| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#81
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
On Sep 9, 2:51 pm, Patrick Turner wrote: And the older you get, the better you was. Patrick Turner. My pulse at waking is 42. That's lower than when I was an exceedingly fit young athlete. Holy ****, on first reading I thought you said "wanking." Mr. Jute, thought I, is in *really* good shape. ;-) LV |
|
#82
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Keithr wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: Here's a big secret. A thoughtfully designed van has super aerodynamics. This is because the centre of aerodynamic pressure starts so far back and keeps moving back as it picks up speed. The Kombi, for instance, had a CdA in the same bracket as a Jaguar E-type but in some conditions it had superior handling because, for instance, longitudinal corner radii were smaller. Andre Jute Author of Designing and Constructing Special Cars published by Batsford in London and Bentley in Boston, several other editions. ROFL the original Kombi had a Cd of 0.76, later versions improved to 0.42, the E-type had a Cd of around 0.3 (depending on the model and which source you believe). It gets even worse when you compare the CdA, the Kombi had a far greater frontal area than the Jag. You're a funny little man, Keefie. And sweetly trusting too if you believe the Jaguar E-Type had a Cd of 0.3. But those not so unworldly as you know that manufacturers and others lied a lot in those days before the German TUV nailed their feet to the floor after the coming of the EU. Those with more experience than you needed to take only one look at certain design details (the junction of bonnet and windscreen for instance) to know the E-type as an aerodynamic artifact was more pose than reality. Of course, I didn't get to be an expert by listening to bar-room gossip, as you did. I did my homework On a single day I took four first series E-types straight off the showroom floor at Robb Motors, and drove them flat out on the same piece of road with the RAC timing the venture. The fastest went 138mph, the slowest 131mph. (The 150mph ones lent to the press were specially prepared as if for racing.) From there you can work out. All you have is to do measure the frontal area and put the engine on a rolling road dynometer to get the actual horses at the rear wheels (note that in the 1960s Jaguar engines straight off the production line could vary in power by as much as 15%). I did exactly that. Simple, straightforward, direct. You can get the formula from my book. The answer you will get is that the Cd of the Jaguar E-type is well over 0.4. To believe as you do, that Malcolm Sayers, great as he was, designed an 0.3Cd shape without the aid of a wind tunnel, simply displays your innocence or your ignorance. Aerodynamic efficiency isn't about the slippery shapes of schoolboy wet dreams but about attention to detail, a strictly engineering venture. For instances compare the tanklike Volvo 760GLE Cd 0.40, the slippery-smooth Porsche 928 Cd 0.41 and the blunt Volkswagen Microbus Cd 0.42 (p36 of Designing and Building Special Cars by Andre Jute). As for a Kombi handling better than the Jag, the Jag was never the best handling car of it's era, but surely you are joking, I drove a 140mph VW Kombi for several months, and had several E-types too (because they were so beautiful) though I never kept them long (because they were rubbish to drive). Did you? No, I didn't think so. after all you do claim to be an expert on the subject Nah, you're the one doing the claiming. I'm the one with actual experience of the 140mph Kombi and the E-types. (and on every other subject really). Did you ever own an E-type or drive one in a hurry? Or a 140mph Kombi? Seems to me that you're projecting your failures onto me, Keefie. On subjects on which I'm ignorant I'm silent. Take a tip and shut up occasionally. You could learn something if your mouth isn't interfering with your ears. Like the old joke says "Anybody who believes that the Germans have no sense of humour has never driven a Kombi in a side wind". How does that halftruth about Kombis make the handling of an E-type better? You're wanking, Keefie. I say again, I had a 140mph Kombi, and the more people you put in it the faster you could drive it. But you're too dumb and too self-important to ask me the relevant questions rather than blustering in your doomed effort to inflate your own importance. Keith Who? Andre Jute No guesstimates here, thank you! |
|
#83
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 6:04*pm, Lord Valve wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 9, 2:51 pm, Patrick Turner wrote: And the older you get, the better you was. Patrick Turner. My pulse at waking is 42. That's lower than when I was an exceedingly fit young athlete. Holy ****, on first reading I thought you said "wanking." Mr. Jute, thought I, is in *really* good shape. *;-) LV Christ, Valve, you just cost me fifty bucks for a new wireless keyboard because I laughed so hard I sputtered my Corton into it and it promptly upped and died. But I have news for you. Real cyclists (roadies are the paradigm) don't have sex. They are too involved with admiring their legs to want anyone to touch them, not even themselves. You only think you know about narcissists until you meet a few *serious* cyclists. Do you know any other group of men who shave their legs? Andre Jute Permanent observer status |
|
#84
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
[...] To believe as you do, that Malcolm Sayers, great as he was, designed an 0.3Cd shape without the aid of a wind tunnel, simply displays your innocence or your ignorance. Aerodynamic efficiency isn't about the slippery shapes of schoolboy wet dreams but about attention to detail, a strictly engineering venture. For instances compare the tanklike Volvo 760GLE Cd 0.40, the slippery-smooth Porsche 928 Cd 0.41 and the blunt Volkswagen Microbus Cd 0.42 (p36 of Designing and Building Special Cars by Andre Jute).[...] Georgi Georgiev designed this bicycle without the aid of a wind tunnel or computational fluid dynamics softwa http://www.varnahandcycles.com/gallery/g09.jpg. Power versus speed measurements indicate a Cd of about 0.08. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#85
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
[...] But I have news for you. Real cyclists (roadies are the paradigm) don't have sex. They are too involved with admiring their legs to want anyone to touch them, not even themselves. You only think you know about narcissists until you meet a few *serious* cyclists. Do you know any other group of men who shave their legs? Body builders (narcissistic - check) and swimmers also shave body hair. On the other hand, recumbent riders do not shave anything. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#86
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#87
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Keithr wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: Here's a big secret. A thoughtfully designed van has super aerodynamics. This is because the centre of aerodynamic pressure starts so far back and keeps moving back as it picks up speed. The Kombi, for instance, had a CdA in the same bracket as a Jaguar E-type but in some conditions it had superior handling because, for instance, longitudinal corner radii were smaller. Andre Jute Author of Designing and Constructing Special Cars published by Batsford in London and Bentley in Boston, several other editions. ROFL the original Kombi had a Cd of 0.76, later versions improved to 0.42, the E-type had a Cd of around 0.3 (depending on the model and which source you believe). It gets even worse when you compare the CdA, the Kombi had a far greater frontal area than the Jag. As for a Kombi handling better than the Jag, the Jag was never the best handling car of it's era, but surely you are joking, after all you do claim to be an expert on the subject (and on every other subject really). Like the old joke says "Anybody who believes that the Germans have no sense of humour has never driven a Kombi in a side wind". Having driven an early 1970's VW Type II for a bit, the handling and braking were such I never wanted to approach the top speed of ca. 110 kph on anything but a level freeway in light traffic and low wind conditions. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#88
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
On Sep 10, 3:31 am, Tom Sherman wrote: "Lord Valve" (who?) anonymously snipes: "I'm not an asshole, but I *play* one on the Internet." - Lord Valve [1] Lord Valve isn't anonymous. His nom de internet is instantly connectable to his real name and to a business of the highest repute in Denver. Fat Willie as his familiars call him is highly valued among guitar performers, and among literate libertarians on the net for his forthright expression and exquisite care with the language. If William Whittaker wants to "play an asshole on the Internet" he should expect to be grouped with the Ed Dolan's and Mike Vandeman's. An anonymous poster is one to whom you cannot attach a name or an address to serve a libel suit, and he is accordingly despicable. By contrast Lord Valve stands behind the goods he sells and his opinion, foursquare and with a gun in his hand when necessary, furthermore backed by coonhounds trained to sniff out pinkos and lunch on them. These days, with so many limpwristed legshavers around, that makes Lord Valve a rare American original. Is Mr. Whittaker's anti-cyclist attitude just "playing an asshole on the Internet" of his true feelings? [1] http://www.duncanamps.com/technical/lvbias.html. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#89
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 1:22 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote: Keithr wrote: Having driven an early 1970's VW Type II for a bit, the handling and braking were such I never wanted to approach the top speed of ca. 110 kph on anything but a level freeway in light traffic and low wind conditions. Ha! I drove my old Type III over 120 mph several times -- gravity assisted. It was a bit squirrelly. |
|
#90
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:31 am, Tom Sherman wrote: "Lord Valve" (who?) anonymously snipes: "I'm not an asshole, but I *play* one on the Internet." - Lord Valve [1] Not only is it on Duncan's site, it's probably affixed to 10,000 Usenet posts, although I don't use it much of late. Lord Valve isn't anonymous. His nom de internet is instantly connectable to his real name and to a business of the highest repute in Denver. Fat Willie as his familiars call him is highly valued among guitar performers, and among literate libertarians on the net for his forthright expression and exquisite care with the language. If William Whittaker wants to "play an asshole on the Internet" he should expect to be grouped with the Ed Dolan's and Mike Vandeman's. Ahem... Even those who *play* assholes on the Internet know better than to pluralise words with apostrophes. An anonymous poster is one to whom you cannot attach a name or an address to serve a libel suit, and he is accordingly despicable. By contrast Lord Valve stands behind the goods he sells and his opinion, foursquare and with a gun in his hand when necessary, furthermore backed by coonhounds trained to sniff out pinkos and lunch on them. These days, with so many limpwristed legshavers around, that makes Lord Valve a rare American original. Is Mr. Whittaker's anti-cyclist attitude just "playing an asshole on the Internet" of his true feelings? "...of his true feelings?" The Internet is of my true feelings? Yes, it am. I mean, no, it are not. Of something. OR somethings. You're difficult to communicate with, sir. I'm, ah, at a loss as to why. Perhaps in the course of your cycling (or recycling, as the case may be) you've ingested sufficient insects to affect the code which brings you here, and, as we all know, buggy code ain't fer ****. Perhaps a course of Ex-Lax.... I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. **** 'em. Clear? [1] http://www.duncanamps.com/technical/lvbias.html. Lord Valve NoBama '08 |
|
#91
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 8:14 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote: Andre Jute wrote [to some Australian jerk who thinks he knows everything]: [...] To believe as you do, that Malcolm Sayers, great as he was, designed an 0.3Cd shape without the aid of a wind tunnel, simply displays your innocence or your ignorance. Aerodynamic efficiency isn't about the slippery shapes of schoolboy wet dreams but about attention to detail, a strictly engineering venture. For instances compare the tanklike Volvo 760GLE Cd 0.40, the slippery-smooth Porsche 928 Cd 0.41 and the blunt Volkswagen Microbus Cd 0.42 (p36 of Designing and Building Special Cars by Andre Jute).[...] Georgi Georgiev designed this bicycle without the aid of a wind tunnel or computational fluid dynamics softwa http://www.varnahandcycles.com/gallery/g09.jpg. Power versus speed measurements indicate a Cd of about 0.08. That, if the assumptions behind the computation were correct, is pretty damn close to the proverbial water drop. No energy crisis chez Georgi, then. As I said several times already in this thread, human ingenuity is the answer. Andre Jute Omnia vincit labor, though it helps if you start smart |
|
#92
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 4:48*pm, Lord Valve wrote:
*It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. Something of that nature recently happened to Mr. Jute. Given his attitude and your attitude, I can well understand where a drive inclined as you are in Ireland may have taken some decisive action to solve a particularly annoying and arrogant little problem. Hummm? I will make no further comment other than I expect an idividual of your accomplishments would have made a more complete job of it. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
|
#93
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 8:17*pm, Tom Sherman
