Lazer Quest

@mark1212123 Well, yes, in that there are more people now than say 1990, and (I think) more of them drive... ...but also it just so happens that some road users are more equal than others, allotted a couple of living-rooms' worth of space. Plus as private motor vehicles get bigger and people are not all piling in one mini anymore they're getting even more space. And also those "small roads" were often "streets" not long back. We've kept the "through-access" available even though they weren't designed for it and they can't easily be expanded for that. And/or the "smallness" of the road is because there are actually three or four lanes of motor vehicles - one or two are all the parked cars we can't "see" when we think "narrow street"...

@Rian_constant : I have the exact same issue with a totally different light: the Lupine SL Grano. Has a cutoff to avoid blinding oncoming traffic and also throws out a carpet of light. It’s ok 80% of the time but my commute takes me through a couple of pitch dark stretches where it’s simply not enough, certainly not riding at road speeds around 30-33 kmph average. It’s great in every other respect but that’s simply something that needs fixing. I’m willing to pay but want to be certain that it works and I’ve seen too many long exposure beam shots that appear to show unrealistic levels of illumination.

Mark's a great bloke. He and I have done similar football related cycling challenges (mine around Crystal Palace) and we met when he cycled to Palace a few years ago. I'm gutted for him.

I'd call it more of a pick-up truck than an SUV, but I expect they want to market it more to people who are trying to replace their SUV rather than a pickup. I own a longtail e-cargo bike that I'm very happy with and would never want a front loader. It's going to be tricky to make the rear suspension work well and not compromise other aspects. Not something that I would trust to a kickstarter project.

@Peterjbdk Even the Government’s Road Safety Strategy says that – Vision Zero... The January 2026 Road Safety Strategy says lots of things- almost none of the important ones are even taken seriously by the government itself, which is why they're 'consulting' on them for long enough that the document is sunk without trace in a sea of digital dust. The police will sabotage anything they don't like, which includes anything to the benefit of cycling and cyclists- how much more evident that they won't lift a finger can it be when Essex and Kent police collude to refuse to even look at close-passing videos when there has been no collision NO MATTER HOW CLOSE. This is 'get yourself KSI'd and we'll see what we can do': Vision Zero?! Sod That for a Lark is the police vision. Pretty much the whole 'strategy' is complete fiction, with no expectation that anything will change if drivers wouldn't like it. As for the 'consultations' on whether driving without MOT or insurance, or with illegal/ fake plates are genuinely a bad thing deserving more than joke punishment...?! Lancashire Police were informed regularly, with photos, for over a year that HN21 VXB was without MOT or VED. I've put many of the photos on here. The police refused to respond after PC Mike Duff of Garstang Neighbourhood Policing Team told me back in January 26 not to tell him about such 'alleged offences' because he didn't have time to look into them. It was only when I sent the Bent Coppers this without comment, taken at the driver's house, that they got worried and suddenly something changed:

I'd rather adopt the habit of staying the hell away altogether in the very busy Christmas shopping season.

[Leaving aside the quibble over possession vs use] Why not 'illegal e-motorbike'? That's accurate and specific.

I think cyclists and e-bike riders should dismount in the pedestrian area. And everyone, perhaps, adopt the habit of walking on their left hand side of the paths or footways. Especially in the (very busy) Christmas shopping season.

Maybe people do not have the capacity to look out for everyone on the roads because there are so many users squeezed onto small roads in the uk. Brains are not 100% functional, as we know they lapse. Maybe we should have a country wide chat regarding vehicle usage. Maybe radios, satnavs, fones should be removed from cars, or restricted to passenger use. Maybe we have to accommodate homo sapiens are a murderous bunch, so when someone's mown down it can be forgotten easily, after the 'ohmygod' ten minutes. Segregated cycle lanes, or a complete ban on the motor vehicle, lol. Essentially the human race is speeding up and the average cyclist cannot keep up. In the midst of these problems as we are, I personally have to not care about my well being if I wish to continue using bikes. This is a strange and interesting dilemma, yet it sits in harmony with the current zeitgeists twisting as they are.

"Illegal e-bikes" seems like a reasonable phrase to me. It's not strictly accurate if you're very pedantic (it's currently perfectly legal to own and even use such a bike in certain circumstances; it's the use of the bike on public roads that is illegal), but it's good enough. "Illegal (motor)bike" doesn't disambiguate between illegal electric and petrol powered bikes - illegally used dirt bikes etc have been around for decades, long before the current electrification. Whether or not that distinction is relevant depends on the context. In fact, without context, I think I would wonder if "illegal bike" was talking about normal pedal bikes that are somehow illegal (maybe circumventing anti-dumping laws or not complying with relevant safety standards etc.) "Electric motorbike" is technically accurate, but I would only apply it to Sur-Rons or similar - I can see that legally it applies to any non-EAPC ebike, but doesn't fit well with less motorbike-esque versions or homebrew conversions. It also doesn't distinguish between legal and illegal - it's perfectly possible to legally ride an electric motorbike or electric moped, and some people do. So to use "electric motorbike" to mean "illegal electric motorbike" falls into the same trap as using "ebike" to mean "illegal ebike". “Illegally modified e-bikes” is also inaccurate - firstly, many of them are not modified in anyway; you can just buy them like that straight from the internet. And again, there's no law against modification, or owning a ebike that has been modified to no longer be an EAPC. It's the use of an ebike that has been modified to no longer be an EAPC (if it ever was one) on public roads that is illegal. So of all options, "illegal ebike" seems like the least problematic.