Slashdot Mirror


Biking @ 80 MPH

sadclown writes "Saturday marked the conclusion of the World Human Powered Speed Challenge in Battle Mountain Nevada. Canadian Sam Wittingham now holds the world record for human powered speed on land, 80.55 mph, on the Varna Diablo, a fully enclosed 60 pound recumbent bicycle. Other competitors included Matt Weaver, with his video-camera-navigated bike (no windows)the Kyle Edge, World (conventional bike) Sprint Champion Jason Queally, with his bike the Blue Yonder Challenge, designed by the formula one race car designer Reynard, and the UC Berkeley team, The Bearacuda, in which two riders pedal back to back. Wittingham's new record is nearly 8 mph more than his record last year. Hopefully some of the aerodynamic technology can be applied to commercially available vehicles (cars, maybe?)."

91 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by Bollie · · Score: 4, Funny

    No! Don't do it!

    Please, slashdotters, post everything in metric, except when dealing with nautical measurements (there's a good reason for a nautical mile!). Only America is still stuck with an archaic measurement system that requires more conversion factors than positive aspects to it..

    Think about it: the SI system is even used by American scientists! It pains me to see how everyhting is turned into pounds and ounces and how you have to grab a calculator to calculate how many inches in a mile.

    CowboyNeal, just think, at more than 2cm per inch, you'd be THAT MUCH TALLER and LONGER!

    Boycott Imperialist sites! Post in metric!

    1. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      the reason we use imperial is because it requires the users to be smarter than those of the metric system.

      Converting square inches into Acres takes MUCH MORE intelligence than mm^3 -> km^3.

      By practicing these conversions, we are constantly honing our math skills, while you lazy europeans (french) just relax in your afterglow of 1000mm=100cm=...0.001km and your tasty fine british wine and your superb french autos. LOL.

      And, for what it is worth, if you aren't smart enough to be able to figure it out, you're probably not smart enough to ride a bike either, so go back to your Big Wheel and wear your helmet to school...

      oh, and PS, should we have metric time & calendars? If Imperial measurements bug you, then you just must hate 3600 sec = 60 minutes = 1 hr = 1/24 day = 1/365 year (except leap) and so on...
      plus some months have 30 days, others 31, and one has either 28 or 29, depending....

      ...just get over it.

      The US is JUST DOMINANT ENOUGH to keep Imperial measurements around about as long as they want. Like it or not.

    2. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by psych031337 · · Score: 2
      Only America is still stuck with an archaic measurement system that requires more conversion factors than positive aspects to it..


      Keep in mind, IF there IS a really US-centric news site in the global village - then it must be /.
      --
      +++ath0
    3. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by psych031337 · · Score: 2
      your sig says:
      Troll or Flamebait -- Any comment on /. that is less than wildly enthusiastic about any Linux-related product.

      You forgot: Any comment that claims invention of the Internet as an US archievement and looks down on other countries because they supposedly are unable to manufacture ICs. Last time I checked www was a thing that came out Switzerland, last time I checked Siemens was still making ICs and last time I checked most major mass-produced ICs were made in the Far East.
      --
      +++ath0
    4. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by Ralph+Bearpark · · Score: 2
      I still order cheese in half-pound portions - I find it's just the right amount to last us a week

      You wouldn't notice much difference from 250g or 1/4 kg. (We're not talking rocket science here after all.)

      Regards, Ralph.

    5. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      Thats a lie. Canada isn't metric -- or imperial for that matter. Theres so much confusion between the two at the moment everything is time based.

      It's an hour to so and so's place. 15 minute walk to the beach, 10 second run to the finish line...

      Someday once the majority have been brought up metric (by schools) we'll start using it :) For now its strictly signs -- not the population.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    6. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by Malc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "The US is JUST DOMINANT ENOUGH to keep Imperial measurements around about as long as they want. Like it or not. "

      Ahhh, but now you're just trying to screw with our minds. You call them Imperial measurements, but some are only in name. Take pints for example, 16 fl. oz. vs. 20 fl. oz. Which has a knock on effect on gallons, and thus car mileage. I find this makes for really small beers in the US. And what about the "short ton"? The US ton is 2,000 lbs vs. 2,240 for the Imperial ton. Talk about a perverted sense of humour!

    7. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by ldopa1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      My car gets 30 rods to the hog's head and I'm happy that way!!!

      --
      The Dopester
      "Yes, I'm a Karma Whore, but I'm doing it to pay my way through school."
    8. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by TheSync · · Score: 2

      Last time I checked www was a thing that came out Switzerland

      Yeah, but the VC for Netscape came from the US... ;)

    9. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by dgroskind · · Score: 2

      The US is JUST DOMINANT ENOUGH to keep Imperial measurements around about as long as they want. Like it or not.

      Not dominant enough at all. It's America's isolation from the rest of the world that keeps Imperial measurements around. The domestic retail and construction markets are the bastions of Imperial measurements. American's international trade, its military, and Federal government construction use metric. Trade, for instance, forced the U.S. auto industry to metricate.

      In the military in particular, you can see that the requirements of speed and accuracy support the metric system. Soldiers calling in artillery strikes have better things to do than trying to remember how many yards in a half mile.

      By practicing these conversions, we are constantly honing our math skills

      The metric system will hone them even further, as those of us who grew up with Imperial and lived through metrication will attest. Mentally converting hectares to acres, kilopascals to pounds per square inch, BTUs to Joules, and bushels to cubic meters will provide hours of profitable exercise in elementary math, the mental equivalent of pushups and kneebends.

    10. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by CaseyB · · Score: 2
      Canada has been using the Metric system since ... a while ago.

      Only halfway. While distance is kilometers, and gas is litres, we still for the most part measure our height in feet & inches, and our weight in pounds. Construction still uses feet & inches. Temperature is still reckoned by many people in Fahrenheit, though that is changing.

    11. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by mindstrm · · Score: 2

      Get real. Hell.. I grew up in a Metric country (Canada), and it doesn't bother me one bit to hear imperial measurements used.

      Imperial measurements are still official in the US.. so who are you to tell them NOT to use them?

    12. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by mindstrm · · Score: 2

      No.. it doesn't. It is based off a certain number of arc-seconds or whatever at the equator, so in a sense, yes, it's derived from the roundness of the earth, but has no other practical value once you go to a different latitude.

      It's just a traditional number.

