Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Does it actually work though?
Does it actually work though? Surely most of those people intend to move one side of the path anyway – it’s just that they both think that it’s their side that they should be moving to? I would have thought that all it’s likely to achieve is them starting to go either side, and then dithering about which way to go. A ‘Pass on your left|right please’ seems like it would be more effective?
Who is ‘we’?
Who is ‘we’?
Is this just an attempt to start an argument out of boredom?
Robes aren’t recommended –
Robes aren’t recommended – they tend to get caught in your chain.
Other desired features:
Other desired features: robustness; reliability; fast charging time (or more precisely, good charge to use ratio); low battery indicator. And it seems a bit odd to bundle mounting options and ease of use in together – they’re two different things.Also, the question on cycling infrastructure is a bit dubious. Cycling infrastructure =/= cycle lanes. If a ‘cycle lane’ is separate, then it’s not a cycle lane – it’s a cycle track. ‘Markings on street’ do not constitute ‘good’ infrastructure. The value of infrastructure doesn’t just depend on what type of provision there is, but how well designed and maintained, and whether it forms a coherent network that gets you where you want to go.
The signs tell you its not a pavement any moreIt is a pavement – it’s just a pavement where cycling is permitted. Pedestrians still have priority.
i HATE that little blue sign! the one that means cyclists MAY use it, but its shared with pedestrians, or the other ones that say this is one side for bikes, one side for people. And then you still get people walking in the bike lane who then act surprised when you appear behind them. Im quite tempted to go round spray painting every damn one of the things making the bikes vanish.It actually doesn’t mean that – it just means cycles must stick to the cycle side. Pedestrians are still allowed to walk on any part of the path they like – it’s still a footway, that just happens to permit cycling on one part of it.
srchar wrote:
Only if you have permissions to install apps and change file associations, which a lot of people don’t on work computers.Boss! Boss! He spends all his time posting on road.cc!
Well, it’s not blocked by the firewall…
;o)
Only if you have permissions
Only if you have permissions to install apps and change file associations, which a lot of people don’t on work computers.
Definitely go rack and
Definitely go rack and panniers – makes the experience so much nicer than a sweaty rucksack. Your laptop should be fine in a half-decent sleeve.
If you can, keep your work clothes at work, rather than lugging a full change in and out. My approach is to cycle through e.g. Fresh shirt one day, underwear the next, etc. To minimise what I’m carrying.
Investing in SPD pedals and shoes is well worth it, particularly once you’re cycling on the odd wet day. That might be something you want to leave until you’ve tested your commitment to it though, as it requires a bit of extra cash and some practice at clipping in and out to get comfortable with it.
If you haven’t already, learn how to change a tube (once you’ve practiced a couple of times it’s easy) and carry a spare, mini pump, and levers.
Enjoy it – mix it up and explore a variety of routes if you can.
If you’re looking to create
If you’re looking to create the actual RL route, bear in mind that RGT will currently only allow you to ride a route that you’ve created if you can get at least 4 other people to ride it at the same time.
Rouvy or Bkool will allow you to upload the route and ride it. In theory, Bkool will generate a 3D landscape for you to cycle through while you do it, but it’s really finicky about what routes it will accept for this, so you’ll likely be stuck watching yourself move across a map. Rouvy gives you more of a Google Earth view. Rouvy are currently running a free beta of the new version of their software; Bkool will give you a free limited time trial.
The RL organisers have hinted that they’re looking at organising some sort of virtual challenge, so there may be an official option on the way on one of the platforms that will give you more of a 3D or video experience of the actual route – keep an eye on their news updates.
The regs state a maximum height for lights, so a single head mounted light would not be legal.I think the regulations also state that one front and one rear light must be actually fitted to the bike (rather than to a bag or to the rider).
What if you’re clipped in? Wouldn’t they then be attached to the bike, with you as a mount?
Get off the road
Get off the road
A rear light and reflector
A rear light and reflector can be combined in one, but a rear light doesn’t automatically count as a reflector if it doesn’t include a reflector that meets the standard.
Well presumably they didn’t
Well presumably they didn’t send in the footage of all the periods when there weren’t cars coming the other way every few seconds, because it didn’t reinforce their perception that cyclists are ‘holding up traffic’ (as opposed to being traffic).
1. A tandem – Sure being the stoker isn’t the glamorous perch to take, but get a driver, female preferably, with a great ass and enjoy the view.1a. A quick-release tilt system for the rear seat of your tandem, for jettisoning the sexist boor behind you.