It's important that you don't wear helmets or funny shoes

David Martin said:

According to one cycling labour MP who rides a .. er .. blue ? bike.

Quoted message said:

http://motoring.independent.co.uk/comment/article351086.ece

She's right though - if cycling is to be accepted as sensible,
practical transport and a serious option to the car for nipping round
town, it has to be regarded as something you do in ordinary gear, not
fancy shoes and saftey helmets.

The fetish for bikes with no mudguards needs to be got rid of too - no
sane car manufacturer would attempt to sell a mass-market supermini
that left the occupants covered in muck every time they used it in the
rain, so why are bike shops stuffed full of guardless bikes?

Ok, I'm biased having just ordered one, but what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable upright
bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear, rather than sports
machinery. Legions of cyclists Amsterdam style all going at 12mph to
replace the hordes of single-occupancy cars. The sports cyclists will
gain as well, from better motorist familiarity with cyclists.

Pyromancer said:

... what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable upright
bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear...

Comfortable /upright/ bikes? I'm sure there's something wrong there ;-)

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Subscribe to PlusNet <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Pyromancer said:

what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable
upright bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear, rather
than sports machinery.

I own both types. Don't forget that sports bikes are a way into transport
cycling for a lot of people (as are Sustrans routes, but that's another
story). It works both ways.

Danny Colyer said:

Pyromancer said:

... what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable upright
bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear...

Comfortable /upright/ bikes? I'm sure there's something wrong there ;-)

Dr. Moulton invites you to step this way ->

I now have 3 Moultons as well as just the one 'bent, and for some trips
one or other of the Moultons will be better, for some rides the Speed Ross
will twist their knickers.

It's nice to have the choice ;-)

Mike

On 15 Mar 2006 01:47:08 -0800 someone who may be "David Martin"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

According to one cycling labour MP who rides a .. er .. blue ? bike.

http://motoring.independent.co.uk/comment/article351086.ece

An MP with common sense, excellent. As it says at
http://www.cicle.org/cicle_content/pivot/entry.php?id=436

==============================================================

Q: When I was viewing the photographs in The Amsterdam Project
series, what immediately struck me was the seemingly laid back or
just everyday approach to bicycling. I mean, for the most part,
there seemed to be no apparent preparation or use of
cycling-specific gear when bicycling. We see women in heels and in
flip flops, men in business suits, and so on...Then there are the
bikes... almost all of them are upright, and what we in the U.S.
might consider clunkers, outfitted with racks, crates, fenders,
etc... Almost no where to be found is the SPD cycling shoe, Lycra
outfit, or bike that emphasizes speed or performance rather than
comfort and utility. [snip]

Cycling in Amsterdam is not a specialized activity. It’s a daily
mode of transportation. People don’t dress special to ride their
bike any more than we dress special to drive our car to the grocery
store. They are wearing business suits and high heels because
they’re on their way to work and that’s what they wear to do those
activities. When you drive to the store you don’t think “I’m going
for a drive;” you think “I’m going to the store”…or to work, or to
the park, or wherever. Culturally it’s a reflection of cycling not
being an activity in and unto itself, but an enabler of daily life.

==============================================================

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

in message <[email hidden]>,

Pyromancer (') said:

The fetish for bikes with no mudguards needs to be got rid of too - no
sane car manufacturer would attempt to sell a mass-market supermini
that left the occupants covered in muck every time they used it in the
rain, so why are bike shops stuffed full of guardless bikes?

Because most people who are currently buying bikes are not buying utility
bikes. And also because bikes come part-assembled, and assembling
mudguards is relatively time consuming when measured against the
perceived added value.

But currently, the bike market is as if Mazda MX5s and Lotus Elises - and
also stripped out custom landrover mud-racers - outsold mass-market
superminis by ten to one. For every sensible adult utility bike a bike
shop sells it sells eight more-or-less serious mountain bikes and three
more-or-less serious drop bar bikes. Not because bike shops don't want
to sell utility bikes, but because the public at large no longer see
bicycles as practical utility vehicles.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; It appears that /dev/null is a conforming XSL processor.

