Feed aggregator

Re: GEARING. .

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 10:12am
I stickin with 8 speed

I agree with that especially the bit about sticking with what you have.
I dont think there is a right answer here and would not be worried about setting off on a tour with any number of gears.

It is a matter of balancing the different strengths.Usability, durability, availability and price coming to mind.

I tour on 6, 8 and 9 speed bikes. The nine speed gives me the smallest gaps between gears and is the easiest to ride.
They can all run on a Campagnolo C9 chain so no issues there. Changing between 8 and 9 is to me only restricted by the price of the STI units, cassettes and chains wear out soon enough derailleurs dont matter.
The six speed will be upgraded to a seven when the cassette runs out only because I have had the last 6 speed cassette in the country and the seven speed replacing it is the last 7 speed of the type in the country. Thumbshifters for that bike have been bought in advance for £4, so that is not the same issue as it is with STIs.

For durability I think the old Shimano 7 speed hub was the optimum and that would probably be my choice for that one of my bikes.
However they are not as available, you can fit 7 speed cassettes on 8 speed hubs but that isnt the same thing, they are not as durable. So in which case you may as well leap to 8 or 9 speed.
In the meantime I will be using the old seven speeds that I have managed to find.

So my ideal would be an old seven speed but due to restricted availability and compatibility I would go for whatever was the best value eight or nine speed STIs. Probably nine as they are a tiny bit more luxurious.

Since Tiagra went ten speed, they have made ten speed widely available and affordable, I am put off by the fact that the chains are not re-rivetable and (as I have not ridden a ten speed ) I think the gear coverage from a nine speed is perfect enough

Nothing would posses me to replace a functioning geartrain with a different one just for the number of gears but I am frugal with my money and like to get full mileage out of anything fitted.
With thumshifters at £4 or similar bargains from CRC you can change non-dropbar bikes gears (6 through to 9) as frequently as the rear cassette. With £200 105 STI units you are rather tied in to your original choice. My 8 speed bike will be staying 8 speed and I have no problem with that.

Re: Pannier Inventory Lists

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 10:04am
I'll be rearranging mine soon and hoping to try it all out at some point this year.
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=90160

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 10:04am
Guy951 wrote:Flinders wrote: In a cycle shop £70+. In a safety clothing shop . . £8.

Are you sure they're the same specification? If so that's pretty outrageous.

They probably are the real thing. A couple of years ago one of my friends worked for Oakley and she got me a pair of Ducati sunglasses for "cost and the price of a beer." I gave her £20. At that time,in the shops, they were £119.95. There really is that much of a mark-up on such things.

I have it on good authority(someone who visited the Chinese factory on business) that Rapha pay $1.25 per item on short sleeve road tops,the same item sells in the UK for £120+

Re: GEARING. .

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 9:56am
If this is a long term upgrade, go for 9 speed. I personally run 8 speed and see no need for any more but unfortunately Mr Shimano and his mates are slowly phasing it out in favour of more and more sprockets at the rear. 9 speed will give you a useable system for longer and better spacing if using big gears.
The jump from my 34 tooth to the 27 ( I think it's 27 anyway!) is huuuuuuge.

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 9:50am
Vorpal wrote:There are many hazards cycling. Low sun is only one of them, and frankly, I think it is far from the worst. There are a couple of well-publicised cases in which a driver *claimed* that he or she was blinded by a low sun, but we know that that alone won't make someone drive into a cyclist.

There are longer periods of low sun in the winter in Norway, due to it being further north, so it is impossible for me to avoid some times of the year, unless it is by just taking the car.

When I get glare off a wet road and / or low sun, I don't generally do anything special, though if I am nearing the crest of hill, or something that is likely to make the hazard worse, suddenly, I will check behind me for cars, and I may adjust my road position, according to the situation. That probably means taking the lane I figure if someone's ability to see is limited, they'll still do their best to look immedaitely in front of the car, and may be a little less likely to see a cyclist in secondary than primary position.

^This sums up my own feelings of so-called cycling risks.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 9:20am
Valbrona wrote:rehon2 - You remind me of this Lancastrian I nonce met of a Graham Baxter trip. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=94407

?

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 9:13am
There are many hazards cycling. Low sun is only one of them, and frankly, I think it is far from the worst. There are a couple of well-publicised cases in which a driver *claimed* that he or she was blinded by a low sun, but we know that that alone won't make someone drive into a cyclist.

There are longer periods of low sun in the winter in Norway, due to it being further north, so it is impossible for me to avoid some times of the year, unless it is by just taking the car.

When I get glare off a wet road and / or low sun, I don't generally do anything special, though if I am nearing the crest of hill, or something that is likely to make the hazard worse, suddenly, I will check behind me for cars, and I may adjust my road position, according to the situation. That probably means taking the lane I figure if someone's ability to see is limited, they'll still do their best to look immedaitely in front of the car, and may be a little less likely to see a cyclist in secondary than primary position.

Re: GEARING. .

