-
-
-
-
I offered to chaperone her for a few weeks of commuting both ways. I'd be stoked to get her rolling. I'm going to powdercoat my old fujitrack and try to give it to her. Reckon singlespeed and two brakes or one brake and fixed straight up?
If shes not ridden much before I'd say geared with two brakes - she won't thank you for putting her on a fixed wheel ride straight off...
-
-
-
Exactly.
I disagree. My mother only learned to cycle at the age of 40. As she doesn't cycle frequently, and doesn't get a lot of practice she is still very nervous about cycling amongst traffic, but is slowly building confidence. Should she stop cycling completely because she is inexperienced and feels uncomfortable in heavy traffic?
As an example of how uncomfortable she finds it: She will put the bike in the back of the car and drive to the canal (paying to go over a toll bridge which is free to cyclists) in order to go for a ride along the towpath, rather than cycle the 5 minutes (if that) to get to where she leaves the car.No - sorry, obviously I was unclear. That's exactly my point - your mum will build confidence to the point when she'll be fine on the roads. In the meantime I don't think that she should be forced onto them if she doesn't feel safe, and I suspect she's not causing any problem. Even if there's the odd junction or stretch of road where she doesn't feel safe I personally have no problem with her considerately using the pavement.
I don't think that all cyclists should be told it's ok to always ride on the pavement though - but I certainly don't think that all cyclists on a pavement are cunts, or even that they're doing something wrong.
In the past week there have been threads here about taxis running wheels over, bus drivers cutting people up, taxi drivers coming at you with wheel jacks - I managed to end up on the floor in the middle of the road a couple of days ago (partly my fault :) ). Yet here we are saying that people who don't feel safe jousting with horrible traffic are idiots... seems the wrong way round to me.
-
-
they would be if you chain smoked cigars though (credit card required to keep up stock as cigars can be expensive)
Worth noting that a cigar would also burn through very quickly when riding due to wind resistance so keeping the holder stocked up would be a full time and expensive (credit card again) job.
Where do you put your lighter and cigar end cutter off thing though?
Perhaps that's on the next iteration? flick a hidden switch and a little flame pops up from the stem bolt hole... I imagine the cigar cutter could easily be incorporated into the end of the drops.
I assume the saddle is covered with quilted velvet?
-
especially on bus lane now, I always hated going down Kennington Park Road with motorcycles zooming past me at 40mph.
Practically every road I ride on is like this, only we have no maximum speed limit. It is not uncommon for cars and motorbikes to whizz past at close to double that.
Training is your friend.
I absolutely agree about the training, you get used to it after a while and it ceases to be a huge problem. However, there's loads of people for whom it would be a big problem - they'd have one go on a busy road or bus lane on it and then never ride again. Others would never feel comfortable riding on it, no matter how much they tried.
This forum is by it's nature full of confident and experienced riders - not everyone is like that.
I'd use Old Street as an example in London (of the top of my head, I'm sure there are far better ones...). I don't mind riding around it, but I'm some people would - I have no problem with people riding considerately around there, the pavements are mostly wide and it could be done stress free (and they'd have to giveway to the peds of course). Oxford street on the other hand could be a nightmare for an inexperienced rider, but I wouldn't want them riding the pavements there as it's just too busy.
Personally, I think they that people who feel unsafe on sections of road and who aren't bothering anyone else should be afforded some discretion (obviously not a total waiver - if they feel unsafe riding on a road at all, then they should question using a bike).
-
Every road user should be insured and have a valid driving / cycling licence. Any fool can buy a cycle and, with no knowledge of the road law or Highway Code, venture out to cause mayhem. I have a car driving licence and tax & insurance and I would be happy for the same on my bikes. Not the tax bit though. Would solve a lot of the issues here.
Anyone caught being illegal should be deported or at least told to walk for the next 500 metres holding a sign saying 'I've been naughty'.
Perhaps a disc on the bike saying it is in good working order and road worthy. A rusty chain will be removed and you'll have to walk home.
Anyone cycling at night wearing black with no lights gets shot where they stand. It's safer in the long run to remove these people before they win the Darwin award injuring someone else.
Old people get re-tested as per current driving licensing.
Helmets should be compulsory. A fall at 30+ mph is going to mess you up.
Summary executions for arsehole / most taxi drivers.
No bendy busses - bad drivers to be stabbed up a bit.
HGV's should have cameras in blind spots and not be allowed in towns during daylight.If all road users are treated the same, there can be no cause for the other groups to attach a general blame to all cyclists for the actions of a few nobs.
