# So what bike are you commuting on + link a picture



## Sore Thumb (8 Jul 2007)

*So what bike are you commuting on + post a picture*

Well what do you commute to work on? .................

I use a pimped up Specialized Langster 06 fixed road bike. Gearing of 48t front with 16t rear. Goldtec hubs and Mavic Open Pro rims with DT DB spokes (all black)

I use a smart 1/2 watt rear light and the Hope LED 2 light up front. Work full time nights so I need some good lights.


----------



## glen (8 Jul 2007)

Wow. nice bike!! I'd love to have one of those. Got the 1/2 watt rear LED though. Just gotta get the rest of it.


----------



## starseven (8 Jul 2007)

Hi ST

I'm using the Allez when its nice weather just because its new and Im enjoying it. The usual workhorse is the Kona, its pretty indestructable and the brakes are great on wet December mornings.
I have just sold a singlespeed but may buy a langster if the 2008 model comes in a good colour!! 
What is the standard gearing 44x16?


----------



## Yorkshireman (8 Jul 2007)

Don`t commute anymore (I`m retired  ), but when I did I used a much modified Trek700 (also does good service as my tourer). 






Seen here `tarting it` in the garden  .


----------



## longers (8 Jul 2007)

How do I put a picture on here? I can get so far as finding my camera and getting picture into Olympus master on my computer. 

Please use simple language.


----------



## longers (8 Jul 2007)

BTW lovely looking bike SoreThumb.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (9 Jul 2007)

I don't commute at the moment (it's 75 miles to work  ) but when I did I either used a cheap old Diamondback MTB with mudguards and slicks and a single chainring or a cheap and nasty Raleigh road frame with all my cast off gear from my other bikes fitted to it. This was on the principle that I should save my "good" bikes for best, until I eventually realised that the only riding I ever did was to work and back. So now if I get a shorter commute I'll use my Cannondale, my Dawes or my fixie.


----------



## domd1979 (9 Jul 2007)

A Dawes Sahara:

http://www.dawescycles.com/dawes/sahara.htm


----------



## Keith Oates (9 Jul 2007)

I commute on a steel framed MTB, locally made and called a DeVinci. It's a bit heavy and has Shimano 7/SIS gearing but I find it's not too bad even on the steep climb I have to get home each night. It makes taking the roadie out at the weekends an extra pleasure.


----------



## magnatom (9 Jul 2007)

I cycle on an upgraded ridgeback cyclone which does the job quite nicely for me at the moment. It isn't the lightest, but for me thats a good thing as it provides me with a workout.






Magnatom junior isn't a permanent feature of the bike!


----------



## Arch (9 Jul 2007)

longers said:


> How do I put a picture on here? I can get so far as finding my camera and getting picture into Olympus master on my computer.
> 
> Please use simple language.



I assume (haven't tried it yet here, but have elsewhere) you:

Choose your picture. 
Find an image hosting site, like Photobucket, and register.
Upload the picture from there (you just browse your computer to find the file)
It will give you various 'tags' you can use - one will be a web address, and that will simply post a link to that pic, and anothe will have [img ] at the beginning and [/img ] at the end, and I think that's the link you put in a message here to embed the image..

Just going try it myself...


----------



## Sore Thumb (9 Jul 2007)

Have you got your boys feet strapped down there? If so is this so he can't kick you to make dad go faster.


----------



## magnatom (9 Jul 2007)

Sore Thumb said:


> Have you got your boys feet strapped down there? If so is this so he can't kick you to make dad go faster.



 He is more likely to kick me because I am going to fast.....honest


----------



## Arch (9 Jul 2007)

let's see if this works...

My summer commuter (seen here in autumnal Northumberland, NOT on my commute!). A Giant FCR, with modifications (different bars, rack added):






My winter hack. A bit overloaded in this shot. Built up out of a no-name frame, and a lot of odds and ends:


----------



## magnatom (9 Jul 2007)

Arch did someone have the runs in your house that day......


----------



## Sore Thumb (9 Jul 2007)

Emergency toilet paper for that just in case scary road incident!


----------



## Arch (9 Jul 2007)

It was my bulk grocery order (a bunch of us order wholesale from Suma, the wholefood supplier), and there was also three boxes of teabags, 6 jars of pasta sauce and some other stuff. I was determined to get it all home in one trip, despite also having my normal pannier, and riding kit to carry (hence the whip!)


----------



## radger (9 Jul 2007)

I ride mister bike to work.

Here is mister bike:


----------



## Steve Austin (9 Jul 2007)

I used to commute on this, and very nice it was too


----------



## ChrisKH (9 Jul 2007)

I'm rather perplexed by what's under the toilet rolls; could be a Goth's SS Stormtrooper's helmet or a witches cauldron. This is for Arch's post btw.


----------



## Keith Oates (9 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> It was my bulk grocery order (a bunch of us order wholesale from Suma, the wholefood supplier), and there was also three boxes of teabags, 6 jars of pasta sauce and some other stuff. I was determined to get it all home in one trip, despite also having my normal pannier, and riding kit to carry (hence the whip!)


I thought the whip was in case an unnamed solicitor was waiting at home!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## TimO (9 Jul 2007)

Here's my all year Brompton T3 commuter:






It's pretty unmodified from standard. I've got the extended telescopic seat pillar, since I'm a bit lanky, and I dumped the Brompton dynamo set, which kept breaking, in favour of an Exposure Endura Turbo front light, Dinotte AA Tail Light, and Cateye TL-LD1000 backup rear light.

There are also fittings on the handlebars for the Oregon Scientific ATC2000 camera, and a Cateye HL-EL500 spare front light, although neither is shown on there.

There are also Bob Nutz on the rear axle, so I can tow a Bob Yak trailer, but you can't really see those in this shot.


----------



## Pingu (9 Jul 2007)




----------



## Yorkshireman (9 Jul 2007)

Lovely Bike Pingu (Pics a bit `large`... no auto re-sizing on here - yet  )


----------



## Shaun (9 Jul 2007)

In-line pics reinstated during forum upgrade 20-07-2007.


