The Chainlink

Bike The Drive - Tell me about it...plz ?

Just signed up for Bike the Drive. There are going to be 5 or more of us doing it. Various skill levels and rides.

We tried to find out about trailers and/or Trail-A-Bikes (are they allowed, how much extra do we have to pay, do the children inside/on have to pay, how much, etc.?). Nothing on the website. Does anyone have any info on that?

Also, if you have participated in it previously, what kind of experience(s) did you have? Any recommendations?

All advice will be read, and we will sort out what we can to make it an excellent ride.

I will have my (by then) 10 yr old on his 20" bike, me on "The Beast", my wife on her Huffy Sea Pines (1974ish), an Army buddy on his Aluminum "hot rod" (that's what I call it), and George Vanderford on something that has 2 wheels (I hope).

Again, any advice will be helpful.

 

Thank you all in advance.

 

 

Respectfully,

 

Manny

Views: 3622

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Duppie on May 2, 2013 at 3:15pm

An astute observation. But you have been around for a while now, no? So you should know that if you don't like to be called out on your opinions, you shouldn't post them to begin with.

That is one reason why I rarely post my opinions anymore, and keep my postings generally to questions, information, thank you's, and the like.

Craig S. said:

Amazing, the inferences people make on this forum, based upon words on a screen, of people they've never met nor set eyes upon.  All because I have a differing opinion of the saintly ATA.  

Anne Alt said:

Sounds like it might take more than one.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

You sound like you are in dire need of a drink. Maybe that will lighten your sour mood :)

Craig S. said:

Get real, Julie.

For free?  Tell my checkbook that I get to drive on LSD for free, all year round.  I think you'll be in for a great debate.

Permalink Reply by Craig S. on May 2, 2013 at 3:27pm

I have no problem "being called out on my opinion" but the way it's done is really what makes the forum such an unpleasant place to visit.  It's okay to attack an opinion, but is it okay to attack an individual whom one has never met?  That is what is rampant on this forum.

I had some free time this morning so I was "trolling."  (This was just to make some folks happy that they can point fingers at me and now yell "TROLL, you're a TROLL!)

Cheers.  By the way, I'm currently enjoying a Victory Golden Monkey.  It's nice.



Duppie 13.5185km said:

An astute observation. But you have been around for a while now, no? So you should know that if you don't like to be called out on your opinions, you shouldn't post them to begin with.

That is one reason why I rarely post my opinions anymore, and keep my postings generally to questions, information, thank you's, and the like.

Craig S. said:

Amazing, the inferences people make on this forum, based upon words on a screen, of people they've never met nor set eyes upon.  All because I have a differing opinion of the saintly ATA.  

Anne Alt said:

Sounds like it might take more than one.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

You sound like you are in dire need of a drink. Maybe that will lighten your sour mood :)

Craig S. said:

Get real, Julie.

For free?  Tell my checkbook that I get to drive on LSD for free, all year round.  I think you'll be in for a great debate.

Permalink Reply by Craig S. on May 2, 2013 at 3:29pm

Hilary, I completely agree with you about helmets. However, you're about to pounced on en masse by the CLink forum police for expressing a different opinion than what is prevalent.  Happens all the time with the topic of helmets.

I'll ride with you, helmet-less, I may even pay the entry fee.

Hilary Thorne said:

I have no problem with paying for this event, I was concerned that i could end up paying and then

not being allowed to attend.

My issue is with helmets, as i do not believe they are safe, and rather than offer genuine protection they offer only a false sense of security.

I work in ER and have seen many bike injuries, and since helmets appeared (mid 1980s I would say), i am sure I have seen an increase i neck injuries, often leading to paralysis.

my belief is that because helmets stick out further than your forehead, your head gets pushed back further if you have a front impact while wearing a helmet.  I am certain that some of the paralysis injuries I have seen would NOT have occurred if they had not been wearing a helmet.

Your neck bones / vertebrae are far more vulnerable than your skull and need protecting, not being made more vulnerable.

Helmets are also designed for low speed impact, but unfortunately are relied on at speed, as they give a false sense of security and in my opinion lead to more careless and dangerous riding.

 

It is my personal choice to NOT wear a helmet, and i will continue until such time that convincing evidence appears to change my mind.

I will happily pay to attend the ride, but will not attend (and therefore not pay) if I am required to wear a helmet.

Does that make my opinion clearer?

Permalink Reply by Tony Adams on May 2, 2013 at 3:34pm

saintly? huh... I've lamented my disappointment with the ATA here on numerous occasions. I'll keep doing so when it is appropriate. I'm still holding out hope for example that they'll return to focusing exclusively on bicycle issues and let others advocate for transit and pedestrian issues. 

Craig S. said:

Amazing, the inferences people make on this forum, based upon words on a screen, of people they've never met nor set eyes upon.  All because I have a differing opinion of the saintly ATA.  

Anne Alt said:

Sounds like it might take more than one.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

You sound like you are in dire need of a drink. Maybe that will lighten your sour mood :)

Craig S. said:

Get real, Julie.

For free?  Tell my checkbook that I get to drive on LSD for free, all year round.  I think you'll be in for a great debate.

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on May 2, 2013 at 3:46pm

I share your disappointment. A more cynical observer might suggest that ATA killed the CBF and got into the pedestrian and transit business because it opens up the possibility of securing more grant funds.

Tony Adams 6.6 mi said:

saintly? huh... I've lamented my disappointment with the ATA here on numerous occasions. I'll keep doing so when it is appropriate. I'm still holding out hope for example that they'll return to focusing exclusively on bicycle issues and let others advocate for transit and pedestrian issues. 