      BTW.. the meter is also based on the earth..

    13. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by mindstrm · · Score: 2

      Well.. true. Even the drug trade is messed up!

      Look at it...

      The standard drug-dealer measurements for marijuana.. for instance. You sell in grams.. but then as soon as it's over 2, you switch to fractions of an oz.. then the pound.
      Yet, with cocaine, you go from grams, or fractions thereof, to the famous '8-ball' or eighth of an ounze', and eventually switch back to Kilograms! It's messed up I tell you!

    14. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      ... and exactly this arrogance is what made the WTC towers collapse...

      What caused the collapse was anonymous cowards (like you?) feeling that they had a right to kill thousands of people because of their anti-american prejudice.

    15. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Any comment that claims invention of the Internet as an US archievement

      And who do you think invented it? It was invented and funded through the U.S. military agency DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and was originally called the ARPANET.

      and looks down on other countries because they supposedly are unable to manufacture ICs.

      No, I look down on other countries that can't design competitive microprocessor ICs. Any third-world upstart can manufacture ICs. It's the difference between designing a car and bolting it together.

      Last time I checked www was a thing that came out Switzerland,

      Please! The web is just a minor protocol and formatting standard. It pales in comparison with Ethernet, IP, TCP, FTP, SMTP, POP, Telnet and other pioneering standards developed by U.S. companies and universities like Stanford, UCLA, and MIT. These foundations for the Internet were being developed in the late 60's and early 70's. Claiming that "www" is the basis of the Internet is as ignorant as claiming that AOL Instant Messenger makes AOL an Internet pioneer.

      The Internet was a U.S. invention. It was not co-invented by the U.S. and other countries. 30+ years after its initial inception, it stands as a monument to the creativity, engineering talent, and technological vision of the United States. You're welcome to come along for the ride, but don't try to pretend that you designed the car.

    16. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by alienmole · · Score: 2
      Ahhh, but now you're just trying to screw with our minds. You call them Imperial measurements, but some are only in name. Take pints for example, 16 fl. oz. vs. 20 fl. oz. Which has a knock on effect on gallons, and thus car mileage. I find this makes for really small beers in the US. And what about the "short ton"? The US ton is 2,000 lbs vs. 2,240 for the Imperial ton. Talk about a perverted sense of humour!

      This is the result of two effects:

      1. When the first settlers came over to the US, they weren't the most educated people around, what with being persecuted for their religious beliefs and all, and some stuff just got screwed up.
      2. Starting over in a new country gave some people the bright idea of "fixing" and "simplifying" things, ranging from measurements to spelling (e.g. aluminum vs. aluminium).
      The result, as usual when incremental changes are made to an historically accreted inconsistent system, was simply more inconsistency. But perhaps it's a good reminder that no matter what units we impose on the world, its underlying nature doesn't change. Base 10 isn't somehow "better" than base 12, and meters are just as arbitrary a unit as feet.

      Myself, I want to mark my speedometer in fractions of the speed of light (c). That's what I call a meaningful unit.

    17. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      If you really want I could put it this way, THe US invented the internet, but couldn't think of anyway to turn it into the big all encompassing, new form of mass-media it is now days. It took a European idea to do that.


      Those in the U.S. responsible for the Internet were, by and large, opposed to it being commercialized and turned into what it has become today. They were not trying to think of a way to make Joe Average into an Internet user. Claiming that they "couldn't think of a way" to make it commercial is hardly fair in light of that.

      I'm not claiming that http/WWW is unimportant, but neither is it "The Internet". Like AOL Instant Messenger, Napster (in its day), and a myriad of other extremely powerful apps, it builds on the pioneering, brilliant work of those that created the Internet.

      Going further, HTTP has morphed so much since its invention that early browsers (e.g. Netscape 1.0, Mosaic, etc.) are practically worthless today. The same cannot be said of FTP, SMTP, and other core protocols behind the Internet. Someone with an FTP client from ten years ago is still able to connect to modern FTP sites. People using old versions of PINE can still retrieve their e-mail. What takes brilliance and foresight is the creation of something in the computer field that can last for 20 or more years and still be useful.

    18. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      The point is he was trying to make is, what cause this anti-american prejudice and can you do anything to stop it? Arrogance of the kind you you just demostrated, is not going to win you any friends anywhere.

      1. Pride in American ingenuity, drive, and technical leadership is not "arrogance."

      2. I will be damned if I will tone down my pro-American "arrogance" out of a cowardly fear of more terrorist attacks.

      3. I don't care to have a bunch of thugs, murderers, and religious zealots from Afghanistan as my "friends."

      Maybe you can start telling blacks and Jews to "have a good hard look at [themselves]" to find out why people hate them so much. Maybe you can counsel blacks to stop listening to rap and hip-hop because it fuels bigotry. Perhaps you can advise Jews not to be so openly pro-Israel because it causes some people to be prejudiced against them.

      The original poster made a sick comment claiming that America was, in some way, responsible for the attacks on the WTC. He was wrong and you are wrong for supporting him.

    19. Re:Imperial vs. Metric: SERIOUSLY OFFTOPIC! by alienmole · · Score: 2
      You see, that's the odd thing. The meter was not meant to be arbitrary at all, and in fact it forms the basis of the SI system (as I understand it). The original measurement of the meter assumed that the Earth had a latitudinal circumference of 4e4km... problem was that the datum they were using was rather inaccurate. *chuckle*

      But the definition of the meter *is* arbitrary. The circumference of the Earth is no less arbitrary than the length of some human's foot. Both would certainly seem just as arbitrary to an extraterrestrial intelligence.

      The only sort of values I can think of that might not be completely arbitrary are those based on apparently unvarying physical constants like the velocity of light in a vacuum (c). Of course, the meter has now been rejiggered to be based on this, but by using an arbitrary scaling factor.

      Based on fractions of c, the common U.S. speed limit of 55mph would be 82e-9c, or 82nc (nano-c). Quite close to the metric equivalent of 88.5 km/h, as it happens. That's why I plan to recalibrate my speedometer in nano-c, so I'll be the only person on earth using meaningful speed measurements while cycling or driving.

  2. design factors by Alien54 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The aero dynamics get more and more closer to a design where it resembles something like a streached out water balloon, a slick shell encasing the rider. After that, it is a matter of physical conditioning for the sprints, as well as judicious choice of gear ratios

    Given open ground, I do not doubt that the speed record will eventually go much higher if you had a sufficient distance to ramp up to speed.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:design factors by Domini · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, they were given sufficient distance to start from. They can choose any distance, but their speeds are measured over a 200 meter stretch.

