# Cycling, a poor mans means of transport!



## classic33 (11 Oct 2012)

Seperate thread, but how many on here consider cycling/travel by pedal cycle to be a poor man's means of transport.


----------



## ianrauk (11 Oct 2012)

Not with the cost of my bikes it ain't.


----------



## SquareDaff (11 Oct 2012)

Have you seen how much I spend on cycling bits and pieces!!!


----------



## Lee_M (11 Oct 2012)

my trek domane says no!


----------



## Dayvo (11 Oct 2012)

It's a poor man who has never experienced or enjoyed the pleasure of cycling.


----------



## tadpole (11 Oct 2012)

I could buy a car for the cost of some of the bikes people on this forum use. Bikes, like cars, can be cheap or they can cost heaps of money.


----------



## Davidc (11 Oct 2012)

With the cost of consumables and accessories cycling may make me poor!

I put £42 worth of new tyres on last night (OK bought those 6 months ago), just to add to recently replacing a chain and cassette, another £40 worth, and a load of other minor bits and pieces this month. Ordered £50 worth of bar tape and mudguards today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## trampyjoe (11 Oct 2012)

Yes it most definitely is a poor mans means of transport.
Also a rich mans means of transport though.
And womans.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (11 Oct 2012)

I'm a poor man and I cycle so yes. If I became a rich man I'd probably cycle more.


----------



## Hacienda71 (11 Oct 2012)

It is a form of transport for everyone.


----------



## hoopdriver (11 Oct 2012)

My Pegoretti says it is not a poor man's transport - on the other hand, I am not rich.

If I were to become rich one of the great lifestyle changing things I would do would be to indulge in long leisurely bike rides every morning without worrying about having to go to work and earn a living.


----------



## Haitch (11 Oct 2012)

If I had known how expensive cycling was I would have picked another pastime: crack cocaine, online gambling, a mistress, something like that - comparatively cheap and noncommittal.


----------



## Soltydog (11 Oct 2012)

i couldnt vote for both 
Its free to ride a bike, but every time that right foot goes down to move a car it costs £££, so i guess that makes it poor mans transport,
but I'm with "deptfordmarmoset" in that if i could afford not to work, I would cycle more


----------



## jonny jeez (11 Oct 2012)

No.

but it is still, sadly, perceived to be Yes.


----------



## Trail Child (11 Oct 2012)

My Pinarello says "hell no!" 

My commuter is my MOR-priced bike, my winter bike is my beater bike, and, obviously, my Pina is my sports car. Add up all the gear & kit that goes with all of them, and you've got an awesome habit. The beauty is that when going to uni & I had no money, it was a very cheap form of transport.


----------



## Typhon (11 Oct 2012)

It's a means of transport for everyone regardless of your financial status.

How you perceive it will be down to your background and to an extent your own prejudices. A lot of people I know/work with see it as a yuppie thing to do.


----------



## coffeejo (11 Oct 2012)

What I love about cycling is that it is accessible to almost everybody in the world, whoever they are, wherever they live, whatever their finances.


----------



## wiggydiggy (11 Oct 2012)

Transport - yes

I started as the bus fare hikes priced me out of using them regularly and the Cycle2Work promotion got me a cheap bike at an affordable price

What else we spend on our bikes above and beyond making it a useful _transport_ for 1 machine doesnt count!


----------



## Andy_R (11 Oct 2012)

ahem....




......I'd be poorer if I went everywhere by car.


----------



## Cyclopathic (11 Oct 2012)

It is possible to get a fairly good quality cycling experience for not very much money. Judicious shopping can land you a pretty darned good bike for £200. if you know what you're looking for and less if you're exceptionally lucky. After that it can be maintained for very little money if you don't have expensive tastes. Then of course each time you make a journey, even a short one you are not spending anything directly.
I conclude that cycling is transport that is within the reach of a poor man or woman and that it is sustainable for said man or woman. This is not true of cars or trains. Buses are available to the less well off but I'd rather take the bike than the bus any day.
On the other hand, you could in effect spend as much as you like on your cycling like so many other things. Cycling is available to virtually everybody. It is egalitarian which is just one of its many charms.


----------



## Arjimlad (11 Oct 2012)

I voted yes, because as a student, I could pedal to lectures free of charge and spend what would have been my bus fare on pasty, beans & chips  for lunch. I had a reasonable good quality bland bike which only needed irregular spare parts. Cycling can save so much money compared to driving.

My grandfather used to cycle from Emsworth to Portsmouth Dockyard every day. He told me on some days he had a little .410 shotgun on the crossbar to bag a rabbit with, on the way home.

I used to resent those who were well-off enough to run a car on some damp & cold days !


----------



## gavintc (11 Oct 2012)

The answer is of course both. My bikes are currently quite expensive, but I have had bikes which were definitely poor man's transport.


