Riding a Bike in a Skirt

[Kirbstone]

They don't seem to have any brakes. Is this an unfortunate trick of the photography, or does it tell us something about the priority given to bikes in the Netherlands?

Looks to me like one of the old style bikes from many years ago, they were called Fixed Wheels because unlike most modern bikes the rear wheel chain sprocket does not have a ratchet system that would allow the wheel to keep rotating when the rider stops pedaling, these fixed wheel bikes are not designed for speed (low gear ratios) and so no brakes are needed as in order to stop the bike you simply stop pedaling

....and it promptly throws you over the handlebars!. I had that experience with a fixed-sprocket bike in my teens.

Tom

[Barefoot Joe]

They don't seem to have any brakes. Is this an unfortunate trick of the photography, or does it tell us something about the priority given to bikes in the Netherlands?

I'd guess it has a back pedaling brake, just like the very similar bike I rode as a child. It had an additional front wheel brake, where a rubber block was pressed down onto the tire. Not very efficient if wet, but otherwise a great bike. And it had those rubber band nets to prevent skirts from getting into the spokes. I would have never thought that some day I'll miss this feature...

[pelmut]

They don't seem to have any brakes. Is this an unfortunate trick of the photography, or does it tell us something about the priority given to bikes in the Netherlands?

Looks to me like one of the old style bikes from many years ago, they were called Fixed Wheels because unlike most modern bikes the rear wheel chain sprocket does not have a ratchet system that would allow the wheel to keep rotating when the rider stops pedaling, these fixed wheel bikes are not designed for speed (low gear ratios) and so no brakes are needed as in order to stop the bike you simply stop pedaling

I live on a plateau 400ft above the valley below, the hill is about 1:12 in places. If you tried to stop the bike by just not pedalling, you would soon discover that "terminal velocity" has more than one meaning.

[Tor]

I live on a plateau 400ft above the valley below, the hill is about 1:12 in places. If you tried to stop the bike by just not pedalling, you would soon discover that "terminal velocity" has more than one meaning.

Well, the I believe the Netherlands are generally a good bit flatter than you describe. Still, I would not be entirely comfortable riding a bike without a good front brake. In most cases on pavement the rear brake can be nothing but redundancy, but redundancy in such an important system is a good thing.

I've tried wearing a skirt on a bike a time or two. Maybe I'll post a pic of the skirt - about knee length. It went fine.

[skirted_in_SF]

Stuart, your bike is known here in the Netherlands as an "oma fiets" or Granny Bike.
They are very popular for their simplicity, ruggedness and affordability
http://omafiets.nl/omafiets-nl-omafiets-28-inch-zwart


Jan.

I may be older, but I'm no granny.
My bike is supposed to be lighter than a traditional Dutch bike, but still weighs about 32 pounds (~14.5 kg). At that weight, I figured I wouldn't ride it as much as I might if I had to carry it the 19 steps up and down to my apartment each time. So I went to the neighborhood hardware store (wearing the skirt I wore riding later) and bought a pair of big eye screws and padlocks to attach the bike to my garage wall with a heavy cable that came with the U-lock I had bought. The U-lock will tie the rear wheel to the frame. I will still put the bike in my apartment if I'm going to be out of town on vacation. I lost my last bike when someone cut a similar size cable to make off with it.

[Couya]

... I would not be entirely comfortable riding a bike without a good front brake.

How strange. I'd say the rear brake were far more important and safer to use. The front one is just in case the rear does not do the trick for some reason.

I grew up using the brake on the rear wheel, which was convenient for me as a left-hander as the brake lever was on the left. Apart from a period when I used (and liked) a semi-fixed wheel bike where you slowed or braked by back-pedaling, the left hand has always been the one I used automatically.

A year or two ago on a visit to Grenoble, I hired a bike, a good sturdy one that had been kept in perfect working order -- especially the brakes. What I did not realize immediately was that the brakes had been reversed, and, on a steep slope, I used my left hand as usual; the front wheel came to an immediate stop, and I went headlong over the handlebar. Nothing worse than bruises, luckily, but it really shook me up.

Martin

[Tor]

How strange. I'd say the rear brake were far more important and safer to use.

On any decent bike with like hand lever brakes on both wheels both brakes have the same ability to grip the wheel. The problem is that the rear brake cannot stop a bike as fast as a rear brake due to the way weight transfers to the front wheel under braking force. The rear brake will transfer enough weight to the front wheel to prevent additional braking long before maximum deceleration. On a down slope this is even more apparent because some of the weight that normally is on the rear wheel is now on the front wheel reducing traction in the rear wheel. It is, however, more essential to use the front brake correctly as you painfully demonstrated by incorrect use.

What I did not realize immediately was that the brakes had been reversed, and, on a steep slope, I used my left hand as usual; the front wheel came to an immediate stop, and I went headlong over the handlebar. Nothing worse than bruises, luckily, but it really shook me up.

On this type of crash the analysis I find most convincing is one I believe was first posited by Jobst Brandt. It says that this type of crash is not a case of locking the front wheel. Rather it is caused by braking with the front wheel without bracing against the handlebars at the same time. The front wheel, which gains traction under braking force, stops the entire bike while the rider is still moving forward. Thighs hit handlebars with the predictable result that the much lighter bike flips over, landing the rider in the street.

With practice, however, one can learn to brake so that the rear wheel is on the verge of lifting off the ground. For anyone used to rear wheel only braking, you will quickly find that you can stop a great deal faster if you learn to modulate the front brake, with demonstrable safety benefits.

Glad your survived your mishap with minimal damage.

[partlyscot]

You are correct in that the front brake is capable of providing more stopping power than the rear. On a motorcycle, with it's greater weight, this can be over 90%. Indeed, on a good road, with good tires and brakes, I can bring a motorcycle to a halt with the rear wheel completely off the ground. A bicycle usually generates about 50-75% of it's stopping power with the front. If you want to get more braking on a bicycle, i.e. emergency stop, you don't brace against the handle bars so much as push yourself back from the bar. The training for an emergency stop is to try to get your butt behind the saddle. With your weight thus moved further from the front wheel's contact point, and lower, you can use much more front brake. I have a cargo bike with cable disc brakes, it is a "long tail" design. The rear wheel is set about 15" further back compared to a regular bicycle. With that bike, I need no special contortions to get very good braking.