Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Penny Farthings, Legality and responsibility.

Options
1…910121415…20

Comments

  • Options
    #332
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Never, but your proving my point, if 50% of cars failed then loads of issues were fixed. I dont buy into the conspiracy theories.
    My car has failed, needed shocks replaced and once a tyre had wear on the inside of a rear tyre. Things i hadnt spotted but were needed. Thats exactly why the test is there, i dont see that as a bad thing, people will always moan but cars are in far safer condition because of the nct.
    Obviously for a bike the test could be much less complicated and your lbs could do the test.
    Will you answer my question within that post?
    "Out of curiosity, how many times have you had a conversation like the above in the motors forum?"

    In terms of a bike test, would you envisage childrens bikes requiring this?


  • Options
    #333
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    cletus wrote:
    Who sets the standard? Who tests the standard? What bikes are tested? Do you have to display a cert showing the bike is roadworthy?


    Govt
    Bike shops, they could do with the business
    All bikes that go on a road
    Why not

    Like i said very very very simple.

    As for cycling a penny farthing, in my opinion its totally unsuitable for modern roads, how do you stop at a zebra crossing or lights or a car blocking your way. If that was a rosd bike it would have very easily missed the van. And im not victim blaming, the van was in the wrong.


  • Options
    #334
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    A bicycle type NCT test is a waste of time. Are the Gardai going to setup "Operation Peloton" where they stop cyclists and check their bikes for defects? Is that really a good use of Garda time? Are defective bikes causing injury and death on a vast scale annually?

    It's a silly idea and the costs of enforcement greatly outweigh any benefits. (How many cyclists lives will be saved?)


  • Options
    #335
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Govt
    Bike shops, they could do with the business
    All bikes that go on a road
    Why not

    Like i said very very very simple.

    As for cycling a penny farthing, in my opinion its totally unsuitable for modern roads, how do you stop at a zebra crossing or lights or a car blocking your way. If that was a rosd bike it would have very easily missed the van. And im not victim blaming, the van was in the wrong.

    Bike shops are not short of business! (They've never been busier)
    Bike shops already offer bike repair services
    All bikes are capable of been ridden on the road.
    A PF is a very old bike..that's true..but so is a Model T Ford or an MGB.
    A PF stops at zebra crossings the same way everyone else does.


  • Options
    #336
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    beauf wrote:
    You said check tyre pressure...
    They did set a standard. It's in the regulations.
    It can change daily so impracticle to test every day.
    beauf wrote:
    Define safe. All bikes stop in a different distance depending on a variety of factors. Bit of gravel, wet manhole, big rider, a few panniers, and it can take a long time to stop.
    Dont be silly, you would test the bike under a set condition with a tollerance in the result. But even checking there were two working brakes correctly set on the rim and working lights would be a start.

    Eacy cyclist has to judge the conditions and adjust his cycling accordingly. We all do that, wind, rain, light, road surface etc... changes how we cycle.

    Are you suggesting a lisc, so cyclists can be examined to see if they know this stuff ?
    beauf wrote:
    So what you don't do is dangerously cut across a cyclist, car, or truck leaving them no space.

    Yes but everyone on a road hss a responsibility.
    If im driving a car and some one cuts infront i dont keep going, sing to myself 'hes in the wrong im in the right'
    I quicky try to avoid him.
    Everyone on the rosd has a responsibility to know and follow the rules of the road, do things in a safe manner and not in a 'im entitled to do this' attitude.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #337
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Gerry T wrote: »

    Like i said very very very simple.

    The reason schemes such as you propose aren't widely pursued is because they're not simple, and the gains aren't worth it.

    This is just a variation on the mandatory registration/insurance idea that everyone thinks they,'ve just invented.


  • Options
    #338
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Seth Brundle wrote:
    Would this bike need that bike nct?
    Yes, if your going to cycle it on a road, how else would you stop when coming down from the hell fire club.
    Seth Brundle wrote:
    What about the rules and understanding of the road for when they are outside their house? Would the rider need to pass a test? Edit: I'd also add that this bike is not allowed (as per the law) be cycled on a footpath.
    I see your lacking in cop-on.
    Parents take young kids onto roads, but if your old enough to cycle on busy roads on your own your bike should be safe, what dont you get


  • Options
    #339
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    What jurisdiction currently has mandatory NCTs for bicycles, given it's easy to do and has enormous benefits?


  • Options
    #340
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    cletus wrote:
    Im not laughing, but I do think it's a silly idea. It's putting large amounts of bureaucracy and cost into solving a problem that doesn't exist, as far as I can tell.

