Aldi cycling specials 29 Sept

[david k]

I remember thinking that when I saw a pair reviewed many years ago. I read that the idea is not to restrict the blood flow in the fingers, while still giving protection from the cold so the fingers are in two separate two-finger compartments. More control than one four-finger compartment, but better blood flow than individually enclosed fingers.

The gloves are not going to be despatched until the 29th so they might be out of stock by the time that I get them and have the chance to tell you what they feel like!

Looking forward to your review Colin, still not convinced they wouldn't feel too strange when on, but I agree the concept is sound and they look decent, may take a punt

 

[ColinJ]

Not that it is cold enough to need them yet!

I will put them on when they arrive to see what they feel like, and then (hopefully!) put them away in a drawer for a couple of months.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Yeh I thought of buying them, on the outside there are only two spaces, but are there four inside? I wonder if it would feel too weird otherwise?

I've got a pair of lobs and there's no extra lining between the two pairs of fingers. The pair I have are not super warm - on the worst of days your two pairs of fingers will feel the coldness in each finger's neighbour - but they're good enough for most winter days, you can feel that your fingers are cold but not numb - and they don't try to turn inside out when you take them off.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Not that it is cold enough to need them yet!

I will put them on when they arrive to see what they feel like, and then (hopefully!) put them away in a drawer for a couple of months.

I got these the other week.http://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/PXLGWL/planet-x-100-waterproof-crab-hand-winter-glove Likewise, i've put them away for the bad weather and look forward to seeing if they are as good as they say.

 

[Adam4868]

Would vouch for the aldi lobster gloves,never had cold hands with them.

 

[grimpeur]

I'm pretty sure that none of the lights are legal for road use on their own.

.

What is illegal about them.? Have I missed something when reading the following?:
http://www.cyclinguk.org/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations

 

[potsy]

I got the lobster gloves last year and find them quite strange to wear, went back to my Altura winter gloves instead.

Favourite Aldi stuff is their socks, got a few pairs both short and long, wear them most days (not cycling) and they last a good long time.
Clothing wise I probably will not bother buying any more, good if you are on a tight budget but prefer to get better.

Never bought lights (I have a few too many as it is) so cannot comment on if they are any good.

 

[DCLane]

Favourite Aldi stuff is their socks, got a few pairs both short and long, wear them most days (not cycling) and they last a good long time..

+1 to the socks, which is probably all I'll buy.

 

[mjr]

What is illegal about them.? Have I missed something when reading the following?:
http://www.cyclinguk.org/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations

Mostly, they're too bright with an unfocused beam (so may dazzle other road users, which is both illegal and dangerous), or they have a steady mode with a crap lens (a technical fail, probably not dangerous), but the helmet light will unavoidably show a red light to the front and white light to the rear if you ever turn your head (dangerous, confusing other road users about your direction, only not illegal because it's on the rider not the bike).

As discussed in a couple of other topics at the moment, you're unlikely to attract police attention unless it's painfully obvious dazzling (and I'm not sure if any are quite that bad) and if you do, it'll probably only be a £50 fine, but with legal lights being so cheap now (Lidl did a set in their recent specials for £10, while online retailers are often similar-priced but postage extra), why bother with tat, especially those with dangerous faults?

 

[grimpeur]

Mostly, they're too bright with an unfocused beam (so may dazzle other road users, which is both illegal and dangerous), or they have a steady mode with a crap lens (a technical fail, probably not dangerous), but the helmet light will unavoidably show a red light to the front and white light to the rear if you ever turn your head (dangerous, confusing other road users about your direction, only not illegal because it's on the rider not the bike).

As discussed in a couple of other topics at the moment, you're unlikely to attract police attention unless it's painfully obvious dazzling (and I'm not sure if any are quite that bad) and if you do, it'll probably only be a £50 fine, but with legal lights being so cheap now (Lidl did a set in their recent specials for £10, while online retailers are often similar-priced but postage extra), why bother with tat, especially those with dangerous faults?

Be interested to know if anybody has EVER been prosecuted for having the incorrect (illegal) sort of light mounted to his bike. And also interested in tips on how the buyer can have a clue what sort of light (legal or illegal) he is buying.

 

[jarlrmai]

http://www.cyclelaw.co.uk/legality-of-cycle-lighting-accessories

 

[mjr]

Be interested to know if anybody has EVER been prosecuted for having the incorrect (illegal) sort of light mounted to his bike.

I'm sure someone will have been ticketed for defective lights, but as mentioned in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/another-legal-lights-topic.207856/ the precise details of the defect may be hard to obtain because such offences are not generally recorded/reported.

And also interested in tips on how the buyer can have a clue what sort of light (legal or illegal) he is buying.

Basically, look for a statement on the packaging and/or the light that it conforms to some recognised European lighting standard. The most likely these days is a German K-number, but a few still have BS6102/3 stamped on the lens.

Also, there's a difference between illegal (such as dazzling or showing white to the rear) and legally-insufficient (could be used alongside a legal light). I suspect most bike lights sold in the UK are legally insufficient but not illegal.

 

[potsy]

Stick a white light on the front and a red light on the back and you'll be fine.

All this BS legal stuff is way over the top, who cares?

 

[Adam4868]

Round our way I'm pretty sure the police would rather you had the "wrong" lights over none.

 

[grimpeur]

Stick a white light on the front and a red light on the back and you'll be fine.

All this BS legal stuff is way over the top, who cares?

That was my way of thinking too. But kept it civil as I didn't want to upset any vigilantes or enforcers lurking on here.