Cheap Gloves: They work for me

I used to pay $35 or more for a pair of cycling gloves, the ones with the fancy gel padding.

A habit I have is if I run over a patch of broken glass, which is quite often on my local bike path; I run the palm of my gloved hand over the front and rear tire.

I do this as I am riding, it only takes seconds, and it will brush away any glass my tire has picked up before it has time to work its way into the tread and cause a flat. The only problem is my nice expensive gloves end up ripped to shreds, usually within a few months.

A little over a year ago when my gloves needed replacing I bought a cheap pair from Wal-Mart for about $5.00. I figured if I was going to wear them out that quickly I would use something that was less expensive to replace.

Well guess what? These cheap gloves lasted longer than the expensive ones; almost a year. I recently bought my second pair.

They don’t have the extra padding on the palm, but I really don’t need it.

The little bit of cushioning my handlebar tape provides I find is enough.

I imagine the palm is not real leather, but it looks and feels like it. The gloves have a mesh back with a Velcro fastening, and a nice feature is a fleecy material on the back of the thumb, which is handy for wiping the sweat from the front edge of my helmet, before it has time to drip all over my glasses.

The other thing is dressing my tires as I have described makes the right glove really dirty. I throw them in the washing machine at least once a week, and let them air-dry over night.

If like me you can live without the fancy padding on your gloves, the next time your gloves need replacing, you will only be risking five bucks if you try a pair of these Bell brand, Wal-Mart cycling gloves.

I’m all for buying quality gear, but in this case cheap and does the job works for me. 
 

                         

Walking, running, cycling: Burning calories

In September of 2007 I wrote an article "Running vs. Cycling: Burning Calories." This one piece gets more hits per day than any other article; at least 150 hits per day, thanks to Google search.

It seems the article gets this many hits because it contains information that people seek out and are interested in. I used data that was gathered by fitness expert Dr. Edward Coyle; he stated that a person running one mile burned 110 calories.

It didn’t matter what speed you ran at, if you were an out of shape beginner, or a super fit athlete. This statement upset a lot of super fit and serious runners. I never intended to belittle the dedicated runner, but the fact is we were talking about distance covered, not speed.

Energy expended is measured in Horse Power, or Watts; both are the energy needed to lift a Weight, a certain Distance, in a certain time. Horse power is Foot/lbs per min, Watts is metric; Kilos/Meters per min.

Many could not grasp the concept that if a fit runner ran a mile in 6 minutes, he was using the same energy, burning the same amount of calories as an unfit runner running a 12 minute mile.

The reason is the slower runner is running at half the effort, but is running for twice as long; so the Wattage/Calories burned is the same.

If effort = y, then the faster athlete is running at (y) times 6 mins. While the slower runner’s output is (½ y) times 12minutes. Both are the same.

Today there is a wonderful website called Wolfram Alfra. You can type in “walking,” “running,” or “cycling.” You can then input time, speed, even gender and body weight, to calculate calories burned, and compare.

You can also add height, age, and resting heart rate, etc. if you want to get really precise.

According to what I found a fit male athlete weighing 150lbs. running one mile in 6 minutes. (Pace 6 mim/mi.) would burn 117 calories. Close to Dr. Coyle’s 110 calories quoted in the original article.

Here is where it gets interesting. Again not to belittle any dedicated runners, but a runner of the same weight and gender, running a mile in 12 minutes, would actually burn 124 calories. (Acording to this calculator.)

The only reason I can think of for the higher calorie burn for the slower runner is that during running or walking, a certain amount of energy is required just to support your body weight. It makes sense if you are on the road for twice as long; you are supporting your body weight twice as long.

The figures for walking also bring up a similar result. 150lb. man walking a mile in 15 minutes (4 mph.) burns 73 calories; a 150lb. man walking same mile in 30 minutes (2 mph.) burns 90 calories.

