Potential good news for Mt. Washington access. - Page 2 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

01-01-2005, 02:30 PM

Charles Beristain wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:01:25 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> wrote:
>
>
>>Wayne Pein writes:
>>
>>
>>>It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>>>Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>
> It would be very dangerous to ride down MW .. especially when cars are
> also going up and down.
>
> I think what really sticks in our craws is that it costs $300 to be
> allowed to ride up MW and that happens only once per year (with one
> practice day.. but even then, the car that brings you down has to pay
> to go up). Only 600 riders each year.
>
> charlieb in ct

On Maui, there is a race to the top of the volcano, 38 miles 10,000 ft.
There are also tour companies that haul you and their bicycle to the
top for sunrise then follow you downhill. They can only use disk brakes
on their bicycles.

01-01-2005, 02:30 PM

Charles Beristain wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:01:25 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> wrote:
>
>
>>Wayne Pein writes:
>>
>>
>>>It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>>>Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>
> It would be very dangerous to ride down MW .. especially when cars are
> also going up and down.
>
> I think what really sticks in our craws is that it costs $300 to be
> allowed to ride up MW and that happens only once per year (with one
> practice day.. but even then, the car that brings you down has to pay
> to go up). Only 600 riders each year.
>
> charlieb in ct

On Maui, there is a race to the top of the volcano, 38 miles 10,000 ft.
There are also tour companies that haul you and their bicycle to the
top for sunrise then follow you downhill. They can only use disk brakes
on their bicycles.

01-01-2005, 02:30 PM

Charles Beristain wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:01:25 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> wrote:
>
>
>>Wayne Pein writes:
>>
>>
>>>It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>>>Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>
> It would be very dangerous to ride down MW .. especially when cars are
> also going up and down.
>
> I think what really sticks in our craws is that it costs $300 to be
> allowed to ride up MW and that happens only once per year (with one
> practice day.. but even then, the car that brings you down has to pay
> to go up). Only 600 riders each year.
>
> charlieb in ct

On Maui, there is a race to the top of the volcano, 38 miles 10,000 ft.
There are also tour companies that haul you and their bicycle to the
top for sunrise then follow you downhill. They can only use disk brakes
on their bicycles.

01-03-2005, 02:04 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <p8ZAd.15484$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Wayne Pein writes:
>
>> It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>> Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>That's an interesting case considering that it is a steep road. I
>don't know whether there have been any injuries from crashing
>bicyclists here but in the Alps, especially in Austria, where there
>are exceptionally steep mountain roads, bicycles are prohibited
>downhill to prevent blowouts from overheating rims.

_ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
and in my experience riding up it is harder.

_ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- okay, okay 12% is steep, but I'll take a mile of 12% over
a quarter mile of 20% any day.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQdnBgmTWTAjn5N/lAQGQcwQAgVCrP67vq6HmsL1vMYLNlGo2oZCVGana
d6vtzWt2SDTbDwCukuydI8CN3QN5fwqWMq2eVWk14gRDlzvbqx vAe69Vhiys8viZ
qXTCv9MA0Rg2W8zXR/krlzCfxS3Q9NNQQMnoHRtIzkU42vin4LKYAFwxSJ/SGgil
9OvrHspsxC8=
=O0kP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

01-03-2005, 02:04 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <p8ZAd.15484$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Wayne Pein writes:
>
>> It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>> Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>That's an interesting case considering that it is a steep road. I
>don't know whether there have been any injuries from crashing
>bicyclists here but in the Alps, especially in Austria, where there
>are exceptionally steep mountain roads, bicycles are prohibited
>downhill to prevent blowouts from overheating rims.

_ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
and in my experience riding up it is harder.

_ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- okay, okay 12% is steep, but I'll take a mile of 12% over
a quarter mile of 20% any day.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQdnBgmTWTAjn5N/lAQGQcwQAgVCrP67vq6HmsL1vMYLNlGo2oZCVGana
d6vtzWt2SDTbDwCukuydI8CN3QN5fwqWMq2eVWk14gRDlzvbqx vAe69Vhiys8viZ
qXTCv9MA0Rg2W8zXR/krlzCfxS3Q9NNQQMnoHRtIzkU42vin4LKYAFwxSJ/SGgil
9OvrHspsxC8=
=O0kP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

01-03-2005, 02:04 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <p8ZAd.15484$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Wayne Pein writes:
>
>> It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>> Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>That's an interesting case considering that it is a steep road. I
>don't know whether there have been any injuries from crashing
>bicyclists here but in the Alps, especially in Austria, where there
>are exceptionally steep mountain roads, bicycles are prohibited
>downhill to prevent blowouts from overheating rims.

_ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
and in my experience riding up it is harder.

_ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- okay, okay 12% is steep, but I'll take a mile of 12% over
a quarter mile of 20% any day.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQdnBgmTWTAjn5N/lAQGQcwQAgVCrP67vq6HmsL1vMYLNlGo2oZCVGana
d6vtzWt2SDTbDwCukuydI8CN3QN5fwqWMq2eVWk14gRDlzvbqx vAe69Vhiys8viZ
qXTCv9MA0Rg2W8zXR/krlzCfxS3Q9NNQQMnoHRtIzkU42vin4LKYAFwxSJ/SGgil
9OvrHspsxC8=
=O0kP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

01-03-2005, 02:04 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <p8ZAd.15484$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Wayne Pein writes:
>
>> It appears that cyclists may have a good case in gaining access to
>> Mt. Washington in New Hampshire.
>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>That's an interesting case considering that it is a steep road. I
>don't know whether there have been any injuries from crashing
>bicyclists here but in the Alps, especially in Austria, where there
>are exceptionally steep mountain roads, bicycles are prohibited
>downhill to prevent blowouts from overheating rims.

_ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
and in my experience riding up it is harder.

_ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- okay, okay 12% is steep, but I'll take a mile of 12% over
a quarter mile of 20% any day.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQdnBgmTWTAjn5N/lAQGQcwQAgVCrP67vq6HmsL1vMYLNlGo2oZCVGana
d6vtzWt2SDTbDwCukuydI8CN3QN5fwqWMq2eVWk14gRDlzvbqx vAe69Vhiys8viZ
qXTCv9MA0Rg2W8zXR/krlzCfxS3Q9NNQQMnoHRtIzkU42vin4LKYAFwxSJ/SGgil
9OvrHspsxC8=
=O0kP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

01-03-2005, 02:43 PM

Booker C. Bense wrote:

> _ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
> at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
> most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
> you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
> and in my experience riding up it is harder.
>
> _ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
> it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
> entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
> would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
> you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
> with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
> time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

Mountain bikers ride fire roads like that all the time. The mountains of the
western US are riddled with them -- 4000' climbs at over 10%, sometimes over
15%. Rims get hot, but not enough to blow tires. So I don't see what the big
deal is. There are a bunch of roads around here with sustained grades like
that, but nothing that long -- 2-3 miles at most.

However, when you have such a road that's a magnet for cyclists, you have a
management problem. As mentioned, that particular road is privately owned, so
there may be liability concerns too. I say people ought to be free to crash if
they want to, but unfortunately US law and insurance doesn't work that way.

Matt O.

01-03-2005, 02:43 PM

Booker C. Bense wrote:

> _ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
> at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
> most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
> you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
> and in my experience riding up it is harder.
>
> _ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
> it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
> entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
> would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
> you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
> with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
> time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

Mountain bikers ride fire roads like that all the time. The mountains of the
western US are riddled with them -- 4000' climbs at over 10%, sometimes over
15%. Rims get hot, but not enough to blow tires. So I don't see what the big
deal is. There are a bunch of roads around here with sustained grades like
that, but nothing that long -- 2-3 miles at most.

However, when you have such a road that's a magnet for cyclists, you have a
management problem. As mentioned, that particular road is privately owned, so
there may be liability concerns too. I say people ought to be free to crash if
they want to, but unfortunately US law and insurance doesn't work that way.

Matt O.

01-03-2005, 02:43 PM

Booker C. Bense wrote:

> _ Actually, it's not THAT steep, except for a few hundred yards
> at the very top. It's just incredibly sustained, 12% for 7+ miles[1]
> most of which is hard packed dirt. If you plot dist vs elevation
> you get a nearly straight line. I've both ridden up and run up it
> and in my experience riding up it is harder.
>
> _ It's not allowed to ride down it and it's only allowed to ride up
> it twice a year as part of an anuual race that has a lottery for
> entries and a very high entry fee. Descending it on skinny tires
> would be very unpleasant, it would be a blast with fat tires if
> you didn't have to worry about cars wandering all over the road
> with driver's watching the scenery. I think you'd have a hard
> time fighting "rational basis" ban on cyclists.

Mountain bikers ride fire roads like that all the time. The mountains of the
western US are riddled with them -- 4000' climbs at over 10%, sometimes over
15%. Rims get hot, but not enough to blow tires. So I don't see what the big
deal is. There are a bunch of roads around here with sustained grades like
that, but nothing that long -- 2-3 miles at most.

However, when you have such a road that's a magnet for cyclists, you have a
management problem. As mentioned, that particular road is privately owned, so
there may be liability concerns too. I say people ought to be free to crash if
they want to, but unfortunately US law and insurance doesn't work that way.

Matt O.