# Whats the best mudguards to get???



## dantheman (19 May 2008)

will be needing to get some mudguards, no hurry yet as weather not too bad.. Dont want to spend loads, just need something that works well, looks good or is unnoticeable, would prefer ones that are easy to take off.. I have seen these

http://www.freemanscycles.co.uk/product2.asp?product_id=479&pname=Alloy Mudguards PW1

what do you think/ any other suggestions??- to fit 700c x 28mm, may fit wider for winter if its an advantage??

thanks all..


----------



## Tynan (19 May 2008)

I've never really noticed one from another over the years, they all loko much the same and do the same job in my experience


----------



## upsidedown (19 May 2008)

Never noticed mine, they're very old Esge. Guess it only matters how durable if you crash/drop the bike. 

My front guard has a flap of rubber type stuff at the bottom which seems to stop any water spraying.


----------



## 4F (19 May 2008)

SKS Chromoplastic. 

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDeta...D=5360010679&N=SKS Chromoplastic Mudguard Set


----------



## mootaineer (19 May 2008)

My bikes don't have eyelets so I fit these:
http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDeta...0005894&N=SKS Race Blade Clip On Mudguard Set

I find them really effective and no problem at all.

For larger widths you might want to try:
http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDeta...D=5360013199&N=SKS Race Blade XL Mudguard Set


----------



## Fab Foodie (19 May 2008)

FatFellaFromFelixstowe said:


> SKS Chromoplastic.
> 
> http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDeta...D=5360010679&N=SKS Chromoplastic Mudguard Set



Absolutely. Accept no substitute. Different widths and colours available including some snazzy Carbon-fibre look-alikes.


----------



## Aperitif (20 May 2008)

Raceblades - carbon look.


----------



## bonj2 (20 May 2008)

What mudguards to get? try NONE.



dantheman said:


> will be needing to get some mudguards



You don't NEED them. You mean you WANT them, in order to look worldly-wise.



dantheman said:


> Dont want to spend loads,


don't then - don't spend anything.



dantheman said:


> would prefer ones that are easy to take off..


I would say that's the most important attribute of a pair of mudguards - how easy they are to take off. And never put back on again.



dantheman said:


> I have seen these
> 
> http://www.freemanscycles.co.uk/product2.asp?product_id=479&pname=Alloy Mudguards PW1
> 
> *what do you think*


i think they're crap.



dantheman said:


> / any other suggestions??


Yep - don't buy them, they're crap.
Mudguards always get in the way, are heavy, rattly, horrible-looking, and crap.


----------



## Twenty Inch (20 May 2008)

> Ignore bonj, he doesn't accept that you get a line of mud/water up your back when riding in the wet without guards.
> 
> SKS chromoplastic are the ones to get. They're not easy to take off, but there are no easily-removeable guards that will do a half-decent job of protecting you.




Plus one, on both counts.


----------



## jiggerypokery (20 May 2008)

I heartily recommend these at http://www.bbbparts.com/ can be taken off quickly, work perfectly, the brackets stay on the bike and are unobtrusive and they don't cost an arm and a leg.

BFD-21F RoadProtector
» Elegant front fender for road bikes.

BFD-21R RoadProtector
» Elegant rear fender for road bikes.

Special Features
» Protects against water and grime.» Easy quick release system. When the main fender body is removed only a very small inconspicuous piece is left on the bike.
» Composite material. Tough and durable yet lightweight. Won't easily crack from impacts, natural projectiles or heavy use.
Installation manual available here.


----------



## Chris James (20 May 2008)

I don't think Bonj has ever actually used mudguards. Mine don't rattle at all and weigh next to nothing. They are reasonably easy to take off but I never bother as I don't have any pretensions to racing and am not worried about their weight, given that my bike and I weigh about 190lbs before they are fitted and 191lb afterwards.

The plus points of mudguards are that you don't get wet and dirty, the person behind you doesn't get wet, your drive chain stays cleaner much longer because it doesn't have crap sprayed at it constantly.

Mine are SKS clones as fitted on my Dawes Audax.


----------



## redjedi (20 May 2008)

mootaineer said:


> My bikes don't have eyelets so I fit these:
> http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDeta...0005894&N=SKS Race Blade Clip On Mudguard Set
> 
> I find them really effective and no problem at all.
> ...



I also use these, as I don't have eyelets. Got mine in black and against the black tyre, you hardly notice them.

Off and on in about 2 mins....easy.


----------



## twowheelsgood (20 May 2008)

Bonj, it really isn't a case of looking worldly wise. Most of us who actually use a bike for day-to-day utility would settle for "dry". We may of course think twice should we ever get to wear the yellow jersey. I fitted my guards 7 years ago, they weight 300g and have never rattled, it isn't difficult for anyone of basic mechanical skill and a tube of loctite. the bike is used all year 'round and keeps me as dry as is possible.

You've been advised on many occasions only to give advice about things you actually know anything about. Communities work by sharing actual experience. When you spout your baseless opinion it only serves to confuse those who came here in good faith to seek advice. the sum knowledge of the universe has been advanced only by knowing you don't like guards and have never actually used any - thanks for that.

Get the SKSs.


----------



## Keith Oates (20 May 2008)

I also consider mudguards on a commute bike a sensible move, however IMO they should be silver/chrome and not black or colour co-ordinated with the frame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## tdr1nka (20 May 2008)

I have black mudguards to match my silver frame.
Please don't listen to Bonj on the subject of mudguards, he gets some funny ideas into his head that young 'un.


----------



## dantheman (20 May 2008)

cheers for the info..
as i said, no hurry yet, and i suppose they dont need to come off that quickly- probably will be lazy and only take them off for the summer anyway..

looks as though the chromoplastics are a favourite round here, a little search and ive found them for 23.99 delivered. - but what size??- i mean i have 28mm shwalbe stelvio slick tyres, but am wondering if its worth fitting wider tyres for winter???- if so what size and tread should i be looking at.. will only be on roads in winter, but theyre backroads and want to make sure ive got enough traction..

thankyou..
dan.


----------



## mootaineer (21 May 2008)

There seem to be some good deals here as well:
http://www.cyclestore.co.uk/rangeViewer.asp?NoOfProducts=20&categoryID=154&page=1


----------



## Rhythm Thief (21 May 2008)

Another vote for a) ignoring Bonj's "advice" on this particular subject, and  SKS Chromoplastic guards. I've used them for years.


----------



## threefingerjoe (21 May 2008)

As a year-around commuter, I'll put in one more vote for FULL mudguards with front flap. I currently have Planet Bike mudguards, and I'm satisfied with them, but I'm listening to the advice, and won't mind trying a set of the SKS Cromoplastic in the future, if, or when, these Planet Bike guards ever break. They've been through 4 midwest U.S. winters, so far. 

As far as Bonj's opinion...well, all bikes are not built or suited for the same purpose. Since this is the "Commuting" room, I'd presume that most people don't want to get mucked up on the way to work.


----------



## tdr1nka (21 May 2008)

threefingerjoe said:


> As far as Bonj's opinion...well, all bikes are not built or suited for the same purpose. Since this is the "Commuting" room, I'd presume that most people don't want to get mucked up on the way to work.



And we have years of accumulated experience rather than one quite potty and agressive opinion.


----------



## bonj2 (21 May 2008)

dantheman said:


> cheers for the info..
> as i said, no hurry yet, and i suppose they dont need to come off that quickly- probably will be lazy and only take them off for the summer anyway..
> 
> looks as though the chromoplastics are a favourite round here, a little search and ive found them for 23.99 delivered. - but what size??- i mean i have 28mm shwalbe stelvio slick tyres, but am wondering if its worth fitting wider tyres for winter???- if so what size and tread should i be looking at.. will only be on roads in winter, but theyre backroads and want to make sure ive got enough traction..
> ...



wider tyres on the road are unnecessary, and are the primary reason why a lot of people _think_ they need mudguards. Thinner, slicker tyres don't get muddy water sticking to them and as such the splash-up only gets a few inches with my 25mm michelin P2Rs. 28mm with nobbles on - COURSE you're going to get muddy... It's like tying a towel round the tap when you're fixing the washer - just turn the water off   Too many people on here suffer from "I-might-go-down-a-towpath" syndrome. There's two disciplines of cycling - road cycling, and mountain biking. This happens to be a ROAD bike forum. People shouldn't try and pretend there's some middle ground to which they belong of being neither one nor the other but just a 'generic cyclist' - just admit you're a roadie and do things the roadie way. And that doesn't mean mudguards. Mudguards are old fashioned becasue they were only really necessary in olden days when there actually WAS a lot of mud on roads and lots of water aswell due to roadbuilding technology not having advanced as far as providing effective drainage.


