Scientific American trick riding 1894 and 1897 [Archive]

carlfogel@comcast.net

12-31-1969, 08:00 PM

Scientific American sometimes rose about mere mechanical matters and
showed trick and fancy riders, as they were known.

Here are eight pictures of the American Valdare doing stunts for a
French magazine on page 53 of the July 24 issue of 1897, all on a
newfangled safety bicycle:

http://i13.tinypic.com/7y3s2fb.jpg

A few years earlier, Scientific American showed ten pictures of the
trick and fancy competition in Leipzig between the American N.C.
Kaufman and the Frenchman August Gouget:

http://i17.tinypic.com/8eufoqs.jpg

It looks as if most of that competition involved highwheelers, which
had already faded from the streets by 1894. One rider would do a
trick, and the other would try to repeat it.

Kaufman stomped Gouget, 284 4/5 points to 228 2/5 points, but the
gentlemanly Scientific American ended the article with the comment
that "Gouget was not to be scorned as an opponent." In fact, Gouget
did some tricks that Kaufman didn't even try to reproduce.

It's a little like the Armstrong-Ulrich rivalry in the Tour. Anyone
who argues that Ulrich was a poor rider should notice that only two
riders finished on the podium seven times between 1996 to 2005, and
only one of those two riders competed regularly in other events:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/results/history/tdfhistory.html

Just as Gouget could probably ride stunt rings around almost anyone
except Kaufman, Ulrich could beat just about anybody except Armstrong.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Sheldon Brown

01-03-1970, 10:19 PM

Dear Carl,

You have been coming up with wonderful stuff from old Scientific
Americans and the like, but the images you link to are so small as to
make the text basically illegible.

You're using Tinypic.com, which is fine, but could you provide
information on how you're finding these articles (assuming you're
finding 'em on line, not scanning long-dead tree versions.)

Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?

( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

As ever, y'r. h'ble', obd't. s'vt.,

Sheldon "It Was All Invented Before WW1" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------------+
| If you like chamber and instrumental music, check out |
| This great podcast from the Boston's Gardner Museum: |
| http://gardnermuseum.org/music/podcast/theconcert.asp |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
<CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

>Dear Carl,
>
>You have been coming up with wonderful stuff from old Scientific
>Americans and the like, but the images you link to are so small as to
>make the text basically illegible.
>
>You're using Tinypic.com, which is fine, but could you provide
>information on how you're finding these articles (assuming you're
>finding 'em on line, not scanning long-dead tree versions.)
>
>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>
>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )
>
>As ever, y'r. h'ble', obd't. s'vt.,
>
>Sheldon "It Was All Invented Before WW1" Brown
>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>| If you like chamber and instrumental music, check out |
>| This great podcast from the Boston's Gardner Museum: |
>| http://gardnermuseum.org/music/podcast/theconcert.asp |
>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
> Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
> http://harriscyclery.com
> Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
>http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

Dear Sheldon,

Oooh, Harper's Weekly digitized--thanks!

***

Image size . . .

It seems unlikely, but you may not have your browser showing the
tinypic images full-size. I expect that you use a Mac, but in Explorer
you move the mouse to the lower right corner of the image and
left-click on the little bigger-or-smaller icon that pops up.

On my alleged 17-inch diagonal screen, this 4-inch-wide unreadable
image expands to about 12 inches wide

http://i7.tinypic.com/6tzaa1e.jpg

Maybe some other Mac users will chime in and reveal how to expand the
images to full size--if that's the probelm.

But the scans are still wretched scans of bad copier printouts of
microfilm scans. Automatic exposure works about half the time, but the
rest of the time I get to guess what setting will fool the microfilm
reader, which retaliates by occasionally sulking and producing a
blinding white scan for the next half-dozen attempts.

***

My source . . .

Alas, I grovel through microfilm at the library. A dead tree version
would be wonderful, since it would be immensely faster and would copy
like a dream.

You wouldn't believe how frustrating and inconvenient the computerized
print-from-microfilm feature is at my library, so here's my rant:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/67f63ad93cf14e0c

Of course, the library microfilm is free, barring the dime-per-page
and my time. I tried a camera, but the lights shining off the reader's
screen made it useless. Like most people, I complain too much about
the quality of what's nearly free.

***

Digital source . . .

Alas, there's no digitized source for old Scientific Americans.

Gutenberg has a sampling of pre-1900 Scientific Americans, usually
with a nice html presentation that includes the illustrations.

But they seem to be just selected articles, not full issues, so the
smaller articles that addressed bikes are usually missing. I searched
them and came up practically empty. You can see them by going to
Gutenberg and searching in the title for scientific american
supplement:

http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/search

No quote marks, and you have to include supplement. Otherwise, the
search fails.

Thanks again for that Harper's Weekly link. An curiously improved
version of your beloved Bio-Pace oval chain rings will appear soon.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Paul Myron Hobson

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
> <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Carl,
>>
>> You have been coming up with wonderful stuff from old Scientific
>> Americans and the like, but the images you link to are so small as to
>> make the text basically illegible.
>>
>> You're using Tinypic.com, which is fine, but could you provide
>> information on how you're finding these articles (assuming you're
>> finding 'em on line, not scanning long-dead tree versions.)
....
>>
>> Sheldon "It Was All Invented Before WW1" Brown

>
> Dear Sheldon,

> Image size . . .
>
> It seems unlikely, but you may not have your browser showing the
> tinypic images full-size. I expect that you use a Mac, but in Explorer
> you move the mouse to the lower right corner of the image and
> left-click on the little bigger-or-smaller icon that pops up.
>
> On my alleged 17-inch diagonal screen, this 4-inch-wide unreadable
> image expands to about 12 inches wide
>
> http://i7.tinypic.com/6tzaa1e.jpg
>
> Maybe some other Mac users will chime in and reveal how to expand the
> images to full size--if that's the probelm.

