“cry for attention”.
(Photo: Jonathan Maus)
This week’s edition of the Willamette Week is all real wank-fest. They rant away on all sorts of stuff, including bikes.
Here are the bike-related things that made it into their “kvetchfest” issue (emphasis is mine):
-
Double-Tall Bikes
They may be channeling absurdist Parisian street performers—ahem, Alberta Street Clown House—but riding a double-tall bike is just impractical. Is dismounting an excuse to show off your tumbling skills? We’re all impressed by your creativity with a welding torch, but commuting on a 9-foot-tall Schwinn is a cry for attention.
Cyclists on Busy Streets
If cyclists want to cruise down Southeast 39th Avenue at rush hour, they have the right. Even if just two blocks east runs a nearly traffic-free designated bike route down 41st Avenue (most busy thruways do have nearby parallel bike routes). But a philosophical argument about right-to-the-road won’t be much consolation when an ER doc is stapling your face back onto your skull. Drivers ought to watch for bikers, but they often don’t. And even in Portland—America’s most bike-friendly city—plenty of drivers resent anyone without a motor. For instance, everyone’s grandpa.
Fixies without Handbrakes
We’ll probably get shot for saying this. Fixed-gear bikes have a sleek, minimalist appeal that’s made them the steed of choice for Portland’s cool kids. Unfortunately, the price for their simple elegance is impending death. They’re called “track bikes” because they are meant for the track. As in a controlled, traffic-free environment that goes on in one theoretically endless circle. Hence, no need for separate brakes. There may be a handful of street riders who can actually safely handle a fixie in your modern urban environment. But our completely unscientific survey reveals that 8.14 out of 10 fixie riders are in it for the image (think about Portland’s low helmet-to-biker ratio) and don’t really know how to ride them. A handbrake might hurt your bike’s clean lines, but can you really count on those spindly, vegan legs to do your braking in a pinch?
I realize this was partly done just to stir up emotions and get people talking. But what do you think? Are WWeek staffers just trying to get attention, or are these legitimate beefs?
[Given what happened on Friday, I found the reference to riding on low-traffic streets tragically ironic.]
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Willy Week is alot like most of Portland, it thinks far to much of itself, and it\’s own importance.
Oh gee Jonathan, you asked for it.
This ain\’t going to be pretty.
Fixie brake/helmet flamefest #385.
as for the WW, this sounds like their cry for attention.
i\’m going to keep ridin\’ while playing my tiny violin on my no brake fancy 70\’s track frame that i will convert to a double one day from the skills i got from the UBI. phewwwww!
I read the WW only when nothing else is available. It sure is not what it used to be 20 or so years ago. Did anyone else notice the cover artisle was very short? And short on any substance?
The Mercury is twice the paper the WW is.
I think a lot of what the WW does is attention whoring. Hence the inflammatory statements in the article, and not solely aimed at bicycles.
… can you really count on those spindly, vegan legs to do your braking in a pinch?
HA! hahahahahaha! Funniest thing I\’ve seen all day. Spindly.
\”Are WWeek staffers just trying to get attention, or are these legitimate beefs?\”
Both, I think.
Riding a recumbent, I can\’t really chastise another for pedaling something weird, but that is a long way to fall.
The other week I saw a guy riding in a lane of the St John\’s Bridge. Yes, the sidewalk zigzags at the towers suck, and cyclist have a right to the road, but WW nailed this one.
Those who possess the skill to ride a fixie well, my hat\’s off to you. Judging from what I see though, I\’m think WW has it right. Fixies also seem to be the #1 runners of redlights. Coincidence?
(PS What are those things in their spokes? They never stop, so I\’ve never had a good look.)
Maybe WW thinks bicyclists should all be wearing camouflage and riding on back streets.
It wouldn\’t have been my choice to base a whole issue on one kid writer\’s pet peeves.
WW\’s bike article covered a couple of months ago about \”building a Frankenbike\” was weak! not only did they blatantly show inaccuracies and lack of bike knowledge but they used cuss words in the article, in my opinion, as an attempt to generalize the bike community and use some lame attempt to reach this group. You tell me who is crying for attention! WW isnt near the mag The Mercury is and I think they are grasping at whatever they can to regain some of their readership..