wrote: Andre Jute wrote: [...] But I have news for you. Real cyclists (roadies are the paradigm) don't have sex. They are too involved with admiring their legs to want anyone to touch them, not even themselves. You only think you know about narcissists until you meet a few *serious* cyclists. Do you know any other group of men who shave their legs? Body builders (narcissistic - check) and swimmers also shave body hair. Body builders are hardly athletes. On the other hand, recumbent riders do not shave anything. Recumbent riders are the iconoclasts of cycling; one would expect nothing less from them than to be bolshie on every point on which roadies agree, including leg-shaving. Why are two grown men discussing other grown men shaving their legs? Only on the internet... Andre Jute GUBU |
|
#94
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Hail, good Jute-fellow! And well met. I see you're up to your usual sensible shenanigans. I'm not sure why you'd want to argue with another in the endless series of commie ****heads who seem to pollute the online world, but...communism it is, and not even presented in a shiny new wrapper (as by Obama et al) at that. And I can't help but notice the myopic focus of those who insist on considering the Earth as a closed system...which it may indeed be on the micro level; however, on the macro level (which this particular type of clod seems to be completely incapable of perceiving) there are quadrillions of tonnes of resources floating around waiting for some enterprising businessmen to snap them up, and that's just in this solar system alone. Metals, organics, gases, water, unlimited solar power...and most of it eminently accessible using technologies which have existed since the 1950s. And anyone who thinks that's balderdash should consider the reaction of someone from, say, 1910, confronted with the prospect of obtaining petroleum from a hole drilled a mile beneath the surface of the ocean: "Absolutely impossible - never happen." Sure...only now, it's routine - and has been for quite awhile. At any rate, wherever you find someone advocating massive control of any natural resource, you can bet your sweet arse you've encountered a commie. And that commie will almost certainly be painted green, for within the green movement is where most of them currently reside...although the Bear is grumbling of late. Perhaps it was just hibernating, eh? ;-) Be well. Lord Valve alias Willie the Gimp I enjoyed reading Heinlein, Niven, Pohl, Brin, etc, when I was eleven. Oh no! Commies hiding out at the recycling center! Save us! If you want a real commie, look no further than Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, his recent action is third in magnitude after Lenin's 1917 Russia, and Mao's glorious people's revolution. My bike has Shimano 600 gearset from the eighties, and a Brooks copper rivet leather saddle from 1975, so liking tubes for audio is unexpected. Don't let ideology blind you to reality. |
|
#95
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
|
|
#96
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
"Lord Valve" aka William Whittaker wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote: [snip useless stuff] I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. "behaviours"? Did you mean "behaviors"? (Two can play this game). Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. **** 'em. Clear? **** the clueless cagers that kill and main hundreds of thousands per year. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#97
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote:
On Sep 10, 8:17 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: Andre Jute wrote: [...] But I have news for you. Real cyclists (roadies are the paradigm) don't have sex. They are too involved with admiring their legs to want anyone to touch them, not even themselves. You only think you know about narcissists until you meet a few *serious* cyclists. Do you know any other group of men who shave their legs? Body builders (narcissistic - check) and swimmers also shave body hair. Body builders are hardly athletes. Indeed, but the specified category was "group of men". On the other hand, recumbent riders do not shave anything. Recumbent riders are the iconoclasts of cycling; one would expect nothing less from them than to be bolshie on every point on which roadies agree, including leg-shaving. [...] Just call us Phreds.  -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#98
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 5:20 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote: Fastback or Squareback? I can imagine a Type III being squirrelly at 190 kph, since it would be developing considerable lift. The so-called Fastback. Overall I give this car a thumbs up. Considering the beating it took from my idiot teen driving the thing was very reliable, almost indestructible. |
|
#99
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 2:48 pm, Lord Valve wrote:
I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I call bull**** on that. |
|
#100
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. "behaviours"? Did you mean "behaviors"? (Two can play this game). Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. There are many ways to operate a vehicle, car or bicycle that, although legal, is unsafe, rude and presumptuous of self importance. Mostly things one wouldn't do as a pedestrian on a sidewalk in a city. I have experienced many riders with whom I do not like to ride on narrow mountain roads because they ride in a thoughtless manner violating common courtesy. That people on bicycles ride in such a manner is apparent in the number of close slices, rude comments from an open window, and horn honking, occurring when I am with such riders. I suspect that those who advocate "taking the lane" and the like on this forum, fit that description. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. That depends on how you call that event. Bicyclists, can cause motor vehicle crashes while riding unpredictably (taking the lane). **** 'em. Clear? **** the clueless cagers that kill and main hundreds of thousands per year. I am suspicious of writer's cycling behavior when I they delve into rude and socially unacceptable language. This newsgroup seem to be heading that way in general. -- Jobst Brandt |
|
#101
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
|
|
#102
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
|
|
#103
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. "behaviours"? Did you mean "behaviors"? (Two can play this game). Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. There are many ways to operate a vehicle, car or bicycle that, although legal, is unsafe, rude and presumptuous of self importance. Mostly things one wouldn't do as a pedestrian on a sidewalk in a city. I have experienced many riders with whom I do not like to ride on narrow mountain roads because they ride in a thoughtless manner violating common courtesy. That people on bicycles ride in such a manner is apparent in the number of close slices, rude comments from an open window, and horn honking, occurring when I am with such riders. I suspect that those who advocate "taking the lane" and the like on this forum, fit that description. I recall riding legally in the right-hand lane of a 4-lane street on a Saturday morning with no other traffic around besides one overtaking car. The driver changed lanes from left to right, pulled up right behind me, honked steadily for about 10 seconds, cut around me about 1 foot to the left, and "flipped the bird" at me as he gunned the engine. Another time riding on a very low traffic rural road, a pick-up truck with a couple of teenagers in it passed in the other direction. The driver slammed on the brakes, did a U-turn through the ditch, gunned the engine and passed at a very close distance. Another incident riding in the right lane of a 4-lane street during a low traffic period. A minivan passes, slows down as it passes, and the front passenger throws a full soft drink can at me. All these incidents took place in areas where cyclists are fairly rare, so the scenario of a pack of cyclists blocking a narrow road for miles and annoying drivers just does not happen. No Critical Mass rides in these areas either. I wasn't there so I can't judge, but I recognize that there are drivers who make a sport of endangering bicyclists. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. That perception reinforces my perception of the problem. No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. That depends on how you call that event. Bicyclists, can cause motor vehicle crashes while riding unpredictably (taking the lane). Without further explanation, I can not see how taking the lane is unpredictable. Then you need to see it from behind the steeing wheel of a car. Taking the lane is necessary in some circumstance, but should not be done to make a point. From the discussions here on wreck.bike, it is often done to make a point as the writers state. **** 'em. Clear? **** the clueless cagers that kill and main hundreds of thousands per year. I am suspicious of writer's cycling behavior when I they delve into rude and socially unacceptable language. This newsgroup seem to be heading that way in general. Rude language is all that some people understand. .... or all that some people speak and write. Jobst Brandt |
|
#104
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 10, 12:19*pm, Tom Sherman
wrote: Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? Anytime you make a blanket statment, you will get the outliers responding -- including me, an almost audiophile (Resolution Audio CD 50, Bel Canto EVO 4, Modwright pre and AudioPhysic Virgo II, REL sub). I also raced for twenty years and still keep up with guys twenty years younger. My apologies to Andre for having a digital amp. If he wants to send me one of his big tube amps, I'll put it to good use -- and heat my study this winter. -- Jay Beattie. P.S. my brother, who is even older than me is a multi-time state mountain bike champ in Washington has a tube set up. |
|
#106
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Jay Beattie wrote:
On Sep 10, 12:19 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? Anytime you make a blanket statment, you will get the outliers responding -- including me, an almost audiophile (Resolution Audio CD 50, Bel Canto EVO 4, Modwright pre and AudioPhysic Virgo II, REL sub). I also raced for twenty years and still keep up with guys twenty years younger. My apologies to Andre for having a digital amp. If he wants to send me one of his big tube amps, I'll put it to good use -- and heat my study this winter. -- Jay Beattie. Most is not a blanket statement. Most does not include outliers. Camp out by the entrance of an audio show and look at the people going in. P.S. my brother, who is even older than me is a multi-time state mountain bike champ in Washington has a tube set up. I thought most of the top mountain bike racers were now running tubeless tires. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#107
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. There are many ways to operate a vehicle, car or bicycle that, although legal, is unsafe, rude and presumptuous of self importance. Mostly things one wouldn't do as a pedestrian on a sidewalk in a city. I have experienced many riders with whom I do not like to ride on narrow mountain roads because they ride in a thoughtless manner violating common courtesy. That people on bicycles ride in such a manner is apparent in the number of close slices, rude comments from an open window, and horn honking, occurring when I am with such riders. I suspect that those who advocate "taking the lane" and the like on this forum, fit that description. I recall riding legally in the right-hand lane of a 4-lane street on a Saturday morning with no other traffic around besides one overtaking car. The driver changed lanes from left to right, pulled up right behind me, honked steadily for about 10 seconds, cut around me about 1 foot to the left, and "flipped the bird" at me as he gunned the engine. Another time riding on a very low traffic rural road, a pick-up truck with a couple of teenagers in it passed in the other direction. The driver slammed on the brakes, did a U-turn through the ditch, gunned the engine and passed at a very close distance. Another incident riding in the right lane of a 4-lane street during a low traffic period. A minivan passes, slows down as it passes, and the front passenger throws a full soft drink can at me. All these incidents took place in areas where cyclists are fairly rare, so the scenario of a pack of cyclists blocking a narrow road for miles and annoying drivers just does not happen. No Critical Mass rides in these areas either. I wasn't there so I can't judge, but I recognize that there are drivers who make a sport of endangering bicyclists. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html Or maybe they just hate recumbent cyclists? Persecution complex, rising on the horizon. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. That perception reinforces my perception of the problem. The behavior of both groups deserve condemnation, but the actions of one do not excuse the other. I would not mind seeing a crackdown on the grosser violations of people on bicycles (e.g. blowing red lights, wrong way riding) since they make life more difficult for the rest of us. Single incidents are something I let pass and don't make blanket assumptions. I don't like car drivers that approach from behind and then dawdle there trying to anticipate the bicyclists next move. That's when I stop or slow down enough that they must pass and if they don't I tell them that "I'll ride the bicycle, you dive the car, OK!" No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. That depends on how you call that event. Bicyclists, can cause motor vehicle crashes while riding unpredictably (taking the lane). Without further explanation, I can not see how taking the lane is unpredictable. Then you need to see it from behind the steering wheel of a car. Waiting to pass a cyclist until the oncoming lane is clear does not bother me in the least, if it is too narrow to pass safely. It bothers me because there is often ample room to pass safely in most of my encounters, especially when the first vehicle is a loaded super large Readymix truck that passed me without hesitation recently only to have the following car play the condescending role of "Oh forgive, another stupid bicycle on my road". Taking the lane is necessary in some circumstance, but should not be done to make a point. From the discussions here on wreck.bike, it is often done to make a point as the writers state. [...] We could do without the Critical Mass attitude. Amen, to use a religious expression. Jobst Brandt |
