Two million new cycle commuters about to take to the roads, says CycleScheme

People fed up with overcrowding and squalor of public transport apparently

by John Stevenson   March 25, 2014  

Commuters (CC licensed image by kube414:Flickr)

Driven out of public transport by overcrowding and squalor, and out of cars by congestion, two million new cycle commuters are set to take to the roads this spring, and three times that number of new cyclists will be out on their bikes for the first time.

That’s the optimistic claim arising from new research by Cycle to Work provider Cyclescheme.co.uk.

Commuters are apparently fed up of the frustrations of public transport. Half of those surveyed admit to being frequently late for meetings due to public transport, and one in twenty say they have been pickpocketed on their way to work.

And then there’s the ick factor of cramming on to buses and trains. A quarter have had a passengers’ armpit in their face, whilst a third have smelt a stranger’s morning breath.

More seriously, surveys show as many as 30 percent of women have experienced sexual harassment on public transport, an experienced that’s especially distressing when its impossible to get away.

Cyclescheme says one in ten Brits plan to change their journey to work in some way this spring. Two million people plan to ‘spring clean their commute’ by cycling to work for the first time.

Spring is the best time to try a new activity, according to psychologist Dr Anjula Mutanda. Research shows three in four people plan to make a ‘spring resolution’ this year, rather than New Year’s.

Dr Mutanda said: “Spring signals nature’s new start and we aren’t immune from it. The physiological affect on mood as well as positive associations with spring as a time of renewal make us want to engage in something new.

“Spring is perfect for new goals like cycling to work, because there is greater synchronicity between our physical environment and our mindset.”

As administered by Cyclescheme and its partner organisations in the Cycle to Work Alliance, the Cycle to Work scheme provides a tax break of 25 to 42 percent for the purchase of a new bike and accessories.

53 user comments

Latest 30 commentsNewest firstBest ratedAll

Bring out the gringos!

seven's picture

posted by seven [109 posts]
25th March 2014 - 17:30

like this
Like (22)

Leodis wrote:
I have noticed more bikes in the racks for this time of the year, it goes back to normal rates by Thursday or if its heavy rain early on.

Maybe this is what's happening.

image.jpg
giff77's picture

posted by giff77 [1048 posts]
25th March 2014 - 17:34

like this
Like (21)

Neil753 wrote:
We should be careful not to read too much into the figures from the "cycle to work" scheme…
…We should all be asking ourselves whether giving affluent riders a 42% tax break on "yet another bike", and effectively asking other people to pay for that freebie through general taxation…

Tax adjustments to achieve shared objectives can be justified (as in the case of the Bike To Work Scheme) by showing that the Exchequer (and hence the nation) is likely to be better off by doing it than not doing it. Advantages to the individual beneficiaries are the mechanism, but only a dull witted or corrupt Chancellor would spend political energy trying to ingratiate the few. £400 to put one more bike in the road sends another £600 of spending into bike shops and their suppliers. It also adds to a range of savings in the public areas that benefit from more cycling and less driving. Pollution, congestion, long-term health, well-being and the rest.

To quibble with the effectiveness of that policy tool or to doubt its financial value is to sit in a very glum place. The same standard applied to fiscal measures in general would bring the Treasury (and the economy) to a full stop. It is only money of course and Government can print of much of that as they want. In periods of sluggish economic activity, shifting the money a bit more quickly is a good thing.

On another tack, I was embarrassed at the side swipes at new cyclists in some other posts. Very silly.

posted by Sam Saunders [20 posts]
25th March 2014 - 17:36

like this
Like (30)

bikebot wrote:
joemmo wrote:

Daily Fails says:

PREPARE FOR THE LYCROPALYPSE! TERROR IN THE STREETS AS MILLIONS OF LETHAL CANCER CAUSING CYCLISTS UNLEASHED ON BRITAINS TRADITIONAL ROADS UNTAXED AND READY TO STEAL YOUR HARD-EARNED TARMAC HERITAGE AND PROBABLY TAKE IT BACK TO BULGARIA FOR THEIR 9 CHILDREN TO EAT

I can't remember if it was in the Fail, but during the recent coverage of the Paris smog cloud I saw a real comment from someone demanding that all cyclists be banned as he thought the pollution was caused by sweating. Rolling On The Floor

I think my favourite news site comment though was from someone who got so angry they became a bit muddled and started calling cyclists "latex louts/loonies".