----------



## tdr1nka (21 May 2008)

I ride regular roads with narrow slicks and got a spray in the wet that completely vanished when I bought mudguards.


----------



## tdr1nka (21 May 2008)

bonj said:


> There's two disciplines of cycling - road cycling, and mountain biking. This happens to be a ROAD bike forum. People shouldn't try and pretend there's some middle ground to which they belong of being neither one nor the other but just a 'generic cyclist' - just admit you're a roadie and do things the roadie way.
> 
> 
> > Bonj, this is a cycling forum, not specifically a road bike forum.
> ...


----------



## dodgy (21 May 2008)

bonj said:


> This happens to be a ROAD bike forum



Eh?

Dave.


----------



## dantheman (21 May 2008)

if the world were as perfect as bonj, it would never rain, and we wouldnt even need tyres as we could all float along...

i just want to be dry this winter...

so thanks to all the helpful advice...


----------



## bonj2 (21 May 2008)

> Wrong on two counts.
> 
> The first you've been told. Ride any bike in the rain and you'll get spray off the tyres.


Ride any bike in the rain and you'll get spray off the SKY. it's called rain.  durrrr...



> Oh, and another. This isn't a road bike forum. It's for everyone.


even escaped convicts on the run.



tdr1nka said:


> I have no problem with your views but I do get annoyed when you kick off with your aggressive and verbose dogma as to what is 'correct' in what appears to be a very narrow view of the whole and varied world of cycling.
> I just don't think you know quite how detrimental your posts can be with regard to offering advice or assistance.
> 
> Live and let live M8.



What are you suggesting, that my views will cause somebody to think "hey, you know that bonj guy? I think he's right after all - I _will_ take my mudguards off!",
and the next morning they cycle to work without them on and it starts to spit on the way in.
Ne'er mind, he thinks - bonj has reassured me that it'll be ok so it must be. Anyhow in an important sales meeting later in the day our cyclist is making a presentation to some customers, and when he turns round to draw a demonstration on the boardroom whiteboard of how great the company's product is, the prospective customers see a muddy line streaked up his back, and start to whisper amongst themselves and give disapproving glances. 

When the meeting's over, the boss expects them to come into an office to discuss the contract but they politely make their excuses and leave. Then the boss sees the line up his back and decides he hasn't made enough of an effort to present himself smartly and cleanly enough and sacks him instantly.

He goes home jobless, and is subsequently unable to feed his wife and family. Depressed, his wife becomes an alcoholic and without any maintenance has to shophift to eat and feed her booze habit. With no money coming in, his kids have no food or school clothes so are also forced to shoplift and mug grannies, they also have to take to dealing a bit of crack aswell when times are hard.
Wtih a history of being sacked for ruining a presentation that otherwise could have gone well, there is no hope for our cyclist to get another job as everybody in the industry knows about it - so he turns to gambling, in the hope that luck will save him instead. Within months he has gambeld away his house, so, desparate - he tries to sell his passport on the streets.
A dodgy looking somalian fellow tries to buy it off him, but the police are coming and there's a scuffle and they nick off with it anyway without paying the 5 grand agreed - and the police catch him amongst the somalian paperwork that is fluttering to the ground from the guy who is soon nowhere to be seen. Thinking it's his, they arrest him for being an illegal immigrant, and with no passport, or house anymore - he can't prove who he is, within days he is being deported back to somalia.
He doesn't have a home, and so, tired, he falls asleep on a bed of hay in the middle of a circle of bricks.
It turns out that as luck would have it that is the exact spot where the local tribe do sacrifices every other monday apart from bank holidays when they go veggie. They turn up, chanting, and find our fellow sleeping amongst the hay and since he is right in the middle of the holy circle of bricks, they assume he is a gift from the gods, so they chop him up while dancing round the circle warlord style with torches, and then boil him in a cauldron for supper.
All because he listened to bonj and didn't use mudguards.


----------



## tdr1nka (21 May 2008)

Oh God do I really need to answer this?

Bonj Mate, you decry actual facts and then insist your thinking is the only 'correct' answer and this is not the first instance.

You could be aiming to be so much better than the 'David Ike of CC'.


----------



## bonj2 (21 May 2008)

You claimed I'm having a detrimental effect. How?

I've never decreed that mine is the ONLY correct answer, it's the correct answer for me, so I don't see why it shouldn't be for others. I'll continue to stand in the way of received wisdom being peddled as learning by experience.
But everyone always acts like such an absolute twat on the mudguards issue that it's often better to just state it out loud rather than pussy footing around. I must say you're surprisingly defensive for someone who KNOWS that they're right. The mark of received wisdom is the desire to have your view the ONLY view that ever gets posted, the fact that you get upset when I post contrary views indicates you appear to require, or think you require, a monopoly on your 'wisdom' in order for it to be received correctly by the next generation.


----------



## tdr1nka (22 May 2008)

Receive this wisdom.

How can I have a monoploy on my 'wisdom' when everyone else is saying the same as me?
I am not the one fighting to be the island here.

How am I being defensive if I simply try to point out that your posts are not just contrary views they are diatribes built entirely on your own tiny and pumped up perception of what is 'correct'. I'm just sick to death of it Bonj. You give some grand sobbing farewell and come back ten minutes later

I was in fact trying to be helpful in saying, and I've said this before, that a lot of your posts give you the appearence of having an unfriendly, agressive and extremely narrow view of any other cyclist if they don't simply conform to your preconceptions, assumptions and demands of 'correct' in cycling.

You write in absolutes. Your behaviour is rigid, vapid, belligerant and, IMO, makes you look a lot like a petty jerk who is rather sadly entertained by being deliberately contrary when they think they are being funny/ironic or worse still clever.

Sorry Mate, I just don't have the patience, you come across as a total and utter arse, go flag me.
Good night.


----------



## bonj2 (22 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Receive this wisdom.
> 
> How can I have a monoploy on my 'wisdom' when everyone else is saying the same as me?
> I am not the one fighting to be the island here.


_Everyone_ else isn't saying the same as you - I'm not.
Granted, _most_ people are saying the same as you - but why isn't that enough?
You appear to want a situation where whenever anyone asks a question, the standard, accepted forum opinion gets wheeled out. You're beginning to sound like a party whip, trying to chastise me because I won't tow the party line.



tdr1nka said:


> How am I being defensive if *I simply try to point out* that your posts are not just contrary views they are diatribes built entirely on your own tiny and pumped up perception of what is 'correct'. I'm just sick to death of it Bonj. You give some grand sobbing farewell and come back ten minutes later
> I was in fact trying to be helpful in saying, and I've said this before, that a lot of your posts give you the appearence of having an unfriendly, agressive and extremely narrow view of any other cyclist if they don't simply conform to your preconceptions, assumptions and demands of 'correct' in cycling.


You've already 'pointed it out'. You've 'pointed it out' once. You've 'pointed it out' many times. You 'point it out' every single sodding week, _day_ even.
And I haven't taken a blind bit of notice. Like the thick pillock you are, you STILL refuse to take the hint that I don't want to change my behaviour to suit you, so SHUT THE F**K UP about it.


----------



## BentMikey (22 May 2008)

Bonj, your a mook.


----------



## magnatom (22 May 2008)

I hadn't looked at this thread as I'm no expert on mudguards. However, it would appear that you don't need to be an expert (or even have anything remotely resembling the slightest inkling of a smidgen of a speck of knowledge). So I'll put in my 2p worth...... I have a niggling feeling that bonj might, just might, not be right. Call me crazy, but that's just what I think. No hard feelings of course bonj.


----------



## Chris James (22 May 2008)

Bonj, of course you are allowed to have your opinion, but equally it is okay of other people say you are wrong (in the same way that you say they are wrong).

Since the OP asked about mudguards then it is only fair that others step in when they see your advice if they believe it to be wrong. Otherwise it would imply that everyone else is in agreement with you.

You dislike mudguards, that's fine, but it seems to be based on your belief that they are heavy and rattle (not true).

