BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

Where to start? My biking history is very similar to Karl's (though I'm a bit younger). So I sort of understand where he's coming from, but I think he's being a bit harsh.

The first issue is which end of the shopping strip did this happen? If at the east end then the behavior was totally appropriate: they were cycling into a tricky stretch, with unpredictable traffic. Actually, cars shouldn't even be going much faster than bike speeds through there.

If at the west end, I don't know. There's actually plenty of room for bikes, though the pavement is not so great.

If I may speculate, Karl's real problem is likely the very short light at the east end; this means that you (in a car) end up waiting multiple cycles to get across. This is frustrating. I can imagine that seeing some cyclists zoom by would be really irritating. (The light is short because you're meant to drive around the circle, not straight through. Now that the city is trying to repair the urban planning disaster that's blighted the area, it should really fix the light timing.)

By the way, cycling up in between lanes in stalled traffic, or even down the yellow line, should be perfectly acceptable bike behavior. Of course, don't be stupid: know how to handle your bike and be extra alert, but otherwise, what's the problem? (While you're at it, make sure you're not one of those douches who rides on the sidewalk.)

Finally, about sartorial styles. I have to say I sort of agree. Back in the old days bikers more or less wore normal sports clothes. Back then bikers in lycra getups were very serious people; they were always out training and they all seemed belong to some racing club or other. Times sure have changed. Yes, I know, it's more comfortable, yadda yadda, and even practical, like shorts with gel inserts. But really, people, all it does is exacerbate the us/them problem.

Finally, about sartorial styles. I have to say I sort of agree. Back in the old days bikers more or less wore normal sports clothes. Back then bikers in lycra getups were very serious people; they were always out training and they all seemed belong to some racing club or other. Times sure have changed. Yes, I know, it's more comfortable, yadda yadda, and even practical, like shorts with gel inserts. But really, people, all it does is exacerbate the us/them problem.

Rivendell's Grant Petersen makes a similar assertion.

I think there's something to be said for specialized clothing making the sport seem unapproachable, as in "I have to buy a buy and shiny clothes?" Specialized clothing has its place, for sure, but for commuting, especially, I've made it a point to wear regular clothes.

so, when bicycles get in the way of cars they're being "childish and egotistical" - yet when cars get in the way of bicycles, god forbid they pass the cars...

it's just a typical dumb driver rant, with some crotchety "kids these days and their fancy spandex" crap mixed in. "i ride a bike" is just a cheap ploy to try to buy some legitimacy.

fwiw, i haven't observed any correlation between the way cyclists dress and how they behave...

i was reading his description and thinking about TIE fighters, seemed pretty awesome, i don't know what he was whining about... if only they had lasers and were protecting him from something

i would speculate that his claim to riding many city miles is a bit of an exaggeration. anyone with a reasonable amount of commuting experience knows there are times that cyclists should take the lane for their own safety. maybe it was different forty years ago, but these days it has been my experience that cyclists who push themselves off to the curb or door zone at every opportunity often invite cars to pass them when there isn't enough room to do it safely. many motorists will try to pass if you give them just a foot of clearance. if that's all the room you have to give them, this is clearly an unsafe situation, especially in pittsburgh with its hills. and that's just one example when it's appropriate to take the full lane.

regarding special clothing for riding a bike, i think there are definitely a class of cyclists who prefer the part-of-the-club feel it gives them to wear spandex and ride a carbon fiber bike. i also see a backlash trend gaining strength, and i believe that the more people there are riding bikes, the more different styles we'll see, and less important this discussion will be.

personally, i'm on the bike these days, unless it's just a quick grocery trip, i almost always wear bike shorts. especially in the summer, the comfort difference is just too great. then again, i usually wear cargo shorts over them just so i can look like a normal person and not feel naked if i'm meeting someone for lunch or something. it's just a personal choice, yeah?

the only time i tut-tut is when i see people wearing pants that'll get caught in their chain (especially when this causes them to bump into me and mess up my pannier! i kid, i kid).

this is actually about me. if only this would have been a missed connection i could be excited about this.

ps.

yes, my taint is feeling very stylish after my 6 hours in the saddle today, thank you very much. it actually helped to not exacerbate another us/them problem that can occur.