|
#108
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote: Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. There are many ways to operate a vehicle, car or bicycle that, although legal, is unsafe, rude and presumptuous of self importance. Mostly things one wouldn't do as a pedestrian on a sidewalk in a city. I have experienced many riders with whom I do not like to ride on narrow mountain roads because they ride in a thoughtless manner violating common courtesy. That people on bicycles ride in such a manner is apparent in the number of close slices, rude comments from an open window, and horn honking, occurring when I am with such riders. I suspect that those who advocate "taking the lane" and the like on this forum, fit that description. I recall riding legally in the right-hand lane of a 4-lane street on a Saturday morning with no other traffic around besides one overtaking car. The driver changed lanes from left to right, pulled up right behind me, honked steadily for about 10 seconds, cut around me about 1 foot to the left, and "flipped the bird" at me as he gunned the engine. Another time riding on a very low traffic rural road, a pick-up truck with a couple of teenagers in it passed in the other direction. The driver slammed on the brakes, did a U-turn through the ditch, gunned the engine and passed at a very close distance. Another incident riding in the right lane of a 4-lane street during a low traffic period. A minivan passes, slows down as it passes, and the front passenger throws a full soft drink can at me. All these incidents took place in areas where cyclists are fairly rare, so the scenario of a pack of cyclists blocking a narrow road for miles and annoying drivers just does not happen. No Critical Mass rides in these areas either. I wasn't there so I can't judge, but I recognize that there are drivers who make a sport of endangering bicyclists. http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html Or maybe they just hate recumbent cyclists? Persecution complex, rising on the horizon. Missing the joke, landed. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. That perception reinforces my perception of the problem. The behavior of both groups deserve condemnation, but the actions of one do not excuse the other. I would not mind seeing a crackdown on the grosser violations of people on bicycles (e.g. blowing red lights, wrong way riding) since they make life more difficult for the rest of us. Single incidents are something I let pass and don't make blanket assumptions. I don't like car drivers that approach from behind and then dawdle there trying to anticipate the bicyclists next move. That's when I stop or slow down enough that they must pass and if they don't I tell them that "I'll ride the bicycle, you dive the car, OK!" How far behind do they follow. I too dislike a car following only a few feet back, so when I drive I leave a considerable distance, then pass as soon as it is safe. No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. That depends on how you call that event. Bicyclists, can cause motor vehicle crashes while riding unpredictably (taking the lane). Without further explanation, I can not see how taking the lane is unpredictable. Then you need to see it from behind the steering wheel of a car. Waiting to pass a cyclist until the oncoming lane is clear does not bother me in the least, if it is too narrow to pass safely. It bothers me because there is often ample room to pass safely in most of my encounters, especially when the first vehicle is a loaded super large Readymix truck that passed me without hesitation recently only to have the following car play the condescending role of "Oh forgive, another stupid bicycle on my road". I see some projection or assumption here - not all drivers are thinking "stupid cyclist". What is a safe passing distance? I would not pass a cyclist within the zone where he/she would likely land from an incident such as a diversion fall, or would end up riding to avoid a pothole or road debris. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#109
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
How far behind do they follow. I too dislike a car following only a few feet back, so when I drive I leave a considerable distance, then pass as soon as it is safe. These folks are not tail-gating, they are making a point that bicycles are too dangerous to pass except where you can use another lane... which they do to the extreme when the road straightens, driving up to the left gutter while I am riding outside of the lane edge stripe. No, you just notice the "people on bicycles" that are irresponsible and tar vehicular cyclists with that brush. Cyclists DO NOT kill innocent people the way ignorant motorists in their steel cages do. That depends on how you call that event. Bicyclists, can cause motor vehicle crashes while riding unpredictably (taking the lane). Without further explanation, I can not see how taking the lane is unpredictable. Then you need to see it from behind the steering wheel of a car. Waiting to pass a cyclist until the oncoming lane is clear does not bother me in the least, if it is too narrow to pass safely. It bothers me because there is often ample room to pass safely in most of my encounters, especially when the first vehicle is a loaded super large Readymix truck that passed me without hesitation recently only to have the following car play the condescending role of "Oh forgive, another stupid bicycle on my road". I see some projection or assumption here - not all drivers are thinking "stupid cyclist". What is a safe passing distance? I would not pass a cyclist within the zone where he/she would likely land from an incident such as a diversion fall, or would end up riding to avoid a pothole or road debris. I have the opportunity to talk to such folks at intersections with stop signs or traffic lights, and they do not conceal their condescension. I also know that, as I explained in various articles, that all the following cars are mad at the bicyclist rather than the driver who is playing games of obstruction behind that bicyclist. Jobst Brandt |
|
#110
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Lord Valve wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: Clive George wrote: "Lord Valve" wrote in message ... Clive George wrote: "Lord Valve" wrote in message ... when I'm not styling through Denver in my Sprinter, an 11-foot high monster which I can easily walk around in. Chortle. It's a delivery van. About as stylish as brown paper. Chortle all you'd like, asswipe... It's a magnificent vehicle, a Mercedes van. Your defence makes it all the funnier. It's a fast transit. It's amusing that it's sold as personal transport, and even funnier if an owner thinks it's got style - over here, nobody would choose to drive one outside work. Even the blinged up minibus variants are seen as no more than utility or maybe hen night transport. They are quite efficient at carrying loads or a full complement of passengers, so they're not all bad, but that's not really the image you're aiming for, is it. But you omitted to say the Mercedes van was designed and made in Europe, where communism doesn't flourish anymore, but where so many think very differently to communists, and are Green Minded in a big way because they think its very good for the economy and future of humanity. Nothing wrong with green, as long as it functions as well as the old way. If not, **** it. Especially if it costs more. Depends how much though does it not? Let us suppose that your grandchildren witness the rapid melting of the Greenland ice mass and sea levels rising 2 metres, with many more metres of rise in future. Enormous economic losses would result. The cost of the baricading of cities built around sea ports would be immense. The grand kids might moan "How come grand dad didn't build on higher ground?" So if there was some way a slight cost could be paid now to prevent such future economic catastrophe it'd be worth it if the catastrophe could be avoided. This pie in the sky solution with gross uncertainties frightens the be-jesus out of those insisting in simple certainties. The one certain thing is uncertainty. Nearly everyone says exactly what you are saying, ie, that green mindedness is quite OK as long as we can have business as usual, and not have any reduction in the standard of living, ie, none of those silly increased taxes or costs to fix up what politicians have finally realised is a mess that we're making around the Planet. Trying to convince 2 billion in China and India for starters that something needs to be done differently is the **real hard part**. Stopping the total removal of the amazonain rain forest amoung other is another hard part. Stopping total burning of easily mined coal and easily found oil is also hard. The list of unpalletable decisions is a long one. I reckon most folks in democracies will vote out governments that try to make us pay for greenhouse prevention measures, so expect rapid successive failing governments, ending up with a scenario of too little too late, everyone will still try to get rich, and keep on saying, "first we get rich, then we fix up the environment". In 100 years at present rates, the environment will be completely un-fixable. I think its partially still fixable now, but when push comes to shove, ppl vote in favour of themselves ahead of anyone else and ahead of the environment. In 100 years, young folks inheriting the steering wheels of government will have never have experienced a world as natural as one we know now, and frankly, they won't realise what's missing, and they will do what we've been doing, finding the easiest and politically and economically expedient short term patch up solution. So why worry anyway? In some countries, people will endure the costs of carbon trading, and might even say to themselves "well we don't mind paying if greenhouse emissions go down and something is achieved". But then after a few years of paying, and it is revealed that emissions have risen, then its over for the optimism, and time to vote out the arsoles who stole all our money! Or thusands of ppl turn up en-masse with hockey sticks and molotov coctails outside Parliments. People might become cranky and bitter about how becoming rich is not quite working out. Its well underway here, and a young couple buying a house costs 8 times average weekly earnings. It cost me 3 times AWE some 34 years ago. 35% of women now born in Oz will not have children. And maybe we'll have a few really decent international wars to settle matters. Doom preachers like Paul Erlich may have been wrong about mass famines and huge problems because he never realised there'd be a green revolution after he published before the 1970s. What he predicted might still happen though; we need another green revolution of increased crop harvest yields *again*, and soon. War might become increasingly attractive to desperate nations if problems of sustainability get really bad. The US is fighting a continuing war of invading Iraq to ensure oil can flow to the US and the "Free World", and so oil flow isn't through the greedy hands of indigenous quarrelsome muslims in that area of the world. Just imagine if oil suddenly hit $400 a barrel. I do worry about Lord Valve's knee though, ****e, only 90 degrees of bend! How is a decent law abiding yankee red-neck ever going to kick a left wing arsole right up the arse nice, and hard!, with a troubly knee like LV has????? Don't worry, I got two of 'em. The other one works just fine. ;-) Or two working arms and hands. Even if you're in a wheelchair, you can wheel up behind a leftie-commo-homo-lesbian, and slip a cracker up its/his/her arse real quick and light the fuse, and wheel away fast...... Just watch out for their greenie commo extremist relatives and friends though; they tend to form insurgency terrorist units and fight back a bit, and then you'll learn the costs of feuding. ( Iraq has cost the taxpayer trillions more than originally estimated, and over 4,000 dead yanks, 2 million displaced Iraquis, and at least tens of thousands of the those poor buggers killed, and depleted uranium dust blowing in dust all around, and huge future health problems of old soldiers, and iraqies, etc....) Oil has proven to be more expensive than we thought.... I'll chortle a little more when he describes his experience of human nature in all its dreadful uncaring manners when he begins to ride a bicycle in America. He'll soon find out about arsoles then. But never mind, Lance Armstrong, the famaous tireless American who won the TDF 7 times did fight a terrible bout of cancer during the TDF effort, and he put up with the Europeans around him. And he got run off the road by the jerks in Texas while he was training in America. Well, that's where the Sprinter comes in. I reckon I could put maybe 20 bikes in the back of that monster. So, what I plan to do is put just one - mine - in the back, and drive it to a place where there are bicycle paths, no cars allowed. We have over 400km of sealed bike paths off-road here in Canberra. So I can ride fast enough to make the heart work hard. Denver, fortunately, has *lots* of bike routes along creeks and rivers, through parks, etc., such that I'll never need to encounter any motor vehicles by riding on the streets. When I'm done, back into the Sprinter goes the bike, and my (hopefully less) fat ass is homeward bound. It does take a lot of cycling to get a fat arse smaller, like it may have been at age 30, when you were maybe better than now. ( This follows the idea that the older you get, the better you was, right? ) I was 102Kg 2.5yrs ago. It took me 7 mths to lose 20Kg, with I reckon about 17Kg being usless lard, and maybe I put on 3Kg of muscle. I could hardly fit a suit I bought in 1983, at age 34, but now It fits just like it used to. In addition to a staple of 200km+ per week on the bicycle, I also swim about 1.5Km a week with daily swims in the 7 warmer months we get. So the top half gets a bit of a work out as well as the bottom half. I