Also, mudguards are not there to protect you from the rain (how would they do that?) but from spray that is produced as you ride across a wet road. You may consider that modern advances in road building make them unnecessary(which advances specifically? As far as I am aware we have been building roads in the same way for decades). But simply looking at a road after it has rained demonstrates that there is standing water on the road after it has rained - thereby completely contradicting your assertion.

Your advice is only good if you only ride on days when there is no standing water / dampness on the roads. Which rules out most of the winter months. I remind you that this is the commuting forum so unless the OP is only planning on commuting on dry days then your advice is flawed.

As far as suddenly suggesting that the OP shouldn't get guards because no roadie uses them - well that is wrong too. Turn up on a club run without guards on a wet day and you may find yourself cycling on your own. Guards are a matter of courtesy to others who you ride with by not spraying them with crap.

Also, from your previous posting history I was not aware that you were a roadie anyway.


----------



## domtyler (22 May 2008)

SKS Chromoplastics here too, they work, what more can be said?

They can be quite a pain to fit though so it might be worth just letting your LBS have the privilege of fitting them for you.


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

Bonj shut up.


----------



## beancounter (22 May 2008)

I'm only new here but even I've realised three things:-

1. some people post good stuff
2. some people post tripe
3. the forum has an "ignore" option

My advice is to use item 3 for item 2. Everyone's a winner!

Regards,

bc


----------



## jiggerypokery (22 May 2008)

Uh?

Roadies don't use mudguards?
Skinny treadless tyres don't throw up spray?

I need to revisit both of my roadbikes and the way I ride them as I must be the problem rather than the rain/trye/road interface that I stupidly thought required a mudguard or two to prevent my arse from getting a good soaking.

My PlanetX carbon road bling - mudguards for rainy days and club rides
My planet X TT uber bling ..... mudguards the other Sunday morning when it was lashing it down...I have no shame 

And who said this was a road forum...it's a cycling forum for all types of bikes irrespective of being skinny or knobly...or so I thought.


----------



## magnatom (22 May 2008)

I should also point out that Glasgow has enough problems keeping the roads pothole free, never mind installing these spray-less mud-less roads. Especially in the winter the roads get absolutely manky and if I didn't have mudguards I would look like my son did yesterday with sh&t all the way up his back! (he has a nasty wee sickness and diarrhoea bug at the moment. His superpoos are something to behold


----------



## jiggerypokery (22 May 2008)

I'm laughing with you Magnatom...though my son has been with us for 7 months now we've managed to avoid any exploding up the back nappy scenarios...untill 4am yesterday when the shoot literaly hit the fan and Finlay woke up to let us know...poor kid. I think this was worse than the black/green poo of the early days.

Poor me too actually as I had to beout oof the house just ober an hour later to catch a plane, can safely say I am not working effectively right now due to lack of sleep, too much beer last night and trying to watch football in a French bar with Americans asking stupid questions. the best of which being - "is this being played in Manchester?".

I worked as a surf instructor for a few years and when the kids asked to leave the water to go to the loo we always said pee in your wetsuits it'll warm you up. One kid went a little far with this instruction and did what comes naturaly! So when it came to the point where we had to strip the wetsuit off this lad...well....lets just say that in a confined space a little shoot goes a long way lol, it was up his shoulders, down his legs  had to make him wash in the sea before we would let him in the van to go home lol


----------



## alecstilleyedye (22 May 2008)

i have the sks ones. i've taken them off the summer, as the low clearance on the front means i can't put more than 100psi in the tyre. and i have to occasionally bend the stays to stop them rubbing.

i think i'll be keeping the winter bike for non commuting only, and using the mtb for the winter commute, so i may not put them back on.


----------



## walker (22 May 2008)

bonj said:


> wider tyres on the road are unnecessary, and are the primary reason why a lot of people _think_ they need mudguards. Thinner, slicker tyres don't get muddy water sticking to them and as such the splash-up only gets a few inches with my 25mm michelin P2Rs. 28mm with nobbles on - COURSE you're going to get muddy... It's like tying a towel round the tap when you're fixing the washer - just turn the water off   Too many people on here suffer from "I-might-go-down-a-towpath" syndrome. There's two disciplines of cycling - road cycling, and mountain biking. This happens to be a ROAD bike forum. People shouldn't try and pretend there's some middle ground to which they belong of being neither one nor the other but just a 'generic cyclist' - just admit you're a roadie and do things the roadie way. And that doesn't mean mudguards. Mudguards are old fashioned becasue they were only really necessary in olden days when there actually WAS a lot of mud on roads and lots of water aswell due to roadbuilding technology not having advanced as far as providing effective drainage.




If you was part of a club, a majority of clubs would not let you ride in a group without guards in the winter, no matter what the weather was like


----------



## dantheman (22 May 2008)

well, im glad i posted this question now, as not only did i get the answer i needed, i also get to read some nice little arguements as well, bonus!

- cant wait till we get some of those "state of the art" new roads round here though, they sound pretty darn good. maybe if they are all done before winter, the price of mudguards will drop to pennies, and then i can buy some just to look stupid!!! (because obviously thats what theyre made for "innit")


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

Dont worry about bonj hes had to many e numbers again.


----------



## Chuffy (22 May 2008)

walker said:


> If you was part of a club, a majority of clubs would not let you ride in a group without guards in the winter, no matter what the weather was like


I still get a faceful when I ride behind Baggy on account of her not having a rear flap to keep the spray arc down far enough.
For those of a filthy disposition, enjoy. 

Oh and I presume the 8 hour soaking that I got from my Schwalbe Blizzard 23s (which gave me a nastily chafed and scabby perineum) was just my imagination?

Silly bugger.


----------



## bonj2 (22 May 2008)

Chris James said:


> Bonj, of course you are allowed to have your opinion, but equally it is okay of other people say you are wrong (in the same way that you say they are wrong).


Course, that's fine - but I don't see the need to throw toys out of the pram in a huff and stamp your feet up and down having a little screaming strop like tdrinka.



Chris James said:


> Since the OP asked about mudguards then it is only fair that others step in when they see your advice if they believe it to be wrong. Otherwise it would imply that everyone else is in agreement with you.


If about 9 people post that they recommend mudguards, then one person posts that they think mudguards are unnecessary, it doesn't take much brainpower to realise that the one and the nine aren't in agreement with each other. People who ask questions on here do so because they want advice from other people, not because they're stupid. 'Beginners' and 'newbies' are just that, beginners _to cycling_, it doesn't mean they're idiots and need every single thing explaining to them. If what they want to take away from a thread is the gist of the general consensus, then they don't need you to explain the fact that the minority of opinion is just that, a minority - they can see that for themselves. If what they want is a _unanimous_ opinion, then - well, I'm sorry - they're not going to get that - and there's not much that you can do about it, short of setting up your own cycling forum called www.mudguards.co.uk where all that is ever talked about is mudguards.



Chris James said:


> You dislike mudguards, that's fine, but it seems to be based on your belief that they are heavy and rattle (not true).


[/quote]
I mainly dislike them on the grounds that they are unnecessary, but what irks me about them is people such as tdrinka who aren't content with simply using them themselves, but also feeling the need to throw a wobbly whenever I dare to suggest not using them. It almost them feels like I haven't advocated not using them enough - and I get the urge to slag them off even more when the next such thread comes along.



Chris James said:


> Also, mudguards are not there to protect you from the rain (how would they do that?) but from spray that is produced as you ride across a wet road.


What i don't get is, what is the advantage in trying to protect yourself from the water spraying up from the road when there is lots more water falling down as rain which is causing you to get a lot more wet than from the water sprayed up from the road anyway.



Chris James said:


> Your advice is only good if you only ride on days when there is no standing water / dampness on the roads. Which rules out most of the winter months. I remind you that this is the commuting forum so unless the OP is only planning on commuting on dry days then your advice is flawed.


The need for mudguards also assumes that all the following are true:
(a) there is standing water AND mud on the road, in the right consistency for the water to hold some of the mud when sprayed up,
( it isn't currently raining any more
(c) he works all day in what he cycles in
(d) it matters that he isn't muddy at work.

when you consider all those, it's not actually that common for all those to be true. That's probably why I've found _through experience_ that I've never needed mudguards.
The reasoning for the above:
(a) if there is no mud, the only water will spray up and will just run off and not leave any muddy marks. if there is no water (e.g. mud but just dry mud) then it won't spray up.
( if it's still raining, the rain falling on his back will wash the mud off.
(c) if you get a bit of mud spray on you but you get changed into something clean then what does it matter?
(d) if you've got an outdoorsy-type job where you might get muddy anyway then again it doesn't matter.