----------



## Pingu (9 Jul 2007)

Yorkshireman said:


> Lovely Bike Pingu (Pics a bit `large`... no auto re-sizing on here - yet  )



Thank-you  

I was about to upload a smaller pic but admin have done away with the need to do so


----------



## Yorkshireman (10 Jul 2007)

Pingu][quote=Yorkshireman said:


> Lovely Bike Pingu (Pics a bit `large`... no auto re-sizing on here - yet  )



Thank-you  

I was about to upload a smaller pic but admin have done away with the need to do so [/quote]
Ah well!  .


----------



## domtyler (10 Jul 2007)

If you commute along the A11 between 7:30-8 am/5:30-6pm- you may see a black streak and feel a rush of warm moist air. It will be this bike ridden by me.


----------



## joebe (10 Jul 2007)

*BLING*. 

See the link below


----------



## TimO (10 Jul 2007)

joebe][b]BLING[/b said:


> .


Yikes, that's a bit... erm... pink?!

I guess it's rather well done if you like that sort of thing.[/b]


----------



## alecstilleyedye (10 Jul 2007)

joebe said:


> *BLING*.
> 
> See the link below



beautiful, but you call it doris?


----------



## Amanda P (10 Jul 2007)

Here are my commuting machines:

This  is my favourite. Just right for my flat, fast, unobstructed, boring journey.  (Don't always use the fairing though).

If I'm not alone (and when she's not working, or she's working at my office - don't ask, she has a complicated occupation - Mrs Uncle Phil likes to get her exercise by coming part of the way with me) I use my elderly but much-loved and travelled Galaxy . I don't usually carry this much stuff to work though.


----------



## bonj2 (12 Jul 2007)

Uncle Phil said:


> Here are my commuting machines:
> 
> This  is my favourite.


What's that thing on the front - for aerodynamic purposes, or what?


----------



## Arch (13 Jul 2007)

It's a fairing bonj, they are usually partly for aerodynamics and partly to protect from wind and rain in the face. 

ChrisKH - that's my horse-riding helmet!


----------



## HJ (14 Jul 2007)

I use a Norco Volante which is as quick and nimble as a hybrid can be...


----------



## Keith Oates (14 Jul 2007)

Uncle Phil, just watched your commute to work on "you tube", gosh those bents are fast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ufkacbln (14 Jul 2007)

> What's that thing on the front - for aerodynamic purposes, or what?



 Mine is smaller than Uncle Phil's!

The one on my Street Machine is identical, and my spare one (Zzipper as seen here on my old Trice and now the winter one for the Catrike) is bigger in size!


They make a big diffference to speed, warmth and comfort in wet weather.
My Commuting machines are:

Queen Alexandra and Uni have restricted parking - Brompton with front luggage

St Marys is OK for secure parking so - Catrike / Street Machine or Hurricane depending how I feel and which route I take

Royal hospital Haslar - good parking so any of above, the Airnimal or the Pashley Delibike if shopping on the way home.


----------



## palinurus (15 Jul 2007)

This thing mostly; only it does have brakes now.. I was waiting for them from Wiggle when the photo was taken. I still haven't got around to fitting full guards, still using raceblades. It's also got gears now..8 of them, operated by a downtube shifter, single front chainring. I liked it as a singlespeed for commuting, but it was shoot for pulling a trailer full of potatoes.

It also features a £2:50 cycle computer from Sainsbury's. Still going strong despite the rain...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/93209406@N00/410014526/

When it's nice I use a slightly upgraded Spesh Allez, very occasionally I use my Brompton.


----------



## killiekosmos (16 Jul 2007)

I commute on a modified Raleigh Firefly- slicks, guards and rack. It's served me well - total cost sub £200.

My bike http://s201.photobucket.com/albums/aa175/killiekosmos/?action=view&current=P1220004_edited.jpg


----------



## Maz (17 Jul 2007)

Unfortunately on the BUS at the moment...fractured my metatarsal playing football last week, so at least another 6 weeks off the bike (specialized sirrus).


----------



## clefty (19 Jul 2007)

Dahon Jack, Folding Beauty but looks like a proper bike.
Still crave the speed of roadies..but just havent got the room *sob*


----------



## goo_mason (19 Jul 2007)

Carrera Vulcan. This is it back in April, without cranks and chainrings, during its first anniversary overhaul and service.

It must have still been dark in the mornings back then as I see that my Electron halogens were still mounted on the bars !


----------



## col (19 Jul 2007)

ok ill try again,heres my bike

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f266/col24/bike.jpg

edit twice
It worked :?: and mine is a carrera vulcan too


----------



## goo_mason (19 Jul 2007)

I'm guessing that you've had yours a bit longer than I've had mine, Col. Am I right in saying that they bring out an 'updated' version every year or two ?

Yours looks so nice and clean that I'm ashamed of the state of mine this week. It needs a clean - been two weeks since I last scrubbed the muck off, though I do wipe down and lube the chain once or twice a week due to the amount of mud and rain around at the mo.

Maybe we should start 'The Carrera Commuters Club'


----------



## col (20 Jul 2007)

Yes iv had it hidden in the shed a few years,about time i started using it again i think


----------



## geordiepaul2001 (20 Jul 2007)

*my bike*

Bought myself a claude butler urban 500 for £165.00
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120140467094

I have since fitted a drinks holder/bottle, pump, maxim d lock, dirt monkey mud guards.

Any views on this bike?, I think I have a good deal


----------



## domtyler (20 Jul 2007)




----------



## barq (20 Jul 2007)

Ok, here is my commuter bike "Judy":






It is a Trek 4500 MTB from a few years back. I replaced the suspension forks with some rigid Kona Project 2 forks and removed the disc brakes - makes it less attractive to thieves. I've stealthed also the Easton bling with some black electrical tape. I used a DMR kit (click - yes I know it needs a clean!) kit to convert the bike to singlespeed. The cranks are just regular Deore cranks with the granny and big rings removed and an FSA bashguard added (click). The tyres are Vredestein Perfect Moires (as suggested by people back on C+) which although not fast are nice and grippy in the wet and large enough for me to be happy on the occasional off-road diversion on my commute home. Occasionally I go XC single-speeding on this bike. It's quite exciting, not least because when I leave the lock at home it pretty much halves the weight of the bike.


----------



## ibren (23 Jul 2007)

*this is my ride "LOTTA"*

dose anyone else have a name for their bike ?