As a Big Fat Guy on a bike, the only statement I'm making with my clothes is "padded shorts keep my crotch from hurting."

Eh, wacky old guy rant. Seems like he's weakly trying to get a rise out of someone or maybe just commiserate, sort of a Seinfeld style "and what's up with that airline food, huh?".

Kind of seems like he's saying that racerboys aren't courteous in traffic and people on junkers are? Again, eh.

Andy Rooney! He's trying to do an Andy Rooney rant.

My dog is chewing on her chew toy right now, she does it every night before we all fall asleep. I sometimes wonder if she thinks about the sort of synchopated rythm she makes with the squeaker. I think my dog is better at chewing than this guy is at whatever he's trying to get up to.

i second my TIE fighter stance now knowing the riders

who fucking cares what this whining clown has to say. <-(not a question.)

many motorists will try to pass if you give them just a foot of clearance.

I've noticed a new (new to me) trend: opposing traffic having to yield to the traffic passing you because they're halfway into the opposing traffic's lane.

I see it in construction zones, too. People just don't want to slow down...

Had an observation of a cyclist recently that only now seems relevant. Was driving (sorry - need to for work) Negley between Penn and Stanton. The lights there always catch lots of traffic, and it was pretty busy, so it was basically light to light.

A cyclist dressed in "the style" (I love that. I'm gonna start using that more often) on what looked like a pretty serious road bike rolled up, stopped for the light, took a sip of water, waited for the light to change, and then proceeded when it did.

He did the same at ELB and at Stanton. He took a lane, kept with traffic. It was perfectly sane and safe.

While I have no doubt Mr. Karl witnessed what was to him inappropriate behavior by cyclists, we have all witnessed B.S. behavior by motorists as well. People (in cars* and on bikes alike) are prone to doing stupid sh*t from time to time. However, to characterize all "in style" cyclists as negligent, etc., makes about as much sense as labelling all dudes driving trucks as homocidal maniacs (disclosure: i'm a dude who drives a truck).

*(And I will pre-emptively concede the point here that motorists who do stupid sh*t are more likely to leaving dead people in their wake.)

The speed limit is 25 mph in the whole area concerned. Sounds like this group could easily have gotten up to that speed on flat terrain such as is found in East Liberty. Let's also note that he's not complaining about all the cars that were backed up at the light before the cyclists passed through. Clearly it wasn't the cyclists who were really slowing down traffic all that much. In any case, going "well below" 25 in a dense commercial/pedestrian area isn't such a crazy idea.

This guy does realize that a speed "limit" is supposed to be an upper, not lower, limit, right?

Guy rants about bikes in long winded email that makes little sense while trying to impress with his writing. Some people care; the rest of us don't.

You kids get off my lawn.

After re-reading this for some reason, are people sure it's not a poor try at humor?

I particularly enjoy the parts where he is angry that cyclists went through a green light, and when he insists that a speed limit is instead a posted fixed speed that every road user must travel.

It's awful ironic how common sense commonly isn't.

Ha! I'm old and sometimes I ride my bike with the kids on people's lawns in my neighborhood. Sometimes I try tricks in my own lawn and crash. I think it confuses people the way I don't respect lawns.

I am succumbing to an overwhelming urge to be completely random with this thread. Tie fighters?

"I have never seen someone riding a mountain bike, beach bike or junker that has appeared

to exhibit bad road etiquette"

i dont want to make a blanket statement, but i find that some of the worst and most dangerous cyclists ride these types of bikes. sidewalk riders, crack heads, scared young professionals...

dont get me wrong, just cause you ride one of the aforementioned bikes doesnt make you a bad cyclist (i own a hybrid, mtb, and junker cruiser), but i find that people who are new to cycling or just oblivious to the road gravitate toward these types of bikes for whatever reason. you dont see a lot of Felts on the sidewalk, amiright?