----------



## VamP (11 Oct 2012)

It's a relatively expensive way to get from A to B where the shortest distance between A and B is 15 miles, but you turn it into 50 - just because you can.


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (11 Oct 2012)

The way I see it, although the bicycle can be seen as a cheap means of transport that is _not_ the same as it being transport for the poor man.

In towns/cities, travelling by bicycle it's often easier to get around and there is no hassle with parking, so it may be the logical choice regardless of finances.

Thinking of a utility cyclist as someone who cannot afford a car is a 1960's/70's attitude which is managing to cling on.


----------



## jakeagusta (11 Oct 2012)

I often chuckle particularly during the Olympics when people referred to cycling as a cheap and affordable. For some maybe but when commuting and taking in the cost of safety equipment, good quality clothing, security equipment etc then it becomes pretty expensive.


----------



## fossyant (11 Oct 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Not with the cost of my bikes it ain't.



Not with the cost of mine either. 4 bikes, spare wheels, two track pumps, 2 stands, collection of lights, 4 other bikes in the family, full tool kit with mainly Park, campag and Shimano tools, plus more bike clothes than civvies.


----------



## RaRa (11 Oct 2012)

When I check out the stupendous sum of money wiggle says I've spent with them over the last year it suggests this is definately not a poor (wo)mans means of transport.


----------



## Deleted member 23692 (11 Oct 2012)

'tis neither poor nor posh ... it's just a means of transport


----------



## Drago (11 Oct 2012)

Driving is a fat and old before their times man means of transport.

Anyhoo, if cycling is for poor men then why do so many drivers whittle on about the cost of fuel/insurance/vehicle duty?


----------



## Saluki (11 Oct 2012)

My bike cost more than my car, but my car was pretty cheap to buy. However having to sort the wiring, the lights, the windscreen washer etc put the price up a bit, not to mention tax, insurance and petrol.

My bike hasn't cost me that much so far, a few new innertubes, a couple of new tyres and thats it.

I don't cycle because I cannot afford to run my car and I don't think that nowadays that a decent bike is the 'poor mans' transport choice. If you want a bike to last more than a season or two you need to go for quality. Quality costs.


----------



## Drago (11 Oct 2012)

Our car cost £40k. I cycle because I enjoy it and it helps me stay trim. Money is not a consideration whatsoever into my transport choice.


----------



## Oldspice (11 Oct 2012)

Considering you can get bikes from £0 to thousands (if you like high-tech bling) there available to anyone. If a person chooses to pimp there bike, it's there choice! It's there money.

PS I cycle because i like the alone time and public transport is just to icky


----------



## MattHB (11 Oct 2012)

I'm lighter, fitter, healthier, saner (just), sociable and far far far more satisfied with life because of cycling.. I'm way richer than I thought I'd ever be.


----------



## RedRider (11 Oct 2012)

Drago said:


> Our car cost £40k. I cycle because I enjoy it and it helps me stay trim. Money is not a consideration whatsoever into my transport choice.


I bet it winds you up people assume it's cos you're skint 

Hypothesis: the poor persons' transport image is a reason some don't cycle, especially those with little money to spare.


----------



## Drago (11 Oct 2012)

And of all my bikes, which cost me from £20 to £1500, it's the cheapo £500 one I love the most.


----------



## 400bhp (11 Oct 2012)

cycling costs for me are about 10p per mile.

Does that make me poor?

Or make me relatively rich? (think about it)


----------



## Psycolist (11 Oct 2012)

I think that perhaps up to 30 -40 years ago it was exactly that, a poor mans transport. but no longer. these days its seen as a life choice rather than necessity


----------



## 400bhp (11 Oct 2012)

These threads are a bit willy wavey aren't they.

I am not poor because of [insert amount spent on bike/car].

I find that a bit distasteful.


----------



## cyberknight (11 Oct 2012)

Psycolist said:


> I think that perhaps up to 30 -40 years ago it was exactly that, a poor mans transport. but no longer. these days its seen as a life choice rather than necessity


Speak for yourself


----------



## Drago (11 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> These threads are a bit willy wavey aren't they.
> 
> I am not poor because of [insert amount spent on bike/car].
> 
> I find that a bit distasteful.


Nope. Plenty out the spent vastly more on bikes and cars than me and I'm not remotely upset. Indeed, good luck to 'em.


----------



## growingvegetables (11 Oct 2012)

Naaah - just transport for everyman, everywoman, and every-inbetween-and-beyond


----------



## GrumpyGregry (11 Oct 2012)

Riding a bike to work saves me £7- £14 a day vs train fare, depending on how you calculate the rail fare. running a car cost a similar amount. Running my commuter is about 7p a mile. Would be less but I like blingy chains and pricey tyres. 

As to the survey, well, it is perceived as a poor person's mode of transport and as perceptions _are_ reality....


