MCRcycling

Manchester Cycling Strategy

2012-01-30T17:19:00.002Z

The Interim Strategy for Cycling in Manchester (draft) was recently brought to my attention via the GMCC. The draft can be found here (Hat tip: Manchester FOE). The Manchester Cycling Strategy (MCS) is a result of the Memorandum of Understanding between British Cycling and Manchester City Council. The executive summary on page 4 states, "Manchester is the home of British Cycling - cycling's national governing body." Whilst it is true that British Cycling is the governing body of cyclesport, the relevance of British Cycling to transport cycling is at best, dubious. Whilst British Cycling have recently started to devote some attention to cycling as transport, they are first and foremost the governing body of cyclesport and not an organisation for furthering the aims of everyday folk who want to use a bike for transport.

The biggest problems in the MCS draft are often a result of this confusing mixture of sports promotion and facilitating cycling as transport. A good example to illustrate the absurdity of this is to consider motorsport. Whilst I am sure that there are a good number of people in Greater Manchester who participate in the various disciplines of motorsports, from rallying to formula three, the groups which represent these interests rarely weigh in on transport consultations such as the LTP3. Where they do decide to comment, it is extremely unlikely that they would try to present themselves as the 'voice of the motorist' because clearly they aren't - they are the voice of motorsports. Whilst these two groups are superficially similar, their interests, needs and wishes are (quite rightly) lobbied for by separate groups.

In cycling, the distinction is less commonly made, perhaps because there are so few people who regularly use bicycles for any purpose. The problem with this is that cycling is conflated with cyclesport, giving cyclesport a louder voice than it perhaps deserves, whilst making cycling for transport less visible and less attractive to normal people who aren't interested in getting hot and sweaty in order to go shopping or to work.

This conflation of cycle sport with cycling for transport is illustrated well on page 5 which includes a list of headline figures for investment in 'cycling' over the past five years:

Over £3.2 million on infrastructure through LTP Highways Capital Programme
£518,000 on child cycle training
£56,000 promoting bike week
£24 million building the National Indoor BMX area
Over £12,000 in small grants to community groups
£2.5 million on promoting and supporting club and sport cycling
Over £250,000 on promoting cycling through initiatives such as Sky Rid [sic]

From this list, several issues stand out to me.

Is all of this funding coming out of a single pot for 'cycling?'
What does the National Indoor BMX Arena, supporting club and sport cycling and to a certain extent, the Sky Ride, have to do with cycling for transport?
If (1.) is in fact the case, how can £24 million for the National Indoor BMX Arena and £2.5 million on promoting club and sport cycling be justified when only £3.2 million is spent on cycle infrastructure for transport cycling, which has the highest potential for growth and thus has easily the highest potential economic, social and public heath returns.
The cyclesport-oriented aspects of this report should be part of a wider report on the uptake, promotion and enabling of sports in Manchester (which in itself is an important and laudable aim)
The cycling for transport-oriented aspects of this report should be part of Manchester's wider transport strategy (and dramatically increased in their scope)

Where the report discusses strategies for increasing and improving cycling in Manchester it refers to the LTP3 plan mentioned previously. The LTP3 is worded in a way which allows for the construction of a real network of quality cycle corridors to Dutch standards, the result of which would be immense growth in transport cycling in Manchester and the enormous wider benefits that brings. Unfortunately, it is also vague enough to allow for little change from the status quo, beyond a bit of paint and some crap signage along back-streets; the sort of measures which have already been well-established to be ineffective. The strategy goes on to identify five 'key issues' holding back transport cycling in Manchester:

Addressing the demand for cycle parking
Making major junctions safer for cyclists
Working with partners to reduce cycle theft
Liaising with City Centre employers to improve workplace cycle parking and changing facilities
Improving opportunities to cross the inner ring road

Sadly, these issues are more likely 'things which existing cyclists would like fixed' rather than issues which hold back those who wish to cycle for transport but do not currently do so. These issues are likely to be along the lines of:

Fear of being killed or injured when cycling with motor traffic
Separated bicycle tracks on main roads
Junction designs put cyclists (and pedestrians) in unnecessary danger in order to prioritise private motor traffic
Rat-running makes riding on streets feel unsafe

All of these issues are tackled in The Netherlands road network model; busy main routes have separate tracks and motor-vehicle rat-running (and hence volume) is eliminated on streets where people live (making them attractive for cycling despite the lack of separation). Address these issues (even in the form of a barebones functional network) and cycling rates in Manchester could easily be increased to 10-15 times their current level.

Despite the paramount importance of infrastructure in making cycling into a viable mode of transport for normal people, the only infrastructure mentioned in the MCS draft are the three cycle centres to be built in the city centre. These will only improve the experience for existing cyclists, they will provide little or no benefit for would-be cyclists. My mother doesn't ride a bike, not because there is nowhere for her to park her bike, shower and stash her lycras in a locker. She doesn't cycle because she (entirely understandably) feels unsafe when cycling on our roads as they currently exist. Providing facilities which would be unnecessary in a mainstream cycling culture is not the way to build a mainstream cycling culture. Where cycling for transport is mainstream, people ride in whatever clothing they need to be wearing at their destination (possibly in addition to a coat and gloves) with the idea of needing to shower and change after cycling to work being something which is utterly irrelevant in a mass cycling culture.

The MCS at least does not explicitly exclude measures which would actually allow cycling for transport to grow, but unfortunately it takes the traditional approach of 'tinkering around the edges,' focussing on marginal improvements for existing cyclists whilst completely ignoring the reasons why normal people would never consider cycling for transport. In addition to the desperate need for vastly increasing the scope of the measures proposed to increase cycling for transport, the inclusion of so much irrelevant material pertaining to cyclesport confuses the issues for all users of cycles. Ideally, the cyclesport content in the MCS should exist as a part of a wider 'Sport in Manchester' strategy in order to prevent the needs of those participating in these two largely unrelated activities being confused. The report also focusses on leisure cycling separately. It is my belief that leisure cycling does not require a huge amount of specific 'strategy' to grow, provided that cycles are considered during the design or renovation of parks & towpaths etc. The measures which will make cycling for transport attractive to normal people will also increase the appeal of cycling for leisure.

To its Logical Conclusion

2012-01-27T13:34:00.000Z

I was stunned this week by some quotes from the Association of British Drivers which were featured in a post from As Easy As Riding A Bike. Whilst the criminal behaviour of motorists being rationalised by a motoring organisation is far from new, I found the sheer unashamed stupidity of what was being said really quite shocking.

"Because speed limits are set below the level at which the majority of drivers consider to be reasonable, you get a very high level of non-compliance. And you get a greater disparity of speeds – you get more frustration, [...] that will result in a large queue of drivers behind, who simply want to drive at what they consider to be normal speeds, and that leads to frustration, dangerous overtaking… "

A responsible drivers' organisation might suggest that a driver who gets so frustrated by having to drive within the law that they might attempt a manoeuvre which not only puts themselves in danger, but endangers the lives of innocent people might be better off not being allowed to drive at all, this is the ABD, and it is not an exaggeration to say that the ABD literally don't know the meaning of the word 'responsibility.' It is interesting to try to apply the ABD's logic to other areas:

Theft:

"Because the definition of theft is are set below the level at which thieves consider to be reasonable, you get a very high level of non-compliance. And you get a greater disparity of theft – you get more frustration, [...] as thieves try not to steal, and that leads to frustration, and when it gets released, events such as the August riots happen… "

Domestic Abuse:

"Because the definition of domestic abuse is are set below the level at which abusive partners consider to be reasonable, you get a very high level of non-compliance. And you get a greater disparity of beating – you get more frustration, [...] as abusive partners try not to beat their partners, and that leads to frustration, and when it gets released, it leads to serious injuries and even deaths… "

Road Safety:

"No, not lower speeds – lower speed limits. Because speed limits are set below the level at which the majority of drivers consider to be reasonable, you get a very high level of non-compliance. And you get a greater disparity of speeds – you get more frustration, because a small minority of drivers will obey the speed limit, even if they think it’s really silly, and that will result in a large queue of drivers behind, who simply want to drive at what they consider to be normal speeds, and that leads to frustration, dangerous overtaking… It also can lead to long queues of traffic, which prevent side road traffic from entering, or crossing, a main road. So you get these additional conflicts, even road rage, as a result. So if you have sensibly-set speed limits, which means set at the 85th percentile, which is the level that 85% of drivers wouldn’t exceed anyway, experience has shown – this goes back, certainly in the United States, to the late 1930s – that is the safest level at which to set speeds, speed limits, and you get the lowest casualty rates."

Oh wait, that one was real. The ABD goes on to use that brilliant debating tactic of pretending that something which is bullshit is actually backed by science (brilliantly debunked later in the original post). Their website actually displays this crap proudly on their homepage, but they have made it even more entertaining to read:

"The ABD calls for the use of sensible speed limits that are based upon well established scientific road safety principles, not political correctness, emotive hysteria, or vociferous local activists."

Ahh yes, that well established scientific principle of 'Be safe: drive as fast as you want, wherever you want.' I really admire the balls they show by calling their made-up science 'well-established.' In fact is it so well established that it goes against everything that every bit of real road safety research and every road safety organisation in the whole world is saying. If that's not well established, I don't know what is! To make this statement of idiocy even more delicious, they included the Daily Mail's favourite phrase, 'political correctness'
(They cleverly use the original meaning of the phrase, which is, 'Stuff what I done don't like').

CEoGB Policy Bash

2012-01-23T12:49:00.001Z

On the weekend of the 28th of January there will be a meeting to really hammer down CEoGB policy. The agenda for the event can be found on the CEoGB website. If you wish to be involved, please email chair@cycling-embassy.org.uk. It will be a great opportunity to have your say about exactly how the UK's brightest new cycling organisation pursues its ultimate goal of a real return to everyday cycling in the UK.

Personally, I feel that the CEoGB cannot be too specific in setting out what is and is not acceptable when building infrastructure for cyclists. The present guidelines allow for really quite good cycle infrastructure to be built in the UK, however they are too easily open to the kind of abuse which results in useless facilities which do nothing to help cycling at all, merely providing fodder for Facility of the Month. I find it baffling that such dangerous (and functionally useless) facilities exist in the same country in which I once had to take a workplace safety training course in order to use a step-ladder. Providing the DfT with a set of rules for cycle infrastructure where useful, legally-binding minimum infrastructure standards are set based on the speed and volume of motor traffic and where the difference between roads, streets and lanes, along with the measures each of these requires to make cycling viable for normal people, is clearly defined. At the moment, the established norm is that 'people have their place, but the car must come first,' what we need to work towards is the making idea that 'cars have their place, but people must come first' the new norm.

With the new standards being a legally-binding minimum standard, we will need realistic final compliance dates. One potential method would be to have several compliance dates, a compliance date for a minimum functional network of cycle paths along the main roads in the most highly populated cities (London, Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow etc.) followed by a date for smaller cities and towns and final dates for complete compliance dates. I'd like to see a minimum functional network of cycle routes along main roads as a priority. There's no point in trying to tinker around the edges with sign-posting 'quiet routes' along back-streets as these areas are already less problematic and are the routes people ideally wish to use to get around. The main roads are the currently the biggest problem for cycling and any approach which ignores fixing the problem of main roads in favour of relegating cyclists to often circuitous routes along back-streets sends a message of cycling not being taken seriously as a mode of transport. Such schemes will fail, as they consistently have in the past.

An interesting idea (although one not likely to happen) is to take the scientific approach and do an experiment. Choose a decent number of towns with broadly similar sizes, population densities, employment rates and geography and split them into three groups. In the first group, re-design the road network in-line with the measures used in The Netherlands. In the second group, ~~waste~~ invest the same amount of money on more traditional British approaches to encouraging cycling, 'promote cycling through advertising campaigns, cycle training, handing out lights and high vis, cycle maintenance workshops, building town centre cycle enclosures with lockers and showers and asking motorists to be nicer to cyclists. The third groups would be the control group. In all three groups, modal share amongst all modes of transport would need to be thoroughly monitored, with demographic information also being useful. Run the experiment for ten years and then publish. I think we all know what the results would be, but at least it'd start an 'interesting' thread on Cyclechat.

Interestingly, this central policy of the Cycling Embassy will actually benefit everyone, not just cyclists. Ending the system whereby our streets and roads are effectively ruled by those who are most able to get their own way by (intentionally or otherwise) intimidating other more vulnerable road users comes with huge and obvious benefits which are simply too numerous to mention in the scope of this piece. Needless to say, anyone who is ever a pedestrian, ever rides a bike, is (or may ever be) disabled or elderly, is (or has, may one day have, or was once) a child, owns or works for (or may one day do so) a retail-based business or who pays (or may one day pay) any form of tax in the UK (amongst many, many other groups) has everything to gain from the UK road network being dragged into the 21st century, closely in line with the system used in The Netherlands today.

Put simply, the Dutch system of Sustainable Safety takes the approach that sometimes people can be dicks. Once you accept this, it becomes easily possible to utilise the design of the roads, streets and lanes themselves in order to minimise the harm resulting from this inevitable fact of life. If you want to have your say on the specifics of this infrastructure, or how we go about lobbying for it, the policy bash is your chance to get involved.

Places for People

2012-01-19T13:42:00.002Z

I came across this earlier today in Macclesfield. It's nothing out of the ordinary, a van parked illegally, partially on double yellow lines and at the intersection with a minor road, blocking the route for pedestrians and making it less safe when they do try and cross. The sort of thing you might see hundreds of times in a typical week in the UK. What tickled me was the company branding, the van belongs to a company called Places for People.

Recurring Themes

2012-01-18T14:09:00.001Z

Once again we find ourselves in January, and once again I find myself writing about an incident where someone has attempted, without provocation, to use a motor vehicle as a weapon to either intimidate or assault me. Once again, the sole reason behind this appears to be something as innocuous as my choice of transport mode. Once again the driver and occupants of the vehicle were around 17-19 years of age and once again they were exclusively male.

The sad thing is that most regular cyclists have similar stories of unprovoked aggression from motorists. Most regular cyclists I have spoken to have at least one story of a motorist attempting to intimidate them or cause actual bodily harm for no other reason that they had the sheer audacity to choose to get around on a bike.

A significant minority of the general population seem to have the capacity to behave like this. When using public transport or on foot they might be a nuisance to others. On a bicycle they may risk causing injury to others and themselves in the process. In a car, they are able to kill and maim without any risk of coming to harm themselves. Interestingly, the behaviour of this fraction of the general public receives by far the most attention from the mainstream press when they also happen to ride bicycles.

Perhaps it is time to seriously examine the idea of including a thorough psychological examination in the process of licensing drivers. In addition to weeding out those who clearly are not able to behave appropriately when operating a dangerous machine in a public place, it will also help put people off driving in general by increasing the costs and hassle associated with learning and continuing to drive. This can only be a good thing for everyone.

Farewell 2012 - a Year in Cycling

2011-12-31T12:13:00.000Z

*The format of this piece is borrowed from David Mitchell's yearly piece in his Guardian/Observer column.

What an eventful year 2012 was in the wide world of cycling. The UK government was forced to adopt the EU fifth motoring pillar as a part of a series of concessions made during negotiating our re-entry into the EU after the events following David Cameron's now infamous use of the UK veto at the end of 2011. The change has yet to have any detectable effect on cycling rates, with a government spokesperson adding, "It seems that the legal technicalities surrounding insurance disputes following road traffic collisions was not the major factor which was keeping people off their bikes. We are at a loss." 2012 was also a year for moral outrage, following from the announcement that Brooks were planning a Soylent variant of their popular B17 saddle. The company to issue a statement apologising for the move, "We misread the market," claimed a Brooks spokesperson, adding "It seems it just isn't the time for this type product right now."

As we are soon to transition from one year into the next, let's take a moment to remember some of the more notable stories from 2012:

Churchill Ballad

Earlier this year Adobe released the Re-animation Suite, a collection of software tools which allowed the creation of an animatable CGI model of a person using a combination of archive still and video imagery. Following Adobe's acquisition of Bremneras, a company specialising in voice emulation software, the means to produce photo-realistic animated versions of people which could speak in the appropriate voice were within the grasp of ordinary people. Predictably, many set about using the technology to make crude YouTube videos. However, cycle journalist Carlton Reid seized upon the opportunity to re-animate the speech by Winston Churchill which is used in one of his I Pay Road Tax graphics:

The resulting video was later re-mixed and auto-tuned into a faux-power ballad and promptly went viral. In the process, Mr Reid, creator of the original video, became a mainstream celebrity on the back of the popularity of the viral hit. Carlton's new-found fame led to him being invited as a guest on Top Gear, leading to one of the most memorably violent interviews in the show's run. He also managed to get the fastest time in the reasonably priced car.

Healing Power of Helmets

In August, ground-breaking work was published in the Lancet identifying the possible use of cycle helmets as a powerful universal placebo. Professor got the idea for the study after seeing how strong many non-cyclists faith in cycle helmets was, despite the lack of evidence in support of this position, "I often receive comments and heckles when out on my bike. One of the recurring comments was along the lies of, 'You should wear a helmet, otherwise you'll have an accident.' it was at this point that I realised that the cycle helmet held a special place in the imagination of a large section of the public, who attributed it with almost limitless healing and protective power" This prompted the Professor to put his lab to work in investigating this effect further. Whilst the helmets could not do much to help cyclists in the event of a crash, the group found that wearing a helmet during the recovery process significantly reduced treatment time compared to the control group. The team proposed that what they were witnessing was actually a super-powered variant of the placebo effect, noting that helmets could be used to reduce recovery times for illnesses and injuries which were completely unrelated to cycling.

Cycle helmets are now used as a universal placebo in hospitals nationwide, shortening the recovery times for all patients regardless of their condition. Whilst the work has been widely welcomed, it has been a disaster for Cyclehelmets.org, who now have to issue a warning to visitors of their site that the contents may prevent their future use of the universal placebo treatment. Those who choose to continue reading the site are urged to carry a card stating that in the event of injury, use of the new universal placebo will no longer be effective.

Cat-6 Olympic Shocker

Earlier in the year, there was a great deal of surprise when the IOC unexpectedly recognised Cat-6 racing as a separate Olympic sport. The inaugural race taking place at the London 2012 games. As I'm sure most of you are aware, professional Cat-6 racing takes place on open streets and the winner does not merely cross the finish line first, but must be acceptably presentable for a working typical office environment. The sport attracted athletes from other cycling disciplines who were keen to be the first to win gold in the new event, in addition to enthusiastic amateurs including Mr Jim Davis from The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain. Whilst Mr Davis (who rode his Dutch bike during the event) crossed the finish line last, he was already dressed in a suit and didn't need to take a shower. To the shock of much of the world of professional cycling, he took home the gold medal.

In the months since the games, the recognition of Cat-6 racing as an Olympic sport and the result from the first race has had a profound result on the nation's Fred population. Many manufacturers were quick to respond, with Specialized producing an all-crabon roadster including crabon mudguards and chaincase and Endura produced a Cat-6 cycling suit which is designed to be indistinguishable from a regular £150 suit in every single characteristic (MSRP £350). Sturmey Archer announced that crabon-shell version of their popular AW hub will go on sale in early 2013, complete with all-titanium internals.

Trek was not so quick to respond, with their new Cat-6 Madone rumoured to just be a Batavus with 'Madone' written on in Tippex.

Cycling is Safe

2011-12-19T08:30:00.000Z

This one has been languishing in my drafts for quite some time, with both Vole O'Speed and As Easy As Riding A Bike sharing their own views on the issue in the meantime. Statistically speaking, cycling here in the UK appears to be surprisingly safe. Indeed, in the past I have focussed on this when talking to new and potential cyclists about their experiences of poor subjective safety. These statistics are also readily utilised by a vocal minority who are ideologically opposed to the use of separation by mode for the prioritisation and protection of cyclists. As is often the case with statistics they only tell part of the story; whilst it appears at first that they show cycling to be a 'low-risk activity,' what they literally show is that the current sub-section of the population who choose to cycle are doing so relatively safely.