[snip]

Permalink Reply by Dragonborn on May 2, 2013 at 10:12pm

I'm with Hilary. I believe the event would gain more paying riders if the helmet requirement is permanently repealed. One of the main reasons why I have never signed up for this event is due to the helmet requirement.

Hilary, to address your concern about paying and then not being allowed to ride, the FAQ clearly states there are no refunds.



Hilary Thorne said:

I have no problem with paying for this event, I was concerned that i could end up paying and then not being allowed to attend.

My issue is with helmets, as i do not believe they are safe, and rather than offer genuine protection they offer only a false sense of security.

Helmets ... give a false sense of security and in my opinion lead to more careless and dangerous riding.

 

It is my personal choice to NOT wear a helmet, and i will continue until such time that convincing evidence appears to change my mind.

I will happily pay to attend the ride, but will not attend (and therefore not pay) if I am required to wear a helmet.

Permalink Reply by S on May 2, 2013 at 11:23pm



Dragonborn said:

I'm with Hilary. I believe the event would gain more paying riders if the helmet requirement is permanently repealed. One of the main reasons why I have never signed up for this event is due to the helmet requirement.

Hilary, to address your concern about paying and then not being allowed to ride, the FAQ clearly states there are no refunds.

Regardless of how you feel about helmets, the helmet requirement is probably a requirement in order to get liability insurance that's reasonably priced.  Given the size of the event, insurance is pretty much mandatory and insurers probably require helmets if the ATA wants coverage at an affordable rate.
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 3, 2013 at 8:56am

How many of those neck injuries would not have mattered because of the damage done by the blow to the head that the helmet did not help to soften?

I hate helmets and I hate wearing them but I do because I would probably not be here to post this if it were not for wearing one; I 'walked' away from a crash on the ice this winter that cracked a Bern helmet and knocked me out for an unspecified amount of time.  Did I have a sore neck?  Yep, and I still do but considering how hard my head it I'm happy with the neck pain over a cracked skull.  

I have a couple of friends who walked away from what could have been much worse accidents thanks to a helmet.  This is why I encourage helmet use, I think it is a legitimate way to mitigate some of the risk involved in riding bike.  That said I don't really preach about it or bitch at my friends who do not; it's there choice.

I will, however, say something when people are speaking out against helmets with nothing but poorly backed up opinions.  Sorry but I really have no faith in your opinion on injuries if you think that my vertebrae are more vunerable to damage than my head when my head bounces off concrete...

It's also pretty childish to not support an event you would otherwise go to just because you don't want to wear a silly hat for a couple of hours.  

No event with bikes is going to get insurance if they do not require helmets, why not just accept that fact and support the event you claim to want to?


Hilary Thorne said:

I have no problem with paying for this event, I was concerned that i could end up paying and then

not being allowed to attend.

My issue is with helmets, as i do not believe they are safe, and rather than offer genuine protection they offer only a false sense of security.

I work in ER and have seen many bike injuries, and since helmets appeared (mid 1980s I would say), i am sure I have seen an increase i neck injuries, often leading to paralysis.

my belief is that because helmets stick out further than your forehead, your head gets pushed back further if you have a front impact while wearing a helmet.  I am certain that some of the paralysis injuries I have seen would NOT have occurred if they had not been wearing a helmet.

Your neck bones / vertebrae are far more vulnerable than your skull and need protecting, not being made more vulnerable.

Helmets are also designed for low speed impact, but unfortunately are relied on at speed, as they give a false sense of security and in my opinion lead to more careless and dangerous riding.

 

It is my personal choice to NOT wear a helmet, and i will continue until such time that convincing evidence appears to change my mind.

I will happily pay to attend the ride, but will not attend (and therefore not pay) if I am required to wear a helmet.

Does that make my opinion clearer?

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 3, 2013 at 8:57am

Seriously?

It's that important to you to ride without a helmet?

Why?

Dragonborn said:

I'm with Hilary. I believe the event would gain more paying riders if the helmet requirement is permanently repealed. One of the main reasons why I have never signed up for this event is due to the helmet requirement.

Hilary, to address your concern about paying and then not being allowed to ride, the FAQ clearly states there are no refunds.



Hilary Thorne said:

I have no problem with paying for this event, I was concerned that i could end up paying and then not being allowed to attend.

My issue is with helmets, as i do not believe they are safe, and rather than offer genuine protection they offer only a false sense of security.

Helmets ... give a false sense of security and in my opinion lead to more careless and dangerous riding.

 

It is my personal choice to NOT wear a helmet, and i will continue until such time that convincing evidence appears to change my mind.

I will happily pay to attend the ride, but will not attend (and therefore not pay) if I am required to wear a helmet.

Permalink Reply by Dave Jacque on May 3, 2013 at 10:13am

Yeesh, "It's the principle of the thing!" seems like a silly reason to miss out on all the fun. Relax, put on a helmet and enjoy the show. We promise not to tell anyone you wore a hat for three hours.

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on May 3, 2013 at 10:30am

Nah, let 'em stay home and sulk.

Things usually were more fun after the, 'I'm taking my toys and I'm going home!' kid left the playground...

Dave Jacque said:

Yeesh, "It's the principle of the thing!" seems like a silly reason to miss out on all the fun. Relax, put on a helmet and enjoy the show. We promise not to tell anyone you wore a hat for three hours.

Permalink Reply by Steven E Gross on May 3, 2013 at 10:48am

Last year was my first time, I hope never to miss it again!  I arrived early and was able to ride 50 miles before they reopened the drive to cars.  

I never thought it was overcrowded and the slower riders stayed to the right.

Its a great event not to be missed. Safe family fun!  Go for it!

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service