• Radio Two's Jeremy Vine busted for speeding in Hyde Park - on his bike1 hour 55 min agoI ride through there everyday

    I ride through there everyday (and used to have the Strava KOM...) and saw the cops this morning though most were actually PCOs.

    I can confirm there are no signs pointing out the speed limit along this section. Moreover Vine is quite right, if they do expect people to ride at 5 mph I (and many others) will just go and ride along South Carriage. Fortunately that's a pretty safe alternative.

    Two things about this though:

    1) Think the Parks are now owned by the Mayor (rather than central Government as used to the case) so Boris Johnson should tell them to go hang. He's also the PCC for the Met should give them a dressing down for wasting resources.

    2) There's a ruddy great big horse track next parallel to the shared use path. It wouldn't be hard to give up some of that for cycling and it'd have no impact on pedestrians.

  • The Great Helmet Debate2 hours 3 min agoBikeboy76, not sure i agree,

    Bikeboy76, not sure i agree, the argument comes down to those who basically don't give a f*** if you wear a helmet or not and the other group who think your an insane moron.

    One group says if you want feel free, just don't think it is a panacea. The other group seems to assume helmets offer more protection than they do. After all we are not talking Motorcycle helmets and if the issue was safety wouldn't we ban baths, showers and stairs????

  • Fourth positive test at Astana as U23 rider Victor Okishev fails doping control2 hours 15 min agoI bet these guys use Tyler

    I bet these guys use Tyler Hamilton's 'The Secret Race' as a handbook. The whole team is awash with dope except nibbles of course - there's a long piece on todays Guardian sports page to that effect. So it must be true. Tossers to a man. At Wits End

  • Radio Two's Jeremy Vine busted for speeding in Hyde Park - on his bike2 hours 16 min agofarrell wrote: I walk at more

    farrell wrote:

    I walk at more than 5mph.

    I'll bet you don't

  • Just In: Blk-Tec C1 wheels2 hours 24 min agoLook at the unimpressive rise

    Look at the unimpressive rise and complete fall of Madfiber wheels. They were a US company, and US customers had trouble getting wheel service from them. My buddy sold one set, and it had to be returned and replaced/repaired twice. I heard of other people sending in wheels and waiting for a long time for repairs.

    Who is going to be replacing these spokes when they break? It's hard enough getting some high-end replacement Campy parts like rims or spokes in the US sometimes.

  • Have we reached peak sportive? Etape Pennines axed due to lack of participant interest2 hours 25 min agoDoes ok in October - moved

    Does ok in October - moved because of 'participant feedback' - participants dont want to do it on new date.

    And what lesson have we learnt here kids?
    Nerd

  • The Great Helmet Debate2 hours 26 min agoI wear a helmet to stop twigs

    I wear a helmet to stop twigs and stuff whacking me on the head, and in the summer keeps the sun off my head.

    If I fall off it may protect me marginally and save a nasty bit of gravel rash on my head, but I seriously doubt it will protect me from 2+ ton of metal travelling at 60mph (saying that, neither would a large metal box with windows and a steering wheel).

    Time and again experts have proven how our perception of danger is seriously out of whack with the reality (like the fact more people are killed by cows than sharks, so why aren't there any Spielberg films about giant rampant cows tearing up the countryside?). At the end of the day, I say if a helmet makes you feel safer, then stick it on, if you would rather not then fine. However you most definitely MUST NOT under any circumstances be allowed to wear baseball caps!

  • Danny MacAskill rides loop-the-loop in latest video stunt - official video2 hours 32 min agoJust updated the story with

    Just updated the story with the official video, providing a bit of behind-the-scenes stuff

  • 9 in 10 Londoners would feel safer cycling on fully segregated lanes2 hours 37 min agoSegregation isn't necessary

    Segregation isn't necessary if you fit collision avoidance systems to all new cars and retro-fit to all commercial vehicles used on our roads.

  • Radio Two's Jeremy Vine busted for speeding in Hyde Park - on his bike2 hours 38 min agoQuote:Comments on road.cc are

    Quote:
    Comments on road.cc are always so predictable. No one here seems to care about the interests or safety of those not on a bike. Rules are for those other bastards etc.

    Are you aware how ridiculously slow 5mph is?

    At that speed the cyclists will need protection from the pedestrians whizzing past....

    Personally I think the parks authority need to justify why the 5mph limit is necessary, and why it is not signposted.

  • Surgeon reveals full extent of Bono's bike crash injuries - and they're much worse than first revealed2 hours 39 min agoI heard that after the crash

    I heard that after the crash wild horses couldn't drag him away. Apparently he'd waited all day for night to come and it came like a hunter while he was trying to punch a hole through the night, throw his arms around the world and he couldn't hold on, now all he's got is hurt. Nerve damage to his arm left his fingers too numb to feel.

