Is it me, or does having the load between the rider and back wheel seem like a more sensible option?
At least you'd have a fighting chance of steering the thing if it got windy!
I suppose if they make them, they must be at least semi-rideable...
I dunno... Is riding a bike at all costs the best option? I keep thinking about the people who take a rugby ball to the beach because they want everyone to know they hate football. They throw it to each other a few times then realise nobody wants a kickabout with a rugby ball.
Am I over-analysing again? Tell me, I'll stop.
Stop.
People have been riding Long John's in Copenhagen since the 1920's. Copenhagen happens to be one of Europe's windiest cities, and people whizz about the place on these bikes without a care in the world. So here's the thing; just because a thing is not popular with the ultra-conservative cyclists, especially the clubmen cyclists, of the British Isles it does not mean said thing is no good.
Is riding a bike at all costs the best option? No, which is why I'll take the train, or the bus, if it is available. But as I don't own a car and I don't like to see us using tlh's motor for trips in town a cargo bike is a very decent best option.
and no rugby player takes a rugby ball to the beach for a kickabout. Only a football player would think they did.
Edit: and no, generally speaking the load low and in front is the way to go, load hauling wise.
near the lake!
