Cycling UK Forum

Hmmm, no EU restrictions on how much we can grow some time down the line so fewer food imports (certainly one should hope milk at the very least will be become a nil importer!), more conference calling via the interweb, the bank people and every other business are naffing off so won't require as much business travel requirements ( )
Also now that we don't require the airforce in such great numbers why can't we use some of the old RAF bases that are either derelict or being run down to skeleton services as regional hubs for any additional flights. The runways/land is already there or is that too simplistic/not money making!

Over the next 5 years Groningen are to spend €85 per head each year for the next 5 years on cycling.
This is their 10 year cycling strategy
if only we could have even 20% of this

http://groningenfietsstad.nl/friksbehee ... 5-2025.pdf
Here's a short film about what they are doing and how people feel about getting around the town
https://vimeo.com/76207227

SA_SA_SA wrote:

axel_knutt wrote:..... the subject of a very well worn psychological thought experiment. ...

That is not applicable: the car driver chose the risk of driving a car and they and their passengers must bear it:

the pedestrians are innocent bystanders, it is unacceptable to deliberately hit them.

Absolutely this, choosing to 'save' those with supposedly greater protection over the lives of those unprotected goes right against what we are trying to do right, that is putting the greater onus onto that/those that are causing the harm and to stop it from doing so. For a manufacturer to basically state because of our customers decision to use our killing machine to transport themselves about other innocent parties could be killed because of our software. That's tantamount to manslaughter

Bikes with a hint of racier geo that have room for wider tyres/guards/racks have always been few and far between, and still many manufacturers make the mistake of not including mudguard and/or pannier rack fitments. This is very apparent on the latest 'gravel' bikes which whilst looking quite nice still have a limited use and in fair few cases clearance for only a 32mm tyre with mudguards, though some have much more. I've seen reviews of one supposed high end gravel/adventure frame that barely had clearance for a 28mm with guards which is frankly crazy.

For me I took a quality butted alu hybrid bike (2007/8 model) which has chunky carbon forks/carbon seat stays (with elastomers) and turned it into an all round bike that has few superiors (in my humble opinion). It has all the mounts you'd want including front rack mounts and can take a 55mm wide tyre. It's not a disc bike either but using TRP mini Vs work perfectly with STIs despite the latest review in cycle magazine stating that mini Vs are unsuitable for wider tyres and are 'spongy'. The braking is as good if not better than my Dura Ace 9000 calipers.

To be able to have a bike for a multitude of differing situations and still be good at all of them without compromises such as seatpost mounted racks or the like and clip on guards is for those that can only have only one bike for all situations (for whatever reasons that is) the holy grail.

Even for those of us with several bikes knowing you can just grab that bike and it work more than just adequately and still bring a smile to your face is a great situation to be in.

UN have suggested 20% of all transport budgets should be spent on infra for people on bikes/foot.

https://cyclingindustry.news/united-nat ... d-walking/

Dreamland and even if it was we know it would be mickey'd up the wall with garbage we get built.

Should be enforced at MOT time. I've not generally had any bother with a motor with blacked out windows before, last nights encounter was it so happens one of these types.
Difficult to ascertain if their std of driving would be just as mickey poorwith or without.

Unless the people on site are actually being obstructive, just turn up. People such as youve encountered are just idiots.write a formal letter of complaint to the head of the county council and cc to your local MP with a side note about contactingthe press.

"we are prone to count ourselves as a collective group", so some people, not all by any means plus some outside the 'collective' too. Not everyone has like minded feelings about injustice but from that, that collectively means we should all be treated as that same group and be given correctional treatment as a consequence, broader in fact encompassing absolutely everyone because one or two idiots do wrong stuff. just WOW.

BakfietsUK wrote:Hope they balanced the programme to reflect the correct proportion of motorists that do stupid things too. I also hope it's not gratuitously having a pop at cyclists. Anyway it sounds like a point that needs to be made and seems like a case in favour of competency tests.

I don't hold with the "we don't help ourselves" landsurfer, I prefer to see it as "some people" don't help themselves, or us (that are predominantly sensible). I draw myself apart from people who cycle in a wilfully dysfunctional way. When I am challenged by non cyclists, about cyclists behaviour in general conversation, I disassociate my own behaviour from the irresponsible riders they site.

OK I may sound self righteous, to an extent, I make mistakes like anyone else, the difference is that I wont wilfully put myself or others in danger.

Please explain this comment further.
One person makes a stupid error and from that you extrapolate that every person whom wishes to ride a bike must undergo a certificated test/training regime to satisfy your and obviously quite a few others way of thinking because you think it'll make the majority safer?
Yeah because that's worked for drivers of motorvehicles really well! Like for like in terms of harm/risk, we'd need to have every single person whom currently has a license removed from the roads until retrained and tested to advance driver level, then retested every year along with an annual health & psyche assessment, well of the ones that bother with licenses, insurance etc which number MORE than those that cycle daily just on their own.
Sorry but that's the reality, sometimes people make stupid decisions whilst on bikes, to then lump everyone to meet X criteria before being allowed on the road on the back of that is complete nonsense.