sometimes ride with a Pedal Power group of non competive riders who just like day rides on low traffic country roads around Canberra. Sometimes 40 ppl show up for the early sunday morning rides. They divide themselves into fast, medium and slow riders, with the fast doing more distance than the slow ones. I sometimes ride away from the fast group, arriving at cafes where we might lunch well before the rest arrive. When I ask the 40 yr olds "what's been keeping youse?", they can't explain, and I say "Well I gave youse a 20 year start..." Chortles all round. They don't have to be tell me that after I die, they'll still have 20 years to enjoy. I did a time trial last year, and found I was riding a 40km time of a "standard" man 5 years younger. At 41, which is 20 years ago, I couldn't ever manage the "age standard" time for my age. But there is a man in Pomme Land, ( Olde Englande ) who at 82 managed to ride 40km at the same speed I do at 61. Record performances are way ahead of "standard averages" which are usually 95% ahead of the rest of cycle club members which are better than 95% of the rest of society that is unfit. So there are always better achievers than yourself, but if you actually manage 40km you're doing better than not being able to get that far! America is ****in' HUGE, see, and most Americans (outside of densely-packed downtown metropolitan areas) simply don't consider bicycles as "transportation." Same here. Huge place Australia, nearly the same area as the USA. But increasing numbers consider a bicycle to be a fine instrument for concentrating exercise into a time/cost affordable self improvement package. Mankind and womenkind were designed to raise a sweat many times a day, but now too many ppl gaze at PC screens all day, and eat piles of junk food. And they whinge and whine about how bad they are doing, and what they have not got. They never sweat. And they worry a lot. They rot. Consequently, American roads aren't designed for bicyclists. Its the same in many countries. Its like that here. Most country roads don't have the extra 4 feet each side outside the two lanes to accomodate a tiny minority of cyclists. Australia has the similar population to California, but its a large country, and to put bicycle lanes on most roads is just way too expensive, and they wouldn't get used enough to justify the expense. 90% of bicycle journeys are less than 10km. Most cyclists like myself own a car and drive the bigger distances. Unlike most cyclists who own a car, I cycle twice the distance I driver per annum. Maybe 2,000 of all the 100,000 working people in my city of 330,000 ride to work each day, and in winter, the numbers decline. operator of a (rather large) motor vehicle, I *hate* ****ing bicyclists and their disdain for the rules of the road, traffic signals, lanes and so forth, and their snotty insistance that it is *my* responsibilty to ensure that they survive their uppity intrusions into my territory by not running over their ridiculous asses with my Sprinter. Yup, plenty of cyclists were not born with high intelligence. Some couldn't get a driver's license if they tried, which is why they have a bicycle, and think they can exploit the motorist's duty of care. Its a bit illogical. At traffic lights I stop, but i might follow a pedestrian across against red light to get to a centre island to wait again before its safe for the pedestrian and myself to cross, and I thus make it through the traffic light intersection quite safely, and faster than waiting all day for the lights to go through their full cycle. It might infuriate a motorist to see me do what he cannot, and adopt the action of a pedestrian when it suits me. I don't care. Its not interfering with a motorist, or ever likely to cause any motorist the horrible experience of running over me. Might scratch the paintwork. I quite understand motorists not liking having to avoid us cyclists on top of having to do the far greater time consuming activity of avoiding other motorists. Motorists hate motorcyclists as well, and many motorists hate *everything else that moves* once they become insane once they are behind the wheel of a vehicle. Many motorists are extremely stupid and inconsiderate, and make moves without looking out for us, even though we are in our cycle lane... I'm constantly looking ahead allowing for a motorist to chop me off, cut in front, and cause me to stop faster than I can, and its my defensive attitude that has me braking before other's might, and turning instinctively with the guy who cuts me off turning left, etc. I've ridden 120,000 km and never had a prang with a motorist. The clash betwen cyclists and other road users has been going on with robust argy bargy now ever since they invented a penny farthing in the 1880s. As oil prices rise, expect to see more bicycles on roads. If oil rises to $400 a barrel, expect to see fewer cars, and more ppl in busses and trains. There will be more room for cyclists, but only a small % of folks would ever select a bicycle as the means to ride to work. Try telling the average american woman of 45 she has to ride a bike after she sells her SUV. You'll have a ring your ear alright, from the big heavy slap across the face. Green governments advocating such draconian change won't be voted for. Americans and Australians have never voted to allow communists to have power over us, and they won't allow the greenies to have much power either. In Oz the Greenies led by senator Bob Brown give a conscience where other parties don't have one. http://www.dinkumaussies.com/GREENIES%2FBob%20Brown.htm America isn't very good at building road systems that allow good safe access by cyclists. See above. ;-) Good to see LV back here and it gives spice to an otherwise dull news group..... Well, hell, thanks. ;-) I've been doing a lot of sitting around lately, although I'm starting to become more mobile. Ouch. I snapped a cruciate ligament in one knee while riding a Matchless G80 500cc motorcycle in 1966, age 19. And because I wasn't looking where I was going, and because I was idiotically young, like most of us were. There was no repair possible for the snapped ligament. My ankle was also broken at the time and I had 8 weeks in plaster. The hospital staff reckoned i'd be OK to resume being a construction apprentice carpenter, but that I'd have trouble with arthritis by 60. 50 came, and I had big troubles, and it forced me out of the building trade, and off the bicycle. After a considerable wait, and after dire predictions by several doctors that to ease my pains I'd need both knee joints replaced with titanium implants, I had a non invasive autheroscopic knee operation where they tidied up the previous 30 years of cuts and tears in cartlidges, and the inflamation these accumulated bothers caused eased right off, and I became much healthier, and I wasn't living "chair to chair". 18 mths after the op, I began to cycle, and 2.5 years later I can now stand for hours, and walk a mile and cycle 125km in rugged hilly terrain, and not drop dead. Cycling is non-impactive exercize, and you can sit down most of the time while provoking your vascular heart-lung system to "work its ****in arse off". If there isn't a history of heart disease in your family tree, cycling hard and fast won't hurt you at high heart rates, providing you go at it regularly. And 60kph down a hill is far more of a thrill than 160kph on a BMW 750. A bicycle reminds you how easily you can die. But your problem is the shortage in a ligament reducing movement, and exercize tends to make ligaments shorter, even though it makes you get stronger and fitter. Yoga practitioners do their thing to naturally *stretch* their ligaments and muscle structure to allow a greater range of movement. Or to maintain the suppleness of youth despite the wrinkles of age. Yoga is seen by many to be a silly sissy ****y thing greeno-feminits do to ease their mind about what men do to them. Go to a yoga class, and there are all these unapproachable women there. Not the place to ask for a BJ! But I braved this harmless mob to learn some yoga while I spent the 6 years between 37 and 43 on a bicycle and racing each week. I got all these aches and pains from the terrific stress of physical building work AND riding 300km a week average. Yoga once learnt, fixed most of the aches and pains, and compensated stress effects very nicely. You don't need to believe in *all* the BS that goes with yoga; just do it, and you improve. There are different types of yoga. "Hatha" yoga is the one for people who exercize a lot. Its stretching, meditation, breathing deeply, and provoking your own internal healing system to get off its fat ass to let you get on with your challenges. Yoga kept me on the road during my 6 year racing career as a "veteran" rider, ( over 35 ). And you may need some additional work by surgeons if it is available if you intend following through and seeing and enjoying yourself at your own personal best despite the limitations. But the non-surgical solutions should be tried first, and with yoga and cycling, you might slowly coax that short string to get longer and stronger. And if you really tried hard, you'd ban sugar in your house, all processed foods, and eat a plate full of raw vegetables daily, give up butter, margerine and bread, and eat olive oil only, and slow slow release carbohydrates along with really lean meats and some fish once a week. I have 2 x 400gram cans of pink salmon a week. The fish oils are excellent for you. Why give up bread? Because its not wholemeal stone ground any more. The fatty ham and butter and cheese you have to have with bread is very poor nutrition, junk food indeed. Reduce calorie intake, increase calorie expenditure. Create a calorie deficit. If your calorie deficit is 2,700 per week, an easily achievable figure, then you must be using 300gms of your unwanted fat stores that are too large in most people today. There's 9 calories in a gram of fat or oil. At an average of 25kph on a flat course ride, a person can use an extra 400 calories per hour, which is 44 grams of fat. 10 hours a week makes for 440 grams, or about 1 pound a week, and 10 weeks makes 4.4kg, or 10 pounds. Find the book by Nathan Pritican, and read it twice. http://frayedlaces.blogspot.com/2008...r-runners.html And the regular exercise every 2 days stirs up your whole system and you burn more fat between exercizes, so you lose more than a pound a week. Sedentary ppl who rarely exercize more than walking from the car to supermarket or having a root session with the missus on sunday morning will have a heart rate of average 64BPM, or more. When you are fit, this average falls, and I'm now 56BPM at rest while I type to r.a.t to let them all know what I'm up to. But I stepped off the bike after 85km this arvo only 4 hours ago, and HR will be down to 52 when I retire later. They say there's only so many heart beats in a person to be had, and then that's it, the heart stops, if nothing else kills you before then. OK, with a lowered average HR, life expectancy time should increase with regular exercise. After a few months of good eating and good exercize, the body will become leaner, and it will become more efficient, and then becomes quite cunning and able to put up with the diet calorie reductions and extra exercise without using precious fat stores, so you will have to stay on the frugal diet where you eat a heck of a lot but don't get fatter for the rest of your life. You'll find that if you slip back to no exercise and eating **** with fast burn carbohydrates such as sugar and breads, your body won't burn them, it'll try to add them immediately to your fat stores. I regard Coca Cola and McDonald's food like poison. I can't recall when I had a fizzy drink. Last time I got conned into having lunch at Mac's, I felt sick. To stay good at 60 like you were at 30 means changing a lot. You have to totally reject the validity of much modern life. Be thus able to walk past 99% of supermarket shelving, knowing that there's not much there worth eating. Stop only where fresh un-processed foods are on offer. If you must have chocolate, eat only Lindt, or chockie with over 70% cocoa content. Its then good for you, but chockie which is say "milk chocolate" is laced with hydrogenated fats and piles of crap that make a really fit man feel a little sick after he eats it. Fructose from corn syryp has been loaded into all sorts of foods to increase the calorie count and increase the "I want more" reaction of most ppl who are unfit. Most ppl then get fat after repeat buying of mass produced **** masquerading as processed "foods". Most people are victims of the mass food marketing industries. Most foods with great natural values are processed into a whole variety of other foods which is called "value adding", but its mainly the opposite, value reducing, or value stripping, and each derivative from a simple whole thing is sold at a huge price so that a food company makes more profits, and the fat shareholders don't care about your health. Capitalism is not always bright and beautiful. Capitalism is ****ing awful, like Democracy, until you consider the alternatives. OK, niether is perfect. I invite you to never swallow the poisonous offerings of either. But both do offer you that option without suffering a death by firing squad! If I couldn't cycle, I'd have a canoe, and paddle all around the water ways here to burn the energy. If I can ride away from 95% of the other cyclists in this town at age 61, then surely you can get a lot better at least. If you can stand walking, which also does not involve excessive knee bend, then walk your arse off. First along flat routes, and like cycling, as you harden up, turn your mind to the hills, walk up them, look out, and pity the lazy people not there with you, see the grandness of nature from afar, and you should notice the littleness of man's cities and towns, and feel the nonsense of being human. Rise above it all, do your own life without gazing at too many others, so give up watching television, OK! Life isn't about finding meaning. Its not about telling others what they must do. But we can mean what we do in life, and invite others to share our journeys. Meaning is just being, and we shouldn't need to control others. Then we see much natural beauty, and after a lot of that we won't even mind dying. The spring breeding