Beauty and the Bike

[dellzeqq]

correction

young people and some more mature types who are blessed with whippet properties!

 

[summerdays]

Well I was looking at the cyclists I saw yesterday - I would say that the MAJORITY were not wearing specific cycling clothing on the bottom half. The top half of their body were mainly covered in waterproofs in a variety of shades (due to the heavy rain), but a reasonable number of the hi-vis amongst them. The bikes were a complete spectrum too: from brompton, halford/toy'r'us specials, fixed and everything in between.

I'm sure that I'm seeing more bikes on the road than this time last year.

 

[MartinC]

correction

young people and some more mature types who are blessed with whippet properties!

Still wrong - I can't claim either youth or whippet properties but I do have a Langster. It further illustrates your point about all sorts.

I think one factor in the clothing debate has to be UK culture. In the UK people tend to only wear indoor clothes - they go from their front door directly to the car outside and then directly from the car indoors again at their destination. People don't possess or use the shoes and top layers that enable them to be comfortable ouside in the winter. In the rest of Europe where other modes of transport are common people routinely wear outdoor clothes - warm and waterproof. Cycling requires you to be outside so you need outdoor clothes. In the UK the cyclist will always be wearing 'different' clothes.

 

[dellzeqq]

I am happy to be corrected on singlespeeds, and especially the Langster, yet again. This is a bicycle that regularly clogs up my hallway, and I may have, in consequence, typecast it as the bike of choice for teenagers.

I confess I once bought a singlespeed. It now sports 18 speeds.

 

[Nipper]

- and, lastly, when you have introduced anything like the number of people that I have introduced to cycling your opinion will be worth something

I quite enjoyed your post until this! I want exact numbers per year and in what context, how long did they cycle for and did they use the bike for shopping... I will compare your score to my own scores and if you are right and you have a higher number, I will ignore my own opinions and tell myself to shut the f*** up.

And, although you weren't to know this, I have spent spells working in a bike shop in your part of the world. The shop is the home of the town's racing club. It's best selling bike is the Ridgeback Velocity, a 'city bike' that weighs about 27lbs. A cyclist is a cyclist is a cyclist.

You Cycle Chat boys are into the mystery posting crap... revealing your name and town is not going to lead to the sky falling in.

So did you work at Bicycle Chain in Taunton? I like the shop, I bought my Pashley there. Ha, Ha, the Ridgeback is not a city bike!!! It has no mudguards, no hub gears and has a nasty leaning over ride. A city bike is upright with hub gears and mudguards... you know that, you ride a Brompton. (I hope you didn't work for RC, that shop is pants)

If you have lived in Taunton you will know the hell that is the Taunton car driver and you will understand the need for separated cycle paths. I have lived and cycled in Birmingham and the drivers are a whole lot better and much more courteous to cyclists.

 

[Baggy]

You Cycle Chat boys are into the mystery posting crap... revealing your name and town is not going to lead to the sky falling in.

Does that mean girls are excluded from your disparaging comments?

The sky might not fall on your head if you reveal your name and town online, but you might end up with a little bit more real-life attention than you're comfortable with.

My previous post referred to Exeter, not Bristol, though both are cycling demonstration towns.

Anyway, like summerdays, I'm certain there are definitely more cyclists out and about, the increase in studenty girls on old Peugeots and Raleighs being particularly noticeable. Maybe that's the Duffy diet Coke ad factor coming into play, or maybe it's because the Uni are actively promoting cycling.

 

[dellzeqq]

You Cycle Chat boys are into the mystery posting crap... revealing your name and town is not going to lead to the sky falling in.

er - yes. Ahem.

 

[patheticshark]

The 06 Langster was the first 'proper' bike I bought as a teenage girl, having previously owned a Raleigh Pioneer off freecycle.

Six years later I am slightly cycling obsessed and on my tenth bike (though I sold the Langster a few years ago)

So easily dismissed they might be, but they definitely got one teenage girl into cycling.

 

[dellzeqq]

The 06 Langster was the first 'proper' bike I bought as a teenage girl, having previously owned a Raleigh Pioneer off freecycle.

Six years later I am slightly cycling obsessed and on my tenth bike (though I sold the Langster a few years ago)

So easily dismissed they might be, but they definitely got one teenage girl into cycling.

my emphasis.........

 

[jonesy]

...


WHAT! Are you mad! The countries with the highest rates of cycling have the most separated infrastructure. It is the infrastructure stupid! ...

Just remember "It is the infrastructure stupid!".

Sorry, but as others have pointed out there is no evidence that segregated cycle lanes are either a necessary or sufficient condition to increase cycle use. I give you Oxford and Cambridge, both of which achieved significant modal share for cycling in the 1970s and 80s (utility cycling: normal people, normal clothes) without significant segregated infrastructure; London that is doing so now; and Milton Keynes and Bracknell, both with extensive segregated networks and very low modal share for cycling. So please don't put forward simplistic assertions about how to get more people cycling and don't accuse people of being mad when they have a better understanding of the evidence than you do!