      There are also several other different classes, for more info, here are the RULES

      Also for a more detailed listing of the records (with km/h and miles/h):
      Go HERE.

      It contains more that just land speed records.

      (I also read that he is only reported to have gone faster than 80 miles per hour, but I do not see it on the official site.

    2. Re:design factors by lisp-hacker · · Score: 2, Informative



      Not really: There are theoretical calculations
      that show, with the given power of a human,
      (~500-600 Watts for professional cyclists) and
      the given minimum cross section, there should be a upper limit of about 90 miles/h / 144 km/h.

      For further increase you have to stretch the rider or to use drugs.
      The varna diablo is even now a very narrow shell.
      There were top-view pictures were Sams shoulders
      were wider than the streamline of the fixed bottom part of the fairing.

    3. Re:design factors by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2

      Yup. There are also theoretical calculations that show that traveling faster than 60 mph will squash you like an egg. Of course, those are about 150 years old.

    4. Re:design factors by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Given open ground, I do not doubt that the speed record will eventually go much higher if you had a sufficient distance to ramp up to speed.
      Actually, you just need a long enough and steep enough ramp DOWN to get good speed...
  3. Metric conversion by D+Anderson+n'Swaart · · Score: 5, Informative
    For those of you not in the US, here's the story again:

    top speed: 129.7 km/h
    weight of bike: 27.3 kg

    1. Re:Metric conversion by D+Anderson+n'Swaart · · Score: 2
      I believe I must be the most misunderstood person on slashdot. If you check my comment history you'll notice a trend:

      • I flame someone: +1, interesting
      • I post a stupid comment that should at best be funny: +1, informative
      • I engage in a long discussion with another user on the merits of Microsoft Word vs TeX etc, under a slashback article regarding licensing, Deep Space 1 and IIS: +1, informative (for several of the comments I made)

      I believe I can see a pattern. I now have the added (dubious) distinction of being modded +1, funny for a quick post I did to make other non-Usian readers' lives easier...

      Whatever fries your bacon moderators...how's the crack today?

  4. Re:breathing apparatus??? by Black+Copter+Control · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have you ever stuck your face out the window of a car at 60 MPH? Now, add 15 MPH and think about trying to pedal a bicycle while breathing in that sort of wind. It's not that you need much of a filter.. You just need somethin that will keep breating easy and comfortable.

    --
    OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
  5. Kyle Edge by Syre · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm really impressed with Matt Weaver who built his own cycle, the Kyle Edge, and hence didn't have the same time for physical training that winner Sam Whittinghham had.

    His time of 5.73 in the 200M is only .18 second slower than the winning time, and his time of 46.78 in the mile is only 1 second slower than the winning time of 45.78. No one else came close.

    Next year, my money's on Weaver to win!

    1. Re:Kyle Edge by lisp-hacker · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Same procedure as last year ...

      Matt had also problem to be at the event.
      Sam started at Monday with his first record attempt. Matt had only Friday and Saturday.

      Jason Queally showed that it's not only the
      force and the money. He had by far the most expensive bike, but he is not adopted to drive
      a 'bent (he trained for 4 months AFAIR)

  6. He still uses only his legs ... by gerddie · · Score: 2

    ... but some guy from germany resently patented a bike with an additional front drive (see picture)
    This should bring the next speed improve. You can reed more about it here (in german).

    Here is a translation - I leave it like this because its sounds so funny -):

    - Translation Results by SDL International --
    That patented is "Tigerbike" especially smart conceived bicycle. In front and back wheel drive leave in this construction independently from one another make use of. A tip speed can be reached of 50 km/h by the additional front wheel drive. This drive functioned over a step warehouse appropriate in addition over the Lenker. This be connected over a chain with a Ritzel mounted at the Vorderrad. A hubs control provides also at the Vorderrad for the suitable translation. In the manual actuating of the front wheel drive can nevertheless problem-free directed become. With this practicable fitness machine, one trains the entire body during a drive.

    1. Re:He still uses only his legs ... by Domini · · Score: 2

      I'm sure one could go faster, but unfortunately this particular competition has some RULES. (Section 3.0)

      Rules are good, M'kay?
      ;)

    2. Re:He still uses only his legs ... by tap · · Score: 2

      Using extra muscles won't make any difference. The limit of human performance is caused by oxygen delivery to the muscles. This is limited by cardiac output and hematocrit levels in the blood. Using your arm muscles won't make you go any faster.

      Pro cyclists don't have huge leg muscles. If more muscle was better, then they would work more on building leg strength. But instead they train at altitude and take EPO to increase hematocrit levels.

  7. Varna Diablo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...damnit, that's just the coolest fucking name for a bike that I've ever seen.

    Who would honestly buy a freaking 'Schwinn' or 'Mongoose' when they could get a....VARNA DIABLO.

  8. Not really human powered... by tap · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These auto paced records aren't really human powered. The current world record holder is Fred Rompleberg with 166.94 mph. If you look at the photo at his site, you can see how the bike is partway covered by a fairing behind the dragster that's pacing him. The force of the air rushing in to fill the vacuum behind the fairing creates a suction effect that pulls the bike along. Almost all of the power is comming from the dragster's engine, not the rider. He might as well just use a rope.

    1. Re:Not really human powered... by Halloween+Jack · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The force of the air rushing in to fill the vacuum behind the fairing creates a suction effect that pulls the bike along. Almost all of the power is comming from the dragster's engine, not the rider. He might as well just use a rope.

      Uh... what's your source on this? Yes, the point of the pace car is to reduce/remove the air resistance from the cyclist (thus simulating riding in a vacuum), but the cyclist still has to crank like crazy. Have you ever checked out the gear ratios on these bikes? The previous record holder had to be towed up to 60 mph before he could even start pedaling.

      --
      I looked into the abyss, and the abyss looked into me--and we both winked.
  9. to get the air inside by tap · · Score: 2

    It takes a lot of oxygen to produce the power needed for a world record attempt. He is sealed inside a carbon fiber shell with no holes. If there was an open window for the air to blow in, that would ruin the aerodynamics. He uses the breathing mask with air tube to help get air inside without compromising the aerodynamics.

