u/D00M98

My question is how different is standard progressive versus computer progressive? Standard progressive works from distance to reading. Computer progressive is optimized for within 4 feet (computer to reading). Will the wider range of standard progressive be harder to adapt to, compared to computer progressive?

I currently use the following:

• Standard vision: for driving, outdoor activities.
• Computer progressive: for computer use and phone use.

I was hesitant to get progressive, because I was concerned it can be dizzy-ing or difficult to use. But last year, I had to give in and got computer progressive. It works well. But I mainly use this at computer, iPad, iPhone, reading. So working distance is like within 4 feet.

For driving and cycling, I am using standard vision. When driving, I now have difficulty reading the phone for navigation. When cycling, I have difficulty reading the bike computer (which have smaller screen and smaller fonts than smartphone).

I'm debating if I should get standard progressive. These eyeglasses are not cheap, and will cost me around $200 USD after insurance. Thus the question.

TLDNR:

I want to separate 2 main effect.

One is going over big deviation, like bumps, potholes, and large rocks. This is first order effect. Carbon feels much more comfortable than Aluminum frame. The main difference is that carbon is stiffer and it just bounce once. Aluminum tend to bounce multiple times in fraction of second.

Second is riding on flat surface, but with many deviations, like small rocks, pebbles, and gravel. This is second order effect. This results in constant vibration. Aluminum fork dampens these vibrations much better than carbon fork.

Details:

I hear a lot of people who claim carbon is like miracle material that is compliant and dampens everything and make ride for comfortable. In my experience, that is not true for all vibrations. Still, I do prefer how carbon frame feels.

Of course every bike can be different. This is my experience based on 3 gravel bikes, over same surfaces and trails.

• Walmart Ozark Trail G.1 Explorer (Drop bar V2):
  • Aluminum frame & fork
  • 45mm tires running tubes
  • 13.2 kg / 29.1 lbs (actual)
• Trek Checkpoint ALR 5 Gen 3:
  • Aluminum frame, carbon fork
  • 42mm tires running tubeless
  • 9.87 kg / 21.76 lbs (spec)
• Trek Checkpoint SL 5:
  • Carbon frame & fork. This bike does have Isospeed at the top tube, seat tube, and chain stay joint
  • 42mm tires running tubeless
  • 9.54 kg / 21.04 lbs (spec)

Yes, carbon can provide weight advance. But comparing the aluminum and carbon Checkpoint bikes that I have, they are very similar in weight. Walmart Ozark Trail is completely different beast in weight.

As for tire, yes, these bikes have different tire brands/models. But at least in tire pressure, there is virtually no difference between these bikes. With the varying weight, different rim width, different tire width, and setup, the resulting tire pressure based on online calculator and my personal optimization result in similar tire pressure. Just 1-2 psi difference. So I run front tire pressure at 37-39 psi and rear tire pressure at 39-41 psi, on these 3 gravel bikes.

Next, more details on bumps/pot holes versus vibration:

First, the biggest difference I feel is when I go large deviation, such as over bumps and potholes. In these, I feel the impact in the entire frame, which translates to me mainly in the saddle, and some effect in the hands. This can be on any surface. On road, this is really the only effect.

If it is a single bump, I can easily feel that carbon bike is stiffer and does not bounce as much. People say carbon is compliant. It is possible. Whether it is stiffness or compliance or combination, carbon has less impact and I can continue pedaling. In comparison, aluminum will bounce up and down (like a spring) for fraction of a second. I would not say aluminum is harsher in these cases, but I do feel the bump more, and it feels less efficient as there is bigger interruption to my pedaling.

If I hit multiple bumps, or possibly big pot hole where I will drop into the hole and hit the other side of hole on way out, this is where the shock can feel harsh. Again, carbon tend to have less impact from the secondary bumps, maybe because it is stiffer and recovers faster. But whenever the bumps are just right (or wrong), carbon can feel harsh also. Aluminum is effected more by multiple impacts, because it bounces more, and there is more chance to feel harsh.

Next, on gravel, there can be multiple type of conditions.

