# No substitute for a car?



## gavroche (24 Sep 2012)

In weather like today ( persistent heavy rain) you can't beat a car for going from a to b and back.
I know some of you may disagree, I mean the hardcore of cyclists, but when I saw this guy with shorts on and water proof jacket, this morning, I thought: " he can't be owing a car otherwise he would be using it".
I know we all love getting on our bikes and ride but surely, there must be limits to when to ride and to me , pouring down rain is no good for riding. Give me a car anytime in those conditions.
And of course, there is also the safety aspect,apart from comfort of dry and warm conditions that the car gives you.
How many of you, also car owners, leave the bike at home and take 4 wheels when the weather is so bad?


----------



## tadpole (24 Sep 2012)

I own a car, and didn't even think about taking it to work.


----------



## gavroche (24 Sep 2012)

[QUOTE 2057653, member: 45"]If I'd known how long it was going to take me to drive the 13 miles to work this morning I'd have cycled. Despite the rain and copious flooding, I'd have still got here more quickly.[/quote]
Yeh , but at least you got there warm and dry!


----------



## AndyRM (24 Sep 2012)

*Rule #*​*9*​
*// *If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.​


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2012)

Provided I can physically get the bike to work - ie, no 4 foot snowfalls - ill ride, cos a car ain't no substitute for a bike.


----------



## G2EWS (24 Sep 2012)

As mentioned elsewhere I was disappointed that I could not ride in today, due the cars needing to be here for valeting. The fact that he did not turn up is even more annoying! So I will have to drive in tomorrow as well. A ride tomorrow evening is called for!

The only thing I can think of that will stop me riding in with my new hobby of commuting to work will be very heavy winds, serious downpour or frost/ice.

Regards

Chris


----------



## ianrauk (24 Sep 2012)

If you have the right gear then cycling in the rain is no problem.
Would never think of ever getting a train or taking the car just because of rain.

I have cycle commuted in the heaviest of thunderstorms and in a ways it's jolly fun.


----------



## HovR (24 Sep 2012)

Not a car owner, but I loved wizzing past the unusually large traffic queues on the bike today! 

I guess all the car owners thought they'd take the car today rather than walking/biking, causing more traffic.


----------



## subaqua (24 Sep 2012)

I have access to 2 cars ( 5 at a push but some of them are not in london)

I got soaked to skin yesterday and this morning and I will still be riding in tomorrow regardless of the weather.


----------



## guitarpete247 (24 Sep 2012)

It all depends on how far from work and how much notice I'm given. 
As a supply teacher who lives out in a little village with no proper bus service I have no option but to drive if I'm phoned at 8:00 to be in a school 20 miles away by 8:45 or earlier. Cycling in would be good if I had a few miles of heavy traffic that I could filter past but not when I have clear roads for 18 of those 20 miles. I did cycle into Leicester the other month for an interview with another agency but I had plenty of notice and interview was early afternoon. 
Next month I'll be working in North Warwickshire at various schools. As yet I don't know where or what I'll need to take with me, so car is essential again. I will be taking bike on back of car though .


----------



## GrumpyGregry (24 Sep 2012)

got rid of the car so I wouldn't give in to that temptation.


----------



## benb (24 Sep 2012)

I must admit that when you look out of the window and it is tipping it down, you do get a bit of a sinking feeling. But once you're actually out in it, it's really not that bad.

So I think it's more psychological than anything.


----------



## smutchin (24 Sep 2012)

I really enjoyed my short ride to the station in the rain this morning. It's only water. HTFU.

Like Greg, I would very happily go car-free to rid myself of the temptation to use it (not to mention the cost). The only hurdle is persuading my wife of the merits of that idea. Ho hum.

d.


----------



## smutchin (24 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> And of course, there is also the safety aspect


 
If you're really interested in the safety aspect, you wouldn't drive a car in these conditions.


----------



## ohnovino (24 Sep 2012)

I'm waterproof.
My clothes are waterproof.
My bike is (mostly) waterproof.

Don't see what the problem is.


----------



## gb155 (24 Sep 2012)

tadpole said:


> I own a car, and didn't even think about taking it to work.


Same


----------



## Jodee1kenobi (24 Sep 2012)

My 12 year old cycled to school today whilst it was  She's not even tempted to ask me for a lift any more! After all its only water. The other mums think I'm a harsh mother, but hey at least jodee1kenobi Jr. will be independent and getting herself places whilst their kids bug them for a lift everywhere


----------



## trampyjoe (24 Sep 2012)

I cycled to the (closed) bank then further into town to another bank today and I have a car.
Rule No. 9  ETA - And I had the toddler in a trailer - Rule No. 9 squared!

Of course the wife had the car so I had no choice, but I'm still badass right?


----------



## Reece (24 Sep 2012)

I cycled to work. Driving doesn't even cross my mind now. I rode through snow and ice and torrential rain last year. 

Plus I only work 1.2miles from home and the car journey takes 3 times as long due to traffic as live on the edge of leicester city centre. and the short journeys would not do my car any good


----------



## green1 (24 Sep 2012)

A bike will never replace the car for me. I drive to work in the winter as I wouldn't cycle along the roads I'd need to in the dark. And I can't carry my cricket gear on the back of my bike in the summer.


----------



## trampyjoe (24 Sep 2012)

green1 said:


> A bike will never replace the car for me. I drive to work in the winter as I wouldn't cycle along the roads I'd need to in the dark. And I can't carry my cricket gear on the back of my bike in the summer.


http://www.changinggear.org.uk/2.html

"_*The "Waitrose" shopping trailer. *We became interested in the Waitrose trailer because it seemed perfect for carrying a cricket bag. Students who have to take their cricket kit to school - or to their local cricket club - say that they cannot go by bike because they have to carry their cricket bag; so someone usually takes them by car. As you can see from the photo below, the "Waitrose" trailer_* holds a cricket bag perfectly. "*


----------



## trampyjoe (24 Sep 2012)

and another thing...


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2012)

I've just added you as a friend on Endomondo Trampy


----------



## GrumpyGregry (24 Sep 2012)

smutchin said:


> I really enjoyed my short ride to the station in the rain this morning. It's only water. HTFU.
> 
> Like Greg, I would very happily go car-free to rid myself of the temptation to use it (not to mention the cost). *The only hurdle is persuading my wife of the merits of that idea*. Ho hum.
> 
> d.


The lovely Helen still has her car. She uses it to commute to her job whilst we avoid using it if possible.


----------



## Dan B (24 Sep 2012)

I walked to work this morning, thus turning a 10 minute ride into a 24-30 minute stroll. If I'd taken the car i'd probably have driven it most of the way back home again while looking for a place to park it


----------



## Sandra6 (24 Sep 2012)

I left the bike at work and persuaded Mr6 to come for me with the car -BUT -only because I remembered all the shopping I'd forgotten that wouldn't fit in the basket. 
I now clearly need one of those trailers!!


----------



## redcard (24 Sep 2012)

40 mile round trip for me today. Got a bit wet. Tailwind all the way home, averaged 21mph over the 25 mile journey home. Roads were quiet as it's a bank.holiday up here. Best day of solo riding in months.

I've completely forgotten about this morning's vicious headwinds


----------



## green1 (24 Sep 2012)

trampyjoe said:


> http://www.changinggear.org.uk/2.html
> 
> "_*The "Waitrose" shopping trailer. *We became interested in the Waitrose trailer because it seemed perfect for carrying a cricket bag. Students who have to take their cricket kit to school - or to their local cricket club - say that they cannot go by bike because they have to carry their cricket bag; so someone usually takes them by car. As you can see from the photo below, the "Waitrose" trailer_* holds a cricket bag perfectly. "*


Don't fancy towing that on a 130 mile round trip to some of the away games on a 'summers' day like we have had around here this year. I'll stick to the car thanks.


----------



## StuartG (24 Sep 2012)

For commuters it is a hard choice. For us discretionary cyclists - less so. Today because of the deluge between me and the Co-op I went without my fresh baguette for lunch. Thank God I'm not French ...


----------



## Crosstrailer (24 Sep 2012)

I don't use the bike to commute and if I did there is no way I could beat the car regardless of the jams due to the distance. I would love to have a job where I could commute by bike.

The weather didn't put me off riding to the gym and on the way back having a meander today, despite the wind and rain.

I will always use the bike for short journeys and pleasure rides however long, medium distance dependent on time constraints but the bike is no substitute for the car on longer trips.

To be perfectly frank, if I was making a 20 mile journey in the pouring rain as much as I love riding my bike, keeping fit and try not to use the car wherever possible the saddle is no match for the drivers seat of my Merc.....


----------



## trampyjoe (24 Sep 2012)

Crosstrailer said:


> I don't use the bike to commute and if I did there is no way I could beat the car regardless of the jams due to the distance. I would love to have a job where I could commute by bike.


yes, but, errm, distance isn't ...


Crosstrailer said:


> the saddle is no match for the drivers seat of my Merc.....


oh.


----------



## Cress1968 (24 Sep 2012)

I never even thought about the car this morning to be honest. My clothes are waterproof so all I had to put up with was the wind, I've rode in worse lol .... The only thing I don't like riding to work in is icy conditions, scares the bejesus out of me but I still do it. 
I don't look on it as a macho thing I just took the decision to cycle to work a few year back and the weather is something I have to contend with lol


----------



## Pauluk (24 Sep 2012)

I love my 17 mile round trip commute but don't find it much fun in the rain or in heavy winds so I take the car. Looks like Wednesday or Thursday before I do my commute. I must admit there is probably some physiological aspect to this as when I've been caught in heavy rain it doesn't bother me that much especially if its on the way home. Sorting punctures in the rain doesn't appeal much either.

Tomorrow looks like strong winds so it'll be the car again.

Its just so much easier to take the car as long as I get 3 or 4 rides a week (leisure if not commute) then that's ok by me.

I love mountain and country walking in foul weather but that's because I have better kit for this.