NB- I, like dellzeqq and others here are not saying there is no role for infrastructure, but don't lets kid ourselves that x more thousand miles of gravelly path in the middle of nowhere, or yet more horrid cycle paths on pavements will give Britain a Netherlands cycling culture...

 

[Nipper]

Sorry, but as others have pointed out there is no evidence that segregated cycle lanes are either a necessary or sufficient condition to increase cycle use. I give you Oxford and Cambridge, both of which achieved significant modal share for cycling in the 1970s and 80s (utility cycling: normal people, normal clothes) without significant segregated infrastructure; London that is doing so now; and Milton Keynes and Bracknell, both with extensive segregated networks and very low modal share for cycling. So please don't put forward simplistic assertions about how to get more people cycling and don't accuse people of being mad when they have a better understanding of the evidence than you do!

NB- I, like dellzeqq and others here are not saying there is no role for infrastructure, but don't lets kid ourselves that x more thousand miles of gravelly path in the middle of nowhere, or yet more horrid cycle paths on pavements will give Britain a Netherlands cycling culture...

There is plenty of evidence that it is all about infrastructure, the Dutch and the Danish haven't built their separated cycle networks on a whim. They actually researched what works and built infrastructure accordingly. The level of cycling in Oxford, Cambridge and London while improved is still nothing like the levels of cycling in Holland.

To quote David Hembrow, "In attempting to grow cycling, Britain seems willing to try almost anything other than the only thing that actually works - which is... building proper infrastructure for cycling."

I am not talking about piss poor gravel paths or pavement paths but real separated infrastructure, look at Hembrow's blog and you will soon get the idea. http://hembrow.blogspot.com/

It is hard for you to admit you're wrong and have been all your life, especially when the answer to increased cycling is so bloody obvious; copy the Dutch! It is a bit like not noticing the stars in the night sky because you never looked up. You have been saying to yourself I know better because I ride a bike on British roads and understand the evidence better; do you? Really? Are you that blind to the success of Holland and Denmark? They are just like us you know, it's just 93% of them rode a bike last week, where as over here 84% of us never cycle.

I know you chaps feel a bit foolish, but come on swallow your pride, if you truly want more cyclists and fewer cars then you have got to admit vehicular cycling is not going to work, never has, never will. You know the truth is out there, "It's the infrastructure stupid"

 

[jonesy]

There is plenty of evidence that it is all about infrastructure, the Dutch and the Danish haven't built their separated cycle networks on a whim. They actually researched what works and built infrastructure accordingly. The level of cycling in Oxford, Cambridge and London while improved is still nothing like the levels of cycling in Holland.

To quote David Hembrow, "In attempting to grow cycling, Britain seems willing to try almost anything other than the only thing that actually works - which is... building proper infrastructure for cycling."

I am not talking about piss poor gravel paths or pavement paths but real separated infrastructure, look at Hembrow's blog and you will soon get the idea. http://hembrow.blogspot.com/

It is hard for you to admit you're wrong and have been all your life, especially when the answer to increased cycling is so bloody obvious; copy the Dutch! It is a bit like not noticing the stars in the night sky because you never looked up. You have been saying to yourself I know better because I ride a bike on British roads and understand the evidence better; do you? Really? Are you that blind to the success of Holland and Denmark? They are just like us you know, it's just 93% of them rode a bike last week, where as over here 84% of us never cycle.

I know you chaps feel a bit foolish, but come on swallow your pride, if you truly want more cyclists and fewer cars then you have got to admit vehicular cycling is not going to work, never has, never will. You know the truth is out there, "It's the infrastructure stupid"

That's a staggeringly arrogant post actually, particularly as it is directed at people who have spent a considerable amount of time looking at what works and what doesn't, including looking at the evidence of what other countries do differently. And there is vastly more to the difference between Britain and the Netherlands than simply the provision of segregated cycle routes. Have you heard of Home Zones? Have you heard of Shared Space? Have you considered other factors, like planning policy, urban density, use of public transport? Speed limits on roads? Priorities? Liabilities? I could go on.

Infrastructure is certainly an important part of it, but in the wider sense that the way in which the whole road infrastructure is designed is important, and there is indeed much to learn from the Netherlands. But to single out one aspect of it, segregation, which is particularly difficult to retrofit effectively in existing streets, and rather arrogantly shout at us that it provides THE solution is being inexcusably simplistic and is the sort of argument that has lead to the vast amount of sub-standard worse than useless segregated routes that is so common at the moment.

 

[Madcyclist]

Nipper, buy a car !!

 

[dellzeqq]

tell you what, Nipper, you draw a map of all those cycle lanes on a map of Taunton......

 

[Baggy]

Milton Keynes and Bracknell, both with extensive segregated networks and very low modal share for cycling.

Having grown up near Milton Keynes I can vouch for the fact that the Redway network has never been particularly popular.

In the 80s when it was all new, smooth tarmac I remember it being more popular, but it wasn't exactly heaving with cyclists.

Last time I rode there (last year) the network was poorly maintained, poorly signposted and think I saw two other cyclists in about an hour.

It's not just about the infrastructure.