and other structures, and their ruse wasn't apparent until they passed their donation cups!

Better yet are people who can stand, sit or lie beside street signs and other markers:

I'd put money in that guy's donation cup!

Spring Fever---Now?

So...Yesterday I experienced a change of seasons--or, perhaps, climates (all right, weather) while riding my bike across a bridge.

Today I didn't experience anything like that.  I did, however, see driving habits change.  Or so it seemed.

My ride took me down Hipster Hook into Brooklyn--DUMBO, to be exact.  After stopping at Recycle a Bicycle, I pedaled up through some central Brooklyn neighborhoods up to the other end of my neighborhood and the north shore of Queens.  

It seemed that everywhere I rode--even through the quietest residential areas--I saw more traffic.  Not only that, it seemed that teenagers of all ages had taken over the roads.  They were sideswiping each other, swooping as close to pedestrians trying to cross streets and honking their horns for no apparent reason.  In short, they were driving like kids who'd just gotten their licenses--or who were going to the beach on the day after they graduated.

At least they keep their eyes on the road!

Or, perhaps, they were driving under the influence of Spring Fever.  Even though the season doesn't officially arrive for almost another month, today felt like the first Saturday of spring.  In the very young--again, of all ages--the first wave of warmth and sunshine seems to stir up their hormones or shake their brains.  

In a way, seeing their behavior was kind of funny.  (I guess I can say that because I didn't, thankfully, have any close encounters with any of them.)  Why?  Well, this evening a storm brought us wind, hard rain and, in some places, hail.  As I write this, the temperature has dropped considerably from its earlier highs, and is expected to fall further.  Tomorrow, the weather is supposed to be more or less seasonal, which will seem almost polar compared to what we've experienced during the past few days.

I have to wonder whether those drivers I saw today will calm down--or return to hibernation.

No, The Chinese Aren't Responsible For Climate Change. I Am: I Took A Ride Today!

It was spring-- almost summer, really--until I crossed the bridge.

In past years, I have noticed a seasonal change when I rode across the Cross Bay Veterans' Memorial Bridge.  To be specific, when I'd be riding through Broad Channel--a shoestring of land dangling from the "mainland' of Queens--the temperature is about 20 to 22 degrees Celsius (68 to 72F) and I would feel the sun against my face.  That is, until I reached the Bridge, which spans Jamaica Bay.  While riding up the ramp to the bridge, the wind would whip waves on the water and I would feel the cold through whatever I was wearing.  By the time I got to the Rockaways--another shoestring of land, this one splayed between the Bay and the Atlantic Ocean--the temperature would have fallen to about 10 degrees C (50F) but it would feel much colder.

I usually experience such momentary climate change in early or mid-April, when the ocean water might be about 8 degrees C (45F).  But I had such an experience today.  It was 64F (17C) when I left my apartment just before noon; the temperature would climb another few degrees by the time I reached Broad Channel.  But, as I crossed the bridge, I was glad I'd brought an "extra" layer with me. (Is something "extra" when you end up needing it?)  A thermometer in Rockaway Beach read 50F, but the wind--which I didn't notice until then--blew the cold from the very depths of the ocean.  According to at least one source, the water was 41F (just over 5C) today.  During the next few weeks, that temperature will fall by another couple of degrees to its seasonal low, which it reaches at the beginning of Spring.

I imagine that the water at Point Lookout, my destination today, was a little warmer, if only by a degree or two.  Knowing that, I understand why down is such an effective insulator!

Anyway, I had a great ride:  I saw a few other cyclists and joggers along the boardwalk and on the streets of Long Beach.  As best as I could tell, they weren't wearing down.

His Stance On Discs

Nearly two years ago, a driver in China narrowly missed death when a runaway circular saw blade impaled the front of his car.

I was reminded of that today after reading about what happened to Owain Doull.

The Sky Team rider crashed with one kilometre remaining in the opening stage of the Abu Dabhi Tour.  Normally, that wouldn't elicit much attention--riders crash during races all the time.  What is causing controversy, though, is an injury he suffered and, more important, what he believes to be the cause.

When he was being treated for road rash on his back side, he pointed to his foot and showed a cut that was visible through a tear in his sock.  

It's unusual, to say the least, for  riders to incur that sort of cut on their feet.  Even if they are wearing flip-flops, they are unlikely to incur more than some scrapes, painful as those wounds may be. 

So what could have cut through Doull's shoe and caused such a wound?  He says that it was the rotor of a disc brake.  "If anything, I've come off lucky here," he said.  "If that'd been my leg, it would have cut straight through it, for sure."

In other words, by a dint of fate, he narrowly avoided--at the very least--the kind of injury Francisco Ventoso suffered last year in the Paris-Roubaix race.  The directeur sportif of Movistar, Ventoso's team, said "The cut was so deep you could see the tibia."

That mishap led to a temporary ban on disc brakes in the peloton, which was recently lifted "on a trial basis" according to the sport's governing body, the Union Cycliste Internationale.  Disc brakes were allowed on the condition that the rotors' edges were rounded off. Marcel Kittel, the only rider using disc brakes in the Abu Dabhi tour, was using rounded Shimano rotors after insisting he wouldn't use technology otherwise.