My Firefox (Mac):
The image loads resized to the width of the window. Placing the cursor
over image, the cursor changes to a magnifying glass with a plus sign in
it. Clicking expands them image to full size.

Safari:
Same exact thing.

The first link that Carl posted is noticeably harder to read than the
second.

\\paul

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
><CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

Aha! Harper's Weekly in Sheldon's link has Much better pictures of the
Victor dynamometer and resilometer than can be seen in Scientific
American:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fharp%2Fharp0090%2F&tif=01022.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABK4014-0090-119&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50

The resiliometer measured the resilence, or bounce, of tires.

Inflation probably mattered more than the composition of the Victor
tires, but that didn't stop them from using it in weekly ads in the
back of Scientific American, which showed the same picture of the
contraption and boasted that the Victor tires were the best.

More useful was the dynamometer, an early version of a PowerTap in the
form of a thick pedal that contained a roll of paper moved by
clockwork while a pen traced the pressure on the spring-loaded pedal.

A version of the dynamometer is mentioned by Sharp, who credits Scott
with the data:

http://books.google.com/books?id=gFMN3-srupsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:archibald+inauthor:sharp&as_brr=1&ei=qK8vR5ezL4GktAPMvqiwCQ#PPA269,M1

And here's Scott's original Cyclograph discussion:

http://books.google.com/books?id=rZQ1AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=cycling+art+energy+locomotion&as_brr=1&ei=5VotR-XvL5SysgOdjbS6CQ#PPA48,M1

Allegedly, the Victor company switched to 8 rather than 7 tooth rear
cogs, based on graphs from the dynamometer that showed that fewer
teeth were less efficient. Such accuracy might have been beyond the
crude device, but modern testing confirms the theory that larger gears
are more efficient.

Incidentally, remember to double the number of teeth on those antique
7 and 8 tooth inch-pitch sprockets to get our modern equivalents, 14
and 16 teeth.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
><CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
>
>>Dear Carl,
>>
>>You have been coming up with wonderful stuff from old Scientific
>>Americans and the like, but the images you link to are so small as to
>>make the text basically illegible.
>>
>>You're using Tinypic.com, which is fine, but could you provide
>>information on how you're finding these articles (assuming you're
>>finding 'em on line, not scanning long-dead tree versions.)
>>
>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )
>>
>>As ever, y'r. h'ble', obd't. s'vt.,
>>
>>Sheldon "It Was All Invented Before WW1" Brown
>>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>>| If you like chamber and instrumental music, check out |
>>| This great podcast from the Boston's Gardner Museum: |
>>| http://gardnermuseum.org/music/podcast/theconcert.asp |
>>+--------------------------------------------------------+
>>Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
>> Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
>> http://harriscyclery.com
>> Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
>>http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
>
>Dear Sheldon,
>
>Oooh, Harper's Weekly digitized--thanks!
>
>***
>
>Image size . . .
>
>It seems unlikely, but you may not have your browser showing the
>tinypic images full-size. I expect that you use a Mac, but in Explorer
>you move the mouse to the lower right corner of the image and
>left-click on the little bigger-or-smaller icon that pops up.
>
>On my alleged 17-inch diagonal screen, this 4-inch-wide unreadable
>image expands to about 12 inches wide
>
> http://i7.tinypic.com/6tzaa1e.jpg
>
>Maybe some other Mac users will chime in and reveal how to expand the
>images to full size--if that's the probelm.
>
>But the scans are still wretched scans of bad copier printouts of
>microfilm scans. Automatic exposure works about half the time, but the
>rest of the time I get to guess what setting will fool the microfilm
>reader, which retaliates by occasionally sulking and producing a
>blinding white scan for the next half-dozen attempts.
>
>***
>
>My source . . .
>
>Alas, I grovel through microfilm at the library. A dead tree version
>would be wonderful, since it would be immensely faster and would copy
>like a dream.
>
>You wouldn't believe how frustrating and inconvenient the computerized
>print-from-microfilm feature is at my library, so here's my rant:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/67f63ad93cf14e0c
>
>Of course, the library microfilm is free, barring the dime-per-page
>and my time. I tried a camera, but the lights shining off the reader's
>screen made it useless. Like most people, I complain too much about
>the quality of what's nearly free.
>
>***
>
>Digital source . . .
>
>Alas, there's no digitized source for old Scientific Americans.
>
>Gutenberg has a sampling of pre-1900 Scientific Americans, usually
>with a nice html presentation that includes the illustrations.
>
>But they seem to be just selected articles, not full issues, so the
>smaller articles that addressed bikes are usually missing. I searched
>them and came up practically empty. You can see them by going to
>Gutenberg and searching in the title for scientific american
>supplement:
>
> http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/search
>
>No quote marks, and you have to include supplement. Otherwise, the
>search fails.
>
>Thanks again for that Harper's Weekly link. An curiously improved
>version of your beloved Bio-Pace oval chain rings will appear soon.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Carl Fogel

A nice trio of ads in Harpers of 1895, showing that the bike boom was
underway:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fharp%2Fharp0091%2F&tif=01097.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABK4014-0091-108

Drawings like the top one of a rider using coasting pegs are rare.

