- Cyclehoop launch Bikeshelf indoor bicycle rack2 days 7 hours agoCanAmSteve wrote: PointCanAmSteve wrote:
Point taken. I suppose there are any number of people with expensive bikes that are kept spotless (by never being used) but who want to "display" their possessions in a conspicuous consumption manner - like the people driving £75K 4X4s in Notting Hill. I would say the usefulness of the "shelf" is moot in that case (unless, of course, they have a *very* expensive helmet
OTOH, there are some ordinary folk who ride frequently but lack the space to stash a bike safely and end up leaving them in communal halls or even outside as a result. A holder like this (there are many iterations) has its usefulness there, but in such a case I again suggest the "work stand clamp" option. Call me a Utilitarian if you must.
Youre a Utilitarian!
Ive just bought one of those arms tho - thanks! Just what I need for the garage.....yes, ive got a garage - its where the bike lives - I dont live in London, clearly.
I do like these fancy designer mounts though. Yes, they are over priced. If Ikea done the same its be £25 so £100 is a bit much. The only technical side is fitting it to the wall which is separate to the mount so irrelevant to the cost/design in part.
If this was well designed, itd include wee pockets for a phone and bike lights with recharging sockets etc - that take designing though, more than just folding and cutting sheet metal - laser or not. By the way - try finding a metalworks that will cut production items without laser....few and far between these days and no cheaper.
Still - add a brand name and focus it to the SE region and these people will pay over the odds. Compared to a Garmin or Saddle, its spot on price wise.
Just call me tight! (or reduce it to £70).
- Kinesis Forks: Help needed...2 days 7 hours agoJo, it's more the handling
Jo, it's more the handling effect I am interested in than just bar height per se. Bit more flex in corners? I take your point about brakes and I did think the shinano calipers would be better with swiss stop pads (already have the pads) but just fancy a project to be honest. But I don't want to blow close on 200quid if I don't like the result.
- London taxi drivers claim film shows most cyclist jump red lights - but does it?2 days 7 hours agoCarl wrote:Are there anyCarl wrote:
Are there any habitual RLJers out there who can tell me what goes on in your heads when the lights have been red for a while and you approach the junction and ignore them?
When I first started to cycle to work, about 5 years ago I would RLJ most of the time. Why? First reason was that it cut my journey time slightly. Secondly, I was unsure if it was illegal for cyclists to RLJ. Thirdly and most importantly, for exactly the same reason so many motorists either use a mobile while driving, drive over the speed limit and drive into the ASL, because there is no fear of getting into trouble for these traffic violations and that they are not seen as a misdemeanour by the wider public. IMO more needs to be done to catch and fine these law breakers. Only when people feel that they might be caught and there will be repercussions will they think twice about it and stop doing this.
Within a year of cycling I stopped RLJing completely. Why? I found out that even for cyclists RLJing is breaking the law. Fear of getting caught and fined. Realising that it’s just plain wrong. Disliked the thought of others thinking I’m another RLJing wxxxxr. Couldn’t work out why I was in such a rush to get to work.
Nevertheless, I don’t know what this video is trying to achieve. LTDA are just stirring up trouble. We should be looking to learn to share the road space in the most safe way possible, ie For drivers and cyclists to respect each other and follow the Highway Code. It’s not difficult but neither seem to want to take the initiative.
Much better to point fingers and call names
- Transport minister rejects call to make HGV cycle safety features compulsory2 days 7 hours agoDid anybody really expect a
Did anybody really expect a Tory scum to give a shit??? Really??
- Transport minister rejects call to make HGV cycle safety features compulsory2 days 7 hours ago"A full assessment of these
"A full assessment of these systems will be needed before reaching a decision to impose additional costs on operators of these vehicles."
In other words, we'll sit on our behinds until we're forced to make a decision...
It seems to me that insurance companies are going to impose these systems on operators before the government does.
- High vis clothing doesn't make cars pass you more safely, says new study2 days 8 hours agocolinth wrote:The main thingcolinth wrote:
The main thing I object to with studies like this is that it sends out what in my opinion is the wrong message. Reading this, especially some of the headlines used by road.cc on twitter to publicise the story, the impression is hi-vis makes no difference to cycling safety. It doesn't take into account junction smidsy's etc but the glaring omission is that it didn't interview the drivers for their opinion and to ask them when they saw the cyclist, when they started their overtaking manoeuvre and crucially how much space they think is appropriate.
I would guess that most of the drivers who we would consider to have passed too close, all think they passed safely. There's a culture in driving that if you don't hit something, then it was safe. We probably all do it when we drive, squeeze through a gap, just miss a lamppost doing a u turn etc
I saw a cyclist from several hundred yards away on a shadowy dual carriage way because he was wearing hi-vis. Because I'm a cyclist I knew what was safe so I moved into the fast lane as soon as possible as I knew it could be difficult later if there was fast moving traffic outside me. I watched 2 other cars stay on the inside lane and pass the cyclist at approx 50mph in the same lane. I can't imagine that they saw the cyclist any later than me (maybe if they weren't concentrating) but the issue imho is that they thought the pass was ok. "I didn't hit him, what's the problem ?"
