Im about 74kg and I probably drink a similar amount of water as OddJob.

Im pretty much continuously drinking it.

I suppose if I did weight my self in the morning after going to the toilet and then in the evening their might be quite a large differential.

As people mention one litre of water = 1kg.

But I’ve never done it.

Looks like I will pay off my mortgage about 5 years early if interest rates stay where they are (unlikely I know).

They might be the way things are going

I just seem to remember being told that the lenders like to rake back most of the interest in the early days. I must have not quite grasped that properly.

Interest is worked out monthly or daily or something. However your payments stay the same through out the mortgage. As the amount to pay back is large to begin with it appears you are paying more interest to begin with.

You could level this off by paying less later, but the mortgage would take longer to pay off. Or by paying more to begin with, but where do you get the money from ?

broken scales ?

I tried running triple and a close ratio road cassette, rubbish, pretty much everytime I changed gear offroad I’d move 2 at a time anyway and I had to switch chainrings a lot more often. I run 22/32 11-32 mostly now, slightly undergeared for downhill fireroads but as I only ride those once in a while it’s fine.
22/36 11-32 has more top end but I like a 1:1 available in middle ring, lots of climbs seem to be just a bit too steep/long for 36/32 so too much use of the granny, wouldn’t mind 24/36 11-36 10spd but CBA with the cost and effort at the moment (and I like my RR dérailleurs too)

I’ve got an ultegra on my race wheels was 12-28 I think but I put an 11t in to make it 11-28T.

Works very well with a triple I find.

I reckon 22f-28r gives me a low enough for going up hills and a 42f 11r gives me enough for road riding even.

but a 11T-30T 8 speed would be even better and probably weigh the same as a 9 speed 11-28T.

Sorry how can you say Croydon ?

What you mean is the riding isnt as bad as you think and can be accessed from the door if you want. Houses are cheaper than for other parts of south london, there are good transport links and there is employment in the area.

But how can it be the “BEST” mtbing town, when clearly Dorking nearby would be a much nicer place to live and is also closer to the best trails. Obviously house prices are more expensive there but thats because its up there with the “BEST” towns in the SE.

If Croydon was one of the “BEST” towns its house prices etc would also be high.

yeah then u would nt need a silly heavy 1O seed cassette out the back and 8 seed or something would do saving weight escially out the back. and meaning u dont damage your hubs so easy

This has been answered it adds almost nothing, it takes away ground clearance, sometimes adds weight, and assuming you’re going up gears also requires more chain, which means more chainslapping and less good chain control in general in the lower gears- ie worse shifting, more noise, more dropped chains. And another part to buy and maintain. In theory a double can give you better chainline too though in practice I’m not sure how often this happens

im not on about adding a big chainring im on about adding a small one.

ok chainline and q factor are valid oints.

I think alot of you are missing my point.

Im not asking what the advantage of smaller front chain rings are. I agree with all of them. I also agree we could probably get away with a smaller range of gears.

Im asking what the advantage of a double.

If you have a front gear mech why not stick in a third chain ring .

Say this XT model

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=67200

it has a 28-4O T model why not just bung in a 22 tooth ring as well.

it would hardly weigh anything.

Yes, but having a triple opens up a much larger range of gears than a 2*9 or a 2*10.

And as I say the weight is better in the middle a 1-36 cassette is pretty heavy and is in the wrong place.

You dont need to lose the gears at the back its just if your weight obsessed like me.

If just seems a triple + 7-8 gears opens up the largest selection of gears for the lowest weight. Which is what we started with !

If they can get a 1*10 (9-36) going that is reasonably light I would change to that.

I would say running is much harder. But I wonder if the answers are slightly screwed by being on a mtb forum.

do you think anyone on a running forum would say cycling is harder ?

Is the nausea low sugar ?

Are you eating a lot of sugary food but not much low GI stuff before the ride ?

Who’s Gok Wan is like one of the big hitters ?

Yawn, tell me when someone really famous walks past like TJ or Hora .

yeah for most of that article I found myself agreeing.

Although he was overstating the case as an “assualt” in typical dail mail fashion.

guilty ! Only on my third mug so running behind some of you guys

Actually looks alright. It does shows you the route overlaid on an OS map which is a must if you ask me.

http://www.mtbtrails.info/Default.aspx

But this is easily the best MTB routes page I’ve seen just need more routes in England + Wales + Cornwall

Blimey! some people don’t half over-think things

🙂

I work at Imperial College that may explain things.