season is underway in the bird world here, and its a marvel that pairs of ducks and swans go about it so easily, and without human neurotics or silly dramas. http://www.australianexplorer.com/ca...ey_griffin.htm http://maps.bonzle.com/c/a?a=pic&fn=i76kfy5r&s=3 Here's where I rode out to today.... http://maps.bonzle.com/c/a?a=pic&fn=c22sjxct&s=3 In the hour or more spent composing this email, my resting HR rate has fallen from 56BPM to 46BPM. Migual Indurain had a resting HR of 28 when at his peak they say. He won the TDF 5 times in a row in the 1990s. That resting HR was an indicator of how fit his big beautiful heart was. But probably he rides a bit now, and not many his age could keep up. Will he be around at 60? who knows? My final tip, If you exercise real hard and get HR up from say 60BPM at rest to say 140BPM which might be after really big effort on a treadmill, then what happens to your HR when you suddenly stop that work? Experts say now that your HR should immediately begin to decline, and by at least 12BPM per minute during the first minute. Thus after 5 minutes, HR could be down to 80BPM, and that's OK. But say your HR only came down to 120BPM, and after an hour was still 100BPM. Expect to die from heart failure within 5 years. The heart recovery rate after strenuous exercize is now regarded as a very good indicator of heart condition and longevity. In trained and practised young cyclists, they may have their HR zoom up to 200PM+ during a criterium race on sprint laps for points, but on the next lap it'll be way down as they ride in the bunch at a lower pace. In bygone ages, we'd outrun game we were chasing so we could catch up and kill them or our tribe starved. Women walked miles for water, and for the the best yams to be dug out of the ground with sticks. They'd carry the youngans. It went on for millions of years, and the weaklings were slowly weeded out. Now the weak enjoy every right to reproduce, but maybe they become great artists, doctors, plumbers, and the nice people next door, so fitness isn't needed, if there is sufficient technical support now. But if you sit too much in front of the PC, you rot. Patrick Turner. Lord Valve Alias Willie da Gimp |
|
#111
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Clive George wrote: "Lord Valve" wrote in message ... This here's America, son, and America's BIG and Americans have lots of stuff. That's why we like trucks. In fact, I've never owned a car in my whole ****in' life, and wouldn't. Can't haul nothin' in some economy ****box, see? It's not exactly a Ram 3500 or an F350. They're big hairy American man's trucks. The Sprinter is a Euro tin-van, bland and inoffensive. Suitable for a San Francisco florist or pageant organiser. Functional utility is plenty stylish if you own a business like I do, and my family and my pack of coondogs love that ****in' truck. You can get help for that. You should nurture the good in a man. LV is talking about going cycling, and that'd be a wondrous thing. His coonies are harmless pets for chrissake. If he had a pack of 10 children, that might be a lot more dangerous. I had a truck with a V8 for 22 years, and needed it for business. I went out of the construction business, so now I have a Ford Laser, 1986 model, pile of ****, but very well suited to my needs, and half the cost to run compared to the truck. Patrick Turner. |
|
#112
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 9, 2:51 pm, Patrick Turner wrote: And the older you get, the better you was. Patrick Turner. My pulse at waking is 42. That's lower than when I was an exceedingly fit young athlete. I reckon anyone over fifty who doesn't weigh at least ten pounds more than he did at twenty has an unhealthy fascination with his body shape. But, hell, here we stand among the roadies who shave their legs, so perhaps we'll just look the other way. They shave because of the falls. With hairy legs, gravel rash is a bigger problem than if hair is removed.. If someone was a fatso at 20, and finally gets around to getting his body into shape by 50, then congratulations. Most 20 yr old cyclists have some weight to put on before they reach their peak. All muscle it is. Fat % is good if around 8%. Few of us can ever hope to get down to 8%. Some do, by means of dieting, and chemicals and body builders are no exception, and to win their shows thay must have extremely freakily low fat % contents. I was at my best at about 33, but felt fat at 36 and 90Kg, so I began cycling instead of hanging out in disco bars. Weight stayed at about 81Kg for 5 years and I was quick for my age at 41, but the elite and more genetically gifted lean mean guys with room fulls of trophies they won so easily were always faster, but hell, there were only about 20 A grade veterans at that time in a city of 250,000 ppl. For many years I didn't do vigourous exercize, and I still enjoyed life. But at 57, I didn't like weighing over 100Kg. Now I am 61, and 81Kg, and feeling 30 again. I could go to about 77Kg, and then be more able to keep up with the very few riders of my age who manage to ride up hills faster than I can. I think being hungry all the time wouldn't be worth being very slightly faster. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html |
|
#113
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
Tom Sherman wrote:
"Lord Valve" aka William Whittaker wrote: Tom Sherman wrote: [snip useless stuff] I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. "behaviours"? Did you mean "behaviors"? (Two can play this game). Indeed, but only one can win. Game, set, match: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/behaviours Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. Since I have done none of those things...yawn I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. Ah, "steel cage." ****tard jargon. OK, I'm dealing with a crackpot. Here, have the last word, and enjoy it as much as you are able: |
|
#114
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
|
|
#115
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 11, 2:29 am, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Sep 10, 12:19 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? Anytime you make a blanket statment, you will get the outliers responding -- including me, an almost audiophile (Resolution Audio CD 50, Bel Canto EVO 4, Modwright pre and AudioPhysic Virgo II, REL sub). I also raced for twenty years and still keep up with guys twenty years younger. My apologies to Andre for having a digital amp. Ha! I'm only a high priest of the ultrafidelista by accident. I was just a low-profile lurker when some small manufacturer thought he'd use a flame war to humiliate me for giving his product a less than enthusiastic review in the late lamented tubie mag Glass Audio. Predictably, when when he gave up this dumb idea several yars later, I had accidentally become a high-profile audiophile (in the same way Carl Fogel and Frank Krygowski latched onto my passing enquiry and instead of frightening me off made me a high-profile cyclist; the Internet enables idiots and magnifies their idiocy). The truth is I'm not an audiophile all, merely a music lover with a talent for electronics engineering. I use ultra-reliable QUAD gear (both transistor and tube) interchangeably with tube amps of my own design or commercial, both single ended and push-pull but always Class A; except for my Quad Electrostats, most of my speakers are of my own design and construction too. I publish some of my designs of amps and speakers for qualified (experienced -- the voltage will kill you if you are careless) amateurs to build; URL under my sig. Currently I'm listening to Emma Kirkby singing songs by Hildegard of Bingen on STAX electrostatic headphones via a near-standard factory STAX amp -- I just breathed on the power supply, multiplying the available current by six or seven -- while I wait for the return from Japan of the proto of a tube amp I designed to deliver a balanced 600V to the earphones. Of course, you have to be very committed to your music to let me deliver 600V potential to speakers in contact with your ears... Audiophiles less brave can let me rig up Quad ESL three feet from their ears on either side (earphones for real men) and for those with plutocratic listening rooms (and bank accounts) I am happy to create a Bessel Array of electrostatic speakers to provide a point source of stunning purity anywhere in any room up to the size of a football field. If he wants to send me one of his big tube amps, I'll put it to good use -- and heat my study this winter. -- Jay Beattie. Problem with a big tube amp is that it is such a lethal item that you cannot in good conscience give it away. I broke up my Millennium's End kilovolt SV572-3 and -10 amp, an 80W SE monster, because the umbilicals between the units were clearly illegal and the units couldn't be combined since just the mains and output transformers weighed a quarter-ton. (Mind you, it is by far not the heaviest hifi I ever designed. An Italian chum sits literally in the mouth of a big horn I designed to be built from several tons of prestressed concrete.) P.S. my brother, who is even older than me is a multi-time state mountain bike champ in Washington has a tube set up. Most bicyclists, once they try tubes, never go back to solid tyres. I thought everyone knew that, even people in Washington (presumably State rather than DC). Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
|
#116
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
About Quad reliability, etc, was Who should be first to die off inthe "energy crisis"?
Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 11, 2:29 am, Jay Beattie wrote: On Sep 10, 12:19 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? Anytime you make a blanket statment, you will get the outliers responding -- including me, an almost audiophile (Resolution Audio CD 50, Bel Canto EVO 4, Modwright pre and AudioPhysic Virgo II, REL sub). I also raced for twenty years and still keep up with guys twenty years younger. My apologies to Andre for having a digital amp. Ha! I'm only a high priest of the ultrafidelista by accident. I was just a low-profile lurker when some small manufacturer thought he'd use a flame war to humiliate me for giving his product a less than enthusiastic review in the late lamented tubie mag Glass Audio. Predictably, when when he gave up this dumb idea several yars later, I had accidentally become a high-profile audiophile (in the same way Carl Fogel and Frank Krygowski latched onto my passing enquiry and instead of frightening me off made me a high-profile cyclist; the Internet enables idiots and magnifies their idiocy). The truth is I'm not an audiophile all, merely a music lover with a talent for electronics engineering. I use ultra-reliable QUAD gear (both transistor and tube) interchangeably with tube amps of my own design or commercial, both single ended and push-pull but always Class A; except for my Quad Electrostats, most of my speakers are of my own design and construction too. I publish some of my designs of amps and speakers for qualified (experienced -- the voltage will kill you if you are careless) amateurs to build; URL under my sig. Currently I'm listening to Emma Kirkby singing songs by Hildegard of Bingen on STAX electrostatic headphones via a near-standard factory STAX amp -- I just breathed on the power supply, multiplying the available current by six or seven -- while I wait for the return from Japan of the proto of a tube amp I designed to deliver a balanced 600V to the earphones. Of course, you have to be very committed to your music to let me deliver 600V potential to speakers in contact with your ears... Audiophiles less brave can let me rig up Quad ESL three feet from their ears on either side (earphones for real men) and for those with plutocratic listening rooms (and bank accounts) I am happy to create a Bessel Array of electrostatic speakers to provide a point source of stunning purity anywhere in any room up to the size of a football field. In the damp Irish climate where you live, its amazing you can say that Quad gear is "ultra-reliable QUAD gear (both transistor and tube)" because my experience is that it simply is NOT any more reliable than many other ordinary generic brands which keep an army of repair people in business. Oh, and it may have been less alarming to mention to readers that 600V at electrostatic headphones would have been at an extremely low current. However, the source resistance is low, and contact with AC signals at high voltages from amp anodes or from step up transformers could be lethal, but of little concern if there is good enough insulation that would keep the most sceptical engineer happy. If he wants to send me one of his big tube amps, I'll put it to good use -- and heat my study this winter. -- Jay Beattie. Problem with a big tube amp is that it is such a lethal item that you cannot in good conscience give it away. I broke up my Millennium's End kilovolt SV572-3 and -10 amp, an 80W SE monster, because the umbilicals between the units were clearly illegal and the units couldn't be combined since just the mains and output transformers weighed a quarter-ton. (Mind you, it is by far not the heaviest hifi I ever designed. An Italian chum sits literally in the mouth of a big horn I designed to be built from several tons of prestressed concrete.) Audiophiles are notorious for changing things in their system which means selling one bit of gear they get sick of and buying a replacement. The more money they earn, the faster the rate of gear change. Its like as if they'd never go back to the same gal at the brothel, and are continually "upgrading" the choice of girls to get the better BJ. So what were one audiophile's umbilicals might soon become another owned by another audiophile. Illegality of umbilicals never ever prevented audiophiles buying the most attrociously designed amplifiers, even those with umbilicals that are sub-standard. Its because some makers did make lethal umbilicals that it became the law that umbilicals were banned entirely. I do wonder how many were killed or shocked though. Not many I guess, but the law is sometimes over zealous, and laws are made for the sake of lkeeping law makers employed. Quad had umbilicals for the Quad-II amps to Quad 22 control unit, and other bits of