“Even when you think you’re safe, there are drivers to show you, you never are”; County reviews speed limits; What’s the most annoying sound on a bike ride?; 2025 Giro could finish with Stelvio summit finish + more on the live blog
Police seize mountain bike modified to reach 70mph
West Sussex Police officers in Lancing confiscated this modified mountain bike, enabled to reach speeds in excess of 70mph, and confirmed the rider will be taken to court. Police stopped the rider and shared the find on social media, saying the bike was capable of reaching 120kmh (74mph), and the rider did not have insurance or licence.
The rider will appear in court at a later date. Sussex Police said: “We saw this home-made contraption being driven in Lancing this evening. Capable of up to 120km/h, the rider had no insurance or licence, amongst other offences and has been reported to court.”
Bikepacking problems
Anyone have any suggestions or changes? I’m still not sure if I should take my Patagonia puffer coat as well or just rely on my fleece and waterproof. pic.twitter.com/q55IjJh6cy
— CyclingMikey “Who made him Batman?” (@MikeyCycling) April 28, 2022
The familiar ‘place everything I could possibly need’ pre-pack photo…then wonder if it’ll all fit…been there, done that.
Ethan Hayter hits back with second stage win in three days at Tour de Romandie
A 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 win for Hayter 🇬🇧
A fabulous ride sees Britain’s Ethan Hayter win Stage 2 of the Tour de Romandie 👊
An 𝐚𝐰𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 victory for the young Brit 🔥#TDR2022 🇨🇭 | @INEOSGrenadiers | @ethan_hayter pic.twitter.com/NUjxdBVtC5
— Eurosport (@eurosport) April 28, 2022
Having won Tuesday’s prologue, Ethan Hayter crashed out of the opening road stage yesterday prompting a few whispers of armchair criticism about positioning. You keep doing what you want, Ethan…especially if it wins bike races…
The young Brit took his second win of the week this afternoon, outsprinting Fernando Gaviria and Jon Aberasturi in the reduced bunch kick in Échallens. Hayter’s former teammate Rohan Dennis keeps the race lead into a punchy third stage tomorrow which looks good for…I don’t know…maybe…another Hatyer win. How about that? A Hayter hat-trick…
28 April 2022, 08:06
Apologies, I got distracted by some legendary KOM-hunting...back with your live blog updates in a second...
Most competitive Strava segment in the world? Ed Laverack smashes Sa Calobra KOM
The 2019 British Hill Climb champion took the legendary KOM, which has stood for seven years, by 18 seconds from former Team Sky pro Sebastián Henao
28 April 2022, 08:06
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
57 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@mdavidford Yes there are lighter bikes and they are available, but if you were to take all restrictions off and allow brands to go even lighter - far lighter than is available now, there is a risk of 2 things. 1. bikes become so light and so brittle that they are not built to last and could become dangerous. 2. This could create a 2 tier system in the brands supplying frames. The mega brands like Specialized or Giant who are far bigger than someone like Wilier or even Colnago who are by no means as big as the some it then becomes a sport dictated more by tech than talent.
The actual title (as opposed to the captioned title) is even more irking (irkish? irkful?): "...a cyclists..."? - sort it out Danny!
They might be, if there was a chance to pass safely, which there wasn't. They're not correct to delegitimise another road user proceeding entirely normally by implying, at length, that they're a nuisance and at fault, or to inculcate a sense of frustration in their learner at normal road use.
But as you pointed out at the start of your comment, amateurs can *already* buy lighter bikes. And the UCI mandates that pro bikes have to be *available* to the public, but it doesn't go around forcing non-pros to buy them. Besides, I don't think anyone advocating for reducing or removing the weight limit is suggesting that there shouldn't be *any* standards - just that maybe there are better bases for it than weight. And I don't disagree that there may be a valid point there (leaving the question of whether a weight limit is the best way to achieve that to others to argue over). I was just questioning the suggestion that it's a non-issue because it only affects pros, when the discussion is in the context of pro sport in the first place.