This is the only actual photograph of coasting pegs in action that
I've found:

http://www.nostalgic.net/index.asp?S=arc/pre1920/1890%27s+man+on+bike%2Ejpg

Graphite chain lubrication gave way to the modern oil versus wax
debate. You could buy graphite sticks, 2nd from the top on the right,
along with other necessities, such as Plugolio and other tube
sealants, rim cement or shellac, and soapstone (apparently they
believed in the virtue of talc on inner tubes):

http://www.nostalgic.net/index.asp?S=arc/ScannedLit/1919%20black%20beauty/Black+Beauty+pg+25%2Ejpg

The same sundries from Morley Brothers 1916 catalogue:

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/morley/14.jpg

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/morley/15.jpg

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
><CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

In September 1897, Harpers opened with a huge article, "Around London
By Bicycle," profusely illustrated and running 22 pages, from page 489
to 510.

A more insipid travelogue is hard to imagine.

From the bicycling point of view, the kindest thing that can be said
of Ms. Pennell is that she had a flat tire on on page 494, but
declined to discuss such depressing matters:

"Of the trouble that came upon me after Godstone, of my punctured
tire, and the long delay in a repair-shop of Oxted--a delay that gave
the artillery a chance to get ahead of us again--I shall say nothing.
Why dwell on the short interval of misery, when the rest of the long
morning has left only memories of great beauty--of sweeping green
meadows and fast-flying clouds, of hedges scarlet with hips and haws
and blah-blah-blah."

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fharp%2Fharp0095%2F&tif=00504.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABK4014-0095-6&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50

Most of the time, you wouldn't know that the wench was on two wheels.
(To be fair, the men writing about their bicycle tours for magazines
at the time turned out drivel every bit as awful.)

Far more pithy and specific is this small ad, second from the bottom
on the left in November, 1897:

"3000 bicycles must be closed out at once. Standard '97 models,
guarnt'd, $14 to $20. 2nd hand wheels at $12 to $15. Shipped to anyone
on approval without advance deposit. Great factory clearing sale. Earn
a bicycle by helping advertise us. We will give one agent in each town
free use of a single wheel to introduce them. Write at once for our
special offer. D.H. Mead & Prentiss, Chicago, Ill."

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fharp%2Fharp0095%2F&tif=01067.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABK4014-0095-8

In other words, the bike boom was starting to burst, even as Harpers
published 22 pages of insipid travel twaddle as its leading article,
the hook being the word "bicycle" in the title. Prices were dropping
like rocks from the $150 to $100 level, even as new companies rushed
to enter the saturated market

A few years later, a Harvard economist studying bankruptcies published
this brief history of the bicycle boom and bust:

Chronological Summary

1890. Beginning of bicycle industry.
1897. Popularity of bicycle reaches its climax.
1898. Promotion of the consolodation.
1899. American Bicycle Company commences operations.
1900. First published statement.
1902. Failure of the American Bicycle Company.

http://books.google.com/books?id=JU8tAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA249&dq=%22american+bicycle%22&as_brr=1&ei=ouFdR6MTp4a2A7PzxIYO

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown

>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?

The gorgeous new Lovell diamond-frame safety bicycle for 1891 appears
illustrated with coasting pegs in "Manufacturer & Builder":

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fmanu%2Fmanu0024%2F&tif=00193.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABS1821-0024-481

Two-inch tires and only 43 pounds!

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

Over the Alps in Century Magazine for April, 1989:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fcent%2Fcent0055%2F&tif=00849.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABP2287-0055-191

Ms. Pennell is more interesting when she writes about cycling through
the mountains of Europe than when she cruised around London
(unbearable). See how many passes sound familiar.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
><CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
>
>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

That link _does_ have Scientific American, but only to 1869, well
before the highwheeler era began around 1875.

From the last issue in the series, June 12, 1869, here's the kind of
velocipede (bare metal wheel, front pedals) that the highwheeler
replaced:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fscia%2Fscia1020%2F&tif=00380.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABF2204-1020-26

Those are coasting pegs on the front. The huge front wheel of the
penny-farthing increased the pathetic gearing and smoothed the ride
(which further improved with solid rubber tires).

Unlike the Gutenberg Scientific Americans, these are scans of the
actual pages from beginning to end, not just selected articles.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:13:00 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>>( http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html )

Scribner's magazine joins the bike boom in ads for 1895:

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fscri%2Fscri0019%2F&tif=00841.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DAFR7379-0019-98&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50

Twelve pages of vapid ads, with a completely unrelated and wildly
racist cartoon thrown in by some confused editor.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Sheldon Brown

01-03-1970, 10:20 PM

Quoth Paul Myron Hobson:

> My Firefox (Mac):
> The image loads resized to the width of the window. Placing the cursor
> over image, the cursor changes to a magnifying glass with a plus sign in
> it. Clicking expands them image to full size.
>
> Safari:
> Same exact thing.

Oh yes, this is a new feature in the latest version of Safari. It was
shrinking the images to fit the vertical size of my screen. Clicking
the magnifying glass did the trick.

Happy Beethoven's Birthday to all!