I’m very much one of the more laid back, anything goes type round here.

Also I’ve been reading this

The Etymologicon

Why do you think so many pros have such a problem keeping their performance level – it is mostly in the mind as they are all highly talented and would shoot in the 60’s regularly if there were no pressure

I like golf but this is probably the worst defence of it being a sport ever.

The difference between a sport and a game is a sport is a physical activity where as a game manly mental.

Chess has some physical activities ie you move the pieces. But it is clearly many mental hence it is a game not a sport.

What your suggesting above is that actually hitting the ball is nt very hard and most of the challenge is mental, which would mean it isnt a sport ! The opposite to what your trying to argue !

In reality hitting the ball well requires a fair bit of skill so it is currently classed as a sport.

I would nt be surprised if the English language does develop new words to more accurately describe events.

For instance in the future

Running,Cycling,Rowing,Swiming,etc = Challenge
Football,Badminton,Tennis,etc = Sport
Golf,Darts,Snooker,Motor racing,etc = Event
Chess,Monopoly,etc = Game

The real question is where does cricket fall in the above list ? i’d have to put it in with Golf, Darts and Snooker myself.

Found this on wikipedia from sweden this is this system we should have. Unlike the system we currently have where peoples right to roam is constantly infringed.

In Sweden allemansrätten (lit. “the everyman’s right”) is a freedom granted by the Constitution of Sweden. Since 1994 the Instrument of Government says that notwithstanding the right to own property “everyone shall have access to nature in accordance with allemansrätten

Allemansrätten gives a person the right to access, walk, cycle, ride, ski, and camp on any land—with the exception of private gardens, the immediate vicinity of a dwelling house and land under cultivation. Restrictions apply for nature reserves and other protected areas. It also gives the right to pick wild flowers, mushrooms and berries (provided one knows they are not legally protected), but not to hunt in any way. Swimming in any lake and putting an unpowered boat on any water is permitted unless explicitly forbidden. Visiting beaches and walking by a shoreline is permitted, providing it is not a part of a garden or within the immediate vicinity of a residence (legally defined as the hemfridszon). According to legal practice this is between 100 to 300 metres from a dwelling house.[9] To better protect access to water and the right to walk along beaches, it is since 1975 generally not permitted to build a new house near (generally 100 m) from a beach and/or shoreline

And if everyone adopted this attitude, there’d be all that anarchy you referred to earlier:

Rubbish this system basically exists in Scotland as TJ says its not perfect but its hardly anarchy

So anything goes so long as nobody finds out?

Where did I say that ? For instance I could of destroyed their property with out them finding out but it would be wrong.

What I said is basically people should have the freedom to choose what they do as long it does not harm other people this is pretty much the definition of a right in my book.

I know this is on a whole nother scale. But in other countries it is illegal to be homosexual ?

Just because its illegal there do you that is right ? surely the people has a right to be homosexual.

I ask again what rights of there’s am I breaking if I pass through with out damage or notice ?

And if Im not breaking any of their rights why cant I be there ?

So, in your world/opinion people shouldn’t be allowed to own land, therefore everyone’s property is fair game? …

No in my opinion the current society we live in requires land owner ship, but we should try to increase access rights to the largest extent we can without intruding on other rights such as privacy.

So it’s ok to abuse access rights/privileges as long as nobody finds out? …

How can I be abusing their rights if they cant find out ? Exactly what rights are you on about ? Please tell me ?

I agree if I was on someones land went right up to their window and started waving in. I would clearly be abusing their right to privacy.

If I started playing loud music I would again be abusing this right.

If I broke their property and destroyed their land I could see I was clearly in the wrong (according to the law and morally).

If I come and go on their land and they dont even notice what rights am I going against ?

What exactly is the grey area in “you do not have landowners permission to ride on their footpaths”? … seems pretty clear (i.e. black and white).

Well for one how do I know the landowner has nt given permission if there are no signs either way ? I can just as easily assume he has as I can assume he hasnt.

Also what do you mean the law is black and white ? The law is based on a serious of assumptions there is no black and white. These assumptions can not be ‘proven’, they are just there because they make society easier to run.

Unless you believe the current law is divinely inspired its clearly shades of grey.

Where is the justification that anybody should be able to own land at all ? Why should the term Landowner even have any meaning.

