Cycling UK Forum

I've used lycra shorts with inserts for over 20 years, and had no real problems. The inserts vary a lot in quality. And some won't suit everyone. The current Lusso ones (not the gel versions- not tried those) have quite firm inserts, which need to bed in quite a bit when you first get them.

For those people who wear underwear underneath other types of shorts- wear microfibre or Tactel underwear- ideally seamless. They wick moisture, unlike anything made of cotton. They can be pricey, but can be had at reasonable prices at discount stores such as TKMaxx- although you may have problems finding larger sizes on discount.

As for B17's, I've used them practically all my cycling life. Can't imagine cycling without them. I use a B17 narrow. They can take a while to break in, but be patient, it's well worth it. Use Proofide as recommended. They last years. I've needed to use the tension spanner once in 23 years. Oh, and you occasionally need to gently clean them with the sort of thing you can get from a proper horse/tack shop- nothing else. And of course, always use a saddle cover if you need to leave your bike outside a cafe in the rain.

thirdcrank wrote:The relevance of the 'paying for the service' argument is that if there is real demand i.e. backed with money, somebody will generally provide the service. Also, the paying cuctomer is in a vastly stronger position to argue than an apparent free rider.

It seems to me also true that on this issue, like some others, the CTC could have been more forceful. It is said that you can gain more by being diplomatic, but I'm not so sure. It is possible to spend all the time avoiding upsetting anybody with the result that you are walked all over.

Nice idea about paying- but with the railway companies- don't think so. The reality is that the rolling stock doesn't have enough room without modification, and the companies aren't going to do that unless there's enough pressure on them to do it. It doesn't matter how much you would pay- no space means no bike on train. After all, paying an inflated price for a rail ticket is no guarantee of a seat!

The only time it was relatively easy to take bikes on trains in the recent past, was when the railways were in steep decline, hence the free carriage. Now there's huge pressure on seating space, they don't want to do it.

Like I said before- the only answer is an effective hard hitting campaign. I agree about the politeness thing- the trouble is that people equate politeness with being a doormat, which means you will get a kicking. If the reality is that the rail companies don't give a damm, CTC should say so- not praise companies when it isn't justified. Enough is enough- we need to kick ass on this one. That's what the media is for.

CJ wrote:

atoz wrote:Maybe if CTC had been in the past rather more forceful on this issue, we wouldn't have got to this.

I can't disagree with that. I think cyclists were lulled into a false feeling of security when we got the child fare for a bike reduced to free gratis and for nothing. And I think we are mistaken to continue to ask for the free carriage of bikes, as this is often granted at the expense of too few bike spaces with no possibility of reserving them.

I don't think the free carriage/charging argument is relevant. The rolling stock won't take more than 2 bikes generally, so whether you pay or not is a red herring. It's the discrimination that is, and unless we work with others to challenge it, nothing will be done.

yes- 1 to 1 gearing can often be not low enough, esp in hilly areas. I often use a superlow of around 25. The touring bike has a superlow of 21- but my new speedy bike has a superlow of 18.5. If you go to places like the Lake District, or Pendle and suchlike you will use them, have no fear. And that's without touring loads!

Last year I did the Pain in the Pennines challenge ride. When riding Mytholm Steeps on this event, I used the 25 inch low, and had to get out of the saddle then. Because of damp road/moss, I nearly came off, and had to walk the few yards to the top. With a lower gear, I could have avoided getting out of the saddle, and losing traction- well, in theory anyway.

Oh yes- Shimano freewheels are junk these days compared with in the past. I've managed to kill off one in 12 months. The previous Sachs one took several years of hard use to finish off- but you can't get them now.

I have a bike with toeclip overlap- a Claud Butler Brevet, which I am rather attached to. It has never been a problem, in the 24 years I have been riding it.

I do wonder if avoiding toeclip overlap has implications for overall frame design, esp if you are shorter than average in the body, when compared to your legs. I often have reach problems with frames, but not with this bike, which does also have a shorter top tube.

Any thoughts?

CJ wrote:Bikes and Trains, it's the longest-running one-sided love-affair ever! And it's oh so pathetic: the bikes love the trains, but the trains don't even want to be best friends.

How much rejection does it take for us to get the message?

The railways may grudgingly have accepted our affections at times when nobody else even liked them, but just now they've got more attention than they can handle already! The entirely predictable response is: "Ooh you dirty little bikes, get off me"!

I'm sorry, but I don't hold out much hope of a forced marriage arranged by parliamentarians.

Maybe if CTC had been in the past rather more forceful on this issue, we wouldn't have got to this. And even now, I'm not convinced they're pushy enough. There was recently a piece in Cycle telling us how positive Northern Rail was on cycles and trains. This is not the company I'm familiar with. The same company that got rid of the reasonably generous class 156 Sprinters (usually up to 4 bikes) on the Settle Carlisle and subsituted class 158's, which struggle to take even 2 bikes. They won't even take out the useless luggage rack in the cycle space so you can get 2 (road) bikes in the small space provided. West Yorks Metro claimed these trains were better generally for passengers, but the guard on the train I used disagreed- said 156's were better for everyone, esp elderly and disabled, as well as cyclists.

