Cycling UK Forum

661-Pete wrote:

kwackers wrote:(It's certainly the way I'd go, what puts me off is buying a new car and paying rental on a battery that is more than the cost of the fuel I use!)

Same for me. Also, the range: I don't use the car all that much, but now and again I have to make a journey of around 500 miles without a chance to re-charge. Maybe I just have to wait for the technology to catch up. But the latest dismal affair with Samsung (albeit on a wholly different scale) will certainly have frightened a lot of people away from all battery technology, and set back the industry.....

So I continue to drive my diesel. Yes, I get stick for that, and not just from this forum (I feel bad anyway, don't have to have it rubbed in! ). My diesel may be of the 'cleaner' variety, it's a modern car with all the anti-pollution bits and bobs, but still it's a diesel. The best anti-pollution measure of all, is not to use it, when the bike or other transport will serve.

Don't feel bad, I don't. I run a 2001 Passat Tdi, partly run on veggie oil (waste and straight) during the summer months. I did a 'lot' of miles this last 12 months (4,000) due to certain circumstances that came up which meant a few more 350 mile round trip journey's back to my folks. I've given up using the train with the bike, it's no longer financially viable despite advance booking and taking the last/late train on a sunday back. End to end it also takes longer.

I worked out that my normal 3,000 miles over a whole year is a real world 7300kg Co2s. That's if using100% pump diesel, the calc is 7440/actual yrly av mpg (49 in my case) = 151.8367g/km which is bob on for my vehicle).
According to some sites that's just over 50% more than an EV car in the UK with current Elec production sources* http://www.nextgreencar.com/electric-ca ... -benefits/
So an EV doing just 5000 miles annually is producing more real world CO2s than me, AND importantly the NOx and the PMs are greater too (see the web page). This is because unless you have an absolute control on emissions at the power source you cannot have greater control of those important emissions (NOx & PMs) that we are wanting to be rid of. Let's not even get into the current battery life of EVs and how the production/pollutants/health effects of such is nicely hidden from joe public.

Yes, ridding the emissions at source in our towns and cities IS important but the real solution is not to make things easier for EVs but to make things easier/safer for those on bikes/foot that has an even greater effect on pollution and safety for all.

I'm certainly not having any guilt about using my 'dirty' diesel
* Some countries with higher rates of coal burning to produce electricty electric vehicles produce massively more!

bohrsatom wrote:
The TdF is the frame I was intending to buy, but I need an XL and they are now completely out of stock everywhere... very upsetting! I really wish I'd started this whole process earlier
The CdF has a 425mm chainstay, similar to the Cross Check, and I'll get heelstrike with my size 12s

Evans have the Tour de Fer in an XL and it's reduced to £339 and you can still get the 3% topcashback bonus too if you sign up to them.
https://www.evanscycles.com/genesis-tou ... ign=126026
And also here at £399 https://www.urbancyclery.co.uk/products ... 5-frameset

PH wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:You could also buy a Reynolds 525 frameset for a lesser amount too, Steve Goff apparently still does a R531 ST frameset for the same price £350 http://www.steve-goff-frames.co.uk/frames.shtml

I followed the link, but alas when things look too good to be true they usually are. £350 frame only, + £100 for a fork.
Still not a bad price and I've liked the look of the couple I've seen, though they had a few extras and I don't know how much they cost.

The £100 was for a special fork, from reading the rest of the blurb I thought a fork is included it's a little ambiguous, probably worth a phone call though.
It was this bit in the 'touring' section that made me think the fork was included.

Touring frame specification
531 Super tourist tubing
Medium to heavy touring
The cost for a Classic frame includes the following:
cast bottom bracket
heavy duty semi-sloping fork crown
tack-on seat-stays (to provide clearance for wide tires and mudguards)
conical brake bridge
adjustable road ends with one or two eyes
531ST fork blades with generous fork rake
choice of lugs (long, short point, cut outs or fancy)
etc

bohrsatom wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:That Spa tourer is £435 more than the Roux Etape I linked to also on the Spa website, you can buy a new R725 frame for near enough that price diff alone so I wouldn't call the Spa steel tourer the best VFM tbh not at that spec.

If you have some suggestions for a frameset then that would actually be perfect, even better than a fully built bike. I have a willing LBS with all my components waiting to be built up but with no frame to put them on!

If you know the measurements you want you can buy a new 725 frameset (Genesis Croix de fer or Tour de Fer) for a penny under £400 posted, quite a few cycle shops with online stores have them, in fact Rutland Bikes have a Large left in stock, use topcashback and get 3% in 'cashback' (£12)plus £4 of Rutland reward points.
You could also buy a Reynolds 525 frameset for a lesser amount too, Steve Goff apparently still does a R531 ST frameset for the same price £350 http://www.steve-goff-frames.co.uk/frames.shtml

My point about the differential in my post is that the Roux Etape for £550 seems to be an a real bargain,transfer your kit over and sell everything you don't want and you'll have a decent steel frameset for not very much at all with all the fittings you'll need and could take discs if you so wished to go that route. The bods at CTC really liked the Roux Etape when it came out, so much so one of the employees at the show bought one and bothered to big it up in a reply to the Road CC review of the Etape.

That Spa tourer is £435 more than the Roux Etape I linked to also on the Spa website, you can buy a new R725 frame for near enough that price diff alone so I wouldn't call the Spa steel tourer the best VFM tbh not at that spec.

http://road.cc/content/news/207554-new- ... -%C2%A328m
and previously http://road.cc/content/news/196730-ligh ... ycle-route
Here's the T&A article but you need to fill in a survey! http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... st___2_8m/

So it would appear that a report/findings by Jacobs Engineering estimated the cost to make the tunnel useable/safe for cycling and walking at £35M. This was funded/commissioned by the Historical Railways Estate (HRE) and that original report presented to former Transport minister, Robert Goodwill, who then decided renovation was too expensive
Filling it in with various materials is going to cost £3m.