Like most other people who choose to cycle in the UK, when I cycle I do so in a hyper-aware state; I always expect the worst from other road users, I pre-emptively hover over the brakes when I see a car approaching a give-way line where I have clear priority and I plan my escape route for when that BMW makes a sudden turn without indicating. I am relatively fit, fast, I cycle in the optimal gear and I know precisely how much force I can put into the brakes before the wheel locks up. Put simply, the bar it set much higher for cyclists than it is for other road users because the road environment is inherently hostile for cycling. Most people who drive motorised vehicles, which are significantly wider, faster and heavier than bicycles, do not do so in a similar state of hyper-awareness. This is because there is simply no need; the vehicles and road environment have been designed in such a way that their operators are largely protected from the limitations of their own ability. The bar has been set rather too low for such inherently dangerous machines.

I have often thought that if some of the greatest minds of the 1950s were put together in a room and given and nearly unlimited budget and the specific task of designing a road network to minimise the number of people choosing to cycle, without being permitted to explicitly make cycling illegal, the result would not be far off the current UK road network. The exceptional hostility for cycling which is designed into the UK road network is enough to prevent the vast majority of people from every wanting to cycle on it. The result is that those few who are willing to cycle on it are not at all representative of the general population; it is because this minority can cope with the road network as it currently exists that cycling appears to be a statistically safe activity.

In The Netherlands, cycling is statistically slightly safer than the UK. The difference is not as much as might be expected, which is often used as an excuse for opposing the construction of Netherlands-style dedicated cycle infrastructure in the UK. However, with a little context the safety statistics from The Netherlands start to appear much more impressive. By implementing road designs which are not inherently hostile to cycling, the section of the population choosing to cycle is much more representative of society as a whole. The majority of ordinary people, cycling without being in a hyper-aware state typical of UK cyclists manage to get around by bike and are still statistically more safe than the tiny minority of physically and mentally exceptional UK citizens who choose the bicycle. Next time there is a discussion about how safe cycling is, remember that in places such as the UK where cyclists are a tiny minority, the statistics don't tell you a great deal about how safe cycling is, only how safe cyclists are.

The Twelve Days of Christmas

2011-12-13T11:00:00.001Z

Apologies for my recent absence, unfortunately the blog had to go on the back-burner for a few weeks. It is now less than two weeks to Christmas, which means I can share with you The Twelve Days of Christmas (for cyclists) starting on the last verse. Feel free to sing along.

On the Twelfth day of Christmas my council gave to me

Twelve Cyclists Dismounts

Courtesy of Facility of the Month

Eleven-inch wide bike lanes

Courtesy of Facility of the Month

Ten side-road give-ways

Courtesy of Facility of the Month

Nine wheel-benders

Courtesy of Facility of the Month

Eight near misses

Courtesy of MiddleAgeCyclist

Seven narrow 'A' frames

Image courtesy of Mad Cycle Lanes of Manchester

Six-Pounds from the budget

Check out At War with the Motorist

Five buckled rims

Image courtesy of Bakfiets en Meer

Four biking 'crackdowns'

Image courtesy of Bike Snob NYC

Free high-vis

Image courtesy of The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club

Two ASLs

Image courtesy of Crap Cycling & Walking in Waltham Forest (RIP)

And a bike lane running through a tree

Image courtesy of Facility of the Month

Re-gearing the Brompton

2011-12-03T14:04:00.001Z

Second-hand bikes can be a great way to get a good bike at a more affordable price. The downside is that you get a bike which has been set-up according to the preferences of its previous owner. When I purchased the Brompton back in February, it had been set-up with obscenely high gearing, a 50-tooth chain-ring with a 13-tooth rear sprocket. With the Sturmey Archer S-RF3 rear hub, this gave gears with 3.7, 4.9 & 6.6 metres development respectively. I put up with this for a long time because although it was much too high, it still worked. Eventually, the stresses to the sprocket and chain from starting from stationary in such a high gear were too much, and the chain would no-longer mesh with the chain-ring.

Not having a 24mm socket to remove the left-hand folding pedal, I had a look at the official Brompton chainsets which would allow me to leave my existing left crank in place without a major mismatch. Needless to say, they were excessively expensive. Instead, I was fortunate enough to find a Stronglight chainset which, online at least, looked similar enough to the Brompton one for me to get away with leaving the original left crank in place.

The unused Stronglight left crank, with the original Brompton one. They could almost have been separated at birth.

The fitted Stronglight chainset with the Brompton original below, again they are very similar looking indeed. I also replaced the rear sprocket and chain, resulting in 42 teeth at the front and 14 teeth at the back. This produces 2.9, 3.8 & 5.1 metres development, respectively. This means the Brompton can now much more easily climb hills and accelerate from stationary without busting my knees. It may not be a very flashy upgrade but it makes a significant difference to how useful the bike is. If your gears are too high (or low) don't suffer in silence, do something about it. It can make the difference between a bike you merely tolerate riding in certain circumstances to one you actively want to use.

Thoughts on Cycling & the Political Spectrum

2011-12-02T14:40:00.000Z

Cycling is not an inherently political thing. However, like many other things it is often framed in terms of the left-right political spectrum. In those who are more right-leaning, there is a tendency to frame things in terms of individualism and to look inwards to find the source of social problems, often suggesting they are a result of a character flaw or behaviour. In those who are more left-leaning, there is a tendency to frame things in terms of collectivity and centralisation and to look outwards to find the source of social problems, often seeing behaviours as a result of environmental factors or a shortcoming of a society itself. As with most things, reality probably lies somewhere between the two extremes.

But what does all this mean for cycling? From a right-leaning perspective the bicycle fits nicely with individualism, an individual mode of transport which has no negative impact on the lives of others and offers the user complete freedom of movement. In a small way it allows its users to directly act against concerns such as climate change without the need to restrict the freedom of others. The economic benefits of cycling are also particularly desirable from a right-leaning perspective. From a left-leaning perspective the bicycle fits well with collectivism by producing wide-ranging societal and environmental benefits, especially in a country like the UK where the cost of healthcare is paid for through the government. Cycling (and affordable public transport) in place of catering primarily for more expensive environmentally and socially destructive forms of transport make mobility accessible to all members of society whilst increasing the health and safety of citizens, which is extremely desirable from a left-leaning perspective.

There are downsides too. There is a tendency towards xenophobia towards the right-end of the political spectrum; where cyclists are seen as a minority group they may be assaulted, threatened & intimidated by those who see cyclists as a group being 'different' somehow from themselves. The focus on social problems being a result of character flaws means that measures to promote cycling may end up being restricted to 'awareness' and 'training,' with infrastructural changes to the built environment to benefit cyclists (and other vulnerable road users) being shunned in favour of encouraging behavioural change indirectly, which is less successful. At the left-end of the spectrum there is a tendency towards over-regulation of the behaviour of the population, with measures such as compulsory cycle helmet legislation considered despite the damage these laws are already known to do to cycling rates.

As stated at the start, cycling is not inherently a political thing. The perception of the activity and those participating is largely due to existing personal experiences or prejudices, although how these experiences or prejudices manifest themselves may be framed depending on the political persuasion of the individual. However, when talking cycling with those in power, it is worth considering how to frame cycling as a 'good thing' in terms of the political mindset of the person whom you are addressing. For example, some might consider cycle infrastructure to be an inherently left-wing means of encouraging cycling, but it could just as easily be considered in more individualistic terms as a means of extending the freedom of movement for the individual, or as a means to produce an economic benefit. It's all a matter of spin.

Luxury Luggage 2

2011-11-30T13:34:00.000Z

Back in February when I purchased the Brompton, I also invested in a luggage block and a Brompton C-bag. Whilst the price of the C-bag was enough to make me wince, it is a high-quality product and has served me well since then. However, circumstances change and I now find myself in need of more carrying capacity when using the Brompton, so I took the plunge and purchased a T-bag.

The T-bag was formerly known as the Touring Pannier and its recent name change brings it in-line with the rest of Brompton's luggage range and also shows that they still don't take themselves too seriously. It uses the same carrier frame as the C-bag but boasts a considerably increased capacity. The downside of this is that it is a bit more unwieldy and less pleasant to carry around when off the bike. The strap lacks the padded sleeve of the C-bag making it less suited to extended stretches of being carried over-the-shoulder.

The T-bag (completely unrolled) next to the C-bag. The difference in capacity is quite startling. The inside of the T-bag is lined with yellow fabric, as is the C-bag, in order to facilitate finding stuff rattling around the bottom. It's the kind of small touch which can help rationalise purchasing luxury luggage such as this.

The zipped pocket contains a fluorescent yellow rain cover much like the one which comes with the C-bag (book not included).

Unlike the C-bag, the carry strap can be removed if preferred, which can be useful to prevent it flapping around when riding. The top of the bag has two strips of velcro to pair the edges of the bag together before the top is rolled down. As a nice extra touch, the bag includes two identical strips of velcro which can be used as 'blanking strips' if you do not wish to use the velcro fastening.

The rider-facing part of the bag contains two pockets, the left one is identical to the pockets on the C-bag, the right is a draw-string affair which permits over-stuffing and would be particularly useful as a bottle holder. After looking it over, I decided to put the bag's capacity to the test:

Much like the C-bag, the T-bag has a reflective rectangle on the front in order to prevent flash photography and possibly also to aid being seen.

This is the T-bag in its over-stuffed state (although I should add that there is still some room in the front mesh pocket). In this state the bag slightly interferes with the steering, but not enough to cause a problem when riding, only when manoeuvring the bike through doorways etc. In this state, the bag is sufficiently large to accommodate the entirety of Star Trek.

After removing the four Enterprise box sets, the bag can be properly rolled-closed and clipped into the sides where the yellow and blue boxes are.

The contents of the bag emptied out for scale: Three The Original Series box sets, the The Animated Series, seven The Next Generation box sets, seven Deep Space Nine box sets, seven Voyager box sets, four Enterprise box sets, the first 10 films box set, a separate copy of The Voyage Home and the most recent film on Blu-ray.

Whichever way you look at it, the Brompton T-bag has an impressive capacity. It would be ideal for carrying a significant amount of grocery shopping, lending further credibility to my assertion that if I could only have a single bike for all purposes, it would be a Brompton.

B&M Lumotec IQ Cyo senso plus T

2011-11-21T08:30:00.004Z

The Cyo T is much like the 60 lux Cyo, but with a row of four LEDs under the main lens which direct light at oncoming traffic for enhanced visibility

I have replaced my ailing B&M Lyt plus with the catchily-named Lumotec IQ Cyo senseo plus T also made by B&M. There are currently around ten+ variants of the Cyo, including 40 and 60 lux versions (the 40 lux incorporates a reflector which the 60 does not) bottle or hub dynamo versions, near-field lighting versions, automatic on/off via light sensor versions, versions with daylight running lights and either a black or silver finish for some of these models (as discussed previously).

The Lumotec IQ Cyo senseo plus T is the hub dynamo version of the 60 lux Cyo, with automatic on/off via light sensor and daylight running lights. In this version, the light sensor switches the light between day and night modes. The daylight running lights consist of four LEDs underneath the lens for the main beam. Unlike the main beam which is directed at the road, these LEDs are directed at oncoming traffic as an aid to 'being seen.' During the day the main light beam is at significantly reduced intensity, whilst the four LEDs underneath the lens are all illuminated. At night, the main beam is illuminated to full intensity and only two of the daylight running light LEDs are illuminated, with these two LEDs also forming the stand-light feature in this model.

Whilst I am very happy with the Philips Saferide lamp recently acquired for the DL-1, the unique proportions of the Brompton mean that only a handful of front lights can be fitted without causing problems with the front luggage system. The Saferide is not one of these due to the lack of mount compatibility with B&M fixings (unless modified). Brompton specify either the bottom-of-the-line Lumotec halogen light with the Shimano dynamo wheel or the top-of-the-range (ish) 40 lux Cyo with the SON dynamo wheel. This is perhaps a little unfair to customers, as it suggests that the Shimano dynamo wheel can only power a low end light, despite it being capable of powering the same range of lights as the SON*. As I discovered, as an alternative option the Lyt can be fitted to a Brompton by using a Cyo mount, although my initial research suggested that this was not common.

In complete darkness the Cyo T provides almost as much illumination as the Saferide. The beam is a bit less wide and the throw seems a little less too. The apparent subjective reduction in throw compared to the Saferide is likely a result of the central bright spot which comprises part of the beam shape. Whilst useful for avoiding potholes (especially so on a small-wheeled bike), the bright spot does make the rest of the beam which is projected beyond it seem less intense than it actually is. The slightly reduced beam width and throw compared to the Saferide is likely being exaggerated in this case by the lower mounting height of the Cyo on the Brompton (~350 mm) than on a conventional bike (~750 mm), but the beam is still entirely sufficient.

Where the Cyo T excels is in its urban-friendly features, such as daylight running mode which to helps mitigate the risk of not being seen by negligent motorists, and the automatic switching between day & night modes via light sensor. The daylight running lights are particularly effective at drawing extra attention in daylight, directing a good amount of light at oncoming traffic. At night, the two lower LEDs which remain turned on are illuminated to a lower intensity, to avoid blinding oncoming traffic. The automatic light sensor can be over-ridden if desired to keep the Cyo T in daylight mode at night. The level of road illumination provided by the light in 'day mode' is sufficient in well-lit areas where being seen may be of more concern than lighting up the road itself, still meeting the minimum standard for a 'proper' light.

The stand-light is different to other lamps I have used. Like the Lumotec Retro, the stand-light is provided by auxiliary LEDs rather than using the main beam as the Saferide and Lyt do. However, unlike any of these other lights the stand-light does not merely stay illuminated until the capacitor has been discharged, it is timed to shut off after around four minutes despite the capacitor having a capacity for a greater length of time. The result of this is that the stand-light is immediately available if the bike (dynamo) is moved again.

The rotary switch on the rear of the Cyo has three settings, off, sensor and daylight mode

Unlike the 40 lux version of the Cyo and the Lyt, the Cyo T does not come with an integrated reflector. A reflector is available for adding to the bottom of the standard Cyo mount, although the Brompton mount is not compatible with this. It is also worth noting that the Torx bolt which comes with the standard Cyo mounting bracket is not compatible with the Brompton Cyo mount due to the different tube thickness. Whilst this set-up has left the Brompton without a front reflector, the daylight running lights are definitely a replacement which is in the spirit of the law even if it does not conform to the letter of it.

The Torx bolt has instead been pressed into service mounting the Lyt back on the Yuba Mundo

I like the Cyo T. In plain terms of brightness and throw, it is not as good as the Saferide, but as I stated in that review, for urban utility riding the beam of the Saferide is overkill. The Cyo T also provides more than enough light for riding along unlit roads. However, the daylight running mode and the automatic switching between day and night modes make this an ideal choice for the primarily urban cyclist, whilst the beam it provides is more than sufficient for riding on unlit roads and paths too. Unless you do a great deal of your riding on completely unlit roads, these extra features probably make the Cyo T the better choice.

*The Brompton SON dynamo wheel could be used to drive a pair of front lights as is fairly common practice amongst SON owners. For typical Brompton usage it is probably not worth the extra cash.

Raleigh Twenty Stowaway

2011-11-18T08:30:00.000Z

The Sturmey Archer AW hub which was used for the pictures taken to make the hub servicing guide which formed my last post was from this Raleigh Twenty Stowaway; the folding version of the classic Raleigh Twenty. This Twenty belonged to a friend of mine and I was servicing the hub before selling it on her behalf. Prior to servicing the hub, I had done just about every conceivable bit of maintenance on this bike including front wheel, headset and bottom bracket bearings, a complete disassembling, cleaning, greasing and reassembling and replacement of the tyres, tubes, chain and saddle. As a result of this, the bike rides just like a brand new bike, despite being from 1976.

Raleigh used the 'Stowaway' branding on some of their folding Twentys (in addition to several unrelated models).

The main hinge in the frame is perhaps inelegant but very sturdy.

Difficult to see on the picture, but the rear reflector is branded as Sturmey Archer.

Pletscher rear rack, complete with a rat-trap for carrying a newspaper.

Sturmey Archer AW hub, as featured previously.

The original Sturmey Archer grip shifter, controlled by rotating the entire grip to switch gears. In practice it works better than I expected.

Raleigh Twenty 'R-20' branding.

Seat-tube decal.

'The Raleigh' Nottingham headbadge.

Brand new Raleigh Record tyres, as originally specified with the bike.

The Raleigh Twenty design has undoubtedly passed the test of time. It is a shame that the equivalent models subsequently made by Raleigh have failed to match the comfort, handling and practicality of this model. Clones of the Twenty do exist, although they have their drawbacks including price and the use of V-brakes on the UK model. There is nothing to stop Raleigh bringing back the Twenty properly, a good, small utility bike could be a good addition to their range. A few concessions to modern manufacturing techniques and componentry could be made, such as a welded frame (rather than brazed) a unicrown fork (rather than lugged). These minor sacrifices could easily be offset by a few improvements, such as dual pivot caliper brakes (or drum/coaster brakes), 406 mm aluminium rims (allowing a greater choice of tyres and the ability to stop during rain) and a proper headset (rather than a nylon bushing at the top of the head-tube).

After courting the 'sporting goods' and 'bicycle shaped object' markets extensively for the past few decades, perhaps it's time for Raleigh to look back on one of the models which once made them great, and bring it back.

Servicing a Sturmey Archer AW hub

2011-11-16T08:30:00.000Z

The Sturmey Archer AW hub is 75 years old this year. The reliability of this design means that there are plenty of these hubs still in service. The ease of serviceability of this design means that returning one of these hubs to its former glory isn't all that difficult. Many minor issues such as resistance to freewheeling, hub seizure, general resistance to rolling and problems accessing certain gears can be fixed by taking the hub apart, cleaning the internals and re-assembling it all with some fresh grease.

Whilst I have written about working on an AW hub previously, the nature of the work means that it is difficult to take pictures whilst cleaning and re-assembling the hub. Thankfully, this time I was able to get a little help with taking pictures. To open up an AW hub (and most other Sturmey Archer hub gears) remove the left-hand (non-drive side) locknut and cone and uncrew the right-hand ball ring using a hammer and a flat screwdriver on the semi-circular cut outs of the ball ring (these are not rounded on the older versions of the AW). This should let you get the internals out, axle and all. This can be further disassembled by removing the right-hand locknut and cone, which allows the rest of the hub mechanism to be taken apart.

One of the notches for unscrewing the right-hand ball ring

Left to right: The left-hand axle nut, non-turn washer, locknut, spacer and cone

Left to right (top): right axle nuts (later integrated into a single piece), non-turn washer, locknut, cone lockwasher & cone. Middle: cone. Bottom: indicator rod (with indicator rod locknut seen above the locknut)

Left to right (top): Dust cap, sprocket snap-ring. Bottom: spacers. Assembled as: Dust cap, spacer, sprocket, spacer, snap-ring.

The driver assembly and clutch spring

Gear ring (left) and right-hand ball ring (right)

Left to right: clutch sleeve, clutch, axle key and thrust ring

Top: Axle (including sun pinion). Bottom (left-to right): Planet-cage, 4 planet pinions (cogs) and 4 pinion pins.

The low-gear pawls in the planet-cage can also be removed if necessary, although when removing these be sure not to lose the tiny pawl springs in the process. The same also goes for the pawls in the gear ring.

Once all this has been disassembled, a good cleaning with some degreaser and a cloth or paper towel should restore the hub to its former glory. Particularly dirty or rusty parts can be soaked overnight or cleaned with wire wool (just make sure to remove any left-over bits of wire wool before re-assembling the hub).

To re-assemble the gear mechanism, hold the axle vertically with the drive-side pointing up (axle hole above the sun pinion).

Add the planet pinions and the pinion pins back into the planet cage and place the assembly over the top of the axle with the planets at the top.

Add a dab of Sturmey Archer hub gear grease to the planet pinions and rotate the planet cage assembly around the axle a few times to distribute the grease around.