on second thought, maybe his idea of good road etiquette is staying on the sidewalk or staying in boyce park

ok... so imagine you're in your vehicle... in space... and SCREAMING DOWN THE DOUBLE YELLOW comes this tightly grouped pack of highly stylized bikers from the future, they have the force on their side so obviously the light changes exactly when they get to it (almost like they ARE controlling the roads) and the change from red to green was a signal to get into attack formation so they immediately fan out to dominate the superior front position, except apparently they are more like bombers because even though they are coming down a hill to a flat they somehow don't make the 25 mph speed limit by a long shot... something tells me some of this guys facts are wrong... if only he would have said that they hit warp speed and disappeared shortly after the light it would have made my story better.

i hit warp speed the other day. i ended up ten seconds in the past and had to reride the block again. so annoying!

you should probably get to the toshi station to pick up some power converters...

my flux capacitor is kinda iffy today

If I imagine I'm in my vehicle in space, the old guy in front of me has had his left blinker on for, like, a parsec.

hahaha @ edmonds

I intended warp speed, f-ed up, went straight to plaid.

Anyone else notice that he mentions riding "a lot of miles" on highways?

and he can easily do 20 miles. whoa dude, whoa

20 miles uphill both ways! IN THE SNOW.

damn whippersnappers. no respect, no respect.

I posted as my Facebook status on Saturday that I got chewed out at a light because I was only driving 25 ... in a 25 zone! In my car! This was on Bascom on the NSide, between the sharp curve at Benton and the top at Perrysville.

I fear that motorists' sense of entitlement that we often refer to on this board also extends to that "Speed Limit X" sign referring to a minimum speed. Contrast that with many cyclists I know who, like me, tend to drive at *or below* the posted limit, especially in situations where a lot of cyclists tend to be.

I wore the cargo shorts/T-shirt style this am and ran some stop signs just to help equalize the unfair bias against roadies.

I'm also curious at which point cycling becomes "serious" enough to warrant wearing some sort of moisture wicking upper body garment? 10 mi commute? A few hours of hill intervals? A 50 mi spin?

@stu: The other day I was driving, stopped at a stop sign that also had a crosswalk. A woman was using the crosswalk, making her way across the street, so I'm waiting for her. A delightful driver pulled up behind me and started laying on his horn. This was while she was *directly* in front of my car. ooooo. I gave him an earful. Something about "so you want me to run her over so you can get where you're going a minute sooner? really?" and some expletives in there that don't really make it a better story. People amaze me, almost every day.

(In retrospect, it might seem strange that I'm directing this at you. I guess somewhere in my head I associate people who get riled by drivers who aren't speeding with people who can't tolerate my not running down a pedestrian for their convenience.)

I wear a merino wool t-shirt when I commute, and that is easily swapped out in my cube. It does, however, just look like a plain ol' black t-shirt.

My reason for wearing "normal clothes" as much as possible has nothing to do with how I ride (or how people in lycra ride). It is a way to show folks, particularly in my office, that they don't need to buy special clothes to ride their bikes to work. Certainly, technical clothing has its advantages, but people shouldn't feel it necessary to drop more money on kit just to go to the office.

if yins want to get angry about bike etiquette, watch this: http://prollyisnotprobably.com/2010/06/lucas_brunelle_line_of_sight.php

I only wear my tie fighter pilot uniform to the office when I'm doing an early am training ride, which is about 1x per week. The rest of the time, I just wear a tshirt & cargo shorts, at least when it's hot & not raining. For the wet stuff, I have some good scuba gear. You know how hard it is to find clipless flippers??

In my office at least, my choice of attire isn't going to affect anyone's decision to commute either way. Either they do or do not... mostly do not. It has less to do with attire than it does with fear, laziness, or distance that they need to cover on the way in.

did you see all those guys wearing their spandex and whatnot?! those crazy roadies

That lucas brunele shit is worse than sport bike squid videos doing 100 mph wheelies on public streets. And of course the wannabe messenger crowd laps it up.

In my office at least, my choice of attire isn't going to affect anyone's decision to commute either way. Either they do or do not... mostly do not. It has less to do with attire than it does with fear, laziness, or distance that they need to cover on the way in.

