Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorReplies
-
October 30, 2018 at 12:31 pm in reply to: Another pathetic outcome from death caused by a driver #930335
hawkinspeter
Verycroix wrote:So, Charlie Alliston, riding a fixed wheel bike at 18 mph with no front brake, swerved to avoid a pedestrian who walks back into his path and is killed, jailed for 18 months. Anna Edwards, driving at 28 mph with a faulty front light and on a hands free, fails to see pedestrian lying in road, doesn’t swerve and drives over and kills him, fails to stop, fined £500 and 8 points on her licence. Why don’t cyclists use the bag of rubbish defence, or fell from the sky, or as above, the Helen Measures my life is of greater value excuse?I do agree that cyclists are heavily penalised and motorists seem to be given a pass, but Charlie Alliston’s sentence was more to do with his attitude than his lack of a front brake so is not a great example to use.
Her Honour Judge Wendy Joseph QC wrote:On your own evidence by this stage you weren’t even trying to slow or stop. You expected her to get out of your way. Thus I make it clear that it was not merely the absence of a front brake but your whole manner of riding that caused this accident
hawkinspeter
Discs are great, but the rim
Discs are great, but the rim brake is by no means dead. However, if you haven’t got a strong preference, then I’d recommend going with hydraulic discs (I’m not convinced about the cable operated ones being particularly good) as they give much better control of braking, especially in the wet. They do cost more, though.
October 29, 2018 at 5:19 pm in reply to: Another pathetic outcome from death caused by a driver #930323
hawkinspeter
don simon wrote:drove over Mr Croxon as he lay in the road – then carried on driving.Edwards briefly returned to the scene – then drove past slowly before slinking away.What sort of person does that?
A psychopath?
- Lack of guilt/remorse
- Lack of empathy
- Lack of deep emotional attachments
- Narcissism
- Superficial charm
- Dishonesty
- Manipulativeness
- Reckless risk-taking
October 29, 2018 at 3:11 pm in reply to: Another pathetic outcome from death caused by a driver #930317
hawkinspeter
It seems that not paying
It seems that not paying attention is now considered “normal” driving.
So, which of the political parties is supposed to be “tough on crime”?
hawkinspeter
I’ve got a pair of those
I’ve got a pair of those winter gloves (I think they’re the same), but I had an issue with them irritating the skin around my wrists. I’d classify them as more “autumnal” gloves as I don’t think they’d be great for really low temperatures. I’m currently using some Endura Luminite gloves which are really good: https://www.endurasport.com/product/luminite-glove/
hawkinspeter
Works for me. What are you
Works for me. What are you seeing?
October 28, 2018 at 7:26 pm in reply to: Always worrying to see the shop mechanic undoing the top cap to straighten the handlebars! #930275
hawkinspeter
Sounds like the stem bolts
Sounds like the stem bolts were loosened when they turned the handlebar 90 degrees and they forgot to tighten them after tightening the top cap. Definitely sounds dangerous to me.
hawkinspeter
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:[quote=HoarseMann]Hannah spends 20mins driving 1.5miles to work and Peter can’t cycle as there are too many cars, so he drives. Depressing. These big developers need to be forced to do more to provide adequate active travel options. Not going to be much of a community with everyone isolated in their cars and the pavements deserted. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45970349%5B/quote%5DDepressing is putting it mildly.
“It can take us up to 20 minutes to drive a mile-and-a-half to work”
So why add to the congestion problem by choosing to drive? Even if cycling is “too dangerous”, how long do they think it would take to walk 1.5 miles?
1.5 miles journey would be best made by one of those micro-scooters (non-powered push along type). As they are so portable, you don’t need to waste any time locking/unlocking them so they’re great for joining up other forms of transport (e.g. bus, train).
https://www.wsj.com/articles/confessions-of-a-grown-up-kick-scooter-rider-1431098923
hawkinspeter
RafatheRed wrote:srchar wrote:That free 6 week service at a LBS will consist of indexing the gears, inflating the tyres and, if you’re lucky, retorquing a few bolts. With hydraulic discs, they wouldn’t even need to adjust the brakes.Not having it wouldn’t bother me in the slightest and, if you can’t DIY, use it as a learning opportunity or budget £30 at your LBS.
