[TwoWheelsDC]

@LhasaCM 194847 wrote:

The main Strava club is open to all but that’s only one part of the registration process. There tend to be a lot of people from outside the area each year who join the Strava club because they sign up for lots of clubs regardless of location, but do not actually sign up for or participate in FS. In my view, the fun is meant for people in the DC metro area (plus some former participants who have moved away but still join in the fun from afar).

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

There are also a few BikeArlington peeps/BAFS alumni who moved away but continue to participate in BAFS and on the forum.

[TwoWheelsDC]

Sign now says Banneker closure will start 12/9…

[TwoWheelsDC]

@bentbike33 194699 wrote:

For the detour (westbound), I recommend exiting the trail at the Roosevelt St. cul-de-sac, up to a left on Sycamore/Roosevelt (there is a median in which to take refuge if you have to wait for the southbound cars to clear) for the short hop to a right onto 16th/Columbia. Then either past Bikenetic or all the way out to Little Falls, and right back to the W&OD. See this ride.

Seems a lot longer and more involved then just taking the path from the basketball court to Sycamore to 19th, no? Admittedly I refuse to take the signed bridge construction detour and just take the sidewalk on Fairfax Drive because I’m ultimately headed to Westmoreland, not the W&OD further west…so maybe that’s why your route makes less sense to me.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Sunyata 194678 wrote:

When I went home yesterday afternoon, they had placed barriers beside the trail and covered detour signs. When I went through this morning, they were still there and the trail was still open.

I expect they will have everything in place sometime today for the detour.

Yeah, looked like they did some survey work or utility marking yesterday…planning for a detour tonight.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Nadine 194649 wrote:

Gee I don’t feel that way at all. I think the ultra milers DO compete individually, the way it is now – Just look at the top 15-20 people on the individual standings chart & you’ll see it.

True…my point is that the *team* competition is inextricably linked to this individual competition, which I think detracts from the fun (and point) of the team competition.

@Nadine 194649 wrote:

I really find this community of diehard cyclists who ride through the winter to be the BOMB. Who cares how the other people play the game? Just look how many cool people we have to play with!

Same! I think people should play how they want to play *individually.* But I think as a team competition, it would benefit by diminishing the impact of those top 15-20 riders and focusing more on the every day folks.

@Nadine 194649 wrote:

Having said that, it’s true that sometimes you end up on a team that doesn’t move much in the standings no matter what you all do, and that can be a li’l disheartening. Probably that will lessen if you get together to ride. But I like the “team” rides being open to everyone – because more people to play with [emoji16], and if you make friends among your teammates, once you’ve done FS for multiple years, you’re gonna wanna ride with your friends you made last year regardless of what team they’re on!

As an introverted misanthrope I will respectfully agree to disagree on this point (I’ve been a BAFS participant from the beginning)! Which is why I’d like to see the core of the team competition be about the regular folks who just want to have some extra motivation and maaaaybe feel a little more social, but not have to worry about letting their team down if they aren’t out riding crazy miles or participating in team rides. For those that want to make it more social or individually competitive, they can do so on their own or using the side bets.

TL;DR -The rules/core of the team game should focus on inclusivity. The individual rules and side bets are what can allow for individual preferences/exclusivity.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@jrenaut 194625 wrote:

I agree with the sentiment, TwoWheels, but I think a lower cap would really hurt the game. We put the cap in place to make the standings more competitive. It didn’t work, and it annoyed people, though others found it motivating.

For me, BAFS is a way of getting people excited about riding bikes, even in crummy weather. You should see how little my kids are fazed by being out in bad weather. It’s great. But it’s a balance. I want to promote the way I play the game without alienating the crazy people who ride 300 miles a week. To that end, I think the best thing to do is competitive leaderboards and lots of fun side things, so that everyone can find their niche. Ideally, the high mileage roadie gets a two mile city commuter to go for a long hill ride, and the city commuter gets the roadie to stop in at a few coffee clubs, and we all expand our biking comfort zone a bit and make some new friends.

I’m going to be lower mileage this year than most – last time I rode 80 miles in a week I tore some scar tissue around my repaired Achilles and it hurt to ride for two weeks.