Sheldon "Still Learning Panther Or Whatever The Current Kittykat Name
Is" Brown
+-------------------------------------------+
| How to Write Like A Wanker: |
| http://guidenet.net/resources/wanker.html |
+-------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

Marian

01-03-1970, 10:21 PM

On Dec 16, 9:12 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
> ><CaptB...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
> >>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
> >>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>
> >>(http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html)
>
> Aha! Harper's Weekly in Sheldon's link has Much better pictures of the
> Victor dynamometer and resilometer than can be seen in Scientific
> American:
>
> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fh...

"They know that the ease, pleasure, and safety in riding a bicycle
depend far more upon positive knowledge on the part of the maker, and
of the use of exact methods in construction, than on a two or three
pound difference in weight."

01-03-1970, 10:21 PM

Using a camera to duplicate from a microfilm reader isn't that hard, but
it does take a bit of setup.

You'll want a camera whose flash can be turned off, a sturdy tripod, and
something to block ambient light to avoid reflections. When I did it, I
used a sheet of cheap black cloth draped over the top of the reader and
over a couple of chairs stacked behind the tripod.

Alternatively, if the library would tolerate it, a laptop and a roll-fed
scanner could get through a hundred-foot roll of microfilm in a few
hours.

--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>

r15757@aol.com

01-03-1970, 10:21 PM

On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:

> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>
> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>
> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
> fixies today.

I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
'scorchers.'

Robert

Ryan Cousineau

01-03-1970, 10:23 PM

In article
<18d17330-cd57-4eb0-9a57-74d344b88148@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

> Quoth Paul Myron Hobson:
>
>
> > My Firefox (Mac):
> > The image loads resized to the width of the window. Placing the cursor
> > over image, the cursor changes to a magnifying glass with a plus sign in
> > it. Clicking expands them image to full size.
> >
> > Safari:
> > Same exact thing.
>
> Oh yes, this is a new feature in the latest version of Safari. It was
> shrinking the images to fit the vertical size of my screen. Clicking
> the magnifying glass did the trick.
>
> Happy Beethoven's Birthday to all!
>
> Sheldon "Still Learning Panther Or Whatever The Current Kittykat Name
> Is" Brown

Ocelot. "Quick Look" is just plain useful. "Coverflow view" is
surprisingly practical. Making the menu bar transparent was silly.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:23 PM

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:39:54 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca>
wrote:

>In article
><18d17330-cd57-4eb0-9a57-74d344b88148@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
>
>> Quoth Paul Myron Hobson:
>>
>>
>> > My Firefox (Mac):
>> > The image loads resized to the width of the window. Placing the cursor
>> > over image, the cursor changes to a magnifying glass with a plus sign in
>> > it. Clicking expands them image to full size.
>> >
>> > Safari:
>> > Same exact thing.
>>
>> Oh yes, this is a new feature in the latest version of Safari. It was
>> shrinking the images to fit the vertical size of my screen. Clicking
>> the magnifying glass did the trick.
>>
>> Happy Beethoven's Birthday to all!
>>
>> Sheldon "Still Learning Panther Or Whatever The Current Kittykat Name
>> Is" Brown
>
>Ocelot. "Quick Look" is just plain useful. "Coverflow view" is
>surprisingly practical. Making the menu bar transparent was silly.

Dear Ryan & Sheldon,

The upcoming "Moggie" operating system is rumored to be large enough
to handle any amount of creeping feature bloat.

Here are a few of the fatter feline candidates being considered for
mascot status:

http://messybeast.com/freak-size.htm

Guinness no longer accepts submissions for overfed monster moggies,
but the computer world shows no signs of such ethical qualms.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Werehatrack

01-03-1970, 10:23 PM

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:39:54 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> may
have said:

> Making the menu bar transparent was silly.

Creeping Vistaism.

I recently emailed an eBay seller to ask if he would possibly be
willing to provide a laptop *without* the added Vista lookalike skin
pasted on to XP, which was listed as a "feature" in the seller's ad.
The response was "Oh, everyone just loves it, we do that to all our
laptops now."

I placed my bid elsewhere.

A friend has been making a nice side income from upgrading* systems
from Vista to XP, and he even does it with genuine licensed installs.
It says something, that folks are willing to lay out an added $180 to
get Vista *removed* from their shiny new toy. (Dell apparently has
that as a factory option again, due to not just overwhelming but
completely intractable customer demand. Some corporate buyers were
reportedly saying "Ship XP, or ship in pieces and we'll assemble the
system and install the OS ourselves.")

* Microsoft wants to call this a downgrade, but as with the South Lake
Union Trolley, the public's opinion is at variance with the wishes of
the people who own the name.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Ryan Cousineau

01-03-1970, 10:24 PM

In article <2u1bm3lvocfi8krqv33o3psgv83c4qm3n9@4ax.com>,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:39:54 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><18d17330-cd57-4eb0-9a57-74d344b88148@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Quoth Paul Myron Hobson:
> >>
> >>
> >> > My Firefox (Mac):
> >> > The image loads resized to the width of the window. Placing the cursor
> >> > over image, the cursor changes to a magnifying glass with a plus sign in
> >> > it. Clicking expands them image to full size.
> >> >
> >> > Safari:
> >> > Same exact thing.
> >>
> >> Oh yes, this is a new feature in the latest version of Safari. It was
> >> shrinking the images to fit the vertical size of my screen. Clicking
> >> the magnifying glass did the trick.
> >>
> >> Happy Beethoven's Birthday to all!
> >>
> >> Sheldon "Still Learning Panther Or Whatever The Current Kittykat Name
> >> Is" Brown
> >
> >Ocelot. "Quick Look" is just plain useful. "Coverflow view" is
> >surprisingly practical. Making the menu bar transparent was silly.
>
> Dear Ryan & Sheldon,
>
> The upcoming "Moggie" operating system is rumored to be large enough
> to handle any amount of creeping feature bloat.
>
> Here are a few of the fatter feline candidates being considered for
> mascot status:
>
> http://messybeast.com/freak-size.htm
>
> Guinness no longer accepts submissions for overfed monster moggies,
> but the computer world shows no signs of such ethical qualms.