The Telegraph motor cycling correspondent, Erin Baker, wrote a few weeks ago words to the effect that cyclists stopping in the advance boxes caused pollution because they slowed motor traffic thus making it use more fuel.

Crosshouses's picture

posted by Crosshouses [183 posts]
25th March 2014 - 18:00

like this
Like (30)

Leodis wrote:
I have noticed more bikes in the racks for this time of the year, it goes back to normal rates by Thursday or if its heavy rain early on.

I'd noticed that, too. We have eight showers in the changing room, and if you're not there by 07:15, you've got a wait on your hands.

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [211 posts]
25th March 2014 - 19:01

like this
Like (18)

I really hope not Sad it's bad enough as it is with the born again cyclist commuting to work at 8mph... With their heads down and aldi lights! They are a danger to themselves and most of all to me! No more please.
Stick to Sunday mornings and get some road awareness first and fitness.

“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

― George Carlin

Cyclist's picture

posted by Cyclist [144 posts]
25th March 2014 - 19:59

like this
Like (13)

jacknorell wrote:
I expect a bunch of cyclists riding into other cyclists this spring...

Takes a while to get used to commuting.

Sad to say, I had someone on a brand new bike, huffing and puffing, ride right into me just this morning. Thankfully not going to fast so I got my foot down, instead of my face. He did apologise and I accepted. Just gonna have to be more vigilant until the newbies find their wheels.

Even 1 more bike and 1 less car is an improvement.

MikeOnABike's picture

posted by MikeOnABike [26 posts]
25th March 2014 - 20:17

like this
Like (20)

Crosshouses wrote:

The Telegraph motor cycling correspondent, Erin Baker, wrote a few weeks ago words to the effect that cyclists stopping in the advance boxes caused pollution because they slowed motor traffic thus making it use more fuel.

When I get slowed down by long queues of cars I get hungry.
If I get really hungry I may have to buy a burger.
Burgers are made from cows.
Cows fart methane
Methane is a strong greenhouse gas.
This argument is incredibly dumb, but still not as stupid as Erin's.

posted by bikebot [498 posts]
25th March 2014 - 20:56

like this
Like (32)

Sam Saunders wrote:
Neil753 wrote:
We should be careful not to read too much into the figures from the "cycle to work" scheme…
…We should all be asking ourselves whether giving affluent riders a 42% tax break on "yet another bike", and effectively asking other people to pay for that freebie through general taxation…

Tax adjustments to achieve shared objectives can be justified (as in the case of the Bike To Work Scheme) by showing that the Exchequer (and hence the nation) is likely to be better off by doing it than not doing it. Advantages to the individual beneficiaries are the mechanism, but only a dull witted or corrupt Chancellor would spend political energy trying to ingratiate the few. £400 to put one more bike in the road sends another £600 of spending into bike shops and their suppliers. It also adds to a range of savings in the public areas that benefit from more cycling and less driving. Pollution, congestion, long-term health, well-being and the rest.

To quibble with the effectiveness of that policy tool or to doubt its financial value is to sit in a very glum place. The same standard applied to fiscal measures in general would bring the Treasury (and the economy) to a full stop. It is only money of course and Government can print of much of that as they want. In periods of sluggish economic activity, shifting the money a bit more quickly is a good thing.