Maybe, but I bet "I don't want to buy/wear weird clothes" might be near the top of their list of excuses....

You know how hard it is to find clipless flippers??

*splatters coffee on PC screen*

this is not the thread you're looking for.

That Lucas Brunele stuff is CRAZY, I have watched alot of his videos.

i saw this on the listserv and decided it was totally useless to engage him. So far, so has everyone else on the listserv, at least a nother post hasnt come up yet. I hope it stays that way.

hm, those "wannabe messengers" sure seem to have about a thousand times more control of their bikes than some of the "tie fighters" i've seen riding around in the door zone 25mph on their carbon fiber everything bike and passing cars on the right at intersections.

maybe they are the same people.

i hope tie fighters becomes accepted nomenclature for serious road bikes

When I hear "tie fighter" in reference to bikes, I think dude in a three-piece commuting to work.

lol

i was thinking more of dudes wearing madmax getup, etc, who were fighting against the dudes with ties.

And I'm sure the dudes pulling 100 mph wheelies have more skillz than I do on my motorcycle. Doesn't make what they are doing any more excusable or less douchy.

doing 100 mile per hour wheelies on my bike is a right not a privilege.

This is what the signs look like in Ireland when they are restricting 5-axle trucks. Made me laugh.



Which is to say, this is what signs look like in Ireland when they want no more than 4 of these in-style roadies in formation at a time. Friggin TIE Fighters.

Wow, is very nearly "No Fireball XL5"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBZN3c7O9wc

@unixd0rk - I was a triangle messenger in the late 80's / early 90's, now I ride on some carbon, generally in tie fighter gear for anything over 10 mi. 2000 road & city miles so far this year with no incidents, so I have some control & street smarts. Plus, I also know unix. Is there a fitting stereotype for me, or am I atypical?

That's it. I'm buying me a Surly Big Dummy and naming it the Death Star.

@JZ - If you want to name something the Death Star, you must run Endomorphs.

@bjanaszek

"Maybe, but I bet "I don't want to buy/wear weird clothes" might be near the top of their list of excuses...."

The last several times I talked to somebody about commuting, their list of excuses has been pretty long. We cannot get rid of hills, hot weather, cold weather, rainy weather, cars on the road, and their laziness in general.

I have a 28 mile round trip commute, wear lycra, and have what a lot of people would consider a junker hybrid.

I think commuting to work and being drenched with sweat (as a first time commuter) would be more of a disincentive than it would be to invest some money in a jersey and shorts and bring a change of clothes.

This clothing thread has gotten pretty long and tangled (so to speak).

If you dress funny people will treat you different. If you're ok with that, that's fine. There's room for everyone.

If you're even somewhat into bike advocacy then you might consider how you come across to other people and how you want them to think about biking. In this time and place you want them to think "hey, I can do that, those people that look just like me are doing it".

So, in the morning, when you're standing there in front of your closet deciding what to wear, ask yourself: will those shorts and a t-shirt work ok? Or is today the day I'm going for that brevet and really do need to dress the part?

@quizbot we prolly know lots of the same peeps. i am not a messenger, but i am a drunken asshole sometimes when i'm not on my bike. i'm pretty sure you aren't the awsm bike guy passing cars on the right thru intersections and wondering why the guy without his turn signal on is suddenly showing you a close up of the passenger side of his car even though you spent lots of money on your bike.

i wear a shorts and a t-shirt every day, btw. i commute 10+ miles a day with a 20 tooth front chainring on a 26" trials bike. i'm thinking about getting a power tap and some zips.

that 5x tie fighter logo is amazing.

I think commuting to work and being drenched with sweat (as a first time commuter) would be more of a disincentive than it would be to invest some money in a jersey and shorts and bring a change of clothes.

True. But not everyone has a 28 mile round trip commute. There are plenty of folks in my office that live within 5 miles. They are the low hanging fruit, as it were. And what about running errands to the store a mile from your home? Some people think you need special clothes anytime you are on a bike (and many shops/media would like you to think that, too).

Just to practice what I preach, I commuted from Morningside to Sewickley for about three months (40 miles, round trip) in regular clothes (aside from a shirt change).