  10. Re:Motorway by motherhead · · Score: 2

    Isn't that fast enough to travel on a motorway/freeway......

    yeah.

    also.. what if the police get you with a radar gun... can you get a speeding fine ?

    in my state you get a several tickets, speeding and also operating a non moterized cycle on the moterway/freeway/tollway/highway

    lets see you maintain at least 60MPH on the tollways and highways around Chicago. this is what would happen: you could/wound not and we would kill you. or some jackass would die trying to avoid killing you (he would probably be from Wisonsin, they are very sweet people there)

    so don't


  11. Reynard not F1 by phaze3000 · · Score: 2

    Reynard actually design cars for the American 'Champ Car' series, afaik they don't design any of the Forumla One cars.

    --
    Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
    1. Re:Reynard not F1 by phaze3000 · · Score: 2

      I could be wrong, but I thought that Reynard merely sponsored the team and allowed use of their facilities? BAR have their own design team IIRC..

      --
      Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
    2. Re:Reynard not F1 by phaze3000 · · Score: 2
      To add to your comment about Americans being clueless about F1, I notice the CNN link you gave shows the 2000 car and driver lineup.

      I'm quite dissapointed that Canadians are clueless about F1, what with having produced some amazing drivers in Gilles and Jaques Villeneuve.

      Perhaps the talk of the new Red Bull 'American super team' will raise North American interest in the sport..

      --
      Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
  12. Wow, cool... by koreth · · Score: 5, Funny

    7.95MPH faster and a bolt of lightning, and we'll see the world's first time-travelling bicycle!

    1. Re:Wow, cool... by zpengo · · Score: 2

      Hmmm...now I'm wondering about that van full of Middle Eastern terrorists from Back to the Future. I hope Osama bin Loser doesn't have any time travelling bicycles!

      --


      Got Rhinos?
    2. Re:Wow, cool... by dattaway · · Score: 2

      Yup.. you just need enough Jigga-watts, and a flux capacitor!

      The time traveling bike should have an efficiency advantage over your DeLorean in that much less than half of two jiggawatts would be required.

      Microjiggawatts, anyone?

    3. Re:Wow, cool... by alexburke · · Score: 2

      You forgot the flux capacitor! How are you going to turn 1.21 gigawatts of power into time travel without it?!

  13. Recumbent Tricycles by Bronster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Years ago, when recumbent cycle 'technology' wasn't as well known as it is now, I had the opportunity to ride both recumbent bicyles and tricycles created by a company called Greenspeed here in Melbourne, Australia.

    My experience with the bicycles was less than perfect - it takes a slightly different balancing technique to ride with your centre of gravity lower than the centre of the wheels. The handlebars are also beneath the seat, rather than up in front. I'm told a couple of weeks experience would be plenty to feel at home though.

    On the other hand, the trike is a joy to ride. Not quite as fast (if you're going for the speed record) but fantastic for cornering. I hit a corner a lot faster than I'd dare on a 2 wheel device, and it swung around without even lifting a wheel. Truly a fantastic piece of machinery.

    At AU$ 3,750 for the economy model, these things aren't cheap - but hey, I can drool.

    1. Re:Recumbent Tricycles by John+Harrison · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I recently rode the BikeE that my brother owns and it felt natural within a few minutes of riding. Not only was it comfortable, but it was great fun. You can buy the least expensive model for about US$575 though his was a bit more than that. Maybe my comfort was due to the fact that the handlebars are in a more normal position and you are sitting more upright than on more agressive recumbents.

      Now, in true hacker tradition, he has outfitted it with a homemade fairing (his wife calls it a windshield)in front and a wind box in back. All for about $6 worth of plastic. This recent inventiveness of his has spurred but the comment of another biker told him that riding behing him was almost as good as dragging off a small car. Hopefully that is no longer the case.

      You go Redbeard!

  14. Re:Drugs are bad, mmmmkay? by Bazman · · Score: 2

    Well, some of the riders participate in boring old slow 'safety' bicycle races at world standard, and there's drug testing a-plenty for The Tour de France!

  15. Re:Motorway by wirefarm · · Score: 2

    There was a little bike shop near Bethesda that had my speeding ticket on its wall for a long time - I was pulled over doing 65mph on the highway up to Frederick, MD on a bicycle. (2:00 am, no lights...)
    Of course, I had been drafting a truck, though, ala 'Breaking Away'...
    That was about 1986 or so, back when 65 was the (unassisted, no-fairings) target speed of that race. (I was a bike messenger then, in *much* better shape, too...)
    Possibly the scariest/stupidest thing I ever did in my life. (Next to getting married, that is.)

    Cheers,
    Jim in Tokyo

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  16. Re:Cambridge by Grab · · Score: 2

    Plenty of owners of recumbent bicycles in Cambridge (I was going to say "recumbent bicycle owners", but that's usually only after a few drinks ;-). Strangely, they never actually seem to go fast at all - they go slower than your typical mountain-bike rider. It's probably cos they're so damn heavy and need quite fat tyres - they may be more aerodynamic but they'll have a sky-high rolling resistance.

    Grab.

  17. Re:Energy economics by Grab · · Score: 2

    Battery weight and cost.

  18. Engineering-yes, style-no by maddogsparky · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Most cars could be much more aerodynamic. The problem is the stylists who decide how a car should look. Then the engineers are stuck trying to make a car work, get good fuel mileage and ride comfortably. All those "power bulges" and rear spoilers on cars with tiny engines that never go above 75 mph don't provide any mechanical advantages and increase drag.

    The real problem is trying to convince designers and the John Q. Public that aerodynamics are "cool", not the body styles with extraneous bulges, scoops and corners.

    --
    science is a religion
    1. Re:Engineering-yes, style-no by Andreas+Bombe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Making fast cars free of spoilers isn't easy. Audi tried with their TT (max. speed ~220km/h, I think), designing the whole car so that it gets enough downforce (the outer rear view mirrors are an important part of that design).

      As it seems, they couldn't get it completely right. There were a number of accidents where TT drivers lost control while simply going straight on German highways (where else would you be allowed to drive as fast ;-). Audi didn't explicitly take responsibility for that, but they do offer free upgrades for all TT owners which consist of a small spoiler and an electronic stability system and all new TTs come in that configuration already.