Sam, do you have a vested interest in the "cycle to work" scheme by any chance? You talk a good talk, but the scheme is expensive, poorly targeted, easily exploited, and excludes pensioners, students and the self employed, all of whom are obliged to collectively pay for a subsidy of up to £420 (sometimes more, if the firm has a credit licence), for the purchase of bikes by many higher earners, who may not use them to cycle to work, and who may own one or more bikes already.

The thing is, it isn't "£400 to put one more bike on the road", is it? If half the scheme applicants already have a bike, and of that subset only half will ride to work, then that £400 becomes £1,600. And, if you take the ten percent figures that some believe to be more realistic, that £400 becomes £40,000.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
25th March 2014 - 21:13

like this
Like (24)

C'mon folks, we were all first timers once. One less car on the commute is a good thing and I genuinely take delight from increasing numbers of cyclists on the commute. As far as short distance urban planning is concerned, the bicycle is the future and the sooner it becomes pub chat to talk about what you rode into work rather than what you drove, the better.
A bit of genuine advice might not be a bad thing ? When it is framed in terms of an individual's safety, I have yet to have a tricky reaction.
Anyway, soon we will be at a point where it becomes harder to ignore and thereafter it only gets better.

posted by arfa [484 posts]
25th March 2014 - 22:14

like this
Like (36)

Timsen wrote:
but..... " there may be trouble ahead " whilst our new cycling friends and other road users get used to one another !

md6 wrote:
bad as lots of them are not exprienced in traffic and around other cyclists which can make them a little dangerous

jacknorell wrote:
I expect a bunch of cyclists riding into other cyclists this spring...

workhard wrote:
...the number of cyclist-on-cyclist SMIDSY's will go up whilst the noobs learn to expect other cyclists.

Sigh.

Who needs cyclist haters, Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail when we've got our very own bike snobs - who presumably already ride bikes.

Everyone might wish to cast their mind back to the launch in 2010 of London's Barclays bike hire scheme. The usual suspects - and no doubt many on here - were predicting carnage on the streets as cycling newcomers and those from abroad cycled under the wheels of buses, taxis and other motor vehicles.

News flash - it never happened.

posted by congokid [116 posts]
26th March 2014 - 3:05

like this
Like (29)

I've noticed an increase in new commuters on my morning ride. All good.

I figure best way to turn new commuters into old commuters is to help 'em out - taking the primary off their rear wheel at pinch points, narrow lanes and junction approaches. Claiming the ASL box, and clearing packed junctions of riders on the near side. Adds to the journey time, but see less close passes and left hooks.

posted by Argos74 [289 posts]
26th March 2014 - 7:38

like this
Like (21)

@Sam Saunders good point well made.

@Neil753 are you paid by the Road Haulage Association for your work on here?

@NewCommuters, using a bike is a great choice for most journeys welcome.

posted by IanW1968 [154 posts]
26th March 2014 - 8:09

like this
Like (19)

congokid wrote:
Timsen wrote:

Who needs cyclist haters, Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail when we've got our very own bike snobs - who presumably already ride bikes.

Everyone might wish to cast their mind back to the launch in 2010 of London's Barclays bike hire scheme. The usual suspects - and no doubt many on here - were predicting carnage on the streets as cycling newcomers and those from abroad cycled under the wheels of buses, taxis and other motor vehicles.

News flash - it never happened.

Except in some cases there were problems. I was taken out twice by people on those bikes, one rode into me through a gap between me and a car both stopped at lights (with no advanced box) - they weren't stopping and in order not to hit the car took me out. In a way that was lucky as a lorry came through the junction at about the time they would have been directly in front of (or should i say under) it had they not come off when hitting me. And another time they just pulled the bike out of the rack stepped back without looking and blocked half the road with it - i was unable to swerve as a car was passing me and so i hit the bike they had just shoved in front of me. Admittedly that's only 2 instances, but both i would put down to inexperience, lack of consideration and stupidity (or a combination of each). My experience with tube strike days indicates there are a lot of extra cycle commuters - which is good. However, some of them are dangerous for the same reasons. Lack of experience around traffic and other cyclists and doing wildly unpredicatable things. This is a minority.and in general it is a good thing that there are more people chosing to commute by bike. I think generally people on here have been positive about it, but wary of the minority who may/will be dangerous.