@Smoggysteve Replying to this comment because for some reason you can only go about 3 levels deep on comments now... Yes, sometimes carbon cracks or delaminates. Thats been happening for years at all price points and all types of carbon bikes. I haven't noticed that having any relationship with the weight of the frame or how high end it is though. Thats just an inherent risk in a process that has a heavy human component and perhaps not amazing QA in many places.
@mctrials23 Yes bikes are brittle and carbon is easily broken - mostly down to accidental or misuse etc. But there are bikes that are breaking through normal use. Suddenly they just crack or delaminate. The closer to the limits you push these materials the more you will encounter this happening. As a consumer product thats not acceptable.
"Undue hesitation" a very common cause of failing a driving test, and driving conservatively behind a cyclist where the examiner seems it possible to pass safely could cause it. The instructor is correct to point this out.
It was this specific example of clickbait wasn't a life changing thing. Not the crash. Cheers
It was this specific example of clickbait wasn't a life changing thing. Not the crash, which was horrible. Hopefully being a collarbone the surgery was straight forward and there won't be any lingering effects like with the horror crash he had in the Basque Country. Cheers
@Smoggysteve I agree that the weight limit is fine but i'm not convinced by the rest of your argument. Carbon is an inherently fragile material when it comes to direct impacts. Unless you made it comparable in weight to aluminium then that will always be the case. Even then I doubt you would really remove the issue. As to consumers? They are free to buy whatever they please. Steel, titanium, aluminium. Lightweight, robust. Whatever they want, they can buy. I could easily build a sub 6kg version of my current bike that would be perfectly robust for my needs. If I decided to go for super lightweight wheels and other parts though I would have to accept that there are tradeoffs in price and sometimes durability. Removing customer choice is rarely a good thing.
57 thoughts on ““Even when you think you’re safe, there are drivers to show you, you never are”; County reviews speed limits; What’s the most annoying sound on a bike ride?; 2025 Giro could finish with Stelvio summit finish + more on the live blog”
A38 cycle lane, that driver
A38 cycle lane, that driver is only looking for oncoming traffic, as you would usually do on a dual-carriageway. Really poor emerge given they must have seen the cyclist as they approached. But signage here could be improved. A cyclist warning triangle and ‘look both ways’ should be installed, along with making it a stop instead of give way.
https://goo.gl/maps/cpd2yUWtrLzXpjyn7
edit: actually, I’d just close the turn. The residents of that side road have to turn left when leaving their road, as there’s no right-turn across the dual-carriageway. So, it’s no big deal to have to go round the block when turning into the road too.
“actually, I’d just close the
“actually, I’d just close the turn”
Actually it gets worse – it appears that before the construction of the cycleway, there was no opening in the central reservation there for cars (see link below). Why TF would whatever authority designed and built it (using dedicated cycling funding no doubt), design in a new feature for the convenience of drivers that can only increase the danger to cyclists???
https://goo.gl/maps/fLm2cCkyv3xqGE4A7
Flâneur wrote:
Would it be that the UK is institutionally car-obsessed and the relevant authority has literally no clue about cyclist needs?
Look slightly further ahead,
Look slightly further ahead, they added the turn as they removed the two way turning 30 yards ahead to I assume, approve the safety and segregation there.
Agree – don’t let cars across
Agree – don’t let cars across. There is a fundamental good reason for not having cycle paths in the middle of car infra (was it Manchester that was proposing this in places, I recall?) Also while there is no absolute proof against drivers not looking in practice the risk can be hugely reduced by design. The best (what should be “the standard”) infrastructure design does the following:
a) Ensures that everyone knows what to expect. In the UK cars are not going to expect cyclists in between traffic lanes and this crossing does nothing to prompt them.
b) Puts the safety of vulnerable users back in their own control. To do that:
c) Ensure it’s very clear when one direction of flow crosses another. That’s not the case here for either the motorists or the cyclists. As a secondary point the “priority” – or rather whose space this is – should be absolutely clear if different types of traffic cross (e.g. cars and cyclists, cyclists and pedestrians etc.)