----------



## dave r (24 Sep 2012)

I've only just brought my car, for over 30 years I was car free and an all weather cycle commuter, now I've got the car I'm going to commute in it when its as wet as it was this morning, I recon that after all those cycle commuting miles in all weathers I've done my bit and earned myself a few dry rides.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Sep 2012)

254 Cycle commutes so far this year.
18 of those it rained.
That's a very low number of wet rides in the scheme of things.


----------



## Matt1705 (24 Sep 2012)

tadpole said:


> I own a car, and didn't even think about taking it to work.


Same here, turned up to work drenched but with a satisfied smile


----------



## Crosstrailer (24 Sep 2012)

trampyjoe said:


> yes, but, errm, distance isn't ...


 
Sorry you have lost me.......


----------



## trampyjoe (24 Sep 2012)

Crosstrailer said:


> Sorry you have lost me.......


Distance isn't shouldn't be a deciding factor but as you said, you prefer your merc.
One mans kipper an all that (sorry, can't remember the actual saying).


----------



## Crosstrailer (24 Sep 2012)

trampyjoe said:


> Distance isn't shouldn't be a deciding factor but as you said, you prefer your merc.
> One mans kipper an all that (sorry, can't remember the actual saying).


 
Thing is Joe, its 25 motorway miles when I have to go to the office. I would guess it is around 30-35 using non motorway roads. A huge time distance car v bike


----------



## I like Skol (24 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> In weather like today ( persistent heavy rain) you can't beat a car for going from a to b and back.
> I know some of you may disagree, I mean the hardcore of cyclists............. there is also the safety aspect,apart from comfort of dry and warm conditions that the car gives you.
> How many of you, also car owners, leave the bike at home and take 4 wheels when the weather is so bad?


For me I will happily take the car when it is wet, wet, wet. I enjoy cycling for so many reasons, even in traffic and in the face of adversity but, riding in heavy, drenching rain just isn't fun. I don't feel I am exposed to any greater danger when riding in rain than riding in dry or dark conditions, this is just a matter of perception. However, I will often ride to work on a pleasant evening knowing the forecast is for miserable weather the next morning when returning home



G2EWS said:


> The only thing I can think of that will stop me riding in with my new hobby of commuting to work will be very heavy winds, serious downpour or frost/ice


Nothing wrong with winds or frost/ice in my book, adds to the spice of life, but serious downpours really dampen my spirits.



ianrauk said:


> 254 Cycle commutes so far this year.
> 18 of those it rained.
> That's a very low number of wet rides in the scheme of things.


So really you are saying that if you took a car for these few cases it wouldn't really dent your reputation as a cycle commuter


----------



## gavroche (24 Sep 2012)

all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
1. you are still young enough not to care.
2. you don't have far to go.
3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)
4. you don't realise the risks of riding in heavy rain from 4 wheeled vehicles. ( maybe goes with 1)
5. you certainly are more devoted cyclists than me.
6. you have no other choice.
feel free to add to this list if you think like me.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care. 46
> 2. you don't have far to go. 21 miles
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish) Keen
> ...


----------



## redcard (24 Sep 2012)

ianrauk said:


> 254 Cycle commutes so far this year.
> 18 of those it rained.
> That's a very low number of wet rides in the scheme of things.



Yeah, even on so-called wet days, you can completely avoid any rain on one or both journeys.


----------



## redcard (24 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care.
> 2. you don't have far to go.
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)
> ...



Point 4, I'm not sure if you're advocating driving in the wet or cycling in the wet.


----------



## gavroche (24 Sep 2012)

I am just saying that driving in heavy rain is safer than riding. In heavy rain, I will feel safer doing 15 mph in my car than on my bike.


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2012)

I feel fine, well within my skills, training and experience.

I wouldn't take the pith, but ifcwe didn't take some risks in a considered manner then we'd never leave the house.


----------



## Lp4k3 (24 Sep 2012)

rain will never bother me, its the wind thats the killer.... i only cycle 4 miles to work and 4 miles home, so i have no reason not to take my bike... leave the car at home!!


----------



## Profpointy (24 Sep 2012)

[QUOTE 2057653, member: 45"]If I'd known how long it was going to take me to drive the 13 miles to work this morning I'd have cycled. Despite the rain and copious flooding, I'd have still got here more quickly.[/quote]

Quite - I too drove as i had extr faff and a dealdine, but took me an hour and a half, as I tried to be "clever" to avoid a queue, compared to 40 minutes one the bike, soaking or no soaking.


----------



## al78 (24 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care. 34
> 2. you don't have far to go. 9.5 miles
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish) neither, just have a goal to be car free.
> ...


----------



## Mad Doug Biker (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> I thought: " he can't be owing a car otherwise he would be using it".



You really are making a lot of assumptions here, aren't you? What was the other one that caught my eye? Oh yes

'They can't have far to go'

Some people just want to cycle in all weathers, be that distance long or short, and, get this, they might have a car sitting at home too! A car isn't the be all and end all of everything you know. Also maybe some of the people you see out in bad weather are in fact in serious training for something. You never know, and should never just assume.

Me? Once I get my winter bike(s) sorted out and once I've had my surgery, I'll be out there too! (Yes, I don't own a car, but I don't think that would change things, certainly not after seeing how utterly ridiculous my family are about their cars anyway).


----------



## slowmotion (25 Sep 2012)

My commute is a modest five miles in each direction in central London. I have a waterproof jacket and (shock, horror) waterproof overtrousers. If it isn't icy, I ride to work. It's faster and, even if it's raining, it's a *lot* more fun than sitting in a car or taking public transport. No contest at all.


----------



## Dan B (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care.
> 2. you don't have far to go.
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)
> ...


See? From "he can't be a car owner otherwise he'd be using it" in your OP, you've now thought of six other possible reasons. Well done!


----------



## gavroche (25 Sep 2012)

and the debate goes on......good thread in it?


----------



## fossyant (25 Sep 2012)

Commuting wise, it's a no brainer - bike ! My shortest commute is about 7 miles upto 20, and usually ride 10.5 each way. Yesterday I even had a site visit, so was out in the rain 3 times.

I have the right clothing for any weather, I have a specific commuting bike which makes the job 'easy', enough lights to turn night into day.

You do have to get into the mindset of riding everyday, as it soon becomes too easy to roll over and take the car - vicious circle.

TBH the last two days have been wet - the wind hasn't been an issue. Yesterday had two comments 'Wow you've ridden in in this ?' and another colleague who was cycling home said, 'thought it was you when I could see the sun chasing me' (refering to my lights).

ICE - I have the MTB which get's equipped with spiked tyres and I also have an off road route to ride which is a good alternative (if a little slow and hard work). The MTB has it's own set of lights so if it's suddenly Icy, I just switch bikes. Snow - well that's great fun !! 3 years ago I wouldn't have ridden in ice, but seeing the forecast in January 10, I made a last minute buy of spiked tyres - even had to drive to collect them as the delivery depot was snowed in. I had over 2 weeks riding on snow covered tracks to get to work - had I not had the tyres, I would have not ridden. I have had some nasty experiences with ice in the past.

Having the right kit really makes a difference. Weekends though, if it's hiossing down, I won't usually take the bike out - don't 'need' to and usually busy with family stuff.


----------



## martint235 (25 Sep 2012)

Don't really have too bad ice where I am although I've cycled on bus routes up until this year. I'll use the MTB if it's bad this winter.

The one thing does put me off is fog. If I can't see the headlights of a car across the green from my house, it's time to weigh up the risks. Most times I'll still cycle but working from home becomes an option.


----------



## 400bhp (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> In weather like today ( persistent heavy rain) you can't beat a car for going from a to b and back.
> I know some of you may disagree, I mean the hardcore of cyclists, but when I saw this guy with shorts on and water proof jacket, this morning, I thought: " he can't be owing a car otherwise he would be using it".
> I know we all love getting on our bikes and ride but surely, there must be limits to when to ride and to me , pouring down rain is no good for riding. Give me a car anytime in those conditions.
> And of course, there is also the safety aspect,apart from comfort of dry and warm conditions that the car gives you.
> *How many of you, also car owners, leave the bike at home and take 4 wheels when the weather is so bad?*


 
On the commute, I leave the car at home. It's not needed when it rains, same as it's not needed when the sun is out, it's Ede, it's the 1 April, there's a day with Y in it, I am feeling happy, sad, indifferent.


----------



## GrasB (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care.
> 2. you don't have far to go.
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)
> ...


1. 32
2. 15 miles direct, normally 25-40 miles
3. keen or foolish has nothing to do with it. I have appropriate clothing there for there's no comfort difference between poring rain at 5C & bright sunshine at 25C.
4. Care to enlighten us on the additional dangers posed by motorists in the rain compared to say bright sunlight? I'm coming up with aquaplaning.
5. It's true I'm probably more devoted than most cyclists
6. My wife drives to work, her destination is less than 1km away from my office.


----------



## smutchin (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)


 
...or depressed by the speed the ice caps are melting and think that some things are more important than me keeping dry.



> 5. you certainly are more devoted cyclists than me.


 
...or I hate driving more than you.

d.


----------



## GrasB (25 Sep 2012)

smutchin said:


> ...or depressed by the speed the ice caps are melting and think that some things are more important than me keeping dry.
> 
> d.


Something isn't right here, dry & cycling in the same sentence without not...


----------



## smutchin (25 Sep 2012)

As a society, we really need to get away from the idea that you need to be some kind of specially devoted person to be a year-round cyclist. Look at the pics on Copenhagenize.com. Over there, they just ride bikes because that's how they get about. They aren't "devoted cyclists". They don't wear special clothing. They don't ride special bikes. They just want to get to work. It's cheaper than car ownership. They don't have trouble parking. They don't have to worry about being stuck in traffic. And they have far worse weather in winter than we get in most of Britain.

Cycling is normal. You don't have to be a superhero to ride a bike. JFDI.

d.