  • The Great Helmet Debate2 hours 48 min agoI despair at the extremists

    I despair at the extremists on both sides. One side says the have never wore one and never will and due to their expert bike handling skills will never need one. That they are therefore uncool and dangerous, causing 'rotational' injuries.
    The other side says helmets (and Hi viz) are required because we are putting people at risk exposing them to drivers.

    There are plenty of people in between with a spectrum of views. I just find it sad that the moderate view of wear a helmet if you want to and it makes you feel safer, but you don't have to if you don't want to; is always drowned out. I personally wear a helmet when I am wearing my bike kit, because I AM going faster and think it will protect me if require and it looks the part too. If I am wearing street clothes I generally don't wear a helmet because I am going slower (in jeans) and just going to the shops. I don't like being told by either side that I am wrong whatever I do. And I don't like being told what to wear even if it is safety equipment. My personal clothing choices are up to me. I would feel like a right berk with a flashing light attached to my head. I have just bought some ridiculous expensive bike lights from kickstarter so I can choice to wear all black in the winter if I want.

    Yes there is no empirical evidence helmets work. The reason being we do not throw fit healthy human beings at static concrete blocks both wearing helmets and not, and see which ones die or are brain damaged. There will NEVER be any empirical evidence. So the anti brigade dismiss the anecdotal evidence of people who have crashed. How dare they characterize other peoples experiences. If some one tells me a helmet saved their life I take this at face value. This is the only evidence available. It is impossible to believe that a helmet never saved anyone's life. Just look at other sports, I have done some extreme things in my younger years and some things you just wouldn't try without a helmet [Helmets ARE Cool.]

    I find the antis the most delusional, whilst the ultra pros are damaging participation and freedom of choice and stoking blame culture.

    Please stop telling other people what to do. {Did I say helmets are cool?}

  • The Great Helmet Debate2 hours 48 min agoLots of the arguments I have

    Lots of the arguments I have seen in favour of helmet compulsion are based on the idea that helmets necessarily make things safer. Ignoring the fact that there is no population study that confirms this, and quite a few that suggest the opposite (see the NZMA's investigation of the efficacy of helmet legislation in New Zealand), this misses the point, IMO - the decision on what personal safety equipment is required should be reserved for the individual.

    I will accept that there are other areas where we allow the law to impinge upon this personal responsibility (safety belts in cars, helmets for motorcyclists) but this is not a good reason, in my opinion, to allow this continued creep to a legislative framework that mandates personal safety. If you want to extend the logic that leads to mandatory head protection for activities that have a similar or greater risk of head-injury in comparison to cycling, we will have car helmets, walking helmets and bathroom helmets.

    The key thing, above all others, that makes cyclists safer on the road is this: more cyclists. More cyclists: more driver awareness, greater push for better facilities. More helmet compulsion: fewer cyclists.

    Lastly, to anyone who would try to characterise me as anti-helmet: I have no desire to take your helmet from you, nor do you need to justify your wearing of it to me. It is your choice. I would simply seek to maintain that choice for every cyclist. Oh, and I wear a helmet - because, even though I think it extremely unlikely it will save my life, I think the chances of it injuring me are also pretty slim (not non-existent), the inconvenience is mitigated by its utility as a camera-mount and it (generally) stops people who would impose their choices on me from lecturing me.

  • Just In: Blk-Tec C1 wheels2 hours 50 min agoso how many people have said

    so how many people have said "mmm yess take my $3000, i really want to spend that much on a pair of wheels that haven't been in a wind tunnel and are from a brand new taiwanese manufacturer" Silly Thinking
    I dont think so but they do look very nice

  • Driver who thought he hit pothole when he ran over cyclist acquitted2 hours 57 min agotell me this is a joke

    tell me this is a joke ????

    vine gets done for speeding on a bike then this fucktard gets off !!!!

    tell you all what ... how about we all go out and run over some judges or ministers wife or kids ... how fast will the law change then ?

  • The Great Helmet Debate3 hours 39 sec agoAccording to the Health and

    According to the Health and Safety Executive: PPE should only be used as a last resort when alternative measures cannot be deployed in order to mitigate risk.

    Bike helmets were originally developed for high risk activities on a bike.

    When racing collisions with other riders are likely so falls at high speed are likely.
    Mountain Biking, high speeds, loose surfaces and rough terrain, therefore a high chance of a crash.
    BMX/Trials etc learning and performing tricks on the bike is likely to result in fall.

    Pootling to the shops at 5-15mph in dry conditions or on off road routes does not imply a high enough risk of head injury to warrant the use of PPE by an experienced cyclist.

    Commuting sits in the middle, I haven't had a head impact in a fall since my first winter of commuting so now I wear a lid more out of habit than necessity.