Then again, perhaps I'm trying to channel Grant Peterson a bit too much.

I read Grant Peterson once where he said that Crocs are the perfect cycle touring footwear. That's about where I lost him.

hunh.

All this time I never realized I was dressed inappropriately. I mined my closet to find biking clothes, depending on distance/destination they were formerly "Painting Clothes" on up to "Casual". But I'm cheap.

I'm supposed to dress like the racing guys? Next you'll be telling me I'm supposed to get those shoes that get stuck to the pedals so I have to Bike Dance at redlights and sound funny when I walk down the hall. Yinz guys are crazy.

I just figured that was a different kind of cyclist than me. Like the guys that rub their Transvettes with diapers and have chrome radio buttons are a different kind of car driver (I'm more the "but rain is like a FREE carwash without any effort!" kind)

Bike Dance. I love it.

I think most cyclists approach the activity with skepticism of all the different "special" clothing. At least I did. I slowly tried them out, one by one, padded shorts, clipless pedals, rain gear, straps to keep my pants out of the chain, etc. They all have their benefits, but none of them are required to pedal a bike. Think of them like moonroof, AC, heated seats, intermittent speed wipers, and power windows in your car, rather than chrome knobs and such. You don't need any of them to make your car go from one place to another, but they actually have a functional benefit, rather than just looking like a silly waste of money.

When I bike around town, I never change clothing. I do use the shoes that stick to my pedals though. Makes hopping over potholes and going up hills way easier, but thats for another thread. It is all about personal preference, cost and comfort.

dwillen - I know the sticky shoes have a purpose (other than for Bike Dancing, which I seriously used to think that's what they were for), but I honestly couldn't think of anything comparable that served a fancy purpose in a car... like intermittent wipers. I have a car with all that flash (4th hand - cheap to me!) and still couldn't think of it, so I described the drivers instead. I love analogies - I'm just bad at them

I would compare them to more horse power and anti-lock brakes myself.

im sorry i missed something in this thread? are we now criticizing members of our community who ride bikes but are different from us? I guess I have to sift through all the responses.

i think close toed sandals probably are the perfect cycle touring footwear

I think cycling clothing is more like power steering. I mean, I guess technically you don't NEED power steering, but it is WAAY easier. I also wear regular clothing when I'm staying in the city. Maybe cargo shorts with a sleeveless wicking top.

I read Grant Peterson once where he said that Crocs are the perfect cycle touring footwear. That's about where I lost him.

I've read that before too. I guess they ARE really lightweight...

And Crocs dry immediately after a rain and don't carry an odor. My Keen closed toe sandals have been pretty awesome on my commutes but stay wet longer and get smelly.

I love my crocs for, like, drinking, for those very reasons. But I like my sticky shoes for biking. I can't afford the 30% loss in power from not being able to pull up. Grant's just off the farm on that one.

if chacos were close toed i'd crown them king... i can see how crocs could be perfect for only biking, but i can get off my bike and do a 10 mile hike in my chacos without changing shoes, which I think gives them an edge... the also never stink and dry really quickly.

after criticizing me the first couple days for biking in sandals one of the guys who did my last bike tour with me was going into every bike store the last 4 days trying to find size 13 clipless sandals...

Can you wear sandals in space?

Clipless sandals: I'm still using a 4-year-old pair of Shimano SPD sandals. Yeah, the leather's a bit rotted, and the funk hidden under the straps is agitating for representation in Congress, but they just work so well for everyday cycling.

I thought what he meant was "Crocs are great for packing in your stuff to wear when you're done biking for the day"

GP;

"But what's the lower limit, shoeswise?

Proabably Crocs. Several people we know ride in them and prefer them to just about anything else. Before you think how ridiculous Crocs are, or how unsuitable for pedaling, consider that they're just contoured foam with enough resistance to offer support. They are not high shoe-craft, but with the right pedals beneath them, they do just fine for lots of riding, including long distance touring (we know people who prefer them to all others for just this purpose).

