Cycling UK Forum

Very interested in this thread as I now have arthritis in both knees resulting from a work related injury years ago. I have found cycling to be beneficial and enjoyable, however with the caveat that it is much less painful to spin a low gear (63 inches) than try to push a high gear. It is also critical to have your saddle position correct to minimise aggravating the knee joints. I can't ride fixed any longer but can still enjoy riding my bike. From experience of living with knee problems, being too young for knee replacements, it is essential to get your riding position and gearing correct. Cycling is low impact, but repetition and incorrect posture can quickly aggravate a chronic condition into something much more painful, so be careful.

What a mess. I have to say that I voted against the move to making the CTC a charity. Some of the subterfuge has come to light, like the membership fee being hiked to support the CTC charity over the years, the increasing annual amount of the members money used for this, and without explaining clearly this was going on.

I really think this is a case of ambition and ability on the part of Mr Mayne and his cohorts. The ambition to make the CTC into something which it should never be - a charity, based I suspect on 'questionable professional advice of consultants motivated by a chance to make a lot of money out of the CTC', and the ability of the CTC governance to actually deliver what they have actually proposed. The economic reality of the current financial mire in which our economy has inexorably sunk seems to have passed the leadership by, on planet Tron, or wherever they gaze at blue skies to do their thinking. Sources of funding from Government are drying up and will continue to be so, for at least the next ten years. Quangos are being killed off in the relentless drive for economy and with them other sources of funding. The gravy train has well and truly hit the buffers. Where is the money to come from to fund the much vaunted aims and ambitions as external funding/donations dry up? The rank and file (if they can afford it!). Therefore be prepared for more membership fee price hikes and a reduction in benefits in the relentless drive for 'streamlining', as and when the whole project begins to unravel. For the public to donate, they have to believe in the aims of and support the charity. Does the CTC have popular support with membership well under 500,000 in a population of over 62 million? Is Mr Mayne going to organize regular street collections to solicit public contributions to his grand scheme, or will regular begging letters be send to cycling clubs seeking funding to run his leviathan? Can the CTC continue to rely on 'Gift aid' if the govt decides to tighten up the rules at a budget?

How is this new 'charity' going to deliver on campaigning/lobbying in three regional assemblies and a London parliament? Where will the bulk of the campaigning money be spent? Will the registration of the CTC in Scotland allow the organization to spend most of it's income outside Scotland? Will this be reflected in the charity accounts in Scotland? Has it been explained that if the CTC is a registered charity in Scotland and does become a registered charity in England & Wales, then separate accounts will have to be filed in each legal jurisdiction for legal/tax/accounting purposes? How much will this cost?

I see BC is now moving to be the sole cycling body to represent cyclists when dealing with the Westminster government. They obviously see the CTC is in trouble. BC doesn't exactly have a glowing record either, and they cannot speak for Northern Ireland.

I am not convinced by MR Mayne's arguments, or the need to make the CTC a charity. I firmly believe that clear heads have not prevailed, despite some CTC members being very able to see the glaring pitfalls. A bit like the case of Neville Chamberlain in 1938, 'Peace in our time'. As far as the charity argument is concerned, it is hard to make a mouse believe a black cat is lucky. The whole thing is a mess. I waited to see how quickly/smoothly the whole process would go. My scepticism has been justified. I will stick by my beliefs and principles too. I will not renew my membership.

I've made my mind up. After over 25 years membership of the CTC it is time to leave. I don't agree with the direction the CTC has been taken, it was a late player defending cyclists in the Northern Ireland helmet debate. The lobbying/campaigning structure is London based and doesn't reflect the current reality or legislative dangers posed by the devolution of political power to the regions. I also don't like Cycle - a poor imitation of the magazine when I joined over 25 years ago. I have decided to save my money and not renew my membership.

I can see that you'd be stuffed with track ends, but the Surly has horizontal dropouts and that works fine with the SKS provided you leave a sufficient gap.

I assume the same would be true of the GB/VO guards...?

GB/VO mudguards are rigid not flexible like SKS. The mudguards work best if they are equidistant around the wheel and are design to eliminate splashback/water escape. If the mudguards are fitted properly they don't work. Owning and riding French bikes with these pattern mudguards fitted I can attest they work when fitted properly. I wouldn't recommend using them with horizontal dropouts. I would also recommend fitting them with either a rubber or leather washer to dampen vibration. Leather is better as it doesn't perish unlike rubber.

I would stick to SKS on the Surly.

