Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
LME - does this look like a good solution to you?
and more time putting a bike path across Holland Park.
Holland Park dickheads.
BUT. As a new cycle wanker, MY WORD am I starting to hate dual-use pathways. There's some utterly abysmal cycle path design on route 23 which runs part of the way from Catford to Greenwich because of this.
Also: anyone cycle down Rye Lane in Peckham regularly? It's a literal wonder of the modern world how I've not hit a pedestrian who's blindly wandered out in front of me.
Just because I got to see someone cycle into Regents Canal once.
was it a case of hit woman and child or bale into a canal? :D
Cycling really fast around this couple, misjudged it and went straight in. It was amazing.
The girl has just got a bike to cycle to and from her work and I kind of fancy giving it a go myself but she's only going to Deptford from New Cross and I'd have to be coming into Old Street which seems to run a lot bigger chance of me dying. Are there any decent cycle routes in?
go up through Catgate, down margate road, take a left up south street past bushy forrest then keep going until you hit the lights near Old cross
You're in New Cross, right? My first bit of advice would be to get both of y'all onto this scheme: http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/transport/cycling/Pages/Cycle-loan-scheme.aspx where you can rent a bike for a month and see if it's for you. That's how I got cycling in Lewisham! The bikes are decent and you can sign up for awareness training while you're at it.
As for cycling into central London, there's a route that goes through Brockley, Peckham, Camberwell and up to London Bridge. It's route 22 and is well signposted along backroads. I did route 22 from my house, to get to London Bridge it takes about 50 minutes so a bit longer to Old Street. You can use http://www.cyclestreets.net/journey/ to plan your journey along quieter routes and there may well be a quicker one rather than route 22 from where you live.
I think the main thing that's helped me was the training I got from the council because it gave me loads of confidence. Also just cycling around with no purpose other than to explore is a great way of finding new routes.
London Bridge is horrible if you're a cyclist, especially if you need to turn right at the end of it.
Really wish I'd known about that last week!
Did you get a bike too? Nevermind. You can still get training through the council.
My ultimate goal is to get a job which I can cycle to within an hour of less (my current job is over 15 miles away so not really doable with my current fitness levels).
And literally expressed a desire for a temporary rental service to see if she'd like it before committing :D
sign yourself up immediately!
TfL publish free cycle guide maps for the whole of London:
well worth getting a couple.
There's bound to be a "safe" route for your commute, I guess Matt knows what he's talking about, but personally I don't find cycling in the centre of London particularly fun. I'm lucky that I only have to commute to the river from the south which is OK.
I ordered them all ages ago, they're dead helpful.
The problem with not following a numbered route is if you have no idea where you're going, you can get lost quite easily. I was following a route on Sunday which was well signposted until there was an option of where to go, and the route we took ended up being completely un-signposted.
That's why on a speculative pootle a few months ago I nearly found myself joining the M23 near Caterham.
When you see what even New York has been able to do in the past decade, the stagnation in cycle infrastructure provision in London and lack of leadership has been very disappointing.
When I read the title I assumed a load of poxy 30cm wide cycle lanes separated by a thin kerb, which would then be populated by angry cyclists trying to overtake each other.
But those pictures look pretty cool to be honest, and that could really boost cycling in town. If it can be done then I'm sure all the whining about "essential freight being logjammed" will soon turn to dust.
then if this is finished by 2016.. a year or two to prove the benefits.. another year or two to get some built elsewhere.. could have a decent cycle network by 2020..
I think people forget just how much was pushed through in the years from 2000, when TfL came into existence and Livingstone was mayor. Not necessarily on cycle infrastructure provision, but in improving the buses, attacking the decades of backlog of tube upgrades/improvements, new DLR lines, Overground improvements, new rolling stock, cycle hire scheme, Crossrail etc.
The sad fact is that outside of the now outdated lardbus, the empty dangleway, the half-hearted CS routes, and the prioritising of cars on pedestrian crossings, there's been very little transport policy put into effect in the past few years.
or a hangover of previous governments?
waffling on about in his election campaigns and photoshoots, even though he's done more to tip the balance away from cycling despite being a cyclist himself.
Given the state of London Underground, buses and the like by the late-90s, cycling infrastructure was (understandably) not the priority for Livingstone in his first two terms, but given what he campaigned on and the way he was able to push through progressive transport policy, there's not really any doubt that we'd be a good four years ahead of where we are now, at least.
Ken got a lot of stuff started quicksmart (you missed the congestion charge which was very quick), but the Overground took a few years to get to where it is now, Crossrail still has a little way to go yet, the bike hires took long enough for Andrew Gilligan to claim it was Boris's idea. etc.
