“I don’t care how much it costs…”: Cyclist stuns bike shop by upgrading $250 Walmart ride with DT Swiss wheels, Shimano GRX and dropper post in $3,000 spree + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"Must get in front of cyclist, no matter what!": Reddit enjoys rider's footage of this incredibly pointless overtake
We stumbled across this on Reddit in a Subreddit dedicated to the noble pursuit of documenting “IdiotsInCars”. Roll the tape…
[OC] Must get in front of cyclist, no matter what!
byu/the-real-vuk inIdiotsInCars
There’s a lot to unpack from this, one of the most pointless overtakes we’ve ever had the pleasure/displeasure of seeing. Some suggested the driver had seen the truck in front pull away and thought the traffic might be moving away, hence the overtake, although we’d point out you’d want to wait until you’re not on a bridge with a blind summit, perhaps?
Anyway, after that we get the rev of the engine mid-overtake, the emergency stop when the brake lights come on in front, a little chuckle from the rider, a wonderfully sarcastic thumbs up for the impressive manoeuvre and, of course, as is required for any MGIF (must get in front), the cyclist then sails on by as the queue of traffic comes to a standstill. Lovely stuff.
Once we’d scrolled past the replies defending the overtake, many seemingly applying US traffic rules to this situation filmed in the UK, we found the comments complimenting the rider for having perfected the sarcastic thumbs up, and another whose plays “car leapfrog” themself.
That is, the commenter explained: “My favourite game when riding in the city. Cars [drivers] are always doing incredibly risky manoeuvres to pass me between lights only to brake hard behind the next car. Then they have to watch me pass them and cross the intersection ahead. City drivers could save on fuel and brake pads if only they coasted slowly between intersection bottlenecks. Instead they have an innate predisposition to slower moving road users. What good is it to pass a cyclist yet gain nothing?”
Summing up the mixed response to the video, we’ll end with a comment by someone called… *checks notes* Poetic_Shart… “This sub is full of idiots. If the cyclist was a car and got cut off like that everyone would be up in arms. The bias against cyclists is ridiculous. People have to learn some patience or get off the road.”
Right, that’s probably enough Reddit for one day…
A "slap in the face" and not what was promised? Cycling community reacts to Budget
So, how has the Budget gone down in the cycling world? The response has been… mixed. Cycling UK gave credit to Labour for “recouping additional £100 million funding for cycling and walking infrastructure”, but others have questioned if this goes far enough?
Critics of the new Labour budget, including Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer, have expressed frustration at the discounted fuel duty, with some describing the funding allocated to cycling as a “drop in the ocean”.
Transport journalist Carlton Reid said it is not the “unprecedented level of funding” in cycling that Transport Secretary Louise Haigh promised was coming after the election victory. “Meanwhile, motorists get yet another fuel duty freeze. Climate change anyone?” Reid asked.
One reply to Carlton’s post on social media called it “staggering” that Boris Johnson “is still the first AND last Prime Minister to do anything for cycling”. Another said yesterday’s Budget had “absolutely shafted active travel”.
Harry Gray from Walk Ride Greater Manchester called the £100m “a slap in the face”.
“A single junction can cost £1.6bn – we are talking about change in the bottom of the pocket being spent on walking and cycling,” he wrote. “Gear Change under Boris Johnson had us up at £300m a year. As a side note, I’ve heard word on the grapevine that the £500m pothole funds will be available for local gov to spend on active travel too. Also, we are not clear if Greater Manchester and West Midlands are included in the £100m because of devolution.
“Alongside the freeze on fuel duty, this isn’t the ambitious budget we were expecting.”
London’s Walking & Cycling Commissioner Will Norman said the £100m was “great to see”, although Donnachadh McCarthy, the founder of Stop Killing Cyclists and director at Climate Media Coalition, replied saying he was surprised to see Norman’s assessment and suggesting it was “better to stay quiet”.
“Another £5.7b giveaway to car sector,” he wrote. “£0.1b ‘extra’ for cycling is the same old breadcrumbs that will NOT build a national cycle network needed for health, kids safety, climate & pollution reduction.”