Anyway, I lost my train of thought here, so I’m going to quit while I’m ahead. We should go for a bike ride!

I don’t think I disagree with any of your points in general, but it seems like the pendulum has swung toward this just being a battle of the ultra-milers, with everyone else relegated to the side bets table. For normies like me, the “competition” is basically just luck-of-the-draw on whether you get placed on a team that is heavy on ultra-milers, and it always feels like my contribution is inconsequential. Also, I’m a little perplexed that the spirit of the competition, which was essentially “grinding out winter commuting miles with moral support from teammates,” is now relegated to one (or multiple) side bets. I don’t want to have to join a bunch of stupid side bets just to make my daily commute “count.” I dunno, maybe make the die-hard, ultra-mileage shit the side bet instead? Why even have teams when this just seems to be a competition among a few? If the ultra-milers want to compete individually, that’s fine! But IMO the team competition should be geared more toward “normal” riders and making everyone feel like their contribution is important.

[TwoWheelsDC]

No signs of construction at Banneker Park as of 9am.

[TwoWheelsDC]

**Unpopular opinion alert**

Make the mileage cap 50 (or maybe even below that) for non-commute rides; commute rides (“utility” rides could be counted as “commutes”) can rack up unlimited miles/points; ditch sleaze rides*. Although some might say the spirit of BAFS is to simply get people riding more in the winter, I always perceived the “competition” as a form of advocacy….getting people to do more day-to-day stuff by bike in the winter. Recreational cycling has a relatively small societal/advocacy impact, while the impact of commuting/errand running by bike is immense, so maybe it’s time the rules of the contest reflected that. Also, I’d wager that many of the newbies get involved not so much as motivation to ride for riding’s sake, but for motivation to get shit done by bike.

I HATE riding in the cold and I basically refuse to do purely recreational rides during the winter, but BAFS generally has kept me motivated me to stay on the bike for my (relatively long) commute and errands. That said, every year it feels like the competition has been increasingly taken over by a bunch of (with all due respect, and I’m overgeneralizing) retirees and flexible-work-schedule types who can take tons of random days off to rack up miles. Good on you for riding a century on a Tuesday in mid-January, but what’s the impact? I’d rather the competition do more to recognize the agony of getting up before dark to do an hour-long commute in freezing temperatures, when it would be so easy to just drive…or riding to the grocery store in a blizzard instead of putting yourself and others in danger by driving.

Obviously my opinion and participation are basically inconsequential, but I think I’m going to skip this year unless there’s a pretty dramatic overhaul of the rules/purpose of the “competition.”

*sleaze rides are stupid don’t @ me

[TwoWheelsDC]

@JustinW 193410 wrote:

Hello Bike-iverse,

My spouse is currently considering the purchase of an e-bike. She is getting somewhat comfortable with the array of primary features and price levels and such, but getting a completely clear picture of what her options are is proving elusive. Plus, her ability to absorb info from her spouse (that’s me) can vary as well, so I’m hoping info from others wil help.

Her primary goals for this bike involve taming some hills (she *hates* hills) for both bike commutes and recreational rides, as well as making it easier for her to accompany her spouse on rides despite a difference in natural pace and endurance. She has just started to do some test rides after conducting some amount of research online. She is dismayed overall at the prices she is seeing and thus is focusing on lower end models, perhaps to an extreme.

So, a few questions for those who have conducted similar searches and / or are e-bike-educated…

– Some have suggested that a Cat 3 e-bike is optimal for taming hills. True? If so, how can that difference be quantified in human (feel) terms?

– Power – what are you seeing as the minimum wattage (motor power) required for happy riding in this area?

– Are there any features that you absolutely love (i.e. a specific form of instrumentation or lighting or whatever)?

– Any experience with Rad Power bikes, both in terms of the pre-purchase research and then post-purchase?

– Has anyone purchased a specific model and found it lacking, and why?

– Lastly, does anyone have a fave e-bike that they’d like to rave about?

Happy to take this offline if helpful – if so please message me.