      And for those thinking that going straight shouldn't cause any problems no matter how strong (or weak) the downforce is: It doesn't matter only if there is no wind and the highway is empty. If there are transversal winds, entering and leaving the wind shadow of large trucks at high speed needs some correction to stay on course and if the downforce is too weak you can lose grip altogether. At higher speeds (say, 150 km/h and above), even normal cars are dragging a quite large cones of air turbulences behind them. These can create asymmetrical forces on an overtaking car. Normally this would rock your car slightly, but if your car is to the limit aerodynamically as the TT seemed to be this can get dangerous.

  19. fast bikes by zephc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    i seem to recall reading about some bike with some crazy gear ratio that got somewhere around 250 mph, but it had to be towed up to at least 70 or 80 mph to overcome the bike and rider's inertia

    i think i read about it in popular science or scientific american a couple years ago

    anyone know what I'm talking about?

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    1. Re:fast bikes by jerrytcow · · Score: 2, Informative

      probably John Howard's speed record of 152 MPH. I think it doesn't count because he was drafting off a car.
      link

  20. Re:breathing apparatus??? by smaughster · · Score: 2

    And you can't smile for pictures, or you'd be picking your teeth for days to remove all the little flies.

    --
    I intend to live forever, so far so good.
  21. Not aerodynamics by GreyPoopon · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Hopefully some of the aerodynamic technology can be applied to commercially available vehicles (cars, maybe?).

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly don't think that there are tremendous gains in automobile aerodynamics on the horizon. Automobile manufacturers can already greatly increase the aerodynamics of their product, but only at a sacrifice to ergodynamics and practicality. The future for more efficient automobiles lies mostly in the development of smaller and more efficient power conversion (IE the engines) and the development of alternative fuel sources. Besides, the featured cycle looked to have the same lines as a Ford Probe concept car from over a decade ago, so I don't think there's much to be learned here. On the other hand, I think it's absolutely cool that cycle riders can achieve true highway speeds, even if they have to be in incredible shape and practically dislocate their shoulders to fit into the vehicles.

    --

    GreyPoopon
    --
    Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    1. Re:Not aerodynamics by macsforever2001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly don't think that there are tremendous gains in automobile aerodynamics on the horizon. Automobile manufacturers can already greatly increase the aerodynamics of their product, but only at a sacrifice to ergodynamics and practicality.

      In the USA, the real problem is that SUVs, trucks and mini-vans don't lend themselves to aerodynamic styling. This is caused by cheap gas and the fact that cars are subsidized heavily by the corporate sponsored government - if you don't believe me, think about who pays for roads, stoplights, etc. We need to remove the road warrior mentality that biggest and fastest are best. Since gas is too cheap here, the public has no incentive to stop using gas guzzlers.

      Aerodynamic technology has existed for a long time and is rarely used because aerodynamic vehicles require small cars which are nearly extinct on US roads.

    2. Re:Not aerodynamics by Ralph+Bearpark · · Score: 2
      In the USA, the real problem is that SUVs, trucks and mini-vans don't lend themselves to aerodynamic styling.

      Hey, here's a pretty aerodynamic SUV.

      Regards, Ralph.

    3. Re:Not aerodynamics by bwoodard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The aerodynamics of SUV's and trucks are not necessarily bad because of styling constraints but rather because of cooling constraints. In the 60's and early 70's cars could pull trailers. In the late 70's when the US fuel prices shot up, cars were made dramatically more aerodynamic by using smaller engines. Smaller engines meant less heat and less heat meant less frontal area devoted to cooling the engine compartment. If you look at car designs from the 60's and from the 80's the big difference that you will see is that the front grill almost disappeared from cars.

      Trucks and SUV's are still designed to pull trailers or carry substantial loads. Therefore they still need the larger engines with much better cooling than cars. Therefore they need more frontal area and the designs are less aerodynamic.

  22. Commercially available by morie · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Hopefully some of the aerodynamic technology can be applied to commercially available vehicles (cars, maybe?).

    A stable tricycle with this technology is commercially available in europe from a dutch company, "Velomobiel". Their "Quest" costs Dfl 12,500, approx. $5000,-

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
    1. Re:Commercially available by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Hopefully some of the aerodynamic technology can be applied to commercially available vehicles (cars, maybe?).
      It's been done more than 70 years ago by Robert Buckminster Fuller. And does anybody remembers the Chrysler Airflow??? (Other links here).
  23. But what can mortals achive? by bluGill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've known for years that you can go really fast on a bike, when you are in good health and in shape and have a short distance.

    What I want is a bike that I can ride at some [fast] speed all day on my own power. Assume my exercise is only riding the bike to work (which if areoboic is enough to keep me in shape, but I'm still not pro level)

    Remember that I'm only getting older. 7 years ago my body was at about the peak of its ability. I've got a long way to 40 and my body is already in decline. I'm looking for something I can use when I retire and still make good time.

    1. Re:But what can mortals achive? by Atom+Tan · · Score: 2, Informative

      In the warm months, I bike to work 3 days a week (9 miles each way, suburban/urban, moderately hilly), and average about 18 mph. The difference in commute time (total time is under 30 minutes either way) between driving is very small, and faster in a bike when traffic is heavy. I am 27 and in average shape. It simply a matter of having a reasonably light road bike (a mid-level Trek, Cannondale, or Fuji -- weight about 20 lbs.) and letting your body condition itself for the ride.

      I could ride on the same moderate terrain all day averaging about 16 mph, or on a long, flat highway at about 20 mph.

    2. Re:But what can mortals achive? by Prof_Dagoski · · Score: 2


      Currently, you can spend as little as $500 US and get one heck of a good bike. I wouldn't reccomend spending less because below that mark most bikes aren't durable. If you stay away from fancy gadgets, that chunk of money will get a bike that will last for years with regular maintenance. In terms of ease of riding, a good moutain bike or touring bike will get you going pretty fast for fairly little effort. If you get a mountain bike, swap out the knobby tires for a smoother tread and you'll have a great city bike. I don't much like the so called hybrid bikes which are lame attempt to combine a mountain bike with a road bike. You kinda get the worst of both worlds with those, but this is my opinion only. In any case, if you stay away from department store brands and go to a real bike shop, it's very hard to get a bad bike these days. I got serious into biking over ten years ago, and that five hundred dollar bike you buy today is better than the $1000 bikes back then.