d) Ensure that the crossing is as close to 90 degrees as possible. In theory that happens here but in practice because the cars are still going fast into the turn they’re not at exactly 90 degrees as they start to cross.
e) Ensure you have good sight lines and both crossing parties can see the other for some seconds in advance. Again that’s the opposite of the case here, cars are going to approach you from behind due to speed. (EDIT – yes, I know the cars should be looking and will be capable of seeing the cyclists in advance but see my comment about vulnerable users – cyclists here – not having to rely on the motorist’s perfect behavour for their safety).
f) Reduce the speed of the crossing vehicles. This helps extend the time for observation, reduces the mental workload and mitigates any mistakes. Here the drivers are already doing too many things: slowing down and turning. Cyclists may only see the driver at the last moment.
There’s a couple of excellent illustrations of exactly this in BicycleDutch videos e.g. showing cars not seeing cyclists – but it’s OK because the cyclists can see that the car’s not slowed. Alas I can’t lay my paws on the exact one ATM!
There was a huge grass
There was a huge grass central reservation in the middle of the A38, so it was the obvious place to find space for a cycle track.
No cycle infra is ever going to be perfect, but the Birmingham Blue Cycle Routes are pretty good.
I think I saw that when they
I think I saw that when they were trailed a while back. Not wanting to make perfect the enemy of good – and for the UK they look pretty good – possibly first class. (I hate “superhighways” – I’d suggest only a handful of routes in the world merit that name and – spoiler – they’re not in the UK).
However at some point I still think this layout needs to change. Bikes in the middle just aren’t good. Same with places which for convenience put bikes on the road side of bus stops and parked cars, or on the inside of pedestrians.
I know that making any changes to the carriageway beyond bolt-ons / paint are the last option of our councils / road authorities for reasons of expense and disruption. I’ve some sympathy for favouring smaller changes on “getting a network in place” and environmental grounds. As long as the infra is segregated / minimum standard (e.g. “best” UK standard). However when the time comes round to resurface a road / do some major maintenance we absolutely should be upgrading the non-motoring infra too. Put the modes in the right places, shifting the kerbs and cars as necessary. Call it fixing outdated layouts e.g. ones which priorise motor vehicles and feature nice wide lanes (for fast driving!) at the expense of everyone else.
Yet again the Dutch seem pretty good at scheduling / batching this so you get occasional major disruption but as much as possible gets fixed when that is done – not just a refresh of the tarmac and some changes to the paint.
Just been for a ride round
Just been for a ride round some parts of town I’ve not visited in a while. Several areas of new build – nothing for bikes. A couple of distributor roads closed for resurfacing and it looks like we’re just refreshing the nice wide tarmac. Which will likely be cratered again in a year, this being Scotland. (Nice surprise for any gravel enthusiasts though).
This is “cycling mad” Edinburgh by the way where some feel it’s not so much a war on the motorist as “cultural genocide” (to use a Russian term).
Still didn’t stop me having a wonderful ride. I just feel sad for the others who don’t fancy trying it. I know they would because the car-free paths were pretty busy!
.
.
Needs to be STOP, not Give Way, for the drivers, and a couple of decent humps are also called for.
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Although I agree, I reckon it’d be really useful to have poor junctions like this designed on purpose (or just keep our current useless road designers) but set them up with cameras and use them as a way of detecting and prosecuting the incompetent drivers. If we’re going to have a war on motorists, then we should at least set up some traps for them.
Incompetent drivers you want?