I recently got some fake Crocs, from Target. They cost $9.99 and weigh about 5 ounces a pair. My foot fits in them loosely with a wool sock, and when I flip the heelstrap out behind my heel, it doesn't even do any good, because my heel doesn't contact it.

I've been riding them lately and the grip is excellent, even better than Tevas. I timed a hillclimb that I do all the time, and my times are no different than with Tevas (or real cycling shoes, for that matter). The fit is loose, but it doesn't seem to matter. The comfort is out of this world. They work great with our Sneaker pedals, and on any ride that didn't involve dragging the bike up steep, loose trails (hiking with it), they're perfect.

The shoes you're used to may be the shoes you prefer, but they probably aren't the only ones that'll work for you."

I'm fully with a lot of his concepts, wool, steel frames, yadda yadda. But dude idolizes $200 Brooks saddles and then recommends wearing $10 rubber slippers on your feet? Clearly deep into "you kids get outta my yard" country.

I like crocs. I own two pair. I am pretty sure I'd walk my bike rather than try to ride in them though. I think they are the best cycling footwear if you have some big, smooth platform pedals, and are cruising along a boardwalk at 5 mph.

They weigh nothing though, so they are perfect to toss in your pannier and change out of those sticky shoes when you arrive at your destination. I keep a pair in my bike locker.

AFAICT there is essentially no proof clipless pedals are more efficient, but if you've seen a scientific study that proves otherwise, please post a link to it.

I think for most people (especially commuters riding in traffic) they're unnecessary, and I always hate to hear the stories about people falling due to not unclipping in time, especially when those stories involve me.

If you want to ride with clipless pedals, do it. They do have some advantages, and I still use mine - mostly on longer rides, rarely when riding around town.

OTOH, if you think you should use clipless because it will make you "more efficient" or it will make you more of a "real cyclist", that's a complete load of crap.

I had to look up what AFAICT meant. I will turn my internet card later today.

OTOH, if you think you should use clipless because it will make you "more efficient" or it will make you more of a "real cyclist", that's a complete load of crap.

Nah, only a partial load of crap, at least as regards efficiency. If one wishes to ride a 'bent with a high bottom bracket, some form of foot retention makes a great deal of sense, so you don't have to expend energy keeping your feet elevated. They tend to slide off the pedals due to gravity otherwise.

That said, "real cyclists" use whatever pedals they darn well please.

Peterson cites some study, I didn't check it, wouldn't buy it anyway. All I know is if I'm riding in tennies, jump to climb a hill, and I forget I'm not clipped in, my feet come off and my face bites the stem. That's pretty much all I need to know. I stand out of the saddle a lot, I almost never sit in the saddle and toodle along like I'm delivering cookies to me grandmum. I can't live without me clips.

If one wishes to ride a 'bent with a high bottom bracket, some form of foot retention makes a great deal of sense, so you don't have to expend energy keeping your feet elevated. They tend to slide off the pedals due to gravity otherwise.

Bah. When I rode the NJ brevet, there was a 'bent rider shod in bedroom slippers[1] with no foot retention. That route had some serious climbing, too (over 10,000 feet elevation gain over 120+ miles).

[1] No, I'm not kidding.

Ah, but bedroom slippers often come with grippy bottoms.

Oh, by the way, with regards to studies of clipless efficiency: the abstract of Electromyography in Cycling, with a whopping sample size of 4 participants, claims to have physically measured less electric activity in the muscles when using clipless pedals. That's the only study I've seen directly tied to efficiency, although there are others related to biomechanical stress factors that imply clipless helps reduce injury potential.

I don't know if its more efficient, but I sure like my feet not bouncing off the pedals. Climbing hills seems way easier when I can pull up and push down at the same time. Pretty neat to be able to bunny hop various obstacles too.

Never had problems unclipping when I need to. Even when I got hit by a car, I came unclipped at some point very early in the accident (since my bike ended up at least a good 50 feet from where I did). I've heard some horror stories though where if you get your front tire stuck in a grate or something you end up staying clipped in since you are being propelled forward in a completely straight line. That scares me a little.

Lack of foot retention doesn't seem to stop this guy from bunny hopping stuff.