Heh. But when you really want to push it into crazy-pet-cat territory,
extreme measures are necessary:

http://jonh-devis.livejournal.com/
(just keep scrolling)

I can only assume, from the lovely photos, that the family in question
are living in the Russian equivalent of rural Colorado or some such:
fishing, mycology, and giant pet cats.

The cat in question is "explained" here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_Cat

Sort of.

Proving that Russia is just way more awesome than any other country in
the world, further (arguably NSFW) photos are here:
http://www.diesel.pp.net.ua/news/2007-02-15-104

Rated sorta-NSFW for a not-really-revealing bathtub shot, and graphic
photos of the cat eviscerating a chicken. Mostly feathers.

The cat in question is notable for being not only big (see regular felis
domesticus in some photos, apparently included for scale) but for being
not fat. It's just really big.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:24 PM

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 12:43:42 -0800, <josh@phred.org> wrote:

>Using a camera to duplicate from a microfilm reader isn't that hard, but
>it does take a bit of setup.
>
>You'll want a camera whose flash can be turned off, a sturdy tripod, and
>something to block ambient light to avoid reflections. When I did it, I
>used a sheet of cheap black cloth draped over the top of the reader and
>over a couple of chairs stacked behind the tripod.
>
>Alternatively, if the library would tolerate it, a laptop and a roll-fed
>scanner could get through a hundred-foot roll of microfilm in a few
>hours.

Dear Josh,

Alas, toleration is not my library's trademark. I had trouble getting
a crude tripod past the vigilant security guard. The outcry when I was
caught swapping lenses on the would have been justified if I had been
roasting babies--or if the first librarian hadn't shown me how to grab
one from an idle machine.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:25 PM

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15757@aol.com wrote:

>On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>>
>> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>>
>> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
>> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
>> fixies today.
>
>I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
>have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
>wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
>there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
>'scorchers.'
>
>Robert

Dear Robert,

These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:

http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

r15757@aol.com

01-03-1970, 10:25 PM

On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>
> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>
> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
> >> fixies today.
>
> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
> >'scorchers.'
>
> >Robert
>
> Dear Robert,
>
> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>
> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
cyclists on the road.

Robert

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:27 PM

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:45:33 -0800 (PST), r15757@aol.com wrote:

>On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
>> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>>
>> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>>
>> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
>> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
>> >> fixies today.
>>
>> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
>> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
>> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
>> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
>> >'scorchers.'
>>
>> >Robert
>>
>> Dear Robert,
>>
>> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
>> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>>
>> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>
>'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
>messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
>number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
>cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
>population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
>of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
>rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
>average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
>something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
>cyclists on the road.
>
>Robert

Dear Robert,

Injury rates higher than meatpackers are common on city bicycle
commuters?

Are you simply redefining any messenger who does misbehave visibly as
"an abject rookie" in order to support a revised claim that "veteran"
messengers" never, never ride irresponsibly?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:27 PM

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:29:12 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:45:33 -0800 (PST), r15757@aol.com wrote:
>
>>On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
>>> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>>
>>> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>>>
>>> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>>>
>>> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
>>> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
>>> >> fixies today.
>>>
>>> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
>>> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
>>> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
>>> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
>>> >'scorchers.'
>>>
>>> >Robert
>>>
>>> Dear Robert,
>>>
>>> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
>>> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>>>
>>> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Carl Fogel
>>
>>
>>'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
>>messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
>>number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
>>cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
>>population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
>>of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
>>rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
>>average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
>>something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
>>cyclists on the road.
>>
>>Robert
>
>Dear Robert,
>
>Injury rates higher than meatpackers are common on city bicycle
>commuters?
>
>Are you simply redefining any messenger who does misbehave visibly as
>"an abject rookie" in order to support a revised claim that "veteran"
>messengers" never, never ride irresponsibly?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Carl Fogel

I wonder how many people laid eyes on these messengers misbehaving?

http://www.digave.com/videos/bronx.mpg

Of course, that's just one of the many "races" Lucas Brunelle filmed.
The rest of the time, those messengers never do anything like that.

At least not the veterans. Those visible riders must all be "abject
rookies."

More videos of "abject rookies" misbehaving:

http://www.digave.com/videos/index.htm

Heck, maybe they're all just faux messengers carrying those messenger
bags and not even "abject rookies."