----------



## bonj2 (23 Jul 2007)

ibren said:


> dose anyone else have a name for their bike ?



that's a horrendous bike. It looks a bit of a deathtrap to be honest.


----------



## vorsprung (23 Jul 2007)

I'm only riding to work a couple of times a week, it is a 120km round trip


----------



## bonj2 (23 Jul 2007)

vorsprung said:


> I'm only riding to work a couple of times a week, it is a 120km round trip[/QUOTE]
> 
> Wow, a bike with gears. You'd think they were the work of the devil :D


----------



## Eat MY Dust (23 Jul 2007)

I'm on one of these. I don't actually have a picture of the one I own!!


----------



## Yorkshireman (23 Jul 2007)

Yorkshireman said:


> Don`t commute anymore (I`m retired  ), but when I did I used a much modified Trek700 (also does good service as my tourer).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Er, ... I've also been known to use this




when the Trek is undergoing 'surgery'


----------



## asterix (23 Jul 2007)

This is my commuter..

50 quid from ebay plus a bit of maintenance.


----------



## vorsprung (26 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> Wow, a bike with gears. You'd think they were the work of the devil



I do have a single speed but I haven't tried riding to work on it 
I estimate it would take me an extra hour and I'd be more knackered afterwards


----------



## ibren (26 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> that's a horrendous bike. It looks a bit of a deathtrap to be honest.



thanks for your insight in fact i can assure you that it is very stable and completely safe but after reading some of your other entrys you seem to often speak without thinking and ride in the same way 
cheers


----------



## Arch (26 Jul 2007)

Don't worry ibren, bonji has a bit of a problem with anything that doesn't fit his rather narrow idea of a bike, or indeed into his personal world, which is very odd place... 

I think it's nice. I know a guy toured America with his Airnimal, really liked it...


----------



## Yorkshireman (26 Jul 2007)

ibren said:


> thanks for your insight in fact i can assure you that it is very stable and completely safe but after reading some of your other entrys you seem to often speak without thinking and ride in the same way
> cheers



And drives ibren, and drives. Bonj drives a van ... A White Van


----------



## chthonic (26 Jul 2007)

I commute in two halves, leaving the trailer at nursery with the boy:





Rubbish old dawes horizon with bent frame and mis-matched forks. Nice trailer, though.


----------



## john59 (26 Jul 2007)

Thorn Nomad for the last 4 years.







John


----------



## littlestwoo (26 Jul 2007)

Ibren,
I'm quite intrigued by your bike, tell us more about it. It looks quirky but fast, I like it. How about a drive side picture?
Steve


----------



## bonj2 (26 Jul 2007)

Yorkshireman said:


> And drives ibren, and drives. Bonj drives a van ... A White Van



not pure white, it's got stripes


----------



## bonj2 (26 Jul 2007)

ibren said:


> thanks for your insight in fact i can assure you that it is very stable and completely safe but after reading some of your other entrys you seem to often speak without thinking and ride in the same way
> cheers



It just looks ... _wrong_. My main issue's with the seat tube assembly - it's only held on to the top tube with a couple of bolts, and it looks like the whole drivetrain / bottom bracket assembly was tacked on as an afterthought. Is that held on with a bolt aswell? And I can't tell for sure, but the rear dropout looks distinctly telescopic.
The steerer tube looks about 5 times too long. Steerer tubes just shouldn't _be_ that long.
And how can it possibly be efficient with those titchy little 22" wheels?


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> It just looks ... _wrong_. My main issue's with the seat tube assembly - it's only held on to the top tube with a couple of bolts, and it looks like the whole drivetrain / bottom bracket assembly was tacked on as an afterthought. Is that held on with a bolt aswell? And I can't tell for sure, but the rear dropout looks distinctly telescopic.
> The steerer tube looks about 5 times too long. Steerer tubes just shouldn't _be_ that long.
> And how can it possibly be efficient with those titchy little 22" wheels?



Time to do a bit of research on efficiency and wheel sizes Bonj  
Do you ever use NewsGroups (uk.rec.cycling and rec.bicycles.tech are interesting and very informative), I think you would enjoy them


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> It just looks ... _wrong_. My main issue's with the seat tube assembly - it's only held on to the top tube with a couple of bolts, and it looks like the whole drivetrain / bottom bracket assembly was tacked on as an afterthought. Is that held on with a bolt aswell? And I can't tell for sure, but the rear dropout looks distinctly telescopic.
> The steerer tube looks about 5 times too long. Steerer tubes just shouldn't _be_ that long.
> And how can it possibly be efficient with those titchy little 22" wheels?




Why should a couple of bolts be any less effective than a weld, bonji? You think maybe, if it was a problem, safetywise, it wouldn't be sold? Most saddles are kept at the right height by a single bolt causing a friction fit, yet you presumably trust that? This has two bolts, passing through the frame parts, and held in place not only by the nuts, but also by gravity and the design of the junction - so the only way it's breaking is if they both snap. Which is about at likely as a weld snapping, I suspect.

Steerer tubes can be as long as you like, if they are stiff enough. Ever seen a Brompton? They seem to manage alright.

As for the wheel stuff... What do you mean efficient? I believe tests have shown small wheels to have equal rolling resistance to large ones, given suitably inflated tyres and a degree of suspension for comfort.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hadland/page15.html

If you just mean, don't you have to twiddle pedals more to cover the distance, than you don't understand the concept of appropriate gearing and I can't be bothered to explain... 

Stop wittering about stuff you nothing about, and go back to talking about evolution...

Oh....

Ibren, I think that Airnimal looks fast! Under me, I suspect it would be a bit more sedate...


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> Why should a couple of bolts be any less effective than a weld, bonji?


Well if they're not, then why bother having welds at all? Surely it would make bikes a lot easier to make and modify to just bolt _everything_ together - top tube bolted to headtube, etc. but the reason most bikes don't is because certain points on a bike are high stress points and so it makes sense not to have something that could come loose, which is why pretty much every other bike in the world has a weld there. But the designers of that bike obviously knew better than convention.



Arch said:


> You think maybe, if it was a problem, safetywise, it wouldn't be sold?


I've no doubt it works. It's just looks... well, ... wrong.