    So, before making helmets mandatory to cyclists the following measures could be considered or deployed to minimise their risk of injury:

    Give vulnerable, non-pedestrian road users priority over motorised traffic in line with the "Cyclists Must Give Way to Pedestrians and Horses" rule for Bridleways and Shared Use paths.
    Apply strict liability in collision resolution.
    Adopt a minimum passing distance law for motorised traffic.
    Make more sections of road car free, enforce this with pop-up bollards.
    Improve driver awareness and rider training. e.g. hit a cyclist, pass Bikeability Level 3 before you get your license back, same for cyclists deemed to be at fault, do the course or pay a fine.
    A review of the road layout at any site where near misses or accidents are reported.
    A change of road 'design rules' to improve cyclist safety without reducing cyclist numbers (if anything design for more than expected) cycling speed whenever a roadway is improved or built.
    A review of collision avoidance technology with a view to making some devices mandatory to new vehicles.
    Provide larger, longer ASLs and delay motor traffic with respect to cycle traffic at complex and high traffic junctions.
    Provide more roads for cyclists (as opposed to shared use paths).

    Once all this is in place and it can be shown that the occurrence of cycling head injury in utility cycling is lower in a meaningful statistically significant way for those who wear helmets then consider making them mandatory.

  • The Great Helmet Debate3 hours 3 min agoI see almost everyone who has

    I see almost everyone who has responded has ignored the author's request for opinions on the helmet debate, which beautifully illustrates the point I assume he is trying to make!

    I will express no opinion on helmets, but the debate itself is a complete waste of time. I've observed this "discussion" on the internet for over 15 years now. People on both sides still repeat exactly the same arguments, I have never seen anyone change their mind, and it always turns into a bad natured confrontation.

    Just make your own mind up and get on with your life, but don't waste time reheating the same old discussion.

  • Driver who thought he hit pothole when he ran over cyclist acquitted3 hours 4 min agoO brave new world, where

    O brave new world, where whether you were distracted by a device is more of a test of driver competency than whether you run over a human being.

    Trying to remember the last time, while driving, I wasn't able to see a pothole before putting my wheel in it.

  • The Great Helmet Debate3 hours 6 min agoribena wrote: Risk is

    ribena wrote:

    Risk is calculated as the probability of an event multiplied by the expected damage from the event. Helmets reduce the damage (those pesky anecdotes you want to ignore) so they reduce the risk. Since this applies to all events, you can argue that helmets are the biggest single risk reducer.

    Yes, but the amount by which it reduces the expected damage is negligible compared to the overall damage of a serious crash with a car. And it does nothing to reduce the probability of an event.

    Unlike, say, providing proper separated cycling infrastructure, which doesn't reduce the expected damage at all, but massively reduces the probability of an event. The overall effect on the risk for this is much greater than for a helmet.

    (Another minor point, it doesn't apply to all events, as it's not going to help you if snap your leg.)

  • Matthew Parris "decapitate Cyclists"3 hours 6 min agoHensteeth wrote:Who's Rod

    Hensteeth wrote:
    Who's Rod Liddle?

    He's an Aldi version of Richard Littlejohn.

  • Have we reached peak sportive? Etape Pennines axed due to lack of participant interest3 hours 6 min agoAs a local, the main reason

    As a local, the main reason is that its ridiculously expensive and its too hard a course for your standard "Sportiver" thanks to the Glorious weather of the Pennines.

    On another note, they also go the wrong way over Chapel Fell/Harthope Moss, which for me spoils it.

  • The Great Helmet Debate3 hours 8 min agoWhat does dynamic balance

    What does dynamic balance mean? It's a tautology at best if used in a bio mechanical sense. Balance is an active process for cycling, running, walking and standing. A bit less for sitting in a moving car, but only a bit.

    Not sure how this applies to risk related behaviours, or helmets.

  • Have we reached peak sportive? Etape Pennines axed due to lack of participant interest3 hours 9 min agoI blame Wiggle; Hell of

    I blame Wiggle; Hell of Hexham is a bit longer at 100 miles for the Epic, a lot cheaper, more convenient with on the day sign up and registration so you don't need to book an overnight stay and you don't need closed roads in the Pennines, as there's hardly any traffic anyway.

  • Just In: Blk-Tec C1 wheels3 hours 9 min ago$2999

    $2999 Rolling On The Floor

  • The Great Helmet Debate3 hours 12 min agoA helmet isn't going to do

    A helmet isn't going to do anything in a crash that will cause serious injuries, e.g. when you're hit by a car.

    It probably will help in less serious crashes e.g. when you fall off your bike after skidding on a manhole cover in the wet.

    I'm not that worried about the second one. I am worried about the first. So the only reason I wear a helmet (which I usually do) is to carry my helmetcam, and to ensure that if I do get knocked off that there is no sharing of liability.

    It may save you from a freak accident where a simple fall manages to kill you at vast odds. It's not going to help in a serious crash. Anyone who says differently is selling something (probably helmets).