----------



## 400bhp (25 Sep 2012)

smutchin said:


> As a society, we really need to get away from the idea that you need to be some kind of specially devoted person to be a year-round cyclist. Look at the pics on Copenhagenize.com. Over there, they just ride bikes because that's how they get about. They aren't "devoted cyclists". They don't wear special clothing. They don't ride special bikes. They just want to get to work. It's cheaper than car ownership. They don't have trouble parking. They don't have to worry about being stuck in traffic. And they have far worse weather in winter than we get in most of Britain.
> 
> Cycling is normal. You don't have to be a superhero to ride a bike. JFDI.
> 
> d.


 
So, so true.


----------



## CopperCyclist (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care.
> 2. you don't have far to go.
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish)
> ...



I don't think like you, I commute in all weathers, and even still increase my distance, raining or not. Hell, I'm as wet after six miles as I am after twelve. 2 and 5 in your list above MAY apply to me, but I think you should also add:

7. you are too stubborn to ever want to pay for the privilege of getting to work
8. you want to maintain your current fitness

and the big one....

9. you've actually tried it and realised its not as big of a problem as people make out


----------



## bobcat (25 Sep 2012)

Why would I take a car,cars are rubbish, fact! Yes I own a car and that too is rubbish, it gets used very rarely and then I just hurl abuse at it! Be prepared for all conditions and cycle.


----------



## Panter (25 Sep 2012)

I took the car today, and yesterday. Probably will tomorrow and Thursday too judging by the forecast...

Do you guys really stay dry and comfortable cycling long distances in heavy rain? I'd love to carry on cycling but haven't found any waterproofs that keep me dry without me totally overheating.
Riding in the rain in Summer is fine, I just get wet and dry off under my own heat on the hills but in the Winter I'd be seriously worried about hypothermia! 

Am I just lacking the right kit to keep on riding?


----------



## 400bhp (25 Sep 2012)

Changed for the fun of it...

all I can say is to those of you who still drive your car in very wet weather is:
1. you don't care.
2. you don't have far to go.
3. you are foolish
4. you don't realise the risks of driving in heavy rain. ( maybe goes with 1)
5. you certainly are more devoted drivers than me.
6. you _believe you_ have no other choice.
feel free to add to this list if you are narrow minded like me.


----------



## gavroche (25 Sep 2012)

_


GrasB said:



1. 32

Click to expand...

_


GrasB said:


> _4. Care to enlighten us on the additional dangers posed by motorists in the rain compared to say bright sunlight? I'm coming up with aquaplaning.._
> 
> 
> > Aquaplaning is only caused by excessive speed . If you drive carefully and at a speed according to the conditions, you will not have aquaplaning. I have two wheels on my bike, each about half an inch wide compared to 4 wheels each at least 8 inches wide, so which is the safest in heavy rain?
> > I am happy to stick to my recreational cycling as often as I can and in good weather. Driving to work is not practical for me. Each to his own


----------



## 400bhp (25 Sep 2012)

You can aquaplane at low speed.


----------



## ianrauk (25 Sep 2012)

You can't aquaplane on a bike...


----------



## I like Skol (25 Sep 2012)

ianrauk said:


> You can't aquaplane on a bike...


Of course you can! You just can't go fast enough to aquaplane on a bike.

And just in case anyone isn't sure and to prevent any misconceptions, skidding on a wet, slippery road is not aquaplaning. These two things are entirely different.


----------



## gavroche (25 Sep 2012)

400bhp said:


> You can aquaplane at low speed.


 only if your car is in a river!


----------



## I like Skol (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> only if your car is in a river!


I have been in a situation where I had to open the doors to allow in more water so I could sink enough to gain traction...... does this count?


----------



## gavroche (25 Sep 2012)

I like Skol said:


> I have been in a situation where I had to open the doors to allow in more water so I could sink enough to gain traction...... does this count?


 That's exactly what I said. The road was turned into a river and in that case, you just float!


----------



## 400bhp (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> only if your car is in a river!


 
not only, no.


----------



## Cress1968 (25 Sep 2012)

Well considering there are lads at work still stuck in traffic who should have started at 8 this morning I think the bike was the right decision lol 
Ps for the record I'm 45, own a car but cycle cos I like to. My feet were wet when I got to work but that's it


----------



## StuartG (25 Sep 2012)

smutchin said:


> They don't have trouble parking. .


Have you been there? It is living proof that the city centre provision of parking will always be inadequate no matter what the mode of transport. However, the rows and rows of bikes stacked so close they inevitably collapse domino style around the main railway station is impressive!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (25 Sep 2012)

Got ruddy soaked, to the skin, this morning. And more than a little bit cold riding back. Three miles to the nearest papershop you see.


----------



## smutchin (25 Sep 2012)

StuartG said:


> Have you been there? It is living proof that the city centre provision of parking will always be inadequate no matter what the mode of transport. However, the rows and rows of bikes stacked so close they inevitably collapse domino style around the main railway station is impressive!


 
Yeah, "no trouble parking" is perhaps not quite the full picture. But it's all relative.

d.


----------



## GrasB (25 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> 400bhp said:
> 
> 
> > You can aquaplane at low speed.
> ...


Not even close, the front of my Exige & the back of my 'cento will quite happily aquaplane with brand new road legal tyres at 15mph in about 2cm of water.


----------



## Drago (25 Sep 2012)

Took the Discovery through 2 feet of water yesterday, thanks to the floods. Damn thing failed to aquaplane at all!


----------



## GrasB (25 Sep 2012)

Oddly enough you're less likely to aquaplane in 2ft of water than 2cm of water! I'd also imagine you were going a lot slower than 15mph.


----------



## 4F (25 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> I've just added you as a friend on Endomondo Trampy


 
Grooming alert


----------



## CopperCyclist (25 Sep 2012)

Ian is right, you cannot aquaplane on a bike. Aqua-planing is a strict definition, it is not just skidding through lack of grip. Aqua planing is when a layer of water builds up beneath your tyre, causing it to sit on this water rather than the road, and generally, lose all control. This can only happen with tyres that have a flat contact surface with the road. Bike tyres which have a curved contact point with the road cannot build up this layer of water below them and cannot aqua plane.

They CAN and of course DO suffer from the lack of grip caused by wetter road surfaces - but then cars have to contend with this AND aquaplaning


----------



## Drago (25 Sep 2012)

But for all this doom and gloom, cyclists still live 5 years longer on average than non cyclists.


----------



## guitarpete247 (25 Sep 2012)

I cycled the 7 miles into and back from Coalville to sign on today. Dry going in, persisted it down coming home. Does this count as commuting even though they have refused to pay me anything for the last 3 months .


----------



## terry_gardener (25 Sep 2012)

i was out last year it very heavy rain and i was surprised how refreshing it was and the rain didn't bother me at all.

strong wind however is a different story.


----------



## Linford (25 Sep 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Ian is right, you cannot aquaplane on a bike. Aqua-planing is a strict definition, it is not just skidding through lack of grip. Aqua planing is when a layer of water builds up beneath your tyre, causing it to sit on this water rather than the road, and generally, lose all control. This can only happen with tyres that have a flat contact surface with the road. Bike tyres which have a curved contact point with the road cannot build up this layer of water below them and cannot aqua plane.
> 
> They CAN and of course DO suffer from the lack of grip caused by wetter road surfaces - but then cars have to contend with this AND aquaplaning


 
I have had aquaplaning on a motorbike at about 60-70 in standing water. It isn't any fun, and the tyres are curved - it is all about speed.
Think of the hull of a boat ploughing through water, the faster it goes, the higher it lifts out, get it fast enough, and it will skim the top like a pebble on a pond. Cycles have to be going some to achieve this, but it is not impossible by any means


----------



## Panter (26 Sep 2012)

*Irrelevant post warning*

I'm sure I read somewhere that you could aquaplane a 23mm bicycle tyre, but the speed would have to be in excess of 186mph


----------



## StuartG (26 Sep 2012)

Panter said:


> I'm sure I read somewhere that you could aquaplane a 23mm bicycle tyre, but the speed would have to be in excess of 186mph


Ok. See you at the top of Reigate Hill this morning 
I think it was our friend Sheldon who worked out aquaplaning speeds. Theoretically that is ...


----------



## Linford (26 Sep 2012)

Panter said:


> *Irrelevant post warning*
> 
> I'm sure I read somewhere that you could aquaplane a 23mm bicycle tyre, but the speed would have to be in excess of 186mph


 
It isn't just the speed, but also the weight (mass) over it pushing against the surface tension of the water.

Going back to the boat in the water thing, it is possible to lose contact with the road surface due to this resistance from the surface tension without actually skimming across the surface of the water above it, and I would imagine that would happen at speeds much lower than the theoretical - depending on the depth of water, the mass of the bike and rider etc etc.


----------



## GrasB (26 Sep 2012)

Linford said:


> It isn't just the speed, but also the weight (mass) over it pushing against the surface tension of the water.


Both the Exige & 'cento are light cars with relatively wide tyres, with not much mass on the front & rear, receptively, of these cars. Hence why those wheels aquaplane.



CopperCyclist said:


> Ian is right, you cannot aquaplane on a bike. Aqua-planing is a strict definition, it is not just skidding through lack of grip. Aqua planing is when a layer of water builds up beneath your tyre, causing it to sit on this water rather than the road, and generally, lose all control.


Aquaplaning requires is that a tyre can't clear the water fast enough so that it doesn't ride up over its own wake. Water being a liquid doesn't care much for a surface being curved or flat it just cares about contact area.

I know when aquaplaning is happening because tyre noise reduces dramatically as the car feels light & remote.


----------



## Drago (26 Sep 2012)

Or to quote my Missus...

"Man up you pussy. It's only a bit of water"


----------



## Panter (26 Sep 2012)

Ooooh, I got 3 alerts popped up for my little contribution, 3!!!

Must post more irrelevance


----------



## green1 (26 Sep 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Ian is right, you cannot aquaplane on a bike. Aqua-planing is a strict definition, it is not just skidding through lack of grip. Aqua planing is when a layer of water builds up beneath your tyre, causing it to sit on this water rather than the road, and generally, lose all control. This can only happen with tyres that have a flat contact surface with the road. Bike tyres which have a curved contact point with the road cannot build up this layer of water below them and cannot aqua plane.