Place the clutch sleeve over the axle and line up the hole in the sleeve with the hole in the axle.

Place the clutch over the axle and the clutch sleeve.

Slide the axle key through the hole in the clutch sleeve and axle, with the threaded hole in the axle key lined up with the centre of the axle.

Slide the thrust ring over the axle key and clutch, lining up the grooves in the thrust ring with the protruding parts of the axle key.

Place the gear ring over the planet cage assembly and clutch assembly, being sure to line up the grooves inside the gear ring with the planet pinions.

Place the right-hand ball ring over the gear ring.

Add some lithium grease to the ball bearings within the ball ring (ideally more neatly than this).

Place the clutch spring over the axle, ensuring the plastic (or metal) ringed-end of the spring pointing upwards.

Place the driver over the axle. The clutch spring will push against the driver until the right-hand cone is added to hold the driver in place.

Add lithium grease the the ball bearings in the driver assembly and screw the right-hand cone onto the axle as with any other cup-and-cone bearing system.

Add the cone lockwasher and locknut.

Add lithium grease to the left-hand bearings.

Add the left-hand cone, spacer and locknut.

On the right-hand side, add the dust-cap, a spacer, sprocket, another spacer and snap ring to the end of the driver assembly.

The wheel may be bolted back into the frame, the indicator rod screwed back into the axle key and to the gear cable and the hub is ready to be tested. With any luck, the hub should perform just fine for another couple of decades. The 'no intermediate gear' (NIG) versions of the hub, such as the current AW hub, the S-RF3 and the gear mechanism in the X-RD3 are fairly similar to this, with minor changes to the clutch assembly and the driver, which has its own pawls in this version. There have also been numerous small revisions throughout the run of the original AW hub, although they should pose little trouble when using this guide as reference. The best advice I can give anyone who wishes to service one of these hubs is to just go for it; when disassembled the hub really isn't as daunting as it may appear from reading this guide (or similar guides).

Raleigh Arena

2011-11-08T08:30:00.002Z

I was recently asked to take a look at A Grim North senior's 70s Raleigh racer. Upon hearing the description of something feeling a bit wrong at the back of the bike, I had assumed the problem would be loose bearing cones or damaged bearings.

When I got the bike I was rather surprised by its small size, it appears to be designed for a teenager or small adult, although it makes a reasonable upright bike for an average sized adult. I took a picture of it with the DL-1 for scale. What really strikes me (apart from the diminutive stature) is the practicality of the bike; unlike modern racing frames, the Raleigh Arena has relatively slack geometry, mudguards (albeit miniature ones to protect the frame rather than the rider, with eyelets for full mudguards) and even the traditional Raleigh lamp mount (although present on the right fork blade rather than the headset).

The Raleigh Arena has Olympic branding and sports a sticker stating that Raleigh's team won the 1977 Tour de France. This suggests the bike is likely from 1980, the next Olympic year following the 1977 TDF win for Raleigh.

Friction down-tube shifter controlling a 5-speed dérailleur set-up. The vestigial front mudguard can also be seen.

Very large rear reflector with the vestigial rear mudguard. Oddly the caliper brakes are Weinmann rather than Raleigh's own in-house caliper brakes as seen on the Twenty

Raleigh-branded dérailleur. Could do with the having the transmission cleaned up and re-greased.

When I saw the bike I had assumed the wheels were 650A (590mm rim size) as seen on smaller roadsters such as the Pashley Princess. Upon closer inspection it turned out to be the even less common 597mm rim size which was traditionally used on Club bicycles and has since fallen into disuse.

The reported problem with the rear end of the bicycle appears to be due to a snapped spoke on the rear wheel, which has led to a slackening of the spoke tension on the rest of the wheel. I'm surprised that the wheel survived being ridden on when the bike was brought to me. With a replacement spoke and some tightening the wheel should be easily fixed, although the obsolete wheel size means that if this bike is to be put back in service, it will eventually need converting to a more common wheel size, such as 650A or 650B.

UPDATE:

After replacing the broken spoke, re-tensioning the rear wheel, breaking a few more spokes and re-tensioning the rear wheel, the Raleigh Arena is back in action with its owner. I'd still recommend replacing those 597mm rims with some 650As as it would open up the possibility of fitting some wider tyres, such as the Schwalbe Delta Cruiser

Dutch pick-and-mix

2011-11-03T10:00:00.000Z

'There's more to 'going Dutch' than having a separate cycling lane' was a recent piece written by Matthew Wright for the Guardian. The title is a valid statement, Dutch levels of cycling didn't come about just from building cycle tracks along busy main roads, it requires that the private car is tamed on streets and lanes, so that a cycle track is unnecessary. However, the article quickly falls into that peculiar trapping which appears to be unique to the English-speaking world; Dutch pick-and-mix.

Dutch pick-and-mix (a term I hope will catch-on) is the idea that picking and choosing randomly from all of the the pro-cycling measures employed by the Dutch (other than building cycle tracks alongside roads) can result in Dutch-levels of cycling. Dutch pick-and-mix is attractive to people who are ideologically opposed to the idea of any separation of cyclists and motor traffic; Matthew Wright's choice, upon visiting The Netherlands, to ride on the main carriageway and shun the far superior adjacent cycle-only facility is a particularly informative one. By avoiding the cycle track-shaped elephant in the room, Dutch pick-and-mix offers campaigners and local authorities the easy way out; rather than making the main roads accessible to all cyclists by installing cycle tracks, a few blue signs can be used to direct cyclists via circuitous residential streets. Rather than addressing lethal junction designs, the roads in adjacent residential areas can have '20' painted onto them within a circle.

Whilst these measures are not a bad thing, they are completely, totally and utterly worthless if cyclists can't use the roads which get them to the places they need to go; main roads. Dutch pick-and-mix fails as an approach not because there is a problem with lower residential speed limits and facilitating cycling on minor roads, these are good things, but because they don't work unless they are built on a foundation of cycle tracks running alongside main roads. There is little point in creating an island of cycling paradise within a residential area if the main road connecting it to the next island of cycling paradise remains unchanged and hostile to cyclists. The Dutch pick-and-mix approach epitomised by 'There's more to 'going Dutch' than having a separate cycling lane' misses this point; there is more to 'going Dutch' than having a separate cycle lane, but without the main road network being fixed by the addition of separate cycle lanes, the rest of the measures used by the Dutch simply won't work. Separate cycle lanes are the very foundation of going Dutch, whilst attempting to build something without first laying the foundations is pretty much what we've been doing in the UK for fifty years, an approach which has done little for anyone who wants to get around by bike.

In addition to a severe case of Dutch pick-and-mix, Matthew Wright's article also falls foul of cherry-picking through the referencing of John Franklin's page of cherry-picked research, which has been dissected here previously and rendered irrelevant by a much more honest and up-to-date equivalent started here.

Whilst it is true that separate cycle lanes are not the only measure involved in 'going Dutch,' suggesting that they are anything less than the very foundation of it is at best extremely naive and at worst shockingly dishonest. Articles such as 'There's more to 'going Dutch' than having a separate cycling lane' simply serve to spread the disinformation which has held back cycling in this country for decades. A Dutch pick-and-mix approach might seem appealing, because it is comparably easy, but without the foundation of separate cycle lanes on the worst parts of the road network, it can only be expected to deliver a continuation of the flat-lining of cycle rates and a continuation of the stream of avoidable deaths on our roads.

Philips Saferide dynamo lamp

2011-11-02T11:47:00.001Z

I briefly mentioned this lamp at the end of the recent post about dynamo lighting, having read universal praise of it online. I continued to look for more information on the lamp and I found an online shop selling it at a price which seemed too good to pass up. Wanting to find out more, I bit the bullet and ordered the lamp.

After a few days, the lamp arrived. The Philips Saferide has a rated light output of 60 lux, the same as the B&M Cyo (although this number alone actually tells us very little). Also like the Cyo, the housing is aluminium to facilitate LED cooling (however, only a portion of the Cyo housing is aluminium). Like most dynamo lights, the beam is dipped so that the majority of the light ends up illuminating the road rather than blinding oncoming traffic.

I was most intrigued by this; it appears that in some jurisdictions this lamp is sufficiently bright for use on 50 cc motorcycles too.

The light comes with a bracket and integrated reflector. The reflector also houses the wire after it leaves the lamp, which would have to be dismantled ion order to change the bracket. At the lamp end. whilst similar to the B&M mounting the Saferide mount is wider at this point, use of B&M mountings would require some bracket modification in order to work.

The light source of this lamp is indirect; the beam is formed by a pair of LEDs which sit at the top of the lamp. The optics then direct the light provided by these LEDs into an even beam.

The cables leaving the back of the lamp include a pair for connecting to the dynamo and a second pair which terminate in spade connectors, for hooking-up a rear light.

The only criticism I have seen of this lamp is that the bracket is weak at the fork crown end, due to the scoring pictured above. In order to mitigate this, I used large washers when the light was mounted in order to spread the load over a wider area of the bracket.

The Saferide on the DL-1 (which I should clean). Whilst the Brompton is more in need of a new front lamp, the bracket of the Saferide would not be compatible with the luggage block. The Saferide is less aesthetically appropriate than the Lumotec Retro which was previously fitted to the DL-1, but the DL-1 is a working bike, not a museum piece.

Unlike the Lumotec Retro, the Saferide does not have the automatic on/off via light sensor feature which I came to appreciate. The Saferide is controlled by an on/off switch on the top of the unit, which also turns off the stand-light when switched off. The capacitor holds the charge for at least a day even when switched off, so the stand-light can be turned back on when unlocking the bike.

Now, onto the performance of the light itself. This thing is bright, I mean seriously bright. The first ride I did with it was Halloween Critical Mass, which took place as it was starting to get dark. By the end of the ride it was completely dark and the mass was heading to Platt Fields park (which lacks lighting in many parts). By this point I was towards the back and the Saferide was illuminating the lower half of all the bikes in front of me and completely outshining the lights on the 15 or so bikes in front of me.

The best light I have to compare the Saferide to is the Lumotec Lyt. The Lyt provides enough light to ride quite comfortably on unlit country roads, producing a bright, slightly narrow beam with a halo of light thrown wide to provide visibility of the sides of the road, overhanging vegetation, visibility for oncoming traffic and illuminate road signs. In comparison, the Saferide has a taller, notably brighter beam which is about twice the width. The whole width of a country road is illuminated easily, and the beam stretches up to around 50 metres in front of the bike. The 'halo' of the Lyt is replaced by a slightly odd 'broken halo,' similar to the stylised rays surrounding a child's drawing of the sun. These 'rays' provide visibility of the sides of the road nearer to the bike and do an excellent job of lighting up road signs and the reflectors on parked cars. When I took the DL-1 on a ride along some unlit country roads in the dark using the Saferide, after a while I wasn't sure how dark it had been when I set off. Switching the Saferide off for a moment confirmed that it was indeed completely dark at the time.

I would like to compare the Saferide to similarly-rated lights such as the Edelux and the Cyo. If Mr MiddleAgeCyclist would like to go for a spin somewhere at night, I'd be happy to see how the Saferide and Edelux compare.

For urban utility riding, the Saferide is complete and total overkill. For rural utility riding, the Saferide represents a worthwhile purchase, especially considering the battery requirements (and conical beam-shape) of a typical similarly bright battery light. Thanks to good (dynamo) lighting, I enjoy riding at night, both for utility and just for fun. For the most part of my riding the Saferide will be overkill, but it will come into its own when I'm riding for fun.

The Lumotec Retro is currently for sale on eBay, although I'd be willing to sell privately to a local instead.

UPDATE (6/11/11)

Yesterday I was able to meet up with Mr Middle Age Cyclist for a ride down the Floop after dark, to compare the Saferide with his Schmidt Edelux. The Floop is completely unlit, providing a good proving ground for the lights. Whilst the comparison is highly subjective, we both agreed that the lights are effectively equivalent in performance. The Edelux casts a slightly taller, more narrow beam whilst the Saferide casts a slightly shorter, more wide beam. The Edelux is effectively a super version of the B&M Cyo, possessing the same optics and LED, but housed in a more thermally-efficient aluminium housing with a glass lens. This set-up is designed to get that little bit more output from the same core light, suggesting that the Saferide is likely an equal, or perhaps marginally superior light to the Cyo. One day I will do another direct comparison with a Cyo.

Classic

2011-10-31T08:30:00.004Z

Taken at the Manchester Tweed Ride on Saturday, a Hercules Roadster. Like many of the British bicycle manufacturers, Hercules was eventually rolled into Raleigh through eventual owners of the majority of the bicycle manufacturing business, TI industries. The Hercules Roadster may have been made around the time of this amalgamation; William, its owner, informed me that the rear hub was dated as 1949. The similarity of the frame to that of the DL-1 is quite striking. It just goes to show, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Light is Running Out

2011-10-26T08:30:00.000+01:00

It's that time of year again. When Sunday comes it will be dark a lot of the time for anyone who works a conventional 9-5 shift pattern. This will be my second winter of riding with dynamo lights, with dynamos on all of the bikes this time, although still only enough lights for two of them; the Brompton and the DL-1. This is the perfect time of year to 'go dynamo,' not only for the long-term savings but, as I learned myself last winter, it's extremely liberating.

Some people hang up their bikes for winter. If you are a utility cyclist however, this is unlikely to be the case. I have ridden through every winter since I started cycling again as an adult. However, until last year I never really got any enjoyment doing it. Having to remember to take my lights everywhere, carry them around when off the bike was a minor hassle. What really bothered me was the persistent, nagging concern that I'd be caught out by flat batteries and have to risk a ride home without lights. The battery lights I had used in the past were adequate, but never truly that bright. I knew of the much brighter options available but the price never seemed justifiable to me, for something which could so easily become useless if forgotten of accidentally uncharged.

When I bought my first dynamo lamp, a B&M Lumotec Retro N senseo plus, it was mainly because I was concerned with having a light which was in-keeping with the aesthetics of my then new-to-me DL-1. English-language information regarding dynamo lights was pretty sketchy, I wasn't sure what I was going to get. Because of this, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the light I had purchased was actually a lot brighter than my previous battery-powered LED lights, despite being a halogen bulb. It was always there when I needed it and would even come on automatically when darkness fell. This started to change the way I felt about riding in the dark, from something to be avoided to something to relish. As that first dynamo winter drew in, I found myself riding as much as I had during summer.

Naturally, I had to get the rear light powered by the dynamo too, whilst permanently attached to the bike, the rear the battery light which came with the DL-1 was still a weak link, dependent on batteries. Once again, information was lacking. B&M produced rear lights with the same automatic light-sensor on/off control as the Retro, although it seemed that this feature was only available with the battery or battery/dynamo hybrid models. Once again I took the plunge and purchased a B&M D-Toplight Plus. The tail-light was wired into the connectors on the front lamp for this purpose; to my surprise the automatic light sensor in the front light also controlled the power supply to the rear light. When it got dark both lights would come on automatically (including when passing through a tunnel). Brilliant.

Having this kind of set-up on the DL-1 made the Yuba Mundo seem almost a hassle to ride. The Shimano dynamo hubs available in my price range were all intended for use with Centerlock disk brakes, rather than the standard 6-bold arrangement used on the Yuba Mundo. The additional cost of a new Centerlock rotor or an IS adaptor pushed the price to more than I could justify spending at the time. A post from Lovely Bicycle! gave me the answer I was looking for, a bottle dynamo. Older bottle dynamos (and modern cheap ones) have contributed to the poor regard with which dynamo systems are viewed here in the UK. However, higher-spec bottles such as the Nordlicht 2000 or the B&M Dymotec seemed to offer a reasonable trade-off between performance and price. I decided to opt for the Basil Nordlicht bottle dynamo in combination with with a B&M Lumotec Lyt plus, a reasonably priced light with a higher light output rating than the Retro. Due to budgetary constraints, an additional rear light would have to wait.

Unlike the Sturmey Archer X-FDD hub dynamo on the DL-1, the Basil Nordlicht took a bit more work to find the optimum fitting. The advantage of the Basil Nordlicht is that the rollers can be changed. Multiple variants are available including a steel roller for running on the tyre, a rubber roller for running on the rim and a larger rubber roller for running on the rim at higher speeds. The larger roller is particularly useful as it allows the dynamo to be 'geared down.' As bottle dynamos are typically designed to produce full power output at relatively low speeds (<10km/h) they can produce too much drag when used by faster cyclists. The larger roller compensates for this by reducing the amount of dynamo revolutions per tyre revolution, and hence the resulting drag. Initially the bottle dynamo was mounted on the fork, unfortunately the pressure it exerted on the rim caused the rotor of the disk brake to rub against the brake pads when it was engaged. Eventually I mounted the dynamo on the seat-stay and adjusted the mounting angle which produced ideal dynamo contact pressure on the rim, enough to prevent slippage but not enough to create noticeable drag.

At present the Basil Nordlicht bottle dynamo is still fitted to the Yuba Mundo, although there are no dynamo lights fitted for it to drive. This is due to my acquisition of a Brompton. After a few weeks with the Brompton, I felt that a bike such as this really needed to be all in-one, including self-sufficient lighting. It was around this time that the annual price increases for Brompton components were being rolled out. The Brompton dynamo wheel RRP was about to increase by about 15% making that then the ideal time to upgrade to the Shimano hub dynamo wheel. I had considered the fitting the Basil Nordlicht bottle to the Brompton, but the relatively good price of the wheel and my uncertainty about clearances for fitting the bottle led me to choose the hub over the bottle.

Rather than splash out on a new front light, my limited budget led me to fit the Lyt from the Yuba Mundo instead. My intention was to replace the front lamp on the Yuba Mundo at a later date, which I have still yet to do. Initially I bent the Lyt mount to fit it into the tight space between the caliper brake and the luggage block, a solution which was far from ideal. I was later able to use a Brompton Cyo mounting bracket to fit the Lyt into the limited space offered by the Brompton. I also added a Brompton rear dynamo light (made by Spanninga) to complete the set-up

The version of the Lyt I had purchased for the Yuba Mundo was the bottle dynamo version; when connected to the hub dynamo on the Brompton, both front and rear lights ran whenever the bike was in motion. Whilst not as optimal as the automatic on/off light sensor of the Retro, this set-up actually works well, due to the extraordinary operational lifespan of LEDs. It now appears that I was a little ahead of the curve in choosing this set-up; B&M's entire 2012 range of dynamo lighting comes with the option for daylight running lights.

My experiences with dynamo lighting have not been universally positive. The standlight functions on both of the lights fitted to the Brompton failed by summer, although they were both relatively easy to fix. However, it is my 'off-label' riding with the Brompton which is more likely the cause of this failure than any deficiency in the lights' designs; Bromptons are not really ideal bikes for fast riding on cobbled paths, the resulting vibrations were obviously a bit too much for the capacitors powering the standlight. Under more typical riding conditions I doubt that this problem would have occurred. For this reason I would still strongly recommend dynamo lighting to anyone, including the models of light which I have had problems with.

A great deal of dynamo lighting technology is designed by (or for) the German market. German regulations stipulate that a bicycle must be sold complete with a dynamo lighting system (except lightweight sports-bikes), including lights which conform to specific regulations for beam shape and light intensity. These regulations are more strict than elsewhere and have effectively become the de facto international standard. The misconceptions about dynamo lighting which persist in the English-speaking world means that we do not constitute a huge proportion of the market for dynamo lighting components, with equipment and information often difficult to come by. B&M in particular make great equipment but the English-language information about them is lacking. They also suffer from the Windows Vista effect; huge numbers of variants on each light model exist with relatively subtle differences between them and confusing nomenclature. These differences are seldom well explained in product descriptions on the handful of retailers which stock them.