Personally, I think I think it was just to stir up tension, for no apparent reason. Who cares why somebody rides a double-tall bike? Attention? Machismo? So what? Why worry about it? The fixies, I can see their point. Riding on busy streets? I can see their point too, but I also think, cyclists having every right to the road as anyone else, the WW and the motorists can shove it.
I\’ve always been a bit perplexed about tall bikes myself, though they do look like fun to ride and I guess that\’s reason enough.
JE those things in people\’s wheels are cryptically named \”spoke cards\”. Usually they\’re given out at alleycats and are kept as souvenirs though sometimes I think some kids use them purely for decoration.
#6: 39th is high traffic, but the St Johns bridge isn\’t. The ODOT traffic engineers say that the thing can handle the all the traffic that it sees just fine with one lane in each direction, the only reason there are two is simple so that people can pass slower traffic, (like bicyclists.)
However, some sharrows would be appropriate there.
There are 2 big advantages (among others) to riding a tall bike.
Seeing and being seen.
At that height you can see over the cars in front of you and can better see approaching hazards.
You\’re also more likely to be seen by a driver contemplating turning or pulling out in front of you.
There are some that believe you will fare better in a collision since the bike will take the initial impact.
The complaint that they are trying to get attention ought to be rethought since it is very smart to try to get the attention of driver\’s eyes when on a bike.
One advantage to a tallbike is you have better visibility in two ways:
1. You are up high and you can see over the tops of cars, sometimes even SUVs.
2. Cars see you. They look, they point, they laugh. So you make people happy, which isn\’t quite they same as seeking attention. I think those you don\’t have the guts to do what they want because of what other people might think are the one who will always say that people who are different from the norm are \”seeking attention\”. It makes them feel better about not doing what they want because they are too much of a conformist. I get mostly get thumbs up, laughing, smiling, and waving on my tallbike. People who don\’t react or who scowl are just harumphing codgers, they probably don\’t have much joy in their lives anyways.
The perceived danger of fixed gear bikes without handbrakes is unfounded. The people who can ride them safely can outride the average cyclist all day,any day. The inexperienced \”fixsters\” would be just as incompetent on a bike with handbrakes and would not know enough about bikes to keep their handbrakes working well anyways. If these bikes really were fixed gear death machines, then where are the fatalities?
I ride all the time…commute, recreation, excercise. I like all sorts of conditions including quite routes, shared lanes, fast rides, downtown riding in traffic.
However, for my safety and the safety of others the WW article makes two valid points:
1. Why bike down really busy streets? Sandy Blvd…come on. Have you ever seen the idiots commuting down Sandy? Bikers trying to navigate through Hollywood during rush hour = Idiot. These people challenge the laws and legitimacy of urban biking.
2. People more concerned about fashion than anything else. Simply put, fixies are for controlled conditions. Fashionistas with no brakes are goin to crash into somebody or something eventually…Now, some folks can ride their fixies and do a damn good job of doing it, and they control their bikes fine and do not need a brake. This is a minority of the biking population. I am talking about the folks (you know the ones) that look like they think riding a fixie without any brake is a good idea. Keep\’em away from me while I am riding and make sure the ER room has enough stitches.
Flame on.
all legit gripes. If you\’re offended by the material in the WW article, that means they are referring to you.
The thing I find kind of ironic about this was Portlands\’s \”progressive\” paper ragging on bikes, while the conservative Oregonian goes all bike gaga the last month.
I think what we had was a young hotshot writer laughing at his own cleverness as he typed. I got a chuckle out of it too, but don\’t take his kvetching any more seriously than intended.
I\’m with Skidmark on the fixed gear issue. Where are all the dead fixed gear riders? Maybe we should drag the river?
There are, however many, many deaths each year due to auto collisions. If we reduced the speed limit to 20 mph everywhere we could eliminate virtually all of those fatalities.
the WW has always tried (and always failed) to be snarky like the mercury.
i also think its kind of ridiculous that they complain about BIKERS crying for attention…
have we all forgot about the ENDLESS amount of enourmous SUV\’s, \”pimped out\” cars, people racing up and down the streets, blasting their stereos (and extra loud mufflers)…etc…?
its pretty funny how the WW forgets about the THOUSANDS of people on the road like that….
but instead is upset with a handful of tall bikes and track bikes.