Technically you could aqua plane on a bike but you would have to be travelling at over 120 mph to make it possible.


----------



## Drago (26 Sep 2012)

Apparently the underside of the Discovery os shaped like the hull of a boat to ease its passage through water. Kewl.


----------



## green1 (26 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> Apparently the underside of the Discovery os shaped like the hull of a boat to ease its passage through water. Keel.


 FTFY


----------



## Rob3rt (26 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care. *25*
> 2. you don't have far to go. *40 mile*
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish) - *I am quite keen yes!*
> ...


 
I do not commute, since I live so close to my office. Yet I chose to go out and ride in this weather for 40 mile yesterday evening, I will be out this evening, and probably some other evenings this week. Yesterday I got so wet my rims were full of water and my shoes are still dripping wet! But I still enjoyed it, it's just water!


----------



## jonny jeez (26 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> How many of you, also car owners, leave the bike at home and take 4 wheels when the weather is so bad?


 
I have the choice of a car, a bike, a motorcycle, a scooter and even a huge white van.

I mostly switch between the motorbike and bike. I never "choose" the car but do occasionally (like twice a year) need to use it to drive to the office.

That said, I wouldn't choose to ride recreationally if the weather was bad, I would if the ride was planned and committed...but not by choice "in the moment".

Even on the commute if the rain is honking down and its cold, I may (like 50% of the time) swap for the motorbike as it gets me there (and out the rain) a little quicker and i can wear heavy waterproof gear that also keeps me warm. In the summer i don't give a jot about the rain, its refreshing and actually quite good fun to ride in once you succumb to the fact that you WILL get wet.


----------



## jonny jeez (26 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> I am just saying that driving in heavy rain is safer than riding. In heavy rain, I will feel safer doing 15 mph in my car than on my bike.


 
I think you have the gauge of safety about face.

Cycling in the rain has more dangers than driving in a car. You have two less wheels for traction and no way to eficiently clear rain to see clearly, your brakes are more easily effected and your lights have less effect, but the thing is, this carries no more "risk" and is no less safe ...as long as you know how to deal with this. 

Or rather, as long as you know how to ride.

I would never ride my motorcycle the same in the wet as the dry...its common sense, but that doesn't make it safer in the dry.

On the contrary, I would argue that I'm safer in the wet as I take my time and make a huge effort to be seen and to see.


----------



## Drago (26 Sep 2012)

2 less wheels for traction, but vastly less mass to accelerate or brake.

No wibdscreen or wipers, but when it's really bad I goggle up and have the advantage of better ambient hearing that in a car.

My Hope 4 pots aren't affected at all in the wet.

I've never yet been to an RTA (I refuse to call then RTCs) when a cyclist has been trapped, his life force ebbing away while Trumpton have to spend time chopping the bicycle to bits to free them.

For every advantage one mode brings, the other brings a disadvantage. Take it steady, ride with skill and awareness and you'll be fine. Take the pish and you'll upset the rain Gods and come a cropper no matter what sort of wheels you got under you. Anyone sets out in a car tomorrow's rain and feeling smug because its so much "safer" is a fool. It's all as safe or otherwise as you choose to make it.


----------



## gavroche (26 Sep 2012)

well, I accept and respect all your opinions
but personally, in heavy rain , I much prefer my car cos I also like my comfort and feel safer.


----------



## Kestevan (26 Sep 2012)

Skin is waterproof. MTFU and leave the car at home.

Although I admit I hate having to put wet kit on to ride home in the evening.


----------



## Crankarm (27 Sep 2012)

I have a 30 minute drive then a 17.5 mile ride to work then the same in reverse. Some evenings I do other things in Cambridge which means I am riding 40-45 miles 3 times a week and the rest 35 miles each day. I think I have the right balance between driving and cycling. I would feel sad if I couldn't do either. We are very fortunate in the UK to have something called freedom of choice. At the end of the day or late at night it's nice to arrive back at the car and put the bike in the back and drive the rest of the way home in comfort and dryness. Some times I think if circumstances were different on occasion I would like to take my 911 Carrera all the way to work .......................


----------



## Moodyman (27 Sep 2012)

Crankarm said:


> I would like to take my 911 Carrera all the way to work .......................


 
Show off!


----------



## DRHysted (27 Sep 2012)

Well Yesterday it was a no brainer, I drove the car home. Not due to weather mind, but because I had just completed a 17 hour shift and had to return 7 hours latter for this shift, which should be 12 hours, but I expect that my forward planning company have failed to get a replacement for the employee who got admitted to hospital Tuesday. So it could be 12, but my money is more on 14 to 18, with me due back in at 18:00 Thursday.

So the car was used to gain maximum sleep time.

p.s. the car was at work because my first shift on Saturday was my first back from holiday, so I had no stores (food, drink, clothing etc) at work. So drive in with the car loaded with a weeks worth of goodies, and the bike in the boot, then ride (with my car left in the car park) until my last shift when I drive home with the bike in the boot.


----------



## ufkacbln (27 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> In weather like today ( persistent heavy rain) you can't beat a car for going from a to b and back.
> I know some of you may disagree, I mean the hardcore of cyclists, but when I saw this guy with shorts on and water proof jacket, this morning, I thought: " he can't be owing a car otherwise he would be using it".
> I know we all love getting on our bikes and ride but surely, there must be limits to when to ride and to me , pouring down rain is no good for riding. Give me a car anytime in those conditions.
> And of course, there is also the safety aspect,apart from comfort of dry and warm conditions that the car gives you.
> How many of you, also car owners, leave the bike at home and take 4 wheels when the weather is so bad?


 
For me, I save 35 minute seach way over a colleague who drives in!

On a wet day the traffic increases and she takes up to an hour more than me.

Simples!


----------



## subaqua (27 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> all I can say is to those of you who still ride your bike in very wet weather is:
> 1. you are still young enough not to care. 40
> 2. you don't have far to go. 10miles each way
> 3. you are really really keen ( or foolish) its a no brainer- sweaty armpits in your face or fresh air
> ...


 
I think my responses in red sum things up nicely for me


----------



## subaqua (27 Sep 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> For me, I save 35 minute seach way over a colleague who drives in!
> 
> On a wet day the traffic increases and she takes up to an hour more than me.
> 
> Simples!


 
I regularly beat a colleague to Stratford from London Bridge. he uses pubic (sic) transport i use 2 wheels and the not so superhighway/canaltowpath.

its the ice on the path i am concerned about this year after seeing how much standing water there is. annoyingly the journey is 50/50 between towpath and tarmac. might have to look at another way.


----------



## Drago (27 Sep 2012)

Raining today. I awoke in plenty of time so I could select the appropriate kit and not have to rush.

It proved to be a comfortable and perfectly safe journey. Indeed, there's something to be said for being prepared and appropriately kitted, and my commute along unlit country roads in the rain was very pleasant.


----------



## gavroche (28 Sep 2012)

Right, went for a ride in cloudy conditions but no rain until......I was a few miles away from home! I can categorically assert that I do not like riding in the rain and will not do so again. ( if I can help it ).
Good luck to those of you who seem to relish it but it is not for me. Rant over.


----------



## Drago (28 Sep 2012)

That's a rant?


----------



## subaqua (28 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> That's a rant?


 how to put this without sounding offensive.

I don't think he is Welsh . Us Welsh can proper rant - Rhod Gilbert being a prime example


----------



## green1 (28 Sep 2012)

Rhod Gilbert is a bloody amauter. You should hear my mother, even her welsh accent which has dissappeared after living in various parts of the world in the last 35 years reappears.


----------



## gavroche (28 Sep 2012)

If I rant in French, you won't understand me so English is more subtle for me.


----------



## subaqua (28 Sep 2012)

gavroche said:


> If I rant in French, you won't understand me so English is more subtle for me.


 
aahhh the gallic shrug- beats a rant any day


----------



## ufkacbln (28 Sep 2012)

I gained some infamy a couple of years ago......

When we had the snow, Portsmouth stopped

At 08:00 the only one of the managers in was me..... lots of people weren't making it in due to the weather.

I had cycled in (recumbent trike with snow tyres) when 4x4s were failing!

The word went round, and to this day I have the reputation of being weatherproof!


----------



## Drago (28 Sep 2012)

Mate of mine got a mention on the tv local news. He's 73 and gets up at 5am every day to do a paper round to the local villages on his olde Ammaco MTB. It snowed, the trains stopped, no one could drive the 3 miles to work, but this cycling pensioner never failed to get a paper to its destination. He's a bit of a local legend because of it.


----------



## subaqua (28 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> Mate of mine got a mention on the tv local news. He's 73 and gets up at 5am every day to do a paper round to the local villages on his olde Ammaco MTB. It snowed, the trains stopped, no one could drive the 3 miles to work, but this cycling pensioner never failed to get a paper to its destination. He's a bit of a local legend because of it.


 
Feb 2009 when the heavy snow hit London on a sunday night a colleague of mine was on breakfast news on Waterloo bridge being interviewed about getting into work on the monday . HE WAS ON HIS BIKE. I walked the 6 miles took me 3 hours. then the tubes started again so i went home and made snow angels with the kids.
17th Dec 2010 when the snow hit badly again, I rode home in it - i fell off at the last corner as it looked a bit iffy alomng my road and thought i better get off. i fell off 2 seconds after deciding to get off.


----------



## ufkacbln (29 Sep 2012)

I always find flood stories amusing form this point of view..

Reporter stating how everyone is inconvenienced, roads are impassible, boats rescuing residents.

Then cue cyclist. There is _*always*_ a cyclist cycling through the flood as if totally unaffected.


----------



## subaqua (29 Sep 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> I always find flood stories amusing form this point of view..
> 
> Reporter stating how everyone is inconvenienced, roads are impassible, boats rescuing residents.
> 
> Then cue cyclist. There is _*always*_ a cyclist cycling through the flood as if totally unaffected.


 
washing loads of grit into that unsealed BB


----------



## Norm (29 Sep 2012)

subaqua said:


> washing loads of grit into that unsealed BB


Someone called 'subaqua' is not allowed to make that comment.