Also let’s say the unfit slower runner weighs 300lbs. double the fit runner’s weight. The 300lb. man would burn 248 calories. More than double the faster runner’s calorie burn at half the speed.

As pointed out in the original article, cycling is different because wind resistance comes into play, and the faster you ride the more calories burned for the same distance.

So a 150lb. male cyclist riding 10 miles in 30 minutes (20mph.) would burn 587 calories.

A 150lb. cyclist riding half the speed 10 miles in one hour (10 mph.) would burn 354 calories.

Considerably less even though the slower rider is on the road twice as long; however, the difference in wind resistance between 10mph and 20mph is huge.

Interestingly, an unfit 300lb. male cyclist riding 10 miles in 2 hours (only 5mph.) would burn 816 calories. That is more than the super fit cyclist riding 10 miles at 20mph.

It seems an unfit newcomer to walking, running or cycling can take some comfort in the knowledge that the extra weight they are carrying will initially cause them to burn more calories.

With running or walking, because wind resistance has little or no bearing on output, your calorie burn will drop as you lose weight. The only way to maintain the rate of calorie burn is to increase the distance, although not necessarily the speed. The only limitation will be the time available to you to walk or run.

However, with cycling as you lose weight and your fitness increases, so too will your speed increase, translating into more calories burned due to increased wind resistance.

More speed also means more distance covered in the same amount of time. The same is true for running of course, but with less effect on number of calories burned.

I feel the Wolfram Alpha program will be extremely useful for anyone starting an exercise regimen, or even a fit cyclist trying to figure out if a short fast ride is as beneficial as a longer ride at a slower pace. It will help an individual better manage the time available for exercise.  

                        

Stopping

In my last article I mentioned that I usually never run red lights even if there is no other traffic present.

I find I rarely have to wait long for a light to change, and I am never in that much of a hurry to warrant running a light.

In most states, including my State of South Carolina, it is legal for a bicycle to proceed through a red light if the road is clear after you have waited for two minutes.

If it were early Sunday morning and the road was deserted, I would probably not sit there for two minutes, but if there is no one there to actually time me or even witness this technically illegal act, it is the same as a tree falling in the forest; did it even happen?

Which brings me to stop signs; I never blow through stop signs without slowing. If it is a busy intersection and there is other traffic present, I will make a complete foot down stop, and wait my turn before proceeding.

Often on quiet residential streets there can be a stop sign on every block; once again I slow down, and if there are no other vehicles present, I will proceed without unclipping and putting my foot to the ground. I am not suggesting you do the same, I am simply saying, "This is what I am comfortable doing."

If a police officer pulled me over, I would have to admit that technically I did break the law. I would point out the impracticality of unclipping at every intersection, state that I took every precaution, and plead with him not to give me a ticket.

I agree with most cyclists that having the same stop sign rule for autos and bicycles needs to change, but until that actually happens strictly speaking I am breaking the law. If I did get a ticket it would be unfortunate, but that is a risk I take. There would be little point in fighting it.

I believe it is not the cyclists treating stop signs in the manner I have just described that irk the motorist; it is those that blow through at speed, without so much as a token slowing down. Often ahead of a car already stopped or just pulling away.

As well as being illegal, this kind of behavior is just plain rude and antisocial. Even if the law is changed in the future allowing cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs, it will not be a license to blow through ahead of another vehicle that was already waiting.

Yield means waiting for those who were there first.

 

An article in The Gothamist tells of New York delivery girl, Krista Ciminera (Above.) who was ticketed for running a stop sign at a deserted intersection; in her own words:

“I saw a police car heading north on Union Avenue and North 12th, and I believe the cop saw me and did a U-turn to follow right behind me, waiting for me to do something illegal.

I made a right onto Roebling and approached the intersection at North 9th, looked both ways while braking, saw that it was clear, and proceeded. As soon as I went past the stop sign, I heard sirens behind me and knew that it was a cop car.