attatched gear such as AM and FM tuners. I doubt Quad killed anyone. Walker could be very bad tempered when production quality sagged at a factory though. Get out of the way, he might kill ya.... You say to an audiophile, "THIS WILL KILL YOU" in a stern slow loud voice, and they just smile. Its never gonna happen, to them. Often they encourage the arrival of the Grim Reaper by plugging in things wrongly, after breaking off locating spigots on octal plugs, leaving things not plugged in right, and if there's a way some **** could happen, then an audiophile will find it without setting out to find it. No matter you one tries to educate them about the basics of electronics, it goes in one ear and out the other. Transparent sound? I am forced into making amps with umbilicals. There isn't an easier other way that is affordable. You see, if you want 50+ watts from apair of 845, then the audio circuit will weigh at least 25Kg before it begins to sound well and was worth the wait while it was made, and the weight of inconvenience. The power supply, if its worth owning, will weigh at least 20Kg. Just for one channel. If you don't use umbilicals, the weight becomes well over the maximum unit weight of things that can be lifted by a person safely under the laws governing workplace safety. The standard bag of cement once weighed 40Kg, and there were 25 bags to the tonne. This bag weight ruined many a buiding worker's health, and caused untold compensation payouts for back injuries, both genuine and feined. I recall carrying two such bags at a time over short distance though, and that was my own weight. Now the bag weight is 20Kg, and most healthy ppl can easily handle that even if they are the age of the average audiophile, 55, and overweight and grossly unfit from sitting in front of speakers for too long. The alternative is to have modular plug in chassis units so the only way they can be operated is if they are stacked on top of each other, with the top unit being the hot one with tubes, bottom one with cool silicon diodes and CLC filters, and a socket placed so the top amp chassis plugs downwards into the bottom chassis with power supply. No cables. This means a more expensive and elaborate two chassis design, and all the audiophiles I know are penny pinching whingers about prices. So OK, its better to disobey one law about umbilicals to comply with another *sensible* law that limits weight of single items to be lifted to 20Kg. If somebody lifts an awkward 40Kg, they could hurt their back, and if they drop the darn thing, maybe wreck a foot. I use very rugged mobile crane hook-up wire for umbilicals, so if an amp falls off a bench, the sudden yank on the cable does not expose bare stripped wires at high voltages. each wire of the 5 within a cable is rated for 15 amps at least, and thus the copper is so thick and strong it won't stretch. And the power supply automatically turns off if a cable is unplugged. P.S. my brother, who is even older than me is a multi-time state mountain bike champ in Washington has a tube set up. Most bicyclists, once they try tubes, never go back to solid tyres. I thought everyone knew that, even people in Washington (presumably State rather than DC). And once they try Shimano SORA very low cost entry level index gearing, they never go back to lever on the down tube gear changing. Campagnolo is nice to own, but I like the cheap 8 speed Shimano well. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
|
#117
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT, World perils and Good Health ideas with cycling etc, was Whoshould be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
I re-post my previous post but to r.a.t only under a different header... Patrick Turner wrote: Lord Valve wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: Clive George wrote: "Lord Valve" wrote in message ... Clive George wrote: "Lord Valve" wrote in message ... when I'm not styling through Denver in my Sprinter, an 11-foot high monster which I can easily walk around in. Chortle. It's a delivery van. About as stylish as brown paper. Chortle all you'd like, asswipe... It's a magnificent vehicle, a Mercedes van. Your defence makes it all the funnier. It's a fast transit. It's amusing that it's sold as personal transport, and even funnier if an owner thinks it's got style - over here, nobody would choose to drive one outside work. Even the blinged up minibus variants are seen as no more than utility or maybe hen night transport. They are quite efficient at carrying loads or a full complement of passengers, so they're not all bad, but that's not really the image you're aiming for, is it. But you omitted to say the Mercedes van was designed and made in Europe, where communism doesn't flourish anymore, but where so many think very differently to communists, and are Green Minded in a big way because they think its very good for the economy and future of humanity. Nothing wrong with green, as long as it functions as well as the old way. If not, **** it. Especially if it costs more. Depends how much though does it not? Let us suppose that your grandchildren witness the rapid melting of the Greenland ice mass and sea levels rising 2 metres, with many more metres of rise in future. Enormous economic losses would result. The cost of the baricading of cities built around sea ports would be immense. The grand kids might moan "How come grand dad didn't build on higher ground?" So if there was some way a slight cost could be paid now to prevent such future economic catastrophe it'd be worth it if the catastrophe could be avoided. This pie in the sky solution with gross uncertainties frightens the be-jesus out of those insisting in simple certainties. The one certain thing is uncertainty. Nearly everyone says exactly what you are saying, ie, that green mindedness is quite OK as long as we can have business as usual, and not have any reduction in the standard of living, ie, none of those silly increased taxes or costs to fix up what politicians have finally realised is a mess that we're making around the Planet. Trying to convince 2 billion in China and India for starters that something needs to be done differently is the **real hard part**. Stopping the total removal of the amazonain rain forest amoung other is another hard part. Stopping total burning of easily mined coal and easily found oil is also hard. The list of unpalletable decisions is a long one. I reckon most folks in democracies will vote out governments that try to make us pay for greenhouse prevention measures, so expect rapid successive failing governments, ending up with a scenario of too little too late, everyone will still try to get rich, and keep on saying, "first we get rich, then we fix up the environment". In 100 years at present rates, the environment will be completely un-fixable. I think its partially still fixable now, but when push comes to shove, ppl vote in favour of themselves ahead of anyone else and ahead of the environment. In 100 years, young folks inheriting the steering wheels of government will have never have experienced a world as natural as one we know now, and frankly, they won't realise what's missing, and they will do what we've been doing, finding the easiest and politically and economically expedient short term patch up solution. So why worry anyway? In some countries, people will endure the costs of carbon trading, and might even say to themselves "well we don't mind paying if greenhouse emissions go down and something is achieved". But then after a few years of paying, and it is revealed that emissions have risen, then its over for the optimism, and time to vote out the arsoles who stole all our money! Or thusands of ppl turn up en-masse with hockey sticks and molotov coctails outside Parliments. People might become cranky and bitter about how becoming rich is not quite working out. Its well underway here, and a young couple buying a house costs 8 times average weekly earnings. It cost me 3 times AWE some 34 years ago. 35% of women now born in Oz will not have children. And maybe we'll have a few really decent international wars to settle matters. Doom preachers like Paul Erlich may have been wrong about mass famines and huge problems because he never realised there'd be a green revolution after he published before the 1970s. What he predicted might still happen though; we need another green revolution of increased crop harvest yields *again*, and soon. War might become increasingly attractive to desperate nations if problems of sustainability get really bad. The US is fighting a continuing war of invading Iraq to ensure oil can flow to the US and the "Free World", and so oil flow isn't through the greedy hands of indigenous quarrelsome muslims in that area of the world. Just imagine if oil suddenly hit $400 a barrel. I do worry about Lord Valve's knee though, ****e, only 90 degrees of bend! How is a decent law abiding yankee red-neck ever going to kick a left wing arsole right up the arse nice, and hard!, with a troubly knee like LV has????? Don't worry, I got two of 'em. The other one works just fine. ;-) Or two working arms and hands. Even if you're in a wheelchair, you can wheel up behind a leftie-commo-homo-lesbian, and slip a cracker up its/his/her arse real quick and light the fuse, and wheel away fast...... Just watch out for their greenie commo extremist relatives and friends though; they tend to form insurgency terrorist units and fight back a bit, and then you'll learn the costs of feuding. ( Iraq has cost the taxpayer trillions more than originally estimated, and over 4,000 dead yanks, 2 million displaced Iraquis, and at least tens of thousands of the those poor buggers killed, and depleted uranium dust blowing in dust all around, and huge future health problems of old soldiers, and iraqies, etc....) Oil has proven to be more expensive than we thought.... I'll chortle a little more when he describes his experience of human nature in all its dreadful uncaring manners when he begins to ride a bicycle in America. He'll soon find out about arsoles then. But never mind, Lance Armstrong, the famaous tireless American who won the TDF 7 times did fight a terrible bout of cancer during the TDF effort, and he put up with the Europeans around him. And he got run off the road by the jerks in Texas while he was training in America. Well, that's where the Sprinter comes in. I reckon I could put maybe 20 bikes in the back of that monster. So, what I plan to do is put just one - mine - in the back, and drive it to a place where there are bicycle paths, no cars allowed. We have over 400km of sealed bike paths off-road here in Canberra. So I can ride fast enough to make the heart work hard. Denver, fortunately, has *lots* of bike routes along creeks and rivers, through parks, etc., such that I'll never need to encounter any motor vehicles by riding on the streets. When I'm done, back into the Sprinter goes the bike, and my (hopefully less) fat ass is homeward bound. It does take a lot of cycling to get a fat arse smaller, like it may have been at age 30, when you were maybe better than now. ( This follows the idea that the older you get, the better you was, right? ) I was 102Kg 2.5yrs ago. It took me 7 mths to lose 20Kg, with I reckon about 17Kg being usless lard, and maybe I put on 3Kg of muscle. I could hardly fit a suit I bought in 1983, at age 34, but now It fits just like it used to. In addition to a staple of 200km+ per week on the bicycle, I also swim about 1.5Km a week with daily swims in the 7 warmer months we get. So the top half gets a bit of a work out as well as the bottom half. I sometimes ride with a Pedal Power group of non competive riders who just like day rides on low traffic country roads around Canberra. Sometimes 40 ppl show up for the early sunday morning rides. They divide themselves into fast, medium and slow riders, with the fast doing more distance than the slow ones. I sometimes ride away from the fast group, arriving at cafes where we might lunch well before the rest arrive. When I ask the 40 yr olds "what's been keeping youse?", they can't explain, and I say "Well I gave youse a 20 year start..." Chortles all round. They don't have to be tell me that after I die, they'll still have 20 years to enjoy. I did a time trial last year, and found I was riding a 40km time of a "standard" man 5 years younger. At 41, which is 20 years ago, I couldn't ever manage the "age standard" time for my age. But there is a man in Pomme Land, ( Olde Englande ) who at 82 managed to ride 40km at the same speed I do at 61. Record performances are way ahead of "standard averages" which are usually 95% ahead of the rest of cycle club members which are better than 95% of the rest of society that is unfit. So there are always better achievers than yourself, but if you actually manage 40km you're doing better than not being able to get that far! America is ****in' HUGE, see, and most Americans (outside of densely-packed downtown metropolitan areas) simply don't consider bicycles as "transportation." Same here. Huge place Australia, nearly the same area as the USA. But increasing numbers consider a bicycle to be a fine instrument for concentrating exercise into a time/cost affordable self improvement package. Mankind and womenkind were designed to raise a sweat many times a day, but now too many ppl gaze at PC screens all day, and eat piles of junk food. And they whinge and whine about how bad they are doing, and what they have not got. They never sweat. And they worry a lot. They rot. Consequently, American roads aren't designed for bicyclists. Its the same in many countries. Its like that here. Most country roads don't have the extra 4 feet each side outside the two lanes to accomodate a tiny minority of cyclists. Australia has the similar population to California, but its a large country, and to put bicycle lanes on most roads is just way too expensive, and they wouldn't get used enough to justify the expense. 