[quiff]

Thanks for the helpful

Thanks for the helpful replies. Booked in for a service and I’ve stuck to running in the meantime just in case! Looking forward to getting back in the saddle at the weekend. 

[quiff]

I’m coming round to this way

I’m coming round to this way of thinking – my leisure riding is less frequent than I’d like now, but I ride to work at least 4 days a week, so maybe I should upgrade my commuter. That said, there’s a certain satisfaction in having a decent, relatively cheap, low maintenance bike that I can neglect without feeling too guilty (Genesis Day One Disc).       

[quiff]

Hunt 4 Season gravel disc,

Hunt 4 Season gravel disc, suitable for tyres 23mm – 50mm, £299?

https://www.huntbikewheels.com/collections/road-cx-disc-brake-wheels/products/4season-gravel-disc-road-cx-wheelset-1589g-24deep-24wide

I have the Mason x Hunt 4 season disc  which are a bit lighter and road oriented with fewer spokes, very well reviewed but just out of budget at £329 –  https://www.huntbikewheels.com/collections/road-cx-disc-brake-wheels/products/mason-x-hunt-four-season-disc-brake-road-bike-wheelset-tubeless-ready

[quiff]

My experience with the Met is

My experience with the Met is that they won’t proactively update you on the outcome, but will provide an update in response to a request. Agree it’s good to have feedback, as it takes a while to upload 2 x 4 mins of HD footage and I’d rather know whether to bother next time.    

[quiff]

“Surely telling them NO just

“Surely telling them NO just once is enough?”

They certainly think once is enough if you say YES… Agree it’s really irritating.

[quiff]

vonhelmet wrote:

vonhelmet wrote:

The £1,000 limit applies at the employer end, not the scheme end. To lend above £1,000 to an employee for something like this the employer needs a consumer credit licence.

Off topic, but the government announced new guidance in June which basically suggested that employees would be able to get more expensive bikes without their employer getting a credit licence (the workaround was that the cycle to work scheme provider could hold the licence instead); but it seems none of the providers have yet implemented it due to some ambiguity in the guidance. It will also depend on your employer – I’ve been pestering mine employer to up the limit, but they’re not obliged to.  

[quiff]

Awavey wrote:

Awavey wrote:

I’d agree let the police decide, the only fly in the ointment is remember a few weeks back that guy successfully argued the mobile phone use in a car law only applies to the phone function, because somehow theres enough wiggle room in the way it was written down,even if the intent for that law was very different, so they might not pursue it anyway

I think this one’s clearer – if he admitted he was using it to navigate, chances are he was using internet connection, which means he is using it for an “interactive communication function” (or somesuch term, as defined by the law). The other guy escaped because he was just using the camera function. But agreed, police may decide there is insufficient evidence unless you can clearly see e.g. Google maps on screen while it’s in his hand.  

[quiff]

And as I said in the other

And as I said in the other thread (which I hadn’t spotted when I posted this), anyone who lost work because the ‘talent’ got a driving ban would surely have some form of civil claim against him to negate any financial hardship (though appreciate the court probably wouldn’t view the right to bring a civil claim as an adequate remedy).   

[quiff]

Oops, just posted a duplicate

Oops, just posted a duplicate thread on this. The “hardship” seems to have been that other people had been booked to work the show, and they would miss out on work if it was cancelled. I’d have thought if that was the case they may be able to sue Steve for causing a driving based show to be cancelled by incurring a driving ban.   

[quiff]

I’m similarly torn between a
I’m similarly torn between a Genesis CdF
30 and a Temple Adventure Disc. The Genesis has a thru axle frame and fork, the Temple has QRs but better overall spec, for a bit less £. Despite already having one and a half bikes with non thru axle disc brakes (one has TA front and QR rear) which I’ve never had an issue with, I’m still irrationally hesitant about buying the QR frame.

[quiff]

I have a local workshop (not

I have a local workshop (not a full LBS) whose quotes for parts are high, but labour cost is low. I always assume they’re putting a massive markup on sourcing the parts, and it puts me off using them as I know I could get them online for half the price and nobody likes being ripped off. But ridiculously, if they gave me the same overall quote, but with more of the price allocated to labour (the bit that I need, know I can’t do myself and value), I’d be happier paying it.    

[quiff]

kil0ran wrote:

I see that the result of the parliamentary debate was “meh, we don’t care enough to make a change”

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/236952

To be fair, the parliamentary debate showed that a number of MPs care very greatly and there is cross-party support for increasing the maximum sentence for death by dangerous driving, but the government doesn’t have the legislative bandwidth to do much but Brexit.

[quiff]

brooksby wrote:

Bmblbzzz wrote:

Is Pero’s bridge actually shared use? Perhaps it is, but in that case, it’s crazy. Way too narrow to ride a bike over except at the very quietest times. Or do I mean way too busy? Comes to the same thing; too crowded. 

Yes it is: you can see the blue roundel on the post to the left, on streetview.

Its also on one of the councils signposted routes so people can avoid cycling on the Centre.

Yes, its narrow and can be crowded but it’s on my desired line/route and the council has said its a cycle route so who am I to argue…?

If you think that’s narrow, try this: https://goo.gl/maps/jPzukY9rHMKSiSS59

It’s on a major shared use route route. The bridge is marked “cyclists dismount”, but people rarely do.

[quiff]

hawkinspeter – why on earth

hawkinspeter – why on earth is this a stock photo? Who commissioned it? I have two theories. Either (a) you own alamy and can bend it to your squirrelly will; or (b) your squirrel photo searches are driving trends in stock photo companies. “Right team, we’re seeing unprecedented demand for pictures of squirrels right now. Squirrels in berets, squirrels in the maillot jaune, squirrels who look like Alaphilippe or Pinot. Just bring me squirrels! You, the one who normally does tedious shots of office stationery and co-workers deep in discussion – you’re reassigned to squirrels!”   

[quiff]

I take the point, but I feel

I take the point, but I feel that answering drivers’ prejudices / criticisms with “I’m a driver too” sort of panders to them and misses the point. It’s immaterial whether or not a cyclist actually pays for the privilege of using their chosen method of transport on the road and whether they have been trained to use it, because law / policy makers have decided the harm they cause doesn’t warrant mandatory licensing and taxation. Instead, drivers of motor vehicles are supposed to be trained to show care for vulnerable road users.   

Anyway, to answer the question, just the standard car test, held for 18 years without points (though not without some stupid moments in my earlier driving years). I consider myself a “petrolhead” and have driven a couple of nice cars, but only recently bought my first (very sensible) car and am now sort of reconciled that my teenage vision of owning a sports car or three is unlikely to happen – it now just feels a bit socially irresponsible, not to mention financially crippling when I don’t actually need a car for day to day life. Maybe a hot hatch or Lotus Elise someday before they ban them.     

[Author]

Replies