I was more suggesting that a lot of things take a long time to implement, rather than to get approval/buy-in. And I'm speaking as a commuter to Victoria who (I believe) still has four years to wait before the roadworks outside the station are gone.
But that's my point. Boris has sat on these for six years, while reaping the publicity photo benefits of Livingstone/TfL's planning and implementation in the years up to 2008.
is of the 'cycle crossing' on Holloway Road which is almost always clogged up with cars anyway.
London's pretty boned for cycling because you need segregated cycle lanes, but you also need bus lanes, car lanes and pavements, and in most bits there just isn't enough room.
Holland was in the same situation 30 years ago, and ten years ago if you looked at New York, you'd struggle to visualise how virtually all of the major junctions would be able to have two or more lanes of traffic removed to accommodate cycle infrastructure, or how cities in America could remove entire urban motorways.
Even if, like the RAC, you're opposed to the ideology of the bike and improving provision, it still stacks up economically. There's a growing realisation that investing in cycle infrastructure makes small, independent businesses much more viable, which keeps money circulating in the local economy, employs more people on better wages and reduces the burden on health providers.
Apologies for the Buzzfeed link, but look at some of these, No.s 4, 5, 6, 9, 17, 24 & 25 in particular.
And has never been in the same position as London. Ever.
It was a deliberate step change in policy following the Stop de Kindermoord protests in the early 70s.
but it was a bit more complicated than just the influence of pro-cycling pressure groups.
In the early 1970s Holland was in the grip of the oil crisis, which reached a critical point in late 1973, when the outbreak of the Yom Kippur war resulted in an oil embargo against a number of countries, including Holland. At that time the country was governed by a progressive, left-leaning coalition, which was unusual as it lacked the more centrist CDA party, who had been in charge for most of the preceding decades. One of the short-term measures the government implemented was "no cars Sunday" which they ran 10 times in a row. This gave a major boost to cyclists. The government realised that alternatives to car travel were necessary, and invested heavily in both public transport and cycling lanes.
not that it was the only cause. The links above mention the oil crisis etc. My point was that everyone assumes Holland has always been a cycling utopia, but that's not true. in the early 70s, in terms of infrastructure, Holland and Britain were about in the same place. It was a deliberate government policy to invest and make the change. Dismissing any attempts at improving London falls into the trap of assuming that the city is not suitable for cycling. Holland and New York show that you can make it so, if there's the political will.
- pro-cycling pressure groups
- left-wing government
- immediate threat to fossil-fuel based transport
London has the first, but not the other two.
but look what it has done in the past decade.
I've got an old Raleigh Arena in my front room at the minute off of freecycle, it's in decent enough nick but could do with a service and everything, is that affordable enough? Can they do anything about rust and that?
Looking at Google it's an old 18 geared road bike? Is the frame rusty? Do the wheels run true? Do the gears work? Does it need new tyres? Are the brakes okay? You can fix a lot of things yourself.
TBH you should be able to take it to your local bike shop and ask if they think it'd be rideable after a service. The price of a basic service can vary wildy too. It's £40 at my LBS, but then you can pay up to £90 to the "full" service. If too much is wrong it might be worth buying something second hand which is ready to ride.
Do they just wash and oil it and then check all the cables are the right tension.
brakes, wheel true-ing, then your gears/cassette/chainset things.. or the full monty taking it all apart and putting it back together again jobbie.
I think mine might need the full monty pretty soon. Chain's been slipping a bit, some of the teeth look a bit worn and some of the gear changes don't work every time.
The fact that I know I ought to learn to fix all this myself makes me feel less of a man, but I'm learning to live with that feeling.
but less time fixing bikes = more time riding.
I'm happy to pay a pro to take care of the big stuff. plus the cost of tools, somewhere to do it all etc.
But sounds as though you need a new chain. A slipping chain means it's got to the end of its useful life. Any longer and it'll start to wear the cassette and chainset (which it sounds like has happened due to the worn teeth). A new chain often means a new cassette as the worn cassette will not take a new chain without it happening (irreversible damage caused by a knackered chain).
Gears not changing might mean a cable replacement or a new rear mech depending on how poor the action is. If you can still change gear, but it sticks or catches as it changes, it could be a rear mech adjustment or a cable tensioning. If it doesn't change at all, new working parts are needed.
Biggest tip to keep this work down to a minimum is to look after your chain and moving parts (front and rear mechs). A weekly clean and oil help to keep chain wear to a minimum.