Incompetent drivers you want? Some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time. So no need to design a screen / filter. Just dig a heffalump trap in the carriageway.
chrisonatrike wrote:
It’s not that I want incompetent drivers, it’s just that we’ve got too many and now driving standard are being normalised down to their level. If we can catch some/most of them and get them to improve their skills, then there should be less carnage on the roads.
hawkinspeter wrote:
You clearly wouldn’t last in political office! What we need to do is show we are reducing bad driving. There are actually two main ways to do this:
1) lower the standards so fewer drivers fail them or
2) stop counting. The second is the more popular method because you can play with “coding” (e.g. “they didn’t die from Covid, it was actually a heart attack / shortness of breath”) and scope / time limits.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
I think someone should tell Flintshire Boy that their login has been hacked… This comment appears to actually be relevant to the subject at hand, and related to cycling
There seem to be a couple of
There seem to be a couple of ways their posts go – reasonable – if a little elegaic – and alt-right. So maybe it should be Shropshire lad and Skin-flint?
Obviously the cyclist’s fault
Obviously the cyclist’s fault – it clearly told them to SLOW because this type of thing is to be expected…
Interesting that the guy
Interesting that the guy blamed the convergance angle & not being able to twist their neck around that far – the driver had clearly just passed him coming up to that junction, so presumably his neck doesn’t twist from looking left
Not sure I follow: the
Not sure I follow: the cyclist would have been to the driver’s right throughout. Once making the turn, the driver would have had to twist (right) well past 90 degrees to check the lane was clear, and so the commenter’s suggestion that the driver should have slowed/stopped because of the poor angle/visibility seems sensible to me.
They should have slowed /
They should have slowed / stopped to give them time to make absolutely sure, but they should also be planning ahead and observing the developing situation on the road well before the manoeuvre, allowing them to spot the person on a bike before they reached the junction.
mdavidford wrote:
A lot of people on the roads just can’t seem to think that far ahead, and asking them to even ease off on the accelerator to slow down a bit is tantamount to asking them to hand their keys in and ride a bike.
(Except then they’d be riding a bike like a twunt instead and other motorists would use them as an object example of why bikes are Bad).
brooksby wrote:
Bikes are good partly because you can ride one like a twunt and be very unlikely to cause anyone any significant harm. Please, let’s get all the incompetent drivers onto bikes or scooters instead.
In other words what you’re
In other words what you’re saying is any half-decent driver with reasonable awareness should have had no issues with managing their own and others road safety in this instance . Sadly , all vulnerable road-users need to be constantly aware of the shit-housery potential of the well protected road-users in their 1+ tonne of rolling metal at all times
Brauchsel wrote:
If only there was some way of attaching a mirror to the door or wing of a car. Then motorist could approach at the angle needed here and be able to check if the cycleway was clear when they get to the giveway line (if the so unskilled that they can’t check on the approach).
jh2727 wrote:
But even if you could attach such a device, what would we call it?
Peripheral rear view mirrors?
Peripheral rear view mirrors?
jh2727 wrote:
Next you’ll be suggesting cars should be fitted with big see through sheets of clear glass to give the occupants a nice view of the outside world and other road users! You’re crazy, it’ll never catch on . . . . .
Brauchsel wrote:
Yes the driver should have slowed and stopped.
On the other hand, the driver was travelling along a road parallel to the cycle path, at a greater speed, so would have been behind the cyclist albeit away from a direct line of sight, but still sufficient to see the cyclists.
It just smacks of a deliberate move to try and get to the junction ahead of the cyclist. I could be wrong but thats what it appears to me
If that was my commute I’d
If that was my commute I’d have an Airzound or Loud Bike Horn for many pre-emptive toots.
Yeah – the last thing you
Yeah – the last thing you want while cycling is flaming bagpipes!
A red hot chilli piper maybe?
A red hot chilli piper maybe?
mdavidford wrote:
He’s wearing a helmet and the bagpipes serve as both a noise making device and high-viz. I do wonder what the CO2 emmisions of the bag pipes is though.
True – but what’s important
True – but what’s important for many here is he’s not “cheating” with an electric set and the pipes are surely aero.
The Bagpiper at the top of
The Bagpiper at the top of “the hill” on the Etape Loch Ness is one of the greatest sounds I have ever heard…. it means the end of pain!
It was a welcome sound last
It was a welcome sound last sunday!
@the editors – please ask
@the editors – please ask James May when he’ll do another series of the show where he sloooowwwwlllly puts something mechanical back together 😀
I learnt about the JIS
I learnt about the JIS (Japanese industry standard) screwdriver, and now my Shimano crossheads don’t get so messed up.
@DanAlexander – can you ask
@DanAlexander – can you ask James May what he thinks of Bristol? (His birthplace). Also, in terms of famous Bristolians, does he consider himself more of a Paul Dirac or a Cary Grant?
And, what’s his favourite squirrel, red or gray or other?
Just had to share this story
Just had to share this story from Metro
Grandad moans about rainy school run because new Land Rover isn’t ready yet
A nice phrase for this in a
A nice phrase for this in a foreign language: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2020/01/08/you-are-not-made-of-sugar/
Du bist doch nicht aus Zucker
Du bist doch nicht aus Zucker! (apparently, in deutscher Sprache)
brooksby wrote:
Or, in Dutch:
Je ben niet van suiker!
Je bent toch niet van zuiker
Je bent toch niet van zuiker gemaakt…I think.
HarrogateSpa wrote:
You might be right… I blame google translate! 😀
So he doesn’t actually need a
So he doesn’t actually need a car to take these children to school. Do all 5 have the same parents? Other cars are available.
brooksby wrote:
Oh, the humanity!
Annoying sounds on a group
Annoying sounds on a group ride:
“Hole”
Most annoying sound on a
Most annoying sound on a group ride:
Others’ disc brakes rubbing/ squealing/ complaining.
Anyone seen this one?
Anyone seen this one?
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/apr/28/doorman-witness-vapes-and-drives-during-testimony-in-depp-v-heard-trial
Doorman witness vapes and drives during testimony in Depp v Heard trial
What a dope!
What a dope!
Annoying sounds on a bike
Annoying sounds on a bike ride:
1. Loose chainring bolts (tick-tick-tick-tick-tick)
2. Front mech cable touching mudguard or tyre but only in certain gear combinations
I think I recently fixed a
I think I recently fixed a creaking that had been bothering me for a month. It only happened when standing on the pedals, or at least pedalling hard, so mostly when I started from a stop. Retightened bottom bracket, tightened a bunch of rear spokes and re-trued the wheel, tightened crank bolts and pedals to cranks.
I accidentally noticed one day that it didn’t happen when I was pedalling hard uphill in the small ring. Aha! It seems to have been eliminated by tightening the three bolts that hold the chainrings onto the spider.
Annoying sounds on a bike
Annoying sounds on a bike ride:
– Crump! Ah, Roger’s forgotten to unclip again.
– SINGLE FILE! – shouted by passenger of car sailing past at speed – with plenty of room.
Annoying sounds on a bike
Annoying sounds on a bike ride:
My mate complaining about his legs as he cruises past me on every hill!!
Which reminds me of a
Which reminds me of a favourite from our rides:
Annoying sounds on a group ride:
“Is that his bottom bracket creaking? No, it’s his knees.”
Trying to find a creak, I
Trying to find a creak, I went as far as changing the bottom bracket, then the crankset (after stripping a bolt ??♂️) before finding the small screws that secure the derailleur hanger had come loose. Cleaned up and some thread lock and it’s been fine since. The saving grace was it even had the LBS stumped. A lesson learned, be warned particularly of your thru axle bolts the hanger it seems.
Which reminds me, I never got
Which reminds me, I never got my spare. I’ve always intended to ride with one and have carried an emergency temporary hanger which has rescued ride mates in the past, but thru-axles mean you have to have the right one. Still, I realise that personally I’ve never needed to change one on my bikes in about 12 years of being a roadie.
Had the exact same thing
Had the exact same thing happen to me at the exact same junction on Tuesday. The taxi driver even looked straight at me as he pulled out in front of me!