----------



## Linford (30 Sep 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> I gained some infamy a couple of years ago......
> 
> When we had the snow, Portsmouth stopped
> 
> ...


There are 4x4s and there are soft roaders the only place to defeat mine was a 1:3 stretch of a hill road used in the Hell Of the North Cotswolds ride when we had heavy snow on the ground last winter. It was still the only vehicle to get up to that point. Most cycles would struggle up there on a dry day with no snow on the ground


----------



## subaqua (30 Sep 2012)

Linford said:


> There are 4x4s and there are soft roaders the only place to defeat mine was a 1:3 stretch of a hill road used in the Hell Of the North Cotswolds ride when we had heavy snow on the ground last winter. It was still the only vehicle to get up to that point. Most cycles would struggle up there on a dry day with no snow on the ground


 
its still a 4x4 though, and i doubt the problem for cyclists is lack of traction to all wheels


----------



## Drago (30 Sep 2012)

Got a spare set of wheels for the Disco, shod with spangly new Hankook winter boots.

No point having a 4 x 4 if you run it all winter with conventiional boots. It'll have all the traction of a one legged cat burying a jobbie on a frozen pond.


----------



## Crosstrailer (30 Sep 2012)

subaqua said:


> its still a 4x4 though, and i doubt the problem for cyclists is lack of traction to all wheels


 
Verging on Godwin's Law..........


----------



## subaqua (30 Sep 2012)

Crosstrailer said:


> Verging on Godwin's Law..........


 
the law of cycle chat says to take the proverbial out of linf for his devotion to vehicles that really can't be justified. and as a formner 4x4 owner i am allowed to. or does that make me similar to a reformed smoker


----------



## subaqua (30 Sep 2012)

Drago said:


> Got a spare set of wheels for the Disco, shod with spangly new Hankook winter boots.
> 
> No point having a 4 x 4 if you run it all winter with conventiional boots. It'll have all the traction of a one legged cat burying a jobbie on a frozen pond.


 
dependss on how good your conventional boots were, and how good you are at putting the power through them. Goodyear M&S were rather good all year round and never let me down in very sticky mud at the bottom of a quarry when i went to a cable repair.


----------



## smutchin (2 Oct 2012)

gavroche said:


> If I rant in French, you won't understand me


 
Que tu crois! 

d.


----------



## smutchin (2 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> Feb 2009 when the heavy snow hit London on a sunday night a colleague of mine was on breakfast news on Waterloo bridge being interviewed about getting into work on the monday . HE WAS ON HIS BIKE. I walked the 6 miles took me 3 hours. then the tubes started again so i went home and made snow angels with the kids.


 
During the worst of the 2009 snow down in east Kent, the line between Faversham and Whitstable (where I live) was often closed. But I was able to get home from Faversham easily thanks the Marathon Winter tyres on my bike.

Of course, the one occasion when I didn't have my bike with me was when the train only made it as far as Gillingham and instead of the usual 8pm, I didn't get home until 4am.

d.


----------



## al78 (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> There are 4x4s and there are soft roaders the only place to defeat mine was a 1:3 stretch of a hill road used in the Hell Of the North Cotswolds ride when we had heavy snow on the ground last winter. It was still the only vehicle to get up to that point. Most cycles would struggle up there on a dry day with no snow on the ground


 
The great advantage of a bike in those conditions is that if you genuinely can't cycle up the hill there is always the get off and push option. You can't do that with a car. There are virtually no weather conditions in the UK that will stop a pedestrian making progress.


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

al78 said:


> The great advantage of a bike in those conditions is that if you genuinely can't cycle up the hill there is always the get off and push option. You can't do that with a car. There are virtually no weather conditions in the UK that will stop a pedestrian making progress.


 

You can also do that in a car, but have the added bonus that you aren't already knackered from the effort of climbing to that point, and aren then dragging your transport up the rest of the hill. I only went up there to see if I could actually do it.
Drivers are pedestrians when they get out of the car as well


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> You can also do that in a car, but have the added bonus that you aren't already knackered from the effort of climbing to that point, and aren then dragging your transport up the rest of the hill. I only went up there to see if I could actually do it.
> Drivers are pedestrians when they get out of the car as well


 
How do you push your car up a hill?


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> How do you push your car up a hill?


 
I can't push mine on the flat, let alone up a hill. The engine does a better job of it TBH


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I can't push mine on the flat, let alone up a hill. The engine does a better job of it TBH


 
you're rambling.

read al78's post again as you weren't comparing like with like.


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> you're rambling.
> 
> read al78's post again as you weren't comparing like with like.


 
And he wasn't either. He was comparing pedestrians riding cycles, with pedestrians driving cars as I read it. I say if the weather is that bad, you won't cycle it, and so no advantage to dragging it up the hill with you...the same as a 4x4 really. Either way vehicular movement was not ont he cards, but on foot it was.


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

he was comparing making a journey on a bike or a car in bad weather, where there happens to be a hill en-route that a car or a bike can't go up.

You would have to ditch the car, whereas you wouldn't have to ditch the bike.

Is that clear enough?


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> he was comparing making a journey on a bike or a car in bad weather, where there happens to be a hill en-route that a car or a bike can't go up.
> 
> You would have to ditch the car, whereas you wouldn't have to ditch the bike.
> 
> Is that clear enough?


 
Ah, right, I was not on a journey, I was playing after work one evening. Had I really needed to get up there, I would have gone back around to the top by another of the routes . There was no prints whatsoever in the snow up to the point I stopped at, and you certainly would think hard about riding down an ice covered 1:3 road with 18" of snow on top of it. This is the only place/time the car has ever been defeated by the conditions. It is also nice and warm inside and can drag 7 passengers through there. It coped with the next road over no problem which is a 1:4 and again a challenge for anyone cycling to ride - even in the dry


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Feck me you're hard work.


----------



## wmtlynx (3 Oct 2012)

Be interesting to see how I get on this winter using the bike. Just have to remind myself of a couple of years ago, when my Asda mountain bike got me 5.5 miles to work in heavy snow, when car and public transport were unavailable.


----------



## theclaud (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> pedestrians riding cycles [...] pedestrians driving cars


 
Known to people who haven't given up altogether on sense as "cyclists" and "drivers" respectively.


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> Known to people who haven't given up altogether on sense as "cyclists" and "drivers" respectively.


 

I have questioned your many times Claudine.

The biggest problem is requirement, and the laws demanding things which are fir for purpose (goddamnit)


----------



## theclaud (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I have questioned your many times Claudine.
> 
> The biggest problem is requirement, and the laws demanding things which are fir for purpose (goddamnit)



Is it just me, or is this gibberish?


----------



## DRHysted (3 Oct 2012)

At the moment there is no substitute for the car. With the hours I'm doing and the fact that my next day off may be the 16th to maximise sleep it can only be the car. 
I am having withdrawal symptoms and the last time I rode was Monday, which I'm not sure to take as a good or bad sign. 


Opps sorry just got the thread on topic.


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> Is it just me, or is this gibberish?


 

Put in simple terms, the 4x4 whilst barely used, is by far the one which circumstances dictate must be kept roadworthy at all costs.

No 4x4 = very expensive Hay, and bedding, as well as £80+ call out fee's before treatment starts from the vets (x2 in the last 4 weeks)

I don't need a cycle, but I want one. I don't really want the 4x4, but I need it


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Put in simple terms, the 4x4 whilst barely used, is by far the one which circumstances dictate must be kept roadworthy at all costs.
> 
> No 4x4 = very expensive Hay, and bedding, as well as £80+ call out fee's before treatment starts from the vets (x2 in the last 4 weeks)
> 
> I don't need a cycle, but I want one. I don't really want the 4x4, *but I need it*


 
No you don't.


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Put in simple terms, the 4x4 whilst barely used, is by far the one which circumstances dictate must be kept roadworthy at all costs.
> 
> No 4x4 = very expensive Hay, and bedding, as well as £80+ call out fee's before treatment starts from the vets (x2 in the last 4 weeks)
> 
> I don't need a cycle, but I want one. I don't really want the 4x4, *but I need it*


 
No you don't.


----------



## Linford (3 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> No you don't.


 

Feck me, you're hard work as well.

No you are right, in an ideal world with pots of money, and no need to balance things, I'd just pay way over the odds for someone else to run the vehicle to do what mine does, and take a hit on any other call out fee's they want to impose.

You don't need a cycle either, it just fits in with your lifestyle. Why not just change your lifestyle and then it is sorted ?

Caveat - We are now running the yard as a business with paying customers. Transport costs make buying of stuff unviable if delivery charges are imposed all the time.


----------



## 400bhp (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Feck me, you're hard work as well.
> 
> *No you are right, in an ideal world with pots of money, and no need to balance things, I'd just pay way over the odds for someone else to run the vehicle to do what mine does, and take a hit on any other call out fee's they want to impose.*
> 
> ...


 
or you would negate the need for the hay & bedding or whatever it's used for.

[ignoring the caveat].

You're absolutely right - i don't need a cycle. But I never said I did, did I.


----------



## vorsprung (3 Oct 2012)

I am mostly working from home at the moment

When I was cycle commuting to Taunton it was never the weather that had me taking the car. Sometimes I would have to pick up my daughter from somewhere straight after work. Sometimes I'd be resting before a big event at the weekend.

But the weather? Never. I got into work during all the snow, the car users were stuck

When I did take the car in I'd usually be thinking "This is awful, I want to be on my bike"


----------



## Oldspice (3 Oct 2012)

Naked pigyback rides in the snow is far better than any car ride (i have pics)


----------



## theclaud (3 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Put in simple terms, the 4x4 whilst barely used, is by far the one which circumstances dictate must be kept roadworthy at all costs.
> 
> No 4x4 = very expensive Hay, and bedding, as well as £80+ call out fee's before treatment starts from the vets (x2 in the last 4 weeks)
> 
> I don't need a cycle, but I want one. I don't really want the 4x4, but I need it


 
This doesn't explain the previous post. Have you thought about eating the horses?