I pulled over and a cop got out asking me, "Do you know why we pulled you over?" to which I always reply, "No," even though I knew it was because of the stop sign, which he then confirmed.”

Tough luck Krista, but my question is this; if you knew the cop was following you, and you knew he was waiting for you to do something illegal, why then did you do something illegal? Why did you not come to a complete foot down stop?

No person in their right mind would roll through a stop sign in a car if they knew a police car was following them. Don’t do it on a bicycle.

You are thumbing your nose at the cop and saying, “Make my day, write me a ticket.” He will probably oblige.

You can bet if I’m approaching a stop sign, and I know a police car is behind me, or I see one sitting close by, I will come to a complete, foot down stop.

In New York City, knowing what is happening there at this time I would probably do it anyway, just in case.

Addendum: 4/13/11

I received an email from Krista Ciminera in which she stated she didn’t know the police car was following her. In telling her story to the Gothamist she had only surmised after the fact that a police cruiser she had seen earlier had done a U-turn and had followed her. This explains her actions; she told me had she known the cop was following her she definitely would have made a complete stop.

                     

Education or Enforcement

There are two ways to apply cycling laws, education or enforcement. Going to school in the UK at least twice a year there would be a special lesson on the Highway Code.

A little Highway Code book would be given to us to take home and keep. It not only had all the rules and laws as applied to driving a car, it laid out those that applied to riding a bicycle and pedestrians.

It was drummed into us, when you cross the street, stop, look right, look left, look right again; (Traffic came from the right in the UK.) if the road is clear then cross.

This was war time Britain of the 1940s and due to petrol rationing there were few cars on the road, especially in the rural area I lived at the time. Never-the-less when we crossed the street we went through this ritual of look right, look left.

There were cycling proficiency tests too, where we would bring our bikes to school and the local police constable would come in and instruct us on how to ride our bike both safely and in compliance with the law.

The result was when I started cycling seriously in the 1950s, I never rode on the pavement, (Sidewalk.) I never rode through red lights, and my bike always had a front and rear light when riding after dark. As for riding a bike on the wrong side of the road, toward traffic, that would be so crazy it would not even be considered.

It was somewhat of a culture shock when I came to the US in 1979 and went for a ride with the local club. The first red light we came to I stopped and everyone else kept going.

It would not be unusual to find a cyclist riding towards me on my side of the road. This led to the quandary, do I pull out in the traffic lane and let him pass on the inside, or hold my course and hope he goes around me? I usually took the initiative and went for the first option.

I remember reading of a case in New Jersey where two cyclists riding at night without lights hit head on because one was on the wrong side. Their heads hit, neither was wearing a helmet; one died instantly, the other had serious head injuries.

Young kids on BMX bikes would jump from the sidewalk to the center of the road, and then wait for a gap in opposing traffic before hopping over to the opposite sidewalk. It was a free for all, with no rules being observed or enforced. Today, from what I read, it is no better in the UK; it seems the Highway Code is no longer taught in schools.

Stuff drummed into me as a kid has stayed with me to this day; so believe me I understand why some cyclists ride through red lights. It is what they have always done since they were a kid; no one said they shouldn't do it.

If I stop for a red light, even if there is no other traffic in sight, it is not because I am somehow better than the cyclist who just rides on through. It is because not to stop feels uncomfortable, and goes against a lifetime habit.

Getting in the habit of obeying traffic laws while riding a bike would be a good thing for all cyclists to do right now. I am reading of a ticket writing blitz going on in Brooklyn, New York; it will not surprise me if this happens in other cities in the US as cycling becomes more popular and more and more cyclists take to the streets.

The article in The Brooklyn Paper tells how critics are saying it is unfair to clamp down on cyclists in this manner. I am inclined to agree to a certain extent. It is unfair that a cyclist should pay the same $190 fine for running a red light that a motorist has to pay.

However, it is quite simple to avoid getting one of these tickets; don't run red lights. Also, whoever said life is fair? It is unfair that I am forced to take my shoes off at the airport, because one idiot tried to blow up a plane with a bomb in his shoe.