"David Hansen" quoted somebody

...Then there are the

Quoted message said:

bikes... almost all of them are upright, and what we in the U.S.
might consider clunkers, outfitted with racks, crates, fenders,
etc... Almost no where to be found is the SPD cycling shoe, Lycra
outfit, or bike that emphasizes speed or performance rather than
comfort and utility. [snip]

It's the universal rule of thumb, round the world, that people would
cycle four times as far as they would walk The area you can reach
goes up as the square of the radius of the circle round your starting
point, so if you travel four times as far, you are able to reach
sixteen times as many places.

In the Netherlands, though, they use a different rule - on a Dutch
bike you can travel only three times as far as you can walk (1).
Thus a Dutch bike is only 9/16 times as useful, about 56%, as a
normal bike
----------------------
(1) see for example, the Dutch Directorate General for Passenger
Transport, "the Dutch Bicycle Master Plan" March 1999, p107

Jeremy Parker

Quoted message said:

but because the public at large no longer see
bicycles as practical utility vehicles.

And never will until traffic levels decrease or urban speed limits are
lowered (or our climate gets better).

Mark Thompson said:

And never will until traffic levels decrease

Or until they increase to semi-permanent gridlock levels.

Graeme

"Pyromancer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

According to one cycling labour MP who rides a .. er .. blue ? bike.

Quoted message said:

http://motoring.independent.co.uk/comment/article351086.ece

She's right though - if cycling is to be accepted as sensible,
practical transport and a serious option to the car for nipping round
town, it has to be regarded as something you do in ordinary gear, not
fancy shoes and saftey helmets.

What? Like what the Dutch do?

Quoted message said:

The fetish for bikes with no mudguards needs to be got rid of too - no
sane car manufacturer would attempt to sell a mass-market supermini
that left the occupants covered in muck every time they used it in the
rain, so why are bike shops stuffed full of guardless bikes?

True.

Quoted message said:

Ok, I'm biased having just ordered one, but what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable upright
bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear, rather than sports
machinery. Legions of cyclists Amsterdam style all going at 12mph to
replace the hordes of single-occupancy cars. The sports cyclists will
gain as well, from better motorist familiarity with cyclists.

True. I'm just finishing restoring a 1950's 3 speed. Superb to ride
(though I need to get the brakes sorted before I take it anywhere other than
round the block.

T

"Graeme Dods" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mark Thompson said:

And never will until traffic levels decrease

Or until they increase to semi-permanent gridlock levels.

What? Like central London yesterday? My colleague insisted on a Taxi.
Walking would have been quicker. The tube + walking would have creamed that
time and cycling would have just been plain silly -- even with a gridlock of
taxis and white vans. Thank god for the Congestion Charge -- it would have
been truly grim without it!!

T

X-No-Archive:yes

Pyromancer said:

She's right though - if cycling is to be accepted as sensible,
practical transport and a serious option to the car for nipping round
town, it has to be regarded as something you do in ordinary gear, not
fancy shoes and saftey helmets.

The problem is once you start wearing proper cycling gear, riding in
normal clothes feels horrible.

Quoted message said:

The fetish for bikes with no mudguards needs to be got rid of too - no
sane car manufacturer would attempt to sell a mass-market supermini
that left the occupants covered in muck every time they used it in the
rain, so why are bike shops stuffed full of guardless bikes?

I suspect most adults getting back in to cycling want a 'mountain' bike
for leisure use.

Quoted message said:

Ok, I'm biased having just ordered one, but what we need if cycling is
to truly become mass-transport again is a return to comfortable upright
bikes that are intended to be ridden in normal gear, rather than sports
machinery. Legions of cyclists Amsterdam style all going at 12mph to
replace the hordes of single-occupancy cars. The sports cyclists will
gain as well, from better motorist familiarity with cyclists.

