[chappers]

if i wanted a "cool" bike i would get a pashley. this one (below) has a three speed hub gear, and i think it looks bad ass, if i could i would get one for my ride to work.


as for the fixed thing. i ride a track bike with a front brake around preston (pretty flat - there is still one hill i am yet to get up in the centre of the city, soon soon!), i could not imagine riding one in sheffield let alone SF, your knees would be fucked in a few days! but as far as something fun to play about on/ride to the pub/commute/project to build yourself i could think of no better way to waste your cash.

by the way. if you are based in the north west (or further afield) and are after a hack to ride with a small budget "GBH Custom Hacks". (16, Whittle St, Manchester) are sound guys with a real reuse, recycle ethic, i poped in for a chat, really nice blokes, top mechanics and they can build you a bike according to your desires (they have a few to ride away) and budget, anything from 75 quid upwards from what i could work out. and...they will soon have some velocity deepV's for you fashion victims (me).

[Duma]

Not sure if the singlespeed comments are directed at me, but the Charge has got the new shimano 8-speed hub on.

Fixed is great fun and pretty much maintenence free, I don't own any freewheels, but my bikes are, as Chappers has said, mainly used around town (Bristol). I imagine Shef would be more challenging! (I've got an on-one il pompino which is fairly sensible, and this, which isn't.)

[webbo]

single speeds used to be all the rage for winter training something like 42x18 usually combined with a frame made from japanese gas pipes and steel rimed wheels.
you had to man up to get up the hills or get good at walking.

[fatkid2000]

Single-speed / fixed is all very trendy for those rapha wearing trendy London city boys who think they are a bike courier but for those who live in a hilly place like Sheffield a total pain. Mind you they used fixed wheels on the early days of the tours, and switched the hub round for the descent - truely hard men.

[Percy B]

Aye - riding a fixie is trendy, and I'm not, so bollocks to it! On a more positive note (and while we're contemplating people developing a whole new rash of knee injuries trying to ride a single gear bike...) I have just got back from my first ride in 6 months without any significant knee pain 

I switched cranks (again) and am now riding 175's which I hope are long enough for me to ride long hills with no knee pain. So far, so good. I'm psyched again!

[DubDom]

Not sure if the singlespeed comments are directed at me, but the Charge has got the new shimano 8-speed hub on

Nobody in mind with the fixed comments from my point of view. They have their place. I started back in sheffield, on my return recently with an old twelve speeder with a 18-12 block on the back. I live in Crookes and Conduit road was a real pain, so I had to get a better spread of gears. Dublin's flat so I single speeded(!?) there, filmy winter road grime killed my groupset., so I just kept taking broken bits off the bike and hey! single speed. riding around the Langsett, strines area etc is too much for me without a serious granny gear. As one of the guys here said, its also great riding.
you used to be able to get a cheap old bike which you could make a fixed for a few quid. Now you can sell any old piece of shit on ebay for over £100 as long as you say fixed or singlespeed in the description. On a more interesting note, I remember reading years ago about some monster doing Winnats on a fixed!

On your comment Percy, that's interesting that 175's have sorted your knees (I'm assuming you were on 170ish before). I thought longer cranks were generally more stressful on knees. I guess it's all about specific fit issues eh? Is that what you were advised to do after your fit consultation at la Bicicleta? I can't afford to even look through their shop window, but one day.......

[Yossarian]

Did anyone read about this site in the Guardian the other day?
http://www.copenhagencyclechic.com/




That's a Dursley-Pedersen - I'm apparently being left one in a will...

[Yossarian]

why won't those hot danish links work?!

[Percy B]

On your comment Percy, that's interesting that 175's have sorted your knees (I'm assuming you were on 170ish before). I thought longer cranks were generally more stressful on knees. I guess it's all about specific fit issues eh? Is that what you were advised to do after your fit consultation at la Bicicleta? I can't afford to even look through their shop window, but one day.......

The guys at Bicicleta told me to hang fire on going with longer cranks once they'd tweaked my position on the bike until I'd ridden for a few weeks and I was sure that my knees had not improved. The position change worked well as regards reducing knee stress ('cos they moved me forward on the bike so I could spin the pedals at a higher cadence in a lower gear) but I was still getting tweaky after an hour in the saddle. The bike fit did highlight that I have very long femurs, so increasing crank length was the next port of call. Changed my 172.5's for 175's and its made a huge difference. Who'd of thought that an extra 2.5mm of length could be so beneficial (as the actress said to the bishop...)!

As a rule of thumb, the bigger you are, the longer the cranks you need. As regards knee stress - longer cranks increase the range of movement your knee goes through each pedal revolution so can aggravate some knee complaints, but it also increases the ammount of leverage and power you can put through the cranks so means that it requires less effort to turn the gears (and thus puts less stress on the knee joint).

As ever, its all swings and roundabouts, and what works for one person might not work for others, blah, blah, blah!

[Joepicalli]

Good luck on the etap Ariegeoise, and let us know how you did.