If the surface is flat, but there are small rocks, pebbles, and gravel. Here, I feel the constant vibration in my hands, and not so much in the seats. Aluminum fork is much better at dampening the vibration. It is almost like it has mini-shock absorber. Carbon fork, either with aluminum frame or carbon frame, has much more vibration. This is not surprising, because carbon is just much stiffer. This is where I disagree with many who claim carbon is compliant and absorbs all vibration. Not in this scenario.

The effect of these small vibrations are not as significant as big bumps and pot holes. So it is secondary effect.

However, in general when riding gravel trail, there can be multiple effects; from bumps, potholes, ruts, small and large rocks, etc. So there can be both large deviation bumps and also small vibrations. Overall, carbon still does feel better, because carbon just feels better over big deviation.

Is carbon worth the price difference? Hard to say. In my case, I bought my carbon Trek Checkpoint used, and it cost less than my new aluminum Trek Checkpoint. So with price out of equation, I would definitely get carbon.

Hope this helps.

I left US Mobile on 4/20 for Visible discount offer. Verizon network coverage and signal do not work for me, so I left Visible. I'm currently on month-to-month with Boost.

I plan to return to US Mobile after 30 days, and if special intro offer is still available.

In the fine print, it states:

> Annual plans (ONLY199 / ONLY299): Line must be a port-in or new number activation, activated within 90 days of purchase.

> The activated line must not have been active on US Mobile in the last 30 days.

Can someone explain to me how this works?

I understand that line cannot be active on US Mobile in last 30 days. That is why I need to wait 30 days.

But what does it mean line must be activated within 90 days of purchase? Does that mean I can buy the plan, and wait 30 days to activate? And the clock on annual plan starts when I activate?

I see many posts on question whether to sell current residence, versus keeping it and rent out. Typically, this question comes up when the selling and renting are both losses. Otherwise, the decision is easier, if either one is positive.

This is my recommendation. Decision should be made based on whether you want to get involved in passive real estate business. Impact of real estate business is not just current gain and losses. Biggest impact is future tax benefits.

And when people calculate income and loss, most are not doing this correctly because they are not considering the tax benefits.

The income is straight forward. This is the rent income.

The loss includes all expenses that goes into the business and property. That includes mortgage interest, insurance, property tax, appliances, repairs, etc. Even expenses that goes into maintaining and repairing your asset, you get to count that as loss; so you benefit on 2 fronts. And the property addition can be depreciated, using 25-year straight line depreciation. For instance, if your property cost $1.5M, and assuming 50/50 breakdown in land versus addition, you can deduct $750k over 25 years, which is $30k per year.

Your income and loss can fall into one of these 3 cases:

1. You can have high positive cash flow, and you pay reduced tax liability.
2. You can be making some money (putting money into your pocket), but you don't have to pay any tax on this earning because you are running a loss in tax purposes.
3. You can be losing money, and your tax losses are even bigger.

If you make less than $100k AGI, you get to deduct $25k per year of passive real estate losses against your ordinary income. Between $100k to $150k, you get some benefit. Unfortunately for high earners (like most homeowners in Bay Area), you cannot deduct passive losses against your ordinary income.

You can roll over the losses, to offset future passive income gains. So if and when your real estate venture becomes positive, such as if you purchase out of state properties or when you paid off your mortgage, you can be depositing money into your bank and not pay taxes (or pay significantly reduced taxes).

Bottom line is that you get tax benefits, from the cost of owning a property and depreciation. In comparison, when owning primary residence, the only tax advantage is mortgage interest payment.

One downside of converting primary residence to rental is that you do not get the $500k capital gains exclusion of selling your primary residence. To me, this is none issue, because I don't plan to sell any investment property; can use 1031 exchange to hold on to investment properties indefinitely.

This is very general. You can always check with CPA to understand what exact tax benefit means for your specific case.

Just want to share some photos from rides in the past couple weeks.

Palo Alto Bayland

Palo Alto Bayland

Palo Alto Bayland

Ravenswood

Bedwell Bayfront Park

Stevens Creek East Trail