There are hundreds of thousands of pounds wasted on pointless studies and vanity projects by phd's. Hi vis does / doesn't help, helmets do / don't help. There was a study a few years ago to show that women like flowers and chocolates more than men (I kid you not).
The issue is people drive and cycle badly, but as we know cyclists might kill themselves, drivers will probably kill someone else. We need driver education, old school public information films to show people that actually, 20cms isn't a sufficient gap and this is why. Until we address the standard of driving in this country we will never solve the problems
We desperately need research like this based on scientifically determined outcomes, not opinions. The danger is that if we don't get some decent outcome based science done, that our lives will get dominated by the opinions and dogmas of the policy makers and not by what actually makes a difference. Common sense is good most of the time , but real science comes up with (the right) conclusions more often than not which contradict common sense and commonly held dogma.
- Video: Thousands expected at London 'die-in' demo today2 days 8 hours ago700c wrote: But then I700c wrote:
But then I remember humans are fallible, and in the scenario where a driver has been distracted, or weather conditions do not make it easy to see, wearing something more visible might make a difference between life and death.
...but only if you assume there is no element of risk-compensation involved. Human psychology being what it is, wearing something more visible will likely only make a difference to how much attention the motorist habitually chooses to pay to the road.
You remember human beings are fallible, but it seems as if you forget that those failings are also in large part a consequence of choices. The more cyclists choose to wear high-viz the more motorists will choose to be distracted. They'll take your high-vis, say 'thanks very much' and spend more time not looking at the road, and your risk will remain much the same.
Then there will be something else you'll have to do to try and save yourself, another additional inconvenience and burden for cycling (an electro-luminsecent suit, perhaps), in order to give still more opportunity for to drivers to text or eat their breakfast rather than looking where they are going.700c wrote:
Its the principle of not wanting to do something for yourself to help you survive on the road, which I don't understand, just because it is the responsibility of drivers to drive safely around cyclists. Its a perverse attitude and seems akin to 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'..take the moral high ground all you want. That won't help you when you connect with several tons of metal, however.
There's a point at which everyone chooses to say 'no, its now your job to pay attention'. This point may vary from one cyclist to another of course (I say yes to lights and reflective, no to high-viz, a reluctant yes to helmets but I'm not wearing body armour!), that's inevitable, and ideally cyclists would try not to bicker amongst themselves over it.
Your point here falls down rather because you also stop at a certain point - where is your kevlar body armour? Why are you cycling at all, in fact, as the safest thing to do would be to get off the road entirely.
Everyone stops at a certain point, including you, so the argument is over where that point is, not an absolute one where you should put no limit on what you do to 'keep safe', which is the argument you seem to be making here.
Also if Kevin McKenna was speaking 'in jest' it was a jest in the context of a generic enraged rant against cyclists - something newspaper columnist are quite fond of when stuck for anything else to write about. The point is that, far from promoting 'harmony', the high-viz just gets thrown into the mix as another way of attacking cyclists.
- Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban2 days 8 hours agoThe mobile phone analogy is
The mobile phone analogy is flawed. That's about, primarily, control rather than awareness, hence why bluetooth is permitted but holding the phone is not.
Cycling is about awareness. But let's not forget here what cycling with headphones is stopping you doing. If we ignore the idiot who crossed the train track without looking, it's primarily about not hearing what's behind you. So, for example, people blithely turn right without checking over their shoulder. In such circumstances the failure is not simply because of the headphones but a staggering amount of self awareness.
If we're talking about being hit by a lorry that simply doesn't see you while you occupy a space 1 foot out from the kerb then the headphones simply are not a factor.
I'd never use them because I'd never deny myself that additional sense, even if that sense is "brace for impact." But the argument is over simplified.
- Sir Bradley Wiggins in trouble over crude joke at charity dinner2 days 8 hours agoOh, and can you imagine Sir
Oh, and can you imagine Sir Chris Hoy getting into the same kind of 'trouble' as BW (or chewing gum with his mouth open like his revolting countryman)? Proper class.
- Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban2 days 8 hours agoThere are two sides to this
There are two sides to this debate, as both the cyclist and the motorist have responsibility for ensuring that all parties are kept safe. I am not taking up the defense of the motorist, because in a lot of cases they are equally to blame for a lack of appreciation of cyclists rights on the road, but they do often get hammered because a cyclist has not taken due care and attention.
However, cyclists need to understand that by wearing headphones, they are threatening their spacial awareness of vehicles and road conditions around them, and as such could quite easily put themselves in the firing line from motorist as well.
I am astounded that the DfT have put their proverbial heads in the sand, when motorists were considered a road threat by using mobile phones, new legislation was introduced (despite the same advice covering this off in the Highway Code), and yet they have vetoed any potential earphone legislation.
I hope that there is a change of heart in the high up echelons at Whitehall, and I also hope that both cyclists and motorists appreciate each other's responsibilities.
- Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban2 days 8 hours agoSomeone in the Civil Service
Someone in the Civil Service with common sense, surely some mistake
- Digital epo2 days 8 hours agoNice use of dose rather than
Nice use of dose rather than does. #freudian
- Get your winter training nutrition right2 days 8 hours agoAfraid my switch from summer
Afraid my switch from summer to winter diet is from a lighter to a heavier red.