A load of this is actually true. Especially the bit about the taxi drivers...
-
I'm not sure I agree with some of the 'pavement riding = cunt' rhetoric. For the record, I don't do it. However, there are situations where I have absolutely no problem with it.
Before I moved to London I lived near Warwick - there are roads that cyclists have to share with cars hitting 60mph (narrow single carriage ways). It's ridiculous to say that someone has to ride on that if they feel, justifiably, unsafe doing so (it's essentially tantamount to banning them from cycling at all on certain routes). I daresay there are horrible junctions in London which are similar to a number of people.
As has been said, anyone causing hurt to a ped, hit them with Assault / GBH. We all go on about how drivers try to have a go at us with their 'lethal weapons' (cars / buses) - same thing with peds / cyclists.
It's already illegal to do it - what more do they want. Allow the police some discretion for parts of the road where a cyclist feels in danger from other users surely.
-
Second having a look around for similar classes nearer to home (local builder / night school?). I do an acoustic guitar building course evening classes which ends up being about £10 a week (plus materials). I find it incredibly relaxing, you spend a few hours with non of the usual problems / thoughts going through your head - very cleansing.
From what I remember the Dave Yates is pretty expensive - you'll get the bike quicker (five days) because of his experience and jigs - but it won't be a Dave Yates frame, yet will cost more.
Your brazes are not going to be any better because it's Dave teaching you as opposed to a metalwork tutor - and I'm sure you could do a good job on your own for less money or spreading it out, also a couple of hours once a week is an easy sell.
I know that most people don't build more than one bike, but I'd always think of Dave's course as an introduction into how you'll be able to eventually build you own bike totally from scratch - why not just do that?
-
24" wheels - I use velocity aerohead rims on my lo pro. You can either order them direct from airnimal (folding bike people - phone them via their website and they're very friendly), or speak to Condor and they can order them in for you.
They're 520's and can be wrapped with Schwalbe Stelvios (which the airnimal people can send at the same time).
-
I've got a pair of these, brand new, still in box.
Been placed on a bike (to assess for size), but never actually fitted.
Currently £24 at chain reaction cycles, yours for £15. PM me if you're interested.
Will post at cost, otherwise pickup in Old street / City area.
Picture below is from chain reaction, I can take a picture of the actual ones tonight if anyone wants.
-
-
-
-
If my maths is any good that makes female cyclists almost 30 times more at risk that males.......
Not sure of the maths you've used - I'm sure what you've done is correct.
But if I were trying to decide whether I could say if women were more at risk of HGVs, I'd have to first see whether I thought 7/8 was a useful stat (I don't think it is - though 70/80 or 700/800 would be), and then I'd have to see what the proportion of women cyclists was in the same area as that stat.
If the proportion of London female cyclists was 90% for example, then that 7/8 stat doesn't look wrong. I know it's not 90%, but we don't know what it is, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are more female cyclists in London as compared to some hilly part of Yorkshire for example.
Anyway, I've no idea whether the actual sentiment of the article is correct (it probably is), I'm just being anal and saying that the reporting was a bit off kilter :)
Anyway, no more, as I'm at risk of being shown to be totally wrong by some stats guru :)
-
From the article:
"Setting lorries aside, the bigger picture is that far more men are killed on their bikes. In 2008, 84% of the 115 fatalities were men and 81% of reported injuries were to men."HGVs are not the major killer of cyclists but do fatally injure a disproportionate amount of women cyclists.
You can't say that they fatally injure a large proportion of female cyclists. We do not know what the proportion of HGV related deaths are outside of London (we would expect the number to be 28% if it was proportionate).
We only know that 7/8 deaths (far too small a sample) inside of london were women - but if the proportion of women cyclists in London was higher than 28% then may not look disproportionate.
Anyway, thats nitpicking, I thought it was quite a good article.
-
It seems to me, from a purely statistical standpoint, that there haven't been enough (recorded) fatalities / accidents to infer any reasonable degree of significance.
This is certainly true. Sample size far to small and slightly dishonest reporting:
*"This year, seven of the eight people killed by lorries in London have been women. *
Considering that women make only 28% of the UK's cycling journeys, this seems extremely high."Eight deaths in London, 28% women cyclists in UK. What is the proportion of women cyclists in London then?
Never the less, interesting article particularly about the defensive cycling.
Wait a second... didn't I see a thread about that over the weekend...