Faster!

It's almost April, which means spring is nearly here. Well, technically, it's already here but as usual, weather doesn't seem to align too well with calendar, so we will have to wait probably another week or two for real spring to arrive.

Nevertheless, it's getting warmer and that means one thing for sure - many, many more roadies out on the bike path. With the beginning of April they crawl out of their indoor hideouts, put stationary trainers back in the closet and roll out on their bicycles to welcome spring. This is to me the best indication of season's change. Far more regular than looking at bird migration patterns or melting snow.

(Source: yehudamoon.com)

Observing these guys and reading some cycling news recently, I thought about the very clear trend in modern road cycling - the focus on speed. Unlike mountain biking that found many niches and offers many different ride styles, road cycling is still driven mostly by UCI rules and catered towards racers.

Hence, modern road bikes emphasize speed over comfort, aerodynamics over functionality and build an image of Lycra-wrapped man enjoying his morning "race" to a nearby cafe. Do you think I'm exaggerating? That it's not that bad? That there are plenty of "other" road bikes that aren't designed for racing? Sure, but those are still minority. A few years ago you would think that gravel bikes would change that. They were not bound by any UCI regulations, yet they still ended up being just another type of race bikes.

If you still don't know what I'm talking about, try to hop onto a modern road bike in regular clothes. It will surely feel weird. You would *want* to wear a helmet, put those Lycra tights on and "race" to your destination (even if that's only your office commute). Plus, "if it's not on Strava it didn't happen", right?

Faster! Like it's a race.

Certainly, part of this focus on speed is that cycling is seen mainly as a sport, much less as a transportation option, and speed is one of the deciding factors how sport can be measured. But I keep finding this "speed matters" approach even in places that aren't focused on competitive sport as much. I've been looking at Jan Heine's blog recently and he published a series of "cycling myths", many of which are speed-related:

• Wider tires are slower
• Fenders slow you down
• Stiffer frames are faster
• Tubeless tires roll faster

I'm not trying to say that Jan hand-picked these because speed matters to him that much, but it seems that all of us collectively find this topic interesting and as such, these speed myths pop out like mushrooms after rain.

So spring is almost here and you may be looking for a new bike, or perhaps looking at your old bike thinking it needs new aero wheels. Just remember - there is more fun in riding a bike than just going faster.

To tube or not tube - this is the question!

What's the most common mechanical defect cyclists have to deal with? Flat tires, of course! No one likes to have ride ruined by that. The bicycle industry tried to solve that issue and borrowed the concept of tubeless tires from the motoring industry. As a result, we can now enjoy riding relatively flat-free. Relatively - because tubeless tires don't solve all problems and actually introduce some new ones. As such, some people would say tubes are still the way to go. I wanted to compare both scenarios - when tubes and tubeless wheels are used and rate both setups in a few situations I encountered in the last years.

Situation 1 - puncture from a nail on paved bike path. I remember this one since this was the first ever flat I got after buying a new bike. It was a classic flat you would get after riding over a pointy object. My bike was set up with tubes at that time. Going tubeless would've definitely saved the day. Verdict - tubes: 0, tubeless: 1.

Situation 2 - punctured sidewall by a large nail. This one was memorable since it happened on the first ride after I put new tires on my bike (Bad luck, I guess). Nail tore the sidewall and I had to replace the tire. Had my wheel been set up tubeless back then, it wouldn't be entirely painless, since hole was quite large and likely wouldn't easily seal itself just with the sealant. But fortunately, larger holes in tubeless tires can be patched with rubber inserts ("bacon bits") without removing tire off the rim. Verdict - tubes: 0, tubeless: 0.5.

Situation 3 - sidewall torn by sharp rocks. I hated when that happened! Especially that I had to do an emergency patch of the giant gap in my tire. I patched it with a small piece of cardboard I fortunately had with me, installed new tube and slowly limped back home. Tubeless wouldn't save me there. In fact, fixing this in tubeless setup would be messy, with all that sealant spraying around. I'll give tubes half a point here for a less messy fix. Verdict - tubes: 0.5, tubeless: 0.

Situation 4 - pinch flat on sharp rocks. My bike still wasn't set up tubeless at that time. I rode on a very rocky trail with air pressure set too low. It's the recipe for a disaster, unless  I rode tubeless, since in such case I would've been fine. Verdict - tubes: 0, tubeless: 1.

Situation 5 - flat from a nail that never happened. I rode tubeless for quite a while and only after I had to swap tires due to wear, I discovered a small rusty nail embedded in casing. That's a very clear example for advantage of tubeless tires. Verdict - tubes: 0, tubeless: 1.

There you have it - 5 different situations, different conditions, different configurations. Tubeless wins 3:0.

