Will British cyclist ever be urban heros?

[c2c]

Well, for what it's worth, I'm going to start by setting out the '50 monkey' theory by Dean Tavioularis.

Who, you ask? I'm shocked. Dean Tavioularis was the designer of all of Coppola's great films. And his '50 monkey' theory was this. 'Put one monkey in a tree - nobody sees the monkey. Put 50 monkeys in a tree, everybody sees monkeys'. And Dean, being Dean was very, very precise in his meaning. 'Everybody sees monkeys' is absolutely not the same as 'everybody sees a collection of chimps and macaques'. Or 'everbody sees a smattering of gorillas, a few bonobos and an orang-utan'. 'Everybody sees monkeys' means just that. And on Clapham High Street and Kennington Road 'everybody sees cyclists'. The fact that those cyclists are riding Bromptons, Dutch utility bikes, fixies, road bikes, MTBs and wearing lycra, baggy shorts, suits, jeans, check shirts and yellow waterproofs does not matter. They are simply seen as cyclists. I've talked to people who have asked me about riding a bike to work and it really doesn't strike them that my wheels have only 16 spokes.

So any little quirk of fashion that gets young people to ride bikes is a good thing. It may be transitory, but, to get back to Dean Tavioularis, if they are some of many then they are simply part of the many.

And my second quotation is from Bonnie Greer and it's this. 'Cyclists are vermin'. Absolutely. They thrive where conditions allow them to thrive, and they take the shortest route from A to B. One hundred and forty million quid spent on LCN+ (London's cycle routes) really didn't have any effect. Four idiots from Yorkshire did have an effect. Cyclists are, generally, people who have made a choice based on convenience and cost. Create the conditions in which cycling is the most convenient and cost-effective option, and no vermin-repellent spray will deter them.

So, in my book, if you get a bunch of people to ride bikes it's good. And the more that do, the more will do. If you see what I mean.

well this thread certainly takes the award for the most bollocks ever written on a cycling forum...... i particularly disagree with the above in bold..... firstly you cant generalise on why pepes choose to cycle, to work or anywhere else, second, i ride to work, it is neither convenient or particularly cost effective. i could easily lift share, i ride to work because it is the healthy option....... urban cool.my arse.!!

 

[MacB]

It's the high vis, stopping for lights, pootlers who are the reason why the hobby is not seen as fashionable.
I know that's going to disgruntle allot of people but I do believe it to be true.

Look at the whole car modding scene and the success of the Fast & the Furious franchise which is all about breaking laws, driving like a drunk and general irresponsible behaviour.

Or the big hitters from the street Skateboarding scene who spend their spare time videoing each other eating puke omelettes and punching each other.

Maybe even the parkour scene that's taken off because a crazy Frenchman came to the UK and jumped of the top of a battleship cannon onto the deck below.

BMX, Mountain bikes & Stunt Jumpers all have their heroes so we're really talking about skinny tyred road bikes having no icon and while I salute Mark Cavendish he's not going to be on kids walls wearing a pink lycra top.

I think someone already commented on the fixie crowd being the trendsetters and I reckon they're probably right, especially with videos like that 'messenger race' on Youtube. But that fly's in the face of most of the advice handed out here so be careful what you wish for.

yeah, but all you're desribing there is recreating the way selfish, and inexperienced, drivers use roads, on bikes. Being a selfish, and frequently dangerous, tosser, remains the same whether you're walking, running, riding or driving. If you wish to get an adrenalin high then go do so, be as dangerous to yourself as you like. As soon as you cross the line into being a danger to others you are the problem.

 

[Downward]

well this thread certainly takes the award for the most bollocks ever written on a cycling forum...... i particularly disagree with the above in bold..... firstly you cant generalise on why pepes choose to cycle, to work or anywhere else, second, i ride to work, it is neither convenient or particularly cost effective. i could easily lift share, i ride to work because it is the healthy option....... urban cool.my arse.!!

Agree there - It's not about the money. The introduction of Tax free bikes means a fair few people are riding around on bikes worth £500 - £1000. If it was about money everyone would ride a £60 Dual Sus machine.

Cycling isn't cool. Most people just want a car and licence at 17. Me included, I always had a bike and used it everyday but all I wanted was my driving licence and a car.
It's only 13 years later that I got back into cycling purely to get fit and to get some time out on my own.

 

[dellzeqq]

well this thread certainly takes the award for the most bollocks ever written on a cycling forum...... i particularly disagree with the above in bold..... firstly you cant generalise on why pepes choose to cycle, to work or anywhere else, second, i ride to work, it is neither convenient or particularly cost effective. i could easily lift share, i ride to work because it is the healthy option....... urban cool.my arse.!!

you're confused.

I'd put the median price of a bike commuting in London as something between £100 and £250. Now a zone 1 to 4 travelcard is a bit under £40 a week. And lift sharing is not an option in London. And cycling is going to be quicker than bus, car, train (in most cases) and tube (in most cases).

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/fares-and-tickets-zones1-6.pdf

My Brompton, which is a relatively expensive bike, saved me £8.50 a day - so it paid itself back in 100 days. The journey door to door took 18 minutes if I hurried, 22 if I didn't. Going by train and shanks' took about 45, by bus and tube and foot between 40 and 55 depending on traffic, and going by car would have taken longer, and cost £15 a day in parking at a minimum.

And that is the difference. When you see 15 people waiting beside you at a traffic light, and most of them are pretty darn ordinary looking, on ordinary bikes and wearing very ordinary clothes, you know it's gone well beyond sport, or politics or health, all of which are marginal concerns. It's simply the most convenient and cost effective way to get around town.

 

[c2c]

you're confused.

I'd put the median price of a bike commuting in London as something between £100 and £250. Now a zone 1 to 4 travelcard is a bit under £40 a week. And lift sharing is not an option in London. And cycling is going to be quicker than bus, car, train (in most cases) and tube (in most cases).

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/fares-and-tickets-zones1-6.pdf

My Brompton, which is a relatively expensive bike, saved me £8.50 a day - so it paid itself back in 100 days. The journey door to door took 18 minutes if I hurried, 22 if I didn't. Going by train and shanks' took about 45, by bus and tube and foot between 40 and 55 depending on traffic, and going by car would have taken longer, and cost £15 a day in parking at a minimum.

And that is the difference. When you see 15 people waiting beside you at a traffic light, and most of them are pretty darn ordinary looking, on ordinary bikes and wearing very ordinary clothes, you know it's gone well beyond sport, or politics or health, all of which are marginal concerns. It's simply the most convenient and cost effective way to get around town.

not confused........ and like a few other people, dont live in london..... londoner`s tend not to realise that.

 

[dellzeqq]

not confused........ and like a few other people, dont live in london..... londoner`s tend not to realise that.

I can see where you live - but the question turns on making cycling a popular thing. The only place in the UK in which cycling is popular to such an extent that bikes outnumber private cars during the rush hour on popular routes is.......