----------



## srw (3 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> Is it just me, or is this gibberish?


Is it linf, by any chance? If so, yes.


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Feck me, you're hard work as well.
> 
> No you are right, in an ideal world with pots of money, and no need to balance things, I'd just pay way over the odds for someone else to run the vehicle to do what mine does, and take a hit on any other call out fee's they want to impose.
> 
> ...









Nobody NEEDS a 4x4. theres thousands of smaller vehicles that will pull a trailer full of hay that don't use as much fuel or take up as much space on the roads , and probably don't have some of the blindspots your WP has.

yes i used to own a WP, but i got rid of it as it was drinking too much fuel and, rightly ,was charged a horrendous VED. after seeing it sat outside the house day after day not moving ( apologies to Cloeridge) - as idle as a painted ship upon a painted ocean- it went. that was over a month ago , and i haven't missed it once.


----------



## G2EWS (4 Oct 2012)

Is this thread about needing a car or a 4 x 4 or a bike or something else?

If it is about 'having' to own and use a 4 x 4 then I'm afraid I am one of those people. I 'have' to go off road in some inhospitable locations across the country to carry out radio surveys. Without it, I would be unable to carry on my business.

Regards

Chris


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> Nobody NEEDS a 4x4. theres thousands of smaller vehicles that will pull a trailer full of hay that don't use as much fuel or take up as much space on the roads , and probably don't have some of the blindspots your WP has.
> 
> yes i used to own a WP, but i got rid of it as it was drinking too much fuel and, rightly ,was charged a horrendous VED. after seeing it sat outside the house day after day not moving ( apologies to Cloeridge) - as idle as a painted ship upon a painted ocean- it went. that was over a month ago , and i haven't missed it once.


 
You are getting your kniickers in a twist with this one.

Whilst I use it for moving stull around, it is ultimately animal transport, and used for boxing them to events, or occasionally to decent hacking which is too far off the other side of the urban sprawl to entertain wanting to ride through it.
My 4x4 was only bought after I towed my 2 horse trailer with a normal medium sized car which was rated at 1400kg kerb weight. It was downright scary as the trailer with even just one horse pushed the car around like the tail wagging the dog.

The trailer with a single animal weighs 1500kg and with 2 animals it is up to 2000kg. Not only would it be willfully stupid to make a habit of this with a smaller vehicle, it is also illegal exceeding the MAM ofthe combination, and that not only puts myself and my cargo in danger, but also exposes others on the road to unneccessary risk. My consideration of other people costs me a lot of money which given the choice I'd rather spend on a foreign holiday, or other toys (like a nice carbon roadie  )

Have you ever heard the term 'redundant capacity' ?

I can entirely understand you living in London and feeling a bit of guilt as they are only used up there for vanity purposes, and in the 'I'm bigger than you so I take priority' contests which you Londoners all seem to take part in, but out my way, there are a lot of these vehicles which are used for the purposes they are intended, and are proper workhorses in the true sense of the word.

How much money did your 4x4 vanity vehicle cost you in purchase cost and depreciation anyway ?


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

G2EWS said:


> Is this thread about needing a car or a 4 x 4 or a bike or something else?
> 
> If it is about 'having' to own and use a 4 x 4 then I'm afraid I am one of those people. I 'have' to go off road in some inhospitable locations across the country to carry out radio surveys. Without it, I would be unable to carry on my business.
> 
> ...


 
Common sense has no place in this argument


----------



## 400bhp (4 Oct 2012)

G2EWS said:


> Is this thread about needing a car or a 4 x 4 or a bike or something else?
> 
> If it is about 'having' to own and use a 4 x 4 then I'm afraid I am one of those people. I 'have' to go off road in some inhospitable locations across the country to carry out radio surveys. Without it, I would be unable to carry on my business.
> 
> ...


 
I think we'll give you that one Chris.


----------



## 400bhp (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Common sense has no place in this argument


 
You say argument, I say discussion.

Perhaps that says something about your mindset when posting?


----------



## green1 (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> Nobody NEEDS a 4x4. theres thousands of smaller vehicles that will pull a trailer full of hay that don't use as much fuel or take up as much space on the roads , and probably don't have some of the blindspots your WP has.
> 
> yes i used to own a WP, but i got rid of it as it was drinking too much fuel and, rightly ,was charged a horrendous VED. after seeing it sat outside the house day after day not moving ( apologies to Cloeridge) - as idle as a painted ship upon a painted ocean- it went. that was over a month ago , and i haven't missed it once.


What smaller vehicle is legally able to tow a 1 ton trailer with a 1.5~2 ton load in the trailer?


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> What smaller vehicle is legally able to tow a 1 ton trailer with a 1.5~2 ton load in the trailer?


 
The law is determined by the MAM, but the safe rule of thumb guide offered by the caravan club, and most other towing guides is to not exceed 85% of the cars kerb weight with the laden trailer.

I consider that what is legal isn't always a safe margin.

Vehicle perforrmance or engine size has nothing to do with towing capacity


----------



## green1 (4 Oct 2012)

Absolutely, that's hence why we have a range rover. Before that we had a soft roader (x-trail) and it wasn't up to the job.
Vehicle performance does matter in that you need something with plenty of torque if you want to be safe.


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> Absolutely, that's hence why we have a range rover. Before that we had a soft roader (x-trail) and it wasn't up to the job.
> Vehicle performance does matter in that you need something with plenty of torque if you want to be safe.


 
Whilst you have made a good choice in going for a range rover as a towing car, the performance in terms of torque or BHP isn't what makes it safer. It is the physical mass of it which is the determining factor. Other things which make a big difference is ensuring that the tow ball height is correct on the back of the car which should be between 15" & 18" from the ground to the top of the ball, as when this is wrong, the trailer or caravan centre of gravity is displaced, and that can either lift the back end ofthe car up or push it down which has a big effect on the amount of weight over the front wheels of the car. THis is why you see them jack knifing on the motorway after a big weave. IMO if the car has a tow bar, the ball height should be measured for compliance as part of its MOT


----------



## DRHysted (4 Oct 2012)

One thing I learnt when I owned (and used properly) an offroad vehicle, was that people that hated them never let things like facts cloud their opinions.

I sold it when it was nolonger needed, and I miss it dreadfully, as It saved my life at least twice.

When I changed down to a normal estate car, a person at work told me I didn't need an estate as I was the only person he ever saw in the car. I asked him how he knew what I needed as he didn't live my life.
The reason for adding this little paragraph is that whenever I see a thread where someone who doesn't know the other person, has the God like knowledge to tell them what they actually need to live, when they don't know squat about the other person, makes my pee boil. Unless you are living their life you don't know what they need.


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> One thing I learnt when I owned (and used properly) an offroad vehicle, was that people that hated them never let things like facts cloud their opinions.
> 
> I sold it when it was nolonger needed, and I miss it dreadfully, as It saved my life at least twice.
> 
> ...


 

Wise words indeed, but the haters have already got their fingers in their ears.....


----------



## 400bhp (4 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> One thing I learnt when I owned (and used properly) an offroad vehicle, was that people that hated them never let things like facts cloud their opinions.
> 
> I sold it when it was nolonger needed, and I miss it dreadfully, as It saved my life at least twice.
> 
> ...


 
Define need.


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> You say argument, I say discussion.
> 
> Perhaps that says something about your mindset when posting?


 
Well I've had similar discussions with subaqua and others on here over the years, and they always start as discussions, but always end up with both sides having to argue a case for their POV because nobody wants to give any ground or listen to the other side.

Do I need a motorbike with 670bhp per tonne at the back wheel in the same way which you have a car with 400bhp ? - no, but I want it and that is my justification.

The requirement for the 4x4 is a utility one for me and is an extension of the horse ownership to help improve the VFM of them in so many ways, and to help reduce my reliance on others to fetch and cary the things which we use.
I get my shavings for bedding free from my mate who runs a joinery company in Stroud. Using the 4x4 and trailer, I can bring back the best part of a tonne of them in five or six 1 tonne rubble sacks and that costs me about £20 in fuel. A compressed bale of these shavings from my local pet supplier would cost about £10 and amount to roughly a quarter of one of these full rubble sacks so economicaly a sensible move for me to use my own transport for collection.

My mate would also have to pay landfil charges if I didn't have them off him so the arrangement is good for him, and good for me....


----------



## 400bhp (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Well I've had similar discussions with subaqua and others on here over the years, and they always start as discussions, but always end up with both sides having to argue a case for their POV because nobody wants to give any ground or listen to the other side.
> 
> Do I need a motorbike with 670bhp per tonne at the back wheel in the same way which you have a car with 400bhp ? - no, but I want it and that is my justification.
> 
> ...


 
I completely understand.

I think as individuals we should sometimes be able to look back on ourselves when we think we need something, it's actually a want.

I need a roof over my head, warmth, food and clothing. They are a given-an absolute. Perhaps one could argue that I need other things too, but there's a difficult line to be drawn between what is needed and what is wanted.

I think I have become a better person because, perhaps in the last year or 2, I remind myself this question and think how lucky I am to have the choice to have many many wants that people don't have.


----------



## mangaman (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I have questioned your many times Claudine.
> 
> The biggest problem is requirement, and the laws demanding things which are fir for purpose (goddamnit)


 



theclaud said:


> Is it just me, or is this gibberish?


 

It seems pretty clear to me.
He's saying he's questioned you many times. There are an unspecified number of problems, the biggest of which is "requirement" and laws demanding something to do with evergreen trees. Goddamnit.

Actually you're right - it's gibberish.


----------



## theclaud (4 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> One thing I learnt when I owned (and used properly) an offroad vehicle, was that people that hated them never let things like facts cloud their opinions.
> 
> I sold it when it was nolonger needed, and I miss it dreadfully, as It saved my life at least twice.
> 
> ...



 Perhaps you should calm down a bit. Linford has spent years deluging us with a tedious volume of detail about his horsey-Tonka-Toy shenanigans, in an _entirely unsolicited_ manner. Perhaps he is seeking absolution - who knows? Whatever his motives, if someone is going to start a conversation which might be entitled "A lengthy justification for everything I have ever done", then they might expect a little comeback...