Because of this, to help prospective dynamo light users I have produced a B&M dynamo light nomenclature guide:

Lumotec: The front dynamo light brand name.
Toplight: The rear dynamo light brand name.
Retro, Lyt, IQ Fly, IQ Cyo etc: The model name.
Plus: Includes standlight. The light (or a portion of it) remains illuminated for a few minutes after motion stops.
Senseo: Includes automatic on/off via light sensor.
N: Includes an on/off switch, intended for use with hub dynamos.
B: Basic version, lower light output but still meeting German minimum standard.
R: Taller beam, including near-field illumination of dark patch in front of wheel.
T: Daylight running lights. In addition to the beam aimed at the road, a series of small LEDs direct light at oncoming traffic to increase cyclist visibility. During the day these lights remain lit, whilst the main beam runs at reduced power or is switched off.

B&M are of course not the only manufacturer of dynamo lights, merely the one with which I have most experience. Mr Hembrow gives high praise to the new dynamo front lamp manufactured by Philips; the Saferide (repeated elsewhere). It is my hope to test out a Saferide in the future and share my impressions here. If anyone has any questions about 'going dynamo,' please feel free to leave a comment and I will endeavour to help you if I can.

Nice Rack

2011-10-24T08:30:00.002+01:00

Despite no-longer being mine, the Kona Africa Bike continues to be treated to upgrades and improvements, the latest of which is a Basil Memories front rack. The Africa Bike originally came with a spring-loaded folding front basket which, whilst an excellent idea in theory, ended up squeaking excessively in use. This may have been partly due to the fact that I one carried a 10 kg bag of cat litter in there, which it became immediately obvious was far too heavy for the basket. The new rack which takes its place has a weight rating of 15 kg, adding a reasonable amount of extra carrying capacity to the bike. I personally find having luggage up-front to be re-assuring because I can keep an eye on it whilst on the move. Access to luggage whilst on the move is another bonus.

The rack is not the only addition to the Africa Bike, a Brooks saddle was added a few months back, and a Carradice Pendle saddle bag is another recent addition.

The Basil Memories front rack attached to the handlebar via hooks, in much the same way as the folding basket which came with the bike. The legs are intended to fit onto the front wheel axle, which would not be a problem on a bike with thin fork tubing or a lot of rake, such as a typical roadster.

Thankfully, despite the thick fork tubing of the Africa Bike, the rack legs were easily attached to the fork via the second set of eyelets above the axle, designed for attaching a large basket or rack.

The hooks which attach the rack to the handlebar are adjustable to accommodate a wide variety of bike sizes and handlebar heights, with at least 20 cm of extra height left over for the set-up on the Africa Bike. The only thing missing now is a wicker hamper to sit on the rack

On Blogging

2011-10-21T08:30:00.000+01:00

When I first started this blog, two years ago today, I wasn't at all sure what I was expecting to get out of the experience. My main aim at first was that I could share my bicycle-related experiences for the benefit of others, such as places which were good for cycling or tips for maintenance. What I did not expect was for it to be a way to make new friends with like-minded people from both Manchester, the UK and the world beyond.

Blogging led me to the Wheelers' Brunch, where in January of this year I got to meet a lot of the other local bloggers and other like-minded people who read them face-to-face for the first time. It was great to be able to put names and faces to blogs. It has also led to some interesting opportunities, including collaborating with LC and Jacky on Manchester Cycle Chic, testing Ian's tandem out for a weekend (in return for lending him the Brompton) and fencing a drum-brake wheel to Jim.

On a national level, the founding of The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, which itself is a product of the UK blogging scene, has allowed me to get to know like-minded folk from around the country. At the meeting in Manchester back in May, I met a large number of people whose work I had been reading for quite some time, and it was great to be able to get to know them all face-to-face. It also provided a chance to show off Manchester's particularly eclectic selection of cycle infrastructure, and support a great local pub too.

Perhaps most impressive of all (and I apologise for how long it has taken me to post this), is the wonderful gift I received from Shawn Granton, who writes the always wonderful Urban Adventure League. I received a package from Shawn containing one of the posters produced from the Rose City three-speed ride, which includes a wonderful graphic of an exploded Sturmey Archer AWC hub, which is currently hung on my wall.

He also included some bicycle artwork and a cycle touring primer containing useful advice for potential cycle tourists, knowing that I have yet to undertake a cycle tour myself.

Also included were some cool badges based on the artwork from the poster, which currently reside on my Brompton bag.

Based on my own positive experience, I'd urge anyone with a strong, specific interest in a subject to give blogging a try. Who knows what kind of friendships, opportunities and experiences it will open up along the way?

Cycling in a Suit

2011-10-19T08:30:00.002+01:00

Once a common sight, people in suits are now seldom seen riding bicycles in the UK. The only possible exceptions I can think of are some of the users of the London Cycle Hire and possibly some in Cambridge.

Recently, I have had cause to wear a suit more frequently. Despite this change of attire I have still had to get around, which for me means cycling. Generally I find formal wear to be a bit more restrictive than I like, although a decent suit makes a big difference. On the sorts of bike I used to ride, cycling in a suit wouldn't have been feasible, the rider posture combined with the restrictions on the arms and shoulders conferred by a suit jacket would be difficult, at least for me. I can imagine this situation would be made worse by a racing or touring bike, with the popularity of sport-oriented bikes, likely a contributing factor in the declining number of cyclists-in-suits.

The Brompton and Yuba Mundo, despite sporting reasonably upright riding positions, are both not ideal for cycling in a suit due to their exposed transmission. Trouser clips are a potential way to avoid the problems associated with an exposed transmission, but if it is essential that you make a good impression, a chain-guard or preferably a chain-case is the best way to ensure you reach your destination suitably smart. Cycling in a suit, just like almost all other cycling, is best done using a bike fitted with mudguards.

For this reason, the DL-1 has been my bike of choice for riding in formal wear. The upright posture prevents the suit jacket coming into conflict with the arms and shoulders, the chain-case prevents the trousers getting covered in chain filth and the generally relaxed feel of the bike prevents you from working up much of a sweat on your way to that important meeting. Plus it has a briefcase clip too. Now I just need a briefcase.

Make Do & Mend

2011-10-12T08:30:00.001+01:00

Way back in early August on a ride back to Manchester at night I was worried the see that the stand-light on my B&M Lumotec Lyt, the front lamp on my Brompton had stopped working. The back stand-light on my Brompton had been non-functional for a while too. I couldn’t really justify the expense of replacing either of these lights, especially after such a short time in service. Thankfully, I have some experience of electronics from sixth form college and had also done some work with battery-backed full-wave rectification circuits previously. The fact that the stand-light had gone on both lights, but both still worked when the bike was in motion suggested to me that the capacitor used to power the stand-light is connected in parallel with the rectified current from the dynamo and in both cases had become disconnected. The rattle was a bit of a giveaway too. I firstly too a look inside the Lumotec Lyt.

The casing of the Lyt can be gently prized apart with the edge of a screwdriver.

The business part of the Lyt, the circuit board, containing the central LED, with the £1 coin-sized capacitor next to it.

After examining the circuit board, I found the part of it to which the capacitor attached. When assembled, the capacitor sits in this position at the top right of the circuit board which sits vertically in the housing. The relatively heavy capacitor is supported at this angle by two contacts soldered in to the board in a manner which is not really ideal for applications with a lot of bumping and vibration, such as in bicycles (especially on the Brompton).

One of the contacts had broken off with the capacitor, a wire was soldered to this end,

and soldered into the circuit board at the other end.

A contact for the side of the capacitor whose original contact was still attached to the circuit board was fashioned from part of the tab from a drinks can,

and placed in contact with the capacitor using tape. The remaining end of the wire pair was soldered to the contact on the circuit board,

and the whole thing was taped (crudely) to the inside of the housing of the Lyt. Whilst hardly a professional job, the result has held just fine for over two months. The situation with the rear light, a Brompton dynamo light (made by Spanninga) was similar, although the capacitor was positioned more sensibly in this design.

The capacitor as intended to be positioned on the circuit board of the Brompton rear light was re-affixed in a similarly crude manner to the capacitor in the Lyt; using solder and a lot of tape. This repair job has also held up surprisingly well since the beginning of August.

The long-term plan is to retire both of these lights to the Yuba Mundo, which is both used less frequently than the Brompton and which, with larger wheels and more voluminous tyres will likely be less demanding on these damaged lights, and replace the front lamp with a Cyo and a new Brompton rear light which I will pre-emptively reinforce. Until I have the funds for that though, I’ll have to make do & mend.

How John Franklin misled a nation's cycling campaigners

2011-10-10T17:05:00.001+01:00

I have been reading the works of John Franklin for quite a few years. My first encounter was as a relatively new cyclist who wanted to know how best to cope with the inherently cycling-hostile UK road network, I discovered the principles of vehicular cycling as promoted in John Franklin's popular work Cyclecraft. As I have previously stated, Cyclecraft is a good survival manual for anyone wanting to cycle on the hostile British road network, containing useful techniques for making the best out of a crap situation. Unfortunately, Cyclecraft isn't promoted as survival manual by its author, instead being suggested as a solution. Even worse, a significant portion of the British cycling establishment agree with this view, one which I feel is divorced from reality.

As was noted by both myself and As Easy As Riding A Bike, cycling according the the principles of Cyclecraft requires a level of fitness and speed which acts as a barrier:

"Cadence and sprint speed

Cadence is the number of times a cycling turns the pedals in one minute. A steady, comfortable pedalling rhythm is essential for efficient cycling, while increasing one’s cadence strengthens the leg muscles and enables more rapid acceleration. Increasing cadence also makes it easier to increase your sprint speed – the maximum speed that you can attain over a short distance, such as through a roundabout.Racing cyclists know well the benefits of having a high cadence, but there can also be important safety advantages for everyone. Generally speaking, you are at your safest in traffic if you can move at a speed comparable to that of the other vehicles. Increasing your cadence and sprint speed will allow you to achieve this more often, particularly at those places where it matters most – junctions with complex manoeuvring. It will also be easier to restart quickly in a low gear at traffic signals and roundabouts, and to get yourself out of trouble if you are on a potential collision course.Increasing cadence and sprint speed are two of the most positive steps a cyclist can take to enhance safety.

A good cadence to aim for is about 80, while a sprint speed of 32 km/h (20 mph) will enable you to tackle most traffic situations with ease. To increase your cadence, select a gear lower than you would normally use for a given road and simply force yourself to pedal faster in order to maintain your usual speed. Gradually, your leg muscles will become accustomed to the higher rate and your cadence and strength will increase."

The physical demands of cycling according to the principles outlines in Cyclecraft aside, it also requires a potential cyclist to possess a level of enthusiasm for cycling which I find unrealistic beyond a small proportion of the population (broadly the same proportion of people who currently cycle). Whilst some drivers are truly motoring enthusiasts, the overwhelming vast majority merely choose to drive because their environment has made driving feel like the safest, easiest and cheapest option open to them. If driving became less convenient and felt less safe than another mode of transport, most of them would switch without giving it much thought. There'd still be Formula 1, motoring exhibitions and car-owners clubs because the people who are interested in them are enthusiasts, much in the same way that many of the people who currently cycle (despite the problems) are cycle enthusiasts. However, the average person would abandon their car without much thought if it ceased to be perceived as the best way to get around, much as the average person abandoned their bike when motor-centric government policies made the bike cease to be perceived as the best way to get around.

I encountered John Franklin's work again when I started to learn about dedicated infrastructure for cycling, such as the segregated cycle paths which adjacent to roads carrying a large enough, or fast enough volume of motor traffic traffic in The Netherlands. Whenever I observed a discussion of the relative merits of this approach online, I often saw someone would present a link to Cycle path safety: A summary of research, citing it as a definitive proof that segregation of cyclists and motor traffic was always a bad idea. It is difficult to blame the average reader for seeing this list and taking it at face value, after all it is stated on that page that, "This list is intended to be without bias, but little evidence has been found to suggest that cyclists are safer on paths than on roads." As a non-expert, why wouldn't you take this statement at face value? After all, it comes from a 'road safety expert.' However, on closer inspection, it is interesting to note that the research on the list is entirely from before the year 2000, so is irrelevant to much of the modern infrastructure present in The Netherlands and Denmark. Secondly, the research on the list is extensively cherry picked; Franklin does not state his criteria for which research makes the list and which does not. However, it appears that in order to make the list, the findings of the research have to agree with John Franklin’s existing ideology; there should be no segregation of cyclists and motorised traffic. Many relevant articles which contradict this ideology are conspicuous by their absence. Thirdly, John Franklin employs a false dichotomy; presenting vehicular cycling and segregation of cycles and motorised traffic as two discrete things when in fact there are a wide variety of approaches to segregation, many of which are crap (such as the Redways) and some of which are outstanding, such as The Netherlands (and to a lesser extent, Denmark) and a wide variety of vehicular cycling environments, some relatively successful (such as the Britain of the 40’s and 50’s) and some truly dire (such as the Britain of 2011). Whilst these three crippling deficiencies in Cycle path safety: A summary of research could perhaps be forgiven if the list were compiled by a total novice, it find it extremely difficult to believe that John Franklin, a ‘road safety expert,’ could have made all of these three errors accidentally. It seems perhaps more likely that a selection of research articles have been picked and presented in a way which deliberately misrepresents the strong case in favour of separation of cycles and motor traffic where motor traffic speeds and/or volumes are high (as a part of a wider array of measures as in The Netherlands), in order to lend credibility to an ideological opposition to any separation of cycles from motorised traffic which is not backed up by the facts.

When writing for the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain’s wiki section, Common Claims & Canards, I noticed a blank section, entitled: Dutch cyclists are not competent to cycle in the UK. Although listed as a common claim, it was something I hadn’t really heard myself and I set out to do some research to find out where this claim originated from or was popularised. One again, John Franklin came up, this time in an open letter to Sustrans; Casualties on cycle paths from 1998., which was written in response to Sustrans (quite rightly) questioning the evidence for Franklin’s continued vocal opposition to cycle paths on the grounds of their alleged poor safety record:

“Sustrans has often cited the fact that Dutch cyclists sometimes leave the ferry at Harwich and find traffic so difficult to deal with that they go back home! Interestingly, this problem is not experienced by cyclists arriving from France, Spain or the USA. Proficiency in using roads on a regular basis is essential to maximise safety, and to maximise one's cycling horizons. I would not like to see Britain on the slope down to Dutch levels of cycling competence.”

To me at least, it seems here that John Franklin is at best making a sweeping generalisation about an entire nation of people, whilst at worst coming off simultaneously as elitist and a bit racist. It seems obvious to me that the vast majority of people in The Netherlands are just like the vast majority of people in the UK, neither feel safe enough to cycle on British roads. It has nothing to do with competence or nationality, the vast majority of British people don’t cycle, put them in The Netherlands and most will; the vast majority of Dutch people do cycle, put them in the UK and most won’t. They don’t not cycle here because they’re incompetent, they don’t cycle here for the same reason that most British people and most tourists from other countries don’t cycle here, it’s shit and it doesn’t feel safe. Reading this, I get the feeling that what irks Franklin is that fact that the average Dutch person can cycle without having to be enthusiastic abut cycling, without having to care about or be interested in cycling, and without having to develop the survival skills outlined for vehicular cycling in Cyclecraft. They made it easy to cycle.

The always excellent Vole O’ Speed spotted another instance of John Franklin’s uneasy relationship with research, the Helsinki paper incident, in which Franklin, whilst chair of Cyclenation selectively publicised results compiled within a political document which disguised as a research paper, the main purpose of which was to politically undermine cycling as a whole. Despite the anti-cycling bias of this document, Franklin chose to selectively use the results compiled within it to misrepresent the safety of segregated cycle tracks at a time when the Camden Cycling Campaign was working towards an expansion of their extremely successful two-way segregated track, a track which remains to this day one of the most successful pieces of cycle infrastructure in the whole of London. I do not wish to re-produce too much of what David wrote on the matter here, but I urge all of you to read it (and learn a bit about Franklin’s disinformation legacy at Cyclenation today).

The final piece of Franklin’s work I encountered was his often-cited ‘research’ into the safety of the Milton Keynes Redway network in Two decades of the Redway cycle paths in Milton Keynes, which I recently decided to look into in greater detail. Suffice to say, the Redways are crap and do not represent what anyone would regard as ‘best practise.’ However, Franklin’s ‘research’ on the Redways tells us literally nothing about their safety in comparison to the general road network, with the whole paper serving merely as a vehicle to further his own ideological agenda. As someone who regularly works with peer-reviewed research, I am genuinely amazed that Two decades was ever published in a real journal.

Having read a great deal of Franklin’s work, I find it extremely difficult to believe that all that is wrong with it is due to a series of mistakes. Whilst Cyclecraft is a great survival manual for dealing with our awful, cycling-hostile road network, it seems obvious that John Franklin believes that cyclists always belong on the road as an ideology. As an ideological view, there is nothing wrong with this. However, presenting this as fact by misrepresenting and cherry-picking research and conducting research which is little more than a collection of meaningless, context-free numbers in order to serve as a vehicle for an ideology which the numbers do not back is a dishonest practise. By compiling all this in one place, it is my hope that this page can be used as a quick answer to anyone who presents Cycle path safety: A summary of research in a discussion about cycle infrastructure, so that we can all get on with having a proper discussion about where cycling in the UK should go from here.

Cycling whilst ill

2011-10-06T14:45:00.000+01:00

The season of winter sniffles and colds is just around the corner and I appear to have been visited by the snot fairy a bit early this year. Despite this, I've still had to get around and for me that means cycling. Cycling whilst ill can be challenging and even unpleasant. Coughs and colds can often make you feel like your lung capacity has been reduced, making physically demanding activities such as fast cycling or hill-climbing difficult as you struggle to catch your breath.

Despite the potential for cycling whilst ill to be an unpleasant experience, there are a few things you can do you compensate for your weakened physical state:

Don't rush, it's not a race after all. Give yourself a bit more time than usual for a given trip, cycling more slowly will reduce the demands which cycling places on your body.
Take a break. If it's all getting a bit too much, get off the bike and walk it along for a little while. It'll give you a chance to catch your breath whilst still making progress towards your destination.
Walk up the hills, ride the flats and the downhill sections. Riding on a flat or downhill shouldn't pose too much of a problem, even if you are feeling under the weather. Walking the uphill sections will remove some of the most physically demanding parts of the ride whilst providing you with a chance to rest.

Please feel free to share your own tips and experiences of cycling whilst under the weather in the comments below.

The Milton Keynes Redways

2011-10-04T15:57:00.002+01:00

The town of Milton Keynes in Buckinghamshire was built as an experiment in town design, started in the late 1960s. At this time, private motoring was almost universally viewed as the future of transport. The now-obvious problems of induced demand, suppression of walking, cycling & public transport, dependence on ever-dwindling fossil fuel resources and health problems related to both the sedentary lifestyle encouraged by excessive car-dependence, the killing and maiming of people in collisions with cars and the premature deaths related to particulate air pollution, were still not widely considered. Milton Keynes was designed primarily around the needs and desires of the private motorist, constructed around a grid of national speed limit A-roads. In order to facilitate high-speed motoring, cyclists were effectively removed from the roads with a separate grid of separate cycle paths; known as the Redways.

The Redways are often used as an argument against implementing any form of separate cycle infrastructure in other parts of the UK. Whilst at the most superficial level, it can be argued that the Dutch and the Milton Keynes approaches are similar (they both involve some degree of separation of cycle and motor traffic), the similarities do not extend beyond the superficial. Unlike the Dutch approach to separate cycle infrastructure, designed to promote cycling by making it subjectively and objectively safer, direct and convenient, the Milton Keynes Redways are primarily an infrastructural intervention designed to benefit the private motorist by removing cyclists and pedestrians from the grid roads, permitting higher speeds and less-attentive driving, whilst leaving cyclists with a network of poorly signed, surfaced and maintained narrow two-way lanes with poor sight-lines, having no priority over side roads or driveways and bringing cyclists into conflict with pedestrians. The Redways have become a popular straw man to be used in forums against anyone who argues for Dutch-style cycle infrastructure in the UK; suggesting that what they actually want is a network similar to the Redways in other UK towns and cities.