posted by md6 [156 posts]
26th March 2014 - 10:03

like this
Like (8)

Cyclist wrote:
it's bad enough as it is with the born again cyclist commuting to work at 8mph... With their heads down and aldi lights! They are a danger to themselves and most of all to me! No more please.
Stick to Sunday mornings and get some road awareness first and fitness.

Who died and made you people the kings of Cyclandia?

Seriously - all the comments about "nodders" and "noobs" and "born again cyclist commuting to work at 8 mph"...?

So s...ing what? Every one of them is a cyclist, one of the people we're vaguely supposed to support. That 8mph commuter who goes into work every day on their bike? They do just as many miles as the lycra-clad weekender, training for his next sportive.

Newsflash - you become fit by riding. It seems a little self-defeating to start going around saying, "No - you will not ride a bike in public, on our roads until you can do the vehicular cyclist 25mph sprint and with a fixed upper body while doing it".

How about a little encouragement for the starters?

posted by brooksby [96 posts]
26th March 2014 - 10:16

like this
Like (28)

Equally surprised by some of the negative comments on here about both new cyclists and the cycle to work scheme itself.

We all had to start somewhere with our cycling, I even consider myself to still be something of a noob, having only picked it up again less than a year ago. Some of the comments do appear to be a little on the "elite" side, which can be something of a negative image associated with the sport...

As for the scheme itself, I don't think I've ever heard a single person complain about it being a waste of taxpayers' money, and I know some seriously left-wing people! As Sam Saunders points out, the few hundred quid subsidy can only be a good thing as against the net benefit to both the indvidual concerned and the population more generally arising from more people cycling.

And so what if people have the means to use it and do so to buy second/third/n+1 bikes, or bikes for family members? Whether the bike is used daily for commuting or by the wife once every few weekends in the summer months only, it's still getting/keeping people on bikes, and the more people that either cycle themselves, or know someone who cycles, the greater the likelihood that they'll be a more considerate driver around other cyclists.

I know this might come across as a "my helmet saved my life" type story, but thanks to the scheme I was able to buy myself a decent road bike which now has me out at least once over the weekend for a good two hours or more, in addition to my daily commute. My resulting enthusiasm for the sport has also got both my brother and my Dad involved too, who between them must have put around £2k into the LBS of recent months in buying bikes and gear. My Dad also now commutes to work on the bike too, so that's two people out of their cars for the price of one!

posted by parksey [216 posts]
26th March 2014 - 10:40

like this
Like (19)

congokid wrote:
Timsen wrote:
but..... " there may be trouble ahead " whilst our new cycling friends and other road users get used to one another !

md6 wrote:
bad as lots of them are not exprienced in traffic and around other cyclists which can make them a little dangerous

jacknorell wrote:
I expect a bunch of cyclists riding into other cyclists this spring...

workhard wrote:
...the number of cyclist-on-cyclist SMIDSY's will go up whilst the noobs learn to expect other cyclists.

Sigh.

Who needs cyclist haters, Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail when we've got our very own bike snobs - who presumably already ride bikes.

Everyone might wish to cast their mind back to the launch in 2010 of London's Barclays bike hire scheme. The usual suspects - and no doubt many on here - were predicting carnage on the streets as cycling newcomers and those from abroad cycled under the wheels of buses, taxis and other motor vehicles.

News flash - it never happened.

More cyclists can only be a good thing. I agree with the less snobbery, more be helpful approach. We need to encourage new cyclists by showing them other cyclists are helpful and courteous and commuting on a bike is the way forward. We have all been noobs, weaving our way along the road, unaware of how to position ourselves, too busy looking at what we're doing rather than what everybody else is doing even if that was when we were kids.