Any more thoughts on the Budget? Get them in the comments and we’ll share some later…
Airbag bib shorts could become a reality in 2025
> Airbag bib shorts could become a reality in 2025
Green Oil hit by i-Ride collapse... but launches world's longest bike brush
Green Oil has suffered as a result of i-Ride, a major UK cycling distributor, entering administration.
The brand told us it was still “owed thousands of pounds”, a “huge hit for a small operation”, bad timing as it has just launched its Green Oil Wet Chain Lube in Prevented Ocean Plastics and the world’s longest bike-cleaning brush… in the words of David Brent… “You’re still thinking about the bad news, aren’t you?”
Made entirely from sustainably sourced wood, the aptly named Green Oil Massive-Brush takes the crown as the world’s longest production bike cleaning brush and has been designed to last over a decade, Green Oil tells us. Its aim is to be better than five cheap brushes and combines a claw brush, spoke brush, frame brush, tyre brush and drive chain brush in one. A Basil short of a full house.
It’s priced at £47.99 for the Massive-Brush 1.0 and £52.99 for the Massive-Brush SLR.
“Cheap brushes out there look like good value,” Green Oil says. “Five in a pack. Made of plastic. £25- £35. But why not have one decent brush for the whole bike? Should we support British Manufacturing and sustainable forestry? Yes. Should we use everything made of plastic and leave bits of plastic bristle in the environment? Hell no. The Massive-Brush is Plastic Free, it has over 5 different uses, and it’s designed to last over 10 years.”
"Underwhelmed by the money for active travel": Your reaction to the Budget
Some of your thoughts…
eburtthebike: “I’m disappointed with the response from CUK and Sustrans, but I suppose they have to deal with the government in the future and don’t want to prejudice those dealings, but Carlton Reid nails it.
The £100m doesn’t even approach restoring the Tory cuts, which the chancellor could easily have done, justifying it by the huge return on investment, and as Mark Sutton says, it’s just a drop in the ocean, not unprecedented levels of funding.
“The only positive thing to be said is that it isn’t a cut, but given the increasing pace of climate change, obesity and the cost to society of car obsession, it should have been ten times that.”
FionaJJ: “I’m equally underwhelmed by the money for active travel and the reaction from Cycling UK and Sustrans, but agree the response is most likely to be a pragmatic one with the calculated hope that staying positive will reap more rewards in future budgets. Building a healthy working relationship and having the ear of those in power is important at this stage of the electoral cycle.”
Rome73: “100 million is nothing – but it’s better than nothing. Freezing fuel duty to save the average motorist £59 over 1 year is also pathetic. But it’s politics and everyone knows that cars come first.”
Steve K: “For me – and nothing to do with cycling – the most depressing transport thing is to increase the bus fare cap at the same time as freezing fuel duty, not even reversing the emergency 5p cut. That cut was brought in because of rising petrol prices; it’s currently about 30p less per litre than it was at that point. There is no justification for prioritising keeping that now unneeded cut over bus journeys.”
hawkinspeter: “I’m with Carlton on the budget – such a tiny amount of money to allocate to the most effective investment we have. I was hoping that Labour might be forward-looking, but they’re just looking backwards at the impossible personal motor car dream that the manufacturers spent a lot of time and money advertising.”
"We made it difficult for the police to ignore": Cyclist leads police to serial bike thief in DIY sting operation – after spotting stolen bike on Gumtree
> “We made it difficult for the police to ignore”: Cyclist leads police to serial bike thief in DIY sting operation – after spotting stolen bike on Gumtree
road.cc contributor Laura Laker talks fuel duty freeze on Jeremy Vine's BBC radio show
Me on @theJeremyVine radio show today talking about the #fuel duty freeze in the #autumnbudget with Tina Daheley sitting in pic.twitter.com/jAmmHFHnGE
— Laura Laker (@laura_laker) October 31, 2024
"There will always be ultra-dominant people": Retiring pro cyclist says it is "normal" there are doping questions around Tadej Pogačar's performances
Retiring French pro Lilian Calmejane has given an interview about Tadej Pogačar in which he said it is “normal” that there are questions around world champion’s performances given the history of the sport, but insisted you “cannot be influenced” by the sport’s past and simply assume “that everyone is cheating”.