John Franklin wrote an article about the safety of the Milton Keynes Redways in Traffic Engineering & Control in 1999 (around the time he appeared to lose interest in new research being published about the safety of separate cycle infrastructure). In it, he notes that the now-defunct Milton Keynes Development Corporation (MKDC) stated that the Redways were designed primarily as a leisure facility, rather than to be a useful part of the transport network. Generally the Redways have grade-separated crossings either under or above the grid roads, although several at-grade crossings also exist. A secondary grid of Redways was originally planned, passing through the centre of estates and bisecting the main roads, but never materialised, leaving instead a maze of largely indirect and poorly signed local paths. The result was that the faster, more confident cyclists instead chose to try their luck on the grid roads; multi-lane roads with speed limits up-to 70 mph, linked to other primary grid-lines by huge roundabouts. The cross-city Redways were constructed in the early 80s in response to the numbers of cyclists choosing to use the grid-roads instead of the low-quality Redways network. These cross-city Redways ran alongside some of the grid roads, although due to the daunting nature of the high-speed grid roads, since the mid 80s there has been a tendency to route Redways alongside estate roads (with no priority over side-roads).

Franklin's article suggests that despite the many inherent limitations of the Redways, cycle ownership in Milton Keynes was higher than average at the time of the 1991 census, with cycling having a 4.3% commuter modal share, half of which took place on the Redways. The current Milton Keynes LTP3 states (rather less helpfully) that at the time of the 2001 census, 9% of people in Milton Keynes travelled to work on foot or by cycle. The article shows the injury and fatality statistics for cyclists using the Redways, grid roads or local roads from 1988-1997. Unfortunately, these statistics are not given in the context of relative cycling rates on each of these types of road, although the fact that at the time, half of the commuter cycling trips took place on the Redways may in itself be indicative of approximately how many of all cycle trips took place on the Redways.

	Injuries	Injuries (percentage)	Serious injury/ Fatalities	Serious injury/ Fatalities (percentage)
Grid Roads	172	32.39	22	37.29
Local Roads	188	35.40	13	22.03
Redways	171	32.20	24	40.68
Total	531		59

Table 1. Injuries and serious injuries/fatalities of cyclists in Milton Keynes between 1988-1997, broken down by road type. In the original article, these figures are given independently for each year. These figures show us literally nothing about the relative safety of the Milton Keynes grid roads, local roads or Redways, because there is no context provided; we do not know what percentage of cycle trips are made using each type of road, nor do we know anything about the differences in experience and proficiency between the groups of cyclists who choose to use each of the road types. Despite this, Franklin says of the figures, "There have been as many, or more, serious accidents on Redways as on grid roads in five of the past 10 years, and more than on local roads in four years." As a statement, it is factually true, but it could equally be said that there had been as many, or more serious accidents/fatalities on grid roads & local roads as on Redways in five of the ten years, more minor injuries on grid roads than on Redways in seven of the ten years and more minor injuries on local roads than on Redways in six of the ten years. None of which means anything without context provided by the relative amount of cycling taking place on each type of road.

The author notes that there is considerable under-reporting of accidents on the Redways, although provides no source for this claim, and so goes on to look at hospital data from Milton Keynes Hospital from 1993-1997. The hospital data includes no information about the severity of injuries, and for the years 1993 & 1994 makes no distinction between accidents occurring on the Redways or on 'other' routes; accidents occurring on non-road, non-Redway routes in an area covering a wider area than just the Milton Keynes 'new town' area.

Year	Road	Redway	Other
1993	86	402
1994	96	477
1995	88	195	242
1996	87	170	305
1997	105	178	292

Table 2. Cyclists attending A&E at Milton Keynes Hospital between 1993-1997, broken down by road type. Again, these figures tell us absolutely nothing about the relative safety of the Milton Keynes grid roads, local roads or Redways, because there is no context provided; we do not know what percentage of cycle trips are made using each type of road, nor do we know anything about the differences in experience and proficiency between the groups of cyclists who choose to use each of the road types.

The author also mentions two hospital-based surveys which went into more detail; a one month survey in 1991, and a longer survey between April and July of 1992, breaking down the numbers of cyclists admitted to hospital by the type of road they were injured on. Once again, without providing context of the relative frequency with which the different types of route are used, these numbers tell us precisely nothing about the relative safety of cyclists using the Milton Keynes grid roads, local roads or Redways.

The closest the author gets to addressing the issue of providing relative usage figures for each of the road types is the results of a survey by the Milton Keynes Cycle Users' Group in 1993, asking cyclists to report their accident experience in the previous year. 27 % reported having an accident on the Redways in the previous year, versus 6% on local roads and 3% on grid roads. The author suggested that some might assume that the relatively low rate of grid road accidents would be due to the grid roads being used by so few cyclists, and those who elected to use them being particularly proficient and experienced (and fast). To counter this assumption, the author states that "43% of respondents said that they cycle on grid roads at least once a week." However, 43% stating they use the grid roads "at least once a week" could mean the grid roads represent anything from almost of the respondents cycling, to a minuscule fraction, and it does not address the issue that those electing to use the grid roads being more experienced, proficient and faster cyclists. Without being able to see the source survey, who was polled, where and how, it is difficult to rule out sample bias. When it is considered that the survey was carried out by a local cycling group, it is difficult not to wonder if roadies, who are traditionally fast, confident and experienced cyclists, often preferring a vehicular approach to cycling either for their own convenience of on ideological grounds, were not over-represented in those surveyed when compared to the general population, perhaps grossly. It was stated that;

"This survey also attempted to relate accident risk to exposure. Cyclists were asked to estimate the distance they cycle in a week on each of the three kinds of highway. Inevitably there will be a wide margin of error in these estimates, but there is no reason to believe that they favour one type of highway over another. Some cyclists were able to give a very detailed breakdown of their mileage."

It seems very naive (at best) to ignore the potential for bias here. Roadies in particular are both more likely to travel further (because they travel faster), choose grid roads because they prefer to travel faster (and have the confidence and experience to survive in such a cycle-hostile environment), be a member of their local cycle users' group (compared to less experienced & enthusiastic cyclists) and be much more likely to be able to, "give a very detailed breakdown of their mileage."

Highway	Injury accidents	All accidents
Grid road	31	47
Local road	149	149
Redway	166	319

Table 3. Survey estimate of cyclist accidents per million km cycled, broken down by road type. This is the first attempt to frame the accident figures in the context of relative usage of each road type, although the numbers are estimates given by survey respondents, which disproportionally favours the grid roads because they are favoured by experienced and proficient cyclists, such as roadies, who travel further (due to their greater speed), are more likely to keep detailed records of their mileage and are more easily reached by local cycle users; groups, such as the group which conducted the survey from which these figures were collected.

I would like to make it clear at this point that I am not attempting to defend the Milton Keynes Redways. As an infrastructural intervention designed primarily to benefit the private motorist, with a massively compromised design, they are about as far away from best practice for cyclists as seen in The Netherlands as any of the rest of the road network in the UK. However, I do find it amazing that an article containing so much bad science, acting as a fairly transparent vehicle to further its author's ideological opposition to any separation of cyclists from motor traffic, could have ever found its way into a (presumably peer-reviewed) journal such as Traffic Engineering & Control. When I look at the Milton Keynes Redways, I see something which, at best, represents the most superficial similarity to the Dutch solution to providing for cyclists. It depresses me that despite this, the Redways are still used as an argument against adopting the Dutch model here in the UK by the ill-informed and a tiny minority who are ideologically opposed to any type of separation of cyclists from motorised traffic.

The figures presented in Two decades of the Redway cycle paths in Milton Keynes tell us very little about the relative safety of the grid roads, local roads or Redways in Milton Keynes. Despite this, the author used the conclusion of the article to push his own vehicular-only agenda:

"There is a temptation to think that Milton Keynes is a 'special case' and that its experience is irrelevant elsewhere. But the cycling infrastructure in Milton Keynes is not inferior to that being implemented in many other places and certainly the constraints are fewer. Many cycle facilities do not achieve the use predicted, and are often ignored by existing cyclists. Major projects such as the National Cycle Network are facing increasing criticism with regard to quality and danger, and for not meeting the real needs of cycling.

At the same time, cycle facility accidents seem to be becoming more common throughout the UK. This should not be a surprise. The author has trawled research from across the world (Ref 11*) and found little to support the hypothesis that separating cyclists from traffic improves safety, especially when account is taken of unreported accidents. Facilities do, however, seem to increase fear of cycling elsewhere.

There seems to have been little research into the deterrent effect that facilities may have on cycle use and competence. It may be difficult to comprehend that cycle facilities could lead to an overall decline in cycling, but the experience of Milton Keynes suggests that it may be time for this to be considered more closely."

(*) Ref 11 is John Franklin's own Cherry-picked list of research into cycle paths from around the world. The selection criteria for this list is not specified, but it appears to be that only research which agrees with John Franklin's ideological opposition to any separation of cyclists from motor traffic is included.

Milton Keynes did separation of cyclists from motor traffic wrong, and for all the the wrong reasons. The problems with the Redways are described in detail in Two decades of the Redway cycle paths in Milton Keynes, these problems do not exist with the Dutch approach to cycle provision. Using the Redways as an argument against implementing Dutch style infrastructural changes to the road network in the UK is little more than a straw man. Milton Keynes separated cyclists from motor traffic, for the benefit of the motorist. The Dutch separated the motorist from cyclists, for the benefit of cyclists (and pedestrians). They made driving short distances, and within towns more trouble than it was worth, whilst making cycling subjectively and objectively safe, direct and convenient. No one can honestly say that the Redways were designed with the same goals in mind.

Five years on a bike (Part Two)

2011-10-02T15:31:00.000+01:00

This is the follow-up to a recent post of my reflections on the five years since I started to cycle again as an adult. The first part can be found here: Five years on a bike (Part One).

I had finally gotten the kind of bike I had been coveting for quite some time but which I could never seem to justify the expense of, a traditional roadster, the Raleigh Tourist De Luxe. After owning the bike for more than a year, I can honestly say that it (or an equivalent bike, such as the Pashley Roadster Sovereign) would have been well worth the full price tag.

Whilst I had finally stopped the hunt for a better bike, some of my friends and family started to express an interest in the sort of bikes I had been getting into, and over the summer and autumn of that year I did a number of Raleigh Twenty and roadster restorations. I was happy with my DL-1, but I was still always on the look out for nice things to go on it, such as new tyres, dynamo lights or a lovely Carradice saddlebag. Even now I like the idea of swapping the rear hub at some point to add more gears. The Yuba was also treated to some dynamo lighting and a Brooks saddle.

By this point, whilst I was a confident cyclist who was well versed in the vehicular cycling techniques outlined in Cyclecraft, I was acutely aware that the road network in the UK was designed without any care or consideration being given to the safety or convenience of cyclists (and very little given to pedestrians either), instead primarily focussed on the needs and whims of the private motorist. Whilst I, and a minority of people still cycled in these dire conditions, I came to realise that without radical alterations to the road network, the vast majority of people never ever would (at least not above and beyond the odd bit of recreational cycling in parks or on trails). I was aware of cycling campaigns, but none of them really seemed to capture my interest, seeming primarily focussed on sport-cycling, or on merely mitigating the problems encountered by the minority of existing, fast, confident, vehicular cyclists, rather than seeking measures to make cycling accessible to a much wider audience. Thankfully, it was at around this time that I stumbled upon the initial founding of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, which at the time seemed like one of the first, sensible glimmers of hope I had encountered in the UK cycling 'scene.'

By the beginning of 2011, my situation had changed so that I was travelling on Virgin and Cross-country trains regularly. Both of these operators have cycle carriage policies (and risible cycle carriage capacities) designed to discourage passengers from taking cycles on their trains (the extra effort, planning and in effect gambling required making it viable for only perhaps for the occasional trip). This presented me with a problem, I wanted to be able to finish my journey by cycle after departing the train. A trip to London, with its recently scrapped Western extension of the congestion charge gave me an opportunity; a glut of Bromptons for sale at good prices, sold by people who could now afford to ditch their bikes in favour of driving again (another win for common sense in policy making there, Boris). Londoners' loss to their liveable streets, health, safety and ability to get around was at least turned to my gain, I had acquired my own Brompton M3L in red.

At first, I wasn't sure if I'd like the Brompton, but I knew that I could probably sell it for as much as I paid, due to the shortage of Bromptons on sale in the North. It was certainly a departure from the kinds of bikes I had become accustomed to, making me even more surprised to discover that I really liked it. The more aggressive, but still quite comfortable riding position made it the fastest of my bikes. It also surprised me by remaining pleasant and comfortable to ride over longer distances; to this day I often ride it from Macclesfield to Manchester a few mornings a month. If, by some cruel twist of fate, I was only allowed to own a single bike, the versatility and sheer all-round brilliance of this little bike means that it would have to be a Brompton.

The Brompton completely filled and exceeded my Twenty's niche, and with space at a premium, I could no-longer justify keeping it. Thankfully, my father was in need of a bike. His modern Raleigh P1000 hybrid was a little bit too big for him to really feel safe when riding it. The 18 gears were more than he needed. I decided that the Twenty would be better off with him, and that it would be a better fit for his needs.

If I had spent the past five years using a bicycle for transport, but without the same enthusiasm I have for bikes, I probably could say that cycling has saved me a lot of money on public transport. However, as an enthusiast, I have probably spent about as much money on bicycle-related things as I have saved on bus, train, tram and taxi fares. The key differences are that I have something to show for the money spent on bicycles and paraphernalia. Firstly, I am significantly more healthy than I was before I started cycling just over five years ago, despite rarely venturing out on a bicycle with the intention of doing so for the benefit of my health. As someone who was particularly unfit for much of my life, I truly appreciate this side-effect. Secondly, unlike money spent on public transport, I still have something to show for the money spent on bicycles and paraphernalia; the actual bicycles and paraphernalia which continue to be useful to me to this day.

I hope this account of my experiences of cycling as an adult can help novices to avoid making some of the same mistakes I did:

If you are cycling to get from A-to-B, don't buy a 'full-suspension' mountain bike, especially if it is in the same price-range as mine was. Spending more money on a quality bike will always be a better idea. Most of the bikes made by Pashley, Velorbis or Gazelle for instance will include many of the accessories needed to make cycling more pleasant & lower maintenance. Whilst it may seem like a lot of money, quality bikes hold their value quite well; if a year passes and you feel that the bike isn't quite right for you, you can sell it and recoup much of what you spent. The same cannot be said for a low end bike, despite it being more likely you will feel this way.
Mudguards are better than waterproof over-trousers.
If you can only ever own one bike, get a Brompton. The folding solves the storage problems which can afflict flat-dwellers, concerns about leaving it locked up outside and concerns about your own fitness as a new cyclist; it is easy to be ambitious with longer distance journeys when you know you can give up and hop on a bus, tram, train or taxi with your bike if something goes wrong along the way.
For purposes where reliability is an important factor, hub gears are a better choice than dérailleur gears, especially if coupled with puncture-resistant tyres.
If you find you are using your bike as a main means of transport, make the investment in dynamo lighting as soon as you can. The sooner you make the change, the more money you will save on replacement battery lights and batteries in the long term. Most of the equipment can be ported from one bike to the next relatively easily if you decide to change your bike in the future.
If you are carrying stuff on your bike, sweaty-back problems can be avoided by carrying the load on a front or rear rack, handlebar bag or saddlebag. It may surprise you how much this improves comfort if you have become accustomed to cycling with a backpack.
Although requiring a discomfort period, a tensioned leather saddle, such as a Brooks or Velo Orange will be more comfortable than a plastic saddle.

Five years on a bike (Part One)

2011-09-23T16:36:00.000+01:00

This summer marked the fifth year I have cycled as an adult. Of course for the vast majority of my life I have owned and ridden a bike, from my first bike at around the age of three, to my last childhood bike which I gave up on at around sixteen. After my last childhood bike and I parted ways, four years passed where I did not cycle at all, depending on walking and public transport for getting around. It was only because of the disproportionally high cost of public transport that I decided to buy another bike, in order to avoid paying £35 each month to get to the part-time job I had whilst I was an undergraduate.

A Shockwave SUS450, the first bike I bought as an adult

That first bike I owned as an adult was truly a real piece of crap, a £90 bicycle-shaped-object from Halfords. I bought it from White City Retail Park and rode it home, a distance of a few miles which seems a completely trivial distance now but which at that time left me completely exhausted. Simultaneously I was also enthused with the feeling of cycling, which I realised I had missed during the previous four years. At the time this bike worked quite well for me, I had no specialist knowledge of bikes or cycling whatsoever and so ignorance was bliss. Within three months of not paying for the bus the bike had paid for itself.

Those early rides to work along the main road from the city centre to Failsworth were a terrifying experience, like most inexperienced cyclists I rode in the gutter, terrified of being hit from behind by a motorist. Thankfully, the rides home were enough to make up for it. Finishing my shift after 10 pm meant the ride home along the same road was much more pleasant and after five hours of manual labour the experience was always refreshing, even in the rain (which on a bike without mudguards, I simultaneously experienced from above and below). I started to use the bike for shopping too, riding to the nearest supermarket with a backpack (the bike had no provision to fit a rack) and riding home with the weight on my back. As an arrangement it was far from ideal, but it was preferable to walking or paying for the bus again.

After three months of using this bike to get around, I had my first altercation with a motorist in Rochdale. The driver had decided to overtake me going down hill on Drake Street in order to make a sudden left turn. It is the sort of stupid manoeuvre on the part of the motorist which, with enough experience, most cyclists learn to expect and compensate for. I hit the left wing of the car and went flying over the bonnet and landed on the road, head first. I suffered some pretty nasty road rash down the side of my face and around my eye, in addition to grazes on my elbow and leg. My bike was relatively unscathed. After leaving the hospital later that day, I knew that I had to get back onto the bike right then, or I might be put off forever. I rode back to the trains station and then on home that night, and luckily the experience didn't put me off cycling for good.

Despite being a terrible bike, I rode it for nearly two years. Throughout those two years, as problems with the bike arose, I started to learn about the basics of bike maintenance courtesy of the excellent writing of the late Sheldon Brown. Sheldon's infectious enthusiasm for all things cycling shone through everything he wrote, even articles about brake adjustment or tracking down mystery creaks, clicks & clunks. After nearly two years of riding the SUS450, the bottom bracket spindle snapped as I was trying to pull away from a set of traffic lights. Whilst initially annoyed, not possessing the tools or knowledge to fix this problem gave me the perfect opportunity to rationalise buying a new, better bike, something which had been on my mind for a few years.

By this stage I was a little bit more knowledgeable about bikes, I had realised that the alleged 'rear-suspension' on my previous bike was little more than a mechanism to leech my pedalling effort and drive me slowly insane with persistent creaking. I also realised that riding with a backpack sucked. However, I was still largely unaware of several important practical features which existed on other bikes, such as the merits of having fewer gears, hub gears, proper mudguards, chain-guards, the irrelevance of front suspension for the type of riding I mainly did and of course, upright geometry. The next bike I purchased was a Revolution Cuillin Sport from Edinburgh Bicycle Co-Operative. At the time I knew little about the specific merits of different types of bicycle brake, I only knew that after riding with some incredibly weak, low-end V-brakes for a few years I wanted something better, and I promptly set my heart on having a bike with disc-brakes.

Despite still being quite an impractical choice of bike for my needs, the Cuillin Sport was definitely a step in the right direction. Being slightly better suited to my needs, I naturally started to make more of my journeys by cycle, and as this bike represented a more significant investment to me at the time, I started to learn more and more about bicycle componentry and maintenance. Over the next 18 months I acquired the tools and expertise I required to keep the bike in tip-top condition, whilst occasionally upgrading the odd component to make the bike more suitable for my needs. After around 12 months, I had converted the bike from a mountain bike to a hybrid, and my level of knowledge had increased to the point where I knew that the bike was not really the right choice for my needs. I also learned about the Yuba Mundo through reading blogs such as Urban Simplicity, and became interested in just how capable a bicycle could be.

