Lycra nits:defend this...

Norman_Castle

MacMickster wrote: »

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

Do you want safer cycling or to commandeer the roads for motorists?.

MacMickster

JP08 wrote: »

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

I take it that turning your head and looking over your shoulder is a bit too much exercise. It is what you should be doing before making any manoeuvre or changing position in the road, rather than merely assuming that it is safe to make a move.

RichardD1970

JP08 wrote: »

You can see it here. And this is good compared to most UK cycle lanes.

That's not a cycle lane, it's a path that's had a line painted down the middle of it. :rotfl:

Say's it all really.

Norman_Castle

MacMickster wrote: »

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

As a leisure cyclist I also avoid cycling on the roads but understand why others prefer to use the road. Many cycle lanes are very poorly designed and for the cyclist are the equivalent of a motorist choosing an unclassified road over an A road. Where they are the best option for cyclists they will get used but many are just a poor compromise restricted by space and cost.
Motorists opinions on the usability of cycle lanes tend to be based on wishful thinking.

Please note. As you admit to riding a bike you must now consider yourself a lycra lout and take responsibility for the actions of all cyclists.

Johno100

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Do you want safer cycling or to commandeer the roads for motorists?.

And a similar question should be asked of cycling activists and campaigners - Do they really want better/safer infrastructure for cyclists or is the real aim of #spaceforcycling just to take road space off the cagers, create more congestion in the hope it will force more people onto bikes?

Norman_Castle

Johno100 wrote: »

And a similar question should be asked of cycling activists and campaigners - Do they really want better/safer infrastructure for cyclists or is the real aim of #spaceforcycling just to take road space off the cagers, create more congestion in the hope it will force more people onto bikes?

You're welcome to ask them. [EMAIL="%63ont%61c%74@spac%65forc%79cl%69ng.org"]contact@spaceforcycling.org[/EMAIL]

Retrogamer

bigjl wrote: »

Having driven round London for 20odd years I have always noted cyclists doing stupid things.

It used to be just cycle couriers that would kick cars and deliberately smash door mirrors.

I live near Glasgow and have been using the roads all around Scotland for the last 20+ years as well.
I've noticed cyclists doing stupid things, motorists doing stupid things and pedestrians doing stupid things as well. As i mentioned, you get idiots everywhere but it seems only permissible within society to use one bad example to set the standard for the rest if it's a cyclist.

bigjl wrote: »

But we have a few new breeds of cyclist.

The cyclist with no perception of danger, the one with the holier than though attitude and the Lycra clad activist with a GoPro that thinks the best thing to do is scream registrations out loudly as if by doing so absolves him or her of their wrong doings.

We have a few new breeds of motorists as well. Ones that see cyclists and try and bully them off the road by driving towards them. A few evenn take the oppertunity to wind down the window and throw stuff, spit at you or yell abuse. If we ignore their relationship with cyclists we still have all the motorists that break the speed limit, accelerate through amber lights, park on double yellow lines and use the middle lane of motorways as a cruising lane.

We also have the pedestrians that walk out in front of traffic without any crossings forcing people to perform emergency stops. This is extremily dangerous when it happens on a rainy night and they're wearing black clothes.
Or the pedestrians i encounter often on shared use pavements (1 half is red for pedestrians, the other half green for cyclsits) who are taking up both parts, but when you ring the bell to get past you get a torrent of abuse.

Should i use these examples to make sweeping statements about all or most pedestrians and motorists?

bigjl wrote: »

Loads of London cyclists ignore cycle lanes.

Lots of motorists ignore speed limits.
Lots of pedestrians ignore the red man.

bigjl wrote: »

Which I think it should as it will stop the political cyclists with GoPro from holding up traffic deliberately as they do all the time.

Perhaps if motorists clipping cyclists and knocking them off their bike then driving away wasn't such a common theme there wouldn't be such an incentive for people to use them.

bigjl wrote: »

And risk awareness course should also be mandatory for cyclists before going on the roads of any large City. Or in fact on the road. Motorcyclists injuries and fatalities dropped when compulsory training was introduced.