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> I completely understand.
> 
> I think as individuals we should sometimes be able to look back on ourselves when we think we need something, it's actually a want.
> 
> ...


 
Well certainly horse ownership is a want, and was the case for a faur few years. However, since taking over a livery yard, and offering stabling and grazing to others, the vehicle has become a tool of the trade, than just facilitating cheaper transport for our own requirements.


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

mangaman said:


> It seems pretty clear to me.
> He's saying he's questioned you many times. There are an unspecified number of problems, the biggest of which is "requirement" and laws demanding something to do with evergreen trees. Goddamnit.
> 
> Actually you're right - it's gibberish.


 
Another Avatar pic from the album Mangaman ?


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> Perhaps you should calm down a bit. Linford has spent years deluging us with a tedious volume of detail about his horsey-Tonka-Toy shenanigans, in an _entirely unsolicited_ manner. Perhaps he is seeking absolution - who knows? Whatever his motives, if someone is going to start a conversation which might be entitled "A lengthy justification for everything I have ever done", then they might expect a little comeback...


 
We can't really justify anything we do Claudine. You could live in the centre of Swansea and walk to work. However, you chose to commute from Gowerton and need more than shankses pony for this as it is a nicer place to live.
I'd have no reason for justification if certain busybodies learned to mind their own business.

They had the ducking stool for that sort of thing years ago. Perhaps they ought to bring it back


----------



## theclaud (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> We can't really justify anything we do Claudine. You could live in the centre of Swansea and walk to work. However, you chose to commute from Gowerton and need more than shankses pony for this as it is a nicer place to live.
> I'd have no reason for justification *if certain busybodies learned to mind their own business.*
> 
> They had the ducking stool for that sort of thing years ago. Perhaps they ought to bring it back



Unsolicited, like I said. You choose to tell us all this stuff. We don't drag it out of you.

I don't live in Gowerton. That was where we started the race commuter challenge from - we thought it was a bit more representative of ordinary barriers to cycle-commuting than Mumbles, which is served by an unusually useful foreshore cycle path most of the way into the city. But I'm a little bit puzzled as to why it impacts significantly on others if I live in Mumbles and cycle to work rather than living in The Marina (which is at least as posh as Mumbles) and walking? Perhaps you could enlighten me? Incidentally, if I did live in the Marina I'd just choose to cycle a 10-mile loop into work anyway.


----------



## mangaman (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Another Avatar pic from the album Mangaman ?


 
Yes

Is that a problem for you?


----------



## mangaman (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> They had the ducking stool for that sort of thing years ago. Perhaps they ought to bring it back


 


theclaud said:


> Unsolicited, like I said. You choose to tell us all this stuff. We don't drag it out of you.
> 
> I don't live in Gowerton. That was where we started the race commuter challenge from - we thought it was a bit more representative of ordinary barriers to cycle-commuting than Mumbles, which is served by an unusually useful foreshore cycle path most of the way into the city. But I'm a little bit puzzled as to why it impacts significantly on others if I live in Mumbles and cycle to work rather than living in The Marina (which is at least as posh as Mumbles) and walking? Perhaps you could enlighten me? Incidentally, if I did live in the Marina I'd just choose to cycle a 10-mile loop into work anyway.


 
You can't weasel out of it - Linf has you as a witch. It's because you are only a girl but seem to have opinions.

It's the ducking stool for you I'm afraid.


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

mangaman said:


> Yes
> 
> Is that a problem for you?


 

Absolutely not 

What is the story behind it ?


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

mangaman said:


> You can't weasel out of it - Linf has you as a witch. It's because you are only a girl but seem to have opinions.
> 
> It's the ducking stool for you I'm afraid.


 
Well I could have said the stocks, but there seems to be a bitmore theatre in using a ducking stool


----------



## mangaman (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Absolutely not
> 
> What is the story behind it ?


 
It's the great Lee "scratch" Perry - one of my heroes.

I felt like a change from my old one of another of my all time heroes Ruel Fox.

What's the story behind your ant?


----------



## theclaud (4 Oct 2012)

mangaman said:


> It's the great Lee "scratch" Perry - one of my heroes.
> 
> I felt like a change from my old one of another of my all time heroes Ruel Fox.
> 
> What's the story behind your ant?


 
It's irritating and evasive?

I'm not sure it's an ant, by the way...


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

Nothing more than I like it. I saw it on another forum, and thought it was a real bug on my monitor.
Trick of the eye and all that....

I was convinced the football player was you. Do I have a 'hero' I'd want as an avatar pic ? - probably Mo Mowlem.


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> You are getting your kniickers in a twist with this one.
> 
> Whilst I use it for moving stull around, it is ultimately animal transport, and used for boxing them to events, or occasionally to decent hacking which is too far off the other side of the urban sprawl to entertain wanting to ride through it.
> My 4x4 was only bought after I towed my 2 horse trailer with a normal medium sized car which was rated at 1400kg kerb weight. It was downright scary as the trailer with even just one horse pushed the car around like the tail wagging the dog.
> ...


 

Just because i live in London now doesn't mean i always lived there. Welsh hill farmers seem to manage in old Subarus. I bought my 1st 4x4 when i was having to go on quarry call outs and drive through 3 or 3 feet of thick mud to get to the problem so they were never vanity vehicles

I also posses a B+E licence so know the rules and laws regarding towing


----------



## green1 (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> Just because i live in London now doesn't mean i always lived there. Welsh hill farmers seem to manage in old Subarus. I bought my 1st 4x4 when i was having to go on quarry call outs and drive through 3 or 3 feet of thick mud to get to the problem so they were never vanity vehicles
> 
> I also posses a B+E licence so know the rules and laws regarding towing


Outbacks have a max towing weight of 1700 braked or 1150 unbraked, but I wouldn't want to be towing that much in one. The clue is sheep farmer. A trailer with ~6 sheep in it isn't going to weigh very much.


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> What smaller vehicle is legally able to tow a 1 ton trailer with a 1.5~2 ton load in the trailer?


 
who dys think I am ? Quentin wilson ?


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> Outbacks have a max towing weight of 1700 braked or 1150 unbraked, but I wouldn't want to be towing that much in one. The clue is sheep farmer. A trailer with ~6 sheep in it isn't going to weigh very much.


 
750kg unbraked is the law or do you mean train weight ?


----------



## green1 (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> 750kg unbraked is the law or do you mean train weight ?


 Thats the max towing weight the chassis can take. If I tried to tow my loaded trailer with that it would pull the back of the chassis off the car. We did that with an old Land Rover series 3 back of the chassis had to be replaced twice in 2 years.


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> Thats the max towing weight the chassis can take. If I tried to tow my loaded trailer with that it would pull the back of the chassis off the car. We did that with an old Land Rover series 3 back of the chassis had to be replaced twice in 2 years.


 
I know what you mean. the last jeep was rated for 3500Kg - it would pull well over twice that without complaint ( was done many times on Quarries and up in them thar hills )


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> Just because i live in London now doesn't mean i always lived there. Welsh hill farmers seem to manage in old Subarus. I bought my 1st 4x4 when i was having to go on quarry call outs and drive through 3 or 3 feet of thick mud to get to the problem so they were never vanity vehicles
> 
> I also posses a B+E licence so know the rules and laws regarding towing


 
So why make out you didn't ? - If you were familar with the regs and requirements of moving heavy loads around, why question it ?

FWIW, I looked at getting Subaru Forester as a towing vehicle, but it simply wasn't heavy enough. In addition to this, the transmission is AWD as opposed to 4WD which means that it is a lot less capable coping with low traction conditions like my car which has deep and wide tread patterned all terrain tyres, auto locking hubs as well as an LSD on the back axle, and a centre locking differential to the front.

Hill farmers run tractors as well as their little pickups as they don't need to transport their animals to events 30 miles up the motorway at the weeekends.
The vehicle is fit for purpose at the end of the day, and if the hill farmers needed a bigger one, I have no doubt they would just go and get one....


----------



## subaqua (4 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> *So why make out you didn't ?* - If you were familar with the regs and requirements of moving heavy loads around, why question it ?
> 
> FWIW, I looked at getting Subaru Forester as a towing vehicle, but it simply wasn't heavy enough. In addition to this, the transmission is AWD as opposed to 4WD which means that it is a lot less capable coping with low traction conditions like my car which has deep and wide tread,pattern all terrain tyres, auto locking hubs as well as an LSD on the back axle, and a centre locking differential to the front.
> 
> ...


 
where did i do that? or are you having another of your episodes where you imagine things people post


----------



## Linford (4 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> where did i do that? or are you having another of your episodes where you imagine things people post


 
You were asking about a small vehicle with the same towing capacity as a larger heavier one.

It is all about Mass, not Horse Power.


----------



## subaqua (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> You were asking about a small vehicle with the same towing capacity as a larger heavier one.
> 
> It is all about Mass, not Horse Power.


 

its not often i get to use this







it wasn't me who asked.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

subaqua said:


> its not often i get to use this
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

What you said was :-
Post - #156


> *Nobody NEEDS a 4x4. theres thousands of smaller vehicles that will pull a trailer full of hay that don't use as much fuel or take up as much space on the roads , and probably don't have some of the blindspots your WP has.*


 
Green1 asked you to name one which can tow a heavier load safely than its own mass (or in so many words) which you have yet too

I'm still waiting for your answers - Oh, the space on the roads is a red herring. My car has a smaller footprint than a Mondeo estate - Vehicle height doesn't equate to congestion  , and the migh higher viewing platform gives a much bigger advantage than a lowered sports car on country roads with high hedges.

You seem to have the answers to it all, so fill your boots and answer the question 

Name a car which can safely do what mine does with the same offroad ability and has a significantly smaller footprint ? - needs to tow 2000kg


----------



## srw (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> I sold it when it was nolonger needed, and I miss it dreadfully, as It saved my life at least twice.