Berthoud (French)/VO (US) mudguards are modern copies of original French mudguards made by several makers, such as Mavic and used by French constructeurs such as Singer, Herse, Reyhand, Goeland, Narcisse and Routens on their randonneur bicycles of the 1930s, 40s and 50s. The designs and fitment were honed in testing in the randonneuring technical trials. They are rigid, they work and do what they are designed to do, to stop water escaping and wetting the rider. They will only work with a frame which has vertical dropouts front and rear. A guide to fitting these mudguards to a frame was given in the US magazine 'Bicycle Quarterly' Volume 5, number 2 published in Winter 2006. Back issues are available for purchase on this link:- http://www.bikequarterly.com/vbqindex.html

[quote][/quote]LANDSURFER74 » Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:48 pm
i travel back and forward to all the Dublin ports monthly on business, i have never been asked for any ID ... But remember why it is called the "Emerald Isle" .... its always raining .....!!! or about to rain ... or just finished raining ...... god it's wet !!!!!

It's called a liquid sunshine and unless you're soaked to the skin, it isn't wet.

Harry Rensch was of German extraction and went by the nickname of 'Spanner'. His Galibier frame was a copy of the Schultz he saw in Paris when on a vist. Would rather own a Schultz than a Paris Galibier any day of the week!

Have to agree with last post. Just sorted out a girls Apollo bicycle which had been left into our local charity shop as a favour. V brakes were set up wrong and weren't really safe for a child. (Perhaps this was why the warning sticker about wearing a helmet was stuck on the top tube!) So much for the much advertised 'Free safety check'. I thought that all goods had to be of merchantable quality under the Sale of Goods Act.

Our local Halfords is not very good either. It's the old story....pay peanuts....get monkeys. But seriously Halfords have a fair old markup on anything they sell. I have seen some of their bikes and knowing what the parts cost trade in the UK and the wholesaler is making money, Halfords are buying direct from the factory in Taiwan or China. Even allowing for the transport and distribution cost, their markup must be very, very healthy on a lot of their bicycle range and this is not taking into account their parts range. However they will have big overheads for their stores,- rent, rates, electricity, heating, insurance. The top management will be on a large salary commensurate with their ego and perceived worth, but the worker on the shop floor will be paid as little as possible to help keep costs down. Training will be part of this cost and if staff aren't happy they won't stay, so training may be witheld because of staff turnover, again to save money.

Halfords musn't be doing that well in relative terms if they are trying to reduce the price of BSOs. Obviously not doing as well from the 'cycle to work scheme' as many LBS's were getting that trade. Poor customer service will eventually catch up with them and hurt them in turnover.

Andy

Thanks for replying to the thread. I was wondering if you still have sets of transfers available as I need to get a frame you made re-enamelled. Transfers were black and white. Bike had been stored by the owner and the chrome spokes have all gone a nice shade of red! Needs a bit of TLC to bring it back to A1 condition and all the original parts are going back on the bike after painting and rebuilding of wheels.

The local election in Northern Ireland may be just a lull in the battle. The whole process may start again after 5th May. There is a lot of emotion around this issue but I believe that Headway as a lobby group will try again. The Northern Ireland Assembly is the least mature of any devolved assembly in the UK and local political journalists know that the N.I. politicians such as Pat Ramsey are poorly prepared in terms of evidence. This proposal was a Private Members Bill and the proposer Pat Ramsey has been exposed in this thread as being poorly prepared in terms of evidence, however this did not prevent this legislative proposal reaching committee stage. The fact the proposal has run into the sand is not a glowing endorsement of the CTC campaigns policy. My understanding is that locally Sustrans were the more proactive of the two groups actively campaigning against helmet compulsion. The questions now are what lessons have been learned from this is where does the CTC go from here?

The first question is what lessons can be learned from this? All UK government is covered by the Human Rights Act. This means the Westminster Parliament, AND Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies. The test for legislation is that it must be proportionate (response to a perceived problem). Therefore in the case of Helmet compulsion evidence will be needed to support the basis for the legislation. As far as I am aware and again mentioned in the thread above, the statistics are not being collected (probably on grounds of cost) and so should be asked for. Second point is that there is no British Standard for cycle helmets. Any legislature or Government Department responsible should be pressed for this. If this information is forthcoming then further questions should be raised about the timetable for introduction of a suitable British Standard. The reason for this is twofold, firstly there will be a considerable cost to government in establishing and developing a suitable standard, something not considered by the N.I. Assembly. Where does the money come from? Secondly should helmet compulsion be introduced through legislation then it is a reasonable expectation that the relevant legislature will introduce and develop a suitable standard and not leave cyclists unprotected. The failure of a duty of this duty care should be challengeable in court as this precedent has been set with both motor vehicles and motorcycles. This point needs to be well made the campaign stage. Whilst the CTC petition is a good idea, I believe that a mass campaign of letter writing to the appropriate minister with responsibility for proposed cycling legislation asking for the appropriate unavailable statistical evidence and details of the helmet standard and safety performance of the headgear should prove a suitable wake up call. This was never tried in the Northern Ireland case. Does the CTC even have statistical evidence for the N.I. Region alone and indeed what steps did the CTC take to obtain this information? This information will be valuable when dealing with a devolved assembly. (The Welsh Assembly now has the power to introduce it's own legislation)

The second question is very valid. Will the CTC in support of their claim to be a 'National' cycling organisation maintain a presence in the devolved assemblies? Many of the CTC much publicised 'successes' are not in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland. CTC members pay the same membership fees in these areas and over the years subscriptions have been increased to subsidise the charity campaigning work of the CTC. Another hike is being looked for at the next AGM. Helmet compulsion has exposed the weakness of the current CTC policy of a Westminster based lobby focus. The CTC was a late player onto the anti-helmet lobby field in Northern Ireland.