By this stage, I was aware of vehicular cycling, Cyclecraft and the range of measures which cyclists can use to minimise the problems which arise when riding on a road network which is designed solely around the needs and wants of the private motorist, where the needs of cycling and cyclists are usually not considered at all. I was mostly confident on the road but could still remember what it was like to cycle as a novice. I was still not quite fast enough to survive on some of the most hostile parts of the road network and blissfully unaware of how things like Cyclecraft, speed and cadence become irrelevant with the right infrastructure.

Eventually, a minor windfall from overtime meant that I could afford to buy a Yuba Mundo of my own. The Yuba Mundo represented something of a turning point for me. Whilst it did not completely representing the frame geometry I would come to evangelise, it gave me a new experience; riding a bike and feeling truly comfortable whilst doing so. Despite its size, the Yuba Mundo became my primary bike. When I did occasionally choose to instead venture out on the mountain bike, I was acutely aware of how uncomfortable it was; riding hunched forward, a fair amount of weight carried by my hands and with a triple chainset making use of the full range of the gears unnecessarily difficult. The Yuba was much more pleasant to ride.

I had not intended for the Yuba Mundo to take over as my primary means of transport, and its sheer size meant that using it as such was a bit of a compromise. I decided that what I needed was a smaller equivalent to the Yuba for everyday use, and I found that with the Kona Africa Bike. The Africa Bike was the first bike I owned without dérailleur gears, which was a revelation. Initially a single-speed, I acquired a Shimano Nexus three-speed rear wheel and decided to upgrade the Africa Bike to a three-speed. Shifting when stationary, the lack of maintenance and the ease with which they pair up with a chain-guard (or case) made me wonder why most bikes used for transport didn't come with hub gears. The only downside to the bike was the front V-brake; I hadn't yet fully forgiven the crappy V-brakes on the SUS450. I decided to remedy this by investing in a new front hub. I was very interested in the idea of the bicycle providing its own power source for the lights, and had been reading up on dynamo hubs. When I saw the Sturmey Archer X-FDD drum-brake and dynamo hub, I knew I had to try it. The hub wasn't available in a production wheel, so I read and re-read the Sheldon Brown Wheelbuilding article and decided I'd have a bash at building myself a wheel. To my surprise, the wheel turned out just fine first time. The Africa Bike, with some modifications had been turned into an ideal shorter-range utility bicycle.

Reading Sheldon Brown's site had infected me with a curiosity about the Raleigh Twenty. After reading about it on his site, I realised that these things were everywhere. After looking on eBay I realised that I could have one of my own for around £20-30 and I promptly took that offer. The Twenty gave me the opportunity to completely strip and re-build a bike for the first time. I had done almost all of these jobs before, but never all at once and on the same bike. After a weekend or two of work, I had re-painted and completely refurbished the Twenty and found it to be a delightful little bike, with the added bonus of it being worth practically nothing allowing me to leave it locked up outside without worrying about it. The Twenty was primarily used as a loaner bike, so I could still use the bike to get around when I had guests. When I later came to acquire a Brompton, the Twenty no-longer had much to do, so I sent it off to retirement at my father's house.

Whilst I was quite happy with the Kona Africa Bike, I was becoming aware that it's hybrid geometry was somewhat limiting on longer rides, where after around 20 miles or so in a single day it would leave my legs really very tired. I was aware that the right geometry, roadster geometry, would allow me to use my leg muscles more efficiently on longer rides. At the time I wasn't planning on changing bike again, until I saw the Raleigh Tourist De Luxe (DL-1) on eBay at a price too good to pass on. Whilst not a huge departure from the Kona, the slightly different geometry was much more comfortable on longer rides, whilst also making it easier to put power down when setting off from stationary. The DL-1 also represented my first experience with Brooks saddles; whilst not exactly comfortable at first, I would later come to put a Brooks on every bike I rode.

Mass Obsession

2011-08-31T22:16:00.000+01:00

Whilst I primarily see cycling as a mode of transport, there are many for whom it is more of a sporting or leisure pursuit. Plenty of cyclists use their bikes primarily for transportation purposes, typically commuting, where the bicycle offers them a time advantage over driving, walking or public transport during peak hours. As sport-cycling is currently the dominant image of cycling sold by bike shops in the UK, it is common to see people riding for a wide variety of purposes on a narrow selection of bikes, typically racing (or road) bikes, mountain bikes, or the horrific merging of the two; the hybrid.

Anyone who gets on a bike to get around is a part of the solution, regardless of the type of bike they choose. After all, even a jump bike with a single low gear and no provision for fitting a saddle is still a more suitable method of getting around town than a single person driving a car designed to carry five. However, at times I do find certain behaviours of other cyclists a bit baffling.

Obsessing over the mass of your bike, also referred to as being a "Weight weenie," is particularly baffling when taken to extremes, especially on a bike ridden as a mode of transport. I can understand not wanting to carry a significant amount of extra weight unnecessarily, but I cannot fathom why anyone would choose not to have a rack on the bike they ride to work, just to save a tiny bit of weight. Often this means carrying a rucksack on your back instead of a pannier on your bike, the discomfort and inefficiency of carrying your luggage this way is a pretty poor trade-off compared to the tiny bit of extra weight a rear rack adds. Mudguards are another bicycle component which many choose to do without, the need for a change of clothes after even a shortest ride on a wet road, (even after the rain has stopped) to save the added mass of a pair of mudguards seems utterly baffling.

Another seldom-considered factor is what I'd like to call "Weight compensation." Common cycle wisdom states that less weight gives the potential for a higher speeds, but it also allows the rider to achieve the same speed with a little bit less effort. Safety interventions such as seat-belts and ABS are supposed to make people safer, but often end up subconsciously encouraging people to take greater risks because of the increase in perceived safety. reducing the mass of your bike will probably just end up making you use less effort to travel at the same speed. The body is a dynamic thing, and it won't take long for it to adapt to the reduced demands placed on it; take off that bike rack and eventually you become that tiny bit more feeble as you settle back to the pace you were travelling at before, losing the muscle strength you once had. I've seen this realisation on the faces of many a roadie when I'm out on the Yuba Mundo. The bike alone weighs in excess of three times as much as a good racing bike, but as they slowly overtake me they see I'm only travelling a few km/h slower than they are, on a huge bike which puts the rider in an upright position to boot.

The rider matters a lot more than the ride.

CEoGB Poster Competition & Launch

2011-08-17T13:23:00.001+01:00

As many of you will have heard elsewhere, the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain is having a poster competition. Whilst I am not eligible to enter, I have done a mock-up of a poster using a photo from Manchester Cycle Chic:

I encourage everyone to have a go at making a poster and spread the word too, encouraging others to do so too. The rules are simple, the poster must include the CEoGB logo, the tagline, "Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike," and the rest is up to you.

The Official Launch of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain will take place on Saturday the 3rd of September in London. More details will follow soon, but I hope as many of you as possible will be there too.

UPDATE (From the CEoGB website):

Saturday 3rd September

Gather at the south side of Lambeth Bridge at 11.30AM for press call.
(Smart ‘everyday’ wear and best smiles please; you might end up in the paper!) All types of bike and riders (including children) welcome.

12 midday; press call / photo opportunity
Photos with the Houses of Parliament in the background. Speech by Jim Davis, Chair and founder of Cycling Embassy of Great Britain. CEoGB declared officially ‘open for business’.

12.20 Depart for Victoria Tower Gardens for (short) cross-river bike ride on “London’s worst bike lane” across Lambeth Bridge (approx. 500 mtrs) Ride will be marshalled by CEoGB board. Further press photos of cyclists using ‘crap’ cycling infrastructure on bridges.

12.50 onwards; celebratory picnic in Victoria Tower Gardens.
Please bring picnic food and drink to share with your new found cycling friends to celebrate the launch of the Cycling Embassy. Family-friendly and child-safe enclosed park space. Sunglasses, picnic blankets and friendly smiles the order of the day. Please note; no glass, alcohol, banners or placards permitted in the park.

Saturday afternoon; informal, optional Royal Parks infrastructure safari taking in the pelicans of St James Park, Buckingham Palace, Hyde Park Corner, the Serpentine, Albert Memorial, Royal Albert Hall and back. Led by Mark Ames."

I look forward to seeing as many of you all there as possible, I expect it to be a great experience for everyone and as always, a brilliant opportunity to meet pleasant, like-minded folk.

The Morning After

2011-08-10T09:00:00.001+01:00

At around 7 am this morning, I decided to have a ride around the streets of the city centre to survey the damage done by the looters. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the streets themselves had already been largely cleaned up by the city’s street cleaning crews. There was a greater police presence than usual, and a lot more glazers around than usual, but the damage itself seems to have been hugely exaggerated by the Twitter rumour mill and rolling TV news reports.

The back of the BMW dealership on Upper Brook Street had a window put through. I often encounter their employees on this back-road, moving cars from the forecourt to the back. Based on my encounters with them, I don’t have a great deal of sympathy here.

Admittedly, the smashing up of this poor bike could be unrelated to the wider disorder last night.

KRO Piccadilly, widely reported to have been ransacked, seems to have gotten away with only some damage to the door.

Caffe Nero at Piccadilly Gardens had a pane of glass smashed in their door, but is otherwise fine.

Jessops on Market Street, heavily boarded up. Apparently the looters didn’t have much luck getting into here, despite their best efforts.

Burned-out Miss Selfridges, Market Street.

The scumbag who was recorded setting Miss Selfridges on fire

Some damage to numerous shops on Market Street and the outside of the Arndale.

Hard Rock Cafe at The Printworks boarded up.

This independent jewellers near Shudehill was hit.

Another small business, in the Northern Quarter.

Odd bar (Northern Quarter) appears to have been re-glazed this morning.

Another small business, a Northern Quarter jewellers was attacked.

Despite loads of rumours to the contrary, Afflecks Palace, which was actually trending worldwide on Twitter at one point, is fine.

As is Vinyl Exchange.

This smashed up, abandoned monitor was the only piece of debris I saw on the streets.

Forbidden Planet’s window was damaged, but the shop doesn’t seem to have been breached.

These two establishments seem to have taken the worst of the damage on Oldham Street.

A bit of door damage to high & Mighty on King Street.

Another shop on King Street damaged.

Looters reportedly hit Sainsbury’s Local on Deansgate early on.

There was similar damage to some other businesses I passed too, although not on the sort of scale suggested by reports on Twitter and the rolling TV news. Thankfully the damage seems to have been a lot less severe than everyone was expecting. The Greater Manchester Police seems to have done an excellent job of containing the disorder last night, despite using tactics which appeared significantly less severe than those used against the largely peaceful anti-fees/anti-cuts protesters earlier this year. Perhaps there is a lesson there at least.

Pedestrian danger from cars versus cycles

2011-08-04T14:04:00.001+01:00

Whenever cycling is discussed in the mainstream press, a common theme which often emerges in the comment thread following the story is the perceived danger cyclists pose to pedestrians. A good example of this is the comment thread under any of the stories published in The Grauniad Bike Blog. It is a truly impressive feat that the motoring lobby has managed to pull off; persuading pedestrians that it is cyclists, not motorists who pose the biggest threat to their safety.

These comments are usually countered by comments from cyclists themselves, who are quick to point out the much, much greater risk posed to pedestrians by motorists. Usually, these comments consist of a series of suppositions which, whilst often perfectly plausible, are difficult to back up with actual documented evidence. These suppositions often include the following: Cyclists are less likely to be distracted on the road compared to motorists due to being aware of their increased vulnerability in the event of a collision, cyclists are more likely to notice pedestrians in their vicinity because their visibility is less impaired than that of someone sat in a car, cyclists are exposed to fewer distractions on a bike than motorists are in a car (generally bikes don't have radios/heaters/fans or passengers), the nature of cycling makes it less feasible to try to text/shave/apply make-up whilst cycling when compared to a motorist sat in a car. Please feel free to leave any other reasonable-sounding suppositions in the comments below.

Another argument given is that cyclists generally travel at lower speeds than motorists and that a bike & cyclist together are smaller and lighter than a car. Unlike the suppositions above, these things are either demonstrably true, or obviously self-evident. The figure at the top of the post shows a diagram of 70 metres of a 6 metre wide road with 1 metre pavements either side. The left lane shows a blue bar, graded in increasingly dark shades. The lightest section of this bar represents the space a 2 metre wide motor vehicle (such as those models favoured by pimps) travelling at 30 mph would travel through during a 3 second "Distraction period," during which its operator is not devoting their full attention to the road. The vehicle travels approximately 40 metres during the 3 second window where the driver is not paying attention, meaning the vehicle will cover an area of approximately 80 square metres. Any pedestrian (or other road user) present in this area at the time the driver takes their eyes off the road is at risk from the motor vehicle. At 40 mph (darker blue), the car will travel approximately 53 metres during this distraction period, covering an area of approximately 106 square metres. At 50 mph (darkest blue), the car will travel approximately 66 metres during the distraction period, covering an area of approximately 132 square metres. Speeds of up to 50 mph are still relatively common on urban roads, these speeds even being officially sanctioned on some roads.

The right lane shows a pink bar, graded in two shades of pink, representing the area which would be covered by a typical 0.6 metre wide utility bicycle travelling at 12 mph and 20 mph (light pink and darker pink respectively), during the same 3 second distraction window. At 12 mph (a fairly typical cycling speed for a utility cyclist) the cycle will travel approximately 15.8 metres during the same 3-second distraction period, covering an area of approximately 9.5 square metres. At 20 mph (the sprint speed recommended in Cyclecraft to enable cyclists to reasonably deal with our fundamentally cycling-hostile road network), the cycle will travel approximately 26.4 metres during the distraction period, covering an area of approximately 15.8 square metres. For a sense of scale, the black rectangle in the lower left corner is 1.7 metres by 0.6, representing the height and width of a relatively large human.

So there we have it, at a fairly common urban speed of 30 mph, a car will travel over an area more than five times greater than the area a cycle would cover at the relatively high speed of 20 mph during a three second period of operator distraction. At a typical cycling speed of 12 mph, a cycle will travel over an area which is over 8 times smaller than the car would at 30 mph. This representation is a bit of blunt instrument, It'd be great to see some research which takes into account the effects of vehicle mass, vehicle profile and some of the suppositions listed above too. As it is, I think it helps to hammer home the fact that it is of course the private motor vehicle which represents the greatest risk to the safety of pedestrians (and cyclists, and even other motorists). The reason people focus on the (much, much lower) risks posed to pedestrians by cyclists, is that the private motor vehicle is the sacred bull in society's china shop.

Shimano and hub gears

2011-08-02T12:37:00.000+01:00

Shimano make some pretty excellent hub gears. I added a 3 speed Nexus coaster brake hub to the Kona Africa Bike and I was very happy with the performance of the hub. In London, the Boris bikes use the roller-brake version of this same hub, and it performs admirably in a rather harsh application. I also have used Shimano Nexus 7 and 8 speed hubs (and the Alfine 8 speed hub) on numerous bikes, including on my visit to Practical Cycles. Each time my experience with these hubs has been very positive.

The Sturmey Archer 3 speed hub (X-RD3) on my DL-1 has broken again. I have yet to open it up, but so far it feels like it is the same problem as last time. The excellent reputation of the Sturmey 3 speed hub, combined with my own very positive experiences of its reliability lead me to think that the re-occurrence of the problem is probably (at least partially) a result of my last repair job. It has been my intention for some time to eventually upgrade the DL-1 to either a 5, 7 or 8 speed hub when finances permit. For the moment however, they do not permit, so I have decided to re-build the rear wheel with the Nexus 3 speed coaster brake hub I have spare from the Kona Africa Bike. This is the cheapest option available to me as I already have most of the parts, and I should be able to re-use the existing spokes.

When I originally upgraded the Kona Africa Bike from a single to a three speed hub, I remember looking at Shimano hub gears online. The prices often seemed quite reasonable at first, but unlike their Sturmey Archer counterparts Shimano hubs are not sold complete with shifters. This might seem only a minor irritation, however it then becomes apparent that the hub doesn't come with the bell-crank mechanism which changes the gears either. Luckily, the bell crank and shifter can be bought together as a single pre-calibrated unit. Great. But then it turns out that the hub doesn't come with the axle nuts or the non-turn washer to fit it. Some of the websites listing the hub sell a "Fitting Kit," for the hub, presumably it contains the axle nuts and non-turn washer needed to fit the hub, and possibly a sprocket and snap ring. This shall have to remain a mystery for now, because none of the websites which sell the fitting kit offer any sort of useful description of what it contains. Luckily it is fairly cheap, so it is not that much of a gamble. The sites selling the hubs also list the Push Rod as a separate item. The hub doesn't come with a push rod, despite it being an integral part of the hub and the fact that there are not multiple push rod options available for a given hub (the push rod to be used is axle-length dependent). Does the fixing kit come with a push rod? Who knows? It is fairly cheap at least, so I buy one anyway.

Clearly this is not a good way to do business. Hub gears are not going to be big sellers to individuals, the market for these hubs is primarily going to be OEMs who may have access to Shimano sales reps to help them through the Shimano parts jungle. However, there will still be a number of enthusiasts and even smaller OEMs who are put off by the needless complexity in the way Shimano sells hub gear equipment. Surely Shimano could make sure that websites selling their parts actually know what they are (I'm looking at you Bikester). Surely they could include all of the necessary equipment (such as axle nuts and push rods), or sell "hub kits" which include all of the parts of the hub for a given drop-out type (where applicable).

As it currently stands, Shimano are shooting themselves in the foot by making the purchasing of their hub gears into a massive pain in the arse for the enthusiast market. Their rivals in this market, Sturmey Archer, have happily been selling hubs with the shifter, axle nuts and even all of the internal parts of the hub included in the deal for years. When I initially upgraded the Kona Africa Bike to a three speed, the confusion, lack of information and sheer number of extra parts I would've had to buy to build up a new 3 speed wheel led me to buy a separate bike with the hub I wanted (a Raleigh Drift), converting it to a single speed (using the original Kona wheel) and selling it on. Surprisingly, that was the more simple option open to me at that time. I shall document my experience with Shimano spare parts here, simply to make life easier for other people in the same situation.

Metrolink: (Further) Degrading Floop accessibility

2011-07-27T16:36:00.001+01:00

A few weeks ago, during my tandem test weekend, I noticed that the already irritating barriers installed prior to the tram crossing at the Chorlton end of the Floop had been re-positioned to provide a serious (possibly impenetrable) barrier to access for anyone riding a cargo bike, tandem, tag-along, bike trailer, modified disability cycle or anyone using a mobility scooter or other mobility aid.

The irritating and unnecessary barriers to access which already existed on the Floop have been well documented. Whilst these barriers should be ripped out as a matter of priority, it is worse still to introduce new barriers, and then to re-position them so as to produce maximum inconvenience to users of the Floop.

Facing towards Fallowfield

Other side of the tracks, facing towards Chorlton

The fact that this work was done recently (and shoddily) combined with the fact that the barriers had already been installed once previously, makes me wonder what consultative processes Metrolink’s barrier redesign went through before being approved by the local authority, cycling campaigns, disability groups, pedestrian groups, Sustrans, Friends of the Fallowfield Loop and so on. My guess is that the work was done without any consultation whatsover, and that the issue of the degradation of access to one of the only cycle facilities in Greater Manchester must therefore be raised at the next Manchester Cycle Forum.

Users of cargo bikes (particularly when loaded) face great difficulties when trying to pass the poorly re-designed barriers.

The tandem, being approximately 20 cm longer than a Yuba Mundo, presented its own problems when attempting to pass this barrier

This barrier re-design, whist only a small local issue, embodies everything which is wring with provision for cycling in the UK; the assumption that making cycling inconvenient isn’t a problem because anyone on a cycle is obviously only doing so for leisure. They couldn’t possibly be trying to conveniently get somewhere in a timely manner, or they’d have gone by car, right?

