[hawkinspeter]

davel wrote:

Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:

Awavey wrote:

yeah I have had similar thoughts for sure, especially following some appalling close passes Ive had lately,though most are still in the daylight fwiw, one car last week only missed knocking me off because their wing mirror was already folded back, but part of me feels like Im letting people like that win if they bully me off the road

I recommend ‘Freakonomics’.  Everything is incentive.  We do things (or refrain from doing things) for pleasure (or pain).  As long as there is no incentive not to act dangerously around cyclists – and a clear incentive in doing so, because the more they do it, the more they frighten cyclists and the fewer cyclists are likely to venture abroad – then car drivers will continue to act dangerously around cyclists. 

The only question is: are you prepared to give them an incentive not to act that way around you?

Can we follow this through – genuinely – because you often espouse the angry response sort of stuff. I relate to it because I can be an angry twat too – particularly when my heart rate is up and I’ve just been skimmed by a berk in a couple of tons of metal.

I agree broadly with your incentives model (economics), but it applies to populations, just like it says in Freakonomics. I might be doing srchar a disservice here, but he hasn’t struck me as a population.

Genuine question, because if there is some sort of consensus on here, we might be onto something useful*. How, without getting arrested, is srchar supposed to incentivise enough drivers on his commute in order to make any sort of difference?

 

* Personally, I think the single biggest change in incentives would be a liability law, you know, like all our more civilised European neighbours have. I have evidence-based (I think) rants about it on various channels and to various people in various levels of politics whenever I get the chance. But if we all started doing something that became noticed – would that have an effect?

I’m more of a fan of using cameras to discourage poor drivers. It takes more effort to submit videos to the police, but I think that having a warning letter from the police drop onto your doormat probably has more of an effect than just getting into a shouting match.

The other advantage of using cameras is that it works better if you don’t retaliate or get angry (i.e. the police are more likely to agree with you) and by trying to do that, it can improve your disposition. I can certainly relate to getting angry with close passes and I used to try to catch up with the drivers to give them my opinion or desperately try to overtake them to “prove my point”.

I also like to think that there’s a “herd immunity” effect with cyclists using cameras. The more drivers that are caught out by cyclist cams, the more drivers that take care around cyclists (hopefully).

[hawkinspeter]

janusz0 wrote:

janusz0 wrote:

You’ll appreciate her help up the hills, you can easily do all the work on the flat. I’ve found that one problem is cadence. My sometime tandem partner can’t cope with my high (to her) cadence. Every cyclist finds being stoker hard until they learn to curb the urge to steer the tandem. Early on, the pilot may find their saddle pointing sideways. Give her tasks like signalling and navigation to make her feel important. Try riding as stoker yourself.

Sometimes you can work around the cadence issue by using shorter cranks for the person that is struggling.

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/tandem2.html

[hawkinspeter]

I’ve been thinking about this

I’ve been thinking about this and have decided to try out the following device:

https://smile.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07DRBKYFH

To be honest, it’s more out of curiosity than anything else. I’ll give an update here when I’ve got it setup.

[hawkinspeter]

Simon E wrote:

cycle.london wrote:

Over the weekend, I cleaned my bike, got it ready for the commute, and charged all my lights.  Yesterday morning, up at 5 AM, and out for the ride into London.

Shit happens. Try not to let incidents like this get to you. Look at the positives.

You could buy a pump with a hose, it means you don’t put the same sideways force on the valve.

In time it may help you to understand what’s behind the ‘bike toss’ and where that frustration comes from. I’ve been prone to taking my anger out on inanimate objects in the past, it’s very common. At least I think it’s in the past…

Nowadays I always try to use a pump with a hose fitting as I’ve got a tendency to be heavy-handed and sometimes have a little rage tantrum at inanimate objects. I try to (afterwards) laugh about it and not take myself so seriously next time, but yes, misbehaving valves deserve everything they get.

Remember that cycling is about having fun, so if you’re not enjoying it have a break for a while (and don’t feel guilty about it).

I do sympathise – you make loads of effort and a stupid puncture knocks you back.

[hawkinspeter]

Dicklexic wrote:

My various sets of Schwalbe Pro Ones and S-Ones with Stans sealant have given excellent reliabilty for the past three and a half years, but in the seat pack I still carry one spare tube just in case, two tyre levers (although the Schwalbes are dead easy to fit without levers) a small traditional puncture kit and a couple of Park Tools Tyre Boots. A decent mini pump (Lezyne HP Road Drive) clipped to the bottle cage is adequate, especially since running tubeless means you can use lower tyre pressues as well. I have wondered about also carrying some ‘anchovy’ type tubeless repair plugs. I never bother with CO2 cannisters.

