Lycra nits:defend this...

Strider590

MacMickster wrote: »

At least you had the good sense to acknowledge that your statement was stupid before making it.

Get yourself off to bed now. It's a school day tomorrow. Talk to your teacher about sentences and full stops.

You have no answer, so you turn to ad-hominem instead? GG :rotfl:

Johno100

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

As for that Spanish cycle lane, I would not use it on a training run either, you would continually have to keep giving way at every junction you came to, alright for going to the shops perhaps but not for a proper ride.

What are you 'training' for? I thought cycling was an alternative mode of transport.

MacMickster

Strider590 wrote: »

You have no answer, so you turn to ad-hominem instead? GG :rotfl:

A bit of Latin, so at least you are in senior school. Who would have guessed?

All right. Your earlier post was so juvenile that it didn't warrant a proper reply, but I'm now so impressed by your newly acquired love of ball-games that I will waste 5 minutes.

You believe that most cycle lanes are designed by motorists. In fact they are designed by highway engineers and town planners. These are the very same people who muck up the roads for motorists, pedestrians and users of mobility scooters.

Would you care to expand on your assertion that cycle lanes are dangerous for cyclists (I presume whilst riding at speeds appropriate to those lanes and obeying the rules of the road)? Do you really believe that nonsense? If so, empirical evidence supporting your assertion would be welcomed. Maybe a comparison between the number of cyclists killed or seriously injured whilst riding in cycle lanes versus the number killed or seriously injured while sharing the roads with cars.

Another of your lycra lout pals (or possibly you using another persona, but still making the same use of the comma rather than the full stop) feels that cycle routes are no good for her training runs as having to abide by the rules of the road and stop at each junction would inconvenience her. Much better that she endangers herself by mixing it with motor vehicles and inconveniences the drivers of those vehicles than having to stop at junctions. Do you agree with that opinion and if so, would you care to expand on it?

Do you want safer cycling, or merely the ability to please yourself and cycle where and how you please without regard for others?

[Deleted User]

MacMickster wrote: »

Would you care to expand on your assertion that cycle lanes are dangerous for cyclists

Yes, you'll find the information you're looking for in Cyclecraft, the manual for cyclists published by TSO, and written by qualified cycle instructor and registered expert witness John Franklin, who drafted the syllabus for the National Standard for Cycle Training, published by the UK Department for Transport.

MacMickster

jack_pott wrote: »

Yes, you'll find the information you're looking for in Cyclecraft, the manual for cyclists published by TSO, and written by qualified cycle instructor and registered expert witness John Franklin, who drafted the syllabus for the National Standard for Cycle Training, published by the UK Department for Transport.

For the sake of educating us all, why don't you just state the empirical evidence on this forum, referenced back to the source quoted in that publication.

Strider590

MacMickster wrote: »

For the sake of educating us all, why don't you just state the empirical evidence on this forum, referenced back to the source quoted in that publication.

Why don't you get on a bike and find out for yourself?

Most cycle lanes are full of debris, nails, potholes, dead leaves, drain covers and anything else that's been kicked up by the wheels of cars/trucks. Many are too narrow, the painted lines themselves are slippery in the wet, riding with ones pedals just inches from the kerb is not going to end well and shying away to the left where roads narrow is just inviting drivers to squeeze past inches from your handlbars.

I firmly believe that cycle lanes don't address the root cause of the problem and do in fact increase the levels of abuse they receive from drivers. The cause of the problem is a "them and us" intolerance, until this is addressed the roads will never be safe.

londonTiger

This snippet epitomises the attitude of cyclists, if a driver even breathes they will shake their head in disgust.

It's a comedy sketch, but the cyclist is a real member of the public. The actor revs the learning car a bit too hard and then look at the reaction of the cyclist. I bet if he had a helmet cam, he would stop, scream out the reg and then shake his head and pedal on:

https://youtu.be/mWx8ydPOE2g?t=4m28s

WellKnownSid

Strider590 wrote: »

Why don't you get on a bike and find out for yourself?

There should be enforced usage of a pushbike for all motorists.

It might prevent the "this idiot got all worked up and all I was doing was bearing down on them at 70 mph in two tonnes of metal completely oblivious to my surroundings because I was busy adjusting the wireless" attitude drivers have. As is often said, there are drivers who cycle and those you don't.

Disclosure: I don't possess any Lycra - jeans are actually fine. I do have a cycle helmet and also an expensive mountain bike bought from Decathlon for about £79 in the sales. I usually go cycling with my children, once I hit 20 mph downhill according to my £3.99 'cyclohawk mega 7000 smile' cycle computer from eBay. In my experience, most drivers (not just car drivers) suck.

MacMickster

Strider590 wrote: »

Why don't you get on a bike and find out for yourself?

Most cycle lanes are full of debris, nails, potholes, dead leaves, drain covers and anything else that's been kicked up by the wheels of cars/trucks. Many are too narrow, the painted lines themselves are slippery in the wet, riding with ones pedals just inches from the kerb is not going to end well and shying away to the left where roads narrow is just inviting drivers to squeeze past inches from your handlbars.

I firmly believe that cycle lanes don't address the root cause of the problem and do in fact increase the levels of abuse they receive from drivers. The cause of the problem is a "them and us" intolerance, until this is addressed the roads will never be safe.

I do ride a bike myself, but only occasionally and I try to stay away from roads.

Your description of cycle lanes could equally be a description of any road and you don't seem to have any qualms about riding on roads. The advantage of cycle lanes is that they contain rather less cars. As long as you ride at a speed where you can stop or take evasive action when you see a hazard (which is what all road users should be doing surely) then what is your problem?

I will await with interest your providing some research on the number of cyclists killed or seriously injured annually while riding in cycle lanes, but won't hold my breath while doing so.

JP08

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

As for that Spanish cycle lane, I would not use it on a training run either, you would continually have to keep giving way at every junction you came to, alright for going to the shops perhaps but not for a proper ride.

The give way at every junction is something I really hate on cycle lanes. It means in practice giving way to traffic coming from behind you. A local cycle lane to me (going to the station so should be heavily used - and relatively modern so should be up to whatever standards local transport planners use) has the cyclist giving way to every factory entrance. It is also shared use, but pedestrians generally don't get that, even when the bushes don't half overgrow their half, because cycle lanes apparently don't need maintaining or sweeping once installed. You can see it here. And this is good compared to most UK cycle lanes.

On a vehicle without wing-mirrors giving way to traffic behind you intending to turn left is madness. And no, you can't get effective wing-mirrors for push bikes (and boy have I tried). Those that are available come in two types. One is a mirror on a metal stick, which on most bikes, which have minimal suspension, will mean the image is just a blur. The other mounts directly on handlebar ends and generally means you can get a good reflection of your own leg or genitalia but not of what is behind you.