If motor companies can have all sorts of bendy seats in hatchbacks and estates to accomodate luggage, why not trains?

Unless the cycling community gets organised and starts making common cause with other passenger groups, things won't get better.

I once wore yellow Mercatone shorts to cycle to work. Admittedly it was in summer holidays though. Given that I work in an FE college, it would cause serious gossip in term time..

Colour doesn't seem to make a lot of difference. I have been hassled wearing black lycra, and totally ignored wearing yellow lycra.

pete75 wrote:Most common cause of sudden and complete bearing failure is the bearing cage breaking up. This will eventually happen if you use bearings for a long time after they're worn out but can also happen to good condition and even new bearings because of manufacturing defects. Thankfully this is rare. Sounds like you've just been unlucky.

I know someone in our club had a Campag one failed- axle broke in two. Only a couple of years old. My budget one did 9 years.

Maybe it's not as uncommon as all that...

Has anyone had a bottom bracket go on them- the sealed unit type? Mine went on Sunday, descending through Cowling on the road over from Colne. I had to train it back from Steeton- bit of a walk from Sutton lane end, which is where it finally gave up the ghost.

In fact, according to the timetable, there should have been buses only due to engineering work, and I was getting concerned. But as 10 people showed up for the train, including 2 young ladies in what looked like 2 inch heels, I suspected a train would turn up- and so it did.

An interesting experience...but I was lucky it didn't die on the climb out of Laneshaw Bridge.

JohnW wrote:I agree that screw-ons are fine. I have several Campag Record screw-on hubs, and they keep getting new rims on them, and I've even bought new spindles/cups/cones/balls for them.

I also have a wheel with cassette hub, and I really can't identify an advantage except that you can get more cogs on a freehub.

Technically, with a freeehub, the bearings are both tight up against the dropout and this make them more evenly stressed and they have less of a tendancy to bend/break the spindles.

If I had to vote, I'd go for screw-ons.

Or perhaps the hellical thread like Maillard did about 25-30 years ago - anyone remember them? The block was very similar to a screw-on, but fitted to the hub with a hellical thread, which didn't tighten to high heaven as you rode, but was positively fitted, once threaded onto the hub, with a screw-on lock ring. The blocks were easy to take off.

I think they failed to become generally adopted because the freehub came shortly after, and because Maillard bearings had a poor reputation at the time.

I just replaced my Campag rear axle and cones (hubs are 24 years old). By contrast, you can't get spares for old style Shimano cassette hubs. I agree with JohnW- I rest my case

The Zefal HPX is great. Trouble is, getting spare washers (unless you go online and combine it with other purchases to make it worth your while). Because it's metal, I imagine it's useful to fend off dogs..oh, and it will take falling off the bike a few times.

You need a pump to inflate up to 120 PSI for narrow sections- day rides, Audax etc. And if you puncture, and the cover's getting past it, you need a pump that'll inflate to high pressures to avoid a second puncture through that cut in the tread (what cut you say- ah but there always is one, in my experience, and you can't always plug them with Superglue)

I managed to get a Blackburn washer to fit the HPX. It seems easier to get spares for Blackburn.

Most common are often SKS- but the ones often sold are cheapo crap. Avoid.
However, the Piccolo (dinky pump) has a washer which may (I said may) fit other pumps.

I have good reports of Topeak, but don't have one myself.

JohnW wrote:Eau-der-de Cagoule.

Or maybe "eau de rubber solution"- from the puncture kit that sees a lot of use in this sort of weather.

JohnW wrote: How about never using internet shops again? I never have, I use my local LBSs (and Spa Cycles, and, by post : Mike Dyason, and GBCycles and Mercian) and I rate them as being honest and honourable.

The more I think about the letter from your internet retailer, the more "......I don't believe it!!......".

I really do sympathise with you.

The problem, I feel, is with the bike trade. Unfortunately, although some bike shops/suppliers are great, some are not. And when they start doing internet business, some of them can't cope.

It's to do with customer care. Many lines of business couldn't now exist without online retailing. Some, like Amazon, are what the Internet is about. The bike trade, by contrast, often thinks customer care is something other people do, not them. Ever tried getting spares for low value items recently? Pump washers? Or tried to find clothing that fits someone other than a very small Italian?

I sympathise, but I think the real problem is with the cycle trade itself. My one-time neighbour once described them as the last refuge of Neanderthal man.

H'm. I used to have a CTC frame transfer- no, I tell a lie, it's actually still there on the bike that's permanently on the turbo that I don't often go out on. But most of it is gone.

It looked attractive to me, but it's probably too retro for many people's tastes. I'm sure a more modern one could be devised that doesn't too naff.

Much as though I liked the winged wheel, it probably doesn't mean a lot outside long standing members- of which I am one. So I can understand why CTC dropped it, although not necessarily agreeing with it.

I hope that the changes will encourage more people to become involved with us.

I'm concerned that we get new people to join us. Too many of the people I ride with are no younger than me- I'm in my 40s. If the groups thing encourages more people, well and good. If not, then people need a good hard think.

That's my opinion, for what it's worth..