Cycling is quickest for commute.

BartC wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
Ian Smith wrote:

The main thing I find with hands (which I agree can suffer if you're
not equipped) is to put the gloves / mitts on before leaving the
house, and do not take them off. Not for a second. This results
in a fair degree of fumbling - I have a padlock and chain to
negotiate to get my bike out, then have to do the padlock back up
afterwards, then put panniers on bike - but it makes a massive
difference. I find my hands stay happy in gloves, but if they get
cold they don't regain lost heat.


If there was ever a better advertisement for a car, I haven't seen
it.

In such weather, cars can have their own problems: engines that won't
start, half-an-inch of ice on the windows, a temperature inside the
car, for the first few miles, which is exactly the same as outside
(especially if needing side-windows open to see out; that's if they
are not frozen solid),

Not if you get it out of your garage, which anyone sensible does.

and slippery ice over the steep side roads you
need to negotiate before you get to the main road.

Much safer in a car.

And you still need gloves..

Er, no you don't. I can't remember the last time I wore gloves to drive.

On 12/06/2011 15:25, Ian Smith wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, wrote:

No, this is where your anti-motor agenda clearly shows it's face. A
car is not a "dangerous machine".

Eh? A car is a dangerous machine - that's why we have mandatory
testing of the condition of the machine, and a mandatory test and
licensing system for the operator.

Afraid not idiot. A car is an inanimate object which cannot be
dangerous all by itself.
--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 12/06/2011 16:16, martynh wrote:


I have read a lot of sad rubbish on this group. But the idea that an
otherwise-fit adult simply can't ride 10 miles on a half-decent bike,
with a few weeks' practice, is too sad for words.

The average adult doesn't want to ride 10 yards on a push bike let alone
10 miles.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

martynh wrote:

On 12 June, 11:09, Kim Bolton wrote:
Phil W Lee wrote:

on a decent bicycle, you could have learned to enjoy it.

That is merely a supposition, but I now see that you are moving away
from the idea that all people can do anything physical, such as cycle
10 miles, to saying that one has to have the 'right' machine, whatever
that is. I haven't seen this point of view expressed in any
pro-cycling literature - perhaps you could point to some?

Unfortunately, there is still a tendency to give crap bikes to kids on
the basis that they'll grow out of them anyway. *You are the proof
that this is the wrong approach - all it does is convince them that
cycling is uncomfortable and strenuous, when it could be relaxing and
enjoyable, on the right bike.

Can you tell me what was the 'right' bike to have in 1955, and what it
cost?

You seem to have added an extra dimension to the cycling debate, by
your repeated point that the 'right' bicycle is the one to have, so I
assume you have conceeded the point I originally made that different
people have different physiology.

I look forward to your description of how 'the right bike' has
developed over the last 60 years.

I have read a lot of sad rubbish on this group. But the idea that an
otherwise-fit adult simply can't ride 10 miles on a half-decent bike,
with a few weeks' practice, is too sad for words.

You're entitled to your opinion, but sometimes you might find they are
better accepted if founded on fact rather than wishful thinking.

--
from
Kim Bolton

On 12/06/2011 16:05, Kim Bolton wrote:


I have to say that in following this thread, I've been surprised by
the number of logical contortions, assumptions, and unsupported
statements made by what appear to be those in favour of cycling,
'better cooling' and 'anyone can do 10 miles without sweating' being
among my personal favourites.

As they say "You ain't seen nothing yet".

I like the cut of your jib BTW

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 12/06/2011 16:28, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
On 12/06/2011 15:25, Ian Smith wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, wrote:

No, this is where your anti-motor agenda clearly shows it's face. A
car is not a "dangerous machine".

Eh? A car is a dangerous machine - that's why we have mandatory
testing of the condition of the machine, and a mandatory test and
licensing system for the operator.

Afraid not idiot. A car is an inanimate object which cannot be dangerous
all by itself.

Tut, tut, do you not remember a while ago, Doug told us that because
cars use computers, they could go wrong, start the car up, drive it down
the road, knock over (sorry ram) a few cyclists, drive down the
pavement, knock a little old lady off her bike, demolish a front wall &
nearly kill a cyclist who was building a model of the Cutty Sark in his
front room.
I think that's what he said.

On 12/06/2011 16:20, Simon Mason wrote:


On a bike though the cooling effect is real, as in effect, your body
is using the whole world as a heat sink after the 20mph breeze has
taken some of its heat away.

In breaking news, Simple Simon blames global warming on cyclists....



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 12 June, 17:05, Kim Bolton wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
On Jun 12, 10:20*am, Kim Bolton wrote:

You'll still go much faster than you would walking, on the same energy
expenditure, but with better cooling.

Do you have any data for that?

If you *really* need "data" to show you that a man on a bicycle can
travel far further for the same energy expenditure than as a
pedestrian, then we're *all* wasting our time.

It was the 'better cooling' claptrap that I was asking for data on.

It might be better cooling if one exposed (nearly all) one's flesh
(and thus the bits that actually do 'the cooling'), but if they are
covered in clothing for various reasons, then the 'better cooling' may
be more myth than reality.

I have to say that in following this thread, I've been surprised by
the number of logical contortions, assumptions, and unsupported
statements made by what appear to be those in favour of cycling,
'better cooling' and 'anyone can do 10 miles without sweating' being
among my personal favourites.

My assertion that different people have different physiology, some of
which does not support cycling 10 miles without sweating no matter how
much training one undertakes, has only been countered (if such a word
could be used) by responses such as "How else did we make it out of
the caves" and "You should have bought a better bike in 1955", which
IMHO don't cut it as arguments.

--
from
Kim Bolton

Everybody has their own physiology. For myself, I am sweaty, even when
much fitter than I am now. I live with it. It doesn't limit how far I
can go on my bike. Why would it? If I'm going to work I shower and
change. If coming home, ditto. Otherwise (like now) I sit in the sun
and drink a pint of beer.

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
news
On 12/06/2011 15:25, Ian Smith wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, wrote:

No, this is where your anti-motor agenda clearly shows it's face. A
car is not a "dangerous machine".

Eh? A car is a dangerous machine - that's why we have mandatory
testing of the condition of the machine, and a mandatory test and
licensing system for the operator.

Afraid not idiot. A car is an inanimate object which cannot be dangerous
all by itself.

So why does a car parked on the road still need third party insurance?

--
Bartc

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 07:17:35 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

On Jun 11, 9:56*pm, Peter Keller wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:35:28 -0700, Simon Mason wrote:

In the winter, I get covered in the stuff, much like just now after just
eating a Lamb Phall in an Indian restaurant :-)

Sounds good.

Where is this restaurant?

--
67.4% of statistics are made up.

Sofia, Bulgaria.
http://www.kohinoor.bg/en/


He was taking the **** - just like everyone else responding to your "holiday"
posts.

I think it takes some sort of sad ******* who goes to Bulgaria - and then
rather than try the local produce - he has to try and find an Indian. Did you
get a nice bottle of lager with it?
--
Simple Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20mph limits just because the limits do not apply to cyclists.
This includes exceeding the speed limit past three schools. A total disregard for the well-being of vulnerable road users.
The actions of a true psycholist.