I agree. I also think that if motorists had to cycle around a city for a while they're become better drivers as they have experience to know what things are like from the cyclist's perspective.

bigjl wrote: »

Many London cyclists seem to think they are immune from collisions. And have no idea what a blind spot is.

Such incidents are probably made worse due to the barriers that councils put up on pavements to stop lemming like pedestrians from crossing at the wrong place which also means that cyclists lose this exit route if they make a mistake.

If you keep basing all the UK cyclists on your London experiences you're probably not going to get a very accurate picture of cyclists in the UK as a whole.

Johno100 wrote: »

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

It's alternative transport, a hobby, a way to get fit, a way to have fun and a competitive sport. People do it for various reasons.

MacMickster wrote: »

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

From my experience if you cycle on the roads, it annoys car drivers.
If you cycle on the cycle paths, it annoys the pedestrians.
If you cycle on off road tracks it annoys the ramblers & dog walkers.
If i don't ring my bell, they complain they can't hear me and got a fright.
If i ring my bell they complain it's too loud and gave them a fright.

MacMickster

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Please note. As you admit to riding a bike you must now consider yourself a lycra lout and take responsibility for the actions of all cyclists.

No. I have never worn Lycra in my life and can't understand why so many cyclists choose to do so. It is designed for competitive cyclists to reduce drag and save them a few seconds over a hundred miles (or milliseconds in a sprint). My cycle gear consists of a bicycle clip - and then only if I am not wearing socks long enough to tuck my trouser leg into.

The lycra lout is of course a broad generalisation. Not all drivers of white vans fit the white van man stereotype. Equally not all cyclists who wear lycra fit the lycra lout stereotype (but they certainly are guilty of extreme bad taste).

My gripe is with the militant "all the gear but no idea" group who believe that the world should make way for them. We have seen an example in this thread from someone who would not use the Spanish cycle lane that I referenced because it would inconvenience them having to stop at junctions. They are therefore prepared to cycle slowly up a steep hill on a narrow road with bends, inconveniencing the motorists who are unable to safely overtake. I saw this happen so frequently over the 6 weeks that I was staying in the area that I have become a bit ticked off with this kind of selfish attitude.

I get equally ticked off with motorists who display similar attitudes such as when parking inconveniently, because "I'm only going to be a few minutes" rather than parking properly somewhere a few extra seconds walk away. Maybe the motoring equivalent of the lycra lout is the German-car driver, as the drivers of BMWs, Mercedes etc seem to be the main culprits.

I also get ticked off by..... No. I'd better stop now as I'm in danger of turning into Victor Meldrew.

JP08

MacMickster wrote: »

I take it that turning your head and looking over your shoulder is a bit too much exercise. It is what you should be doing before making any manoeuvre or changing position in the road, rather than merely assuming that it is safe to make a move.

Well, yes. In the absence of effective wing mirrors, that is what all road users should do. But I was talking about travelling in a straight line in my lane, not manoeuvring or changing lanes, and having to give way to traffic from behind. Stupid highway design.

You'd also notice for the path I was talking about (and as I say it is better than the average UK cycle lane), you have the joys of deliberately uneven road surfaces on dropped kerb descents where the gradient changes aren't even graduated. You can either believe me, or try it for yourself, but I can assure you for such surfaces you want to be looking forward not backwards !

JP08

MacMickster wrote: »

No. I have never worn Lycra in my life and can't understand why so many cyclists choose to do so. It is designed for competitive cyclists to reduce drag and save them a few seconds over a hundred miles (or milliseconds in a sprint).

No, it is designed to wick away sweat. And you don't have to be going that fast or hard to work up a sweat. It also has the advantages of minimal seams. And I can tell you from personal experience that the combination of sweat and chafing takes the shine of anyone's day. And it normally comes with some padding built in, which ones non chafed, non (or at least less) sweaty gonads and sit-bone appreciate for several hours to days after a ride of any length.

Or to put it in terms that more people might be able to relate to. A decent pair of lycra cycling shorts is as important to a Sunday cyclist as a decent pair of footie boots to a Sunday league footie player. Cycling in jeans is about as good as playing football in a pair of brogues.