Standard slams “homicidal cyclists charging at pedestrians”… with image showing motorist about to hit cyclists on bike lane; Evenepoel says his shoulder is “pretty much destroyed”; Brutalist ‘brifters’ blasted by baffled bicyclists + more on the live blog

Partly - would it be also that the cycles chosen (and that dealers put out there) are a reflection of the conditions and the people cycling. Like in the UK most people - even those "into cars" - don't buy an open-topped race car which doesn't actually have luggage space (or a built in lock) as their primary vehicle. And the market is full of practical general purpose vehicles *

The conditions and the infra in NL allow most people to cycle short distances practically - that's what explains cheap, not fussy or "speedy" but very durable and practical bikes (which like UK cars often live outdoors) **. The infra itself although not specifically designed for high speed is hardly ever going to slow you down. (in fact they understand the importance of maintaining cyclist momentum eg. avoiding complete stops). And the Dutch race and have velomobiles... but like most people in the UK most people in NL aren't racers.

I'd question whether the UK in general or even most of London is at the start of a transition. And London is a bit of an outlier in the UK.

* the analogy doesn't go so far, because the market is sometimes trying to upsell stuff which in fact people don't need, and for cars there is a strong "displaying social position" element.

** Also history and culture feed in - the traditional "Dutch bike" is just their version of bikes that were common in the early days of the 20th century "bike boom". Some have suggested that a culture of not being "flashy" has kept it relatively unchanged. There's also that for normal use most of the key features were hit upon early - after that "marginal gains".

I don't think it is peculiarly Dutch even. I've travelled all over Europe for work, and I'd say that the popularity of this style of bike is much higher all across Europe - including in Switzerland, which distinctly does not have a culture of "not being flashy" ...

I didn't really know why in UK we've gravitated away from them. It's hard to distinguish cause from effect. Is this type of bike less popular because only the hard core cycle in UK, or do only the hardcore cycle because of you walk into a bike shop this is pretty much they only types of bike you see?

Velo-drone wrote:

I didn't really know why in UK we've gravitated away from them.

(A long ramble ...) In a word: cars.

In several words: it's the lack of appropriate infra that motor vehicles haven't taken over.

The most common types of bike depend largely on who is riding, how they are riding and for what purposes.  I'll come back to that (type of bike/rider/purpose) at the end.

History: when people could get cheap personal transport that was much more effective than walking and cheaper / less maintenance than a horse, they got it.  That was initially cycles of varied kinds.  After infra had improved (partly because bikes, and then more because early motor vehicles / cheaper tarmac) and the price of motor vehicles came down (AND they were pushed hard by governments), people bought cars.  Once sufficient numbers had done so the roads started becoming less safe and pleasant for cycling and they also started being further adapted for the benefit of driving on at the expense of cycling.

Velo-drone wrote:

It's hard to distinguish cause from effect.

Again, I suspect the primary cause (for whether people cycle and who) is how convenient / pleasant / safe / culturally accepted cycling is.  Both absolutely but - probably more important - relative to other modes.  And in most places the "default" mode is driving.

Cycling is often not pleasant or safe * because motor vehicles exist and our public spaces have largely been adapted for them to progress at high speed and in numbers.
Cycling is less convenient than driving because the greater reach of cars means we're expected to get places quicker and our amenities are now further apart.  There are now traffic lights which delay cyclists (it's harder to start from standstill with a bike than a car!) and we often don't have secure cycle parking.
Cycling is not culturally accepted because this has been the case for generations, because (uniquely) we now expect cycling to be done in a less social manner than other transport.  Plus motor vehicles now bound up with all kinds of social status and role-marking factors.

Velo-drone wrote:

Is this type of bike less popular because only the hard core cycle in UK, or do only the hardcore cycle because of you walk into a bike shop this is pretty much they only types of bike you see?

I think the former is a fair summary.  What's available guides buyers' choices BUT the common choices are reflected by the market here **.

Finally (!) who cycles?  Per previous ramble in the UK we have more of the "enthusiasts", the fit and the brave cycling.  (And the poor and desperate).  What do they cycle for?  We have less "transport" cycling and more "recreation / fitness / sport" cycling.  Our transport cycling is in large part commuting - tends to be men who are doing this for fitness purposes.  How do they cycle?  If people are cycling for fitness obviously they'll go faster, but when cycling with fast traffic it generally feels "safer" to try to keep up.

All of that tends to favour use of cycles which are designed either explicitly for sports / cycle touring or generally prioritise lighter weight / faster speed.  Because of parking issues we tend to store bikes inside, so more delicate components are OK, and because of enthusiasts bikes that allow more customisation and may require more maintenance make sense.

In e.g. NL there is far less "need for speed" (running with the cars).  On the other hand "low maintenance" is extremely important.  (Most people want bikes that "just work" every day and don't want to spend evenings / weekends doing maintenance.).  Being durable enough to be parked outside is important.  Being able to carry things is important (more people doing the shopping / taking kids or even other adults around).