:-)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

dugoutcanoe@gmail.com

01-03-1970, 10:27 PM

On Dec 17, 12:29 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:45:33 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
> >On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>
> >> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>
> >> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
> >> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
> >> >> fixies today.
>
> >> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
> >> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
> >> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
> >> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
> >> >'scorchers.'
>
> >> >Robert
>
> >> Dear Robert,
>
> >> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
> >> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>
> >> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>
> >> Cheers,
>
> >> Carl Fogel
>
> >'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
> >messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
> >number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
> >cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
> >population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
> >of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
> >rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
> >average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
> >something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
> >cyclists on the road.
>
> >Robert
>
> Dear Robert,
>
> Injury rates higher than meatpackers are common on city bicycle
> commuters?
>

Yes.

The survey you cite, of Boston messengers, shows they have lost-work-
due-to-injury rate second only to meatpackers. Oooh, scary, right?

But, whoops, the survey also shows that the entire population of
Boston messengers (as represented by survey respondents), including
abject rookies, have an accident/injury rate, per-mile, that is in the
same ballpark as that recorded by Moritz in his extensive survey of
LAB members. The injury rate recorded in Mortiz' survey was the lowest
ever recorded for any group of cyclists, anywhere, ever, and is often
cited by those looking for evidence that cycling is a fundamentally
safe activity. So, the rate found by Moritz for primarily recreational
riders who pick and choose their routes and who don't go out on the
ice and who reported an average of 17 years experience was about the
same as that found in the Harvard survey for the entire population of
Boston messengers, including abject rookies, who have many orders of
magnitude more interactions with vehicles per-hour or mile of riding
than the typical recreational rider, and who work year-round in icy
conditions (undoubtedly, many of the injuries recorded in the
messenger survey were due to falls on ice). Now, what does that tell
you about the veteran messengers of Boston. This stuff is not that
hard.

> Are you simply redefining any messenger who does misbehave visibly as
> "an abject rookie" in order to support a revised claim that "veteran"
> messengers" never, never ride irresponsibly?

You brought up injury rates. If a messenger crashes as often as the
highly experienced LAB members in Moritz' survey he is going to crash
about four times as often per year and be in the ER quite often.
Obviously, messengers need to do a lot better than that if they want
to stay out of the hospital for any length of time, and in fact they
do a lot better than that.

Robert

dugoutcanoe@gmail.com

01-03-1970, 10:28 PM

On Dec 17, 1:27 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:29:12 -0700, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:45:33 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
>
> >>On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
> >>> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >>> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>
> >>> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>
> >>> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
> >>> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
> >>> >> fixies today.
>
> >>> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
> >>> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
> >>> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
> >>> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
> >>> >'scorchers.'
>
> >>> >Robert
>
> >>> Dear Robert,
>
> >>> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
> >>> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>
> >>> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>
> >>> Cheers,
>
> >>> Carl Fogel
>
> >>'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
> >>messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
> >>number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
> >>cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
> >>population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
> >>of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
> >>rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
> >>average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
> >>something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
> >>cyclists on the road.
>
> >>Robert
>
> >Dear Robert,
>
> >Injury rates higher than meatpackers are common on city bicycle
> >commuters?
>
> >Are you simply redefining any messenger who does misbehave visibly as
> >"an abject rookie" in order to support a revised claim that "veteran"
> >messengers" never, never ride irresponsibly?
>
> >Cheers,
>
> >Carl Fogel
>
> I wonder how many people laid eyes on these messengers misbehaving?
>
> http://www.digave.com/videos/bronx.mpg
>
> Of course, that's just one of the many "races" Lucas Brunelle filmed.
> The rest of the time, those messengers never do anything like that.
>
> At least not the veterans. Those visible riders must all be "abject
> rookies."
>
> More videos of "abject rookies" misbehaving:
>
> http://www.digave.com/videos/index.htm
>
> Heck, maybe they're all just faux messengers carrying those messenger
> bags and not even "abject rookies."
>
> :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

No, those are messengers. But not messengers at work. Those are
veteran messengers racing for bragging rights who know they're being
filmed.

Anyway...Those are the only messengers you have ever seen. All you
know about messengers, Carl, is on those videos. I suppose you figure
that is all you need to know.

Robert

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:28 PM

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:18 -0800 (PST), dugoutcanoe@gmail.com wrote:

