Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I suppose the point is that I
I suppose the point is that I’ve had many bikes over 60 years of cycling and have never seen this – just about all the spoke holes show the circumferential crack and 2 of them are already pulling through. It’s sold as the Vitus Substance Adventure ‘gravel bike’ and has spent almost all it’s time on ordinary roads around North Lancashire or cycle camping trips towing a trailer- not a very hard life, and the spokes are intact and all original. Cleaning has nothing to do with it, and it’s pretty clean anyway for a bike just back from the Lakes!
Chain Reaction denied all responsibility for the hub failure and referred me to JoyTech who don’t reply and then said ‘buy a new wheel’. The irksome notion that all failures are due to someone else, preferably the cyclist, must be resisted so it’ll be the Small Claims Court procedure. I’ll probably win, as I did 20 years ago against a travel company.
Either defective rims, or
Either defective rims, or massively over-tensioned straight gauge spokes, perhaps?
I checked these off the peg wheels when the bike arrived, and they were surprisingly smooth. I also squeezed the spokes and they seemed normal. Both wheels went a little out of true after a few weeks but I wasn’t surprised at that, and they only needed minimal spoke adjustment. Surprisingly, that rear is still pretty true despite being completely wrecked! The noise from the hub only appeared a couple of months ago.
Front hub and rim seem fine,
Front hub and rim seem fine, and this bike is almost exclusively used on the roads towing a trailer for camping trips.Good point. It does indeed
Good point. It does indeed claim to be i23. I’ll know to avoid WTB in future. The JoyTech hub is rubbish as well- it started making a noise and I found at least 2 too few drive side bearings and a knackered cone. JoyTech doesn’t reply, so you can’t get a spare cone.Yes- I noticed it first when
Yes- I noticed it first when returning from the Lakes. Fortunately, I always carry the gear in a trailer.
Just can’t get these right way up on Android!
View 3
View 3
View 2
View 2
View 1
View 1
You didn’t hear anything for
You didn’t hear anything for six months??
Why the surprise?! The police and CPS, in Lancashire at least, are trying to get rid of cases involving cyclists by fair means or foul. Here, you will rarely hear anything, they’re settling nearly all cases by ultra-joke ‘words of advice’, super joke ‘warning letter’ and joke ‘driving course online’, but they won’t tell the cyclist anything because they don’t want you to know the above.
Probably depends where you
Probably depends where you are. Cycling Mikey shows that London Magistrates are intent on punishing offenders, whereas in Lancashire the overwhelming impression is that the police/ CPS Axis is dedicated to delaying cases as long as possible in the hope the prosecution can be forgotten about and abandoned. The cyclist will have to push hard for a prosecution based on impeccable evidence to go ahead at all. I have only been once to the Preston Magistrates- I was told I didn’t need to attend, and I only found out the date of the hearing by harassing the “SRU Court Presentation Officers” for over a year. I was suspicious, so I did attend incognito. I was right- dirty work was afoot…the hearing only took place because the offender had failed to attend the offered joke driving course by February 2020. I’m assuming it was the proper ‘you have to be there in person’ course then. The offender showed up looking like the Golf Professional he is, rather like a WWII spiv, and accompanied by ‘counsel’. Counsel said that spiv agreed to attend the (now super-joke online no-tiresome-inconvenience) course by November 2021, the CPS/ Court Presentation Officer or whatever, demonstrated that she couldn’t operate the computer system, and that was that. As far as I could make out there is another hearing in November, but maybe that will all be done by post?
This offence of later in the
This offence of later in the day on 23.6.21, and reported on the 24th, was only acknowledged on 8.7.21 and allocated an 8th July log incident reference- 15 days after the offence. It’s obvious that they’re just ensuring the case is ‘too late to process’ before they officially look at it.
This is 2 minutes later
This is 2 minutes later
This offence of 23.6.21 was
This offence of 23.6.21 was acknowledged close to midnight on 7.7.21, and allocated a 7th July log incident reference- this is 14 days after the offence by VW Caddy van YE61 ZSY, which repeated the offence 2 minutes later
it’s the offence below by
it’s the offence below by Avid Brewery’s VW Transporter AV10 BUS (the dirtiest vehicle on the roads, with a completely obscured rear window)
The police tell me that this company received a warning letter. This looks to me like a standard non-penalty penalty: the company receives the letter, doesn’t need to say who the driver is so deliberately ‘doesn’t know’, and the same driver can do the same thing again without fear of a proper punishment
You might but I’m not! They
You might but I’m not! They restrict the file size, and require and advise users to compress to get under the limit. HEVC is only new in the sense that it’s not stone age, and I can already easily compress using MPEG- but they only come under the limit if the resolution is brought down to about 10 x 10. If they wanted to read HEVC, they could.