Arch said:


> Steerer tubes can be as long as you like, if they are stiff enough. Ever seen a Brompton?


Yes, I don't like them either. There's one chained to a sheffield stand in the communal bike storage area of the block of flats I live in. Surely that defeats the point of it - that you can store it anywhere, like in a cupboard or the boot of a car?



Arch said:


> As for the wheel stuff... What do you mean efficient? I believe tests have shown small wheels to have equal rolling resistance to large ones, given suitably inflated tyres and a degree of suspension for comfort.
> 
> http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hadland/page15.html
> 
> If you just mean, don't you have to twiddle pedals more to cover the distance, than you don't understand the concept of appropriate gearing and I can't be bothered to explain...


Yeah yeah, great. You need a bigger gear to make up for the lower circumference. I know. But again, why break with convention? What makes the maker of that bike think he knows better than over 100 years of bicycle evolution history, or that his crackpot idea is somehow better than the result of that carefully tuned, tried and tested evolution?
But surely those wheels can't keep the bike as stable as bigger ones when steering?
I just personally still wouldn't ride it because it looks like a death trap.

The whole thing looks exactly the sort of thing to come out of scrapheap challenge.

And just answer me this - if these bikes are that good, why aren't they more popular? If they're just as good as normal bikes, surely you would expect to see them alongside them in bike shops?


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

That's another problem with it - the steerer tube is FAR longer than on a normal bike - but it needs to be able to cope with far MORE stress - as the handlebars stretch way way out in front, so the moment about the stem caused by the weight of your hands cannot be good for the headset at all! I wouldn't be surprised if that steerer tube is actually bent when he's leaning forward.
And is that lots and lots of normal spacers, or just one big tubular spacer?!


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> Well if they're not, then why bother having welds at all? Surely it would make bikes a lot easier to make and modify to just bolt _everything_ together - top tube bolted to headtube, etc. but the reason most bikes don't is because certain points on a bike are high stress points and so it makes sense not to have something that could come loose, which is why pretty much every other bike in the world has a weld there. But the designers of that bike obviously knew better than convention.



<Psst> The point is, if you have a weld there, you can't fold the thing to fit in a suitcase. Which is the point of the bike... 


> Yes, I don't like them either. There's one chained to a sheffield stand in the communal bike storage area of the block of flats I live in. Surely that defeats the point of it - that you can store it anywhere, like in a cupboard or the boot of a car?



So you write off the bike, because it's owner is a dork? What do you ride bonji, so that I can make sure I don't like them...



> Yeah yeah, great. You need a bigger gear to make up for the lower circumference. I know. But again, why break with convention? What makes the maker of that bike think he knows better than over 100 years of bicycle evolution history, or that his crackpot idea is somehow better than the result of that carefully tuned, tried and tested evolution?



What, like the evolution from the Ordinary to the safety? Wheels got smaller then... If everyone had followed your principle, we'd all be riding Penny Farthings. There'd be no gears, no difference between MTBs and Roadbikes, no specialist clothing, nothing except the most basic thing that worked.

'Why break with convention?' you said. How does that fit with your 'novel' idea for housing flood refugees in prisons and prisoners in flooded towns. I seem to remember then you said words to the effect "Don't be constrained by convention!"



> But surely those wheels can't keep the bike as stable as bigger ones when steering?



Ah, there's the rub. Maybe you just have to be a better rider than you are. Although actually, you don't. I don't think there's a noticable difference.



> I just personally still wouldn't ride it because it looks like a death trap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Depends on the bike shop you go to. I've seen them in shops. On the other hand, they are a more specialist market, so not every bog standard shop stocks them. Curry's don't do top-range hi-fi do they? Tesco don't do truffles. Halfords probably don't do the specialist parts for an Aston Martin. Sometimes, bonji, stuff isn't in all the ordinary shops because it's better, more expensive, and therefore not of interest to the plebs...


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> So you write off the bike, because it's owner is a dork? What do you ride bonji, so that I can make sure I don't like them...


I don't like them anyway. The fact that one particular owner chooses to take up the parking space of a normal bike is not the reason I don't like them, just an additional observation. The reason I don't like them is because they look like a deathtrap and that you have to pretty much pedal as hard as you can to go 5mph.



Arch said:


> Depends on the bike shop you go to. I've seen them in shops. On the other hand, they are a more specialist market, so not every bog standard shop stocks them.


Yes, in pretty much the same way that those umbrellas-on-hats that the japanese invented and only get sold in the Innovations catalogue are a 'specialist market'.



Arch said:


> Curry's don't do top-range hi-fi do they? Tesco don't do truffles. Halfords probably don't do the specialist parts for an Aston Martin. Sometimes, bonji, stuff isn't in all the ordinary shops because it's better, more expensive, and therefore not of interest to the plebs...


Are you seriously comparing that work of crapola to aston martins, bang and olufsen and truffles?!  Well, if they're that good - I ask you again _why haven't more people got them?_ I've seen far more aston martins, bang and olufsens and truffles than I have bikes like that (not counting when watching scrapheap challenge on tv). If they're the work of an unsung genius, why have they not made it into major races like the TdF yet? I'll tell you why, shall I - because even though they may work and be just about able to cope with the increased stresses put on parts of them due to their crap design, they're _not as good as normal bikes_. Fact.


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> I don't like them anyway. The fact that one particular owner chooses to take up the parking space of a normal bike is not the reason I don't like them, just an additional observation. The reason I don't like them is because they look like a deathtrap and that you have to pretty much pedal as hard as you can to go 5mph.



So, you haven't actually ridden one then? Funny, I've ridden with plenty of people riding them at 15-20mph with no more effort than a 'normal' bike.



> Are you seriously comparing that work of crapola to aston martins, bang and olufsen and truffles?!  Well, if they're that good - I ask you again _why haven't more people got them?_ I've seen far more aston martins, bang and olufsens and truffles than I have bikes like that (not counting when watching scrapheap challenge on tv). If they're the work of an unsung genius, why have they not made it into major races like the TdF yet?



I suspect because the rules of the UCI have stifled bike design and development and don't allow anything different. Anyway, they aren't designed to ride in the Tour de France, they're designed to pack small in order to be taken on other methods of transport easily. Your mountain bike wouldn't be seen in the TdF would it? Does that mean it's rubbish? No, it means it's not designed for out and out speed, but for off-roading. Can you really not see the concept of design for a purpose?