I do find myself cringing in horror at some of the close calls starting at this time of year though, I've even been run into a couple of times myself by other cyclists. This isn't just noobs but also summer cyclists being rusty in city traffic, I wish they'd just take there time for the first few weeks if they're on a bike for the first time, or the first time in 5 months. Other road traffic (vans, taxis and lorries) does seem to take a couple of weeks to adjust to the increase in cyclists too. It's my least favourite time of year to cycle.

As with everything it seems there's a minority of people with bad manners and an elevated sense of self importance spoiling the fun for most by shoaling, red light jumping, etc. I just try to be even more diligent and courteous to all other road users (including pedestrians)

posted by rore [11 posts]
26th March 2014 - 11:31

like this
Like (12)

I have never once seen anyone use cycle scheme to start cycle commuting. From my experience the people using it either already commute by bike or want a nice cheap bike to put in the shed for the weekend.

@rich22222

posted by rich22222 [109 posts]
26th March 2014 - 11:46

like this
Like (10)

brooksby wrote:
[...]
Who died and made you people the kings of Cyclandia?

Seriously - all the comments about "nodders" and "noobs" and "born again cyclist commuting to work at 8 mph"...?

So s...ing what? Every one of them is a cyclist, one of the people we're vaguely supposed to support. That 8mph commuter who goes into work every day on their bike? They do just as many miles as the lycra-clad weekender, training for his next sportive.

Newsflash - you become fit by riding. It seems a little self-defeating to start going around saying, "No - you will not ride a bike in public, on our roads until you can do the vehicular cyclist 25mph sprint and with a fixed upper body while doing it".

How about a little encouragement for the starters?

correct, when I started cycle commuting, I was a very blobby 17 stone just two years ago and could only cope with two at most days a week doing it.

Now 13 1/2 stone and still overweight, but a heck of a lot fitter as a result.

posted by Paul_C [176 posts]
26th March 2014 - 12:05

like this
Like (22)

rich22222 wrote:
I have never once seen anyone use cycle scheme to start cycle commuting. From my experience the people using it either already commute by bike or want a nice cheap bike to put in the shed for the weekend.

My first bike was bought on c2W.

2013 Focus Cayo Evo --- 2013 Boardman CX Team (hit by car, RIP) Sad

IngloriousLou's picture

posted by IngloriousLou [45 posts]
26th March 2014 - 12:38

like this
Like (6)

rich22222 wrote:
I have never once seen anyone use cycle scheme to start cycle commuting. From my experience the people using it either already commute by bike or want a nice cheap bike to put in the shed for the weekend.

I did
And everybody has to start somewhere. I did not go out on weekend/Sunday rides. I simply started by riding to my nearest station and then every fortnight moved one station closer to my destination in the case Romford to London.
I now Commute up to 4 times per week in most weather conditions.
When I started commuting I was around 19 stone and I am still a fat git but a fat git with 3 Bikes now and always looking for the next one.

Wesselwookie's picture

posted by Wesselwookie [132 posts]
26th March 2014 - 12:39

like this
Like (15)

Ah bless!

All the newbies at snobbery trying out their best off-the-peg snob attitudes! I suspect they are all young (at least I hope they are).

Eventually they'll get the hang of looking down on people.

(Also, I was anti-elitist _before_ it was fashionable!)

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [665 posts]
26th March 2014 - 13:51

like this
Like (11)

Personally I'm not bothered about being some sort of virtuoso expert 'cyclist', I'm just a non-motorist who would like to see fewer cars on the road. A less-than-brilliant cyclist is far preferable to an average motorist as far as I'm concerned.

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [665 posts]
26th March 2014 - 13:59

like this
Like (13)

I was just looking at the ONS 2011 Census Analysis - Cycling to Work that has just been released. In 2011 for England and Wales 741,000 people cycled to work, an increase of 90,000 in the ten years since the 2001 census.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/cycling-to-wor...