Hi,I could do the brakes,tryes and bolts.Just not the gears. I have tried a few times. Ok so the service thing is not the issue now.
Gears aren’t really that difficult. Watch a couple of youtube videos on how to do it first and then start tweaking the gears. For a 6 week service, it should only be a case of tightening the cable slightly to allow for the initial cable stretching – you shouldn’t need to adjust the limit screws.
It’s well worth learning how to do it.
hawkinspeter
NorthDevonCyclist wrote:
NorthDevonCyclist wrote:I’m after bolt through rather than qrThe Prime wheels can be converted to Thru-Axle. My pair (RP50s) came with the conversion kit, but it looks like the older/cheaper RR range doesn’t.
£6: http://www.wiggle.co.uk/prime-rd020-conversion-kit-12mm-x-142mm/
hawkinspeter
October 25, 2018 at 12:43 pm in reply to: Downhill descent: Can a bike be too light for a particular person? #930001
hawkinspeter
OldRidgeback wrote:StraelGuy wrote:hawkinspeter wrote:However, other things aren’t equal.Extra weight would actually help when going downhill, providing that the weight doesn’t hugely increase your frontal area (unlikely to make much difference unless you’re carrying dustbin lids or something).
Assuming that you’re just coasting and not pedalling, then the forces driving you forwards will be a component of gravity i.e. the steeper the slope, the greater the force. NB. The force increases with increased mass, although in a vaccuum, the acceleration would stay the same as more force is required to accelerate more mass (F = M x A).
The forces acting to slow you down will be mainly the air resistance against you (approximately proportional to your frontal area and the square of your speed) and the rolling resistance. Rolling resistance is proportional to your weight and speed, but is generally quite low compared to the air resistance, so we can forget about it at higher speeds.
So, increased mass will produce a larger downhill force which will be balanced (at terminal velocity) by the air resistance at a higher speed – hence heavier riders will go downhill quicker unless they are bizarrely shaped.
Does this affect how quickly fat and thin squirrels can run up and down trees, too?
Thin squirrels are more likely to be younger and less experienced and therefore less likely to run up a tree when a (my) whippet bears down on them at high speed, with a much greater chance of them then being caught. Fat squirrels conversely are more likely to be older and more aware and less likely to end up in the mouth of a whippet (with a high prey drive) and being shaken violently from side to side.
So, what about a fat whippet vs a thin squirrel?
hawkinspeter
alansmurphy wrote:I’d anticipate the ‘young couples’ is part of the problem.Didn’t grow up playing outside, want their little brick box the same as next doors with their catalogue minimalist crap inside, always driven to their job as they were driven to school.
I’d never live in one of these hell holes but guess what, I ride past my butcher, farm shop, the supermarket and all these people as they leave their shit estates to get to their shit jobs in a longer time than it takes me. As i get fitter, economic value et al the only opportunity they get to redress the balance is to close pass me and then tell me its my fault due to ‘the road’, ‘the sun’ or my ‘invisible black top’…
Grumpy?
hawkinspeter
Go for some carbon fibre
Go for some carbon fibre Prime wheels.
hawkinspeter
brooksby wrote:hawkinspeter wrote:brooksby wrote:Mark B wrote:The large developments, basically new villages, tend to be a little better, and do include pubs, shops, doctors surgeries and schools. The problem is more with the smaller ones where they put a hundred houses on the edge of an existing town, and then a few years later another hundred on the next field.Even when they are well designed with facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, the distances involved in going into the middle of town are often a bit far for a family with young children.
I agree that the article rather overstates the problem; most new estates either do have basic shops etc or they’re on the edge of an existing town at a distance which is an easy cycle or a slightly annoyingly long but perfectly possible walk. I can well believe there are some estates which are bad, I don’t know any of the ones mentioned in the article.
Cough, cough – Portishead! – cough, cough.
A small town, conveniently close to Bristol and the M5 motorway. Build a few hundred houses. Then a few hundred more. Then fill in the gaps left. “Doctor’s surgeries“, you say? “Schools“, you say? “How the f will I actually get in and out of the town since there are only two small A roads?” you say?
Just get the train.
You think that’ll actually ever happen?
(If so, would you like to buy a bridge I’ve got in the back of my van…
)It’s as likely as Bristol getting a stadium.
-
AuthorReplies