    They thought seat belts were a stupid idea and i remember when people would have 4 or 5 pints and drive, the outrage when it was stopped. Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes


  • Options
    #341
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Yes, if your going to cycle it on a road, how else would you stop when coming down from the hell fire club.


    I see your lacking in cop-on.
    Parents take young kids onto roads, but if your old enough to cycle on busy roads on your own your bike should be safe, what dont you get

    How did you get your Penny Farthing up to the Hell Fire Club, cycle?
    Are unsafe bikes a problem?
    How many cyclists were injured or killed last year as a direct consequence of a defective bicycle?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #342
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,996 ✭✭✭cletus


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Govt
    Bike shops, they could do with the business
    All bikes that go on a road
    Why not

    Like i said very very very simple.

    As for cycling a penny farthing, in my opinion its totally unsuitable for modern roads, how do you stop at a zebra crossing or lights or a car blocking your way. If that was a rosd bike it would have very easily missed the van. And im not victim blaming, the van was in the wrong.

    And what's the net benefit you see in implementing this system and infrastructure?


  • Options
    #343
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Gerry T wrote: »
    They thought seat belts were a stupid idea and i remember when people would have 4 or 5 pints and drive, the outrage when it was stopped. Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes

    Yes, but your idea genuinely has no merit.


  • Options
    #344
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Gerry T wrote: »
    As for cycling a penny farthing, in my opinion its totally unsuitable for modern roads, how do you stop at a zebra crossing or lights or a car blocking your way. If that was a rosd bike it would have very easily missed the van. And im not victim blaming, the van was in the wrong.
    So what is the requirement then. Is there a license for separate types of bicycle. I'd have no issue with the above on a track bike, no reason that I would have an issue on a PF. How long do I have to go with a tester following me before I am deemed safe on a PF?
    07Lapierre wrote: »
    A bicycle type NCT test is a waste of time. Are the Gardai going to setup "Operation Peloton" where they stop cyclists and check their bikes for defects? Is that really a good use of Garda time? Are defective bikes causing injury and death on a vast scale annually?

    It's a silly idea and the costs of enforcement greatly outweigh any benefits. (How many cyclists lives will be saved?)
    Can you imagine, ironically the people who give out about bikes without thinking it through would be conflicted as they would be compelled to give out about Gardai wasting their time. To say its a silly idea where the costs outweigh the benefits is being overly nice. Based in reality, as the world stands and the data we have from Ireland, it would be beyond stupid.


  • Options
    #345
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,996 ✭✭✭cletus


    Gerry T wrote: »
    They thought seat belts were a stupid idea and i remember when people would have 4 or 5 pints and drive, the outrage when it was stopped. Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes

    Both wearing seat belts and stopping drink driving saved large numbers of lives. They were two issues that contributed massively to road fatalities


  • Options
    #346
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes

    Agreed, that's why it's a legal requirement to have brakes. (A Penny Farthing has a Brake)


  • Options
    #347
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gerry T wrote: »
    It can change daily so impracticle to test every day.

    It was your suggestion not mine. I was wondering where you going with that, and the answer is...nowhere.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Dont be silly, you would test the bike under a set condition with a tollerance in the result. But even checking there were two working brakes correctly set on the rim and working lights would be a start.

    You only need working lights during lighting up hours. Maybe you should check the rules. PF doesn't need two working brakes. Again the rules.

    If you want new rules for your NCT. Maybe you should suggest some. Daylight running lights for bicycles. only Hydraulic Disc brakes for bicycles.

    Then maybe suggest something similar for pedestrians.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Eacy cyclist has to judge the conditions and adjust his cycling accordingly. We all do that, wind, rain, light, road surface etc... changes how we cycle.

    Are you suggesting a lisc, so cyclists can be examined to see if they know this stuff ?

    I suggested nothing. You're the one who suggested a NCT for bicycles. Seemingly without knowing the rules.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Yes but everyone on a road hss a responsibility.
    If im driving a car and some one cuts infront i dont keep going, sing to myself 'hes in the wrong im in the right'
    I quicky try to avoid him.
    Everyone on the rosd has a responsibility to know and follow the rules of the road, do things in a safe manner and not in a 'im entitled to do this' attitude.

    Not sure what responsible has to do with someone driving into (or at) you.


  • Options
    #348
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Gerry T wrote: »
    They thought seat belts were a stupid idea and i remember when people would have 4 or 5 pints and drive, the outrage when it was stopped. Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes

    Dear f*cking lord, are you serious?!? Are you, I ask just to be clear, comparing seat belts and drink driving, to the lack of an issue with no NCT on bicycles.