I think the reason _I personally_ don't need mudguards is a combination of mainly (, the rain washes it off, and a little bit of (a), there isn't THAT much mud on the road anyway as it's fairly urban, not that many farms, etc., and a tiny bit of (c) I get changed at work anyway.



Chris James said:


> As far as suddenly suggesting that the OP shouldn't get guards because no roadie uses them - well that is wrong too. Turn up on a club run without guards on a wet day and you may find yourself cycling on your own. Guards are a matter of courtesy to others who you ride with by not spraying them with crap.





walker said:


> If you was part of a club, a majority of clubs would not let you ride in a group without guards in the winter, no matter what the weather was like



The fact that club runs insist on them must mean one of two things - (a) they ride in close packs on muddy roads at sufficient speed that the spray is fairly parallel to the road and is more likely to hit the cyclist behind than the originating one, (B) the notion that all cyclists MUST have mudguards is fairly 
well and truly ingrained into the cycling community.

and I didn't say NO roadie uses them. Find me where i said that. I don't think i did but if i did i'm mistaken.



Chris James said:


> Also, from your previous posting history I was not aware that you were a roadie anyway.


yes, didn't used to be but am now.



miloat said:


> Bonj shut up.


oh keep your hair on miloat.


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

Shut up bonj.


----------



## bonj2 (22 May 2008)

keep yer 'air on.


----------



## bonj2 (22 May 2008)

> bnoj
> 
> You're waffling.
> 
> ...



haven't you got to report to your probation worker in half an hour? You'd better get cracking.


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

Shut up bonj.


----------



## bonj2 (22 May 2008)

shut up yourself, you tart.


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

Do shut up bonj.


----------



## Milo (22 May 2008)

What does mr kipling do in his spare time?


















Wait for it....












Nearly ready....








Fill tarts with cream!


----------



## BentMikey (23 May 2008)

Bonj your a mook. Shut it.


----------



## Jockey (23 May 2008)

*For what its worth*

I haven't been a memeber of this forum for long, but I'll dish my 2 pence for what it's worth.... I've been riding with mudguards on my bike since I started commuting in January.. I don't really like them on my bike, but needs must when the devil drives. Anyway, with the weather being so good lately, i took the brave decision to take them off... thinking summer was here!! Needless to say, today I got well and truely sprayed from surface water after the rain early this morning... So, tonight the guards go back on again and next time I won't be so hasty. They truely do stop your shoes and back getting wet.

that being said I do to a certain degree I agree with Bonj, i find them a pain (my Bikehut guards do rattle a tad), and I think they make my bike look a little "unsexy", but hey - this is daily commuting and if you want to get to and from work without being covered in muddy spray, get some mud guards as I find they do exactly what they say on the tin.. they guard you from the mud - Genuis!!


----------



## mootaineer (23 May 2008)

> bnoj
> 
> You're waffling.
> 
> ...



I think worse still...you can end up with roadmuck in your mouth!
That's the main reason I use mudguards. I don't care about the clothing so much as what doesn't get in my mouth!

 <- maybe I am breathing too hard


----------



## walker (23 May 2008)

bonj said:


> *I think the reason I personally don't need mudguards is a combination of mainly (, the rain washes it off, and a little bit of (a), there isn't THAT much mud on the road anyway as it's fairly urban, not that many farms, etc., and a tiny bit of (c) I get changed at work anyway.*
> 
> 
> 
> .



Bonj, Can I ask if you have spent good money on a Jersey, only to get it ruined by Muck that is flung off your back wheel because you didn't have guards?

I'm not a primadonna, I don't have Mudguards either, Never have never will, purely because when I do ride in the rain I am on my own. so therefore not a risk to other riders. 

the only risk I run in wet weather is flint and glass sticks to tyres when wet.


----------



## Wolf04 (23 May 2008)

Never had a problem with my SKS guards until reading this thread, then all of a sudden they start rattling and rubbing on the front tyre. Took 20 seconds to repair!


----------



## Arch (23 May 2008)

Jockey said:


> I
> that being said I do to a certain degree I agree with Bonj, i find them a pain (my Bikehut guards do rattle a tad), and I think they make my bike look a little "unsexy",



The implication being, that without guards, your bike is sexy? I like cycling, but... I don't think I'd say any bike was sexy!

The only rattlely guard I have is on my recumbent trike and thats because I failed to replace a zip tie when it was last dismantled to fit in a car and haven't got round to fixing it. But since a recumbent trike is so far outside bonji's comfort zone anyway, I don't suppose a rattlely mudguard will make much difference...


----------



## Milo (23 May 2008)

Dont forget this is a roadbike forum arch.


----------



## tdr1nka (23 May 2008)

Just a little bit of information to the dear Bnoj.
Yes, it is true, there is very little mud on the roads of cities, but there is an accumulation of dirt caused by motor oil, rubber, dust from vehicle brake pads and other such detritus that mixes with or floats on any wet road surface.
This is what gets sprayed up ones back when you ride, in the wet without mudguards.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (23 May 2008)

BentMikey said:


> Bonj your a mook. Shut it.



Can I add: 'spanner'? 

Honestly, bonj, if somone asks for advice, why don't you leave it to people who actually understand cycling and have some constructive advice? Your 'theory' on mudguards is all very amusing for Cake Stop discussion but elsewhere just gets in the way of adult conversation.


----------



## tdr1nka (23 May 2008)

I think FM has made my point a more clearly and snappily Bnoj.
I stated I wasn't adverse to you opinion but that you fly in the face of popular opinion in an agressive and contrary manner that doesn't befit you and is frankly off putting to sensible conversation.


----------



## Arch (23 May 2008)

miloat said:


> Dont forget this is a roadbike forum arch.



Yes, and all my bikes are road bikes of one sort or another. And my trike is a road trike.

Shut up you... Tea?


----------



## Arch (23 May 2008)

A bit late but <puts on pedant's hat> it should be "What're" the best mudguards, not "what's"...


----------



## Joe24 (23 May 2008)

I have the Giant version of Raceblades. I didnt put them on for the first week when i got the bike because i didnt have them. I had a high-vis vest which road rubbish on it(it was winter) and big sprey marks on the back of it because of no mud guards. The front one came off on the first ride and i just never put that one on.
Last week it started to spit and i couldnt be botherd to put the rear guard back on. So on some stretched of road with standing water i got dirt marks on the back of my cycle club jersey. They washed off(did it as soon as i came home) with some scrubbing.
Put the rear one on today when i came home from school because it was spitting. It took me about 5mins to do, so now i will just take them on and off.
At first they were annoying and i did really hate them. They rattled and i didnt like the look of the bike with them on. It went from looking sporty, to looking not so sporty. And as much as i dont like them for the way they look, they did stop rattling, or i just went faster and the noise went. 
They are good to stop sprey up your back, but they lack protection and the front of the back wheel near the seat tube. Which means when there is lots of standing water, your trousers get soaked, which runs down and wets your over shoes and then goes into your socks. The sprey from me not having one on the front wheel also made it so that when i tilted my foot forward water dripped out from the shoe. Could have done with full length guards then.
Heres a tip though, if you go out in the rain in a group, be behind someone with full length mudguards on. You dont get lots of sprey from the back wheel then.


----------



## bonj2 (23 May 2008)

Jockey said:


> I haven't been a memeber of this forum for long, but I'll dish my 2 pence for what it's worth.... I've been riding with mudguards on my bike since I started commuting in January.. I don't really like them on my bike, but needs must when the devil drives. Anyway, with the weather being so good lately, i took the brave decision to take them off... thinking summer was here!! Needless to say, today I got well and truely sprayed from surface water after the rain early this morning... So, tonight the guards go back on again and next time I won't be so hasty. They truely do stop your shoes and back getting wet.
> 
> that being said I do to a certain degree I agree with Bonj, i find them a pain (my Bikehut guards do rattle a tad), and I think they make my bike look a little "unsexy", but hey - this is daily commuting and if you want to get to and from work without being covered in muddy spray, get some mud guards as I find they do exactly what they say on the tin.. they guard you from the mud - Genuis!!