----------



## Accy cyclist (12 Oct 2012)

The state of some of the cars i see while out cycling reassures me that cycling definately isn't the lowest form of transport!


----------



## Cyclopathic (12 Oct 2012)

Rickshaw Phil said:


> The way I see it, although the bicycle can be seen as a cheap means of transport that is _not_ the same as it being transport for the poor man.
> 
> In towns/cities, travelling by bicycle it's often easier to get around and there is no hassle with parking, so it may be the logical choice regardless of finances.
> 
> *Thinking of a utility cyclist as someone who cannot afford a car is a 1960's/70's attitude which is managing to cling on*.


 
With the ever rising price of running a car I'd say it was a use of the bike that is making a come back rather than just hanging on. I have recently bought a trailer so that I can use my bike in a greater variety of ways that would otherwise have needed a car. Obviously I can't carry quite as much as far but it's been useful so far.


----------



## Red Light (12 Oct 2012)

Some of the noveau-paupers who ride bicycles:


----------



## gavroche (12 Oct 2012)

Is running an even poorer means of transport?
I, personally, never run anywhere as I hate running, much quicker on the bike!


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (12 Oct 2012)

Current Bike - £250 new + upgrades
Current Trike - £800 2nd Hand
Current Car - £500 8th-hand


----------



## 400bhp (12 Oct 2012)

gavroche said:


> Is running an even poorer means of transport?


 
I guess you need to split an activity into recreation or a means of transport.

Most running is done for recreation. So is a lot of cycling for that matter.

Clearly there is some overlap as well.

I'd class my commute as transport and recreation for example.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (12 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> I guess you need to split an activity into recreation or a means of transport.
> 
> Most running is done for recreation. So is a lot of cycling for that matter.
> 
> ...


 
I think there is so much overlap that there is often a complete dual use with cyclists. Even when riding as a means of transport it's also a recreation. Few commuters would say that they cycled purely to get to and from work.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (12 Oct 2012)

Poor and Wealthy is a term which is relative... Bill Gates would consider himself poor if he lost 80% of his personal fortune, while I would still consider him to be wealthy.
To the man who lives in a cardboard box behind kings cross station anyone with a bed and net connection is wealthy


----------



## Drago (12 Oct 2012)

Anyone who doesn't have an ex wife to feed is wealthy!


----------



## Hacienda71 (12 Oct 2012)

Red Light said:


> Some of the noveau-paupers who ride bicycles:


Not sure it would be that easy to ride the bikes in the Branson pic as they have ne pedals!


----------



## fossyant (12 Oct 2012)

Drago said:


> And of all my bikes, which cost me from £20 to £1500, it's the cheapo £500 one I love the most.



You need converting mate. Spending 40k on a car and only 1500 on a bike...lots to learn..... Heh heh


----------



## fossyant (12 Oct 2012)

400bhp said:


> These threads are a bit willy wavey aren't they.
> 
> I am not poor because of [insert amount spent on bike/car].
> 
> I find that a bit distasteful.



Heh heh. We need how fast are yer legs thread.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (12 Oct 2012)

Ahemm .... What happened to the "poor" woman? Is she not going anywhere? 
Just kidding!
Really, before I started to read Cycle Chat, I thought one just jumps on the bike and goes, the only expense the bike itself.
Then I found out I need to put air in my tyres, get a pump ... then discover I really need a track pump.
Not allowed to cycle on the pavement, get lights for the road. Then discover any light won't do, get better ones.
Then discover any tyre won't do: get other ones, more grip, more vavawhumph, more money!
Brake pads need replaced regularly, what a discovery!
Then find out a day ticket for the bus costs a fortune if you give up your monthly one: need N+1 just in case N is off sick ...


----------



## Crankarm (13 Oct 2012)

The cost of running a car is MUCH more expensive than cycling. Period. The fact that SOME bikes are expensive is irrelevant as most cyclists I suspect ride bikes worth considerably less than £500. The capital out lay for a car is far more than this and then you have the cost of insurance, tax, fuel, servicing and general maintenance. Cycling by comparison is significantly cheaper. I suspect there are drivers of cars and also cyclists who are equally tight or poor, likewise there are those who must have a top of the range expensive status symbol car or a plastic carbon bike to impress work mate or the neighbours. Cars and bikes are both expenses. For many I shoulld imagine it is solely about getting form A to B as cheaply and quickly as possible.


----------



## Crankarm (13 Oct 2012)

Hacienda71 said:


> Not sure it would be that easy to ride the bikes in the Branson pic as they have ne pedals!


 
Tramp stamps ................


----------



## mickle (13 Oct 2012)

There's a perception amongst non-cyclists that we ride bikes only because we cant afford a car.


----------



## mickle (13 Oct 2012)

And its interesting that some of the poorest areas of the country have the lowest levels of cycling.