I agree with what you are saying but I think this is a problem of
image. Most people regard transport cycling as something only the lower
classes who can't afford a car do.
Whereas mountain biking or sports cycling is an acceptable middle
class hobby.

"Simon Jester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I agree with what you are saying but I think this is a problem of
image. Most people regard transport cycling as something only the lower
classes who can't afford a car do.
Whereas mountain biking or sports cycling is an acceptable middle
class hobby.

It's interesting that a lot of transport cycling is done by more well off
people, despite the image.

cheers,
clive

X-No-Archive:yes

Clive George said:

It's interesting that a lot of transport cycling is done by more well off
people, despite the image.

True, but we are still very much a minority of road users and there are
a lot of people not particularly well off who try to give the
impression that they are. The sort of people who spend six months
salary on a new car to get one up on the neighbours.

Quoted message said:

Most people regard transport cycling as something only the lower
classes who can't afford a car do.

Nooo, they get the bus.

The wide-eyed astonishment when I mention that I cycle reveals that it's
viewed as something only the suicidal or the brave do. Nowt to do with
class.

Quoted message said:

The wide-eyed astonishment when I mention that I cycle reveals that it's
viewed as something only the suicidal or the brave do. Nowt to do with
class.

I remember in my last job when I first said I was intending to cycle to
work; people looked at me as if I was intending to take up a career in
unexploded ordnance disposal or other activities with a similar risk level.

Most of my friends are fairly young(ish) and many take part in "risky"
activities such as raves etc but are still shocked when I say I cycle
everywhere (apart from the ones which are cyclists). Even they consider
something like a 26 mile ride to be a "big feat of athletic endeavour".

I'm not sure either about the class issues but I do think most modern youths
can't wait to get a car as they equate it with freedom and an amount of
youthful "rebellion" - particulaly if they wish to attend music events which
are often held in different locations every time (including even licensed
ones as most big nightclubs don't like *regular* dance events in their
venues as cops lean on them..)

The "gary boy"/"max power" cruise scene has also merged with some aspects of
the rave scene - most of you must have seen a young chav driver in a car
with a cheap body kit blasting hard house/hardstyle from their speakers at
full volume...

Paradoxically this creates an even *greater* problem with drunk/drugged
drivers than the old skool days when most raves/clubs where in areas people
could either walk or cycle to....

Alex

--
Mr R@T / General Lighting
Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom
http://www.partyvibe.com

David Martin said:

According to one cycling labour MP who rides a .. er .. blue ? bike.

http://motoring.independent.co.uk/comment/article351086.ece

..d

She's actually paraphrasing Steven Norris:

"The former Conservative transport minister said: "I never wear a helmet
for the same reason I never wear lycra.

"I think the idea that you have got to dress up like a bloody spaceman
in order to ride a bike is just completely potty.

"You should be looking at it [cycling] as something that normal, fat,
middle-aged men like me do. "

From

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2013678.stm

Mr R@t (2.30 zulu-india) said:

The "gary boy"/"max power" cruise scene has also merged with some aspects of
the rave scene - most of you must have seen a young chav driver in a car
with a cheap body kit blasting hard house/hardstyle from their speakers at
full volume...

I imagine many of us have probably *felt* their "music" as the house
vibrates when they go past...

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Subscribe to PlusNet <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Simon Jester said:

X-No-Archive:yes

Quoted message said:

Pyromancer said:

She's right though - if cycling is to be accepted as sensible,
practical transport and a serious option to the car for nipping round
town, it has to be regarded as something you do in ordinary gear, not
fancy shoes and saftey helmets.

Quoted message said:

The problem is once you start wearing proper cycling gear, riding in
normal clothes feels horrible.

Thanks for the warning. I'd better stick with the ordinary clothes
I've been cycling in for fifty years then.

Quoted message said:

I agree with what you are saying but I think this is a problem of
image. Most people regard transport cycling as something only the lower
classes who can't afford a car do.

One solution to that is to regard anyone who thinks that as a lower
class thinker :-)

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]