[huskerdont]

Came along too late to vote, but this was the clear winner anyway. Congrats on a great caption.

[huskerdont]

@baiskeli 208699 wrote:

I will never forget the strange feeling of climbing a somewhat steep hill and being passed by a jogger.

Used to do that when I was a younger runner. Ah to be young again and not so painfully slow.

I don’t much like eBikes on the trails, but I’d never even think of yelling at one. To each his own, and let’s try to be respectful of one another, or at least be quiet about our prejudices.

[huskerdont]

@Mtansill 208005 wrote:

I have decided to cancel this prize because we’re more than half-way through the competition, and no one has posted any submissions. Besides, we appear to have plenty of other pointless prizes this year. Perhaps next year.

So sorry, I’m afraid that for me, this one got lost in the many, many posts this year. I enjoyed last year’s “calendar”–it’s up on the wall in the kitchen. Hopefully we can try again next year, as you say.

[huskerdont]

You said you had your bike leash in the handlebar bag! Great, now we can’t go in. We’ll have to go around the long way.

[huskerdont]

@ImaCynic 205323 wrote:

Well, ratio can’t be changed without altering the chain length. If it has horizontal dropouts, it might be able to do one change.

They would have altered the chain length when they did the configuration–to get rid of all the slack from no longer have a rear derailleur or needing the big ring. The dropout is visible in the pic.

[huskerdont]

@ImaCynic 205278 wrote:

It’s a converted single speed. My guess is that the front chainrings are swapped to maintain better a chainline with a lower ratio. No rear change is possible unless the rear dropout can be adjusted.

That’s certainly the case, and it’s a pretty clever solution. Instead of installing a rear freewheel or fixed cog, this person just kept what was there and was able set it at the ratio he or she wanted by swapping the rings around.

[huskerdont]

@bentbike33 203173 wrote:

Sigh. I will miss the flashing red light where Cottage crosses Cedar. That light won’t change for a bike and the east-bound pedestrian beg button is hard to reach.

I will miss that light as well–Fairfax has way too many lights that won’t change for a cyclist.

I will also miss bombing down Cedar from Gallows/Electric with the reduced traffic that made it feel not as harried.

Not sure if anyone remembers this, but back when they rebuilt the bridge over Scott’s Run, Georgetown Pike was closed to thru traffic for a while, and you could walk or ride on parts of it in bliss. Cedar was not quite that free, but some days, I’d ride from Electric to Cottage and encounter just a few cars.

[huskerdont]

@loki 203181 wrote:

Need to create strava segments in all 3 directions

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

That’s 6 Strava segments; loki could have 6 KOMs! [love the username]

[huskerdont]

I rode around the traffic island from all three directions this afternoon. I actually like it and feel it’s an improvement. Other than the silly left-turn arrow coming from the west, which is similar to but more poorly done than lane arrows on roadways and will fool no one, I think it helps. One benefit of course is now we have a yield sign that people may adhere to rather than a stop sign that everyone ignored. I came from the east as someone was coming from under the bridge, we looked at each other, he was there ahead of me, and I yielded. The sight lines are much improved.

[huskerdont]

@mstone 203174 wrote:

“Motorists complain about those because they have to slow down and be careful, and of course some won’t be careful, but surely we’re better than that?”
So you meant to say something other than what you said? Who is the “we” that’s somehow on the edge of not being “better” than complaining about having to slow down? The strawman here is that you’re the first person suggest that complaints about this design are somehow related to speed, then you argue against that suggestion. If you had argued for the design by directly countering points previously raised as criticisms or raised your own points in support of the design (even regarding speed, as kwarkentien did!), then you would not have been arguing a strawman.

Not a strawman; a strawman would be if I took someone else’s argument and distorted or simplified it in order to argue against it more easily than I could the actual point being made. I simply made a comparison that you decided to take issue with or don’t feel is relevant, whereas I feel that it is relevant.

Safety here is related to speed; it seems that would be clear without it being repeated by me. If you slow down and look where you are going, then the safety issue is lessened, just as with the traffic islands. And yes, I realize that some won’t slow down, but that’s no different than with the previous design or any design that could be shoehorned in here.

But in no way do I wish to get in the way of you complaining about things. Proceed.

[huskerdont]

@mstone 203159 wrote:

You’re arguing a strawman in a way that’s frankly insulting to a number of people who have not historically shown signs of arguing facilities on the basis of personal convenience rather than safety.

“Strawman”–I don’t think you understand what that term means, and apparently you get insulted far too easily. No one is going to run over the center island because the arrow is poorly done, and others having to slow down a bit when you yourself probably would have anyway doesn’t make it more unsafe. I’ve gone through here a number of times now; it is safer than it was. It was an area that deserved caution before, and it does so now as well, but now there are indicators to that effect. Just because they didn’t do exactly what you wanted them to does not make it terrible.

[huskerdont]

The arrows are poorly drawn, but overall, it’s no different from the little traffic islands designed to slow down traffic on places like Key. Motorists complain about those because they have to slow down and be careful, and of course some won’t be careful, but surely we’re better than that?

[huskerdont]

Ah, on reread, could be. I thought that since he had been rear-ended, the car rack had been damaged or destroyed.

[huskerdont]

@jrenaut 202915 wrote:

Bringing this thread back up – we ended up replacing the derailleur. Bike shop was able to save the wheel. And then we got rear-ended while driving with the bikes on the back and that was it for the Linus. After waiting forever, Bicycle Space finally got us a beautiful blue Bridge Club.

Now I’m looking for a rear rack. Anyone have recommendations? I figured there would be a way to look up racks by fit (I have a disc Bridge Club, what rack can I get) but if that exists I haven’t seen it.

If you’re still looking for a trunk rack, I have a Thule you can have. It’s pretty adjustable and worked for Subaru Impreza, Honda Fit, and a Subaru Crosstrek. Was able to get it to work with a couple of odd mountain bike designs, but honestly no idea on that Bridge Club.

It’s in good shape but we got hitch racks and haven’t looked back. PM me if interested. Free if you pick up, or I would meet somewhere inside the beltway in VA.

[huskerdont]

Way late, but I threw a few in. Saw the article on ArlNow.

I haven’t been by here much lately b/c not much has been going on, then I got logged out and could never seem to log back in. It’s the Internet’s fault, I’m sure. ;0

[Author]

Posts