I do do all the basic maintenance stuff, but it's done a lot of miles and my lack of fitness (plus the inherent exciting unpredictability of London cycling) means I punish the gears a bit so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it needs some new parts.
I'll be taking it to pn's repair shop just down the road imminently.
open until 7pm tonight iirc (and I need to go and pick my bike up from them too!)
I'd definitely budget for a new chain and cassette if I were you. If the teeth on the cassette and the chainset look like shark fins, then they're too worn to be useful and need replacing. Alternatively, a new chain every 1000 miles or 6 months helps prolong the life of the cassette.
Replacing the chain and not changing the cassette will result in the gears slipping just as much as the did with the older gear.
much safer to knock em all down to stop people gawping, save a few million.
Or imgur. Or Twitter. So I can't post photos of my shiny new bike either :(
oh wait found one:
I'm feeling determined to keep cycling through the winter as I'm planning a cycling holiday and I need to keep my fitness up for it.
What are good clothes to wear that'll keep me dry? NO LYCRA! Also, same question re: shoes. NO CLIPPY IN SHOES!
to a fancy dress party.
Overtrousers are good when it's cold, but you can easily get too hot because there's no ventilation. You can get waterproof socks, gloves and hats by Sealskinz but I've never bothered, I just wear good boots and take a spare pair of socks. Vulpine do a waterproof cap as well.
Kind of assume you've got a coat but if not, I've had a fairly cheap dhb one for a couple of years that has always kept my body dry.
I’ve had a pair of sealskinz gloves for a few years – pricey but worth it. My current ‘weather proof’ set up is a pack-a-mac and waterproof-trousers. The mac is fine as it’s quite breathable, but the trousers are horrible – basically bin bags. And they just make the water run into my shoes.
The worst bit is having to wear my glasses when I cycle! Can get a bit difficult to see sometimes. I need windscreen wipers!
If you get overshoes that are larger than you should get, they can fit over trainers, then you have quite a snug cuff round your ankle to keep rain from dripping in.
I don't know if it'll work but have you tried wearing a cap? I wear one under my helmet when it's rainy to give a bit of shelter to my eyes, but I don't know if it'd be effective enough for glasses.
waiting for me in the Royal Mail depot, alongside some new brake cables. Exciting times!
By using 'waterproof' overshoes. They get warm as there's no ventilation, but the work reasonably well. There'll be a bit of seepage from water dripping down the leg but it's nothing too major.
I can't recommend as I'm a Lycra wearing wanker. I would suggest a pair of leggings, but that's out of the question.
A cheap coat will work fine. Dhb or even Lidl will last a winter.
Definitely recommend mudguards if you haven't got them on the bike. Really is noticeably better riding with them. No splash or spray from the road or tyres.
they make a lot more difference than you'd think, and you can buy clip-on ones.
I just put a change of clothes in my 100% waterproof saddlebags. Anything else and you're just kidding yourself.
getting to/from somewhere like work I agree.. but going out on a long ride piss wet through with a wind blowing and you can get cold pretty quick.
If it was pissing it down with rain and I wanted to go for a bike ride for the sake of it...stay in and watch telly.
The inner city infrastructure is obviously great but the countryside paths going from city to city are amazing too. It was so nice to be fully relaxed whilst cycling.
How did you decide where to go?
Getting the ferry to and from Rotterdam meant that doing a loop going Delft/Bodegraven > Utrecht > Amsterdam > Haarlem > Leiden > Rotterdam was pretty logical, plus that meant there was always good beer. Any other cities would've been out of the way.
I had the routes on my Garmin but I only really needed them to find the places we were staying in cities, when you're going between towns/cities, it's really well sign-posted. The LF routes are pretty much all fully segregated ( http://www.holland-cycling.com/where-to-go/long-distance-cycle-routes/national-long-distance-cycle-network ) but there are red signs for more direct routes.
If you flew to Amsterdam and hired bikes there you could skip out Rotterdam and never have more than 40km to go, which is pretty easy going on flat, well-surfaced paths.
how many cyclists lives will it save cw how many lives could be saved spending it on the NHS (I don't actually know, Im just asking.......I thought we were strapped for cash, and were having to cut back on existing strategic services which are/will be resulting in more citizens deaths/injury)
but you know, I ctrl f for money, and no one has mentioned it.
Is it the elephant in the room? Where will it come from?
Just read a throwaway line saying they'll reduce the Westway by one lane on the East-West section. Fucking hell. Absolutely terrible idea.
Also, a billion quid on this?
I agree they need to improve the cycling network - but that's a lot of money - and if it's using existing roads why the fuck is it costing this much?