[webbo]

As a rule of thumb, the bigger you are, the longer the cranks you need. As regards knee stress - longer cranks increase the range of movement your knee goes through each pedal revolution so can aggravate some knee complaints, but it also increases the ammount of leverage and power you can put through the cranks so means that it requires less effort to turn the gears (and thus puts less stress on the knee joint).

As ever, its all swings and roundabouts, and what works for one person might not work for others, blah, blah, blah!

don't most mountain bikes come with 175s as standard.

[DubDom]

That's very interesting, it sounds as though the consultation made a big difference eh? money well spent? 172.5 to 175 isn't such a big jump but in terms of leverage I can see how it could make all the difference.

[fatkid2000]

Percy - how much is this bike fit thing - I'm getting shoulder pain - and I think I need to get wider bars + it would improve the bikes handling.
Anybody doing the La Marmotte or L'etape this weekend?? I've heard there are some people doing both!!

[Percy B]

£30 for an hour long fitting session is what I paid. Well worth it if you're feeling tweaky, and saves you money buying new bits to try and sort a problem out.

[chappers]

this may have been done before... recommend me a helmet.

(smashed mine up today crashing my bike on the forest of bowland, lucky it was my winter bike - needs a new back wheel, fully fucked myself up on a 20% decent - i feel quite lucky to still be here!!!).

i was thinking about a catlike whisper......??????

http://www.prendas.co.uk/details.asp?ID=1836

[Percy B]

I use a Giro Atmos, which I like. Helmets are a bit tricky to buy - just try a load on and go for the one that feels comfiest rather than the best looking one. The aesthetics are irrelevant - nobody looks good in a helmet! (But by the same virtue nobody looks good in the morgue, so always wear one. Its way too easy to get nailed on a road bike not to.) The dudes I see out in their trendy Rapha caps and no lid have no idea of the carnage that will be unleashed if they crash hard or have some cock open their car door on them. I guess its an experience thing - having crashed a few times I know I won't go out without one on!

Glad to hear you're not too fucked up Chappers. Crashing is a painful business, but almost always inevitable if you ride a bike for long enough. I have a perfect and permenant large road rash scar on my hip as a memento of my last unplanned dismount. Any good gravel rash? Clean really well if you've got some - gets nasty if it goes septic!

[DubDom]

I never used a helmet riding on the road. apparently wearing one makes you twice as likely to be hit by a car, (statistically drivers perceive you as less vulnerable and take less care). Mad innit? I'm guessing you had a spill on the mountain bike? that's a different kettle of fish!

[BVT]

As a rule of thumb, the bigger you are, the longer the cranks you need. As regards knee stress - longer cranks increase the range of movement your knee goes through each pedal revolution so can aggravate some knee complaints, but it also increases the ammount of leverage and power you can put through the cranks so means that it requires less effort to turn the gears (and thus puts less stress on the knee joint).

As ever, its all swings and roundabouts, and what works for one person might not work for others, blah, blah, blah!

Putting longer cranks on just lowers the gear presented at the pedal - the power still comes from the rider and unfortunately you can't magically increase it.  It's easy to mistake something feeling different with actually being better, especially in the short term.

Most people ride with too long cranks: I'd go for shorter cranks, lower gears and spinning more, but as you say we're all different.

I'd also be careful about making big changes to a riding position over too short a time if you are doing heavy mileage but it sounds like you're getting advice.

[squeek]

this may have been done before... recommend me a helmet.

(smashed mine up today crashing my bike on the forest of bowland, lucky it was my winter bike - needs a new back wheel, fully fucked myself up on a 20% decent - i feel quite lucky to still be here!!!).

i was thinking about a catlike whisper......??????

http://www.prendas.co.uk/details.asp?ID=1836

What kind of helmet was it?  Giro apparently give you money off a new one if you've got your smashed up one, but you'd have to look at the details of this.

I never used a helmet riding on the road. apparently wearing one makes you twice as likely to be hit by a car, (statistically drivers perceive you as less vulnerable and take less care). Mad innit? I'm guessing you had a spill on the mountain bike? that's a different kettle of fish!

I don't doubt you read/heard something that said that, but I don't believe it.  1) You can use statistics to prove whatever you want. 2) I can't believe motorists would think that much when faced with situation involving cyclists.

I think chappers would have been on a road bike.

[slackline]

I never used a helmet riding on the road. apparently wearing one makes you twice as likely to be hit by a car, (statistically drivers perceive you as less vulnerable and take less care). Mad innit? I'm guessing you had a spill on the mountain bike? that's a different kettle of fish!

I don't doubt you read/heard something that said that, but I don't believe it.  1) You can use statistics to prove whatever you want. 2) I can't believe motorists would think that much when faced with situation involving cyclists.

Statistics can indeed be used to "prove" anything, the challenge is to have a clearly defined question in the first place and to ensure that you collect the data appropriate to answering your question as well as data on anything that may confound your analysis.

Q. Does wearing helmets decrease your chance of getting hit by a car?

A. ???  Haven't found anything substantial yet in a few cursory literature searches.

More importantly though is the question....