 In the same way as a helmet saved your life?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

2078296 said:


> Not to someone who can't see past it it doesn't


 
Why would you want to do that ?


----------



## DRHysted (5 Oct 2012)

srw said:


> In the same way as a helmet saved your life?


 
No.
Once was when towing the trailer (pretty light at one tonne), I had to take avoiding action due to a super mini driver trying to take my bonnet off (I don't know what it is about super mini drivers but they all seem to be idiots). Stopping myself from killing the other road user by becoming involved in a horrific crash of their actions, unsettled the trailer to such a point that one wheel became airbourne. Due to my truck weighing 2.5 tonnes I managed to get everything back under control, it took all three lanes of the motorway. If i had been driving a normal weight car (as I do now) the torsional forces from the trailer would have pulled the car over.

I now tow the same trailer with a Mondeo estate which weighs 1800kg, and I have had to adapt my driving style as the trailer can drive the car. The greater mass of the towing vehicle makes for a stable and safe (both for yourself and other road users) platform.


----------



## DRHysted (5 Oct 2012)

I am not defending Linford, as I don't know him or what he has done in the past.

But I like the live and let live approach to life. I can not stand the haters, the banners, or the people who believe they know what others need. Need has many different aspects, my mother has 6 dogs, they are essential to her mental well being, does this mean she needs them.

To know a man you must walk a mile in his shoes. Old but true.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

2078374 said:


> To see if it is safe to pass when I am riding my bike obviously.


 
How would you manage that when I am travelling faster than you ?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> No.
> Once was when towing the trailer (pretty light at one tonne), I had to take avoiding action due to a super mini driver trying to take my bonnet off (I don't know what it is about super mini drivers but they all seem to be idiots). Stopping myself from killing the other road user by becoming involved in a horrific crash of their actions, unsettled the trailer to such a point that one wheel became airbourne. Due to my truck weighing 2.5 tonnes I managed to get everything back under control, it took all three lanes of the motorway. If i had been driving a normal weight car (as I do now) the torsional forces from the trailer would have pulled the car over.
> 
> I now tow the same trailer with a Mondeo estate which weighs 1800kg, and I have had to adapt my driving style as the trailer can drive the car. The greater mass of the towing vehicle makes for a stable and safe (both for yourself and other road users) platform.


 

Er, something you need to know - Anecdotal evidence from real world experiences is irrelevant to SRW. As a statistician, he needs cold hard numbers which he can manipulate to give an answer which fits in with his world view


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

2078391 said:


> Just stop it.


 
Well if I did that, I'd get in everybody's way. I think they should ban silly sports cars which have a viewing height of a 3 year old, and replace them with 4x4's which have a similar viewing height as a cycle 

Overtaking in a low car on country roads is well dangerous because of that


----------



## DRHysted (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Er, something you need to know - Anecdotal evidence from real world experiences is irrelevant to SRW. As a statistician, he needs cold hard numbers which he can manipulate to give an answer which fits in with his world view


 
I actually did an A level in statistics.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> I actually did an A level in statistics.


 
Tell me you don't do it for a job...please


----------



## green1 (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Well if I did that, I'd get in everybody's way. I think they should ban silly sports cars which have a viewing height of a 3 year old, and replace them with 4x4's which have a similar viewing height as a cycle
> 
> Overtaking in a low car on country roads is well dangerous because of that


 Deciding when to go takes longer, but once you decide to go and sink your foot the time on the wrong side of the road is a fair bit shorter.


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> I actually did an A level in statistics.


 
A long way to go then...


----------



## Spinney (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> To know a man you must walk a mile in his shoes. Old but true.


And if you still don't agree, you're a mile away from him.

And you've got his shoes...


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Er, something you need to know - Anecdotal evidence from real world experiences is irrelevant to SRW. As a statistician, he needs cold hard numbers which he can manipulate to give an answer which fits in with his world view


 
Why the need to be so nasty/snide?

Stuff like this really doesn't help.


----------



## DRHysted (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Tell me you don't do it for a job...please


 
No, but I learnt alot.
The main thing being don't trust statistics unless you have the raw data.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> Why the need to be so nasty/snide?
> 
> Stuff like this really doesn't help.


 
You've gone and done it now with that quote. I'm on his ignore list after he threw his toys. It isn't nice being told by him that any real life experiences have no value because they can't neccessarily be backed up with a dataset. See what he has said to me over the years and I'm quite polite by comparison...


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> You've gone and done it now with that quote. I'm on his ignore list after he threw his toys. It isn't nice being told by him that any real life experiences have no value because they can't neccessarily be backed up with a dataset. See what he has said to me over the years and I'm quite polite by comparison...


 
I don't know the background, but why not put him on ignore then ignore him/don't bring him up in conversation?

It doesn't achieve anything does it?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

green1 said:


> Deciding when to go takes longer, but once you decide to go and sink your foot the time on the wrong side of the road is a fair bit shorter.


 
Now I prefer the m/bike to cars. Same viewing height, and in my case 670BHP per tonne at the back wheel and a lot easier to get back onto the correct side of the road  The 4x4 is just plodding wheels to move stuff around with


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

How does bhp/tonne help you get onto the correct side of the road?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> How does bhp/tonne help you get onto the correct side of the road?


 
The footprint oof the bike is that much smaller than a car. The BHP means you spend that much less time on the wrong side of the road


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

How does bhp do that then?


----------



## DRHysted (5 Oct 2012)

bhp doesn't help you get to correct side of the road, but it does reduce your TED (Time Exposed to Danger).
Yes I also used to be one of those hated motorcyclists. In fact I really can't think of any point in my life when my choice of vehicle has not enraged some group (including now as a cyclist).


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> bhp doesn't help you get to correct side of the road, but it does reduce your TED (Time Exposed to Danger).
> Yes I also used to be one of those hated motorcyclists. In fact I really can't think of any point in my life when my choice of vehicle has not enraged some group (including now as a cyclist).


 
As he said..


----------



## mangaman (5 Oct 2012)

DRHysted said:


> bhp doesn't help you get to correct side of the road, but it does reduce your TED.


 
Yes but that's offset by an increased FB31 at high torque


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

mangaman said:


> Yes but that's offset by an increased FB31 at high torque


 
A what ?

Ah, I've found it now - and Automatic Flush Bolt 

http://www.iveshinges.com/Ives-FB31-Automatic-Flush-Bolt-items.aspx


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> As he said..


 
Probably best in future not to post something you don't understand.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> Probably best in future not to post something you don't understand.


 
Perhaps you can enlighten us ?


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

Enlighten "us" to what.?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

2078580 said:


> Well that's shrunk the internet right down.


 
Have you been taking lessons from srw ?

400BHP - take note about snide remarks. The only time I ever communicate with Adrian is when he offers this sort of diatribe. I'm not on his ignore list though, so perhaps I've not yet given as good as I got...


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

eh???

I'm lost.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> Enlighten "us" to what.?


 
What this means ?



> Yes but that's offset by an increased FB31 at high torque


----------



## 400bhp (5 Oct 2012)

Norfolk en idea.

Probably an engine I would guess.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> eh???
> 
> I'm lost.


 
Adrian only ever contributes when he wants to slag me off. I can be happily posting on a thread minding my own business, and then bang, he pops up out of nowhere and gets personal.

I have a small but determined following of bullies ' fans' who do this...eventually they get the message and give up - like srw


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

2078651 said:


> You are. I created an ignore list for you specifically. Unfortunately it doesn't work on the mobile setting.
> 
> In this instance however my comment was not specifically directed at you. You are after all only responsible for a very small part of the bollocks spouted on the internet. Disproportionate maybe
> in relative terms but still minuscule in absolute.


 
You can't help yourself Adrian...I think you have said enough!


----------



## theclaud (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I can be happily posting on a thread minding my own business, and then bang, he pops up out of nowhere and gets personal.
> 
> I have a small but determined following of bullies ' fans' who do this...eventually they get the message and give up - like srw


 
I suppose I should be amused that there are still people out there who fall for this sh|t.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> I suppose I should be amused that there are still people out there who fall for this sh|t.


 
I don't buy the indignation bit either. Some people just enjoy being angry....It is such aa negative emotion. Have you thought of trying Reiki for that ?


----------



## Hebe (5 Oct 2012)

Taking a huge diversion back to the original topic, we walk or cycle the mile to school every day. If it's chucking it down, we walk or cycle. The traffic is even slower than normal in poor weather, and parking at school even harder, so the only benefit offered by a car is dryness. Which we can get from a brolly and waterproofs anyway.


----------



## theclaud (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I don't buy the indignation bit either. Some people just enjoy being angry....It is such aa negative emotion. Have you thought of trying Reiki for that ?



I am indeed an irascible git. I scarcely know how they put up with my ill temper on the FNRttC. Anyone invited you on a bike ride lately?


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> I am indeed an irascible git. I scarcely know how they put up with my ill temper on the FNRttC. Anyone invited you on a bike ride lately?


 
Last week, but I declined as I am a bit busy ATM


----------



## theclaud (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> Last week, but I declined as I am a bit busy ATM


I suppose it would also help if you had a bike...


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> I suppose it would also help if you had a bike...


 
I've got one. I was still too busy.


----------



## theclaud (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I've got one. I was still too busy.


You bought one? Sorry - I missed the announcement! Let's see the pics then!


----------



## swansonj (5 Oct 2012)

Linford said:


> I have a small but determined following of bullies ' fans' who do this...eventually they get the message and give up - like srw


Also, apparently, a small but determined following of apostrophes.

(sorry, I regard commenting on grammar as bad manners, but that one was too good to miss.)


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

theclaud said:


> You bought one? Sorry - I missed the announcement! Let's see the pics then!


 
A new roadie is still sadly in abayance due to 'life' getting in the way 

Still got the clunker though.


----------



## Linford (5 Oct 2012)

swansonj said:


> Also, apparently, a small but determined following of apostrophes.
> 
> (sorry, I regard commenting on grammar as bad manners, but that one was too good to miss.)


 
If it fussed me that much, I'd have put it through the spill chucker first


----------