90% of bicycle journeys are less than 10km. Most cyclists like myself own a car and drive the bigger distances. Unlike most cyclists who own a car, I cycle twice the distance I driver per annum. Maybe 2,000 of all the 100,000 working people in my city of 330,000 ride to work each day, and in winter, the numbers decline. operator of a (rather large) motor vehicle, I *hate* ****ing bicyclists and their disdain for the rules of the road, traffic signals, lanes and so forth, and their snotty insistance that it is *my* responsibilty to ensure that they survive their uppity intrusions into my territory by not running over their ridiculous asses with my Sprinter. Yup, plenty of cyclists were not born with high intelligence. Some couldn't get a driver's license if they tried, which is why they have a bicycle, and think they can exploit the motorist's duty of care. Its a bit illogical. At traffic lights I stop, but i might follow a pedestrian across against red light to get to a centre island to wait again before its safe for the pedestrian and myself to cross, and I thus make it through the traffic light intersection quite safely, and faster than waiting all day for the lights to go through their full cycle. It might infuriate a motorist to see me do what he cannot, and adopt the action of a pedestrian when it suits me. I don't care. Its not interfering with a motorist, or ever likely to cause any motorist the horrible experience of running over me. Might scratch the paintwork. I quite understand motorists not liking having to avoid us cyclists on top of having to do the far greater time consuming activity of avoiding other motorists. Motorists hate motorcyclists as well, and many motorists hate *everything else that moves* once they become insane once they are behind the wheel of a vehicle. Many motorists are extremely stupid and inconsiderate, and make moves without looking out for us, even though we are in our cycle lane... I'm constantly looking ahead allowing for a motorist to chop me off, cut in front, and cause me to stop faster than I can, and its my defensive attitude that has me braking before other's might, and turning instinctively with the guy who cuts me off turning left, etc. I've ridden 120,000 km and never had a prang with a motorist. The clash betwen cyclists and other road users has been going on with robust argy bargy now ever since they invented a penny farthing in the 1880s. As oil prices rise, expect to see more bicycles on roads. If oil rises to $400 a barrel, expect to see fewer cars, and more ppl in busses and trains. There will be more room for cyclists, but only a small % of folks would ever select a bicycle as the means to ride to work. Try telling the average american woman of 45 she has to ride a bike after she sells her SUV. You'll have a ring your ear alright, from the big heavy slap across the face. Green governments advocating such draconian change won't be voted for. Americans and Australians have never voted to allow communists to have power over us, and they won't allow the greenies to have much power either. In Oz the Greenies led by senator Bob Brown give a conscience where other parties don't have one. http://www.dinkumaussies.com/GREENIES%2FBob%20Brown.htm America isn't very good at building road systems that allow good safe access by cyclists. See above. ;-) Good to see LV back here and it gives spice to an otherwise dull news group..... Well, hell, thanks. ;-) I've been doing a lot of sitting around lately, although I'm starting to become more mobile. Ouch. I snapped a cruciate ligament in one knee while riding a Matchless G80 500cc motorcycle in 1966, age 19. And because I wasn't looking where I was going, and because I was idiotically young, like most of us were. There was no repair possible for the snapped ligament. My ankle was also broken at the time and I had 8 weeks in plaster. The hospital staff reckoned i'd be OK to resume being a construction apprentice carpenter, but that I'd have trouble with arthritis by 60. 50 came, and I had big troubles, and it forced me out of the building trade, and off the bicycle. After a considerable wait, and after dire predictions by several doctors that to ease my pains I'd need both knee joints replaced with titanium implants, I had a non invasive autheroscopic knee operation where they tidied up the previous 30 years of cuts and tears in cartlidges, and the inflamation these accumulated bothers caused eased right off, and I became much healthier, and I wasn't living "chair to chair". 18 mths after the op, I began to cycle, and 2.5 years later I can now stand for hours, and walk a mile and cycle 125km in rugged hilly terrain, and not drop dead. Cycling is non-impactive exercize, and you can sit down most of the time while provoking your vascular heart-lung system to "work its ****in arse off". If there isn't a history of heart disease in your family tree, cycling hard and fast won't hurt you at high heart rates, providing you go at it regularly. And 60kph down a hill is far more of a thrill than 160kph on a BMW 750. A bicycle reminds you how easily you can die. But your problem is the shortage in a ligament reducing movement, and exercize tends to make ligaments shorter, even though it makes you get stronger and fitter. Yoga practitioners do their thing to naturally *stretch* their ligaments and muscle structure to allow a greater range of movement. Or to maintain the suppleness of youth despite the wrinkles of age. Yoga is seen by many to be a silly sissy ****y thing greeno-feminits do to ease their mind about what men do to them. Go to a yoga class, and there are all these unapproachable women there. Not the place to ask for a BJ! But I braved this harmless mob to learn some yoga while I spent the 6 years between 37 and 43 on a bicycle and racing each week. I got all these aches and pains from the terrific stress of physical building work AND riding 300km a week average. Yoga once learnt, fixed most of the aches and pains, and compensated stress effects very nicely. You don't need to believe in *all* the BS that goes with yoga; just do it, and you improve. There are different types of yoga. "Hatha" yoga is the one for people who exercize a lot. Its stretching, meditation, breathing deeply, and provoking your own internal healing system to get off its fat ass to let you get on with your challenges. Yoga kept me on the road during my 6 year racing career as a "veteran" rider, ( over 35 ). And you may need some additional work by surgeons if it is available if you intend following through and seeing and enjoying yourself at your own personal best despite the limitations. But the non-surgical solutions should be tried first, and with yoga and cycling, you might slowly coax that short string to get longer and stronger. And if you really tried hard, you'd ban sugar in your house, all processed foods, and eat a plate full of raw vegetables daily, give up butter, margerine and bread, and eat olive oil only, and slow slow release carbohydrates along with really lean meats and some fish once a week. I have 2 x 400gram cans of pink salmon a week. The fish oils are excellent for you. Why give up bread? Because its not wholemeal stone ground any more. The fatty ham and butter and cheese you have to have with bread is very poor nutrition, junk food indeed. Reduce calorie intake, increase calorie expenditure. Create a calorie deficit. If your calorie deficit is 2,700 per week, an easily achievable figure, then you must be using 300gms of your unwanted fat stores that are too large in most people today. There's 9 calories in a gram of fat or oil. At an average of 25kph on a flat course ride, a person can use an extra 400 calories per hour, which is 44 grams of fat. 10 hours a week makes for 440 grams, or about 1 pound a week, and 10 weeks makes 4.4kg, or 10 pounds. Find the book by Nathan Pritican, and read it twice. http://frayedlaces.blogspot.com/2008...r-runners.html And the regular exercise every 2 days stirs up your whole system and you burn more fat between exercizes, so you lose more than a pound a week. Sedentary ppl who rarely exercize more than walking from the car to supermarket or having a root session with the missus on sunday morning will have a heart rate of average 64BPM, or more. When you are fit, this average falls, and I'm now 56BPM at rest while I type to r.a.t to let them all know what I'm up to. But I stepped off the bike after 85km this arvo only 4 hours ago, and HR will be down to 52 when I retire later. They say there's only so many heart beats in a person to be had, and then that's it, the heart stops, if nothing else kills you before then. OK, with a lowered average HR, life expectancy time should increase with regular exercise. After a few months of good eating and good exercize, the body will become leaner, and it will become more efficient, and then becomes quite cunning and able to put up with the diet calorie reductions and extra exercise without using precious fat stores, so you will have to stay on the frugal diet where you eat a heck of a lot but don't get fatter for the rest of your life. You'll find that if you slip back to no exercise and eating **** with fast burn carbohydrates such as sugar and breads, your body won't burn them, it'll try to add them immediately to your fat stores. I regard Coca Cola and McDonald's food like poison. I can't recall when I had a fizzy drink. Last time I got conned into having lunch at Mac's, I felt sick. To stay good at 60 like you were at 30 means changing a lot. You have to totally reject the validity of much modern life. Be thus able to walk past 99% of supermarket shelving, knowing that there's not much there worth eating. Stop only where fresh un-processed foods are on offer. If you must have chocolate, eat only Lindt, or chockie with over 70% cocoa content. Its then good for you, but chockie which is say "milk chocolate" is laced with hydrogenated fats and piles of crap that make a really fit man feel a little sick after he eats it. Fructose from corn syryp has been loaded into all sorts of foods to increase the calorie count and increase the "I want more" reaction of most ppl who are unfit. Most ppl then get fat after repeat buying of mass produced **** masquerading as processed "foods". Most people are victims of the mass food marketing industries. Most foods with great natural values are processed into a whole variety of other foods which is called "value adding", but its mainly the opposite, value reducing, or value stripping, and each derivative from a simple whole thing is sold at a huge price so that a food company makes more profits, and the fat shareholders don't care about your health. Capitalism is not always bright and beautiful. Capitalism is ****ing awful, like Democracy, until you consider the alternatives. OK, niether is perfect. I invite you to never swallow the poisonous offerings of either. But both do offer you that option without suffering a death by firing squad! If I couldn't cycle, I'd have a canoe, and paddle all around the water ways here to burn the energy. If I can ride away from 95% of the other cyclists in this town at age 61, then surely you can get a lot better at least. If you can stand walking, which also does not involve excessive knee bend, then walk your arse off. First along flat routes, and like cycling, as you harden up, turn your mind to the hills, walk up them, look out, and pity the lazy people not there with you, see the grandness of nature from afar, and you should notice the littleness of man's cities and towns, and feel the nonsense of being human. Rise above it all, do your own life without gazing at too many others, so give up watching television, OK! Life isn't about finding meaning. Its not about telling others what they must do. But we can mean what we do in life, and invite others to share our journeys. Meaning is just being, and we shouldn't need to control others. Then we see much natural beauty, and after a lot of that we won't even mind dying. The spring breeding season is underway in the bird world here, and its a marvel that pairs of ducks and swans go about it so easily, and without human neurotics or silly dramas. http://www.australianexplorer.com/ca...ey_griffin.htm http://maps.bonzle.com/c/a?a=pic&fn=i76kfy5r&s=3 Here's where I rode out to today.... http://maps.bonzle.com/c/a?a=pic&fn=c22sjxct&s=3 In the hour or more spent composing this email, my resting HR rate has fallen from 56BPM to 46BPM. Migual Indurain had a resting HR of 28 when at his peak they say. He won the TDF 5 times in a row in the 1990s. That resting HR was an indicator of how fit his big beautiful heart was. But probably he rides a bit now, and not many his age could keep up. Will he be around at 60? who knows? My final tip, If you exercise real hard and get HR up from say 60BPM at rest to say 140BPM which might be after really big effort on a treadmill, then what happens to your HR when you suddenly stop that work? Experts say now that your HR should immediately begin to decline, and by at least 12BPM per minute during the first minute. Thus after 5 minutes, HR could be down to 80BPM, and that's OK. But say your HR only came down to 120BPM, and after an hour was still 100BPM. Expect to die from heart failure within 5 years. The heart recovery rate after strenuous exercize is now regarded as a very good indicator of heart condition and longevity. In trained and practised young cyclists, they may have their HR zoom up to 200PM+ during a criterium race on sprint laps for points, but on the next lap it'll be way down as they ride in the bunch at a lower pace. In bygone ages, we'd outrun game we were chasing so we could catch up and kill them or our tribe starved. Women walked miles for water, and for the the best yams to be dug out of the ground with sticks. They'd carry the youngans. It went on for millions of years, and the weaklings were slowly weeded out. Now the weak enjoy every right to reproduce, but maybe they become great artists, doctors, plumbers, and the nice people next door, so fitness isn't needed, if there is sufficient technical support now. But if you sit too much in front of the PC, you rot. Patrick Turner. Lord Valve Alias Willie da Gimp |
|
#118
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
"Lord Valve" aka William Whittaker wrote:
wrote: On Sep 10, 2:48 pm, Lord Valve wrote: I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I call bull**** on that. Hey, you can call the FBI for all I ****in' care. Hell, call yer mom. Tell her I said howdy. Does his mom like fat guys driving delivery vans? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#119
Posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who should be first to die off in the "energy crisis"?