AHA!!  So they DO rattle! and this coming from a mudguards user. So now we know! It obviously takes someone who is fresh enough onto the forum not to have been indoctrinated into the faith and thus never had their brain washed to admit this.

I see all the mudguard crew scrabbling for excuses as to why those particular ones rattle, but a mudguard's a mudguard. The writing's clearly on the wall now.




walker said:


> Bonj, Can I ask if you have spent good money on a Jersey, only to get it ruined by Muck that is flung off your back wheel because you didn't have guards?



http://cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=13103



Flying_Monkey said:


> Can I add: 'spanner'?
> 
> Honestly, bonj, if somone asks for advice, why don't you leave it to people who actually understand cycling and have some constructive advice? Your 'theory' on mudguards is all very amusing for Cake Stop discussion but elsewhere just gets in the way of adult conversation.



Why don't you stop spouting your mouth off FM and instead go and make a SENSIBLE contribution to this thread - how on earth do you ever hope that i'm going to listen to you on the subject of recommending stuff if you won't even help me to reconcile my own personal experience with what you expect me to recommend or allow to be recommended uncontradicted?
Because otherwise, this is just yet _another_ subject on which you come over like a evangelical religious fundamentalist.


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

Bonj your wrong again....


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

> Good guards don't rattle. The Bike Monkey ones are awful.



yeah yeah yeah whatever you say flower.  The fact is most mudguard users like to pretend that _their_ mudguards are better than others and that they don't rattle. But it's been admitted now. You need to be slightly quicker on the uptake and audain the newbies slightly more promptly if you don't want them to drop a clanger like that again!

OK here's a challenge for you: I've posted a picture of my jacket having been cycling for 1hr40mins on wet roads, without any streaks of mud on it.
Can anyone manage to post a picture of their jacket WITH mud on it due to riding without mudguards?


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

Shut up bonj.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (24 May 2008)

bonj said:


> how on earth do you ever hope that i'm going to listen to you on the subject of recommending stuff if you won't even help me to reconcile my own personal experience with what you expect me to recommend or allow to be recommended uncontradicted?



bonj - someone asked a question about which mudguards to use. They did not ask for a discussion of your theory of why mudguards are rubbish, which we have all heard before, and which you go on about almost as much as simoncc goes on about the BBC. 

I am asking you to try to consider what is appropriate. Do you find this so hard to understand?


----------



## Joe24 (24 May 2008)

Ok Bonj, here is my hi-vis, after it has been washed a few times, after one week of riding with no mudguards in the winter. The sprey went all the way to to my helmet by the way.
Its also been out in heavy rain and not even that had washed the crap off. I wore the hi-vis instead of letting all the crap get onto my jacket which would damage it. The salt and other rubbish wouldnt have done it any good.









26c Kendas that were brand new. 
Ok now Bonj?
No mudguards on the bike now though, but if its raining tomorrow the back one will be put on, which will take me only 5mins to put on right.


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

Admit it bonj your wrong.


----------



## andyfromotley (24 May 2008)

Sorry but i am definitely with Bonj on this.

You absolutely DO NOT need mudgaurds. If you have them your bike could wiegh as much as 500grams more. 
Instead of wasting ohhhhhhhhh £30 on mudgaurds simply spend £300 on a decent washing machine £100 pounds on a tumble dryer, £100 quid on a second set of clothes, £60 on a power washer for your bike and throw in say £30 a month on electricity, get home on any night it has been raining and simply wah your clothes instead, then spend 20 mins washing your bike.

People today, wasting money on mudgaurds....................did i mention they rattle as well you know.


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> bonj - someone asked a question about which mudguards to use. They did not ask for a discussion of your theory of why mudguards are rubbish, which we have all heard before, and which you go on about almost as much as simoncc goes on about the BBC.
> 
> I am asking you to try to consider what is appropriate. Do you find this so hard to understand?


They asked for advice on which mudguards to get, I replied 'none'. That would have been my last post on the subject, but people had to try and argue. So I argued back. I repeat my assertion that beginners aren't idiots. They most likely have the wherewithall to sift through all the advice given and judge for themselves which to take, they don't need a 'unanimous front' to be agreed upon by virtue of those of the faith shooting down those that dare to dissent and trying to force them to accept the One True Word, an acceptance which incidentally is never going to happen.
You FM are someone who has proven themselves to have a track record in latching onto doctrines like a religion and denouncing anyone who doesn't adopt The Faith in the same way that you have, as heretics and simpletons who don't understand the issue or as minor insignificant flies in the ointment. One of these days you are just going to need to realise that everyone has different beliefs.



> No, because my bike has mudguards.


Take them off then.



miloat said:


> Admit it bonj your wrong.


Go and try and find the mud on my jacket in my 'proof mudguards are unnecessary' thread. Go on, off you go, there's a good lad.


----------



## andyfromotley (24 May 2008)

PS total respect to DANTHEMAN on getting a 9 page thread out of mudguards..... WTFG


----------



## Flying_Monkey (24 May 2008)

Bonj - I accept entirely that you are entitled to believe what you want about anything. Everyone else is also entitled to tell you that you are totally wrong. You've shown time and time again that you know jack all about cycling beyond your tiny personal experience. By all means discuss it, but don't think that your ideas count as anything to offer in the way of serious advice to serious questions. Most of us have been cycling many more kinds of bikes, and for a lot longer than you... so grow up a bit and stop being so self-centred.


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

Joe24 said:


> Ok Bonj, here is my hi-vis, after it has been washed a few times, after one week of riding with no mudguards in the winter. The sprey went all the way to to my helmet by the way.
> [pics]



Well, ok - YOU need mudguards. YOu've learnt this from experience.
It's fine for you to recommend mudguards based on this experience.
But if you look at my 'proof mudguards are unnecessary' thread, you'll see that I've learnt from experience that I don't need them. So can you not see how, TO ME, it seems really crass that people are trying to pigeonhole the issue and narrow it down to there being only one possible answer, that everyone needs mudguards.
I TRY to be rational, but when people feel the need to tell me I'm wrong especially by saying I must be lying when I say I just don't get excess mud on me from the tyres, it becomes hard not to see the response to anyone who asks about mudguards to be anything other than evangelical brainwashing. Do you not see where I'm coming from...

AGain, I repeat my question as to why it's necessary for the advice from the forum to be unanimous - why does any advice that's different from your own have to be argued with into submission?


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

bonj said:


> They asked for advice on which mudguards to get, I replied 'none'. That would have been my last post on the subject, but people had to try and argue. So I argued back. I repeat my assertion that beginners aren't idiots. They most likely have the wherewithall to sift through all the advice given and judge for themselves which to take, they don't need a 'unanimous front' to be agreed upon by virtue of those of the faith shooting down those that dare to dissent and trying to force them to accept the One True Word, an acceptance which incidentally is never going to happen.
> You FM are someone who has proven themselves to have a track record in latching onto doctrines like a religion and denouncing anyone who doesn't adopt The Faith in the same way that you have, as heretics and simpletons who don't understand the issue or as minor insignificant flies in the ointment. One of these days you are just going to need to realise that everyone has different beliefs.
> 
> 
> ...


Shut up bonj.


----------



## Joe24 (24 May 2008)

Indeed i do Bonj. You can have your opinion. At the moment with the dry weather no mudguards are good for me.
So is this thread over now, or are we going to go into another discussion about how you 'must' have mudguards on?
Bonj does has his view with there is no need, its the same as a view on saying one bike is rubbish because it doesnt suit that one person, would everyone moan at that aswell?
I can see the point of no mudguards, and round here the roads nearly always have road cack on them and what ever else is spilt on them or put on them. But now its dry i dont see the need for them to be on, for just in case it rains. But then i can just put the rear one on in 5mins and be off.
This has turned into the helmet and RLJ threads.


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Bonj - I accept entirely that you are entitled to believe what you want about anything. Everyone else is also entitled to tell you that you are totally wrong. You've shown time and time again that you know jack all about cycling beyond your tiny personal experience. By all means discuss it, but *don't think that your ideas count as anything to offer in the way of serious advice to serious questions*. Most of us have been cycling many more kinds of bikes, and for a lot longer than you... so grow up a bit and stop being so self-centred.



all well and good for you to try and claim that - but if that was the case, why get so het up and argumentitive? If you thought no-one was going to listen to me you wouldn't feel the need to try and shoot me down would you? _I_ know that _you_ know that _I'm_ not going to accept what you're saying, so it can only be for the benefit of the questionner or others reading for advice that you think there's a point in trying to point out how wrong I am. The fact that you haven't yet shown the intelligence to consider this proves that your above post is nothing more than an attempt to patronise me with gibbering sound-bites - and again, I know full well that _you_ know it doesn't work - so stop playing up and trying to look all responsible for the non-existant camera that incidentally ISN'T on you and talk some sense for a change.


