Whats the best mudguards to get???

[bonj2]

Very good. Can't see THAT much mud though. If you think that's a lot of mud, then you need to post a picture of, say, the BACK of your shin, and the same pics in the same conditions WITH mudguards. Because I think you would have got that dirty with or without mudguards.
You presumably didn't get overtaken by any cars then? What about the spray from their tyres?
oh by the way yer look like dave 'ill from slade.

 

[bonj2]

well it doesn't matter whether its the cheap shite aldi socks or his legs does it - the question "what's the back like" or "what's it like WITH mudguards" still stands

 

[bonj2]

With mudguards, his socks wouldn't have been that soaked. Nor his rump.

Well I want proof.

If you want the only type of proof that you accept benjy then I'm afraid that you're going to have to fit guards to your bike and commute in the rain.

Well I thought you were going to ask that, and my response is that the "proof mudguards are unnecessary" thread is proof of how muddy I get WITHOUT mudguards, so it can be inferred therefore that how muddy I get WITH them is some amount LESS muddy than that.

 

[Milo]

Wrong again bonj?
Must be tough.

 

[jiggerypokery]

Bonj you utter fruit loop! My arse was wet, it never gets wet when I use mudguards, ergo they keep the spray off my arse ergo it stays dry ergo....mudguards have a practical use. Why would the backs of my legs get skanky, without mudguards the spray and road crud from the front wheel goes backwards from the wheel hitting my shins...how the hell does it wrap around and get over my calves? And as for the mud...oh get over it, I was riding on the A45 Coventry road, a dual carriage way, where the hell am I going to find mud in the middle of Birmingham???? But...sans mudguards on the crosser in Sutton park in the mud no less I get a muddy back...what does that infer Sherlock?

 

[bonj2]

Right there's several issues with this post. The overriding one being that it doesn't follow any form of logic in the slightest or make sense AT ALL.

Bonj you utter fruit loop! My arse was wet, it never gets wet when I use mudguards ergo they keep the spray off my arse ergo it stays dry ergo....mudguards have a practical use.

this is basically just STATING your case. You'd had a go at proving it, and you'd got reasonably far, but with this it seems you've given up and gone back to square 1, just repeating it again.

Why would the backs of my legs get skanky, the spray and road crud from the front wheel goes backwards from the wheel hitting my shins...how the hell does it wrap around and get over my calves?

Well, by the same token, how does it hit anything other than the down tube if it actually is sprayed up from the tyres? by virtue of it sticking to them for a small period of time before detaching and flying off at a tangent causing it to be projected into a parabolic arc the plane of which being parallel to the vector of motion of the bike?

And as for the mud...oh get over it, I was riding on the A45 Coventry road, a dual carriage way, where the hell am I going to find mud in the middle of Birmingham????

This completely blows your whole argument out of the water by contradicting yourself.
You claim your shins were muddy, yet you are now suggesting there ISN'T any mud in central birmingham? So if that IS mud on your shins in the photo (which it doesn't really look like to me - doesn't look like anything), where did it come from?
I put it to you that you took the mudguards off hoping to get muddy, but then when you didn't, on arriving home you got some soil out of your garden and smeared it on to your legs, but then to make it look authentic washed it off with the hosepipe. But you washed it off a bit too much and got your socks wetter than they would normally be. Hence the only very very slight amount of dirt, excessive sock wetness, and leg dampness profile that suggests a wetting by a running stream of water rather than dripping water. Yep, I think that's a pretty accurate estimation of today's events!

But...sans mudguards on the crosser in Sutton park in the mud no less I get a muddy back...what does that infer Sherlock?

That you should have mudguards on your crosser but not on your road bike?

 

[jiggerypokery]

Mud? Where did I mention mud...I said road grime.

Stop being such a pedant Bonj, I think I know your game now...it's "mud" guards as opposed to "fenders". Yes the majority of us ride on the road and yes the majority of us use mudguards/fenders to prevent our feet/arses from getting overly wet as opposed to overly muddy - as there is no mud on the road!