Speaking to Cyclism Actu, Calmejane said “there will always be ultra-dominent people” in sport and pointed to Olympic swimming sensation Léon Marchand and Usain Bolt.
“But who says that Tadej Pogačar will continue at this level for five years? I am not sure. It is normal that there are questions, cycling is a difficult sport with a scandalous past and that will continue for a long time,” he added. “As a professional cyclist you cannot be influenced by that [cycling’s past] and think that everyone is cheating.”
Town where cyclist ordered to pay £1,150 for riding on shopping street cuts 'no cycling' tannoy message down to twice an hour because "it was too repetitive" – as councillor says residents can "park their bike up and walk in"
Community notes takes on bike lane basher
Even skinny cyclists…
The best all-road bikes of 2024 — bikes that have mastered both road and gravel
"I do not care how much it costs. I want it to work good": Legendary customer asks bike shop mechanic to upgrade $250 Walmart ride with DT Swiss wheels, Shimano GRX and dropper post in $3,000 upgrade spree
This is a bit of us…
[rentdue_nofoodforyou/Reddit]
The Bike Mechanics Subreddit had its mind blown by one US-based mechanic’s tale of how one customer racked up a “ridiculous abomination” of a ticket by asking for $3,000 of upgrades to be put on this $250 Walmart gravel frame.
DT Swiss wheels, Shimano GRX groupset and dropper post (that’s yet to arrive) later and this is the end result. “I do not care how much it costs. I want it to work good,” the regular customer apparently told the mechanic, giving the green light for upgrades totalling 12 times the value of the original bike.
The mechanic continued: “[He] skipped out on nothing, and I’m pretty sure if we didn’t stop him, he would’ve let us put $7K into it. DT Swiss rims, hubs, and bladed spokes. He asked about a Chris King bottom bracket and headset, but maybe that’s for next time lol. $85 tyres. Zoom in on the 203mm front rotor and all the configuration it took it make things work great. This was awesome to be honest.
“It rides how you’d expect an upgraded Walmart frame to ride. Shifting and braking work great, but something still feels… off. Definitely not something I would notice if I hadn’t been doing this for a while, but my customer is very happy and that’s all that matters.”
It’s been dubbed The Bike of Theseus by one of the astonished Reddit users to comment on the post. To save anyone out of the loop, like myself, that’s after Theseus’s Paradox — a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object.
Another top comment added: “Wow! Well, all he has to do is upgrade the frame someday, if he wants to.”
Another comment said: “These frames are not garbage like a lot of other Walmart bikes. Both this one and the OT MTB get pretty good reviews for what they are and I think the intent is to provide a decent foundation that you can build on as you progress as a rider. Incrementally replace parts as you need them and as your skills and needs advance. I really like the idea of making very affordable bikes that aren’t absolute garbage to ride. I’m sure a lot of potential riders are turned off by heavy, shitty, poorly designed and specced BSOs from box stores.”
To which the mechanic who did the work said: “I totally agree! It’s one of the reasons we agreed to do this for our customer. It’s been getting a lot of compliments as the project progressed from other customers.”
10/10 no notes.
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 £1.99. 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.
43 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Erm, Ruggins did manage to ride her bike very fast, perhaps in part because she'd headed up towards the Arctic Circle before the worst of the heat took hold. Are you perhaps thinking of Lael Wilcox?
@Rome73 The solar panels top up the battery. A battery is still needed especially when there isn't enough direct sunlight onto the panels to provide assistance. Brings a new meaning to fair-weather cyclist.
roadcc sinks to new low, next week wee reviewing electric cars !
@GravelIsNothingNew nearly, but not quite.
@chrisonabike I think its defining features are that it has nothing to do with sport, and very little utility.
@Sriracha I'm guilty of this because it's easier than going through the collision dynamics (which I'd no doubt get wrong). It's a proxy - I guess it's more fairly useful for explaining to the occupants of motor vehicles why less speed could be better (for them) eg. when crashing into an minimally yielding hard object? And for a gross "what damage does the vehicle do" in a collision - cyclists don't commonly bend or break street furniture, or buildings... As you say accelerations are more to the point. Of course as others note with larger heavier vehicles you could still suffer additional impacts (vehicle carries you on its front into an unyielding object, or you go under it / into a wheel arch). Plus potential crush if it ends on top of you.
I think you sort of miss the point. The idea of " pulling up whenever you fancy " just isn't possible with a roof tent as they overtly advertise your being there. You are limited to camp sites, themselves getting more and more expensive. A van remains the only viable choice for a true adventurer, as you can legitimately just pull up and go for a ride. Stealth... Stealth is the name of the game and a big orange triangle on your roof is only going to attract attention and end one way....
Again, two photos of the tyre still banded up fresh out of its packaging. No photo of the tyre fitted and inflated clearly showing the tread and profile.
I don't think the research stands up to the highest levels of scrutiny but the long notjusbikes video about this issue ("these stupid trucks are literally killing us") references some things like companies effectively "marketing towards arseholes" and a version of the common "roadkill experiment" by Mark Rober which had "SUV" drivers as the biggest (fake) animal killers. Now that these things are everywhere * perhaps this effect would be smaller. But perhaps it's not shocking that "less pro-social types" might be more likely to get a big mean car (and drive aggressively) than a 2CV... * What exactly is an "SUV"? Is it more "bigger car" plus the "look"?
@ROOTminus1 Plus 1 from me. I'd also add "LibreWolf" - Firefox fork that is focused on privacy and security. It adds some things like letterboxing to defeat fingerprinting by screen size, deletes most cookies on close by default, has other privacy protection mechanisms.
43 thoughts on ““I don’t care how much it costs…”: Cyclist stuns bike shop by upgrading $250 Walmart ride with DT Swiss wheels, Shimano GRX and dropper post in $3,000 spree + more on the live blog”
Same happens to me all the
Same happens to me all the time, riding or driving, if I keep a safe driving distance (2-3 sec.) between me and the vehicle ahead, it never fails, another driver will pass and occupy that little space!
I’m with Carlton on the
I’m with Carlton on the budget – such a tiny amount of money to allocate to the most effective investment we have. I was hoping that Labour might be forward-looking, but they’re just looking backwards at the impossible personal motor car dream that the manufacturers spent a lot of time and money advertising.
It’s symptomatic of the
It’s symptomatic of the system we have that we ‘laud’ breadcrumbs.
I was expecting fuel duty to be raised, it’s an ideal time, world oil prices are low, pump prices are low too so banging up duty would’ve been lower impact than it was last year when petrol and diesel were over £1.50/l.
As a whole, the budget was ‘more of the same’ with no account taken of the elephant on a skateboard thundering towards us in the form of climate change and environmental breakdown.
There is no point being
There is no point being forward looking if you lose the next election and based on the astonishing amount of anti-Labour media since day one and the fact most Tory voters probably wouldn’t have any issue blaming Brexit and the last 14 years of shit leadership on Labour somehow, you can’t just go in all guns blazing.
Its nice to think that a radical and massively unpopular policy would win the hearts and minds of people by the time the next election comes around but it won’t. People are squeezed financially at the moment so upping fuel duty would be deeply unpopular.
Labour can either try and move towards a better country whilst toeing the line on unpopular policies and hopefully get a decade or more to do things or they can go down in a blaze of glory, have most of their changes undone and the country in another mess in 10 years which they have to start again on.
We tend to be very idealistic on here when perhaps a slice of realism is necessary. Doesn’t matter if people are the dregs of society or have completely the wrong views on everything. Their vote is as good as yours and Labour wouldn’t even be this position if our voting system was proportional representation.
mctrials23 wrote:
I get your point, but investing in active travel infrastructure can be easily justified by many studies on return on investment. I suppose I’m looking for a rational, analytical style of governing rather than the knee-jerk follow the newspapers populism style.
In 2016, the Conservative
In 2016, the Conservative Government invested 316m I think? Now your beloved Labour throws you a 100m pitance. The delusion so many of you have, is that you think Labour are any different. Political parties are nothing but crime syndicates, only looking after themselves. Conservative, Labour, LibDem; they don’t care about you, they really dont, yet they sucker you in to vote for them and have you trash other parties all day long. Public opinion needs to change, to affect more support for cycling infra investment, but that wont happen while hate-filled one-sided NPC mob sites, such as this one, propogate conflict. Honestly, this site has fast become a mirror of the Telegraph, for the hate and niave one-sided view on everything. You should merge into one site, you all deserve each other, you really do. Now cue my buddy Rendal, to respond with more hate, name calling and prove the point again, as he always does – thanks buddy!
Hi Alex, thanks for popping
Hi Alex, thanks for popping in!
I have found the link that you were missing for your reference to £316 million.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/cycle-funding-and-bike-lanes-is-there-enough-money-to-create-mini-hollands-in-england/
I note that whilst a figure of £316 million is mentioned, it appears to be for the period of 2016-2021. So my rudimentary maths has that coming out at £63.2m per year. Obviously the money spent by this government will not go as far due to the catastrophic inflation we have suffered under the previous administration.
The inflation caused by
The inflation caused by printing money during covid you mean ?
They’ve got 5 years. If they
They’ve got 5 years. If they can encourage people out of cars and on to bikes then those people will experience the freedom of cycling along with the improvements in physical and mental health that go with it. That in turn will reduce demand for NHS and social services. If that doesn’t convince enough people to reelect tham then we may as well give up.
It’s will soon be 5 years
It’s will soon be 5 years since the start of the Covid pandemic.
it doesn’t feel despite the fact for at least a few months of that brief period nearly 5 years ago people were encouraged out of cars onto bikes, that attitudes changed towards cycling, or the demand for NHS reduced in any measurable way.
Could that be due to the fact
Could that be due to the fact that as soon as restrictions on driving were removed the standard of driving, especially around cyclists, deteriorated rapidly and nothing was done to stop it. I was so appalled I invested in cameras and have been reporting ever since. The police did nothing. Active travel infrastructure was cancelled or delayed (in my area funding that had been allocated to a cyle lane was diverted to provide extra lanes for drivers).
Many people have told me they gave up on cycling, despite having enjoyed it in lockdown, because it was too dangerous and they thought I must be stupid to continue to brave the roads on my bike. Hardly encouraging active travel was it.
I share a number of the
I share a number of the frustrations about the budget.
As an EV driver I got a very unwelcome letter on Wednesday telling me in effect that the government doesn’t make enough in VED from taxing petrol and diesel vehicles so I would now have to pay VED at the current normal tier (i.e. £190 per year). Meanwhile, people who bought dirty diesels through the 00s and early 10s under the “old” VED system will be paying a fraction of that (it was £20 on my 2010 A-class). So whilst it is necessary to levy VED on my vehicle which doesn’t emit anything in order to raise funds, we aren’t willing to tax the people that actually do the f-ing emmissions. Its very frustrating.
More interestingly, until you realise how little it is, was the extra money for road maintenance – however £500m vs the c. £16bn to fix all the pothole is again a drop in the ocean. But its alright, we can continue to fund motorists to the tune of £5bn plus per year.
Just imagine what we could do with £5bn – one obvious example is that that’s the roads across the country being meaningfully less shit within 3 years – with knock on benefits to people property not getting trashed by poor quality infrastructre. And then at least when the motorists yell about paying for the roads they might have a bit more of a leg to stand on!
EV’s are heavier, create more
EV’s are heavier, create more particulates and road damage. Not excusing the ridiculous budget of course.
Andrewbanshee wrote:
I don’t think the particulate bit is true. Regenerative breaking means there are not creating brake dust.
I don’t think the particulate
I don’t think the particulate bit is true
It might be- they’re all really heavy on big, fat, noisy tyres pushing out tyre dust. Diesels ought to be the greater menace, depending on how effective DPFs are
wtjs wrote:
Yeah, more tyre particulates, fewer from brakes. Overall, less pollution.
Some opinions on this here:
Some opinions on this here:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/26/electric-cars-air-pollution-problem-brakes-tyres
My EV is lighter than my
My EV is lighter than my father in law’s Audi, my Mum in Law’s WV Golf, My fathers Skoda and my neighbours Jag.
Thus, given the rule regarding road damage, my car which has driven less than 10 000 miles in nearly three years as I tend only to use it for local trips when carrying stuff is required or where there isn’t a train service, causes less damage than most cars.
I regret that your statement about the weight of EV is now out of date.
essexian wrote:
Is your EV a scooter? 😉
brooksby wrote:
I’m guessing a BMW i3, I used to have one. Around 1250kg, lightweight construction of aluminium and carbon fibre and a battery range of around 90 miles. Designed around the fact that the vast majority of car journeys are less than 30km.
Unfortunately the rest of the EV market went in the opposite direction direction to allay the range anxiety fears of potential buyers and now we have massive batteries – which leads to more weight – which leads to less range – which leads to bigger battery (repeat until car is over 2000kg).
Life cycle assessment of
Life cycle assessment of electric vehicles.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969721079493
The only serious way to address overshoot of multiple planetary boundaries is to reduce global resource use to about 30% of current. At this point the term ‘sustainability’ is more than marketing wash.
levestane wrote:
Really? Well, we’re f-ed as a civilisation then, aren’t we? Maybe the species will survive, but we won’t have the shiny stuff any more.
Not news – it’s just extended
Not news – it’s just an extended Mathusian trap. In general populations of creatures grow and use more resources until they hit some limit. That could be depleting the resources, or being eaten or subject to disease / parasites.
Our ancestor creatures stoned-and-burned the predators, then speared our way to meat beyond reach of our weight and teeth / claws. Much later we cleverly expanded beyond limits of hunter-gathering resources, and very recently we’ve tapped into vast new energy sources. And in the last hundred years or so massively increased average lifespan.
Barring a “conspiracy” of some kind the only limits are excess population density issues (e.g. wars) OR us running out of something we can’t find an alternative for. “Conspiracy” could be something cultural e.g. the theory that the rate of having kids is going to decline at a rate which compensates for lifespan increases, or an extremely uncommon agreement that somewhow everyone will ease off a bit (actually a vast amount in the “west”) to avoid everyone losing out.
OTOH plenty of cultures and civilisations have collapsed in the past, it’s very natural!
For me – and nothing to do
For me – and nothing to do with cycling – the most depressing transport thing is to increase the bus fare cap at the same time as freezing fuel duty, not even reversing the emergency 5p cut. That cut was brought in because of rising petrol prices; it’s currently about 30p less per litre than it was at that point. There is no justification for prioritising keeping that now unneeded cut over bus journeys.
Politicians don’t tend to
Politicians don’t tend to last long if they’re completely technocratic.
Steve K wrote:
— Steve KAbsolutely cannot agree more.
Also train fares are going to rise by 4.6% (more than inflation) in March 2025 so why is petrol and diesel not subject to a similar increase?
According to The Guardian’s key points article yesterday, potholes are something that so many people want fixed: “as every councillor will tell you, at length, voters are very, very interested in potholes.” Yet those who cause them don’t see they should pay for the damage so they are subsidised by people who don’t drive. More VED on larger, heavy vehicles might help (electric as well as fossil fuels).
Also in the Grauniad’s summary: Air passenger duty will increase by up to £2 for each economy short-haul flight. Two whole pounds? Woefully pathetic. All flights should be taxed to the hilt. People who choose to fly should be paying even more duty/tax than drivers.
Cycling will be more
Cycling will be more dangerous due to council clampdowns, say campaigners (Gruniaad)
Critics of cycling bans in city centres say they unfairly punish cyclists and push them on to congested roads
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2024/oct/31/cycling-clampdowns-city-councils-danger
Shame the article didn’t do a
Shame the article didn’t do a better job of distinguishing between legal EAPCs and illegal electric motorbikes “ebikes”. It was alluded to, but wasn’t made at all clear.
Also would have liked a bit more generally commentary on PSPOs, which I think give local authorities too much power to criminalise people without proper scrutiny (this article is old but nothing has changed https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/08/pspos-new-control-orders-public-spaces-asbos-freedoms).
Also enjoyed this nugget:
I.e. we want people to come and spend time in the town centre, but as long as they don’t spend too much time there. (And also nicely highlights my previous point – it’s now criminal to simply spend time in a public place).
OnYerBike wrote:
Whats the betting that if I turned up in a nice smart polo shirt and loitered in the middle of the town centre for a few days no-one would notice.
While if one of my younger (bame) colleagues turned up in a scruffy hoody and loitered while eating a sandwich/coffee bought in said town centre they would be fined/kicked out within 5 minutes…
I can’t see a ‘no loitering’ PSPO being used for anything but criminalising anyone the enforcers want to criminalise – your only loitering if we don’t like the look of you…
OnYerBike wrote:
But isn’t that the common attitude? I’d wager pretty much everybody you asked on the Clapham Omnibus would think that an electric motorbike (or as one blog I read puts it, “a smokeless moped”) and a legal EAPC are the same thing.
Part of the problem is how much public space is actually pseudo-public space, and actually owned/managed by a private company (like Business Improvement Districts). Wasn’t there a William Gibson novel where everyone has to have a credit check on them before they’re allowed into any shopping malls or other public places?
brooksby wrote:
You’re absolutely right that it is the common attitude, which is precisely why I think it would behove the media to try to rectify that situation rather than perpetuate it.
Particularly in this article – if the problem is people “using powerful e-bikes […] zipping by at 20mph”, then it seems like it would be helpful to point out that such vehicles are considered motor vehicles under the law (i.e. are not legal EAPCs), and so are not permitted in areas where motor vehicles are not permitted (i.e. pedestrian/cycle zones), and riders must be registered, insured etc. I assume that is what Mat MacDonald means when he says “there is already ample legislation to deal with that” but really could have done with spelling it out. There is some abiguity because he could have meant something like careless cycling laws which could be invoked if the manner of cycling is problematic, rather than the vehicle.
OnYerBike wrote:
No loitering, unless you’re doing your duty.
And we’re all out of
And we’re all out of bubblegum
“Mum settles legal action
“Mum settles legal action over air pollution death”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx6leg4nqo
Ironically, Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah is against LTNs.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/appalling-councils-fining-londoners-driving-through-ltn-kissi-debrah/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ella-adookissidebrah-report-whitewash-b1894722.html
And when talking about
And when talking about pointless MGIFs…
All through the Massive Brush
All through the Massive Brush video, I see a brush being useless at cleaning a bike, with big black streaks where he just used it.
Also, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a guy as enthusiastic about a product as purple hair man at 0:12.
Reeves focused on the 2
Reeves focused on the 2 things that we have been waiting 14 years for a Government to focus on, the NHS and Education.
There’s no magic wand to make everything right in one go. Start on the most important things that society needs, and work on the others as you go along.
Sure if this government righted everything in one wave of the wand, you bhoys wouldn’t have anything to complain about. That wouldn’t do would it?
If they fixed everything in
If they fixed everything in one go I suspect we’d have issues with either the tax bill or whoever was auditing their claims.
Are you aware of the link between the NHS & active travel? Asking for a bunch of friends.
For an entertaining take on
For an entertaining take on Theseus’s Paradox, Google Trigger’s Broom (video clip). Comedy Gold, and an education.
I have read elogious comments
I have read elogious comments about that particular Walmart bike – and not on Walmart website! so I’m not totally surprised here.
S.E. wrote:
Looked at the reviews out of curiosity, the only complaints with it seem to be that it sometimes arrives poorly assembled (Walmart seems to be the equivalent of our own dear Halfords in that respect), everyone seems pretty happy with the bike itself. Hefty at 13kg but at £195 for a bike with brifters and disc brakes it’s pretty incredible, if that was offered over here I’m sure it would fly off the shelves.
The 5p Fuel Duty cut costs
The 5p Fuel Duty cut costs The Treasury £3billion/year.
Keeping bus fares capped at £2 is costing us a tenth of that – £00million/year.
The total of all bus fares collected in England is £3.1billion.
So reversing just that 5p cut (ignoring that Fuel Duty has been frozen for over a decade instead of rising with inflation) would raise enough revenue to make all bus services near-enough free. Instead they chose to continue subsidising drivers and increase bus fares by a staggering 50%.
As an (almost) life-long Labour voter, I’m glad I voted Green; their principles seem much more closely aligned to mine.
When I got to the part where
When I got to the part where he said the massive brush handle was the perfect shape for scraping grease off the jockey wheels I knew it was 1st April.