My assumption is because the society we have developed relies on these concepts to continue to function without turning into total anarchy.

Therefore why do footpath exist ? to give public rights of way and access to land that is not owned by them for the common good. Personally I see little difference between accessing it on foot as on bike.

I mean if someone decided to visit my garden with out damaging anything. I admit would be miffed but

1. How would I know they have done it ?
2. The cats/bird/dogs visit my garden all the time how is a person visiting different from them ?
3. What actual right to the land do I have more than them ?

The only thing I would say is I have a right to privacy. So if the person came too close to my house while I was in, their right to access would be imposing on my right to privacy.

It depends on the law as to which is more important. I think as most people want some privacy this has outed. Hence why society has decided wondering around other peoples gardens is a no-no.

But wondering around someones 100 acre estate is a bit different as generally your not affecting their privacy.

But some people think they can do whatever they like just because “it’s not hurting anyone”

Yes if its really not hurting anyone yes. I’d rather do something thats illegal but morally right than some things thats legal but morally wrong.

Although obviously everything really is shades of grey no black and white.

Most stuff that is illegal does hurt people though. Some stuff that isnt illegal does hurt people.

Posted in the other thread we were arguing in 🙂

email to council

Dear Sir/Madam,

Currently the Land End ford. Can be access by car/horse across the ford
and by foot across the foot bridge.

However it can not be cross on bike.

This is unfortunate as it would provide quiet safe route for cyclists
from Hurst/Twyford to Woodley/Reading.

Both Old Bath Road and Sandford lane are not great for cyclists as they
are narrow and drivers can be somewhat aggressive on them.

All that is needed is for the footbridge to be altered such that bike
handle bars can easily pass along it. To do this the railings could be
lowered and the entrance cleared.

Regards

Roger

Responce :

Dear Roger

Thank you for your email message. There are some plans to improve the
cycle routes in the Woodley/Twyford area – if the opportunity arises. I
will pass your request on to my colleagues in highways as they have been
looking into this.

Regards

Sue Griffin

email to land owner + response

On 2 November 2011 13:12, Roger Robinson <scu98rkr@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Currently the Land End ford is accessible by car/horse across the ford and by foot across the foot bridge. However it can not be crossed on bike.

This is unfortunate as it would provide quiet safe route for cyclists from Hurst/Twyford to Woodley/Reading. Both Old Bath Road and Sandford lane are not great for cyclists as they are narrow and twisty nature makes it difficult for drivers to over take.

Im just wondering if you have any opinions on this ? I assume you own the field leading to the footbridge across from the centre.

It seems to me the best the solution to this dilemma would be to reroute the footpath and reclassify it as both a footpath and a cycleway. It would be rerouted such that it starts from near the field gate (opposite your centre) and proceed directly to the bridge. It could then be fenced off and walkers/cyclist would not need to walk though your field potentially disturbing the horses. As this would be fenced off from the horses the barrier to the footbridge could be removed allowing cyclist to cross as well as walkers.

Im just wondering if you would support a change in rights of way such as this given it would have the advantage to you that the public would no longer have direct access to your paddock ?

I include an image showing my proposed new footpath. The Blue line represents the current footpath, the red line represents the route of my suggested footbath/cycleway and the green line a possible fence to discourage the public from access your paddock.

If you were in favour of this change maybe we could approach wokingham council together with a local cycle access group to implement the changes on their transport/cycle access budget ?

Regards

Roger

Hi looking at your diagram there is no way it could work as i own the whole field and it couldn’t be split as it would cause inconvenience due to no water in the small paddock and it wouldn’t be viable to split the field as would cause problems with access.your best bet would be to get the council to put footbridge over the ford. regards Ian

I did once contact a landowner.

There is a small ford here ->

lands end ford

It currently can be crossed by horse/car and there is a footpath on a small bridge next to it.

Would be a great commuting (not mtbing) route between the villages on the edge of Reading.

I suggested the footpath to the bridge should be rerouted and classified as a footpath/cycleway I also wrote that it should be down at the edge of the field so as not to disturb the horses. The land owner said not happening.

I contact the local council who said a small budget would be coming up for cycling improvements and would get back to me but never did.

what do you suggest Sandro ? I can forward you the emails.

I also started this petition.

click here[/url]

I was also kinda offered the position of transport officer for twyford village partnership but I tend to have very busy periods at work and then very lazy periods (ie now)

click here

anyway what is your advice sandro ?