Somehow I don’t think that an extra 2 million cycle commuters will be appearing on the roads in the next few weeks !

posted by Pete B [13 posts]
26th March 2014 - 14:57

like this
Like (12)

Neil753 wrote:
Sam Saunders wrote:
Neil753 wrote:
We should be careful not to read too much into the figures from the "cycle to work" scheme…
…We should all be asking ourselves whether giving affluent riders a 42% tax break on "yet another bike", and effectively asking other people to pay for that freebie through general taxation…

Tax adjustments to achieve shared objectives can be justified (as in the case of the Bike To Work Scheme) by showing that the Exchequer (and hence the nation) is likely to be better off by doing it than not doing it. Advantages to the individual beneficiaries are the mechanism, but only a dull witted or corrupt Chancellor would spend political energy trying to ingratiate the few. £400 to put one more bike in the road sends another £600 of spending into bike shops and their suppliers. It also adds to a range of savings in the public areas that benefit from more cycling and less driving. Pollution, congestion, long-term health, well-being and the rest.

To quibble with the effectiveness of that policy tool or to doubt its financial value is to sit in a very glum place. The same standard applied to fiscal measures in general would bring the Treasury (and the economy) to a full stop. It is only money of course and Government can print of much of that as they want. In periods of sluggish economic activity, shifting the money a bit more quickly is a good thing.

Sam, do you have a vested interest in the "cycle to work" scheme by any chance? You talk a good talk, but the scheme is expensive, poorly targeted, easily exploited, and excludes pensioners, students and the self employed, all of whom are obliged to collectively pay for a subsidy of up to £420 (sometimes more, if the firm has a credit licence), for the purchase of bikes by many higher earners, who may not use them to cycle to work, and who may own one or more bikes already.

The thing is, it isn't "£400 to put one more bike on the road", is it? If half the scheme applicants already have a bike, and of that subset only half will ride to work, then that £400 becomes £1,600. And, if you take the ten percent figures that some believe to be more realistic, that £400 becomes £40,000.

Well pensioners, by definition, don't go to work (so don't need to commute) and anyway are being given pension money by the State every week. Obviously they could use that to buy a bike if so desired.

The self-employed could actually write the entire bike and accessories off their tax bill if they could justify that the bike was necessary to do their work. They can also buy cars and vans as a business expense too. Even if a car is largely for private use you can also write off any interest paid on a loan used to buy it.

You are also ignoring the tremendous health benefits of more people cycling regularly too. Imagine the difference in costs to the State of just one person avoiding an early heart attack or stroke and thereby continuing to work and pay their taxes ... or instead them suffering the stroke, then requiring months/years of expensive treatment, then having to leave their job and then spending the rest of their 'working life' being supported on incapacity benefits. What about fewer people being overweight and therefore requiring fewer hip operations and diabetes treatment for example? Your "£40K" guessimate is starting to look like small beer in comparison. The CTW scheme costs next to nothing compared to the potential cost savings of a healthier nation and less congested roads.

posted by Joeinpoole [247 posts]
26th March 2014 - 17:28

like this
Like (7)

Pete B wrote:
I was just looking at the ONS 2011 Census Analysis - Cycling to Work that has just been released. In 2011 for England and Wales 741,000 people cycled to work, an increase of 90,000 in the ten years since the 2001 census.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/cycling-to-wor...

Somehow I don’t think that an extra 2 million cycle commuters will be appearing on the roads in the next few weeks !

It's interesting that a behavioural impact analysis, published by the "Cycle to Work Alliance" in Feb 2011, reveals that over 400,000 cyclists "benefitted" from the scheme over roughly the same period.

Whatever the true figures, it's clear that many cyclists have abused the scheme whose purpose, as set out in the 1999 Finance Act, is to facilitate the "loan of bicycles and cycling safety equipment to employees as a tax exempt benefit for the purpose of cycling to work".