I did have some Schwalbe Pro Ones on my bike, but I’ve found that their not very tough and I did get a big cut on one that ruined it (it was only a week old as well). The biggest issue that I had with commuting on them is that they tend to get very slippery in the wet if you put more than around 70psi into them.

I’ve got some “anchovy” fixers as well, but whenever I’ve had a puncture that was too big for sealant to work, it was too big for the anchovy to work as well.

[hawkinspeter]

Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:

Unless there’s something glaringly obvious (and bleedin’ heavy) that I’m missing and that I absolutely need, I reckon my in-backpack commuting tool roll will be halved in weight.  I currently have …

1 x lezyne foot pump

1 x ‘var’ tyre lever

3 x acrylic tyre levers

2 x Specialized inner tubes

1 x small pack of tie-backs

Do I need an inner tube?  As my commute is relatively ‘local’, if I get stranded, I can jump on a train.  

I have a tube, tyre levers, a hand pump and a co2 cannister, but have never bothered to muck around with putting in a tube when I’ve had a big cut as I’ve been close to a train station. I might ditch the co2 cannister as I’ve never had them work very well, so I’d be carrying a hand pump anyway (iPump twist: https://ipump.co.jp/#iPumpTwistClass ).

[hawkinspeter]

I can recommend the IRC

I can recommend the IRC Formula Pro X-guard tyres: https://thecycleclinic.co.uk/collections/road-tyres/products/2017-irc-formula-pro-fusion-x-guard-tubeless-tyres

Also Caffelatex is a great sealant.

[hawkinspeter]

Caffelatex: http://www.wiggle

Caffelatex: http://www.wiggle.com/effetto-mariposa-caffelatex-tyre-sealant-250ml/

[hawkinspeter]

cougie wrote:

Spend the money on stuff to not get it nicked in the first place rather than on trackers. 

Nice idea, however any lock can be cut through easily with a battery powered angle grinder, so there’s a limit as to how protected your bike can be.

[hawkinspeter]

I’ve been looking for a good

I’ve been looking for a good bike GPS tracker for ages, but haven’t seen one that looks to be worth buying. I’ve seen several versions of a GPS tracker that fits into the end of handlebars, but the reviews aren’t confidence inspiring – they all seem to be cheaply made and not reliable. That light-shaped one on Amazon has very mixed reviews, so it sounds like a bit of a long-shot.

Going on Amazon, I’ve found this device that looks intriguing: https://smile.amazon.co.uk/Hangang-Anti-thief-Tracking-Motorcycle-documents-TK901/dp/B07DRBKYFH

I’m probably waiting for someone to include GPS tracking with a bike computer (though that would be too easy to remove by a thief) or possibly integrated with a Di2 battery.

[hawkinspeter]

Resolutebay.cc wrote:

You should try our new reflective commuter jackets. They have reflective thread woven into the fabric so it doesn’t look construction worker jacket. 100% water proof and tons of ventilation… comes in orange, grey & black

We are also based in Belfast.

Click here >>> Commuter Jacket <<<

I hope you’re right about it being perfect – I’m waiting on the black jacket. Are you still on course for the first week of January?

[hawkinspeter]

Freetime101 wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Freetime101 wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

So, why was there that “threat” about the physics of cars vs bikes?

 

I don’t know, I can’t see any “threat”…  Only a light hearted comment that cyclists usually come off worse so be careful…

 

Anyway, lesson learned, the readers of road.cc are intellectually superior and do not need to be reminded or informed of anything. 

I am however slightly confused as to why people who know everything would spend so much time on a site which predominately posts news and reviews? Presumably you also get annoyed at the entire advice section of this site? How dare some presumptuous journalist lecture you about which lights are best?! Or which jacket is best, or how to prep your bike for winter?

Well that’s a strawman argument. We’re not claiming to know everything and most of us welcome insights about cycling products and the like.

However, cyclists tend to get bullied on the road by motorists who don’t even know the Highway Code correctly and then you come along and warn us about using lights or else the bigger, heavier vehicles will do us physical harm. Can you understand why that is considered victim blaming by a lot of us?

I totally appreciate the value of being easily seen and like most Road.cc readers, I take precautions, but if you’re serious about improving road safety, then you need to get your message out to motorists so that they can take especial care when it’s dark. They are the ones that can make the road safer.