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

Please shut up and admit defeat bonj.


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

Joe24 said:


> Indeed i do Bonj. You can have your opinion. At the moment with the dry weather no mudguards are good for me.
> So is this thread over now, or are we going to go into another discussion about how you 'must' have mudguards on?
> Bonj does has his view with there is no need, its the same as a view on saying one bike is rubbish because it doesnt suit that one person, would everyone moan at that aswell?
> I can see the point of no mudguards, and round here the roads nearly always have road cack on them and what ever else is spilt on them or put on them. But now its dry i dont see the need for them to be on, for just in case it rains. But then i can just put the rear one on in 5mins and be off.
> This has turned into the helmet and RLJ threads.



i don't have any issue with people recommnding mudguards, I don't have any issue with people using mudguards, the only thing I have an issue with is people who tell me I must be lying or that I'm an idiot because i recommend not having mudguards. Which to be fair doesn't include you Joe, so i don't have an issue with you whatsoever.
But in a way it's not even _about_ mudguards, it's about people's inability or unwillingness to accept another point of view than their own, which in that sense makes it entirely comparable to the helmet issue - people choose to wear a helmet and they can't, or won't, understand why anyone else would choose not to.


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

So whats your reasoning behind this then bonj?


> This happens to be a ROAD bike forum.


----------



## bonj2 (24 May 2008)

miloat said:


> So whats your reasoning behind this then bonj?



the vast majority of the people are road bike riders?


----------



## Milo (24 May 2008)

Wrong.
Shut up bonj.


----------



## dodgy (25 May 2008)

I'd say this site was primarily a commuting site, *judging only* by the number of threads in the respective forums anway http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/
It's definitely not a road bike forum! This site has more diversity than any other cycling site that I visit.

Dave.


----------



## bonj2 (25 May 2008)

hmmm..., you're probably right actually going by the fact that the commuting forum has the most threads of all the cycling related forums. But the general impression i get is that it's mainly a 'utility' cycling forum. But when I say it's a road bike forum, that's because most people don't understand mountain bikes, they view a road bike as the 'default' bike


----------



## bonj2 (25 May 2008)

> And some people don't understand that there's more to cycling than either MTBs or road bikes.


Well... there's 'trekking', which is _technically_ a form of MTBing, but if people who do it would call it as such for one thing and do it on the correct bike for another then it would be a lot more palateble.



> Bonj
> 
> It's been proved to you, and you've accepted it, that mudguards can be necessary.
> 
> So for you to make a general statement to everyone that mudguards are unnecessary is wrong.



OK, well I'm willing to call a ceasefire. In other words, if instead of such sweeping generalisations based on my own experience I instead post things along the lines of the below, then if people could please stop trying to shoot me down and calling me a liar it would be much appreciated.
But if I try and be more rational and reasonable by modifying my position to the following but people still try and accept nothing less than toeing the party line with equivalent evangelism then I don't see why I should even bother to make the effort to be reasonable. A little bit of give on both sides. It's up to you lot - you should probably know by now that I seriously don't believe in mudguards and I'm not just doing it to wind people up, but I'm willing to be open minded if you are.

"_I personally_ don't use mudguards and don't suffer any ill effects such as getting excessively wet and muddy from tyre spray - but you might want to look at the recommendations from other mudguard users as to what the best sort to get are if from your own experience you find that you do suffer from such spray. Don't just use mudguards because you've read that you should, use them because you find that on practical experience, you need them - in other words, don't be afraid to try various mudguard options including various makes of mudguard and also not having mudguards, till you find a configuration that suits you".

OK?


----------



## bonj2 (25 May 2008)

> Unnecessary for all. <FAMILY FORTUNES NOISE>



pedantic, maybe, but i'm not sure when i've used the term "FOR ALL". That's simply been inferred.


----------



## bonj2 (25 May 2008)

> "Mudguards are unnecessary"
> 
> What does that mean?



That _I_ find mudguards unnecessary. How am I supposed to be able to know and therefore comment on whether anyone else finds them necessary?


----------



## tdr1nka (26 May 2008)

bonj said:


> That _I_ find mudguards unnecessary. How am I supposed to be able to know and therefore comment on whether anyone else finds them necessary?




Exactly, Bonj. So why on earth then did you see fit to insist that the majority of mudguard users on this thread were so catagorically wrong in the first place?

Do please take note as here in lays the rub.
Your initial posts declared the general thinking of forummers, on this subject to be somehow 'flawed', 'misguided' and 'incorrect'.
Hence we get to the point where your opinion reads 'I am correct and everyone else is incorrect' and friction starts.

If only you took the time to post with a little less alacrity, as you have shown you can in the above example, then some people might be more inclined to take you seriously.


----------



## Milo (26 May 2008)

I wouldn't


----------



## bonj2 (27 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Exactly, Bonj. So why on earth then did you see fit to insist that the majority of mudguard users on this thread were so catagorically wrong in the first place?
> 
> Do please take note as here in lays the rub.
> Your initial posts declared the general thinking of forummers, on this subject to be somehow 'flawed', 'misguided' and 'incorrect'.
> ...



I see your point, and I accept that that's what it may have looked like - although I hope you can see how I might have seen that sooner if a lot of forummers hadn't been accusing me of lying and posting crass comments like 'you obviously don't cycle very much then' - because posts like that come across as pure bluster, you see, so with 10 posts like that the one reasonable one in the middle goes unnoticed. Boy who cried wolf principle. As I've already said, a bit of give is required on both sides, and also as i've already said, I'm sure (or certainly hope) you recognise that I'm not simply making an attempt at being controvertial.
So yes. I can now see the value of caveatting my recommendations that they are my personal experience only, and that what suits me might not necessarily suit everyone, so you will have to try it - but equally I would also hope that people, like you tdr1nka, will recognise that I _am_ talking from experience and that therefore my contribution to such threads is just as valid as anyone else's. The alternative is for both 'sides' to just be completely irrational as has been the case previously.


----------



## dantheman (27 May 2008)

andyfromotley said:


> PS total respect to DANTHEMAN on getting a 9 page thread out of mudguards..... WTFG



CHEERS, I TRY MY HARDEST- im thinking of starting a "are mudguards necessary" thread- then we could have all this arguement agian, but with the correct title!!- 12 pages and counting...


----------



## Daniel B (27 May 2008)

Blimey that was a long rambling thread 

I have SKS guards on my commuter, and have fitted 45mm ones to my gf's commuter, running 35mm tyres, and have bought a 35mm pair for my Marin which will shortly be running 28mm tyres, the suggested maximum for that width (35mm) mudguard.

Cheapest I found was Ribble:

£13.25 or £11.93 - 35mm without mudflaps: http://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/productdetail.asp?productcatalogue=SKSAMUDR200

£17.75 or 15.98 - 45mm with mudflaps: 
http://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/productdetail.asp?productcatalogue=SKSAMUDR235

Postage for Ribble for mudguards is £3.50, but as I was ordering some other bits, and managed to get them for the lower prices, I thought they were bargainous.

I'm glad I chose the non mudflap variety for my Marin, the mudflap varieties come with a large rear reflector on the rear guard.

Dan


----------



## bonj2 (27 May 2008)

> Or, how about just typing the right thing in the first place instead of typing a load of junk and only resorting to what you know to be really right when you're backed into a corner?
> 
> Mudguards help to keep the bike and rider clean and drier. There's no middle ground to move to from that statement, because it's entirely true. It's your ridiculous opening assertions that need *moderating, and you're the only one who can do that.*
> 
> Your way of working doesn't help the newbies.



Right, well as I've said I'll adopt a trial period of moderation, during which we'll see if you can behave yourself by being open minded enough not to try and make me tow the party line, and if you can't manage that then we're back to square one aren't we.


----------



## Milo (27 May 2008)

Wrong again bonj?