  • Options
    #349
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    The reason schemes such as you propose aren't widely pursued is because they're not simple, and the gains aren't worth it.

    This is just a variation on the mandatory registration/insurance idea that everyone thinks they,'ve just invented.

    If they wanted to they could stop all the bikes going down the major roads in a city with no lights after dark. Shooting fish in a barrel.

    Last time I check the stats of people getting fined by the cycling fixed charges.
    They were at a rate of 3 a day nationally.
    More likely they did for a week or so then ignored it for the rest of the year.

    Enforcing the existing rules and laws would be cheaper than a NCT.


  • Options
    #350
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gerry T wrote: »
    They thought seat belts were a stupid idea and i remember when people would have 4 or 5 pints and drive, the outrage when it was stopped. Whats silly is someone being able to cycle a bike on a busy road that might have no brakes

    I'd be curious how many actually do that (cycle with no brakes). Any stats on it?

    Is it even possible to cycle with no brakes at all?

    Even a "Fixie" or Track bike has a form of brakes. They just aren't as good as other forms of brakes.


  • Options
    #351
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Some kids uncouple the v-brake when the wheel go out of true, but they usually have one brake still working, even if it's metal on metal because they don't replace the pads.

    I did see a kid one day with both brakes uncoupled, but he was spoon-braking with his shoe on the rear wheel. Only time I ever saw it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #352
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    I did see a kid one day with both brakes uncoupled, but he was spoon-braking with his shoe on the rear wheel. Only time I ever saw it.

    We used to do that when we were kids. My mum was always mad because i was wearing my school shoes at the time! :)


  • Options
    #353
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    You do see kids whose main method of braking is to scrape their heels on the ground too. Adults with no brakes at all you don't see often, though the set-up is often sub-optimal, based on my time being unofficial bike guy at work once.


  • Options
    #354
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    You do see people with one V brake disconnected. But as you say its usually obvious as they've wrapped around the handlebar or such.

    I'm sure if you checked every fixie a few will have no hand brake. Very hard to ride a fixie.

    Until recently I had a bike with a coaster brake. I hated it. Slides and braking were fine. Its just a PITA to lift the pedal at the lights for setting off.


  • Options
    #355
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Just a thought. Bikes are simple machines. Other than brakes, most other defects make them pretty much unrideable. You can ride a bike that has defective brakes, but a broken chain? A flat tyre? Broken spokes? Badly buckled wheel?


  • Options
    #356
    Gerry T
    Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Seth Brundle wrote:
    Will you answer my question within that post? "Out of curiosity, how many times have you had a conversation like the above in the motors forum?"
    I did. I started with "Never"
    I seldom post on the motors forum.
    Seth Brundle wrote:
    In terms of a bike test, would you envisage childrens bikes requiring this?
    Depends on the age, if a kid is 12 cycling to secondary school alone, then yes.
    But if the kid is 6 and out with a parent and being supervised then no, i doubt they'll be doing 40km/hr through town.

    I'm suggesting this to help and protect cyclists.


  • Options
    #357
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    The Dutch Bike Shop add a front brake onto the coaster brake bikes they import, as the law here is different. My daughters have coaster brakes. I haven't used one in ages, but they seem to prefer to use the lever brakes.


  • Options
    #358
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,767 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Just a thought. Bikes are simple machines. Other than brakes, most other defects make them pretty much unrideable. You can ride a bike that has defective brakes, but a broken chain? A flat tyre? Broken spokes? Badly buckled wheel?
    I guess metal fatigue in wheels and fork, loose headsets and misaligned gears cause sudden falls.


  • Options
    #359
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Gerry T wrote: »
    Depends on the age, if a kid is 12 cycling to secondary school alone, then yes.
    But if the kid is 6 and out with a parent and being supervised then no, i doubt they'll be doing 40km/hr through town.

    I'm suggesting this to help and protect cyclists.
    How many incidents are there on record where this form of protection has been shown to be necessary?
    Have you any expert evidence to show this will actually help protect cyclists?


  • Options
    #360
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    Gerry T wrote: »
    I'm suggesting this to help and protect cyclists.

    Rubbish! Defective bikes are not the problem you think they are. If you really want to protect cyclists you should:

    1: always give 1.5 meters gap when overtaking.
    2: campaign for better cycling infrastructure
    3: Drive with due care and attention at all times
    4: don't use your phone while driving.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #361
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Gerry T wrote: »
    ....
    I'm suggesting this to help and protect cyclists.

    Maybe start from the top of the list of important issues, maybe.

    Better still look at the studies. See if we can address the biggest issues first.

    For example using lights at night is the most effective way to be seen. Its also a legal requirement.


Advertisement