You speak to the land owner and ask for it to be designated a permissive (for cycles) path, or in the case of council owned land such as urban common, you can refer to other precedents where the land owner has classified cyclists with the same rights as walkers.

Obviously this works well im some areas but I just have a feeling if you contact some landlords in busy parts of the country it will just alert them to you and they’ll quickly get the fences going up so only walkers can access the land.

I did once contact a landowner.

There is a small ford here ->

Clickhere

It currently can be crossed by horse/car and there is a footpath on a small bridge next to it.

Would be a great commuting (not mtbing) route between the villages on the edge of Reading.

I suggested the footpath to the bridge should be rerouted and classified as a footpath/cycleway I also wrote that it should be down at the edge of the field so as not to disturb the horses. The land owner said not happening.

I contact the local council who said a small budget would be coming up for cycling improvements and would get back to me but never did.

what do you suggest Sandro ? I can forward you the emails.

I also started this petition.

click here[/url]

Signed and shared – Even if it is a bad idea, the more people who sigh the more awareness the subject gets and hopefully it will be debated properly leading to changes allowing access to be more widespread

I dont disagree but isnt this how most deals are done ?

Aim high and hope to agree on the middle ground ?

Oh I see what you want,

Well done Sancho !

cool cheers guys it runs till August try and forward to as many places as you know. Ie local clubs,facebook etc etc etc

maybe you should do more than think that the internet can solve your problems.

try engaging the people who own the land, you might get something out of it.

But there is no “area of land” that I particularly want to access. I dont want to create trails in one particular forest.

I just want to able to ride in the countryside or even in town. There are plenty of trails out there which I believe should be available to us MTBers.

If you have different aims and therefore different methods from the OP and me you need to understand this and stop slagging people off.

have you signed it yet ??????????

I just posted the link to the e petition did nt I thats a good start have you signed it yet ????????????????????????????????

Give cyclists access to footpaths petition

Click here

Why dont you do something positive like I am doing and engage the land owner to give permissive status to cyclists on the fotpaths that you ride.

Because quite clearly a person on a MTB is much closer in size and in potential damage to the trail to a normal walker. Than a MTB is to a horse and we should be classified with walkers not horse.

Therefore we should be able to ride footpaths unless they do a total reclassification.

rubbish the OP is completely right.

The long game of that kind of behaviour is we’ll lose access IMO.

Access to what ? Bridleways big deal !

Its time we stepped up and demanded rights to use footpaths just like ramblers did back in the day.

Whats the reason we cant use footpaths ?

Whats the reason we can use bridleways ? How am I a 75kg person + 25 kg bike anything like a 500kg horse + 75kg rider ?

Clearly the bridleway rule was just made up because no one could be bothered with the expense of working out which trails are suitable for bikes (ie most of them). And at the time there wasnt many offroad cyclist to be bothered disagreeing.

Also the rights of way system isnt good to begin with. Often a Bridleway turns into a footpath for no obvious reason. Most of the ROW were just draw up on a definite map back in the day by one ROW officer and often they didnt put much thought into what type it should be. Also rich land owners tended to lean on them to remove ROW from their land and there werent even MTBs round then.

Seeing as the ROW system is so nonsensical I cant see there is much point sticking to it.

http://www.mtbtrails.info/

is good you can import GPX or build from scratchclick Here[/url]

I obviously want everybody to be able to enjoy the countryside.

But the rights of way system is rubbish.

It needs to be based on what is sustainable.

Plenty of green lanes are not capable of supporting 4×4 without destroying the surface for other users.

There are attempts to try and make green lanes sustainable for 4×4 but surely this is closing the door after the horse has bolted.

Ie the lane should be capable of supporting a 4×4 and hence its a green lane/boat not the other way round.

The whole ROW system needs to be updated all routes should be reclassified mainly based on sustainability but also on suitability.

Im my opinion many of the bridleways in the Chilterns arent suitable for horse riders in the Winter and should just be open for 9 months of the year.

Also many footpaths can quite often be wide open and almost be roads these should clearly be open to MTBers and horse riders.

And clearly there needs to be separate categories for bikes, powered bikes and powered 4 wheel vehicles.

With bikes total weight of bike + rider 100 – 150kg being treated very differently from horse + rider 380 to 550 kilograms + 70kg rider.