Does anyone know the whereabouts of Phillip Pike, son of Stan Pike? There was a thread on the forum in 2007:-

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5480&start=0

I have a frame made by him and I would like to try and get a build date for the frame. It is nicely made from Reynolds 531 tubing using Bocama Professional lugs. Any help greatfully appreciated.

My understanding is that the bill reached the second stage without an effective lobbying campaign being run.

Just caught this thread. CTC failed to mount a timely and effective campaign against compulsory wearing of helmets in Northern Ireland. The legislation was passed on 31-01-2011.

It is also a timely comment on the charity debate. For years our subscriptions have been syphoned off and increased to support cycle campaigning in some areas of the UK without fulling disclosing what was going on to the membership. How much did the CTC spend in Northern Ireland as a percentage of their overall campaigning budget year on year? The proposer for the charity motion was Mr Flood, the council representative from Northern Ireland. Great things were promised and members exhorted to support this 'all singing bells and whistles necessity' which was essential to bulwark cycling and protect the interest of all cyclists in the UK. I think the facts now speak for themselves as the CTC campaign has been acknowledged as late and ineffective. Has the action of the 'CTC Charity' been in the interests of all cyclists and how will the ramifications of this legislation pan out both within Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK? How will insurance companies interpret this when dealing with compensation for cyclists injured in the rest of the UK where a precedent for the compulsory wearing of helmets has been allowed to be established?

The question now is, does the CTC represent value for money in terms of membership? It cannot claim to be a national organisation any longer when it has clearly failed to mount an effective challenge to this legislation. The ambivalence shown by the CTC in recognising the threat and dealing with the issue in a timely fashion has failed cyclists in the Northern Ireland region but has the potential to cause harm in the rest of the UK. Does the CTC any longer does what it says on the tin?

I've been cycling longer than 15 years and work in the emergency services. Cycle helmets have not been shown to save lives. A motorcycle helmet will not always save a motorcyclist when in collision with another motor vehicle. Fat chance of a cycle helmet protecting a cyclist when hit by a motor vehicle. This legislation is supposedly to protect cyclists, the spurious reason used for compulsory wearing of helmets. There isn't even a decent BS standard applicable to cycle helmets to protect against cranial injury, but how will a helmet prevent a broken neck caused by an impact with a motor vehicle? Anyway what weight would a helmet and neck support be to give the level of protection required?

Motor insurance companies do not 'always pay' as anyone who has been involved in a collision with a hit and run driver will confirm. If the driver makes off and is not caught or else is not insured it is the Motor Insurance Bureau which picks up the tab which means I pay for it on my insurance along with everyone else.

I also pay tax, both to central government and local government. The stupid legislation has to be policed so the tax payer has to pay. A £50 is to be implemented for not wearing a helmet. If you don't pay the fine then I would image court will follow, again paid for by the tax payer. If fined in court and still refuses to pay, then likely a warrant will be issued in default, so then I would image a week or two in HMP will follow. Is this a good use of tax payers money? Under Human Rights legislation, is this legislation a proportionate response to the problem?

As a CTC member of over 25 yrs living in Northern Ireland I have to agree with meic's comment above. The local DA brands itself Northern Ireland but is Belfast based. (You will search in vain to find any runs starting outside the greater Belfast area). I contacted the CTC HQ about the threat posed to local roads by the new A5 road scheme here in Northern Ireland running from the border at Auchnacloy to Londonderry. The response, I received, was frankly bloody awful with little or no interest. My job precludes me from being involved in politics and campaigning against a road scheme is political. Sustrans have been more heavily involved lobbying against the road scheme. CTC have not only failed cyclists who they claim to represent in Northern Ireland and handed insurance companies a stick to beat all cyclists with but also failed cyclists in the rest of the UK by not effectively fighting this motion. This is the thin end of the wedge and this legislation will be tried in other devolved regions before trying Westminster.

It is also a sad comment on the charity debate. For years our subscriptions have been syphoned off and increased to support cycle campaigning in some areas of the UK without fulling disclosing what was going on to the membership. How much did the CTC spend in Northern Ireland as a percentage of their campaigning budget year on year? The proposer for the charity motion was Mr Flood the council representative from Northern Ireland. Great things were promised and members exhorted to support this 'all singing bells and whistles necessity' which was essential to bulwark cycling and protect the interest of all cyclists in the UK. I think the facts now speak for themselves as the CTC has been acknowledged as late and ineffective.

The question is, do I still remain a member of the CTC or get insurance to ride the bike more cheaply from another cycling body?