----------



## CopperCyclist (13 Oct 2012)

mickle said:


> And its interesting that some of the poorest areas of the country have the lowest levels of cycling.



Really? That's interesting, how is that measured?


----------



## screenman (13 Oct 2012)

Is it possible to ride "A to A" as my start and finish points are always the same?


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Oct 2012)

One of the selling points for many tourist routes is that cyclists place more money in a local economy whenthey pass through than motorists


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Oct 2012)

Hacienda71 said:


> Not sure it would be that easy to ride the bikes in the Branson pic as they have ne pedals!


 
it's the Ballantyne method for new cyclists


----------



## Cyclopathic (13 Oct 2012)

What I like about bikes is that if I'm careful I can afford a level of technology and sophistication on a bike that I could never come anywhere near in a car. Also when you consider that £5,000 can buy a person pretty much as much bike as there is (A quick note here that I do realise that it is possible to pay much more than this but I chose this as a sort of optimum after which the laws of diminishing returns on investment will apply and that a ten grand bike is probably not going to be twice the experience of a five grand bike.(Though what do I really know as I've never ridden anything that cost more than a grand when it was new and that wasn't mine)) but to get that much car you'd have to spend tens of thousands. 
In short, top of the range is not out of the reach of a lot of people if they have set their mind on it.


----------



## al78 (13 Oct 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> One of the selling points for many tourist routes is that cyclists place more money in a local economy whenthey pass through than motorists


 
Must be all those cake stops.


----------



## Drago (14 Oct 2012)

And Guinness!


----------



## subaqua (14 Oct 2012)

a similar discussion was had on Thursday in work, when I mentioned I had bought some decent winter riding kit over the weekend. the site secretary asked how much i had spent and when i told her she exclaimed " I thought you cycled cos you was poor" I did explain that the kit would be used for commuting and recreation so fell under hobby rather than travel. once people know there are other reasons apart from financial they start to understand why we cycle.


----------



## mrandmrspoves (14 Oct 2012)

Poor man's transport....rich man's pleasure! (or woman's of course!)


----------



## SomethingLikeThat (15 Oct 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> One of the selling points for many tourist routes is that cyclists place more money in a local economy whenthey pass through than motorists


Yeah, because if you're driving through a town in a car you've got to find somewhere to park and that may be quite far from the main street with all the businesses. In that respect you're quite trapped inside the car whereas on a bike you can just lock it to a railing or something pretty much anywhere you want.


----------



## classic33 (15 Oct 2012)

screenman said:


> Is it possible to ride "A to A" as my start and finish points are always the same?


 No. Now stop asking questions.


----------



## Globalti (15 Oct 2012)

Cycling's poor man image carries a strong cultural stigma in certain countries. The son of my Pakistan agent who is in the UK as a student rang to ask my advice on insurance because he and his four pals were thinking of buying a used 3 series BMW for driving the half mile from halls to college. Having explained that no, he shouldn't drive on a dodgy licence bought in Karachi and that that would not get him cheap insurance anyway - quite the opposite in fact - and having explained that running a £1500 BMW would drain his and his pals' wallets faster than a shopping trip to London, I suggested he considered buying a cheap bike if he disliked walking the ten minutes. I could almost see the sneer on his lips and hear him spit on the floor at the idea of him, a smart young man about town being seen on a bicycle, let alone his friends and family back in Pakistan finding out!


----------



## tyred (15 Oct 2012)

There are many people who have bikes that are worth more than my car and many people who have shoes worth more than my bikes


----------



## Globalti (15 Oct 2012)

My flippin' wife for one!


----------



## mrandmrspoves (15 Oct 2012)

Ffoeg said:


> 'tis neither poor nor posh ... it's just a means of transport


 
How can you say that?? Presumably you belong to this forum because cycling is not _just _ a means of transport? For me it's a means of transport, a hobby, a passion, an obsession.........


----------



## Deleted member 23692 (15 Oct 2012)

mrandmrspoves said:


> How can you say that?? Presumably you belong to this forum because cycling is not _just _ a means of transport? For me it's a means of transport, a hobby, a passion, an obsession.........


I posted that in the context of the thread title, and believe that to be true.

I belong to this forum because I own 2 bikes, and I also belong to 2 car forums/clubs because I own a car - both means of transport have their strengths and weaknesses, and I don't favour one more than other, nor would I say that either (in my case) is proportional to wealth.


----------



## mrandmrspoves (15 Oct 2012)

Ffoeg said:


> I posted that in the context of the thread title, and believe that to be true.
> 
> I belong to this forum because I own 2 bikes, and I also belong to 2 car forums/clubs because I own a car - both means of transport have their strengths and weaknesses, and I don't favour one more than other, nor would I say that either (in my case) is proportional to wealth.



Was only teasing!


----------

