@andy256 I disagree with some of the voting :) Popular and correct are not always well connected. And interestingly, some of the users get more than half their rep from that one answer - the water filled tyre one, for example.
@alex People do all sorts of stupid stuff, and as people keep reminding me "no-one is actively working to make climate change worse because they want more of it"... I may not agree, but it's a popular idea.
@Criggie I have to do almost 25km/day to get to and from work. 175km a week for you, 140km for me just from 28km there and back. Add a wee ride on the weekend and it's done. But if I didn't have to ride the 140km, I would struggle.
I think it's about time. I get a bit sick of not knowing what the funk people actually want to know, because they don't know enough to ask an answerable question.
Hopefully being able to read the list of options will help them decide what their actual question is. Because a lot of the time I suspect it is "I am comparing a carbon and aluminium road bike options, but a friend insists that steel is the only way to. How do I know which is right?" or something similar.
@Criggie yes. I believe the limit is MAX_INT_32, but it may be as high as MAX_UNSIGNED_INT_64
(look at the terminology index, for example)
I still want an entry in there "Glossary: see 'terminology index'"
I am trying to resist filling it with examples of unusual materials, because I know that 99% of people will only care about the first few steel, aluminium and carbon/bisphenol options
Not that bikes are really sold that way, but I think if we get examples of generic CroMo and a couple of Reynolds that will split out the key details.
@freiheit it's difficult to test ride all seventy-bazillion different options, even if you have a team of minions to make them for you.
I am currently waiting a response from the perspex bike guy, and really trying to find a cardboard bike. As Clarke and Dawe put it "materials? Well, cardboard is out. No cardboard derivatives, no paper"...