Q. Does wearing a helmet reduce the risk of head injury should you be involved in an accident?

A. Yes it does.  Even though its intuitive there is actually little proper data despite helmets having been around for a long time.  A systematic Cochrane Review performed meta-analysis of five case-control studies identified from literature searches and found that overall wearing a helmet reduced the risk of head, facial or brain injuries by between 63 to 88%, and that they provided equal levels of protection for injuries involving motor vehicles and all other causes.  Not sure if everyone will be able to view it, but the full article for those interested can be read DC Thompson, FP Rivara, R Thompson (1999) Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists. Cochrane Review Library Issue 4

Theres also an interesting article the quarterly journal of the Royal Statistical Society Significance.  It points out that there is the possibility of risk compensation whereby a cyclist wearing a helmet feels safer and therefore engages in more risk-taking behavior whilst cycling, thus increasing their risk of having an accident in the first place and therefore wearing a helmet has overall no net reduction in risk, but there is no compelling evidence to support this theory in full.  Again not sure if you'll all be able to view this but the article is online at Cook A (2004) Mind your Head. Significance 1[]/b]:162-163.

I'd agree that most motorists don't consciously think about how much distance to leave when passing cyclists.  A significant proportion don't even seem to notice cyclists at all!

[dave]

as a motorist who isn't a cyclist I can assue you that i'm not looking out for if a cyclist is wearing a helmet when overtaking. i certainly don't think "hey he's got a helmet on, i'll swing the passenger door open as I pass him".

theres no doubt some dubious statistics available that say stuff like "drivers are less likely to have a crash if they DON'T wear a seatbelt", or drink driving is actually safer, or that smoking actually improves your health, but we all know its bullshit. Wear a helmet guys - you may worry that it makes you look uncool, but I can assure you its the gaudy lycra with a strip of muddy water sprayed up your back that making you look like a tool, not the helmet. 

[tlr]

Some of the stats on this may have come from the fact that in countries like Holland, where lots of people don't wear helmets, the accident/damage rate is low, whereas in places like the Uk where most people do where helmets the accident/damage rate is higher.

In fact the reason for this statistic has a lot more to do with the environment that the cyclist have to ride their bikes than their helmet wearing tendencies, ie. in Holland there are lots more cycle lanes, and car free areas compared with the UK where we have to share the narrow roads with cars.

[squeek]

Some of the stats on this may have come from the fact that in countries like Holland, where lots of people don't wear helmets, the accident/damage rate is low, whereas in places like the Uk where most people do where helmets the accident/damage rate is higher.

In fact the reason for this statistic has a lot more to do with the environment that the cyclist have to ride their bikes than their helmet wearing tendencies, ie. in Holland there are lots more cycle lanes, and car free areas compared with the UK where we have to share the narrow roads with cars.

Plus given that in Holland cycling is a popular, both to watch and participate in, I would imagine drivers show more respect to the cyclists on the road. 

[slackline]

Some of the stats on this may have come from the fact that in countries like Holland, where lots of people don't wear helmets, the accident/damage rate is low, whereas in places like the Uk where most people do where helmets the accident/damage rate is higher.

Not in the paper cited, the meta-analysis includes studies done in the UK, USA and Australia, the studies identified as part of the meta-analysis and subsequently  included/excluded are given on the review itself (you'd have to read the Cochrane Review to find out the inclusion/exclusion criteria, I shan't bother reguritating it here, but studies would genearlly be excluded through poor study design or insufficent reporting of results).

In fact the reason for this statistic has a lot more to do with the environment that the cyclist have to ride their bikes than their helmet wearing tendencies, ie. in Holland there are lots more cycle lanes, and car free areas compared with the UK where we have to share the narrow roads with cars.

All confounders as to whether wearing a helmet increases the risk of having an accident in the first place (also includes the risk compensation aspect mentioned below).  Obviously it would be desirable to identify what increases the risk of having an accident and try and prevent them from occuring in the first place, but thats far more complex to identify (due to all the confounders mentioned and more) than accepting that accidents will happen and then seeking to minimise the injuries that arise.  The evidence indicates that if you do have an accident wearing a helmet reduces your risk of head injuries irrespective of the cause (be it vehicular or otherwise).  Thus as Dave and Percy say, wear a helmet if your worried about your grey matter.

[chappers]

i was on a road bike.

fully over the bars at about 40mph on a wet greasy road. good quality rash on my shoulder which is also now really really stiff. (one last big ride out before my sportive next weekend i thought to myself! what a twat). winds me up that i was going so well too. squeek and others may know these hills: jeffery hill (longridge) waddington fell, trough of bowland, and they all felt piss, 5 miles from the cafe at scorton and over i go!!

it was my first major spill, just glad that i didnt take any of the lads that i was riding with out and that im still here to tell you boys, not in hospital.

cost of crash: new helmet, new back wheel (my bike is insured but the excess is 60 and it was an askium race on my winter bike so bollocks to it).