I rode a bit of trail / footpath out the back of Ambleside / west side of Windermere whilst on the way to Claiffe Heights. It was c.1m wide and the far side of the dry stone wall from the road. Took me and mate off the skinny roads and was good. More of that sort of stuff would be good IMO. Usable for all (providing everyone shares and plays nicely). Probably more achievable (technically and financially) than bigger stuff int he mountains and more accessible to a larger group of users.

Trail centres are lovely and all but I think I’d like to see more money on more tracks / routes / trails / facilities more easily accessible to as wider cross section of the whole population.

8-)

You might not mean literally mean “bin it” but if you are intending to please have a look for a cycle charity or something who’d probably be glad for any bike stuff, Claud Butler or not ;-)

I know of one in Leeds but sadly that sounds like it’s miles from you. Be nice if something else good came out of it as well as you getting a bargain.

All well and good.

Isn’t J (Mugboo) talking about folks building bad stuff that makes the trail unrideable, rather than someone just changing (arguably improving it)?

Further down some idiot has dug sodding great holes in the line and created mantraps to add big berms

J – nad luck fella, just put it back to a decent condition. Half the time it’s kids / folks who don’t know any better who’ve tried to build something, found it doesn’t work and then never come back.

And TJ please pull your head out of your arse :-P

Tempted for the Gryphon but, in all honesty, it’d be needless upgraditis as the BB7s on there are working just fine. Head ruling the heart at the mo, it may change!

That’s a lovely wee film 8-)

Fair point. It’s not what I meant when I wrote that but I can see how it could read that way.

The appraoch you describe is not the intention from meetings that I’ve intended, IMO. There are spots where user conflict might mean changes / compromises but I’d hope that in doing so the changes amount to more than what is being “sacrificed”. Plus we’re not involved in things at all those locations.

TBH, what people do now and enjoy is unlikely to change. What is hopped by adding stuff is more trail, that itself will be formally recognised, so it’s more likely to persist.

In all our proposals though we advocate sharing and consequently that all users do so responsibly with due consideration to each other. Personally I reckon it’s easier to get people on side with this sort of thinking. It’s my stock answer to the (non riding) people who complain about bikes being where they “shouldn’t be” and “terrorising” others.

In a parrallel universe I’d be looking to create dedicated MTB trails but the reality is people walk on trails envisioned for bikes and bikes ride on paths designated for walkers. In our small world I think we have to (and will probably improve our lot more quickly) by advocating responsible sharing.

Soap Box!!

8-)

… and pp7 of the consultation draft:

“Bradford Council is the single largest woodland owner in the District (see map) with 111 sites (74 woods, 37 parks) totalling 857 hectares (590 woodland, 267 parks) managed as woodland.

In 2003 a further 703 hectares of woodland was owned by a wide range of private or charitable owners, however, planting schemes by the Council, Forest of Bradford and other land owners and community groups are believed to have increased the amount of woodland cover in the district to a figure in the range of 5 -10%.”

Not to be sniffed at.

Oi, J – you stuck it on the main site and FB / Google+ yet?

;-)

Where are Bradford’s areas of Woodland though? Ok I know there are small pockets of woodland all over, but none of them are large enough to do commercial tree felling or cycle routes etc…?

That is incorrect. We (SingletrAction) are actively involved with potential trail developments in two of Bradfords woods. They control plenty of large areas of land / woodland and the scale of operations or size of a site needed dependst on exactly what you want to do. Sure it’s probably not enough to do commercial forestry like your typical FC operation but there’s still scope.

Also, piecemeal development of smaller trail areas, accessible to all and then linked by PROW is perfectly feasible. Many people riding in Airedale do exactly that by using the canal and dipping in and out of the various woods (Calverley, Thackley, Esholt etc). Creating permissible trails should at least open up and/or formalise current “trails” that aren’t legit. Hopefully it’ll actually add more technical trails.

I think the futures bright and making efforts to ensure there’s some mention of MTBing in the district’s Plan will be much better than there being none.

ed – trying to learn that hence no more posts on this

LOL

Heard that before.

Seems that nowadays accidents only happen to keep lawyers busy.

Why whatever makes you say that:

Mr Whippey, from Castleford, West Yorkshire, had been ordered to pay Mr Jones £15,000 damages along with a further £25,000 in lawyers’ bills .

Oh lord.

Do you have special glasses or something?

Sod it, life’s too short :-P

TJ, the master of balanced and rational communications, strikes again I see.

It’s odd though that TJ hasn’t actually managed to link to anything that seems to really support his absolutely definitive statements i.e. that it’s a matter of “strict liability”. Fervent Googling (IMO) appears to have only found him relatively vague or oblique references to liability in the form of solicitors touting for business. I wouldn’t have made the proud boast that there’s “loads of precedent” on that basis.

Are there any links to some actual records of court proceedings and/or judegements?

Have used Cyclejersey and they’ve been really good to deal with. However, would echo the comment about collars having an odd fit. Fine on the bike but funny when standing up. Personally, I’d prefer a better fit if doing custom ones again but would check with TCJ to see if they’ve resolved the issue.

Gil @ thecycleshed might do custom stuff too. Top fella.

Please accept my apologises for any inconvenience this has caused you.

or in other words:

“I’m sorry we tried to shaft you for a significant amount of cash on the basis that we hadn’t looked at your details properly (oh, riiiight!) and will now beat a hasty retreat as you appear to have cuaght us out.”

Funkers!

That’s where it was fiddled a bit, and has been clamped down on by the Inland Revenue – people were claiming that a £1000 bike was worth £50 after 18 months, which is obviously ridiculous – so now they have more realistic fair market values you have to pay to get to keep the bike at the end of the rental period.

I kind of agree.

It raise the question of how / why are the lease “payments” effectively valuye of bike less tax savings and divided by 12?

If you were paying a nominal sum over the lease period and then a more appropriate (related to value) lump sum at the end if you wanted possession then OK. Otherwise why would anyone rent a Cotic Roadrat for 12 months at c£70 (IIRC) a month for 12 months. It just doesn’t make finaincial sense.

[quoteBreak into a shed or garage with no one in it, is slightly different to breaking into a house full of people, don’t you think?[/quote]

Well, 2 years ago they broke into my house whilst we were all (family of 4) asleep upstairs. The dog (soft sack of spuds lab) was downstairs as well. We’d been stupid and left keys, wallets, laptop etc on tables etc in the room. Never seen the wife’s Zafira since (some could argue small loss ;-) Never knew until we came downstairs in the morning.

Year later and the garage gets done. It’s so close to the house you wouldn’t believe it. Again all four in the house, plus dog. No idea again.

Friends round the corner had their back room cleared whilst she was upstairs putting the kids to bed.

Whilst in some cases inside the house may be more secure I wouldn’t kid yourself.

Yes, I know my frame numbers except for the ones that are illegible due to paint thickness.

Again, my solution would be frame numbers marked clearly and vissibly in several prominent places. One illegible due to damage might be legit but anymore is likely to be dodgy. All classifieds etc insist on a listing including the frame number / a photo of it.

Would make police identification and tracing easier as well, surely?

Doesn’t stop everything / everyone but, IMO, would go a long way and seems relatively simple. Hey ho.

I got three nicked from a locked garage last year. Pulled apart timber side door (proper door with mortice locks, not some crap 2″ thick shed style thing), snapped out the mortice lock body and got in. Having been burgled the year before that and taking it as a lucky escape I’d got all the bikes locked together and hanging off hooks, effectively blocking the up&over door. The scrotes brought 42 inch (i.e. massive) Irwin Record bolt croppers and cut the 11mm security chain (tried the Squire padlock but it resisted).

3 bikes and c.£6.5k worth of gear gone, never seen again.

Since then I’ve beefed up chains, locks, doors and linked it to the house alarm which is on whenever we go to bed and y’know what? I still check out the back when I come down in the morning with a slight feeling of “they’ll have been back”.

I’d have loved to have given the three (spotted in the street riding off) of them a good slap. I don’t belioeve in violence and have no personal illusion about how tough I am. But honestly thank Christ I slept through and didn’t know. 3 against one when they’ve already got screwdrivers and chisels (that they ditched after getting through the door) would have likley ended badly for me.

Personally, I think one way would be to make bikes more identifiable. I’d get the frame number stamped on several visible places on the frame, not just under the BB at point of manufacture. At least that way there’s a quick, easy and relatively unique identifier that can be used by the police and everyone else.

Wouldn’t stop the stripping and parts selling but would go a long way, IMO, to help.

If ebay, gumtree and classifieds made it policy that you couldn’t sell a bike / frame without listing / photo of the frame number it’d make disposal harder. It seems relatively straightforward to me but I remember discussing it on here with Brant and him thinking it’d be rather difficult (at the factory). I’m not convinced but then again I reckon he probably knows more about manufacturers than I do ;-)

Whilst I can imagine some stuff goes off abroad the mate locally who got his Spesh back (the only one of 5 nicked) was a more (IMO) typical scenario. It was lying in the back garden of some scrotes house (pretty local to my mate) who got raided for some other reason. THe guy was just getting round to sripping and flogging it. Got 9 months I believe for handling stolen goods (claimed not to have done the burglary).

I just prefer being more pleasant and polite to people.

Got an EBB (thinks it’s a Woods) in a Singular Gryphon. Not used a huge amount but been just fine. Got some dents and marks and no issue thus far.

TJ in usual dogmatic, over-bearing-opinion shocker!

you only hire it from your employer

Not in our case, emp;loyer has totally handed everything to Cyclescheme so the bike is theirs and all dealings are with them (so it doesn’t matter if you leave employer).