> I'll tell you why, shall I - because even though they may work and be just about able to cope with the increased stresses put on parts of them due to their crap design, they're _not as good as normal bikes_. Fact.



Ignoramus. You've never ridden one, you've never seen one, but you can't bear to think that they might work. I've heard of Popes with more flexible belief systems than you...


----------



## Peyote (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> they're _not as good as normal bikes_. Fact.



It depends what you expect from a bike surely. I reckon an Airnimal would be a lot better bike than my Spesh Allez if I wanted a fold up bike. Actually I've only got a bottom of the range Alllez and from what I've heard about Airnimals they'd probably wipe the floor with it!


I love it when people put 'Fact.' after their opinions, it's so David Brent!


I like it anyway Ibren. Not a fan of Bromptons, but that's just personal prejudice!


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> So, you haven't actually ridden one then? Funny, I've ridden with plenty of people riding them at 15-20mph with no more effort than a 'normal' bike.


Ah, the old "you've never ridden one" get out.
I wouldn't ride one because the geometry's all wrong. I'm still waiting to hear what you think about my reservations about the stress on the steerer tube caused by the long handlebars and its ability to handle that stress what with being so long.



Arch said:


> I suspect because the rules of the UCI have stifled bike design and development and don't allow anything different.


Oh, I _see!_ So it _would_ be in the Tour de France, but politics gets in the way! I see, now. So what rule exactly have the UCI made that specifically prevents that bike entering? That it must not be a deathtrap?



Arch said:


> Anyway, they aren't designed to ride in the Tour de France, they're designed to pack small in order to be taken on other methods of transport easily.


OK, point taken. But you don't need a spanner and lots of tools to undo those bolts holding the seat-tube assembly on? And does that mean the dropout IS telescopic, like I thought?
And the fact that it's easy to dismantle means you're having to assemble it every time you reach the park and ride or whatever and continue your commute. Obviously this is down to the rider, but if you're in a bit of a rush and don't assemble it quite correct, it could easily fall apart while you're riding it.




Arch said:


> Ignoramus. You've never ridden one, you've never seen one, but you can't bear to think that they might work. I've heard of Popes with more flexible belief systems than you...


I've already said I can accept that it will _work_. But I wouldn't ride it because it looks like an inefficient deathtrap that was cobbled together on scrapheap challenge.


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

> Bonj
> 
> When have you ever seen a truffle?



On telly.
Like I said, I've seen something a bit like that bike on telly aswell. But I did specifically say excluding scrapheap challenge.


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

> Bonj
> 
> When have you ever seen a truffle?



Every time he goes to the 'Cheap Choccy' stall in the market ... Rum, Almond, Coffee, Cream, Vanilla, Strawberry etc etc


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

> Which part? Saddle to bars? Saddle to crank? Crank to floor?


Bars to stem, and stem to headset for a start.



> Maybe when you post your details on the thousands of kiteflyers killed by electrocution last year, you can also list the names of dead Airnimal riders?




Maybe there aren't any. Maybe, just _maybe_, it's because most people are sensible enough not to look twice at it.


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> Ah, the old "you've never ridden one" get out.
> I wouldn't ride one because the geometry's all wrong. I'm still waiting to hear what you think about my reservations about the stress on the steerer tube caused by the long handlebars and its ability to handle that stress what with being so long.



I think it works perfectly well, because it's been designed to cope with the stresses - possibly with thicker tubing. I've never seen a bike with a long steerer tube in which the tube has snapped, and I've seen a lot of different bikes, ridden by some pretty hefty riders.



> Oh, I _see!_ So it _would_ be in the Tour de France, but politics gets in the way! I see, now. So what rule exactly have the UCI made that specifically prevents that bike entering? That it must not be a deathtrap?



So you know nothing of the rules of the UCI and how closely they define the bikes?



> OK, point taken. But you don't need a spanner and lots of tools to undo those bolts holding the seat-tube assembly on?



Well, probably one spanner, one allen bolt. Is that too complicated for you? If the bolt happens to be a captive-headed one, you'd only need the one tool - I don't know whether it is, off-hand.



> And does that mean the dropout IS telescopic, like I thought?



No idea, but I doubt it... Doesn't look telescopic to me, I think you're seeing the suspension block.



> And the fact that it's easy to dismantle means you're having to assemble it every time you reach the park and ride or whatever and continue your commute.



Most people with bikes like this only dismantle them if they have to. I would imagine ibren leaves the bike assembled most of the time, and commutes all the way, but has the option of putting it in a case to take on a train or plane or bus for a longer trip like a holiday. Of course, if you own one, you tend to get very skilled at the process, so you could do it quickly and efficiently.




> Obviously this is down to the rider, but if you're in a bit of a rush and don't assemble it quite correct, it could easily fall apart while you're riding it.



Then you would be a dope, and eligible for a Darwin Award. Although actually, on most folding bikes I've come across, the safety tolerances either stop you getting it wrong or mean you can get away with a bit of sloppy assembly, for a while. You generally notice any problems straightaway and put them right.



> I've already said I can accept that it will _work_. But I wouldn't ride it because it looks like an inefficient deathtrap that was cobbled together on scrapheap challenge.



Well then, you prove yourself, as usual, wrong, and narrowminded.


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

OK Bonj, Have a quick look here http://www.alexmoulton.co.uk/ 

"1. Why the small wheels? 
The small wheels are an essential feature of the Moulton concept. They offer many advantages. 


With only half the rotating mass of the wheels on a 'conventional' bicycle, it is possible to accelerate faster. 
They are extremely stiff and much stronger than larger wheels because of the short spokes. 
The aerodynamic drag is lower; there is less frontal area and less spoke area causing turbulence to slow you down. 
The centre of gravity is lowered, resulting in improved stability. 
The small wheels free up space normally occupied by large wheels, allowing luggage to be carried lower. 
2. Aren't smaller wheels harder to pedal? 