Doull was asked whether he has a stance on disc brakes.  "I do now," he said.  "In my opinion, unless there are covers on those things, they're pretty lethal."

Others have expressed the opinion that "everybody or nobody" should use them in a race.  Whatever one thinks of disc brakes (I have never used them myself, and probably won't unless some compelling reason presents itself.), I think it's fair to ask why Kittel or anyone else saw the need to use them in pancake-flat Abu Dabhi.

Rubber Matches Leather?

Almost two years ago, I wrote about one of the funniest listings I've ever seen on eBay, or anywhere.  It expresses the seller's loathing for the saddle he or she was trying to sell:  a Brooks Cambium C15.

Now, I am not going to offer an opinion on it, or the C17, as I have never tried either.  I probably won't (unless someone offers me one for free), as I am satisfied with the Brooks saddles I have (Professionals and B17s) and don't want to change.

The idea behind Cambium saddles is, however, intriguing--and not new.  For one thing, Cambiums are certainly not the first saddles to come with canvas tops, though, when they were introduced a couple of years ago, they might have been the first such saddles in half a century or so.

More important, however, is what lies underneath that cloth covering:  a vulcanized rubber base.  That, too, is something that most cyclists who aren't collecting Social Security haven't seen before.  Rubber in a bike seat?  

Turns out, it was once fairly common, or at least not unusual. (Fifty shades of equivocation?)  I was reminded of that when I came across this:

Cyclists of a certain age will recall the name Wolber.  Until the '80's or thereabouts, it was the chief rival of Michelin in the world of bicycle tires.  In fact, to many cyclists, Wolber was even more highly regarded, as they made a more extensive line of tubular tires, which included one of the nicest pairs of tubulars I ever owned and rode. (I can't remember the model name.)  They also improved upon Michelin's "Elan", widely considered to be the first high-performance clincher.

So it's fair to assume that Wolber knew a thing or two about making things from rubber.  The saddle in the above photo was made by Ideale, the premiere French saddle-maker, from a "skin" Wolber fabricated.  The undercarriage appears to be the one used on the Ideale B6, which is remarkably similar to the Brooks B72:  the saddle that came with many classic English three-speed bikes.

A B6/B72 with a rubber top actually makes sense, at least in theory, for commuters and others who ride or park their bikes in the rain.  I wonder how long those saddles lasted.


Perhaps it's not surprising that another leading bicycle-tire maker of the time also made bicycle saddles, or at least the tops for them:

I don't know whether Dunlop made the carriages for their saddles, or whether--as  is apparently the case with Wolber saddles--they were made by a company that made leather saddles.  

Interestingly, Raleigh bicycles came with Dunlop tires, which were considered to be the finest quality (Riders did everything they could to extend the life of those tires!), until Dunlop stopped making bicycle tires in the late 1960s. To my knowledge, however, those same Raleigh bicycles were not equipped with Dunlop saddles:  Instead, they came with B72s or other Brooks models.  

Like the Cambiums, the Wolber/Ideale and Dunlop saddles were constructed of a rubber base layer topped with cloth that was treated with a rubber compound for waterproofing. The Cambium looks more cloth-like than the others--a conscious decision, I am sure, on the company's part.  The Wolber/Ideale has a textured appearance that makes me think of a cross between carbon fiber and leather, while the Dunlop looks like leather, at least from a few feet away.

Although Dunlop hasn't made bicycle tires in nearly half a century, they continue to make tires for motorized vehicles as well as other rubber products.  In the late '80s, Wolber absorbed Super Champion, then the best rim-maker in France (or anywhere else) with the exception of Mavic. (For a few years, Super Champion rims were marketed under the Wolber name.)  Then, a few years later, Michelin took over Wolber!

Did This Idea Ever Fly?

We have all felt, at least once, that we were "flying" while riding our bicycles.

In a sense, it always feels that way because we're not surrounded by walls or sheets of steel.  More often, though, when we say that we were, or felt as if we were, "flying", we mean that the ride was fast and effortless:  We were feeling good and spinning our gears while the wind pushed at our backs.

Most of us don't mean that we were literally aloft.  However, a few cyclists have gotten their wheels off the ground.  And I'm not talking about the kid on E.T.!

Nearly half a century before one of the world's favorite movies came out, a French inventor came up with this:

In the November 1936 issue of Popular Science, it was described thusly:

PROPELLER DRIVES NOVEL BICYCLE

A whirling, three-bladed propeller provides the motive power for a bicycle of odd design recently exhibited in Paris by a French inventor. Mounted at the front, the propeller is attached to a driving rod in a gear box supported over the front wheel by a metal frame. The gear mechanism is connected by a chain to the conventional bicycle sprocket wheel, which is pedaled in the usual manner. An extremely high gear ratio, it is said, enables the cyclist to drive the propeller at high speed. A hand lever is used to operate a rear-wheel brake, as in ordinary European bicycles.

As a cyclist who came of age during the 1970s--in the twilight of that decade's Bike Boom--I find the last sentence particularly fascinating.  I'm guessing that in 1936, most Americans had never seen or ridden a bike with a hand brake:  Most American bikes at that time were made for kids and had coaster brakes.  

I wonder whether that bike got off the ground, literally and figuratively.