\”man, i reeeeeally can\’t stand those people….rolling around, NOT polluting the environment…who do they think they are?!?!?!\”
Sounds like classic WW sense of humor to me. Let us all laugh at ourselves once in a while…..
I think **deleted by moderator** (SKiDmark) **deleted by moderator** is going to give bad cycling advice to a person that curious about cycling…and then end up hurting themselves. It is scary to see a Fixie out of control…can\’t imagine being on one. Their narrow type of thinking (I want to do ANYTHING I want) is healthy for a while. But most people mature.
…I don\’t know of many valid cycling statistics that would show the number of \’Fixed Gear Cycling Accidents\’. That dataset would be interesting. Especially if we get a demographic profile of the type of people involved in the accidents.
#14 I regularly ride sandy when I am going from my house to downtown. It is by far the fastest way to get from point A to point B and from 60th through hollywood I am usually traveling as fast or faster than most automobile traffic. I don\’t see any reason why I would ride 40% further instead of taking the diagonal thoroughfare.
Also if you look at the map that shows reported bike injuries and fatalities you will find that Sandy is one of the safest streets in portland. Perhaps partly because it has fewer riders than some of the bike boulevards but you\’d be hard pressed to show that riding on Sandy is dangerous.
Bjorn
I\’d like to see WW do an issue dedicated to morons…in cars, on foot and on bikes. They\’d have no shortage of examples or sources. PDX is infested with self-absorbed, arrongant morons who cause a lot of trouble for the rest of the population. Drives who cant drive, riders who cant ride. It\’s an endless source of fascination and frustration for my and my fellow bike and motorcycle riders and nobody considers themselves anything but a freaking expert.
Tall bikes are different (like recumbents)and have their own issues. Fixies (aka trendies) should only be ridden by people with riding skills (the few that there are). Skills dont come with money, ink and/or piercings. Only practice.
Only the brave, skilled and situationally aware (the few that there are)should ride on crowded (with cars) streets.
Freedom of expression shouldn\’t override self-preservation when it comes to riding.
Just my $.02- worth everything you paid for it!
\”I think **deleted by moderator** (SKiDmark) is the type of narrow minded fashionista\”
Ginseng.. I do not tolerate this type of name-calling at all. If you continue to reference other commenters in this way you will no longer be able to comment.
Personal insults achieve nothing.
Thank you for understanding.
Jonathan:
Please edit the personal attacks out of Ginseng\’s last comment and encourage him/her to remain on topic and constructive with his/her comments. And, perhaps, to refrain from the \”you can\’t disprove a negative\” logical games, because if one wants to disprove an assertion based on statistical evidence, one had better come through with one\’s own evidence.
Whoops, too late!
Fritz (#23), I totally agree that there is a mind-numbing level of self-absorbed arrogance in this town. Everyone could stand to learn a little humility, patience, and cooperation in this world, myself included.
For all those complaining about bikes on busy streets, grow up. Or are you under the delusion that because someone rides a bike they are not entitled to use the muncipal servises they helped pay for, ie City streets.
Well since we are restricting peoples rights because of a personel prefrence, I really don\’t like people that are unattractive being allowed out in the daytime, can we keep them off the streets from say 7am – 8pm?
Thanks
**deleted by moderator – SkiDmark, and everyone else, please refrain from personal back-and-forths that do not address the issue at hand or add value to the dialogue. Thanks for your understanding.**
Actually my advice to anyone trying a fixed gear bicyle for the first time is to have handbrakes and keep them until you are comfortable not having them. I recommend learning how to resist the forward motion of the pedals, hop stop, and skid, because you never know if that cable may snap. Even then I think it is stupid to have no handbrakes on a bike that has holes for them. The only fixed gear bikes that should have no handbrakes are track bikes, because the nice ones do not have brake holes.
Me, narrow-minded, what a laugh.
Or a \”fashionista\”.