----------



## bonj2 (27 May 2008)

> There's no party line on here bonj, old boy.



Good. There better not be


----------



## tdr1nka (27 May 2008)

I think you might just have 'general concensus' and 'party line' muddled up a bit.

Another thing, Mr. 'Ambassador, with these moderated trial periods you are really spoiling us' Bonj.
I have never honestly suggested that you don't post from experience, just that your writing style and delivery simply suggests it to be an incredibly fixed and narrow field of experience.

But still remember then, as Ghandi said, 'Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.'


----------



## jiggerypokery (28 May 2008)

Today, 28/5/08, in Birmingham it is raining...not hoying it down, just a constant dank drizzle thats been going on all night. result - wet roads. Sooooo after three weeks off the bike I hopped on, forgetting that I had taken my mudguards off and the result is.......

Wet feet and skanky road grime covered legs....







And a wet arse.....






So what am I doing wrong Bonj? You asserted that mudguards do not keep you dry, I beleieved you, I trusted you, I put all my faith in you and you let me down 

perhaps it's where I live, perhaps it's the type of rain that Mr Paul and I get in the Brum area, perhaps it's the type of tarmac we have on the roads here? Who knows? But...I'm putting my mudguards back on!


----------



## BentMikey (28 May 2008)

Shave or wax that hairy nightmare ASAP! Oh, and your shorts are not a wetsuit, so don't wee in them!

LOL, just kidding.


----------



## dodgy (28 May 2008)

jiggerypokery said:


> And a wet arse.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## jiggerypokery (28 May 2008)

Oh you japester you Dodgy


----------



## tdr1nka (28 May 2008)

Oh! Those are shorts?!!

I thought they were your lungs!


----------



## jiggerypokery (28 May 2008)

Tis the gloriously comfy inner of my Assos 'can't afford to eat they were so expensive' shorts. agree the orange is rather shocking tho!


----------



## bonj2 (28 May 2008)

Very good. Can't see THAT much mud though. If you think that's a lot of mud, then you need to post a picture of, say, the BACK of your shin, and the same pics in the same conditions WITH mudguards. Because I think you would have got that dirty with or without mudguards.
You presumably didn't get overtaken by any cars then? What about the spray from their tyres?
oh by the way yer look like dave 'ill from slade.


----------



## bonj2 (28 May 2008)

well it doesn't matter whether its the cheap shite aldi socks or his legs does it - the question "what's the back like" or "what's it like WITH mudguards" still stands


----------



## bonj2 (28 May 2008)

> With mudguards, his socks wouldn't have been that soaked. Nor his rump.


Well I want proof.



> If you want the only type of proof that you accept benjy then I'm afraid that you're going to have to fit guards to your bike and commute in the rain.



Well I thought you were going to ask that, and my response is that the "proof mudguards are unnecessary" thread is proof of how muddy I get WITHOUT mudguards, so it can be inferred therefore that how muddy I get WITH them is some amount LESS muddy than that.


----------



## Milo (28 May 2008)

Wrong again bonj?
Must be tough.


----------



## jiggerypokery (28 May 2008)

Bonj you utter fruit loop! My arse was wet, it never gets wet when I use mudguards, ergo they keep the spray off my arse ergo it stays dry ergo....mudguards have a practical use. Why would the backs of my legs get skanky, without mudguards the spray and road crud from the front wheel goes backwards from the wheel hitting my shins...how the hell does it wrap around and get over my calves? And as for the mud...oh get over it, I was riding on the A45 Coventry road, a dual carriage way, where the hell am I going to find mud in the middle of Birmingham???? But...sans mudguards on the crosser in Sutton park in the mud no less I get a muddy back...what does that infer Sherlock?


----------



## bonj2 (28 May 2008)

Right there's several issues with this post. The overriding one being that it doesn't follow any form of logic in the slightest or make sense AT ALL. 



jiggerypokery said:


> Bonj you utter fruit loop! My arse was wet, it never gets wet when I use mudguards ergo they keep the spray off my arse ergo it stays dry ergo....mudguards have a practical use.



this is basically just STATING your case. You'd had a go at proving it, and you'd got _reasonably_ far, but with this it seems you've given up and gone back to square 1, just repeating it again.



jiggerypokery said:


> Why would the backs of my legs get skanky, the spray and road crud from the front wheel goes backwards from the wheel hitting my shins...how the hell does it wrap around and get over my calves?



Well, by the same token, how does it hit anything other than the down tube if it actually is sprayed up from the tyres? by virtue of it sticking to them for a small period of time before detaching and flying off at a tangent causing it to be projected into a parabolic arc the plane of which being parallel to the vector of motion of the bike?



jiggerypokery said:


> And as for the mud...oh get over it, I was riding on the A45 Coventry road, a dual carriage way, where the hell am I going to find mud in the middle of Birmingham????


This completely blows your whole argument out of the water by contradicting yourself.
You claim your shins were muddy, yet you are now suggesting there ISN'T any mud in central birmingham? So if that IS mud on your shins in the photo (which it doesn't really look like to me - doesn't look like anything), where did it come from?
I put it to you that you took the mudguards off hoping to get muddy, but then when you didn't, on arriving home you got some soil out of your garden and smeared it on to your legs, but then to make it look authentic washed it off with the hosepipe. But you washed it off a bit too much and got your socks wetter than they would normally be. Hence the only very very slight amount of dirt, excessive sock wetness, and leg dampness profile that suggests a wetting by a running stream of water rather than dripping water. Yep, I think that's a pretty accurate estimation of today's events!



jiggerypokery said:


> But...sans mudguards on the crosser in Sutton park in the mud no less I get a muddy back...what does that infer Sherlock?



That you should have mudguards on your crosser but not on your road bike?


----------



## jiggerypokery (28 May 2008)

Mud? Where did I mention mud...I said road grime. 

Stop being such a pedant Bonj, I think I know your game now...it's "mud" guards as opposed to "fenders". Yes the majority of us ride on the road and yes the majority of us use mudguards/fenders to prevent our feet/arses from getting overly wet as opposed to overly muddy - as there is no mud on the road!

I applaud your curmudgeonliness - now get back in your bath chair and take the Mogadon theres a good chap.


----------



## bonj2 (28 May 2008)

> Bonj,
> 
> Don't you ever cycle around corners?



ah yes but then you've got g-force to consider and it's a whole different kettle of fish. Why do you think when a plane turns a corner and banks, the people on the offside don't fall into the aisle? same principle.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (28 May 2008)

Bonj, you really do have far too much time on your hands.


----------



## tdr1nka (29 May 2008)

Just so noBj doesn't have to go trolling back thru the thread, allow me to repeat myself.......................



tdr1nka said:


> Just a little bit of information to the dear Bnoj.
> Yes, it is true, there is very little mud on the roads of cities, but there is an accumulation of dirt caused by motor oil, rubber, dust from vehicle brake pads and other such detritus that mixes with or floats on any wet road surface.
> This is what gets sprayed up ones back when you ride, in the wet without mudguards.


----------



## threefingerjoe (29 May 2008)

For those of us who are not foolhardy enough to ride in wet weather without mudguards, and those of us who also want to keep our chains free of the water and grime that gets sprayed on the chain from the front tyre (if you don't believe that the downtube keeps it off) don't forget to add a long, mudflap to your front mudguard. 
(I can't for the life of me, figure out HOW the mud and grime gets all over the front of my mudflap, and inside of my mudguards. SURELY it can't be coming off the tyres!) ;-)


----------



## bonj2 (29 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Just so noBj doesn't have to go trolling back thru the thread, allow me to repeat myself.......................



heard you the first time.
All this isn't really helping the prospects for the next mudguards thread I decide to take part to go completely smoothly and devoid of irrationality - a 'next one' which there inevitably will be as you well know. User is buying into the amnesty - who are YOU to ruin it?
Shut up NOW, and there might be a chance - or am i deluding myself in thinking it's rationality in a mudguards thread that you actually want?
it was you that said "i'm fed up of it bonj" - well, now's the time to see whether you really are fed up of it or not or whether you're in fact gagging for more.


----------



## tdr1nka (29 May 2008)

bonj said:


> User is buying into the amnesty - who are YOU to ruin it?




Great, that simplifies everything, 'cos as far as I can tell with this 'amnesty' forummers simply avoid verbose and experienced postings by answering you with comments like, 'shut up Bonj' or 'Bonj you're wrong'.