No, because:- 


The gears are chosen so that they correspond to pedalling a bicycle with large wheels. 
The smaller frontal area results in less aerodynamic drag. 
The lower inertia means that you can accelerate faster. 
If you are still doubtful, consider the HPVs (Human Powered Vehicles) developed for the ultimate performance - many 
of these use the unique 17" Moulton wheels and tyres fitted to the AM series bicycles. 
3. Why the space frame? 


The construction makes it far stiffer and stronger than conventional frames. 
The weight is similar to that of the best conventional touring bicycles - and the Speed model is comparable with the 
lightest racing frames. 
In conjunction with the small wheels it results in a low centre of gravity. 
The standard frame size can be ridden by cyclists of almost any size. 
The low top tube leads to improved safety and controllability. 
The low top tube allows it to be ridden equally easily by men and women; it is also a major advantage for elderly or 
disabled riders, who cannot easily ride conventional bicycles. 
4. Why suspension? 


It allows the advantages of the very rigid small wheels, high pressure tyres and space frame to be enjoyed while giving 
a much more comfortable ride than a conventional large-wheeled bicycle. 
The road shocks experienced on a conventional bicycle are dramatically reduced. It is a light, simple, maintenance free system. 
Improved traction - the wheels do not bounce going through corners or on rough surfaces. 
Reduced strain on the wheels - the wheels stay true, spoke nipples stay tight and spoke breakages are extremely rare. "


Sounds a bit better than the average 'Double Boinger' for road use


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> I think it works perfectly well, because it's been designed to cope with the stresses - possibly with thicker tubing. I've never seen a bike with a long steerer tube in which the tube has snapped, and I've seen a lot of different bikes, ridden by some pretty hefty riders.


Do you not see though how the potential for the steerer tube to bend during riding is greater than on a normal bike?



Arch said:


> So you know nothing of the rules of the UCI and how closely they define the bikes?


I don't know the exact rules, but neither do you it would seem, or you would be able to quote which rule that heap breaks.
I can hazard a guess as to the _reason_ they define bikes closely though. Would it be something to do with ... _safey_?



Arch said:


> No idea, but I doubt it... Doesn't look telescopic to me, I think you're seeing the suspension block.


It's got _suspension_? But it's a road bike! Why has it got suspension?


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> Well then, you prove yourself, as usual, wrong, and narrowminded.


Oh, I'm _wrong_ because I wouldn't ride it. OK. Nice to know my opinions are officially _wrong_.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (27 Jul 2007)

Bonj - the extent to which you will make yourself look like an idiot never ceases to amaze...

You may well not like the look of the Airnimal. But apart from that you know nothing about it (or about bikes in general by the sound of it), but you're doing your usual thing of taking a prejudice and to retrospectively make it sound like this was the outcome of some rational thinking. 

You'd really do better if you just asked some questions politely some times. Like, 'that's an unusual bike, not sure I like the look of it, but can you tell me more about it?'

And yes, it does make a difference it you've actually ridden one... obviously.


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> It's got _suspension_? But it's a road bike! Why has it got suspension?


Bonj, do me the honour of reading my post if you can't be @rsed to click the link (the one thats three or four above this one), the one that states "Improved traction - the wheels do not bounce going through corners or on rough surfaces" near the end. If you can't be bothered to at least make an effort to inform yourself when you're supplied with the information (or the means to obtain it) Shut Up


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> Do you not see though how the potential for the steerer tube to bend during riding is greater than on a normal bike?



Yes, but I also see the potential for the designer to design it so that that doesn't happen, which is what has been done.



> I don't know the exact rules, but neither do you it would seem, or you would be able to quote which rule that heap breaks.
> I can hazard a guess as to the _reason_ they define bikes closely though. Would it be something to do with ... _safey_?



No, I don't. I do know that they are generally in order not to give an advantage to anyone because of their bike - ie the greater aerodynamic advantage of a recumbent. 

I don't know that safety comes into it, no, beyond the basic level of demanding that bikes have brakes etc, which that bike has. If anyone dos have the rules to hand, I'd be interested to know.



> It's got _suspension_? But it's a road bike! Why has it got suspension?



To absorb the slightly greater road shock, which is the result of the slightly smaller wheels. It's not boingy suspension like on an MTB, it's an elastomer block, and its the sort of thing found on many smaller wheeled bikes. But why would you ask, you never listen or learn or anything do you?


----------



## Arch (27 Jul 2007)

bonj said:


> Oh, I'm _wrong_ because I wouldn't ride it. OK. Nice to know my opinions are officially _wrong_.




Well, usually, yes....


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

Arch said:


> But why would you ask, you never listen or learn or anything do you?



Bit like banging ones head against a wall, but with a big soft fluffy pillow tied to the head Arch ... Not painfull ... Just a bit of a waste of time


----------



## HJ (27 Jul 2007)

domtyler said:


>



Nice bike Dom.


----------



## Sore Thumb (27 Jul 2007)

Oh dear.

Its a post a picture thread not post an argument.:?:

Maybe the thread should go to soapbox or maybe we should have a separate sub-forum for members scrapping.

Like at school, I'll meet you at the school gates ...............................

We could each slap each other on the face and then proceed to "scrapping forum" to keep the fight away from everyone else.


----------



## Yorkshireman (27 Jul 2007)

Sore Thumb said:


> Oh dear.
> 
> Its a post a picture thread not post an argument.:?:
> 
> ...




Looks as if it might have died down now anyway :?:


----------



## HJ (27 Jul 2007)

Sore Thumb said:


> Oh dear.
> 
> Its a post a picture thread not post an argument.:?:
> 
> ...





bonj said:


> Oh, I'm _wrong_ because I wouldn't ride it. OK. Nice to know my opinions are officially _wrong_.





Arch said:


> Well, usually, yes....



Shouldn't this lot be move to Folding Bikes where is belongs, there is a shortage of threads there, so the rest of us can get back to showing the bikes we use to get to work, etc. Either that or meet behind the bike sheds after school and sort it out in the old fashion way. :?:


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

(debate moved.)


----------



## bonj2 (27 Jul 2007)

Hairy Jock said:


> Shouldn't this lot be move to Folding Bikes where is belongs, there is a shortage of threads there, so the rest of us can get back to showing the bikes we use to get to work, etc. Either that or meet behind the bike sheds after school and sort it out in the old fashion way.



