3 ms·

New York City bike-share program bans fat riders

6 points by Lightning 13y ago

dllthomas 13y ago
They're probably just going with what the manufacturer says. My bike has a limit lower than 260 printed on it.
revelation 13y ago
Bikes are a total enthusiast crapfest, but if you are running a bike-share program, you should invest some money to get bikes that will last at least a year. Plenty of normal sized bikes out there that will withstand 290 pounds and more.
- dalke 13y ago
  "enthusiast crapfest" .. perhaps in a hilly area, or region which doesn't keep bike traffic in mind. But as every discussion on this topic points out, there are cities (Amsterdam and Copenhagen are the most common examples) which include bike traffic as an integral part of the city and building construction, so people use bikes for practical reasons, and not only for enthusiasm. In any case, have you looked at what the manufacturers say about "normal sized bikes"? Trek specifies a weight limit of 275 lbs for a road bike and 300 lbs for a city bike ( http://www.trekbikes.com/faq/questions.php?questionid=104 http://www.trekbikes.com/faq/questions.php?questionid=104 ) while Schwinn bikes meant "To be ridden on paved roads only" have a limit of 275 lbs ( http://media.schwinnbikes.com/skin/frontend/schwinn/default/pdf/Schwinn-Owners-Manual_IBD.pdf http://media.schwinnbikes.com/skin/frontend/schwinn/default/... ). Based on that Schwinn link, it appears that "ASTM CONDITION 1" bicycles have a rider limit of 275 lbs and luggage limit of 10 lbs. These Citi Bikes have a limit of 265 and 11 lbs, respectively. No, it doesn't make sense to me that they are of a lower limit than the Trek and Schwinn bikes. Still, it seems there is an entire class of bicycles that aren't designed to withstand the 290 lbs that you think is reasonable. Of course, even if they were designed to handle 300 lbs, there would still be a restriction on those who are over 300 lbs, and this headline and the arguments therein would be unchanged. Citi Bike can't win in that case. There has to be a limit. What should that limit be? The sumo wrestler Asashōryū Akinori weighs 330 lbs. Should the bikes be designed with people like him in mind? U.S. sumo wresting champion Kelly Gneiting was 400 pounds when he did the L.A. marathon. John Taylor, is a defensive tackle for the Central Penn Piranha of the semiprofessional Gridiron Developmental Football League and weighs 500 lbs. These are athletes. Should all of the bikes be designed with them in mind? I say no. At some point it's just not reasonable.
  - revelation 13y ago
    I don't mean "enthusiast crapfest" as in "nobody considers bike for serious transport", but as in "build quality and engineering of modern bikes is stuck in 1920". Brakes, transmission, drivetrain - one of these is guaranteed to fail in a way that makes the bike unsuitable for driving within a year. You basically can't use a modern bike in winter if you want to still be using it come spring. That's what I mean with "enthusiast crapfest" - bikes were replaced by public transportation and cars and reduced to a hobby segment, where all manufacturers produce is overpriced gadgets for people that like building bikes but would never dare drive their beloved posessions. They are basically not usable as dependable transport.
    - dalke 13y ago
      Overall I agree with you. My current bike has been quite good, but that's because I bought one (a Koga) designed for long-distance cycling trips. My previous bike (a Trek) was indeed a bit of a lemon. OTOH, my wife's, a Hase, is expensive, but apparently uses some crappy, non-standard parts and it's been at the bike shop for a few weeks waiting for replacement parts. I think an issue is that most people neither need nor want a bike that they use in winter, so most of the bikes aren't designed for that. A $200 bike from Walmart is probably good enough for a few summers of use. Another is that bikes, because they are human-powered, don't have much flexibility. Someone interested in "relaxing" 100 mile ride isn't going to want the heavy frame and pannier holders that my bike has, and neither is a mountain biker. The field of commuter bikes is much smaller than those two, so I think there's been less optimization for that style. I don't know much about the biking world, but looking around now it seems that Kona makes a dependable commuter bicycle. There are likely others. A third problem is that it's hard to figure out which are the good bikes, and it's really hard for me to care about most bike reviews. With car reviews I feel that most care about things that I don't, like "high speed handling", and I think most reviewers are chummy with the manufacturers in order to get access to the vehicles for testing. This is why I have a much higher respect for Consumer Reports policy of only reviewing cars they or their members bought. Bike review have much of the same feeling, compounded by the much greater diversity of bicycle manufacturers. I had not heard of a Koga before I borrowed one from a friend, and had not heard of a Kona until today. The is the paradox of choice and the sense of complete ignorance mean that people will tend to buy something "cheap", in the hopes that it's good enough. Which it is, for a while.
herge 13y ago
I use the original Montreal based version of this program, and they caution a limit of 265lbs[1] for the bicycles. It is also really popular, and amazingly handy. 260 is probably the limit the bikes can handle while lasting a whole season. [1] https://bixi.com/foire-aux-questions?lang=en https://bixi.com/foire-aux-questions?lang=en

6 points by Lightning 13y ago

They're probably just going with what the manufacturer says. My bike has a limit lower than 260 printed on it.

Bikes are a total enthusiast crapfest, but if you are running a bike-share program, you should invest some money to get bikes that will last at least a year. Plenty of normal sized bikes out there that will withstand 290 pounds and more.

dalke 13y ago
"enthusiast crapfest" .. perhaps in a hilly area, or region which doesn't keep bike traffic in mind. But as every discussion on this topic points out, there are cities (Amsterdam and Copenhagen are the most common examples) which include bike traffic as an integral part of the city and building construction, so people use bikes for practical reasons, and not only for enthusiasm. In any case, have you looked at what the manufacturers say about "normal sized bikes"? Trek specifies a weight limit of 275 lbs for a road bike and 300 lbs for a city bike ( http://www.trekbikes.com/faq/questions.php?questionid=104 http://www.trekbikes.com/faq/questions.php?questionid=104 ) while Schwinn bikes meant "To be ridden on paved roads only" have a limit of 275 lbs ( http://media.schwinnbikes.com/skin/frontend/schwinn/default/pdf/Schwinn-Owners-Manual_IBD.pdf http://media.schwinnbikes.com/skin/frontend/schwinn/default/... ). Based on that Schwinn link, it appears that "ASTM CONDITION 1" bicycles have a rider limit of 275 lbs and luggage limit of 10 lbs. These Citi Bikes have a limit of 265 and 11 lbs, respectively. No, it doesn't make sense to me that they are of a lower limit than the Trek and Schwinn bikes. Still, it seems there is an entire class of bicycles that aren't designed to withstand the 290 lbs that you think is reasonable. Of course, even if they were designed to handle 300 lbs, there would still be a restriction on those who are over 300 lbs, and this headline and the arguments therein would be unchanged. Citi Bike can't win in that case. There has to be a limit. What should that limit be? The sumo wrestler Asashōryū Akinori weighs 330 lbs. Should the bikes be designed with people like him in mind? U.S. sumo wresting champion Kelly Gneiting was 400 pounds when he did the L.A. marathon. John Taylor, is a defensive tackle for the Central Penn Piranha of the semiprofessional Gridiron Developmental Football League and weighs 500 lbs. These are athletes. Should all of the bikes be designed with them in mind? I say no. At some point it's just not reasonable.
- revelation 13y ago
  I don't mean "enthusiast crapfest" as in "nobody considers bike for serious transport", but as in "build quality and engineering of modern bikes is stuck in 1920". Brakes, transmission, drivetrain - one of these is guaranteed to fail in a way that makes the bike unsuitable for driving within a year. You basically can't use a modern bike in winter if you want to still be using it come spring. That's what I mean with "enthusiast crapfest" - bikes were replaced by public transportation and cars and reduced to a hobby segment, where all manufacturers produce is overpriced gadgets for people that like building bikes but would never dare drive their beloved posessions. They are basically not usable as dependable transport.
  - dalke 13y ago
    Overall I agree with you. My current bike has been quite good, but that's because I bought one (a Koga) designed for long-distance cycling trips. My previous bike (a Trek) was indeed a bit of a lemon. OTOH, my wife's, a Hase, is expensive, but apparently uses some crappy, non-standard parts and it's been at the bike shop for a few weeks waiting for replacement parts. I think an issue is that most people neither need nor want a bike that they use in winter, so most of the bikes aren't designed for that. A $200 bike from Walmart is probably good enough for a few summers of use. Another is that bikes, because they are human-powered, don't have much flexibility. Someone interested in "relaxing" 100 mile ride isn't going to want the heavy frame and pannier holders that my bike has, and neither is a mountain biker. The field of commuter bikes is much smaller than those two, so I think there's been less optimization for that style. I don't know much about the biking world, but looking around now it seems that Kona makes a dependable commuter bicycle. There are likely others. A third problem is that it's hard to figure out which are the good bikes, and it's really hard for me to care about most bike reviews. With car reviews I feel that most care about things that I don't, like "high speed handling", and I think most reviewers are chummy with the manufacturers in order to get access to the vehicles for testing. This is why I have a much higher respect for Consumer Reports policy of only reviewing cars they or their members bought. Bike review have much of the same feeling, compounded by the much greater diversity of bicycle manufacturers. I had not heard of a Koga before I borrowed one from a friend, and had not heard of a Kona until today. The is the paradox of choice and the sense of complete ignorance mean that people will tend to buy something "cheap", in the hopes that it's good enough. Which it is, for a while.

herge 13y ago

I use the original Montreal based version of this program, and they caution a limit of 265lbs[1] for the bicycles. It is also really popular, and amazingly handy. 260 is probably the limit the bikes can handle while lasting a whole season. [1] https://bixi.com/foire-aux-questions?lang=en https://bixi.com/foire-aux-questions?lang=en