>On Dec 17, 1:27 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:29:12 -0700, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:45:33 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >>On Dec 16, 6:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:46:56 -0800 (PST), r15...@aol.com wrote:
>> >>> >On Dec 15, 6:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>> >>> >> The Bicycle Thief cartoon, Feb. 1897, from Harpers:
>>
>> >>> >>http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=m...
>>
>> >>> >> "Scorching" was the term for wild, high-speed riding with no regard
>> >>> >> for anyone else, roughly the equivalent of messengers misbehaving on
>> >>> >> fixies today.
>>
>> >>> >I note that few of the people who talk about 'messengers misbehaving'
>> >>> >have ever laid eyes on an actual messenger or seen one working, and I
>> >>> >wonder if it was the same thing with 'scorchers' in 1897. Of course,
>> >>> >there were bike messengers in 1897 and maybe some of them were
>> >>> >'scorchers.'
>>
>> >>> >Robert
>>
>> >>> Dear Robert,
>>
>> >>> These injury rates do not seem typical for ordinary city bicyclists
>> >>> who lack the messenger motivation to hurry:
>>
>> >>> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bikemess.html
>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>>
>> >>> Carl Fogel
>>
>> >>'Seem' being the operative word there. In fact the injury rate for
>> >>messengers is better than that for the average cyclist. Consider the
>> >>number of miles and hours that messengers ride compared to the average
>> >>cyclist, then compare those numbers again. It seems the entire
>> >>population of messengers (which includes all the abject rookies, many
>> >>of whom have very little cycling experience whatsoever) has an injury
>> >>rate similar to that found in a survey of LAB cyclists who reported an
>> >>average 17+ years of experience (Moritz). This seems to suggest
>> >>something I already knew, that veteran messengers are among the safest
>> >>cyclists on the road.
>>
>> >>Robert
>>
>> >Dear Robert,
>>
>> >Injury rates higher than meatpackers are common on city bicycle
>> >commuters?
>>
>> >Are you simply redefining any messenger who does misbehave visibly as
>> >"an abject rookie" in order to support a revised claim that "veteran"
>> >messengers" never, never ride irresponsibly?
>>
>> >Cheers,
>>
>> >Carl Fogel
>>
>> I wonder how many people laid eyes on these messengers misbehaving?
>>
>> http://www.digave.com/videos/bronx.mpg
>>
>> Of course, that's just one of the many "races" Lucas Brunelle filmed.
>> The rest of the time, those messengers never do anything like that.
>>
>> At least not the veterans. Those visible riders must all be "abject
>> rookies."
>>
>> More videos of "abject rookies" misbehaving:
>>
>> http://www.digave.com/videos/index.htm
>>
>> Heck, maybe they're all just faux messengers carrying those messenger
>> bags and not even "abject rookies."
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>No, those are messengers. But not messengers at work. Those are
>veteran messengers racing for bragging rights who know they're being
>filmed.
>
>Anyway...Those are the only messengers you have ever seen. All you
>know about messengers, Carl, is on those videos. I suppose you figure
>that is all you need to know.
>
>Robert

Dear Robert,

So your argument is based on what you (for unknown reasons) believe I
have or haven't seen?

Please tell us all the cities that you think I haven't visited and why
I wouldn't see "actual" bicycle messengers there.

Meanwhile, you've switched to arguing that those were "veterans" who
suddenly decided to behave entirely differently in the middle of
traffic for a camera? That they don't ride that way normally?

They seemed to be quite comfortable behaving that way in live traffic,
almost as if they do it often enough to do it in front of a camera.

And the hundreds of people in cars and crosswalks who saw the "race"
live (often coming at them head on through red lights), not on the
video, would they fit into your vision of ignorant people who've never
seen "actual" bike messengers misbehaving?

Lots of messengers behave sensibly, but lots of them behave like the
messengers in such videos.

If I'm wrong, then lots of RBT posters will chime in to say that they
never see messengers riding like that and can't believe that I would
think such a thing.

I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

r15757@aol.com

01-03-1970, 10:29 PM

On Dec 17, 4:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:

> So your argument is based on what you (for unknown reasons) believe I
> have or haven't seen?
>
> Please tell us all the cities that you think I haven't visited and why
> I wouldn't see "actual" bicycle messengers there.
>
> Meanwhile, you've switched to arguing that those were "veterans" who
> suddenly decided to behave entirely differently in the middle of
> traffic for a camera? That they don't ride that way normally?
>
> They seemed to be quite comfortable behaving that way in live traffic,
> almost as if they do it often enough to do it in front of a camera.

Yes, Carl, it's true that sometimes a scattering of messengers will
gather after work to blow off steam in these informal races. But this
happens maybe once or twice per month at most and involves relatively
few messengers -- a small subset -- whereas messenger work goes on all
day every day and involves all messengers, and is extremely
conservative in comparison. Two completely different things. If
messengers were as irresponsible as you seem to think, don't you think
they would have been scrubbed from the streets long ago? The fact is
that messengers have been working in a responsible, sustainable
fashion in cities for decades, and their most frequent customers
include city and state governments, police departments, district
attorneys, federal prosecutors, the most powerful law firms in the
world, etc., the same entities that would and could end such
'irresponsible' behavior at a moment's notice if they had the
slightest desire to do so. Try to figure this out.

Robert

Peter Cole

01-03-1970, 10:29 PM

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> Lots of messengers behave sensibly, but lots of them behave like the
> messengers in such videos.
>
> If I'm wrong, then lots of RBT posters will chime in to say that they
> never see messengers riding like that and can't believe that I would
> think such a thing.

You're wrong, but I can believe you would think such a thing.

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:30 PM

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:17:43 -0800 (PST), r15757@aol.com wrote:

>On Dec 17, 4:32 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> So your argument is based on what you (for unknown reasons) believe I
>> have or haven't seen?
>>
>> Please tell us all the cities that you think I haven't visited and why
>> I wouldn't see "actual" bicycle messengers there.
>>
>> Meanwhile, you've switched to arguing that those were "veterans" who
>> suddenly decided to behave entirely differently in the middle of
>> traffic for a camera? That they don't ride that way normally?
>>
>> They seemed to be quite comfortable behaving that way in live traffic,
>> almost as if they do it often enough to do it in front of a camera.
>
>
>
>Yes, Carl, it's true that sometimes a scattering of messengers will
>gather after work to blow off steam in these informal races. But this
>happens maybe once or twice per month at most and involves relatively
>few messengers -- a small subset -- whereas messenger work goes on all
>day every day and involves all messengers, and is extremely
>conservative in comparison. Two completely different things. If
>messengers were as irresponsible as you seem to think, don't you think
>they would have been scrubbed from the streets long ago? The fact is
>that messengers have been working in a responsible, sustainable
>fashion in cities for decades, and their most frequent customers
>include city and state governments, police departments, district
>attorneys, federal prosecutors, the most powerful law firms in the
>world, etc., the same entities that would and could end such
>'irresponsible' behavior at a moment's notice if they had the
>slightest desire to do so. Try to figure this out.
>
>Robert

Dear Robert,

So now it's just some of the veterans, only twice a month? The rest of
the time they're all safe, sensible, conservative bicyclists?