      The real key to having a good time with your bike is maintainence and regular use. For instance, if you let your wheels get out of true, they'll rub against the brake pads, making it very hard to keep going. And if you don't use your bike, you'll find it hard to ride. I know I go through this every spring when I have to get back on after the snow melts. In terms of your body declining, it declines a lot slower than you think. Forty isn't so very long away for me, and I can keep getting stronger and faster. When I was in my early twenties, I used to think I was hot shit til some old geezer in fifties blew past me like I was standing still. Of course that geezer had been training and racing thirty years longer than I'd been alive. Just goes to show you that decline is relative. If you build up excess capacity while you're younger, then the decline you inevitably suffer will still you leave functioning at higher level than otherwise.


      As to choosing the right bike, you have a lot of options. If you want to do some recreation mountain biking, get one of those. Moutnain bikes are also good for riding in the city because you can hop curbs with ease and deal with just about any pot hole. Touring bikes are sturdy and relatively fast. They have long wheel base with drop out handle bars. Your back will hurt when you start riding one of these, but the muscles will develop the more you ride. You can't hop curbs as easily with one of these, but it can be done. Touring bikes are ideal for longer commutes on roads, especially in suburban or rural areas. Recumbants are another option, but they are not cheap, and they're not as easy to handle. Figure spending at least $2000 on one of these. But, they are the most comfortable bike around. I'm also concerned about the safety of these bikes because they have a much lower profile than conventional bikes, making them harder for cars to see you. So, those geeky orange flags that the driver's ed books say cyclists should be using are must. With any bike you'll want to tuck away another $50-$75 to get good lights. I used to work a night shift at a NOC and wound up riding my bike home at 1:00AM. Having good lights avoided a lot accidents, especially the time the students around here stole the construction barricades marking some serious road work. Glad I had some big ass headlights that time. I also like clipless pedals; pedals which lock your feet to the pedal. You can still get out if you need to and a fall will snap your feet off the pedals, but your feet will stay on the pedals during wet conditions. The drawback is that you have to wear special shoes. If you carry a bunch stuff, you might also want to invest in some good saddle bags or panniers.

  24. 80 MPH? Pah! by DrXym · · Score: 2

    WTF is the point of this story? The current cycling speed record is already 166.9mph so 80mph is peanuts.

  25. Re:Motorway by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2
    My roommate went 81 MPH on his rollerblades, tucked close behind a truck to avoid air resistance. He did this on a very steep stretch of freeway in San Luis Obispo, CA. The police found out about it through the local paper, and they thought it was cool. I miss that place...

    spork

  26. Re:What aerodynamic technology? by teraflop+user · · Score: 2

    Actually, the technology used in these bikes is more akin to that used in the space and aerospace industries, (or sometimes in Formula 1) than in conventional car making.

    The materials are all cutting edge - aluminium is now in mainstream bikes, the top end machines are using titanium and carbon fibre.

    Weaver is looking at running air pumps off the rear wheel to give the machine active aerodynamics - air pumped out at strategic locations to encourage laminar flow. This is cutting edge even in aerospace, and is unlikely ever to make it into cars.

    Basically a car has so much power that a lot of these cutting edge techniques would have no measurable benfit. For both bikes and spacecraft, every last gram of weight and thousandth of drag coefficient is critical.

  27. Re:Geeks by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This isn't about sports--it's about geeks building cool things. Imagine that instead of some hired jock pedaling the thing, there was instead a hamster. That would clearly not be a sport, and it's not a big difference, believe me.

    Which makes me think a bit... Why not try and build the ultimate hamster-powered vehicle?

    spork

  28. ummm.... no. by mikey504 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think a better way to say it would be "This bike is more aerodynamic and therefore lets you attain a higher speed with the same energy input from the rider."

    In the slower (but lighter) bike, more of the rider's (driver's?) energy is consumed by drag.

    The energy the rider supplies should be viewed as nearly constant, and then you can compare different bikes by looking at how much performance you can get for the energy the rider has to invest.

  29. Speeds which are dangerous by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At speeds that these guys ride on even after taking due cautions What magnitute of injury can rider suffer in a crash? Also i rememember reading somewhere that in the Tour De France while riding downhill riders approach 100++kms and they have at that speed nothing but their skills to count on for brakes at that speeds tend to Jam.Can anybody enlighten.... PLEASE:Moderators dont sleep....The mods are downright stupid and idiotic!!!!!

    --
    Wanted : A Signature.
  30. Pics from last year's contest by mecran01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Some cool pics from last year's contest can be found at the same site:
    http://wisil.recumbents.com/wisil/speedruns2000/ wo rlds-fastest-bicycle-2000.htm

    They're worth looking at because they show more interior details of the bikes, including small video display units and breathing masks.

    If you want to see an almost-recumbent car, check out this prototype from Corbin Motors:

    http://www.corbinmotors.com/

    It's the closest implementation I've seen of the faired recumbent style. Of course it'll go 110 mph using dead dinosaurs, and it is amazing looking.

  31. That's nothing. Why not make use of gravity? by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you really want to make a "__speed__" record on a bike, you should jump out of an airplane while holding onto one.

    --
    Free unix account: freeshell.org
  32. Horse Bicycle by sadclown · · Score: 2, Funny

    If human running speed is 20 mph and human biking speed is 80 mph, then horse running speed is 45 mph and horse biking speed is 180 mph. It runs on oats and hay! This will change the world!

  33. Car spoilers by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For sure the majority of spoilers on consumer cars are absurdly useless. Indeed I remember in the mid/late 80s when you could get the Mustang 5L (did Americans call this the Mustang 1.32G? :-}) in two variants: The plain jane version, and the "GT" version chocked full of ground effects and spoilers. In actual tests the GT version was somewhat slower than the plain version because of the added 40lbs+ of ground effects, plus the fact that they were aerodynamically horrendous and thwarted rather than helped the car.


    The coolest thing about F1 cars is that most of the ground force is caused by air going under the car and sucking the car into the ground. Indeed they banned things like Venturi tunnels under there because the ground force was getting too extreme.

  34. You don't need to go fast - by wirefarm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You just need to go.

    My landlady is 81 years old and rides her bike every day - A single-speed upright bike, with a basket in the front for her groceries. She's healthier than me.

    The Chinese restaurant near my old office has a man of at least that age who delivers lunches on a bike - 5 or 6 bowls on a tray balanced on his shoulder, held by just a corner.