One Brooklyn cyclist got three tickets; one for riding his bike on the sidewalk, another riding against the flow of traffic, and a third for mouthing off to the cop who was giving him the ticket. All three of these tickets could have been avoided, had this particular cyclist not become accustomed to riding his bike where ever and however he please.

Laws regarding cyclists running red lights and other infractions are in place everywhere right now, so too are fines set. Because the police have not enforced these laws in the past, it may seem unfair when they suddenly start issuing tickets.

There are ways to get people to follow the rules. You educate, preferably at an early age as happened with me, it then becomes a lifetime habit. Or you start fining people as a deterrent. 

I find obeying the law as I ride my bike, does not affect my cycling pleasure; it does not slow me down all that much either. And if my local law enforcement starts issuing tickets to cyclists, it will not affect me.

Those who get tickets will no doubt say how unfair it is, and how they’ve always ridden on the sidewalk or went through red lights. I may sympathize, but I doubt I will be offering to pay their fine.

                     

Labels and other BS from Copenhagen

Labels can be useful; for example if I say “Vehicular Cycling,” most regular readers of this page will know exactly what I am talking about. If you don’t this short video explains it.

To me this is defensive riding that works because for the most part, drivers of motor vehicles will go out of their way to avoid hitting you as long as they know you are there.

It is the inattentive or distracted driver who is the most danger, but by riding predictably, signaling intent, and correct positioning on the road, you make even the most inattentive driver aware of your presence.

For example, whatever direction I leave my home I have to travel a busy two-lane highway. The traffic seems to come along in platoons because of traffic lights in both directions.

When the road is clear behind me I ride out in the lane about two or three feet. When I hear a vehicle approach from the rear, I move over to the right to let them pass.

This has the effect of slowing them down and the first car makes a conscious effort to go wide around me. Each car following does the same.

If I stay close to the right edge of the road all the time, a car approaching from the rear will not slow down and will often not deviate from his line of travel.

A driver of a car three or four vehicles back will not even know I am there.  If people want to label this “Vehicular Cycling” that’s okay; it works for me.

However, I prefer not to be labeled a “Vehicular Cyclist.” I didn’t pay a subscription to join a Vehicular Cyclist’s organization. I have not even read John Forester’s book. (He’s the man who coined the term.) 

I am simply a “Cyclist” doing what is necessary to survive while riding my bike on today’s streets and highways.

I have just read an article by Mikael over on Copenhagenize.com titled “Vehicular Cyclists – Cycling’s Secret Sect.” A secret sect… Really. The writer suggests that Vehicular Cyclists:

“Fight tooth and nail against virtually any form of separated bicycle infrastructure because their theory is based up on the premise that bicycles are 'vehicles' and therefore should act as the vehicles in the traffic, using the car lanes just like cars.”

The article then goes on to ridicule Vehicular Cyclists, comparing them to the Flat Earth Society. According to Mikael it is our own fault, the established cyclists in America and the UK, that we don’t have a widespread cycling infrastructure.

What utter bull-shit. I would love it if my local authority was making my city as bike friendly as Portland, Oregon, or Davis, California. But in the mean time I am making do with what I have. The other alternative is to not ride my bike.

There are many people who would ride a bike but are scared to do so I today’s traffic. It is the avid cyclists who take to the road each day, who are showing others that it is possible to survive out there.

Who knows how many others might be encouraged to try cycling just by seeing us pedaling around the city streets. The more cyclists on the road the more cities are likely to facilitate cycling.

I suggest Mikael does not have a clue what it is like to ride a bike in any American city, or in the UK for that matter. Both countries are steeped in the car-culture, and it is not going to change overnight.

The situation is improving, but slowly; I doubt there will be huge improvements nationwide in my lifetime. All we can do in the mean time is keep riding our bikes, while doing whatever is necessary to stay safe.