I got caught in the period where HMRC changed guidance and ended up takin the option to pay an additional one-months-equivalent deposit to extend the lease period for several years at which point the value of bike is (IIRC) either £0 or equivalent to the deposit. If I want it then I keep the bike and they keep the deposit, lease over, asset transfered, done.

I don’t like it as the bike is still someone else’s and if HMRC revisit the guidance there’s a chance I’ll get clobbered again. Plus strictly speaking, if it’s nicked etc I would have to replace. Still, seemed cheapest and easiest option at time.

Personally, as an employee, the way my employer runs (or not in my case) the scheme is probably one of the least advantageous ways. Can’t even exploit the BIK option at end of lease.

I suspect the “knife” point was one of many possible reasons why the idea wasn’t such a good one. If bike theft and the stuff TJ suggest hasn’t been discussed with the local force then it seems an obvious opportunity / step in the process has been missed. The assumption that the force won’t do anything about it is not the same as actually making the effort to see if they will (at the right level. with sufficient effort etc).

You pays your taxes, the force gets a proportion of that and ought to respond in some way to the concerns of the community they are charged with policing. As always, there’s a multitude of factors and considerations. Getting to talk to the “right” person is probably key, but as there’s been advice on that there seems little to lose trying it before getting all urban ninja.

Only missing a couple of bricks and a canal.

;-)

I am a bag whore 8-)

A tip:

Either replace the draw cord with something a bit less “slippy” in the cord lock or put a knot (granny on the bight works for me) after the cord lock to stop it slipping.

Only been a small issue on my (club branded – cheers duffman) bags when well loaded with heavy stuff. Certainly not a big enough issue to stop me ordering another one cheap as I have done ;-)

I would rather pay £30 a year to an organisation that campaigned to get bicycles access to footpaths.

Me too.

RangerBill and Tony Lund (TonyL) off here (or I think I have their emails) look after a lot of stuff in Lancs / PBW. Email me if you can’t reach them. They’re both Lancs CC employees.

There’s loads of stuff available for Stainburn but it’s probably not the type of trail example required. Say if it’d be useful though.

Refering to IMBA Guidelines might be worthwhile. Would show ability to work to a recognised, durable and sustainable specification. It’s what all the stuff at Stainburn is built to. It’s also agreed and inspected by Forestry Commission (RAnger and Civil Engineer). All our stuff has been to their ultimate satisfaction so shows some track record.

Tim (chairman@singletraction.org.uk)

You can stick your name on an “interested” list by the folks who’ve done the proto’s. Can’t remember the name :oops:

I have and have punted it on to various people. You should be cc’d.

Fingers crossed.

Try Colin Palmer or someone else suitable at CTC maybe?

I think SingletrAction helped set that route up in some way (before my time) but we haven’t had anything to do with it in my working knowledge (c.8 years).

Happy to support someone if I can / they feel it would help. Not a personal area of expertise but might be able to point you to the right people or ones that might provide useful advice.

Streetmap link might help?

Cheers

Tim
chairman@singletraction.org.uk

I have a long (contrary to Mike’s advice) Mk1 built up as a Pump Track bike. 5’9″ and 32″ inside leg.

Love it for the PT, have ridden it a little “around the woods”. Great bike, not sure it’d be better than a small PA for more all round stuff but then it’d be you riding it not me ;-)

Still not sure whether I should have gone for a short. One day, maybe …..

34.9 Hope on mine. Anodized small it was a fine fit, painted white medium it took some persuading. Works fine on either though.

If there’s a set of 150mm rockers for the Mk2 going I might be interested ….

cheeky, how did you replace the Kobe? With something similar, but different, or was this ages ago?

With a secondhand one that popped up within days of me being burgled. The frame numbers were different ;-)

It’s still hanging up, waiting to be re-built and looking a little unloved. Currently distracted by full sus, skill compensation, fun 8-)

Did do back in May. Still waiting patiently 8-)

That link keeps jamming up on my works PC.

Just proto’s aren’t they?

Isn’t that Chumba a HX2?

Just from looking at the other pics in the album. Nice looking thing whatever it is, if the difference matters.

I had an Alpine. I wasn’t really getting on with it until a mate borrowed it and subsequently sorted out the dodgy, grounchy job I’d mad eof the build. I rode it once after he’d smoothified it and was very impressed. Maybe a little “weighty” (which is entirely subjective) but I think I fall in the camp that best fits a PA, much like Mike has described.

Then the thieving barstewards robbed it from my garage.

Mike gave me a great option on a pre-loved Alpine but I decided to use the limited insurance payout to replace the Kobe they also took.

If Alpine Bikes ever realise the Ti Alpine I will considering selling a kidney.

Never ridden a BFe.

Look up singletraction on Facebook or check out our website at http://www.singletraction.org.uk.

Come up to Stainburn (off the Pateley Bridge Road, north of Otley) and try the trails. Can be a “marmite” experience ;-)

Volunteer trail building days are first sunday of every month from c.10am at the main car park (same as the trail head). All welcome.

Tim
Chairman, SingletrAction