I applaud your curmudgeonliness - now get back in your bath chair and take the Mogadon theres a good chap.

 

[bonj2]

Bonj,

Don't you ever cycle around corners?

ah yes but then you've got g-force to consider and it's a whole different kettle of fish. Why do you think when a plane turns a corner and banks, the people on the offside don't fall into the aisle? same principle.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Bonj, you really do have far too much time on your hands.

 

[tdr1nka]

Just so noBj doesn't have to go trolling back thru the thread, allow me to repeat myself.......................

Just a little bit of information to the dear Bnoj.
Yes, it is true, there is very little mud on the roads of cities, but there is an accumulation of dirt caused by motor oil, rubber, dust from vehicle brake pads and other such detritus that mixes with or floats on any wet road surface.
This is what gets sprayed up ones back when you ride, in the wet without mudguards.

 

[threefingerjoe]

For those of us who are not foolhardy enough to ride in wet weather without mudguards, and those of us who also want to keep our chains free of the water and grime that gets sprayed on the chain from the front tyre (if you don't believe that the downtube keeps it off) don't forget to add a long, mudflap to your front mudguard.
(I can't for the life of me, figure out HOW the mud and grime gets all over the front of my mudflap, and inside of my mudguards. SURELY it can't be coming off the tyres!) ;-)

 

[bonj2]

Just so noBj doesn't have to go trolling back thru the thread, allow me to repeat myself.......................

heard you the first time.
All this isn't really helping the prospects for the next mudguards thread I decide to take part to go completely smoothly and devoid of irrationality - a 'next one' which there inevitably will be as you well know. User is buying into the amnesty - who are YOU to ruin it?
Shut up NOW, and there might be a chance - or am i deluding myself in thinking it's rationality in a mudguards thread that you actually want?
it was you that said "i'm fed up of it bonj" - well, now's the time to see whether you really are fed up of it or not or whether you're in fact gagging for more.

 

[tdr1nka]

User is buying into the amnesty - who are YOU to ruin it?

Great, that simplifies everything, 'cos as far as I can tell with this 'amnesty' forummers simply avoid verbose and experienced postings by answering you with comments like, 'shut up Bonj' or 'Bonj you're wrong'.

As you have failed to grasp, most of my posts confirm your right to post from your own experience but have been mostly with regard your 'mode' of posting and the fact your dogged, aggressive, pompous and plainly contentious way of playing the fool(on the forum in general)is actually tiresome, predictable, unnecessary and worse, potentially off-putting to new members.

 

[bonj2]

Great, that simplifies everything, 'cos as far as I can tell with this 'amnesty' forummers simply avoid verbose and experienced postings by answering you with comments like, 'shut up Bonj' or 'Bonj you're wrong'.

that doesn't annoy me at the moment, but I can't guarantee I won't get annoyed by it at some point in the future. There's not really much point though is there, it's not really even a post 'cos you're not saying anything. I expect that sort of nonsense from your little sidekick miloat but you're supposed to be an adult.

As you have failed to grasp, most of my posts confirm your right to post from your own experience but have been mostly with regard your 'mode' of posting and the fact your dogged, aggressive, pompous and plainly contentious way of playing the fool(on the forum in general)is actually tiresome, predictable, unnecessary and worse, potentially off-putting to new members.

Hence why I've offered to post in a less outlandish style. All I currently get as responses to my views as I currently post them is criticism and sniping, which I don't mind, I'd rather not have it, but it doesn't particularly bother me - but if I'm still going to get that, then what's the point in me making the effort to moderate my 'mode' of posting?

 

[bonj2]

If you think I'm being arrogant, then I'm genuinely sorry for that - I hate having to be, but I'm afraid I do geuinely feel quite strongly about what in my eyes is received wisdom being peddled, and I'm sure on the flip side you also feel that you are trying to give helpful advice in the face of what you see as unfair contradiction - HOWEVER, I do genuinely feel that an environment where we can all post what we feel without being sniped at from the other side is achievable, hence this 'amnesty' - it's only my attempt to actually make ground in an argument that was going nowhere.