And you've dropped the claim that I've never seen messengers?

But replaced it with the new and even more amusing claim that
all-powerful police and federal prosecutors would stamp out
irresponsible bicyclists if they did it more than twice a month and do
so "at a moment's notice"?

The way they've stamped out drunk driving? Or Critical Mass rides?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

r15757@aol.com

01-03-1970, 10:31 PM

On Dec 17, 10:53 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:

> So now it's just some of the veterans, only twice a month? The rest of
> the time they're all safe, sensible, conservative bicyclists?
>
> And you've dropped the claim that I've never seen messengers?
>
> But replaced it with the new and even more amusing claim that
> all-powerful police and federal prosecutors would stamp out
> irresponsible bicyclists if they did it more than twice a month and do
> so "at a moment's notice"?
>
> The way they've stamped out drunk driving? Or Critical Mass rides?

Not sure what you're talking about, really.

Yes, the downtown bike messenger industry could be easily eliminated,
outlawed if you will, without too much hoopla. As it is, the forces
that would and could do the outlawing not only recognize crazy
scofflaw bike messengers as a legitimiate and important cog in the
city's machine, they use these messengers for their own purposes on a
constant basis.

Another thing that you don't seem to realize is that each of these
scofflaws is insured by a multi-million-dollar policy while on the
job. Those insurance companies must be absolutely bat**** to cover
such irresponsible lunatics, right.

Nothing you've written indicates that you've ever laid eyes on an
actual bike messenger other than in some youtube videos. I figure you
will chime in to correct me if I'm wrong.

Robert

carlfogel@comcast.net

01-03-1970, 10:35 PM

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:33:49 -0800 (PST), Marian
<marian.rosenberg@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Dec 16, 9:12 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 13:21:07 -0800 (PST), Sheldon Brown
>> ><CaptB...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
>> >>Is there some central repository of ancient back issues, sort of like
>> >>the wonderful Cornell "Making of America" series?
>>
>> >>(http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html)
>>
>> Aha! Harper's Weekly in Sheldon's link has Much better pictures of the
>> Victor dynamometer and resilometer than can be seen in Scientific
>> American:
>>
>> http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fh...
>
>"They know that the ease, pleasure, and safety in riding a bicycle
>depend far more upon positive knowledge on the part of the maker, and
>of the use of exact methods in construction, than on a two or three
>pound difference in weight."

Dear Marian,

It's certainly a good theory.

But part of the attraction in the who-cares-about-weight claim lay in
the fact that the early Overman Victor bicycle was a hefty,
full-figured beast with gaudy front suspension:

http://www.nostalgic.net/pictures/1676.htm

After Overman moved away from the front suspension, their bikes
started to look pretty much like what everyone else sold, so they
turned to ads involving resiliometers that didn't really say much,
though they're fun to read.

Ditto for the dynamometer, which merely gave a faintly scientific
basis for choosing an 8-tooth rear inch-pitch gear over a 7-tooth. An
ordinary bicyclist probably couldn't have noticed the slight
difference in mechanical efficiency, but he could certainly use the ad
to pick one bike over another.

Notice that the Overman Company was equally certain about the future
of selling bicycles:

"The demand is ever-increasing, as it must as long as Victor bicycles
are synonymous with the greatest strength, the lightest weight, and
the greatest ease in running."

--p 32, lower right

http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?root=%2Fmoa%2Fharp%2Fharp0090%2F&tif=01024.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABK4014-0090-119&coll=moa&frames=1&view=50

Oops! Looks as if the marketing department forgot what it said earlier
about light weight not being that important and started claiming that
Victors were the lightest.

The prediction for ever-increasing demand was typical of early days of
bike boom optimism in 1895. Overman turned out various Victor models
from 1885 to 1900:

http://www.thewheelmen.org/sections/bicyclebrands/showresults.asp?alphachar=V

By 1902, the bike boom had burst. The Overman Company had abandoned
the dead business of building bicycles and had turned to selling
steam-engine carriages:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160186608276&ssPageName=MERCOSI_VI_ROSI_PR4_PCN_BIX_Stores&refitem=150177663072&itemcount=4&refwidgetloc=closed_view_item&refwidgettype=osi_widget#ebayphotohosting

By 1903, Overman Auto was acquired by Locomobile:

http://books.google.com/books?id=8goAAAAAMAAJ&pg=RA2-PA517&lpg=RA2-PA517&dq=locomobile+overman&source=web&ots=an9BGkrRYs&sig=rYXZMbVOq2iAjpl04Xh5tUJLZLk#PRA2-PA517,M1

Cars proved more long-lived than bicycles. Locomobile was acquired by
Durant in 1922 and lasted as a model until 1929:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locomobile

Something or other happened in 1929, and Durant closed its doors in
1931:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durant_Motors

I need to start another thread about how Overman was accused of making
terribly dishonest claims in its ads about the results of a coasting
contest.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel