What happens when your carbon wheels break? Roval now offers lifetime warranty on its carbon wheels

Ernest Hemingway was once sent off by his wife to buy a suit bag from a New York department store for an upcoming trip to Europe: the sales assistant showed him a top quality bag which, he assured him, could easily accommodate half a dozen suits. Hemingway explained, "Can afford bag. Can afford six suits. Can't afford both." I think this extraordinarily priced item would create the same problem, can afford through axle, or can afford a stand to attach to it, but...

Funny how opinions can differ. As a lifelong cyclist in The Netherlands (basically anything, from errands to daily commutes to cargo to mtb/gravel to bike messaging and bike packing) for over 4 decades, I've never missed a kickstand. There's just always something to lean my bike against, and apparently I am just very skilled at doing so, as my bike never tips over (pro tip: keep it almost vertical, and lean it with the rear *tire* against the pole/wall/tree etc.). Being a bike mechanic in my country means I deal with bikes with kickstands all the time, and I hate them. There's just about always something going on with them. They rattle, they have play because the bolts come loose, they creak, the black paint flakes off, the end cap gets lost, they are unstable. And of course, they are heavy, and ugly. And often quite expensive to boot.

I work at Decathlon as a bike mechanic in their Dutch service center, and products like this menstrual cycle bib shorts make me proud to work for them.

What an absolute dipshit that man is.

Feels like you're greeting an old friend there... Pretty sure that people driving motor vehicles often think that most others are "in the way" and that is generally the case for *different* transport modes "sharing space". No need to believe that infra will usher that in *! Indeed Calton Reid's work on the 1930s UK cycle path project (see britishcycletracks dot com) documents that the suspicions of cycle groups of the time eg. the Cycle Touring Club were correct - the planners *did* want cyclists off the roads! Of course the failure was not in providing cyclists with an alternative and trying to move them there but in letting the drivers of motor vehicles take the roads and streets over. Between heavy promotion / accommodation for drivers and the resulting unpleasant and dangerous conditions that resulted from so many humans driving, most people ditched the bike. Interesting to see where vehicular cycling folks fall: are they absolutist ("my right to ride on motorways")? Do they believe in "accidents" (or maybe the cyclists who die weren't ... skillful enough)? What do they think of all the others not riding - do they (apparently) not care ("I'm alright Jack"), do they think they're just weak / lazy, is it due to "dangerisation of a perfectly safe activity" (and if so why do many of them think that tiny active travel organisations manage to achieve this propaganda feat) etc.? * Aside what must be billions spent over the years on pro-driving lobbying, advertising etc. there's all that ancient human psychological kit of "us and them" and "detecting cheaters". Plus the fact that while cycling may have partly replaced horse riding the car has taken on its prestige / rank-marking function.

@ianking Riding back from a trip to Spain through France, it was noticeable that the amount of bad driving near us cyclists increased the farther north we got, and the cars had Brit plates.

@jackcycles On a very busy NSL A road with heavy coach and HGV traffic it makes perfect sense to provide cyclists with a separate carriageway. It's not saying cyclists don't belong on the road, it's saying here's a great way that everyone can enjoy cycling this route safely, even if they're a child or elderly person who can't manage above 10mph. I can't stand this posturing, usually from fit young racers who do feel safe on such a road, saying that separate cycling infra isn't necessary. On this sort of road even if every single driver is highly skilled and obeys the law and the Highway Code to the letter cycling would still be a highly unpleasant and somewhat dangerous experience, especially for the aforementioned young or elderly riders, riders lacking in confidence, small riders easily blown around by turbulence etc. Everyone involved, from Chris Boardman down to local cyclists, seems delighted with it; the idea that having a cycleway here isn't better for all concerned is what's "ludicrous and false".

@chrisonabike I could call it mamilism and get cheap bikes and lycra ;-)

As long as cars crossing the cycleway have to wait for bikes to pass rather than vice-versa,.I don't see a problem.

"This cycleway isn’t just a piece of infrastructure, it’s an invitation to thousands of people to leave the car at home and travel in a way that’s better for them and better for their community." Er no, a cycleway *is* just a piece of infrastructure. The idea that you need a dedicated cycleway in order to ride a bike is ludicrous and false, and gives succour to those who think that cyclists don't belong on a road.