But our completely unscientific survey reveals that the WW is the realm of the non-expert talking through a pin-hole of a sphincter blocked by a gaggle of numerous heads all jammed in the same passage-way, screaming \”Me too!\” in alarmingly shrill counter-counter-counter-culture overtones. 2 bits a gander? Why, no sir, it\’s FREE!
#29
\”…because you never know if that cable may snap.\”
Well there\’s our hot new topic right there!
Stop discriminating against the bikes w/ brakes and gears. We want to be controversial too, damnit! Now that the deadly potential of a snapped brake cable has come to light, I feel that we should include all bicycles into the debate. Are bicycles actually safe? Should they be retired as a catastrophe of engineering?
Tall bikes. I use the inseam/waist ratio on this one. If you waist is bigger than you inseam, then you\’re fat. If your bike is taller than it is long, then…ummm, I hope that you have a small waist. Proportion is important.
A 1.5mm cable snapping is much more likely than a bicycle chain snapping.
You must either fastidiously maintain your bikes, never ride old bikes, only ride new bikes with low miles,or hardly ever ride bikes, to have never had a brake cable snap. I bet it is the #2 repair behind flat tires at bike shops.
I can only imagine how many folks over at the Willy commute by bike themselves. I think the story was their idea of polking fun at and getting differing reactions from the bike community. And I agree with others here, that the WW better get it together…because it\’s getting pretty tired these days. Go Merc.
Remember one of the Neocons saying before the Iraq war that the build-up would begin in September because, \”You don\’t roll-out new products in August\”, or something like that?
I saw the WW \”article\” as the result of a slow news month when most people are on vacation. It was prefaced with a comment about being able to laugh at ourselves, which I think we all need to do from time to time.
If I had one personal Kvetch, however, it would have to be the cavalier attitude toward safety of many of our bike community. I live on Belmont and frequently see people on busy streets…dressed in dark clothes…no lights…no helmet…iPod plugged in…maybe a frikin\’ cell phone to their ear. If I hit them accidentally with my van, how will I be perceived on this blog? What about my trauma from being the so-called perpetrator when the cyclist is so blatantly disregarding her safety?
I don\’t have answers, but I sure would like to see more emphasis on safety from all users of the road, not just a knee-jerk response to defend anyone on 2 wheels.
-Ian
Boo Willamette Week. Seriously… Boo. I ride a \”fixie\” that is also a double-tall bike and it is AWESOME! No. I mean- I am AWESOME!
The only issue I see with those who argue against running a hand brake on the fixed gear bike is that even if you are an elite, skilled Dabbylicious beast on your machine, does the aesthetic really mean more to you than your life? No matter your skills, there are situations where that brake might save your ass. Feet in the wrong spot when that truck cuts you off? You\’re hosed. Riding brakeless is great fun, but I guess I\’m not so full of myself as to think that I won\’t ever make a mistake or get caught in a spot where that brake means everything.
Now, people who go brakeless without first acquiring the skills to unconsciously and ambidextrously skid, skip, resist, and everything in between? Well, them\’s just future Darwin award winners.
I\’ve never had a brake cable snap, and I fit none of your categories, Skidmark. Had a few derailleur cables snap, but never a brake cable. Snapped a few chains too, prolly \’cause each link wears down and is a potential failure site. A 1.5mm cable will hold the weight of a very fat man with no problem, so its diameter has absolutely nothing to do with how it fails; they always snap at the head or at a frayed end.
Valid issues or not, in the context of that article, it\’s obviously meant to be humorous. Jeez, some of you need to lighten up and quit riding without a saddle.
I won\’t shoot the kid. I\’m amused by well written (22 year old?) critics. Of course, due to my own fear of heights and inexperience with a fixie I\’m not referenced in his article… oh yeah except for those trips down 39th and any other busy street I need to ride on.
I love you people who think that safety devices are some sort of ticket to invincibilty.
And the people who think the only way out of a collision is to stop. Evasive manoever anyone? Sometimes coming to a stop just puts you in the path of the vehicle, making you a sitting duck.
And my favorite are the ones who have never ridden the type of bike they are criticising and think they know everything about how they work, and who believe that just because they can\’t do it, nobody can.