The propaganda deemed acceptable to show in schools

2011-07-19T16:27:00.003+01:00

Years ago, when I was in high school, I remember that we were given numerous safety presentations. Sometimes these were about the railways (dare to step on the tracks and you WILL certainly be killed), sometimes about not flying kites near pylons and sometimes about the roads (such as the green cross code). The issue of responsibility was never discussed, interviews with children who had been maimed by cars were shown, although we were never told what happened to the motorist in the aftermath. The takeaway message from these videos was that when crossing the roads, the onus was very much on us to look out for cars and only cross when it was safe to do so. The wider issues of government-enshrined inequality between transport modes were never discussed, and the implication from the road safety propaganda we watched was that if we were hit by an adult in a car, it was our own stupid fault.

I have a little sister, who is currently in high school. In order to assess the state of "Road Safety" propaganda shown in schools nowadays, I decided to ask her what were the sort of things they showed her in school on the issue. I don't really talk to my sister about the issues I discuss here, she is quite young, like most people she doesn't cycle, and she doesn't generally give much thought to the issue of transport. By being careful in how I asked about it, this presented me with an opportunity to find out what the take-home message she (and by extension the average pupil in her age group) got from the propaganda. The conversation went something like this:

Me: Do they still show you those road safety videos in school nowadays?

Sis: Well, there was this one about a boy who got paralysed when crossing the road.

Me: Oh. Did they tell you what happened to the adult in the car who hit the boy?

Sis: No. It was the boy's fault because he was wearing dark clothes

So-called "Road safety" education programmes are generally funded by the fake road safety charities such as the Road Safety Foundation, RAC Foundation and the Road Safety Fund set-up by the AA, RAC and FIA. These education programmes have a very poor success record worldwide. Their main purpose is to counter the bad press the motoring lobby were receiving at the time they were founded due to the death-toll (particularly of children) caused by the actions of their members. It seems odd to me that this propaganda is welcomed by schools, but for example the tobacco and alcohol industries are not similarly indulged. At the very least the obvious conflict of interests should be recognised by the governments. Allowing the motoring lobby to set the agenda for how road safety is perceived by school children is a bit like allowing Anheuser-Busch InBev or British American tobacco to set the agenda for health education in schools. Perhaps all they need to do is set-up a cynical faux-charity foundation and they will be welcomed with open arms.

The benefits afforded to the motor lobby and those whom it represents as a result of such education programmes are many. Firstly, it creates the image that the motoring lobbies care about, and are actively trying to reduce casualties. Secondly, by targeting the young and vulnerable, they are able to plant two very powerful ideas into the minds of the next generation; if a motorist hits a pedestrian (or any vulnerable road user, such as a cyclist), it is the victim who is at fault and that these activities are intrinsically dangerous compared to the perceived safety of the car.

Motorists benefit from this propaganda by the creation of a culture in which drivers are blameless for collisions involving their vehicle with more vulnerable road users. Additionally, this helps to prevent governments from reversing the creation of a road network favouring the use of the car for almost all journeys, high volumes of motor traffic and the high speeds attained by these vehicles.

The "Decade of Action on Road Safety" is a fine example of this. Fronted by Lewis Hamilton (Booked for speeding in UK, reckless driving in Australia) and Jenson Button (Booked for speeding in UK multiple times) and funded by the FIA, one of the biggest motoring lobbies and the world governing body of motorsport, it embodies our arse-about-face approach to road safety. It saddens me that an institution such as the United Nations would degrade itself by choosing to be associated with this pish.

Those of you who have reproduced may wish to prevent your own children from being exposed to this blatant propaganda, or at least get through to them ahead of time. It might be fun for them to have an understanding of the forces at work behind the scenes of these campaigns, at least then they will be able to ask some awkward and disruptive questions in class.

Tandem

2011-07-12T18:20:00.000+01:00

Last weekend I was able to spend some time getting to grips with a tandem, a completely new experience for me. This was made possible thanks to Ian of Lazy Bicycle Blog, who agreed to lend me his tandem for the weekend in exchange for a loan of my Brompton. When we were discussing the exchange, Ian said that there were some pictures of the tandem on some of his older blog posts. Whilst I did have a look for them, I didn't look too hard, so I was slightly surprised when I got there and saw these:

A racing tandem, complete with Shimano Deore components, 24-speed dérailleur gears and drop handlebars. Not the sort of thing I usually ride. Ian rode me to the main road (presumably being amused by my relatively poor proficiency with drops) and I set off back to the city centre. It didn't take too long before I became reasonably happy with the narrower bars, the positions of the brake levers and the bar-end shifters. As I headed down Hyde Road, I decided that I would take a detour on the Floop to avoid the traffic. Needless to say, I was initially unimpressed to encounter this:

However, my irritation was soothed slightly by the fact that the tandem weighs so little. It actually felt lighter than my DL-1 does when equipped with saddlebag and locks. I returned home and planned to try the bike out with a "Rear Admiral," on the following day. That evening I swapped the saddles for some of the Brooks saddles on bikes I had to hand. This was partly because of personal preference, but largely so I could mount my Carradice saddlebag to cope with the lack of a rear rack.

The next day, Ms. C. and I took the tandem out for a ride together. Whilst we were initially wobbly during the process of starting and stopping, we quickly seemed to get the hang of it and managed a round trip to Chorlton, checking out the newly opened Pedal MCR on the return home. The ride experience was interesting, the bike felt quite fast with a Rear Admiral, presumably due to the increase in power without much change in aerodynamics. This experience is probably somewhat skewed though, as the racy geometry and components of the tandem encouraged me to ride faster regardless of whether I was on it alone or not. After all, the great thing about drops is that they make you go faster, but what sucks about drops is that they make you go faster. I found myself cycling faster and tiring myself out more than I usually would without any intention of doing so.

The real fun of the tandem though, came later that night when we took it over to see some friends. After a bit of persuasion, everyone wanted to give it a try. With me as captain, this seemed to go relatively smoothly. When I was not captain, the results were generally more amusing.

I'm very pleased to have had the opportunity to try a tandem, it was definitely a good experience. Whilst it is not based on the type of bike I would normally ride, it was still immense fun. Now, if anyone has a tandem based on a roadster, let me know...

Segregation Myths #3: If we build segregated cycle infrastructure we'll be banned from the roads

2011-07-06T08:00:00.002+01:00

One of cycling's great bogeymen is the fear that a cycling ban is imminent and that anything which rocks the boat, such as asking for high-quality segregated infrastructure, will result in our being banned from the highway. To quote cycling journalist Carlton Reid:

"[The] CTC, like myself, is worried that local councils will instal sub-standard infrastructure and then force cyclists to use it, banning them from roads. This happens in the Netherlands, where use of many cycle paths is obligatory. This works in the Netherlands because standards are adhered to."

However, I feel that this outlook is overlooking several important points:

Firstly, councils have been building sub-standard infrastructure for years, infrastructure which more often serves as an outlet for dadaism than as a facility for cyclists. Whilst there is not legal requirement for cyclists to use it, in many cases cyclists who shun sub-standard infrastructure are subjected to abuse and intimidation from motorists who are ignorant of the problems with such sub-standard infrastructure. This continues to be built despite it often not effectively catering for cyclists' needs whatsoever.

Secondly, much of the main-road network has been for many years designed to prioritise high volumes of motor traffic travelling at high speeds. This is particularly evident on inter-town and inter-city A roads and dual carriageways, where a nominal speed limit of 50 mph or higher is routinely flouted by motorists, and on "urban motorways," such as The Bridgewater Way in Manchester. Whilst there is currently no de jure cycling ban on roads like these, there is a de facto ban on cycling; most people, including people who regard themselves as cyclists do not feel safe enough to cycle on these roads. I suspect that the fact that cycles are legally permitted on these roads provides little comfort to those who are prevented from doing so by the perceived lack of safety offered to cyclists who use these roads. A high-quality segregated cycle lane, with appropriate priority at junctions and side roads, will make these roads feasible for use by bike, for the average person once again.

The issue of quality brings my to my third point; if cycle paths are built to an appropriately-high standard then cyclists will choose to use them over the main carriageway without the need for legislation to make it mandatory. A common misconception about pro-segregationists is that we want cycle paths on every street. This would obviously be ludicrous; what is needed is segregation which "scales-up" with the speed and volume of motor traffic carried by the main carriageway. The degree of separation needed would vary from none on quiet residential and access roads carrying low volumes of traffic up to a completely separate path on fast-inter-city A-roads and "urban motorways," (the roads from which most cyclists are already excluded from by a de facto ban). The degree of separation required would be specified by set of Separation Principles, similar to The Netherlands and Denmark, in place of our current (failed) Hierarchy of Provision. Because of this, some on-road cycling will always be inevitable, so there wouldn't be an issue of a blanket ban on cycling on the road.

My final point is something perhaps unique to Britain. As a long-established country, with an uncodified constitution due to a political system which evolved over time rather than being suddenly brought into existence by revolutionary means. For example, unlike many other countries, there is no jaywalking law here, and pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders have the right to use the road by statute. There are a few examples of other transport modes being provided with infrastructure for their exclusive use; pedestrians and buses (strictly for the sole use of buses, cycles and taxis). Pedestrian infrastructure; The pavement, is a long established part of our road network. Despite the extensive infrastructure which has been provided for pedestrians in the UK, pedestrians have yet to be banned from using the main carriageway. Few choose to exercise their right (similar to cyclists with respect to their right to use fast A roads) to walk on the main carriageway due to the more attractive option offered to them in the form of the pavement, but it remains their right to do so if they choose. Bus lanes have proved to be a very successful tool to reduce peak road capacity (and hence ease congestion), whilst making bus travel more competitive with personal motor travel at peak times (although the arguments in favour of allowing taxis to use them are poor at best). Similarly, where "Bus lanes" do exist, their use by the operators of buses, taxis and cycles is not mandatory.

ASA: Spreading the fear to kids

2011-07-05T16:09:00.001+01:00

This advert was brought to my attention a while back. It is for some car (yawn) but the ad also featured cyclists as well. A complaint was made to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA):

"Ad

A TV ad, for Citroën, featured a cyclist pulling up behind a Citroën C4 at a set of traffic lights on a busy urban street. Other cyclists joined him until there was a large crowd of cyclists pursuing the C4.

Issue

A viewer, who noted that none of the cyclists featured in the ad were wearing cycling helmets, challenged whether the ad was appropriate to be broadcast at times when children were likely to be watching, because it could condone and encourage behaviour prejudicial to their health and safety.

Assessment (Upheld)

The ASA considered that adults and older children would understand that the scenario depicted in the ad was fantastical and set apart from reality, because of the sheer number of cyclists involved, the lack of cars in their immediate vicinity and the fact that they were cycling in unison and chasing the C4. We therefore concluded that the ad did not condone behaviour prejudicial to the health and safety of adults and older children and was unlikely to cause harm to them.

However, we considered that younger children might not appreciate the fantastical nature of the ad and might consider that the ad represented a real-life scenario. We were therefore concerned that the ad might encourage younger children to emulate a behaviour prejudicial to their health and safety, and therefore concluded that the ad should have been given an 'ex kids' scheduling restriction to ensure that it was not broadcast at times when younger children were likely to be watching.

The ad breached BCAP Code rules 5.2 (Children) and 32.3 (Scheduling).

We also investigated the ad under BCAP Code rules 4.1 and 4.4 (Harm and offence) but did not find it in breach."

The message from the ASA here is that cycling without a helmet is a behaviour, "Prejudicial to [childrens'] health and safety." This has already been established to be false. However, the main issue here is that the ASA have not been fair with respect to the issue of safety, and behaviour which children might emulate. The driver of the car in the ad was not wearing a motoring helmet, a behaviour which children might emulate which would actually be, "Prejudicial to their health and safety." It could also easily be argued that advertisements showing people travelling by car, "Might encourage younger children to emulate a behaviour prejudicial to their health and safety."

The ASA, by classifying adverts of this nature as, "Ex kids," on these grounds have managed to help perpetuate the mistaken beliefs that cycling is a particularly high-risk activity, that helmets are effective in the event of a crash with a motor vehicle, and the sadly prevailing ideology that the responsibility for minimising the risks posed to cyclists in the event of this type of crash (with the aid of ineffectual safety equipment) lies with the cyclist victim, rather than (by the moderation of dangerous driver behaviour) with the driver whose vehicle is the actual source of the danger.

Considering the relative risk posed to children by travelling by car, and the significantly greater benefits afforded to motorists in comparison to cyclists by helmet-wearing in the event of a crash, maybe we should be complaining to the ASA whenever an advert depicting people travelling by car without a motoring helmet is shown in the advert breaks surrounding children's programming.

The 5 Stages of Cycle Advocacy

2011-06-27T18:42:00.000+01:00

1. Denial

"Cycling is awesome! I don't get why so few of my friends or family ever get on their bikes."

"All people really need is a bit of training to give them the skills to ride safely on the roads."

"If we give out free breakfasts it'll persuade people to cycle to work."

"People just need some help learning how to adjust their gears and brakes, and how to fix punctures and they'll be back on their bikes."

"We just need to make people aware that cycling can save them money, make them healthier and is good for the environment and they'll start cycling more instead of driving."

"Cycling rates in [city/town] are up 4% this year!"

"When the price of oil hits [£X], cycling is really going to take off again."

2. Anger

"Idiot nearly killed me, he won't be laughing when the price of oil hits [£X] and he can't afford to drive."

"If I can be bothered to cycle, why can't all these lazy sods get out of their cars too?"

3.Bargaining

"If we can get the cyclists who go through red to stop instead, then we will finally be respected as legitimate road users by the motorists."

"If we all ride our bikes as if they were cars, then we will finally be respected as legitimate road users by the motorists."

4. Depression

"I'm so sick of the hostile roads and dangerous and aggressive drivers. I can't see myself still cycling like this in ten years time."

"I'd love for the UK to be like The Netherlands, but there will never be the political will to do what they have done over here."

5. Acceptance

"If we want significantly more people to cycle, we will have to make some radical changes to the road network."

"It'll be hard work, but we have to start reversing the damage if we ever want to make cycling feel safe and attractive for the average person."

Alternate History

2011-06-23T12:36:00.000+01:00

As someone who wants both our road and rail infrastructure to be re-designed using best practice from around the world, I see a lot of work ahead. When faced with a task of such proportions, it is easy to wonder not only what it would be like after the goal is realised, but what it would be like if it had happened already. A popular concept explored in storytelling is that of the "Alternate history." An example of this type of story is Watchmen, but it is a common theme, especially in science fiction (often facilitated by some sort of time travel). This morning I rode into Manchester from Macclesfield and I started to consider what my ride would be like if we, much like the Dutch, had halted and reversed the decline in walking, cycling and the railways back in the 1970s, through measures including restricting the growth, convenience and public subsidy of private motoring, together with investment in rail and either maintaining nationalised ownership of the railways, or at least not botching its privatisation.

I started to think about the wider changes which would have resulted in this alternate history. Roads which are effectively "Urban motorways," would likely be absent, preventing the terminal decline of many town centres such as Rochdale and reducing the resulting sense of social isolation and community division. Casualties from road accidents and (more commonly) negligent motorists would have been much lower for quite a few years. Helmets and high-vis would be an irrelevance as we move away from blaming the victims of traffic crashes, and the slice of UK GDP sent overseas to prop-up dodgy oil-producing regimes would also be a bit lower. The arduous task of replacing a great deal of our ageing electricity-generating capacity with renewables would not also be occurring at the same time as plans to electrify a 30-million strong fleet of frequently-used private motor vehicles.

However, I realised that things in this alternative history weren't all rosy. I started to consider how the sense of social isolation, desperation and fear fostered by our current road network has inspired great works of art, films, literature and music. Would Radiohead still have recorded "OK Computer," in 1997 if the consequences of the British transport experience, producing feelings of social isolation and desperation, had been significantly reduced? Would Michael Caine have been "Harry Brown," if there were no high-speed urban motorways which necessitated pedestrian underpasses? He certainly wouldn't have had to kill all those people in order to cross the road, had that road been more civilised in the first place and we would have missed out on a great film.

DL-1: One Year On

2011-06-22T16:47:00.002+01:00

It has been around a year since I took delivery of my Raleigh Tourist De Luxe. Of course by, "Took delivery," I mean cycled to Didsbury on the Yuba Mundo to meet the old gentleman from whom I was purchasing this fine steed, and towed it back to home. At first I wasn't sure if it would be for me, having had no opportunity to test ride it. What I did know however, was that if I didn't like it, I could sell the bike (or its component parts) for a fair bit more than I paid for it that day.

When I got the bike home, I adjusted the saddle and took it for a spin. Whilst I liked the ride, it wasn't quite right; the gearing was far, far too high, with first gear being what I imagine a reasonable third gear should feel like on a three speed. The rod-brake handlebar was limited in its range of height adjustment and the angle of the bar was fixed. Luckily, a few replacement parts allowed me to fix these minor gripes and turn the bike into the perfect everyday transport solution for me. Over the past year I have made numerous additions and upgrades to the bike.

Additions and upgrades:

Rod-brake handlebar, plastic grips and drum-actuating rods replaced with Raleigh North Road handlebar, BBB stitched leather grips, Shimano V-brake levers and Sturmey Archer drum brake cables.
New larger sprocket to lower the gearing and new Shimano Nexus chain due to increased size of sprocket
Front-wheel rebuilt with Sturmey Archer X-FDD drum/dynamo hub replacing the original X-FD drum brake hub.
B&M Lumotec Retro front dynamo-powered headlamp.
Imitation Raleigh Record-tread roadster tyre replaced with Schwalbe Delta Cruisers in cream.
Rear B&M D-Toplight Plus dynamo tail-light.
B&M Lumotec Retro headlamp moved to top of headset via a new bracket.
Carradice Pendle saddlebag.

I have also been forced to replace a few parts due to failure.

Replacements due to failure:

New-type Sturmey Archer shifter to replace damaged classic lever.
New axle and planets for Sturmey Archer X-RD3 rear hub.

However, I should mention that the X-RD3 hub was at least somewhat faulty from the start, and that my own experience shouldn't detract from the consensus that this hub, and internal hub gears in general, are the best choice for a practical, low maintenance utilitarian bike.

After a year riding this bicycle, I can sincerely declare it to be one of the smartest purchases I have ever made. Since getting this bike I certainly cycle a lot more. My odometer is currently displaying a total distance cycled of 13,029 km, up from 8,000 km at about this time last year, most of that distance has been for transportation (as opposed to leisure), covered on the DL-1 because it is such an easy bike to ride.

When I say the DL-1 is easy to ride, I am not just referring to its ride quality (which is excellent). As an upright bike with mudguards, a chain-case, comfortable Brooks saddle and (since the addition of the saddlebag) permanent luggage, puncture-resistant tyres, automatic & permanently affixed dynamo lighting and low maintenance brakes and gears, all I ever have to do if I want to go out is unlock the bike, hop on and go. It is my hope that all of these features represent part of a bigger future for cycling in the UK, even if a lot of them come from its past.

The Tourist De Luxe as it is kitted out today

Whilst not quite the same as my Tourist De Luxe, Raleigh has recently started to sell the Raleigh Superbe again in the UK, after courting the, “Sporting goods,” and “Bicycle-shaped object,” markets almost exclusively here for the past few decades:

The 2011 Raleigh Superbe, is specced and priced similarly to the Pashley Roadster Sovereign (although not made here in the UK). It is available from numerous cycle outlets, including Evans Cycles.

Running and walking

2011-06-21T11:57:00.000+01:00

I have a few friends who are enthusiastic runners. Personally I don't see the appeal, I understand the health benefits and even the potential to feel a sense of achievement after running a certain distance or doing so faster than a rival, but it really isn't for me.

However, what I find most peculiar about running is that it usually completely absent from transport consultations such as the Greater Manchester LTP3. There was no mention of any athletics facilities at all in the LTP3, and United Kingdom Athletics did not submit a response at all. Whilst it could be argued that running is a sports or leisure pursuit, it is in many respects similar to walking, which is considered by this kind of consultation to be (an admittedly unimportant) form of transport.

The title page from the LTP3 "Active travel" section, with a picture choice which aptly shows everything which is wrong with cycle promotion and provision in the UK.