"Lord Valve" aka William Whittaker wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote: "Lord Valve" aka William Whittaker wrote: Tom Sherman wrote: [snip useless stuff] I'm not "anti-cyclist," I'm anti-scofflaw. The vast majority of cyclists I've encountered during the course of my life have shown either a profound ignorance of or a profound disdain for the rules of the road, routinely running stop signs, ignoring traffic signals and lane markers, switching lanes without signaling and a whole host of other downright ****ing rude behaviours. It's a miracle more of them aren't set upon and beaten to a pulp by irate motorists. "behaviours"? Did you mean "behaviors"? (Two can play this game). Indeed, but only one can win. Game, set, match: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/behaviours Gee, I did not know you were living in Great Britain. When did 230 South Broadway, Denver, CO 80209-1510 become part of Great Britain? Try riding a bicycle in accordance with the law, and getting deliberately run off the road by some asshole, or having a full can of beer thrown at you from a vehicle traveling in excess of 100 kph. Those actions are ATTEMPTED MURDER, yet the police laugh in your face if you file a complaint. Since I have done none of those things...yawn No, but you obviously approve of the anti-cyclist attitude. Furthermore, your general attitude is anti-social. Do you offend your customers this way? It is a wonder you have any, but maybe they do not read your Usenet postings. I've seen clueless two-wheeled turds cause serious injury accidents when motorists were forced to dodge their ridiculous antics in order to avoid squashing them. I've seen them kick dents into the sides of innocent motorists' vehicles and then disappear down a convenient side street or alley. I've seen them knock down pedestrians, run over pets, curse motorists in traffic (some of them mothers with young children) and stop to **** in someone's front yard shrubbery. They impede the smooth flow of traffic and become downright snotty when called on it. For every "clueless two-wheeled turd" on a bicycle, we can find ten or a hundred "clueless four-wheeled turds" in a steel cage. Ah, "steel cage." ****tard jargon. OK, I'm dealing with a crackpot. Here, have the last word, and enjoy it as much as you are able: The great and august William Whittaker uses the term "****tard"? Is he a 13-year old posting comments to YouTube? By the way, I could not find "****tard" in a dictionary. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia “Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken / She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.” |
|
#120
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
|
About Quad reliability, etc, was Who should be first to dieoff in the "energy crisis"?
On Sep 12, 1:49*am, Patrick Turner wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 11, 2:29 am, Jay Beattie wrote: On Sep 10, 12:19 pm, Tom Sherman wrote: Andre Jute wrote: On Sep 10, 3:42 am, Tom Sherman wrote: [...] Most audiophiles are middle aged, pasty and overweight. Cycling would do them much good. Indeed. Unfortunately for your generalization, the three audiophiles who contributed to RBT recently, John Byrns, Patrick Turner and me, are all hard cases, Patrick and I being constant cyclists to boot.. We fit only one of your particulars, in that we are indubitably middleaged. But even that we do not consider to be pejorative, as all it means is that we shall live to be well over ninety.[...] When did most become wholly inclusive? Anytime you make a blanket statment, you will get the outliers responding -- including me, an almost audiophile (Resolution Audio CD 50, Bel Canto EVO 4, Modwright pre and AudioPhysic Virgo II, REL sub). *I also raced for twenty years and still keep up with guys twenty years younger. *My apologies to Andre for having a digital amp. Ha! I'm only a high priest of the ultrafidelista by accident. I was just a low-profile lurker when some small manufacturer thought he'd use a flame war to humiliate me for giving his product a less than enthusiastic review in the late lamented tubie mag Glass Audio. Predictably, when when he gave up this dumb idea several yars later, I had accidentally become a high-profile audiophile (in the same way Carl Fogel and Frank Krygowski latched onto my passing enquiry and instead of frightening me off made me a high-profile cyclist; the Internet enables idiots and magnifies their idiocy). The truth is I'm not an audiophile all, merely a music lover with a talent for electronics engineering. I use ultra-reliable QUAD gear (both transistor and tube) interchangeably with tube amps of my own design or commercial, both single ended and push-pull but always Class A; except for my Quad Electrostats, most of my speakers are of my own design and construction too. I publish some of my designs of amps and speakers for qualified (experienced -- the voltage will kill you if you are careless) amateurs to build; URL under my sig. Currently I'm listening to Emma Kirkby singing songs by Hildegard of Bingen on STAX electrostatic headphones via a near-standard factory STAX amp -- I just breathed on the power supply, multiplying the available current by six or seven -- while I wait for the return from Japan of the proto of a tube amp I designed to deliver a balanced 600V to the earphones. Of course, you have to be very committed to your music to let me deliver 600V potential to speakers in contact with your ears... Audiophiles less brave can let me rig up Quad ESL three feet from their ears on either side (earphones for real men) and for those with plutocratic listening rooms (and bank accounts) I am happy to create a Bessel Array of electrostatic speakers to provide a point source of stunning purity anywhere in any room up to the size of a football field. In the damp Irish climate where you live, its amazing you can say that Quad gear is "ultra-reliable QUAD gear (both transistor and tube)" because my experience is that it simply is NOT any more reliable than many other ordinary generic brands which keep an army of repair people in business. My QUAD gear just keeps soldiering on. Of course there are repairs. One of my electrostats needs new panel for the second time in about twenty years, one of my 405 Mk II (which in the 1970s stood switched on at the BBC in Nottingham for a several years on end and has worked faultlessly since) needs to be recapped, my 34 pre-amp has lost a channel after about thirty years. Oh, and it may have been less alarming to mention to readers that 600V at electrostatic headphones would have been at an extremely low current. However, the source resistance is low, and contact with AC signals at high voltages from amp anodes or from step up transformers could be lethal, but of little concern if there is good enough insulation that would keep the most sceptical engineer happy. I know some guys talking of driving their electrostatic earphones with 845. I tell them to calm down... It's over the top. If he wants to send me one of his big tube amps, I'll put it to good use -- and heat my study this winter. -- Jay Beattie. Problem with a big tube amp is that it is such a lethal item that you cannot in good conscience give it away. I broke up my Millennium's End kilovolt SV572-3 and -10 amp, an 80W SE monster, because the umbilicals between the units were clearly illegal and the units couldn't be combined since just the mains and output transformers weighed a quarter-ton. (Mind you, it is by far not the heaviest hifi I ever designed. An Italian chum sits literally in the mouth of a big horn I designed to be built from several tons of prestressed concrete.) Audiophiles are notorious for changing things in their system which means selling one bit of gear they get sick of and buying a replacement. The more money they earn, the faster the rate of gear change. Its like as if they'd never go back to the same gal at the brothel, and are continually "upgrading" the choice of girls to get the better BJ. So what were one audiophile's umbilicals might soon become another owned by another audiophile. Illegality of umbilicals never ever prevented audiophiles buying the most attrociously designed amplifiers, even those with umbilicals that are sub-standard. Its because some makers did make lethal umbilicals that it became the law that umbilicals were banned entirely. I'm not so sure about that, Patrick. I think European lawmakers are such a nanny-state onto themselves, they just picked on umbilicals as potentially dangerous. They go to extraordinary lengths to protect people against even the tiniest danger. They seek a risk-free society... I do wonder how many were killed or shocked though. Not many I guess, but the law is sometimes over zealous, and laws are made for the sake of lkeeping law makers employed. Quad had umbilicals for the Quad-II amps to Quad 22 control unit, and other bits of attatched gear such as AM and FM tuners. I doubt Quad killed anyone. Never heard of a single case, and you can bet we would have. Walker could be very bad tempered when production quality sagged at a factory though. Get out of the way, he might kill ya.... You say to an audiophile, "THIS WILL KILL YOU" in a stern slow loud voice, and they just smile. Its never gonna happen, to them. Often they encourage the arrival of the Grim Reaper by plugging in things wrongly, after breaking off locating spigots on octal plugs, leaving things not plugged in right, and if there's a way some **** could happen, then an audiophile will find it without setting out to find it. No matter you one tries to educate them about the basics of electronics, it goes in one ear and out the other. Transparent sound? I am forced into making amps with umbilicals. There isn't an easier other way that is affordable. You see, if you want 50+ watts from apair of 845, then the audio circuit will weigh at least 25Kg before it begins to sound well and was worth the wait while it was made, and the weight of inconvenience. The power supply, if its worth owning, will weigh at least 20Kg. Just for one channel. If you don't use umbilicals, the weight becomes well over the maximum unit weight of things that can be lifted by a person I thought for a while of building the bigger amps in a layered format, like a tea trolley, because I tend to keep my audio gear on wheeled computer tables anyway, but considerations of upending it for service, and unwillingness to reach in under a shelf when there could be a kilovolt lurking on a 50uF cap, dissuaded me. The truth is that huge SE amps don't truly sound better than small ones. The smart audiophile looks to his speakers first, and only then to his amp. safely under the laws governing workplace safety. The standard bag of cement once weighed 40Kg, and there were 25 bags to the tonne. This bag weight ruined many a buiding worker's health, and caused untold compensation payouts for back injuries, both genuine and feined. I recall carrying two such bags at a time over short distance though, and that was my own weight. Now the bag weight is 20Kg, and most healthy ppl can easily handle that even if they are the age of the average audiophile, 55, and overweight and grossly unfit from sitting in front of speakers for too long. The alternative is to have modular plug in chassis units so the only way they can be operated is if they are stacked on top of each other, with the top unit being the hot one with tubes, bottom one with cool silicon diodes and CLC filters, and a socket placed so the top amp chassis plugs downwards into the bottom chassis with power supply. No cables. This means a more expensive and elaborate two chassis design, and all the audiophiles I know are penny pinching whingers about prices. And I'm not so sure at all the lawmakers will love you for that one either. So OK, its better to disobey one law about umbilicals to comply with another *sensible* law that limits weight of single items to be lifted to 20Kg. If somebody lifts an awkward 40Kg, they could hurt their back, and if they drop the darn thing, maybe wreck a foot. I use very rugged mobile crane hook-up wire for umbilicals, so if an amp falls off a bench, the sudden yank on the cable does not expose bare stripped wires at high voltages. each wire of the 5 within a cable is rated for 15 amps at least, and thus the copper is so thick and strong it won't stretch. And the power supply automatically turns off if a cable is unplugged. P.S. my brother, who is even older than me is a *multi-time state mountain bike champ in Washington has a tube set up. Most bicyclists, once they try tubes, never go back to solid tyres. I thought everyone knew that, even people in Washington (presumably State rather than DC). And once they try Shimano SORA very low cost entry level index gearing, they never go back to lever on the down tube gear changing. Campagnolo is nice to own, but I like the cheap 8 speed Shimano well. I have cheap (by roadie standards) Shimano Nexus 8 and more expensive Cyber Nexus 8 speed, and I love them. I don't pine for Campy. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| "AKAI", "KURZWEIL", "ROLAND", DVDs and CDs | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