Yes, probably:
http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=28568#post28568


----------



## peejay78 (28 Jul 2007)

back to the thread; i commute on this:







off the peg fuji frame, cinelli criterium bars, harry rowland cpx22 wheels, goldfinger brake, 48:16 gearing.


----------



## Keith Oates (29 Jul 2007)

peejay, that looks smart. Is your commute hilly or flatish!!


----------



## peejay78 (29 Jul 2007)

fairly flat - central london. i go up highgate hill on it though. which can hurt.

this is what i use for hills:


----------



## User169 (29 Jul 2007)

I commute on an older version of one of these...

http://tinyurl.com/ys2y6x


----------



## peejay78 (30 Jul 2007)

classic sit up and beg. great bike.


----------



## User169 (30 Jul 2007)

More commuters...

The pink one was for London

The green one is for the Netherlands

http://tinyurl.com/ys2hd9


----------



## fossyant (30 Jul 2007)

Well, got a new job within 9 miles from home (many routes to extend the journey) so the mtb has had some work done.

Gone are the knobblies, on are Vittoria Randonneur 26x1.5 slicks and a set of black zefal guards.

Intend to commute most days except ice, or really bad howling storms. I don't do ice - had 3 really bad falls in one day many moons ago on a commute. How I look forward to not having to use the car everyday !

Commuting from Thursday - first couple of days I'll check out the bike and changing locations. Intend to commute not in my full 'lycra larry roadie' kit - will use cycling shorts with either baggie shorts or trackie bottoms on top, spd mtb shoes and a plain cycling top - don't want to scare my new work colleagues. Should be fun catching a few roadies dressed like that  - might just have to tell 'em not to worry 

Here is the commuter mtb thingy !


http://digitalsafe.pipex.com/12931981


----------



## longers (19 Aug 2007)

Thanks for the advice on how to do this Arch. (assuming it works)
This was the day my wormery got delivered. Short route home that night.


----------



## longers (19 Aug 2007)

What did I do wrong? As suggested I put a photo onto a photosharing thingy (I used Flickr as it's linked to Yahoo), I then tried to put it on here using the address and the add photo button. It obviously hasn't worked. Help please.


----------



## Road Fiddler (19 Aug 2007)

Felt F1X i will get an image up in a sec






Here is an image, pretty happy with it so far, its less than a month old. I have changed the tires from the stock 38c cycloX tires to 25c contis. 

I have also ordered new brakes as the Tektro Orxys ain't all that although they do do the job, I just fancied something a bit classier and probably better at stopping me. So have gone for 4ZA CB2s.

Next i will be getting a Fixie, probably a Steamroller for around town and as an urban play bike.


----------



## HLaB (19 Aug 2007)

Assuming it works, this is a picture of my Ridgeback Velocity I use to commute, if not heres a link to the photo


----------



## Arch (20 Aug 2007)

longers said:


> What did I do wrong? As suggested I put a photo onto a photosharing thingy (I used Flickr as it's linked to Yahoo), I then tried to put it on here using the address and the add photo button. It obviously hasn't worked. Help please.




Did you use the link with [ img ] [ /img] at each end? (but without the spaces..)

I just copy the right link from photobox (they give several options for links or embedding the image), or if I'm copying the URL from the address box at the top of the screen, add the img tags in the [] brackets...


----------



## Arch (20 Aug 2007)

For example, going to HlaB's pic, and copying the URL:

URL alone:

http://galleryadrian.fotopic.net/p43167228.html

Add [ img ] to the front and [ /img ] to the end (without the spaces)

Tada!






Oh.. Er.

Ah....

Try adding www 






Oh. Um... No idea....

I'm stumped...


----------



## longers (20 Aug 2007)

Here's a link to the picture anyway 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11737479@N03/1172217869/


----------



## HJ (20 Aug 2007)

*longers* it should work something like this 


```
[IMG]http://flickr.com/photos/link_to_you_photo[/IMG]
or 
[URL="http://flickr.com/photos/link_to_you_photo"]Your link here[/URL]
```

Hope this helps.


----------



## HJ (20 Aug 2007)

Ah, I see you have it working now. Isn't the wheelie bin a wee bit over the top and Do you often let your dog do the driving?


----------



## HLaB (20 Aug 2007)

Arch said:


> For example, going to HlaB's pic, and copying the URL:
> 
> URL alone:
> 
> ...



I had to take it into Flickr, not Fotopic and copy the picture location, not the html and ensure that it finished .jpeg


----------



## longers (20 Aug 2007)

Hairy Jock said:


> Ah, I see you have it working now. Isn't the wheelie bin a wee bit over the top and Do you often let your dog do the driving?




It's not my car so I'm not worried about the no-claims.


----------



## Elmer Fudd (20 Aug 2007)

My tub thumper
Claud Butler XC Sport




Slightly different (better) spec. to what was originally on the spec. sheet but I have a feeling that CB were using up what they had on the shelf !!!

For my £225, the price of the bike (I'd just had a bike nicked so low on funds, the LBS, Village cycle centre in Nuneaton, excellent service, and no, it's not local to me but it is to my Bro!) They changed the plastic pedals to alloy and fitted open toe clips, mudguards and smart front and rear lights. 
I like it, well I did 'til somebody posted a link to specialized hybrid bikes, I thought they were just mountain. BUGGER !! Got to go rob a bank now. GRRRRRR !!!!!


----------



## Arch (21 Aug 2007)

Love that pic longers, glad to see you have a suitably sized saddlebag for snacks...


----------



## fisha (21 Aug 2007)

My bike ... on the commute to work yesterday:

Klein Attitude
Carbon forks
disc brakes
1" slicks

*



*


----------



## Arch (21 Aug 2007)

That looks lovely, where is it?


----------



## fisha (21 Aug 2007)

Thats the Greenock Cut ( also known as Loch Thom cut ). I occasionally cycle along it and then turn down the hillside along a singletrack path down into IBM from up the hillside. 

Want another one taken a few hundred yards further along? just to really rub it in?


----------



## longers (21 Aug 2007)

Great commute fisha. You lucky devil.


----------



## HJ (21 Aug 2007)

fisha said:


> My bike ... on the commute to work yesterday:
> 
> Klein Attitude
> Carbon forks
> ...