Of course it doesn't make sense to talk about running in the same terms as we talk about walking. Running is a popular leisure pursuit, but it is not the same as walking. Whilst some also walk for leisure or health, it is primarily considered to be a simple and effective way to get from A to B. When government talks of, "Providing for pedestrians," they generally do not mean providing showers at work for those whose commute is a run, providing pleasant cross-country running routes or shiny new athletic facilities.

When government talks of, "Providing for cyclists," however, they confuse cycle-sport and leisure cycling with cycling to get from A to B, an error akin to confusing runners with pedestrians. Whilst there will always be a minority of sporty cyclists who use their time travelling to work as a training ride, just as there are a few people at my place of work who use their time travelling to work as a training run, complete with performance clothing and a shower afterwards, this is not and never will be a mainstream activity. There's nothing at all wrong with treating your ride to work as a training ride, but by confusing a minority pursuit such as this with utility cycling, which when provided for adequately, can be a mainstream mode of transport, successive governments (and some cycle campaigners) have failed to achieve any significant, meaningful gains in cycling rates. Promoting running and providing a circuitous cross-country route is not going to persuade the overwhelming majority of motorists to switch away from driving the 2 miles to work. Providing a decent walking environment and promoting walking (whilst hindering motoring) is. The same applies to cycling.

Cycle sport is probably very nearly as popular as it is going to get, and the popularity of this hobby is particularly impressive. Utility cycling by non-enthusiasts has been suppressed by years of car-centric and outright hostile street design to a level similar to that of sport-cycling, making it easy for governments and even cycling campaigns to consider cyclists as a single homogenous group. This confusion of sport cycling with the much greater potential for growth in utility cycling from A to B severely limits the potential for cycling's growth. If we want to see any significant gains in cycling rates, we need to end this confusion of the more-nichey sport-cycling with the kind of everyday, utility cycling which can be made to appeal to the average person where the right kind of provision is made for them.

Twats

2011-06-14T17:58:00.002+01:00

One of the more serious downsides to cycling in the UK is, "The twat factor." I think we will all have a story about a motorist who has consciously made the decision to attempt to intimidate a cyclist with their vehicle, verbally abused a cyclist or threatened them with violence, typically attempting using the car itself as a weapon (although this is not always the case). It is a markedly different experience from the constant stream of bad behaviour from motorists which we as cyclists endure on a regular basis, such as unsafe overtakes, left hooks, cutting in and ASL/cycle lane obstruction and intrusion, to name a few. The less cynical amongst us can dismiss this kind of behaviour as a symptom of ignorance or selfishness, rather than outright bigotry or malice.

I encounter similar behaviour sometimes in a non-transport context, after all, the person who tries to assault a cyclist with his car will still be a twat when he is away from his vehicle. However, in this context this kind of behaviour is much more easy to deal with, as the playing field is much more level. When an aggressor is armoured with a few tonnes of car which can accelerate to a high speed very quickly, and the victim is, well, not, such behaviour can be particularly intimidating.

It made me think of that quote attributed to Gary Fisher;

"Anybody who rides a bike is a friend of mine."

Whilst this particular statement is a bit too rosy to sit well with my own slightly more misanthropic world-view, it got me thinking. Whilst the man who tries to assault a cyclist with his car will still be a twat when he is away from his vehicle, his ability to harm is severely reduced. If he were to ride a bike instead of drive, I'm sure it wouldn't make him the sort of person I'd want to call a, "Friend," but his very existence would suddenly become less of a detriment to the lives of others. So, I have decided to modify Gary Fishers quote to fit my own view of the world;

"Anybody who rides a bike, is less of a twat than they would be if they were driving a car."

It perhaps doesn't have the same ring to it, but I think the sentiment is similar enough. Feel free to share your stories of these sorts of encounters in the comments.

Punctures

2011-06-06T22:24:00.003+01:00

Those of you who follow me on Twitter may have noticed my recent Brompton tyre problems. On Thursday morning I was cycling from Macclesfield to Manchester along the Middlewood Way, when I heard a violent, “Whoosh,” of air leave my back tyre. Thankfully I was very near Rose Hill Marple station so I decided to just fold-up and hop-on. When I took the tube out I found a small spear-shaped piece of glass had managed to pierce the centre of the tyre tread.

A utility bicycle needs to be resistant to punctures; if the frequency of punctures on a bike is too high, it will cease to feel like a viable mode of transport. This was the fist puncture I had on the Brompton which was not due to the poor rim tape, and I decided it would be wise to invest in some Schwalbe Marathon Plus tyres as an upgrade over my Brompton green-label tyres.

This turned out to be a wise choice, on Friday I got a second puncture. At first I expected it would be a piece of the glass which had worked its way through after the repair, but when I pried the tyre off the rim to patch the tube, I found that the puncture was a rather large tear in the sidewall (I had been taking a turn at the time of the puncture. I patched the tyre and the tube and hoped it would hold until my new tyres arrived.

On Saturday I got a third puncture whilst riding down Princess Street in the evening. This was about 1 cm away from the previous sidewall puncture. Again, I patched the tube and put the tyre back on the rim. By this point, the tyre was starting to look like a special effect from Peter Jackson’s seminal masterpiece; Braindead.

The bulging, infected-looking tyre

Some serious warping

I decided that the bike was more of a liability than an asset in its current state, and decided to walk instead on my Sunday train trip to The South.

Today I got my new tyres, which have been fitted to the Brompton. The Marathon Plus tyres were quite challenging to get onto the rim, but their reputation suggests I won’t be taking them off regularly. The tyre-swap also provided me with an opportunity to replace the frankly terrible Brompton rim tape.

The new tyres seem make the Brompton feel a bit more nippy than before, and the ride is a tad harsher, likely due to being 2 mm narrower. Another advantage is the extra clearance between the tyre and the mudguard stays, removing the squeak after a bodged fold which was common with the old tyres. Overall, I am quite pleased with them, as long as I don’t have to take them off for a while.

Segregation Myths #2: Segregated Cycle Facilities are Dangerous

2011-06-01T12:10:00.001+01:00

After writing my critique of Cyclecraft a few weeks ago, I noticed that a thread had cropped up on Cyclechat discussing the post. A common research article is cited by those who oppose introduction of Dutch-style cycle infrastructure in the UK is, Bicycle Track and Lanes: A Before and After Study, most commonly linked in the form of a summary report. This is often linked to as "proof" that segregated cycle facilities are dangerous, which in itself is rather unimportant, for reasons to be discussed later. Interestingly, very early on in the introduction, the author writes:

"Many studies of bicycle tracks have been undertaken in Northern Europe. A meta analysis of 11 studies shows a reduction of 4 percent in crashes, and the crash reduction is almost the same for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists respectively."

The meta-analysis being referenced there is from, "The handbook of Road Safety Measures," by Rune Elvik. Meta-analyses are useful because they take a broader consensus from numerous studies, minimising the effect of any flaws or limitations in individual studies by looking for overall trends in the body of work as a whole. Picking a single piece of research which agrees with your own opinion whilst ignoring the wider consensus offered by the body of literature is called "Cherry-picking," and is generally frowned upon.

The study compares the numbers of cycle*-car and cycle-pedestrian crashes on roads with cycle tracks and with cycle lanes, to predicted crash figures based on figures for unaltered roads which have been altered to factor in the alteration to traffic volume and composition. The crash figures for junctions and straight road sections are treated separately, and the study finds that on roads with cycle tracks, cyclist crashes are decreased by 13% on straight sections, whilst at intersections they are increased by 24%. Overall, crashes involving cyclists increased by 10%.

This is the oft-cited percentage increase when discussing Dutch-style segregated cycle facilities with those who are vehemently opposed to them, and it is interesting to see how it is calculated; previously cyclist injuries at junctions had been measured as 353. After the installation of cycle tracks, the number of cyclist injuries at intersections was measured as 285, a reduction of 19% in absolute figures. However, the 24% increase figure is calculated from a predicted number of crashes figure for the after period, based on the changes to the traffic volume and mode composition, which predicted that at unmodified intersections with the same increase in cyclists, decrease in motorists and subject to pre-existing crash trends seen at the intersections which had been modified with cycle tracks, there should be 230 cyclist crashes. This is the figure which is used to generate the eye-catching 24% increase in crashes figure. The author of the paper also states that:

"The construction of bicycle tracks resulted in a 20 percent increase in [bicycle] traffic mileage and a 10 percent reduction in motor vehicle traffic mileage on those roads, where bicycle tracks have been constructed."

Taking intersections and straight sections together gives a figure of a 10% increase in crashes involving cyclists overall versus the predicted figures on un-altered junctions for the same traffic mode/volume composition (broadly speaking, a 10% reduction in motor traffic and a 20% increase in cycle traffic), a composition which is arguably only achievable where segregation is applied. The actual before and after numbers show a decrease in the absolute numbers of cyclist crashes of 29%. It is important to consider the effects of any pre-existing downward trend in crashes which could be contributing to this number, but also important to consider that this effect is seen contemporaneously with an increase in cyclists' mileage of 20% on these facilities.

"The bicycle facilities effects on traffic volumes are rather large. We do not know for sure whether these effects are a result of changes of route choice or transport mode choice or both. The magnitude of the changes in traffic volumes on the reconstituted streets, and the traffic volumes on parallel streets, however, do indicate that thousands of travellers in total must have changed their choice of transport mode. We do not know who have shifted mode - children, middle-ages or elderly, women or men, beginners or experienced, etc."

It is also interesting to note the large effect which the presence or absence of car parking restrictions on the adjacent road has on the number of collisions and injuries for cyclists and pedestrians which occur at intersections. Where parking restrictions were in place, there were more collisions due to the effect of motor vehicles parking on minor roads instead, resulting in more turning thus collisions.

At the beginning of this post, I stated that the safety effect of Dutch-style segregated cycle facilities is actually rather unimportant. Cycling, even on our hostile road network is actually a very low risk activity. A lot of people have invested a lot of time in trying to convey this message, that cycling is actually very safe, low risk and that the benefits from cycling hugely outweigh the risks a person is exposed to by cycling. It also featured as a common theme on the Cyclechat thread too, demonstrations of the statistically low risk which comes from in motor traffic and links to works such as the study discussed above (ignoring the wider consensus offered by the overall body of literature, which are even discussed in the introduction of this particular study).

Generally, the body of research shows that Dutch-style segregated infrastructure moderately decreases the risk to which cyclists are exposed, despite expanding the demographic itself from what is largely a small minority of experienced and vigilant hardcore cyclists under a vehicular approach, to include such disparate groups as teenagers chatting as they ride together or riding alone with earphones in, older people, parents with their children (either on their own bikes or on the parent's bike), children cycling to school without the need for supervisions and boozy revellers returning home from a pub or club by cycle. Despite the incredible broadening of the demographic, safety is still increased.

However, all of this is missing the point. Surprisingly, the main benefit and purpose of implementing Dutch-style segregated cycle infrastructure isn't just to reduce risk, it is to reduce fear. Increasing people's sense of subjective safety is a huge part of making the bicycle seem like an attractive and viable mode of transport to them. Another important factor is convenience. Both the need to feel safe whilst cycling, and the need for it to be convenient are provided where there are Dutch-style segregated facilities (and the extra options it opens up for reducing the speed, volume and permeability available to motorised traffic). All the statistics demonstrating the low-risk of vehicular cycling isn't going to change the average person's mind as long as it doesn't feel safe to them. People don't work that way

"Making these bicycle facilities must have contributed to benefits due to more physical activity, less air pollution, less traffic noise, less oil consumption, etc. [...] The positive benefits may well be much higher than the negative consequences caused by new safety problems." (My emphasis)

*In the study, numbers for cycles and mopeds limited to 30 km/h (which are legally permitted to use cycle tracks in Denmark) are bundled together. Make of this what you will.

Saving a Shimano “333” 3-speed hub

2011-05-27T16:58:00.001+01:00

Before the Nexus and Alfine internal hub geras, Shimano hub gears were not regarded as well as those made by Sturmey Archer. Shimano’s answer to the AW hub was the 333 hub. The hub was generally less well liked than its main rival due to the fact is was not able to match its extreme durability. Because of their lower durability, there are fewer of these hubs around nowadays and spares are much less widely available for this hub.

A few weeks ago I purchased a Universal folding bike which was built on the other side of the iron curtain many years ago. It came with a 333 hub and a seized gear cable. Like the modern Nexus INTER-3 hubs, the 333 hub shifts via a bell-crank mechanism which transforms cable pull into a pushing action on a rod which sits inside the axle, changing the gears. Unlike the modern Nexus 3 speed hub (but in common with the AW), when cable tension is relieved, the hub defaults to 3rd gear. The seized cable terminated in a barrel adjuster, much like the one found on a Sturmey AW gear cable. Unlike the AW hub, the cables are no longer widely available and the barrel is of a different diameter.

The 333 shifter contains a ball bearing on the underside of the lever plate. This ball bearing is what holds the cable in place, at each gear position, and it will fall out when you disassemble the shifter.

The underside of the lever plate, with the ball bearing sat in its socket

Fortunately, at the shifter end the cable terminates in a cylinder which runs perpendicular to the cable, and it is of similar dimensions to the one used with the modern plastic Sturmey Archer gear shifters.

The lower portion of the trigger shifter housing, with the lever plate installed and the cable being fed in

The cylinder at the end of the cable sits in the hole in the lever plate, and a white plastic piece sits on top of the cable and lever plate. The cable is then pulled tight to allow the top part of the shifter housing to be re-attached.

The re-assembled shifter

At the other end, the barrel adjuster from the old cable was cut off and attached to the end of the new Sturmey Archer cable using a cable pinch bolt from a caliper brake:

Old cable meets new cable via a cable pinch bolt

The barrel adjuster was then used to align the gears up with the shifter:

The bell crank showing gears 1,2 & 3 from top to bottom. I believe the circular hole to the left of the hinge pin on the bell crank is supposed to allow a mark on the moving piece to be seen when in second gear, but has corroded away on this hub.

Hopefully this work-around will help other people out there trying to salvage an old 333 hub. Despite their reputation, having taken the bike out for a spin the gears seemed perfectly acceptable, smooth shifting and similar in range to the AW.

Segregation Myths #1

2011-05-26T17:36:00.000+01:00

There are a few common canards used to attempt to discredit anyone who dares to talk about going Dutch with respect to cycling infrastructure here in the UK, including:

1) We'll never get segregation on every street.
2) There isn't room on British streets for separate cycle facilities.
3) People need somewhere to park their cars.

1) We'll never get segregation on every street

In The Netherlands (and Denmark for that matter) they don't even come close to having separate facilities for cyclists on every street. Instead they have specific guidelines for how much separation is required in a given location (Separation Principles) based on factors including the importance of said route as a main commuting route for cyclists, the volume of motorised traffic on said route and the speed of motorised traffic on said route. The degree of separation increases with all of these factors, from zero segregation on a quiet service road up to wide separated cycle lanes all red traffic signal phases at functions to allow cyclists and pedestrians to turn in whichever direction they wish at junctions, or roundabouts with radial exits and legal priority for cycle traffic.

An advantage of this type of infrastructure is its calming effect on motor traffic, due to the reduction in motor traffic capacity. This has obvious benefits for pedestrians without bringing cyclists and motorists into conflict in the way that conventional lane narrowing does, as it is usually implemented without any serious consideration for the needs of cyclists.

2) There isn't room on British streets for separate cycle facilities.

Now that we have addressed the myth that Dutch-style infrastructure means putting a separate cycle lane on every street, we have gone a long way to addressing canard number two. The roads which most unattractive and unsafe for cyclists at present are the very same roads which have require the very highest level of separation of cycle and motor traffic under the rules of the Separation Principles. These roads are the widest and fastest roads we have, roads which are easily capable of accommodating Dutch-quality separate infrastructure for cyclists. In Manchester, good examples of roads matching this description include Upper Brook Street (A34), Oxford Road (B5117), Princess Road (A5103), Chester Road (A56) & Regent Road (A57), to name a few. Reducing the speed and volume of motor traffic reducing road capacity on these streets has wide-ranging benefits to pedestrians and the local community in which these roads are situated.

Unlike current approaches to tackling motor traffic speed and congestion through road capacity reduction and lane narrowing, using the space taken away from motor traffic to build Dutch-quality infrastructure does not necessitate bringing cyclists and motor traffic into conflict and so enhances the attractiveness and convenience of cycling rather than further diminishing it.

3) People need somewhere to park their cars.

Ignoring for now the obvious oddity that is the widely accepted phenomenon that is the routine storing of personal property on the public highway, in addressing canard number two, we have gone a long way to tackling this one too. The streets I named are generally of the kind which have either blanket parking bans, or at least have peak-hours parking bans along most of their length. The biggest roads are the roads where parking is already prohibited all the time, and where it is not prohibited all the time, it definitely should be (I'm looking at you, Upper Brook Street).

Even if implementing Dutch-style infrastructure did mean displacing some established car parking, I don't see why this should be regarded as a problem. It is a very depressing prospect that the safety of vulnerable road users be regarded as a lower priority than the publicly-subsidised storage of personal property on the public highway. Streets are primarily intended for people and movement, not storage.

Cycling: Lessons from Recycling

2011-05-24T14:47:00.000+01:00

When I was at school in the 1990s I remember there was a lot being said about recycling, how it was important and how we should all make an effort to recycle our glass, paper and cans (there was little mention of recycling plastic at that stage). I distinctly remember that one month we were all encouraged to bring all of our family's empty tins and cans into school, sorting them into separate steel and aluminium bins by testing them with a magnet. At the end of the month the bins were taken away, I remember being enthusiastic and wanting to continue recycling the cans but the only place to recycle them was through large bins at the supermarket car park, or at the borough tip. At the time we didn't even have wheelie bins, we had several metal bins at the back of the house which were emptied by the bin men every week. There was no separate collection for different types of waste, the whole waste collection infrastructure was designed around the need to move all domestic waste to either landfill or incineration.

Recycling in the 1990s was possible, but it required individuals to think about their domestic waste and make the conscious effort to elect to take their waste to centralised recycling facilities. The more destructive option of not recycling waste which could have been recycled was the convenient and easy choice because it didn't involve individuals to elect to change their behaviour. Most people didn't particularly care about the issue of recycling and thought nothing of throwing all their domestic waste out in the same bin. Less than twenty years in 2011, almost everyone recycles the majority of their recyclable domestic waste.

Image courtesy of MEN

In 2011, do the majority of people care about the issue of recycling? The answer is still a resounding "No." People recycle because it in 2011 it is easy and convenient for them to do so, so it is the natural choice. Rather than continuing to promote elective behavioural change to increase recycling rates, councils have changes the waste collection infrastructure to make recycling the natural and convenient option. Separate bin facilities are provided for different sorts of waste, often different categories of recyclable waste in addition to a general waste bin for non-recyclable material. For those choosing not to separate waste so it can be recycled, life is made inconvenient by a reduction in general waste capacity through reducing the frequency of general waste collections. Overall capacity is maintained or improved through additional collections for recyclable waste, making recycling a convenient and attractive option. Mass recycling was brought about not through elective behaviour change but through subtle coercion; changes in the waste collection infrastructure were made so that recycling became attractive and convenient, whilst not recycling became a less attractive and less viable option.

Those who wanted to promote recycling realised early on that an approach based mainly on elective behavioural change was inherently limited in its ability to deliver significant gains in recycling rates. Elective cycle training, "Be nice," and "Mutual respect," campaigns directed at both motorists and cyclists, and things like Bike Week are all similarly limited. A few weeks after the end of "Can collection month," I had a bag of cans I wanted to recycle, but because the waste collection infrastructure was based around not recycling, and I was too young to take them to the recycling centre myself, I ended up throwing them into the bin and I forgot about the issues and importance of recycling. In 2011, at the end of Bike Week, there will be the same realisation and people will get back into their cars and forget about cycling for another year, because approaches based extensively on conscious, elective behavioural change are inherently very limited in their ability to bring about significant long-term results.