GP actually concedes this, and then dismisses it:

"2. When you climb a super steep short hill, you actually can pull up on the upward-moving pedal for a few strokes, and doing so helps you turn over the other pedal (get it past 12:00 and into the power part of the stroke)."

Gee, I almost never run into super steep short hills around here.

Lack of foot retention doesn't seem to stop this guy from bunny hopping stuff. He doesn't have panniers filled with groceries

after riding clipless in the woods for a few years and in city traffic for well over a decade, i will tell you that you unclip instinctively before you even think about needing to do it. of the many many many times i've hurt myself on a bike i can only remember once when it was because i didnt clip out (forgot i was clipped in and fell over sideways attempting to lean against a tree in bavington)

I found this on the interwebs. Not sure how good the study is though.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the influence of different shoe-pedal interfaces and of an active pulling-up action during the upstroke phase on the pedalling technique. Eight elite cyclists (C) and seven non-cyclists (NC) performed three different bouts at 90 rev · min?1 and 60 % of their maximal aerobic power. They pedalled with single pedals (PED), with clipless pedals (CLIP) and with a pedal force feedback (CLIPFBACK) where subjects were asked to pull up on the pedal during the upstroke. There was no significant difference for pedalling effectiveness, net mechanical efficiency (NE) and muscular activity between PED and CLIP. When compared to CLIP, CLIPFBACK resulted in a significant increase in pedalling effectiveness during upstroke (86 % for C and 57 % NC, respectively), as well as higher biceps femoris and tibialis anterior muscle activity (p < 0.001). However, NE was significantly reduced (p < 0.008) with 9 % and 3.3 % reduction for C and NC, respectively. Consequently, shoe-pedal interface (PED vs. CLIP) did not significantly influence cycling technique during submaximal exercise. However, an active pulling-up action on the pedal during upstroke increased the pedalling effectiveness, while reducing net mechanical efficiency.

You certainly don't need foot retention for hopping. Trials and bmx never use such things.

Commuting? Nah. Even touring I don't use them, preferring clips and straps. But for aggressive or competitive riding clipless rules. Won't really mountain bike without them, as while I'm pretty proficient at riding platforms I still find myself bounding off of them at times and like the connection and feel that clipless provides.

Once you're used to them and over the hump of it becoming second nature you'll never fall over again.

You only "forget" you're clipped in if you sometimes ride platforms. I find they're most useful for hill climbing and fast acceleration. I do both on my commute.

If they weren't effective, I wouldn't be pulling out when I climb hills too hard.

edit: I think this is the key: Consequently, shoe-pedal interface (PED vs. CLIP) did not significantly influence cycling technique during submaximal exercise. In other words, if you're just toodlin' along, it don't make no difference.

Wow, it's almost like debating wheelsize or tire width.

I think that's it, I'm in such terrible shape, I blow right past "submaximal exercise" just throwing my leg over the bike.

Has anyone checked if the original guy from Highland Park has gotten any responses from his rant?

wow. i've never heard boys talk about shoes so much in all my life.

as for the HP rant, I haven't yet seen anything related to his email pass through the listserv.

meanwhile i'll keep my eyes out for footwear bargains to report

Wow, it's almost like debating wheelsize or tire width.

Except that everyone knows that 584mm wheels, with 42mm tires, are ideal.

Right?

@saltm513: SEXIST!

@bjanaszek: That depends on whether you are going by ETRTO or French sizing.

406 by 28, baby. Nothing better.

Anyone wanna discuss the best chain lube? I understand that boiling in the purest Tibetan beeswax is quite en vogue these days.

You really should support your LBS instead of buying that made-in-China crap online.

i like the direction this thread has taken

"Free Tibet! (With any purchase of China)"

make sure you take each link apart to properly lube them, though.

Maybe that's why I haven't been able to post a photo link, I'm not lubing them.

"When manipulating one's photos online, one should always use proper lubricant."

Nope, that's not going to sound good no matter how you phrase it.

Well, no worse than

"If they weren't effective, I wouldn't be pulling out when I climb hills too hard."

+5 to HiddenVariable for the Sheldon Brown reference