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
26th March 2014 - 18:39

like this
Like (6)

Sam Saunders wrote:
Neil753 wrote:
We should be careful not to read too much into the figures from the "cycle to work" scheme…
…We should all be asking ourselves whether giving affluent riders a 42% tax break on "yet another bike", and effectively asking other people to pay for that freebie through general taxation…

Tax adjustments to achieve shared objectives can be justified (as in the case of the Bike To Work Scheme) by showing that the Exchequer (and hence the nation) is likely to be better off by doing it than not doing it. ... Pollution, congestion, long-term health, well-being and the rest.

To quibble with the effectiveness of that policy tool or to doubt its financial value is to sit in a very glum place. The same standard applied to fiscal measures in general would bring the Treasury (and the economy) to a full stop. ...

Interesting post, but not sure I agree.

Without wanting to sound glum (which is not me, generally) I would say that perhaps you are looking at it from the wrong perspective. If we applied evidence based policy to all categories of government spending, we wouldn't have the massive debt mountain that we have at the moment, that has built up over many, many decades (irrespective of the colour of the governments) and we would have a much healthier, more functional society. Instead, it seems that governments only stop a spend when the evidence is irrefutably against - and even then, sometimes short-term political gains override it.

Lets face it, our economy doesn't live within its means, just like the vast majority of western (and probably eastern) economies.

posted by edster99 [161 posts]
26th March 2014 - 18:44

like this
Like (11)

parksey wrote:
Equally surprised by some of the negative comments on here about both new cyclists and the cycle to work scheme itself.

Great to read your post. Agree with all of its details and thank you for the positive tone.

posted by Ush [389 posts]
27th March 2014 - 2:03

like this
Like (7)

No snobbery from me. Coincidentally, I had a chat with the future of cycling this morning in Hackney.

She wheeled her bike - a ~30 year old Mixte, with metal 'dork disc', and probably the original tyres and chain/gear oil - gingerly off the path and into the road. Directly onto the piece of tarmac where I was heading at ~30kph (on a slight downhill). I wafted out and around her and continued on my way. At the next lights I stopped in the ASZ; when she arrived she edged past me and stopped a good 2 metres ahead. Ho-hum, I thought. At least she stopped.

True enough, no blazing getaway was made when the lights went green. I followed her sedately for a hundred yards or so until there was space to pass, when it occurred to me that she - on her knackered old bike, in 'proper clothes', no lid, no lights and at barely above walking pace - is the future of cycling. It's not me in full Lycra, doing 20km each way at ~25kph on a shiny newish toy. It's 'normal' people, going about their day, using a bike because it's the best option. So at the next lights, I said hello. Gave her a few tips. Reminded her that she should stay at the stop line because turning vehicles swing across junctions and she should be careful about going up the inside of long and heavy vehicles. Finally, reminded her that it's not a race and sitting behind a couple of cars at lights if there's not space to pass is better than shoving through and then holding them up, and went about my way.

Be nice to newbies. You were one once.

Boardman CX Team '14 | Cannondale CAAD8 '12 (written off, SMIDSY) | Scott Sportster '08

Gizmo_'s picture

posted by Gizmo_ [825 posts]
27th March 2014 - 17:00

like this
Like (3)

rich22222 wrote:
I have never once seen anyone use cycle scheme to start cycle commuting. From my experience the people using it either already commute by bike or want a nice cheap bike to put in the shed for the weekend.

To quote Geri Halliwell: look at me. Smile

CAAD8 bought on CTW. 1500 miles' commuting before its untimely demise.

Boardman CX Team '14 | Cannondale CAAD8 '12 (written off, SMIDSY) | Scott Sportster '08

Gizmo_'s picture

posted by Gizmo_ [825 posts]
27th March 2014 - 17:13

like this
Like (5)