 

I don’t think I was victim blaming at all – in fact there was no victim in my story as nothing really happened. My post certainly wasn’t intended this way. 

I appreciate that you, and many other readers are seasoned cyclists, but there are plenty of lurkers and newbies reading this who may or may not comment. I may be preaching to the converted, but the message may also get beyond that and reach a wider audience. Also, once again – this was a light hearted post. 

 

Don’t get me wrong, the burden of saftey shouldn’t be on the cyclist – and from a legal position, the driver of the more dangerous vehicle should take care. However, I think it’s in all of our own interests to keep ourselves safe. 

I know nothing else about this cyclist, or his route, for all I know it’s entirely off road and this is the one point where he has to cross a busy road – but the fact is he did cross the road and it would have been wise to be wearing something more visible given the conditions, not a legal requirement, merely wise. Had this happened on a bright summer morning I wouldn’t have said anything, but it wasn’t a bright summers morning.  Perhaps he thought that as a fully grown adult he would be easy to see – cars have headlights afterall. Perhaps he looked at the clock and figured suns up, must be light. Maybe he set off earlier than usual and wouldn’t normally be riding in these conditions. Maybe it was his first time out and he’s still learning – in fact if he is a newcomer to the sport it wouldn’t surprise me if his new interest lead him to a forum such as this eventually, in which case he may see this thread – he almost certainly didn’t notice me or my car as I slowed in plenty of time so he may be unaware of the situation entirely.  Who knows.

 

As for getting the message across to motorists, I highly doubt the motorists in question are reading this forum but I do spend my fair share of time explaining to them that an inch isn’t enough space for an overtake, or that overtaking then turning left immediatley isn’t just highly annoying but potentially dangerous, or that cyclists are often travelling faster than you think – and need more space to stop than you think etc…

Okay, I accept that there was no malice in your post – we do sometimes get motorists trolling us with posts similar to this, so that probably got some of us jumping to the wrong conclusions.

There’s a common misconception that “cyclists” form a cohesive group – there was even a case when some minister sent a warning letter to a cycling group (can’t remember which one) about policing cyclists. In reality, there’s little that we have in common except for enjoying cycling and as can often be seen  in the comments, we don’t tend to agree on much (except for poor driving standards by some motorists).

My view on “cyclists” is that we need to get as many idiots as possible out of cars and onto bikes/feet/public transport. That means that we’ll get pedestrians staring at their phones whilst stepping into the road and cyclists not taking any reasonable steps to make themselves visible or safe. It’s the job of the “rest of us” (i.e. everyone who considers themselves an experienced rider/driver) to ensure that we can cope with idiots being on the roads and to do what we can to let everyone get to where they want to go in a safe fashion.

There’s always going to be dark clothed pedestrians and cyclists. Whenever you get through to one “idiot”, there’s always plenty more to take their place.

[hawkinspeter]

Freetime101 wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

So, why was there that “threat” about the physics of cars vs bikes?

 

I don’t know, I can’t see any “threat”…  Only a light hearted comment that cyclists usually come off worse so be careful…

 

Anyway, lesson learned, the readers of road.cc are intellectually superior and do not need to be reminded or informed of anything. 

I am however slightly confused as to why people who know everything would spend so much time on a site which predominately posts news and reviews? Presumably you also get annoyed at the entire advice section of this site? How dare some presumptuous journalist lecture you about which lights are best?! Or which jacket is best, or how to prep your bike for winter?

Well that’s a strawman argument. We’re not claiming to know everything and most of us welcome insights about cycling products and the like.

However, cyclists tend to get bullied on the road by motorists who don’t even know the Highway Code correctly and then you come along and warn us about using lights or else the bigger, heavier vehicles will do us physical harm. Can you understand why that is considered victim blaming by a lot of us?

I totally appreciate the value of being easily seen and like most Road.cc readers, I take precautions, but if you’re serious about improving road safety, then you need to get your message out to motorists so that they can take especial care when it’s dark. They are the ones that can make the road safer.

[hawkinspeter]

Officer FluffyTail reporting

Officer FluffyTail reporting for duty. I wood have got here sooner, but I spent some time at the beech.

There’s been some serious reports that this tree has been taking drugs – it’s been dropping needles everywhere.

 

[hawkinspeter]

So, why was there that

So, why was there that “threat” about the physics of cars vs bikes?

[Author]

Replies