People often feel pushed to get X in an effort to protect/make themselves feel safer, what it actually does is make matters worse in the long run, so have this fitted and when you get mown down because you failed to indicate the blame is yours.

We already know that caving in to the victim blaming as the system has gone toward puts greater and greater onus on the vulnerable as being the accepted norm (see helmets & hi-vis) and less and less responsbility on those that harm and with respect to motorists a lower standard of driver that creeps ever more down the pan and on from that jury's (made up mostly of people that drive...poorly) that are ever more forgiving of incidents involving motorists that kill and maim. Isn't that why the government brought in 'death by careless'?

I for one am never going to contribute to that knowing that these 'safety' aids are anything but.

There's a helmet that got a lot of kickstarter funding that includes a rear facing camera that sends the image to a screen or glasses wirelessly.

Body position/aerodynamics is more likely to be the main difference here not wind speed. It seems too short a distance to garner any real useful data and too short a distance for a GPS to be useful IMHO.

It wouldn't surprise me if the tyres on the Moulton offer better RR, IF as I suspect the majority of the speed diff (at the start of the flat section) is the result of better aerodynamics on the Mercian then that is likely the explanation.

unless you have a wind tunnel it's impossible to prove accurately that X bike is more aero than Y bike, even small variations in your body position could totally cancel out any differences in aero differential between the bikes themselves, even counter the whole aero drag of a bike. We know this as total drag of riding can be as much as 90% due to the person on it.

Here's a link that might be helpful https://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/a ... mics1.html

ALL extra gadgets/add ons/creature comforts add weight, it's not just the facia, and as importantly it all draws power from the battery which has a detrimental effect on fuel economy especially in an EV vehicle.
So if you think none of the extra stuff that is put into modern cars has no extra weight how come a 1989 Astra is 300kg lighter than its modern equivalent, how come the latest 1.4l 16v fuel injected Astra with computer management, improved aerodynamics, 30 years worth of improvements everywhere and with 25% more power is SLOWER than a non fuel injected vehicle and in real world use is no more economical?

Given the hefty weight of the LEAF, 300kg of which is the battery, it would have a heck of a lot more range if all the extras that are on show and plenty hidden behind the trimmings were just ripped out. You must think it's all weightless and runs on fairy dust!

As for the old MKII Astra, in over 125,000 miles i was hit once, from behind at between 25-30mph whilst I was stationary, the car was repaired within a few days, i had a stiff neck for a week or so. So actually I had no qualms about being in a crash, adding the extra protection is what makes people get sloppy and take more risks, we know this already. Not getting into a crash in the first place is paramount over everything else.

2001 Passat estate 4681mm length, 1740mm wide, 1406kg Kerb weight, that makes it 23cm longer, 3 cm narrower AND at least 68kg LIGHTER than the LEAF!
I can't imagine the LEAF can carry 5 full sized adults in comfort/enough leg room (I've seen the stock photos with the front passenger and drivers seat pushed right forward to make it look like there's loads of leg space in the rear) plus luggage so why so damn big? EV cars around town should only have the benefits IF they are taking up half the space of a full sized car, as in they should be two seat plus a little space for some work gear/shopping size only so should be like this.
640kg kerb Weight, max speed 58-61km/h, Range @ max speed - 72KM, @ 50 km/h - 86KM, @ 40km/h - 110KM, why would you need anything else for town/city use?


As for gadgets, my Passat (big car remember) no cd player, no Aux in for ipod/phone etc, no sat-nav, no on steering controls, no traction control, no WHIPS, no heated seats, no reversing detectors, oh and no stupid DRLs either! it's got climate control though which I love

It's all the rubbish (ergo added weight) they put into modern cars that has a huge effect on fuel economy and by definition how much pollution, my old 1989 VX Astra weighed 880kg for goodness sakes and I could get 55mpg out of its 1.3 carburetter engine, it also seated 5 in comfort and a decent sized boot.

Even with a tiny battery the vehicle above ($4000 net to purchase BTW) is not far shy of the LEAF's real world range (not some dreamland marketing nonsense!), maybe the big manufacturers and indeed government should be looking at these 2 people max vehicles as the way to go for towns/cities.

My mum said if you haven't anything good to say, don't say it.
Sorry mum...
You're questions/answers are absolutely god awful and ambiguous, you still haven't decided whether injuries are for incidents or wear and tear, "mainly" as you've said doesn't mean all so either you want wear and tear injuries only or you don't, in which case make it absolutely clear which injuries are to be included, also only one injury could be selected, not multiple as per your choose as many as required statement.

That's just one out of many problems with these Qs , c'mon, this is basic stuff, how can you get accurate/useful responses when the Qs/format is flawed. Asking people who cycle regualrly advice on this should have been your first priority.
it might sound brutal but this kind of rubbish flicks people off immensely!