    Here, I see mothers with 2 or even 3 children on their bike, out running errands - Hard to imagine a mother of 3 in the US who doesn't feel she needs a minivan to take the kids somewhere.

    You don't need some $2,500 custom mountain bike - Get yourself a solid used Raleigh 3 speed with a basket and USE the damn thing. I see business men riding to work on their bikes in a suit and dress shoes in traffic on a 90 degree morning, or riding along in torrential rain, carrying an umbrella. If you live within a few miles of your work and your supermarket, you will use your bike and stay in shape. If you live way out in the suburbs, yes, you will probably have a nice trophy bike decorating your garage, that you will occasionally load on the back of your car to drive to the bike trail.

    Too many people think of exercise like it's some kind of pill you take occasionally to feel better - It's a lifestyle choice. A choice that is too easily dismissed for the sake of convenience. Convenience of living in the 'burbs and driving those two blocks to the mailbox. Sure, there are reasons that people do these things, but they really don't help you when you're feeling old at 40.
    For me, 40 is less than 5 years away and I look and feel 25 - I bike every day. I'm no health nut either - I smoke more than a pack of cigarettes a day and can drink obscene quantities of beer. I believe it is due to the excercise that has become part of how I live my life. Last week's health checkup confirmed that I am in great physical shape and I know that's not due to my diet...

    You don't need to go fast - You just need to go.
    Cheers,
    Jim in Tokyo

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  35. Why no recumbents in Tour de France? by GodSpiral · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is there a rule that prevents recumbent bicycles from running in road races? Or is there a technical reason (maybe they're not so great for hill climbing ??) that makes them not the best choice.

    1. Re:Why no recumbents in Tour de France? by Thurn+und+Taxis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Recumbents aren't used in road races because they wouldn't affect the outcome. What most people don't understand about the Tour de France (or any serious bike race) is that it's not an individual sport, but a team sport. No single rider can maintain a fast pace unassisted for any length of time. In the Tour, riders have to travel about 200 km per day most days for 20 days (okay, they get one day off in the middle). This year, Armstrong averaged 40.01 kph for 3452 km. Could he do that on his own? No chance. The reason he was able to maintain that speed was that he rode in a group -- the peloton -- that took turns fighting wind resistance. The peloton (a French word meaning "a bunch of guys on bikes" -- at least 90% of the riders on any given day) is made up of many teams, all riding together in one big group. The people at the front of the peloton put out an extra effort to fight wind resistance, so the rest of the group doesn't have to. Various teams take turns at the front, so that no one team gets worn out. The strategy of the Tour involves teams trying to control the speed of the peloton, either speeding up or slowing down, by spending extra time at the front either riding hard (to speed up the group to catch cyclists trying to break away) or riding slow (to slow down the group and let their team's star ride away with the victory). Of course there's more to it than that, but that's the basic idea. And that basic idea would not change if the riders were all on recumbents. Whether you're riding at 40 kph or 70 kph, your basic foe is wind resistance, and the rules of the peloton still apply. So allowing recumbents would not change the spirit of the race (which is really more like chess than like sprinting), but would increase the danger to all the participants. Is that a good idea? I think not.

      --
      On stereophonic equipment, the monaural sound obtained through multiple channels will enhance your listening pleasure.
  36. Re:wow! that's incredible! by ackthpt · · Score: 2
    Indeed very cool. I picked up some Speedplay pedals, yesterday, for my roadbike and they'll certainly help me in my quest for speed, though I'm more of a climber. All very well and good on ideal open flat roads in the high desert, these bikes would fare badly at much of a grade, due to weight and gearing. It's a great engineering exercise (no pun intended! ;) and establishes a mark to make or break next year. Probably work OK on the flat farming roads of the the Saginaw Valley of Michigan, but not too well in the hills around Grand Rapids.


    In terms of practical application to scooting down highways, keep in mind that these were designed for short runs and hardly idea for commuting, unless you have a large supply of bagels (cyclists can go through 10,000 Calories in one day, on a 120+ mile ride) and a shower at work. Where I work a number of people do commute on cycles, due to their job being under 5 miles from home.


    There were 3 wheel autos made several years ago, powered by motorcycle engines, which were fairly sophisticated areodymanically, however, as anyone who regularly drives in a crosswind can tell you, you have to consider lateral stability and drag as well, something these vehicles were somewhat weak on. Most cars handle headwinds and crosswinds pretty well. Jeeps are terrible for crosswinds (what do you get when you put a square box on wheels?) and I can only imagine what it must be like driving one of those goofy jacked-up four wheelers.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  37. Bicycle by "The Devil" by ackthpt · · Score: 2

    Didi Senft, known as The Devil who cajoles riders in the Grand Tours of european cycling builds some very unusual bicycles, including world record holding largest bicycle

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  38. Re:breathing apparatus??? by Tassach · · Score: 2
    It's designed and built specifically for the speed record

    Too true. Unfortunately, this contest seems to be as much a test of athletic ability as it is a test of engineering ability. Not that there's anything wrong with athletic competition, but for a contest like this where the designs are what are supposed to be competing, there should be some method of handicapping the riders so they perform at a fairly constant level.


    Perhaps a more fair way to test the design would be to have a pool of neutral riders. Each bike would be driven by several (3+) different riders, chosen at random from the pool. The winner would be the design with the highest average time across all the runs. This would help determine which team has the best design, and not the one that could hire the best rider. Another alternative would be to put in a system to monitor the rider's power output (like on the lifecycles at the gym), and require the riders to keep their output within a given range (95 - 105 watts, for example)

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  39. Argh. Please read. by mindstrm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've heard this over and over again.. and having travelled around the world a bit, I've come to two conclusions.

    The first, is factual. There is no such continent as 'America'. Canada, the US, Mexico, Nicaragua, Costa Rica... are all in 'North America'. Brazil, Argentina, Chile, etc... are in 'South America'. So saying 'America' must mean something ELSE....

    The second is observational. When anyone in the world says 'American', they mean someone from 'The United States of America'. I even hear my fellow Canadians refer to them as 'Americans' all the time, you probably do it too. How else do you refer to our neighbors? United Statsians? Get real.

    'American' is a term, the world over, that refers to those citizens of the United States. Get used to it.

    I do not consider myself part of 'America'. I am from 'Canada'.