Altogether a low-maintenance but very reliable cycle which just does everything you need once you've bought it will be what sells most there (just like most cars!).  So mudguards, carriers, built in lighting and lock, simple controls.

* "Safe" is an interesting one and for humans generally doesn't mean just some meansure of "actual risk".

** There is some "fashion" - lots of the "bike-shaped objects" in the UK are in the "mountain bike" style.  I'm not quite sure how that came to be but I do note that people have the same tendency for cars e.g. buying "off-road" style vehicles (or 4-wheel drive") which will clearly never go near any mud!

Does this count ?

That's two helpful self-filling examples already!

Definitely more bang for your buck-off than the Trafford example.

It was other pedestrians and sacks of potatoes falling from the sky.

In addition, the 7% figure is entirely meaningless unless it is complemented by information regarding who was at fault in these collisions. RLJ cyclists in London infuriate me and I have to admit it's getting worse with significant numbers of people now not just jumping reds when it's clear but slaloming through busy pelican crossings when people are using them (though I must add as a corollary to that in 50 km of cycling in London most days I haven't seen a cyclist hit a pedestrian since 2018). However, almost every time I ride there are multiple instances where I have to swerve, brake or otherwise take evasive action due to pedestrians stepping out into the road or onto cycleways without looking, almost always with their heads buried in their mobile devices. I would be most interested to see the figures with illegal electric motorcycles and pedestrian-at-fault injuries removed; from my empirical observations from many thousands of kilometres of cycling in and around central London each year I would be really surprised if the percentage of (legal) cyclist-at-fault pedestrian injuries was anything like cycling's modal share in the city.

eburtthebike wrote:

“A useful mode of transport has been hijacked by lunatics”

Pure, unadulterated clickbait.

I'd go one step further and class it ragebait.

It just bleeds into the idea that cyclists are fundamentally bad.
"I'm scared of cyclists because of phone theft". No, you're scared of people stealing your phone, not cyclists. 

I swear that any time anyone on two wheels does anything wrong its reflected on cyclists and yet stick another 2 wheels onto that and magically its the distinct person behind the wheel to blame rather than the collective group. Well, until they hurt someone and then its the car that did the hurting. 

Not scared of the real threat though (cows). 

Clem Fandango wrote:

Not scared of the real threat though (cows). 

https://road.cc/content/forum/police-issue-cow-warning-after-man-seriously-injured-308531

mctrials23 wrote:

It just bleeds into the idea that cyclists are fundamentally bad.
"I'm scared of cyclists because of phone theft". No, you're scared of people stealing your phone, not cyclists.

I'm scared by drivers coming up behind me because I've beem close passed so many times I think it's going to happen again. Am I wrong to be afraid? I find it difficult to distinguish the good drivers from the bad so I prefer to assume they are bad until they've proved otherwise.

Do I write articles condemning all drivers. No I just report the bad ones and hope the police will take action against those that need it. I am often diappointed.

If only the police could be bothered.  Someone in my neighbourhood watch police meeting asked the officers if they could do bike patrols.   There are four officers and one bike, and they would all need to undergo two training courses before they are allowed to ride the ward bicycle, so the answer was basically no.

I just hope they have enough truncheons, boots, helmets etc in the police station, and that they're all trained on how to use them.

Well Gloucestershire are getting better. I'm being told whether or not action is to be taken, but not what action, within a few days of each report and I've just heard that an advisory letter is going out for a close pass when in the past it would nave been NFA. Not ideal I know but small steps in the right direction are always encouraging.

Don't say that!  You'll give us all a bad name! 

If you do have your phone stolen, don't wait 2 days to contact the bank like this bloke !

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8y70pvz92o

Hirsute wrote:

If you do have your phone stolen, don't wait 2 days to contact the bank like this bloke !

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8y70pvz92o

And if you do discover that your phone wasn't stolen after all, don't go and turn it on without telling the police/employer that you were wrong about it being stolen.

Similar issue with e-bikes: Judging by the machines I see on the road it would appear to be easier to buy an illegal electric motorbike or e-scooter than an EAPC.

The growth of opportunities for people do illegal stuff has outpaced the Police's ability to enforce it to the point that the police don't bother with any enforcement at all.

I would LOVE to know what the actual questions posed to those people in the video were

I can guess at the first one, after they have assessed the potential mark for undesirable characteristics (lycra-clad, TdF wannabee, not obese enough etc.): do you read the hyper-junk press? An unashamed affirmative should get them the answers they want.

Something along these lines I expect !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahgjEjJkZks

Me too, but it never seems to result in as much velocity as I hoped!

Mr Blackbird wrote:

I have to plead guilty to part of these alleged cycling vices. I do pedal furiously on a regular basis.

Is that the form your aversive action takes?