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 9:10am
For me the issue wasn't the number of gears but the lowest ratio. My first touring bike was a Dawes Horizon and it's lowest gear was just too high for getting up hills loaded with camping gear. I changed the front chain wheels for some MTB ones which had a 22 tooth little chain wheel. From memory the largest sprocket on the back was 32 teeth. I could then get up hills!

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 9:00am
pwa wrote:When the roads is wet after recent rain and the sun comes out low in the winter sky you can find glare from the road to be a problem. I suggested some time back that my habit of switching on a nice bright rear LED light might make us visible to motorists also struggling with the glare. I was told I was mistake. Well, last week my wife was riding ahead of me after recent rain, there was a piece of road that had blinding glare and her rear LED shone through and made her more visible to people behind. The red light stood out from the field of glare around it. So I've done the test and it works.
Fairly specific conditions.

There is no rear light that can hope to compete with direct "low" sun.

Particularly if you have polarising glasses on then the reflections should be drastically cut (depending on the quality of the filter) giving the light a much better chance.

Not suggesting that it didn't work, but it's not a given that it will...

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 8:57am
gplhl wrote:I Wear a cycling cap under my helmet.

1. Stops glare as you lower your head when sunny.

2. Stops rain hitting your eyes if raining.

Gary
http://www.longbikeride.co.uk

Used to do this, only with a baseball cap. Then last August on a 1100k Audax we only got 3 hours' rest out of 72, and keeping my head racked back to see out under the peak gave me Shermer's Neck - couldn't hold my head up for the last 24 hours. Fair description of Hell.

I found that the peak of a cycling cap wasn't enough of a rain-shield, so now I have a helmet with built-in visor. In oncoming traffic I just frown and let my eyebrows deal with the headlights. As for riding into the sun... sun? What sun?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 8:08am
Here's an example of the complications involved in building a junction intended to allow traffic in the offside lane to turn left, while traffic in the nearside lane goes straight ahead. The streetview link shows the junction of the Headrow (outside Leeds Town Hall, start of last year's TdF) and Oxford Place which forms a feeder road to the Leeds Inner Loop (a sort of inner inner ring road, which is largely within the actual Inner Ring Road.) The nearside lane is a bus and cycle lane and buses go straight ahead to towards the transport box (an even more inner inner inner ring road, reserved for public transport and delivery vehicles and the roll-out of last years TdeF .) The greater part of the traffic in the outer lanes turns left onto the Loop. Achieving this involves advance signs, road markings including surface colouring, kerbs and traffic lights programmed to give priority to buses. There are "farcilities" as well and anybody who likes playing about with streetview may notice that the left turning cycle route ends abruptly behind a marked parking bay. The green man lets pedestrians cross in between everything else.
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=53.79 ... 0&t=h&z=11
So, where there's a will, there's a way but in the grand scheme of things, that junction is an important one where the conflict is between buses, which they want to priritise and general traffic they want to divert. it's hardly likely to be the model for protecting segregated cycle routes in the UK where the norm at junctions is GIVE WAY lines across the cycle route or CYCLISTS DISMOUNT signs.

Here's a streetview of a typical junction remodelled in the modern era of providing for cycling. This existing dual carriageway was "improved" when the M1/A1 motorway link way built and the pavements were converted to shared use. (The blurred-out blue sign on the 20 mph sign is CYCLISTS DISMOUNT.) Note that the left turning traffic is only local traffic and further down that side road, substantial traffic-calming measures have been introduced. It seems it's beyond the wit of man to prioritise cyclists going ahead on the main route using the cycling provision as part of the traffic-calming eg a raised crossing. NB, the usual rationalisation for giving priority to the left-turners is that to do otherwise risks a queue dangling out onto the main road. At this junction, an exit slip lane has been provided which would prevent that. At a junction like this, they simply want to prioritise motor traffic and will pay only lip-service to the needs of cyclists.
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Northw ... m&t=h&z=11
For connoisseurs of the pedestrian crossing menagerie the crossing immediately beyond the junction in the second link is a Pegasus crossing (for equestrians) which demonstrates that when this road was "improved" they really were doing their pathetic best with neither money nor space causing the usual problems. Note that the blue sign in this streetview link says HORSE RIDERS ONLY. Perhaps they are expected to tie up their horses before crossing, although, come to think of it, I think Pegasus could fly,

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Northw ... m&t=h&z=11

(PS The signwriter avoided the word "equestrian" because the highway authority said that queues must be avoided at all costs. Sorry. )

Re: Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 7:47am
When the roads is wet after recent rain and the sun comes out low in the winter sky you can find glare from the road to be a problem. I suggested some time back that my habit of switching on a nice bright rear LED light might make us visible to motorists also struggling with the glare. I was told I was mistake. Well, last week my wife was riding ahead of me after recent rain, there was a piece of road that had blinding glare and her rear LED shone through and made her more visible to people behind. The red light stood out from the field of glare around it. So I've done the test and it works.

Cycling into the sun

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 5:33am
I Wear a cycling cap under my helmet.

