Ahead of tonight’s London ride, Birmingham cyclists demand Space for Cycling

Followed the wheel in front up the wrong road? Been there, done that, eh?

Calling somebody a C..t is a "nasty thing to do". No public order offence???

Fine knowledge. I'm still running late 90s xtr and early to mid 90s xt.

"the speed limit does apply to them" Well, sort of. But they shouldn't be being ridden at all in the first place, at any speed. Exceeding the speed limit is just an additional offence on top.

Shimano started using 2mm hex for derailleur limit screws in 2015. Most of their groups now use those rather than JIS. This happened in the second generation 11sp road, so R7000/R8000 all use this, all the 12sp stuff as well, Tiagra from 4700 10sp, all GRX, CUES. Some lower end groups (Sora/Claris) do still have JIS screws and of course older stuff, I do still have bikes with them.

@ "Unfortunately the UK is covered with ill conceived cycle routes built in a rush with no real strategy. ..." That's no way to describe the Notional Cycle Network! Where abouts are you? "Covered" - there's certainly enough for eg. "(crap) cycling facility of the month" sure ... but you'll be saying that cyclists are "literally running the place" next! Unfortunately the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain's site and their "good cycle facility of the month" pages afloat to be no more ... but you can still enjoy the unbelievable infra of the Netherlands (but also banal - almost no people making a big deal) care of: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/

@TrainWalkWheel RE: "We need to sit down and think what we actually want and then plan where it can go." Are you straying into "nobody is swimming the river, we won't build a bridge" territory? (Or is it "not many are coaching from Brimingham to London, we won't build a railway"? Only for cycling it's many orders of magnitude cheaper...) Certainly councils have "ticked the boxes, got the funds" and "built it not where most needed but where *possible*" ( eg. where they'll only have complaints about wasting money on cyclists and not death threats from businesses and residents.) However in many (most? ) cases the "let's all agree" idea is problematic. Few people cycle, most places are seriously car-sick. And there are some very loud voices ready to steer things away from any change to the unsatisfactory status quo that doesn't involve more motor provision. (Occasional exception: small areas of pedestrianised streets - that people can drive to). Why bother then? We can ill afford the growing cost and side effects of growing motoring. Cycling for most would be enhanced walking - and most people walk. It can work together with public transport to genuinely replace car trips. Places like parts of London, Manchester etc have found that after the dust settles people's existences weren't ruined at all and they just get on with life. What would makes that work? Quantity and building networks. Along with some motor traffic reduction / displacement (alas - that's the harder part). But of course in most places - given the motoring push-back and "but costs" - piecemeal infra is all that seems possible.

Why are there no line breaks? Or are we going for the middle class niche, like the G?

The mismatch between the brifter hoods and the handlebar bend is hideous. An extra layer of tape underneath would have made such a difference!

Rome mate, you are giving us all a bad name... Was she fully loaded, were the kids screaming on the back?