As you have failed to grasp, most of my posts confirm your right to post from your own experience but have been mostly with regard your 'mode' of posting and the fact your dogged, aggressive, pompous and plainly contentious way of playing the fool(on the forum in general)is actually tiresome, predictable, unnecessary and worse, potentially off-putting to new members.


----------



## bonj2 (29 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Great, that simplifies everything, 'cos as far as I can tell with this 'amnesty' forummers simply avoid verbose and experienced postings by answering you with comments like, 'shut up Bonj' or 'Bonj you're wrong'.


that doesn't annoy me at the moment, but I can't guarantee I won't get annoyed by it at some point in the future. There's not really much point though is there, it's not really even a post 'cos you're not saying anything. I expect that sort of nonsense from your little sidekick miloat but you're _supposed_ to be an adult.



tdr1nka said:


> As you have failed to grasp, most of my posts confirm your right to post from your own experience but have been mostly with regard your 'mode' of posting and the fact your dogged, aggressive, pompous and plainly contentious way of playing the fool(on the forum in general)is actually tiresome, predictable, unnecessary and worse, potentially off-putting to new members.



Hence why I've _offered_ to post in a less outlandish style. All I currently get as responses to my views as I currently post them is criticism and sniping, which I don't mind, I'd rather not have it, but it doesn't particularly bother me - but if I'm _still_ going to get that, then what's the point in me making the effort to moderate my 'mode' of posting?


----------



## bonj2 (29 May 2008)

If you think I'm being arrogant, then I'm genuinely sorry for that - I hate having to be, but I'm afraid I do geuinely feel quite strongly about what _in my eyes_ is received wisdom being peddled, and I'm sure on the flip side you also feel that you are trying to give helpful advice in the face of _what you see_ as unfair contradiction - HOWEVER, I do genuinely feel that an environment where we can all post what we feel without being sniped at from the other side is achievable, hence this 'amnesty' - it's only my attempt to actually make ground in an argument that was going nowhere.


----------



## Milo (29 May 2008)

Sidekick?
Seeing things that are not there again?
Tell me bonj did your mother drop you on the head as a child repeatedly?


----------



## tdr1nka (29 May 2008)

bonj said:


> If you think I'm being arrogant, then I'm genuinely sorry for that - I hate having to be, but I'm afraid I do geuinely feel quite strongly about what _in my eyes_ is received wisdom being peddled, and I'm sure on the flip side you also feel that you are trying to give helpful advice in the face of _what you see_ as unfair contradiction



Wrong, I see it as you giving 'humourous' but contentious advice in the face of an overwhelming consensus of positive experience.

BTW - get your peepers round this;
The attached pic is of my arm & sleeve after riding to meet Walker in the rain this evening. My trike has no front mudguards but if it had, my arm would not be covered in water and road sh*t. You can see the sand & grit all up the sleeve.


----------



## bonj2 (29 May 2008)

you can post any number of muddy pics, and I can post any number of clean pics, it isn't going to change anything. We're just going to have to accept thatit's different for some people than others, it would be slightly suspect even if everyone experienced everything in exactly the same way.

If i could tell you what it is that i do that means i don't get muddy - i would, but I dont' know, i just DON'T....
Admittedly the front of my shins were wet today (similar to jiggerypokery's pic), not muddy, and only as wet as, say, my face was, so entirely attributable to forward motion incident upon raindrops en route from cloud to earth.

oh, and: trike - whole different kettleof fish. arms much closer to ground! specially if USS? and also TWO front wheels so point about the spray having to splay out to be incident on anything other than the downtube doesn't apply - your arms are directly _behind_ the wheels aren't they?


----------



## Milo (29 May 2008)

Yawn can we finish this thread yet?


----------



## tdr1nka (29 May 2008)

bonj said:


> oh, and: trike - whole different kettleof fish. arms much closer to ground! specially if USS? and also TWO front wheels so point about the spray having to splay out to be incident on anything other than the downtube doesn't apply - your arms are directly _behind_ the wheels aren't they?



Yes Bonj, exactly. Just as your feet are directly behind your front wheel.
You front wheel which also 'points about' or turns.

Isn't it really about time you moved along from being so pedantic 
and acknowledge that most on here are talking about water and road grime and not mud in the literal sense.
Or do you require we refer to 'mudguards' as 'waterguards' so as not to test you ire and suffer such unecessary confusion in future?


----------



## bonj2 (29 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Yes Bonj, exactly. Just as your feet are directly behind your front wheel.
> You front wheel which also 'points about' or turns.


my feet aren't directly behind the front wheel, no.
It doesn't actually turn that much actually. I know if I am doing a sem-trackstand, the front of whichever foot is furthest forward can touch the back of the tyre if I turn it too much, so it certainly doesn't rotate that far in normal motion!



tdr1nka said:


> Isn't it really about time you moved along from being so pedantic
> and acknowledge that most on here are talking about water and road grime and not mud in the literal sense.
> Or do you require we refer to 'mudguards' as 'waterguards' so as not to test you ire and suffer such unecessary confusion in future?



When i say 'mud', i mean EITHER mud or 'general road grime', i'm not being pedantic and saying I don't get mud on me but i do get road grime. I don't get dirt on me full stop - look at the pics in my other thread if you don't believe me. 
Water on the shins, yes, but that's due to rain, not spray, I would imagine.
If I want to go the whole hog should I get a set of umbrellas fitted to my bike - one pointing upwards for when I'm still, another transparent one fitted to the front for when i'm cycling into the rain, and another one at the right of me so i dont' get splashed/sprayed by cars?


----------



## tdr1nka (30 May 2008)

I'm starting to think Bonj only rides indoors on a turbo trainer, hence he doesn't get wet or go round corners?


----------



## Milo (30 May 2008)

I must have missed the bit about no corners enlighten me?


----------



## tdr1nka (30 May 2008)

Bonj has said that any spray from the front wheel hits the down tube and not the feet.


----------



## RedBike (30 May 2008)

Blimey, 3 pages about muguards. 13pages of shut up Bonj


----------



## tdr1nka (30 May 2008)

Beggers belief dunnit?!


----------



## Milo (30 May 2008)

I reckon his dad never taught him how to ride a bike. Thats what it all boils down to rejection from his father.


----------



## RedBike (30 May 2008)

tdr1nka said:


> Beggers belief dunnit?!



Errrm, no it doesn't. Not after reading some of his other posts.


----------



## tdr1nka (30 May 2008)

You're not far wrong there!

Actually Bonj is an enigma, being that you punch feed information into him and get an undecipherable answer out the other end.


----------



## sonny (30 May 2008)

I have had to ride my bike recently without guards after many moths of riding with and I know for 100% certainty that they work. Spray is not just thrown up my back but up onto my face. In effect you are riding between two discs of spray and you are constantly riding into the front one.
In rain, or even just on wet roads they are hugely beneficial. 
Today I bought and fitted a pair of full length SKS guards to my daily commuter, a Boardman Urban Pro. THEY WORK!


----------



## Rhythm Thief (30 May 2008)

sonny said:


> Today I bought and fitted a pair of full length SKS guards to my daily commuter, a Boardman Urban Pro. THEY WORK!



Of course they do. Everyone except Bonj knows that.


----------



## Joe24 (31 May 2008)

I find not having a front mudguard gets my feet wet more then anything. Never really had a problem with sprey in my face unless i have been riding close to someone infront going down a wet muddy road. Even then they had full mudguards and the flappy bit at the back to stop sprey.
However, i forgot to put my mudguard on the bike on Tuesday and i rode down to the caravan (about 7miles) in the rain, with alot of standing water and i dont have any stains on the back of my trousers or coat. The bike did get alot or road dirt on, most being under the saddle and on the saddle bag. I was on main roads aswell so i was getting alot of sprey from cars and trucks. 
So, besides getting wetter, having a wet-ish arse i didnt have any road crap marks on me.
So Bonj is slightly right, but if you do want to keep a dry arse then mudguards are better then none.


----------



## summerdays (1 Jun 2008)

Ok - I need a mudguard for my son - he's just changed bikes, the old one had a mudguard on and I hadn't realised how much difference it made to the old bike (he loves puddles). Its for 20" tyres ... is it just the option of the clip on ones? Are there children's clip on mudguards?


 

 


All photos taken in the last 2 weeks so you can see how often he ends up in water.


----------

