"It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and even twelve."
"Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
"For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their use entirely free from danger."
--J.F. Baldwin, M.D, "Physicians and the Bicycle," Columbus Medical Journal, June 1883 http://tinyurl.com/yc844f8
> "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > even twelve."
> "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > use entirely free from danger."
And that was before the popularity of the "safety" bike, that weird thing with two equal-sized wheels and a chain drive.
> On Nov 6, 10:55 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > > even twelve."
> > "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> > "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > > use entirely free from danger."
> And that was before the popularity of the "safety" bike, that weird > thing with two equal-sized wheels and a chain drive.
Also probably preceded the wild popularity of SUV's, shock-talk radio, cell phones, drive-up mcmuffin and coffee shops.
> On Nov 7, 8:14 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 10:55 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > > "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > > > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > > > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > > > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > > > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > > > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > > > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > > > even twelve."
> > > "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > > > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> > > "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > > > use entirely free from danger."
> > And that was before the popularity of the "safety" bike, that weird > > thing with two equal-sized wheels and a chain drive.
> Also probably preceded the wild popularity of SUV's, shock-talk radio, > cell phones, drive-up mcmuffin and coffee shops.
Yep, it's a dangerous world, all right. Stay home! Watch TV.
> On Nov 7, 11:59 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 8:14 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 6, 10:55 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > > > "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > > > > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > > > > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > > > > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > > > > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > > > > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > > > > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > > > > even twelve."
> > > > "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > > > > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> > > > "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > > > > use entirely free from danger."
> > > And that was before the popularity of the "safety" bike, that weird > > > thing with two equal-sized wheels and a chain drive.
> > Also probably preceded the wild popularity of SUV's, shock-talk radio, > > cell phones, drive-up mcmuffin and coffee shops.
> Yep, it's a dangerous world, all right. Stay home! Watch TV.
Is that your smarmy way of arguing that bicycle use is, in fact, "entirely free from danger"?
On Nov 9, 7:40 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 9, 9:11 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 9, 7:31 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yep, it's a dangerous world, all right. Stay home! Watch TV.
> > Is that your smarmy way of arguing that bicycle use is, in fact, > > "entirely free from danger"?
> Only a fool would interpret that as such. Surely _you_ wouldn't, not > really - right?
Well, it was your response to my mention of additional risk factors weighing on the assertion "entirely free from danger" (context that you've conveniently snipped).
> Give it a rest, Dan.
Only a fool (and/or a smarmy, supercilious asshole) would interpret my mention of additional risk factors (which you began) as suggesting that people should just cower in their homes in front of the TV.
On Nov 10, 1:29 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Only a fool (and/or a smarmy, supercilious asshole) would interpret my > mention of additional risk factors (which you began) as suggesting > that people should just cower in their homes in front of the TV.
On Nov 10, 9:54 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 1:29 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Only a fool (and/or a smarmy, supercilious asshole) would interpret my > > mention of additional risk factors (which you began) as suggesting > > that people should just cower in their homes in front of the TV.
> "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance.
I've had the misfortune to ride a saddle horse 15 miles and was very uncomfortable at the end of the ride. Long distance horse riding is for the hardened rider accustomed to pain and misery.
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:07:10 -0800 (PST), "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
<russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote: >On Nov 6, 9:55 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote: >> "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all >> wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a >> day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had >> ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance.
>I've had the misfortune to ride a saddle horse 15 miles and was very >uncomfortable at the end of the ride. Long distance horse riding is >for the hardened rider accustomed to pain and misery.
Dear Russell,
Kind of like long distance bicycling?
:-)
Actually, the riders get used to it. Think of all the posts on RBT that tell new riders how they'll get used to the hard, narrow bicycle saddles.
And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid rubber tires: http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
Two things worth pointing out about that photo.
First, the photo shows highwheelers in their natural habitat, not in the usual studio pose.
(Modern highwheelers are almost never ridden on anything but modern pavement, which is a bit like riding a mountain bike with knobby tires around a board-track velodrome.)
Second, the photo is reversed, as shown by the mounting step, the brake levers, and the watch-chain.
> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding > things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid > rubber tires: > http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
> Two things worth pointing out about that photo.
> First, the photo shows highwheelers in their natural habitat, not in > the usual studio pose.
> (Modern highwheelers are almost never ridden on anything but modern > pavement, which is a bit like riding a mountain bike with knobby tires > around a board-track velodrome.)
> Second, the photo is reversed, as shown by the mounting step, the > brake levers, and the watch-chain.
Hmm. Did British ordinaries have the mounting step on the opposite side? I've only ridden American ones.
<frkry...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding >> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid >> rubber tires: >> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
>> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
>To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads >had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody >understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward >upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor >was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, >he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
>(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as >much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
>> Two things worth pointing out about that photo.
>> First, the photo shows highwheelers in their natural habitat, not in >> the usual studio pose.
>> (Modern highwheelers are almost never ridden on anything but modern >> pavement, which is a bit like riding a mountain bike with knobby tires >> around a board-track velodrome.)
>> Second, the photo is reversed, as shown by the mounting step, the >> brake levers, and the watch-chain.
>Hmm. Did British ordinaries have the mounting step on the opposite >side? I've only ridden American ones.
>- Frank Krygowski
Dear Frank,
The ordinary was simply the ordinary bicycle, until the new-fangled dwarf safeties lowered the general level of riding.
A surprising number of early safeties had left-hand chains.
But I've never seen a single right-hand mounting step (as opposed to double left-right steps) on a UK or US highwheeler, nor a spoon-brake lever on the left--not in the flesh, not in photos, not in catalogues or contemporary illustrations.
***
Double mounting steps, left and right, on a UK Bayliss-Thomas:
>> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding >> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid >> rubber tires: >> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
>> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
>To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads >had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody >understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward >upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor >was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, >he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
>(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as >much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new fangled safety bicycles.
The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal maybe.
<ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:51 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> >wrote:
>>On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding >>> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid >>> rubber tires: >>> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
>>> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
>>To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads >>had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody >>understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward >>upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor >>was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, >>he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
>>(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as >>much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
>Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new >fangled safety bicycles.
>The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started >hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal >maybe.
Dear Ron & Frank,
The term "ordinary bicycle" predated the modern dwarf rear-drive bicycle, which appeared in late 1884.
An "ordinary" meant a traditional highwheeler, as opposed to the various dwarf and safety highwheelers, which still used large front wheel drive, but which reduced the risk of headers by seating riders lower and further back through smaller wheels, chains, treadles, even small-front-wheel highwheelers with the big wheel in back.
***
Here's a typical example of the language, which mentions a safety highwheeler whose name, Xtraordinary, was a play on "ordinary":
"This hill is deceptive and dangerous to riders of the ordinary bicycle. Many have had narrow escapes of their lives. I am now riding a safety bicycle, "The Xtraordinary," and can descend it at a rapid pace." "English Mechanic," Aug. 6th, 1881, p. 519 http://tinyurl.com/yey3j3b (you have to page up)
The Kangaroo, whose double-chain design achieved the same effect as treadles, seating the rider lower and farther back while preserving speed through gearing:
> "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > even twelve."
> "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > use entirely free from danger."
> --J.F. Baldwin, M.D, "Physicians and the Bicycle," Columbus Medical > Journal, June 1883 > http://tinyurl.com/yc844f8
Where can I purchase the 'lamp of invulnerability', must be pricey?
> On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding > > things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid > > rubber tires: > > http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
> > A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
> To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads > had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody > understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward > upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor > was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, > he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
Bicycles don't kick quite as hard as horses.
> (* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as > much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
High wheel, or euphemistically 'Penny-farthing'. It only became ordinary in comparison to the new-fangled and complex safety bicycle with its multitude of adjustment.
> > Two things worth pointing out about that photo.
> > First, the photo shows highwheelers in their natural habitat, not in > > the usual studio pose.
> > (Modern highwheelers are almost never ridden on anything but modern > > pavement, which is a bit like riding a mountain bike with knobby tires > > around a board-track velodrome.)
> > Second, the photo is reversed, as shown by the mounting step, the > > brake levers, and the watch-chain.
> Hmm. Did British ordinaries have the mounting step on the opposite > side? I've only ridden American ones.
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:51 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> >On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding > >> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid > >> rubber tires: > >> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
> >> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
> >To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads > >had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody > >understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward > >upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor > >was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, > >he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
> >(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as > >much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
> Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new > fangled safety bicycles.
> The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started > hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal > maybe.
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:27:17 -0700, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote: >On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:38:57 -0500, RonSonic ><ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:51 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> >>wrote:
>>>On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>>> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding >>>> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid >>>> rubber tires: >>>> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
>>>> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
>>>To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads >>>had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody >>>understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward >>>upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor >>>was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, >>>he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
>>>(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as >>>much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
>>Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new >>fangled safety bicycles.
>>The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started >>hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal >>maybe.
>Dear Ron & Frank,
>The term "ordinary bicycle" predated the modern dwarf rear-drive >bicycle, which appeared in late 1884.
>An "ordinary" meant a traditional highwheeler, as opposed to the >various dwarf and safety highwheelers, which still used large front >wheel drive, but which reduced the risk of headers by seating riders >lower and further back through smaller wheels, chains, treadles, even >small-front-wheel highwheelers with the big wheel in back.
>***
>Here's a typical example of the language, which mentions a safety >highwheeler whose name, Xtraordinary, was a play on "ordinary":
>"This hill is deceptive and dangerous to riders of the ordinary >bicycle. Many have had narrow escapes of their lives. I am now riding >a safety bicycle, "The Xtraordinary," and can descend it at a rapid >pace." > "English Mechanic," Aug. 6th, 1881, p. 519 > http://tinyurl.com/yey3j3b (you have to page up)
>The Kangaroo, whose double-chain design achieved the same effect as >treadles, seating the rider lower and farther back while preserving >speed through gearing:
The safety highwheeler proved to be a better platform for a motor than the ordinary:
"In 1881, Lucius Copeland from Phoenix, Arizona had been experimenting with steam powered bicycles, using a high wheel or 'Ordinary' Columbia bicycle. Add a heavy steam engine and you have a dangerous combination which eventually led Copeland to scrap his own creation following a crash. Further experimentation by Copeland led to a Star high wheel bicycle, combined with his steam engine. The steam powered bicycle could develop a boiler pressure of 80psi and carried sufficient fuel and water to allow the machine to operate for an hour. The 1/4 horsepower engine allowed the Copeland to ride along at a heady 12mph. It was also reported that he rode his contraption a mile distance in 4 minutes. Following several exhibition appearances across the country, the Copeland simply disappeared while its inventor advanced to other intellectual projects." http://www.landroverbase.com/auctionlot/by-id/251071618/
> > "It may be regarded as settled, by the universal agreement of all > > wheelmen, that a man can, on fair roads, make forty to fifty miles a > > day on a bicycle, and be no more fatigued at the close than if he had > > ridden an easy saddle horse the same distance. Under special > > circumstances, a hundred miles a day is no very unusual feat, while > > nearly double this distance has been accomplished. The ordinary speed > > may be placed at eight miles an hour, though ten is easily made, and > > even twelve."
> > "Light packages such as instrument case, medicine case, umbrella, > > rubber coat, etc., can be carried, attached to the handle bar."
> > "For night riding, the lamp with which they are provided renders their > > use entirely free from danger."
> > --J.F. Baldwin, M.D, "Physicians and the Bicycle," Columbus Medical > > Journal, June 1883 > > http://tinyurl.com/yc844f8
> Where can I purchase the 'lamp of invulnerability', must be pricey?
I believe there's a shop in Hyrule. Shouldn't be more than 5 or 6 gold, though the name is misleading: it only gives you an extra saving roll from falling damage.