However, a subsequent report by the people whom wish to keep the tunnel open suggest from their findings/experts it'll only be £2.8M to make it navigable/safe for people on bikes/foot.
Would be the longest tunnel in Europe dedicated to such. Seems a worthwhile venture if the money is earmarked to fill in is used to actually keep it open!

bovlomov wrote:

thirdcrank wrote:

bovlomov wrote: I know there are a couple of forum regulars up in the north who will have some good advice. ...

In the wilds just north of Watford? Aren't they more concerned about things like wolves and grizzly bears?

So you've been to Letchworth!

Oi..lol, for a small ruralish area North Herts is shocking for it's lack of infra, horrible road surfaces and agressive drivers, but is no better or worse than anywhere else in reality.

I cycle the big roundabouts in Stevenage along the dual's, when you're experienced it's just another strip of road to command maybe a bit more in advance of town/city ones but the process is the same nonetheless. etting your road position early, judging speed, not getting intimidated, knowing where is best/safest to exit/traverse lanes to prevent passes on the roundabout itself is important.
Also ensuring you check out for oil/diesel dumped by wagons/buses etc comes up high on your checklist.

http://www.discountcyclesdirect.co.uk/c ... I_ID=12315 is in the same vein as the sirrus but you want steel and no CF fork.
Another that fits your bill but needs the drops swapping out, ROUX Etape http://www.rouxbikes.co.uk/etape-250/ & @ http://www.spacycles.co.uk/m1b0s21p3283/ROUX-Etape-250

I use a Specialized globe pro as my daily but also used for touring, audax etc, I got my son has a sirrus expert. I find new old stock or mint bikes/frames and spec them how I want them to fit my needs not what a manufacturer wants to sell you. Trawling various sites to find a base frame to start from can be very rewarding.

ibbo68 wrote:

roberts8 wrote:You should live near box hill in the surrey hills as we do. It happens nearly every week. Is there any law that limits sportives or require permission to ride.

The big problem seems to me that the marshals on junctions seem to think their job is to hold up the traffic to allow the riders through, we see many near misses and collisions which would all be avoidable if the entrants were slowed down or stopped at junctions.

It is getting us cyclists a bad name in this area and I am always saying we are not all this bad but it is a problem that needs to be sorted.

I Marshall our CCs Two Sportives a year and we are instructed to do the exact opposite!
We're at junctions to advise approaching riders whether or not it's clear to proceed and NOT to stop traffic!
If it's clear we'll let the riders proceed if there's oncoming traffic we instruct the riders to stop.It'a up to the riders whether they listen to our instructions or not.99% of them do.

This has to be the most logical approach, giving certain types any inkling that they can ride without any boundaries encourages anti-social and dangerous riding in exactly the same way motorists act at present.
Making it clear that anti-social and dangerous riding WILL be dealt with by organisers harshly and that dangerous riding is likely to end up in the hands of the police (like the OPs), would have a dramatic effect on behaviour particularly at the larger events IMHO.

riding in the gutter and actually within the demarkation of the edge of the carriageway, no wonder the car had space

Psamathe wrote:The newer white LED ones are terrible. They have a broad spectrum and cannot easily be filtered out. At least the and can be optically filtered out.
Ian

Well firstly I never mentioned LEDs, whichever the light being used it's far superior to sodiums. The light emitted throws more effective light to the road surface and is a steady easy to see area, there's little spill above the light head in the way the sodiums do and no horrible glare.

I've no idea what you mean by easily filtered out, not showing the road surface is primarily the main concern certainly for people on bikes and with regard to safety the newer lights are better...by a lot.
As far as im concerned you're in the minority.

I'm not saying it's necessarily justified to keep them on everywhere, however if there are particularly bad bits on urban roads even with a good light it's not always easy to differentiate between something really poor and just an average bit of rough tarmac.
Most of the time it is, most of the time you'll swing clear but sometimes folk hit bad bits lit or not lit (as we read only a few days back). If the roads were in reasonable condition everywhere and drivers didn't drive with retina burning driving lights on the roads it would be far easier to navigate safely and mega bright urban lights for people on bikes wouldn't be needed or felt that they are needed.

I do far prefer the newer whiter lights to the yellow-orange sodiums and if they come in smart variants all the better.

Psamathe wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:Making it law (which I thought it was by the way i interpreted the lightinging regs) so that motorists are only allowed to use side lights in lit areas would improve visibility for everyone.
They turn the lights off here at midnight and have done for a couple of years, it's okay if the road surfaces are not badly potholed, even with a good light it can be hazardous.

We have horrendous potholes and no street lights (have never had them) and we manage (drive after dark,, etc.). Why can't people driving in towns and cities manage as well?

Ian

I meant when cycling not when driving.

Making it law (which I thought it was by the way i interpreted the lightinging regs) so that motorists are only allowed to use side lights in lit areas would improve visibility for everyone.
They turn the lights off here at midnight and have done for a couple of years, it's okay if the road surfaces are not badly potholed, even with a good light it can be hazardous.

I had a very bad case of this when I was in the army, infected blister It's mainly caused by Staph and Strep

Suggest looking at the types of socks you wear and also the type of shoe and how well ventilated they are. heat/moisture in a shoe are breeding grounds for bacteria so any susceptibility over and above your average joe is likely to be an area that needs to be considered.
Give your cycling shoes a good wash for starters and spray them with a quality anti-bac spray or even powder
Using a tea-tree oil based foot spray before rides might be something to think about also, you could buy a small concentratws bottle of oil and make your own,
good luck.