Thanks much, Justin

I have two Radpower bikes (RPB)…the Radwagon and the RadCity. RPB’s advantage is that they are very cheap…like, almost disposably so (obviously don’t just throw away an e-bike). I’ve put about 3k miles on my Radwagon and about 1k on my Radcity. I’m generally pretty happy with both of them, but I would say that the Radwagon is overkill for me at this point and now I pretty much only ride my RadCity. These are Class 2 (750W with throttle, limited to 20mph), and I find they have plenty of power for all but the steepest hills in this area. RPB recommends staying below 500W assist/throttle for steep hills, which is not a problem. RPB come with integrated front/rear lights controlled by the main assist controller, which I think is super helpful. I never have to think about having a charged head/tail light with me. RPB also have a bell integrated into the brake lever, which is a nice little feature. If I’m conservative with power assist (like, 2 or 3 out of 5 levels), I can generally get 30+ miles. But most of my riding I do at assist level 4 (~500W), and would anticipating getting closer to 20 that way. I never run the battery down though, so that’s just a super rough estimate.

Obviously I’m happy with RPB, but when buying a “cheap” e-bike there are a few things to consider:

-Cheap bikes = cheap components. Frankly, the old shifters and freewheels on my Rads work perfectly every time, and the “meh” brakes work fine too. “Cheap” here is an issue because older, cheaper components are harder to find easy replacements for, harder to find the right tools for, and generally just more of a pain to work on. Finding 26×2.3″ schrader tubes is not easy…Also, my freewheel removal tool couldn’t fit over the axle of my Radwagon and I’m still not sure how I’m going to get around that problem.

-RPB are unnecessarily heavy. Rear-drive e-bikes are typically heavier than mid-drives, but RPB are heavy AF. This is mainly just a problem if you have to move one up or down stairs or are trying to do maintenance. It’s not so much an issue with actually riding.

-RPB customer service is fine. But if you need maintenance, some shops may refuse to work on it. VelofixDC is the official partner with RPB, but getting an appointment with them is neither easy nor cheap.

Maybe I’ll think of more stuff, but that’s about it. Long story short though, I’d say RPB are ideal for two types of people: 1)those who don’t ride enough to justify paying a ton for an e-bike and who are unlikely to put much wear-and-tear on the bike; and 2)People who are fairly decent at working on bikes and ride a lot, but who don’t want to pay almost triple the price for an e-bike that’s more mainstream. For people who ride a lot but aren’t into doing their own maintenance, RPB is harder to recommend….not because they need a lot of work compared to other bikes, it’s just that there fewer simple tasks on an RPB compared to a more “modern” e-bike. For example, changing the rear tire on a read-drive is a legit production….

[TwoWheelsDC]

Just signed up! Definitely down for renting a group house again.

[TwoWheelsDC]

You want to adhere to the same rules and laws as when you are driving your car.

Yeah, no. The definitive rule for urban cycling is simply “assume every driver is trying to kill you and ride accordingly.”

[TwoWheelsDC]

Just an observation, but there are no signs for the detour for riders coming from Westmoreland/Fairfax…learned that the hard way earlier this week.

[TwoWheelsDC]

I plan on being there.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@huskerdont 188614 wrote:

This morning on the exit ramp from GW Parkway to Key Bridge I witnessed an older “gentleman” blaring his horn at a woman runner in the crosswalk. If I were king, people who blew their horns at pedestrians in crosswalks would have their licenses taken away. In fact, any use of a horn around a pedestrian or cyclist, “justified” or not, might put you in contention.

Alternatively, implement a $5 “honking tax” that is dedicated entirely to bike/ped/transit funding.

[TwoWheelsDC]

I get the feeling that the law is vague enough that you’re basically at the mercy of the responding police officer and how they perceive the situation and write the report. If the report leaves any wiggle room on fault, which in this case seems not unlikely, the driver’s insurance company will almost certainly seize on that and try to deny your claim. When I got hit in December, the FFX police found the driver 100% at fault, but still managed to not actually cite the driver because I was following another car (yes, it’s absurd). 2.5 months later, and the driver’s insurance still hasn’t paid me for property damage and is still “investigating.” It’s possible that they aren’t planning to question the fault decision, but they’re taking their sweet-ass time and I suspect some of that is trying to find some contributory negligence issue to hide behind.

[Author]

Posts