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:26:27 -0700, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote: >On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:27:17 -0700, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:38:57 -0500, RonSonic >><ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:51 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> >>>wrote:
>>>>On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>>>> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding >>>>> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid >>>>> rubber tires: >>>>> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
>>>>> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
>>>>To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads >>>>had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody >>>>understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward >>>>upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor >>>>was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, >>>>he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
>>>>(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as >>>>much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
>>>Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new >>>fangled safety bicycles.
>>>The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started >>>hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal >>>maybe.
>>Dear Ron & Frank,
>>The term "ordinary bicycle" predated the modern dwarf rear-drive >>bicycle, which appeared in late 1884.
>>An "ordinary" meant a traditional highwheeler, as opposed to the >>various dwarf and safety highwheelers, which still used large front >>wheel drive, but which reduced the risk of headers by seating riders >>lower and further back through smaller wheels, chains, treadles, even >>small-front-wheel highwheelers with the big wheel in back.
>>***
>>Here's a typical example of the language, which mentions a safety >>highwheeler whose name, Xtraordinary, was a play on "ordinary":
>>"This hill is deceptive and dangerous to riders of the ordinary >>bicycle. Many have had narrow escapes of their lives. I am now riding >>a safety bicycle, "The Xtraordinary," and can descend it at a rapid >>pace." >> "English Mechanic," Aug. 6th, 1881, p. 519 >> http://tinyurl.com/yey3j3b (you have to page up)
>>The Kangaroo, whose double-chain design achieved the same effect as >>treadles, seating the rider lower and farther back while preserving >>speed through gearing:
>The safety highwheeler proved to be a better platform for a motor than >the ordinary:
>"In 1881, Lucius Copeland from Phoenix, Arizona had been experimenting >with steam powered bicycles, using a high wheel or 'Ordinary' Columbia >bicycle. Add a heavy steam engine and you have a dangerous combination >which eventually led Copeland to scrap his own creation following a >crash. Further experimentation by Copeland led to a Star high wheel >bicycle, combined with his steam engine. The steam powered bicycle >could develop a boiler pressure of 80psi and carried sufficient fuel >and water to allow the machine to operate for an hour. The 1/4 >horsepower engine allowed the Copeland to ride along at a heady 12mph. >It was also reported that he rode his contraption a mile distance in 4 >minutes. Following several exhibition appearances across the country, >the Copeland simply disappeared while its inventor advanced to other >intellectual projects." > http://www.landroverbase.com/auctionlot/by-id/251071618/
The 1880 Singer ad for the "Xtraordinary" (note the play on words) highlights the differences between the safety highwheeler and what was beginning to be called the "ordinary" bicycle.
Sadly, that particular treadle design precluded the snazzy coasting pegs ("footrests") common on high-class touring ordinaries.
The catalogue also featured a folding locomotive-drive tadpole tricycle. Tricycles were popular because they were easy to learn to ride, they didn't crash like the highwheelers, and they could outclimb the highwheelers.
Folding tricycles became popular because they would travel easily by train--think of folding wheelchairs.
RonSonic <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:39:51 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> >On Nov 10, 2:00 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> And keep in mind that the medical expert was talking about riding > >> things like these two examples 40-50 miles on unpaved roads with solid > >> rubber tires: > >> http://www.pepcak.webzdarma.cz/vyspan456.JPG
> >> A 50-mile highwheeler ride on a real road in 1883 was no picnic.
> >To bring the "safety" aspect back into the discussion: Those roads > >had potholes, rocks, dogs, and - horrors! - even squirrels. Everybody > >understands the tendency of an ordinary* to pitch the rider forward > >upon hitting an obstruction or upon braking hard. Yet the good doctor > >was not wringing his hands about the dangers. Perhaps even back then, > >he felt the health benefits of cycling outweighed the dangers?
> >(* Of course, "ordinary bicycle" as a name for that machine makes as > >much grammatical sense as "clipless pedals.")
> Probably a retronym. Had to call it something to distinguish it from those new > fangled safety bicycles.
> The "clipless" thing is just plain confusing. Back when they first started > hitting the market someone should have tried to do better. "Latching" pedal > maybe.
Not too late. `Latching' is good. I've been saying "click in pedals".
|