  40. a bit of bike racing history by Kartoffel · · Score: 2, Informative
    The truth is a fully faired recumbent would devastate the Tour de France. They are terrible for hill climbing but going downhill they could easily go twice as fast as the pack of upright cyclists.

    Aside from the ultra-conservative rules governing the Tour de France, there are some practical problems.

    • 'Bents are longer and lower. They handle differently. The peloton would behave differently if it were made up a pack of recumbent cycles...
    • In fact, there would be less need for a peloton in the first place, as individual riders would encounter less wind resistance. The entire strategy and tactics of the sport would the thrown off.
    • You said it yourself-- recumbents can't climb. Neither can they sprint. In a hypothetical mixed recumbent/upright Tour, the green (sprinting) and polka dot (climbing) jerseys would still remain on upright riders.

    In the early 20th century the Tour was comprised only of simple bikes with "fixed/free" rear wheels. Rear wheels had two cogs--one on each side. One side had a freewheel, the other was fixed. To change their gear ratios the riders had to stop and flip their wheels around.

    Derailleurs were common in touring bikes well before it was accepted in professional racing. Let me quote an excerpt from http://chainguard.org/jfderail.html:

    "derailleurs were not generally allowed in road races because derailleurs required freewheeling, and mixing riders with fixed and free wheels produced problems on the turns, when fixed-gear riders were limited by pedal scrape on the turns while free-wheeled riders were not. However, there was also a series of special races for derailleur-equipped bicycles, typically hill climbs, that were sponsored, at least in part, by the derailleur manufacturers."

    Perhaps if the racing sponsors and cycle manufacturers sponsored recumbent-only races, recumbent cycling would become more widely accepted.

  41. better than me by xeno · · Score: 2

    Wow. That's pretty impressive. Especially when at the beginning of this year, I took a ride on a recumbent bike with a microjet on the back, and didn't get nearly that fast.

    Yah, some bike freaks in North Seattle put a real engineer-designed jet engine onto one of their bikes as a marketing stunt, and I was stupid enough to take it for a ride on city streets. But I only got up to about 45mph with a jet engine, fercrissakes! (Of course, I weigh ~275#, and the turbine had an output of under 20ft/lbs at 150,000rpm...)

    Jon

    --
    I think not...(*poof*)
  42. Re:Motorway by bluGill · · Score: 2

    Or, even more likely, you'd run into the person from Wisconsin, because they're driving 10 mph below the speed limit.

    those who have driven in Wisconsin understand. Police there will decide to get you, and sit on your tail until you exceede the limit. With all the hills there you are bound to not get off the gas fast enough coming over one, so they will get you. Your only chance is to maintain 10 under which is enough margin.

    Yes I have seen the above happen. More than once. I avoid Wisconsin if there is any other choice.

  43. Re:Imperial System does have an advantage by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
    There may be an occasional basketball player here and there who's feet are 12 inches long, but most peoples' feet are less than a 'foot' in length.

    The big problem with Metric is that changing our mental concept of our time system is way too hard to get people to accept, so the MKS system has this weird bag on the side - seconds/minutes/hours, which are NOT expressed in 10's even though everything ELSE is.

    When the Metric system was first proposed, it came with a new way to recon time: 1 day = 10 decidays (2.4 imperial hours) = 100 centidays (14.4 imperial minutes) = 1000 millidays (1.44 imperial minutes), and so on. This went nowhere, not because it's bad, but because it was just too alien for people to accept it. (Our current 24 hours per day system is purely made up and arbitrary, unlike the other aspects of the system that are based loosely on celestial events we can't control - length of a day, length of a year, length of a month (although our calender is way off on that one). )

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  44. Re:The word is ... by sacherjj · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can buy recumbent HPVs for road use, but down there the trucks aint gonna see you. keeping out the way should give you an extra speed boost even if nothing else does. Some models have things like flags on long poles to give you a chance of being seen.

    Have you actually riden a recumbent? My RANS Rocket has an aerodynamic advantage over an upright, and I ride it safely on the street. Instead of looking at my front wheel, I am in a upright position looks at drivers directly in the eye at their eye level. I am far from invisible. I also can ride 100 miles in a day without sore arms, neck, and wrists and without feeling like I just got a prostate exam with a weed eater.

    Please learn just a little about the subject before making ignorant flippant remarks. You sould like one of the upright riders I recently toasted... :)

  45. The radiator needs to feel the wind. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
    The radiator *needs* air to ram into it to operate correctly (hence the fan that kicks in when you are idling for too long). This is at odds with the needs of areodynamics.

    To get rid of the flat front grill of cars you have to first design a different style of radiator, one that doesn't require air to funnel through its fins. I'm not sure how to go about doing that.

    Besides, airflow only becomes an issue at higher speeds. Most of the gas wastage comes from commuters going at speeds less than freeway speeds, either on heavily traffic-lighted roads where there is a lot of idling, or on jammed highways that are supposed to go faster, but don't during the mis-named "rush hour". The times of greatest gas wastage are times when airflow doesn't matter at all.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  46. hmmm, they missed the abdomen ... by twitter · · Score: 2

    Don't forget the ever popular dolphin bike. Talk about streamlined. Whew. People look kind of silly flopping down the road, though.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  47. Yes - Sweat is a problem - by wirefarm · · Score: 2

    Funny - they don't even sell deodorant here. (I buy at least a half-dosen sticks each trip to the states.) Add these super lightweight summer suits and the guys do fine. BO is probably less acceptable here than in the states, too. Foreigners often have a tough time with that.

    When I wore a suit to work on my bike, I had to carefully plan what I would wear. (Dress shirt folded with my jacket in the front basket - no backpack.) Small towel for drying off. (See the other reply...) And if that didn't work, a shower at the healthclub at lunchtime would. You also had to remember which intersections didn't have a shady spot in which to wait for the light to change or find a better place to wait.
    Still it was *way* better than being crammed into a Tokyo train with your jacket and tie on. They are just as crowded as you've probably heard.
    It's fall here now and much cooler - Biking to work now is a joy.
    Plus, you will thank yourself when you are 40...
    Cheers,
    Jim

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  48. Re:Motorway by wirefarm · · Score: 2

    It was 270, believe it or not - 2:00 am, with no lights on the bike, either.
    Of course I used to be a DC bike messenger, so I was a bit nuts to begin with -

    Cheers,
    Jim in Tokyo

    --
    -- My Weblog.