Christ, what happened?? Did you fall off??? 



fisha said:


> Thats the Greenock Cut ( also known as Loch Thom cut ). I occasionally cycle along it and then turn down the hillside along a singletrack path down into IBM from up the hillside.
> 
> Want another one taken a few hundred yards further along? just to really rub it in?



GO on fisha show em the stuff yous posted on the _other place_ make em _*really*_ envious


----------



## fisha (22 Aug 2007)

OK . . . as per request, here are some pics from my commute:


----------



## Freewheeler (27 Aug 2007)

I ride a vintage 3-speed between home and the railway station, about 1.5 miles each way; this is just the kind of job these bikes were designed for. The bike cost 8 quid from Ebay. New tyres, tubes, ball bearings, cotter pins and a period back light for the dynamo and the total cost was about £50. Oh, and it's most unlikely to get stolen. 







I've also bought a non-folding Raleigh Twenty, also for £8. This one is going to stay in Manchester to provide transport between the station and my work, less than a mile each way (at the moment I just about catch the early train home by jogging to the station, arriving as a stressed, sweaty mess). I'm hoping it will remain unmolested overnight at Oxford Road station.







They each weigh a ton, but I reckon that's a good thing for my fitness considering the commute is so short.


----------



## Arch (30 Aug 2007)

Excellent, a bike for every job, and none of them expensive. Just shows how practical cycling can be!


----------



## Freewheeler (30 Aug 2007)

Well, the Raleigh Twenty is now in Manchester and survived unscathed last night on Oxford Road station. What with red lights and heavy traffic, rolling to the station doesn't seem much quicker than walking/jogging, but it's much more fun! If anyone sees me riding down Princess Street/Whitworth Street, shout Hi. :-)


----------



## peejay78 (31 Aug 2007)

the three speed is great - i used to have a hopper that i repaired after finding it under the stairs rusting in a communal area of a block of flats. it had a dynohub and everything. i sued to commute on the fuji, a few pages ago, now i commute on this:





although it now has white bar tape which looks much nicer.

currently a bit confused, had 48:18 on the fuji, thought it was 16, never bothered to check, now have 48:16 on this, and it is quite a bit bigger. will either make or break me i guess.


----------



## Freewheeler (31 Aug 2007)

Hmm, your bike looks just a tad quicker than my shopper 

Nice clean lines too.


----------



## peejay78 (1 Sep 2007)

i love it... since i got it i haven't stopped riding around and now have a sore ass.


----------



## bonj2 (2 Sep 2007)

peejay where's the brake lever on that?!


----------



## peejay78 (2 Sep 2007)

you can just see it on the bars, a little hint of gold hiding there.


----------



## gambatte (5 Sep 2007)

This is mine, just after I got it a couple of months ago.
Now sporting SPDs and a Carradice Barley bag.

But those amber reflectors are 'outta there'!!


----------



## jonathan ellis (8 Sep 2007)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12989225@N04/1345529219/

http://www.pinkbike.com/photo/650449/




my commuter (if theres a picture above!) when the weathers nice

otherwise its a Langster 06 SS


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Sep 2007)

Not quite in the same league as most of these, but I like it;


----------



## gambatte (8 Sep 2007)

Not uncomfortable with the saddle nose that high?


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Sep 2007)

gambatte said:


> Not uncomfortable with the saddle nose that high?



Very  Not so much while riding, but afterwards, yeah, especially this week. 

I figured that out today, and angled it down (I'd taken the bike out of the garage for the pic and to do some seat height adjustments).

I wish I'd had a proper look at it 3 weeks ago though


----------



## mikeitup (9 Sep 2007)

*re:*

I have a Carrera Fury 07 mtb. Have just upgraded the tyres to Schwalbe Road Cruisers 26x1.75 for my commute. (they have made a hell of a difference) I have added, a topeak wedge saddlebag, topeak front and rear lights, cateye micro computer and a lizard skins chainstay protector. I have also replaced the grips with ODI X-treme lock ons (really good!) and am about to put on Shimano M520 clipless pedals and a new wtb laser saddle.

here are some pics:

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b384/mikeitup/fury07cust01.jpg


http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b384/mikeitup/fury07cust02.jpg


oh yes... forgot my crudcatchers!


----------



## caesar (9 Sep 2007)

Here's mine:






I sometimes get asked why I have a disc brake on a fixer - the answer is that:

a) It's not a fixer: I've got a freewheel on at the moment because I haven't plucked up courage to ride fixed in London traffic yet!
 The front hub is a Schmidt dynamo and when I was buying the parts I thought that when the rim wore out I'd have to wait for the wheel to be rebuilt or buy an expensive new wheel. Slightly neurotic perhaps, and it's moot anyway now as I ended up building the wheels myself!


----------



## BentMikey (9 Sep 2007)

I don't think it's very clever to ride brakeless fixed on the road!


----------



## Jacomus-rides-Gen (10 Sep 2007)

I agree with you Mikey, I think it is irresponsible.

I know that a fixie can use leg braking (I ride one myself) but it is impossible to stop a fixie with leg braking as it is by using brakes. I was recently having a heated, erm, discussion(!) with a friend who rides a brakeless fixie, he maintained point blank that he could stop very fast on it "Nearly as quick as with a brake if I do a skip-stop."

We tested it in a 20-0mph emergency stop. Unsurprisingly I stopped a LONG way before he did, and with far more control over the bike. It settled that part of the argument, but he still thinks that brakeles is perfectly safe.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Sep 2007)

I think it's quite possible to become very skilled with leg braking, but the best leg brakers will only ever approach the stopping ability of a rear brake. We all know that's a small fraction of the stopping power available from a front brake. I don't want to ride without a front brake because I'd have to ride slower. Risk compensation in action or what!!!

Still, aren't back-pedal (coaster) brakes and no front brake legal in some countries?


----------



## peejay78 (10 Sep 2007)

good to see you yesterday mikey.

a guy came down to bike polo yesterday on a big dutch thing with no front brake and the coaster brake wasn't working.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Sep 2007)

Hehehe, I was thinking of your comment yesterday when I posted that!

Perhaps I'm a little unfairly biased given the stopping power on my 'bent. I can stop maybe twice as hard in the dry as a normal bike because it's so low.


----------