Does it mean that you should switch to tubeless right away? Not so fast. First of all - everyone's mileage may vary. Plus, tubeless has its own problems and there are several factors you should consider first:

• Cost. If wheels in your bike are not tubeless-compatible, it may not be worth upgrading them. You would likely need new tires and new rims, which means rebuilding wheels.
• Riding style. If you ride your bike on clean, well-maintained pavement, chances to get a flat are significantly reduced and as such, switching to tubeless may simply make little sense.
• Ride frequency. If you rarely ride your bike, you may not like the fact that tubeless tires may leak more and require more frequent inflation than when you use tubes. So if you use your bike very infrequently, using tubes is more convenient.
• Swapping tires. If you have one wheelset but need to periodically swap tires, going tubeless will be just too much hassle. This is why my commuting bike runs on tubes at this point. I have to swap to studded tires in winter and then back to normal ones in the spring. Using tubes makes it much easier and faster.

Other than that, there aren't probably good reasons not to switch to tubeless setup. While tubeless systems are not perfect and still being developed, they definitely work well in variety of situations.

Parkland and Park Slope

On February 14 this year, Nikolas Cruz entered Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida and started shooting his classmates with AR-15 rifle. He killed 17, injuring 16 more. It was yet another of hundreds of mass shootings in the last decade in United States and one of many this year, even though 2018 has just barely started.

But one thing turned out to be very different this time. Students spoke and started a nationwide outrage, much more pronounced that during any previous shootings. As a result, the debate over smart gun control laws is back in Congress, several major firearm retailers changed their rules of how and to whom they sell guns and many companies ceased their discount programs for NRA members. We have never seen that level of change in such a quick time before Parkland shooting and everyone hoped that perhaps the youngest generation will trigger Congress to act smart this time.

America has a long history of deadly mass shootings due to our undisputed love of the Second Amendment, lack of any serious background checks and regulations and inability to treat mentally unstable citizens. Not to mention - military-grade weapons are seen as "toys for boys" that apparently you have a right to own. Even if you are mentally ill.

As such, tens of thousands of Americans are killed by firearms every year, but at least we, as a nation see it as a problem, even though some of us aren't willing to offer more than just "thoughts and prayers". There is however another cause of death in America that gets virtually no media coverage, even though it results in higher death numbers year by year. I would call it - murder by car.

Our roads are dangerous to everyone outside of the reinforced metal box, our cars became in the last decades. Long years of road design that focuses on drivers and speed, not those vulnerable users - pedestrians and cyclists, lead to over 33,000 dead every year. On top of that is the American licensing system with its very lenient rules and general inability to exclude dangerous drivers from being part of the traffic.

The most recent tragic example came from New York City, where 2 children were killed and a pregnant woman severely injured when driver ran them over in a crosswalk, ignoring the red light. The driver, 44-year old Dorothy Bruns was not arrested (as this seems to be a norm in such situations, especially in New York), but her license was revoked (unfortunately, much too late) after a massive outcry following this collision, once it was discovered her car had 12 traffic violations on record, including speeding and running red lights. On top of that, she was found to have a history of seizures, multiple sclerosis and heart failures - conditions that should not allow her to drive in the first place.

Such traffic collisions happen every day on American roads. And every day police usually dismisses the case, doesn't arrest the driver nor even issue a citation and media quickly call it yet another "accident". Next, we move on, forgetting about victims and not even trying to pause for a moment and think - why are these deaths so frequent? What causes them? Where is the source of the problem? What can we do to stop it?

Similarly to gun ownership, driving is such a well-established part of our life that we generally tend to accept any collateral damage it causes, no matter how tragic it would be. Seeing all this you may think, it's good that cars were invented over 100 years after foundation of the United States of America. Otherwise, our Founding Fathers would probably add "a right to drive" to the Constitution.

Unfortunately, any change will be a difficult one. Not everyone owns guns yet everyone understands danger they pose, which is why it's easier to petition for gun control laws. But, at least here in America, nearly everyone drives and therefore, it's so much harder to impose any restrictions on what most us see as our "right" and a seemingly safe activity. That makes solutions such as congestion pricing be extremely unpopular as that would affect every one of us, not just some remote "guy with a gun" somewhere in Montana.

It became clear that we need to change our streets, making them safer, slower and more friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists. It's clear that we need to end our reliance on cars and built efficient transit systems. It's clear that we need to revise our licensing system to keep people who should not be allowed on roads, not to drive. And finally, it's pretty clear that we need to reform our police and ask them to truly "serve and protect", not to catch people on e-bikes or ticket jaywalkers. Probably the best summary of the problem was given by one of the NYC citizens who confronted Mayor de Blasio the day after the event:

“I don’t want drivers pulled over for speeding. I want them not to be able to speed in the first place. Because the minute they are speeding is the minute they can hit somebody. I want streets where a driver looks at it and says, ‘I’m the guest here.’” https://t.co/IZl8PwfHRO

— Alissa Walker (@awalkerinLA) March 6, 2018

Basically, we need another #NeverAgain campaign (hashtag used by Parkland shooting survivors to promote their call for change) and it shouldn't be the #VisionZero. In fact, there is no need to reinvent the wheel - the Dutch did that for us back in the 70's. Their "Stop de Kindermoord" seems very appropriate. Now it's time to implement it here in America and stop #murderbycar.

re Park Slope, worth noting that the Dutch went with Stop de Kindermoord (literally "the murder of children") instead of some generic corporate-consultant-speak like "vision zero"

— Whet Moser (@whet) March 6, 2018