Jonathon S,
You may fit into the \”fastidiously maintain\” category if you are looking for frayed cable ends, although maybe not because you let your chains wear out.
Maybe your chains snapped because they were not properly installed. Usually when a chain fails it is because the pin was not pressed in far enough. I had a chain with one link plate broken that still would not snap even though I was skidding on it (coasterbrake not fixed).
Or maybe you are just a troll trying to be contradictory.
Could a bike shop employee weigh in and tell us what is more common, brake cables snapping or chains snapping?
The taller they are, the harder they fall. It has something to with the law of gravity, I think. Of course, being that high, one can avoid a direct impact to one’s body (think road rage and Johnny Eschweiler). Following a collision, one should be able to escape serious injury by deploying a parachute.
As for brakes, I\’ve decided to remove them from my Porsche 959. It tops out at only 205 M.P.H.; I figure I can stop it by dragging my feet.
I too can say I\’ve never broken a cable (and I\’m hardly fastidious about maintenance, but I do pay attention to my equipment). I\’ve broken chains many times, but always on a geared bike, where the chain is rarely in perfect alignment; a single speed or fixie, properly installed is unlikely to break.
I think the point really is that both situations are extremely unlikely, so it\’s silly to bring either up.
I never figured tall bikes were about anything except fun. My cousins used to build them. I always thought the bikes looked stupid. Certain other people probably do to, but so what? People ought to be able to have fun doing something different if they want to.
It seems highly doubtful that such bikes are going to take over more conventionally built bikes as transportation and recreation.
Poor, rather pathetic Willamette Week, a one article weekly with a lot of little news items thrown in, surviving on the revenue from escort ads in the back pages. It used to ridicule the Portland Tribune until some of its own writers fled the WW to work for that paper.
#38 – Thanks for saying it so I didn\’t have to.
\”fastidiously\”? Nah, basic maintenance works just fine.
I think the last brake cable I had snap was on my Team Murray BMX bike back around 1985. Man that bike was a piece of crap.
I now have three bikes with both front and rear brake cables (that\’s 6 potential failures), and I run them fairly tight. Never had a failure. Also have two bikes with coaster brakes. Took the 1971 Stingray on a Zoobomb and I\’ll be damned it that old coaster didn\’t get hot as hell, but no failure (they usually seize if/when they fail anyway).
I do still, however, have a dent in my kneecap from a broken chain – still tender after all these years. Then there was that 5 mile walk in cycling shoes after my chain broke while just pedaling along on the Springwater.
I guess individual experience lends itself to personal viewpoints.
P.S. How do those tall bikes keep from wheelie-ing on steep climbs?
What is up…post #15 was a direct attack on me.
\”Oh look, a harumphing codger…\” as skids stated…and then later in post # 29…\”So wonderful to have my own personal troll. Who\’s looking for attention? Is it you, Ginseng?\”
I made articulate statements regarding the article in post 15. **deleted** (skidmark) feels that flat out insults are appropriate. I am far from Politically Correct, JMaus, but to isolate me and not get at SkidMark…
And anybody reading this post, you can see, skids is was overly defensive about his poor judgement in not using a brake…like today in the rain. I wish skidmark the best in trying to stop today.
Avast! 40 cubits on Ginseng!
-Ian
Ginseng,
I have edited parts of SkiDmark\’s comment now too.
Please realize that these comments are not for settling personal arguments with other commenters.
Also realize that I moderate comments solely by my own discretion and only do it as I have time for.
If you have a problem with another commenter, please email me directly and I will deal with it ASAP.
jonathan[at]bikeportland[dot]org
I agree that we all need to lighten up a bit. They weren\’t writing a serious news piece, just a silly story. You might not agree with everything, but I think that was the whole point! I DO agree however (off bikes), that restaurants that don\’t take credit cards and don\’t tell you until you go to pay the bill (Nutshell on Williams) really suck! So there…
Anybody who believes that this was a serious story– as opposed to an attempt to stir a little controversy and boost readership– might want to invest in my underwater ranch scheme…
Not to create a fire-storm, I agree with WW on all three points.