- Transport minister rejects call to make HGV cycle safety features compulsory2 days 8 hours agoIn the netherlands (and
In the netherlands (and probably most of the EU) most big trucks, busses etc are fitted with deadspot mirror's this should already help a lot.
As extra camera systems become more common it's a good idea to have these systems fitted in the next 4 years, it's also good for insurance company's who more and more demand video proof for car crash claims.
- Muc-Off C3 Ceramic Lube Wet2 days 8 hours agoI used this through the
I used this through the summer on my number one bike, and have continued its use on my winter bike. As Stuart says, it really makes for super-quiet running. Noticeable to the point where a couple of clubmates have asked what I'm using.
The only downside is the smell of it, which I find rather nauseating.
- Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban2 days 9 hours agoOMG we are almost making it a
OMG we are almost making it a good thing to have people using earphones now - backfire!
There is no way that we could expect someone to listen to the 'correct' type of sound entertainment or use the correct volume either, thatd be like saying its okay to use a phone if you limit the call to urgent stuff only....yea right.
Comparing using earphones to people with hearing difficulties is a low blow too - typical of the government that run the country into the ground.
If you live with hearing difficulties, id say you are a lot more aware of youre surroundings than a cyclist without difficulties or earphones. Its something you tune yourself to do due to living with a constant level of impaired-ability.
You dont use earphones constantly nor cycle constantly either so its no comparison. Cheap shot.
Whilst this shouldnt deflect from the issues surrounding road planning and including all types of transport - whilst we are on the subject, earphones should be banned - its idiocy.
I wouldnt ride my motorbike in traffic listening to music/phonecalls/podcasts etc for the same reason - even my earplugs are the type that allow a level accoustics non-restrictive of traffic noise.
- High vis clothing doesn't make cars pass you more safely, says new study2 days 9 hours agoInteresting guardian
Interesting guardian article:
And before you thought flashing lights at night help , cop a load of this :
I think the failure of hi viz is linked th the above (siccadic masking)
- High vis clothing doesn't make cars pass you more safely, says new study2 days 9 hours agoThis is a very well , but
This is a very well , but despite them feeling uncomfortable , close overtakes are not what causes most accidents.
Most accidents are caused by look but didn't see at junctions. Could we have some proper research on the effect of attire on this please? Not much out there.....although my suspicion is that hiviz actually makes it worse not better!
- Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban2 days 9 hours agoWhy do people presume that
Why do people presume that any cyclist that is wearing headphones has the volume maxed out to 2unlimted's greatest hits. If I am cycling by my self either commuting or for fun, and have remembered to charge the various necessary bits then I listen to a range of podcast, they don't especially interfere with me being able to hear other noises, certainly no worse than wearing a helmet and the wind buffeting.
So could people just give the banning of stuff a rest, empowering people to make responsible decision based on their own circumstances is a much better way.
- Video: Thousands expected at London 'die-in' demo today2 days 9 hours agoLook at this woman, she's
Look at this woman, she's been made invincible by the safer roads partnerships in Warwickshire.
- Christmas gifts for cyclists – cycling gadgets2 days 9 hours agoYeah listening to the archers
Yeah listening to the archers so distracts me when I am cycling. Must of hit 30 cars and trucks this week alone.
You don't want to wear headphones fine, but don't ram your prejudices down everyone else's throats (ears?).
- Video: Thousands expected at London 'die-in' demo today2 days 10 hours ago700c wrote:
You've lost me700c wrote:
You've lost me there. What risk is there to wearing high visibility clothing?
There is actually a very strong risk that by wearing hi-vis, which is remember not a legal requirement. Making it more dangerous for other cyclists, not yourself but for others.
It comes down to what people are, or are not, looking for. Yes you should be looking for everything but you can't the human brain can not process everything the eyes see and anyone who says different is lying or stupid.
Yes you should be looking for Deer, foxes, badgers etc but going by the numbers i see dead on the way to work, alot of people aren't looking. If drivers start to expect cyclists to be light up like christmas trees and wearing hi-vis then that is what they will look for. A cyclist lit up LEGALLY wouldn't be visible!!!! The lights would be too dim.
- Muc-Off C3 Ceramic Lube Wet2 days 10 hours agoThese ceramic lubes are
These ceramic lubes are fantastic and mucoff stuff is usually good, so if you've not tried ceramic yet, this sounds worth a go.
- Christmas gifts for cyclists – cycling gadgets2 days 10 hours agoacjim wrote:That bell isacjim wrote:
That bell is lovely, I just need a fancy city bike to go with it!
Looks nice, but it's a ping ping singlestrike hammer. Rotary hammers sound nicer, I think.
- London taxi drivers claim film shows most cyclist jump red lights - but does it?2 days 10 hours agoperhaps a road system with no
perhaps a road system with no road markings or furniture with a mandatory limit of 10mph may help. No. Well then, we are where we are. We have a road system thats not designed for cycles and definitely not designed for mixed mode and mixed speed traffic. So, be careful out there and obey the law when safe to do so.