1. Stops glare as you lower your head when sunny.

2. Stops rain hitting your eyes if raining.

Gary
http://www.longbikeride.co.uk

Re: Flying back to UK from Cape Town

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 5:20am
Hi hector, I bought a normal twin leg pletscher, put some old tube around and installed. The tube has since perished and I had to tighten again. I've not looked to see if there is any damage while I'm still on tour. I'm expecting paint damage. I'll wait till I get home next month to look when I overhaul the bike.

Gary
www.longbikeride.co.uk

Re: Advice sought on choosing a touring bike

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 22 February 2015 - 3:11am
Your long term plan is to move from UK to European, to long haul stuff. I don't know how quickly you will be doing this, but you may want to be thinking about a bike for the end of your plan rather than the beginning.

Debate rages, but many would say a robust 26" tourer would be more suitable for fully loaded touring in Central Asia.

PS I am biased, I ride a Surly and tour amost exclusively in Asia.

Re: Filthy Drivers: Roadside Rubbish

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 2:40am
rehon2 - You remind me of this Lancastrian I nonce met of a Graham Baxter trip. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=94407

Who's Been on a Graham Baxter trip?

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 2:38am
Ever get that nagging feeling you might have actually met one or two forum members in your life, like on a Graham Baxter trip?

Tour of Lombardy sometime in 1990s - memory is a bit vague - Hotel Nuovo.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 1:49am
mjr wrote:Pete Owens wrote:In terms of the increased danger that segregation (whatever the currently fashionable euphamism is) causes at junctions, it make no difference at all whether the cycle path is shared with or separated from pedestrians on the approch.

The problem here is that it is a very very bad idea to ride to the left of left turning motor vehicles (which of course is where a segregated facility would be put). This leads to inevitable conflict where the paths cross at junctions. Whichis why such things have such a poor safety record - increasing the collision risk by a factor of 3 for same direction traffic and a factor of 10 for bi-directional paths such as the new super-duper highways that all the facility fanatics are raving about at the moment.
Are those factors still the oft-cited ones from the debatable 30 year old Lund data that is rather hard to obtain? The headline figures draw no distinctions for cycleway types, junction layouts and so on and are used to wrap it all up into one answer which is "clear, simple and wrong."

The fact that cycle paths increase the danger at junctions has been well established for much longer than that - it is the reason why use of cycle paths was never made compulsory in this country in the '30s despite the best efforts of the motor lobby, unlike the rather more authoritarian regimes on the continent. It is not just one study. Indeed, most of the research has been conducted by believers in segregation who were surprised by the supposedly counter intuitive results. The effect is not marginal - we are talking about an order of magnitude here which is far more clear cut than most road safety interventions. And it does distinguish between junction layouts in that bi-directional tracks are identified as particularly dangerous. There are undoubtedly design features that may mitigate this to a minor extent but that is tinkering at the edges of the problem and certainly quibbling about whether the path is shared with pedestrians or not makes no difference whatsoever.
I agree that there is inevitable conflict where carriageways and cycleways would cross at junctions, but it should be easier to manage,

The fact that the conflict is inevitable this means it is not possible to manage - it is a fundamental feature of the geometrical arrangement. If you arrange for a stream of left turning vehicles to approach a junction to the right of a stream of vehicles heading straight on then expext collisions at the junction.
so in a well-managed junction, the tipper truck driver would have had the truck crunching on bollards or similar, rather than a person.

This is getting silly. If you place a line of bollards across the mouth of a junction then it ceases to be a junction.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 1:07am
pwa wrote:Mjr, correct me if I am wrong, but contrary to what you implied this cyclist was not in a separate lane from the lorry she was trying to overtake on the left, she was in the same lane. Given that the lorry seems to have been indicating left at the time I fail to see how you can begin to defend that manoeuvre. I am horrified at the thought of going down the left side of a lorry in that situation.

But of course it follows from that that if the manoevre is a bad idea in the first place then placing infrastructure in order to encourage that manoevre is even worse. A cyclist may make a mistake in trying to overtake trucks on the wrong side; professional traffic engineers really ought to know better.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

CTC Forum - On the road - 22 February 2015 - 12:23am
Flinders wrote:I have never, to the best of my recollection in 30+ years of cycling, including 7 years in central London, gone down the inside of a lorry. But I have been overtaken close to a junction by lorries. I'm not sure how I can prevent that, short of taking a Sherman tank with me as escort, which would be inconvenient and not very eco-friendly in terms of fuel consumption.
The trick is not to allow yourself to be pressurised into secondary if you believe the door will be closed on you,if you find yourself in that position,for your own self preservation it's better to step off the bike and get onto the pavement,rather than risk life and limb.

Now if I were to be overtaken by a lorry close to a corner and got squashed, it seems I'd be automatically condemned by some cyclists here as it would be assumed I'd gone down the inside of the lorry. No doubt me being a woman would make people even more sure it had been my fault.

If you believe that to be the case you need to go back and read the whole thread again as you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick.
No one has posted such as that on this thread.
Syndicate content

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions