So What is Cycle Chic? Here is a short video of what some other people think it is.
| [+] Embed the video | Video Download | Get the Flash Video |
Is this something we think is good, and is it something we want to see more of?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
What is Cycle Chic?
(62 posts)-
. Posted 14 years ago # -
OK the link to the video above didn't work, so until chdot fixes it try this one.Its fixed!!Posted 14 years ago # -
I think it is something we want to see more of in that it is people cycling. I don't however give a damn if they wear lycra or jeans or even a helmet as that is all their choice. I do feel however those who are going for "style" are somewhat vain.
I simply opt for the practical option baggy shorts and cycling vest for air flow and not overheating (note lack of word "cool",) I wear a helmet on my bonce as I have had a few low speed accidents over the years that could have been a lot worse. I don't wear clippy pedal shoes as I often have toddler on the back. Lastly after a left-turning-not-indicating white van man sandwiched me into the railings at Nicholson/West Nicholson I picked up a hi-vis "binman" jacket in the opinion it doesn't hurt and if it gets me spotted even 1% of the time it is worth it
That being said I can see the argument behind "we shouldn't have to wear all this just because some drivers say we should" but at the same time being a driver myself I had to get up off the road after my second Edinburgh vehicle related accident and ask myself - would I have seen a cyclist if I had been behind the wheel or was the manoeuvre I just pulled over estimating my visibility... it is because I cycle that I pay much more attention to my wing mirrors and blind spots than perhaps I did when I hadn't cycled in a few years. There is no way in either of my incidents that road position could have helped me be more visible, with the van we were stationary in an ASL with me literally staring in his wing mirror assuming he was going straight on too...Posted 14 years ago # -
@spytfyre How do you come to be "with the van we were stationary in an ASL with me literally staring in his wing mirror assuming he was going straight on too..."?
Were you in the ASL and van came up along side or did you filter there?
Posted 14 years ago # -
I want to make two replies, because one will be unpopular so at least we can have the agreeable one first!
To me, cycle chic is sort of two elements - the catwalk style "beautiful people on beautiful bikes" (which is irrelevant except insofar as it goes to make bikes seem "cool" to a certain segment of society).
Secondly a grassroots movement which popularises a rejection of the "bike warrior and his deadly battle with maniac drivers" meme. The really important thing about cycle chic is not that you *should* try really hard to look great before getting on your bike, but that you *can if you want to*.
Because let's face it, if cycling is really an unusual, dangerous and risky sort of "pursuit of weirdoes", you wouldn't be able to do it in a skirt and heels with an ordinary handbag on your way to the office. You wouldn't be able to do it in a smart shirt ferrying some mochafrappolatechinos from the coffee shop to the design studio, these are all "normal" things anathema to the image of cycling that we have in the English speaking world.
When I see footage of "chic" cyclists I don't admire them for their fashion so much as the way that they present cycling as something anybody can do, without requiring a load of special equipment to keep them alive until they get to the corner shop.
My fiancée had a colleague who could be seen riding across the Mound to work with an umbrella when the conditions warranted, of course he wasn't spanking it up the inside of HGVs at 30mph but set the opposite example, as it were.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"My fiancée had a colleague who could be seen riding across the Mound to work with an umbrella when the conditions warranted"
Bet he was from Oxford. Everyone does that there - rain and snow.
Posted 14 years ago # -
There is no way in either of my incidents that road position could have helped me be more visible, with the van we were stationary in an ASL with me literally staring in his wing mirror assuming he was going straight on too...
I'm really genuinely bemused by this story. There are three possibilities for your left-turning driver - either he didn't look in the mirror at all, he saw you but figured you could get lost, or he looked at you in the mirror but somehow couldn't tell you apart from the rest of the world due to your ordinary clothes (!?!?).
I hope I misunderstood, but it sounds like you bought a high-viz vest to prevent a repeat occurrence - this is the wrong lesson! If you value your health, never tolerate something alongside you at a junction, especially if there are railings!
Perhaps I'm being uncharitable and you don't sit on the inside of left-turning vehicles any more. But for the sake of anyone else reading, I thought it was a point worth making. How anyone can sit on the inside of a left-turning vehicle and say there was "no way" their positioning contributed to the incident is a mystery to me!
This typifies what I hate about high-viz and helmets. Even if it prevented 1 in 100 accidents, that leaves the other 99 where people are staking their life on "assuming he was going straight on"... an assumption which kills about 20 cyclists a year in London alone.
Sure, there are probably times where you do everything right but still get hit, and maybe some small fraction of those times, high-viz would make a difference. But it's like wearing a motorcycle helmet to drive your car along the M8. We should focus on training drivers to be safe on the motorway, not sell them kit for extreme edge cases as a silver bullet.
Posted 14 years ago # -
of course he wasn't spanking it up the inside of HGVs at 30mph but set the opposite example, as it were.
There is a slow travel movement.
Speed sells though.
If I said to someone buy this bike because it's more comfortable and slower, many wouldn't get it.
Maybe it's a UK thing.
In Amsterdam you end up cycling in town en mass at an 'agreed' comfortable speed as it's less hassle than constantly overtaking.Posted 14 years ago # -
I agree with Dave's description:
"Secondly a grassroots movement which popularises a rejection of the "bike warrior and his deadly battle with maniac drivers" meme. The really important thing about cycle chic is not that you *should* try really hard to look great before getting on your bike, but that you *can if you want to*.
Because let's face it, if cycling is really an unusual, dangerous and risky sort of "pursuit of weirdoes", you wouldn't be able to do it in a skirt and heels with an ordinary handbag on your way to the office. You wouldn't be able to do it in a smart shirt ferrying some mochafrappolatechinos from the coffee shop to the design studio, these are all "normal" things anathema to the image of cycling that we have in the English speaking world."
@SRD Riding with with an umbrella when the conditions warrant is considered normal behaviour in much of continental Europe. The thing that would stop me from doing it here, is the way that rain comes in horizontally which generally makes an umbrella impractical.
Posted 14 years ago # -
@Kim - then van was in the ASL I think I filtered there as he wasn't indicating
@Dave - I think it was the plain - didn't check his mirrors, thought turning left was the most natural thing to do, either that or he was in cloud cuckoo land and only realised the wanted that left turn if he wanted to get to where he was going (this was back before vans all had GPS gadgets) at the last split second
"this is the wrong lesson!"
OK you are entitled to your opinion. Only last night I was driving my car and spotted someone wearing hivis and wondered if I would have been as aware had they not had hivis, that is my opinion and I am entitled to it, thanks.
"Perhaps I'm being uncharitable and you don't sit on the inside of left-turning vehicles any more. "
You are and I don't and did I mention he wasn't indicating!.If I hadn't filtered up I would still have been beside another vehicle as there were no spaces to get in front of anybody and get that golden heavenly road position I keep hearing so much about
Posted 14 years ago # -
OK - it wasn't clear whether you had bought a vest to allow you to feel safer while sitting next to left-turning vehicles (!!) :-)
The point about indicating is irrelevant - if you think about it, the reason it's considered so dangerous to be on the left of traffic is precisely because people don't indicate (otherwise you could just wait at their nearside rear and the situation wouldn't arise).
Of course, I appreciate it is easy to criticise in hindsight. But in the example where you've gone up a cycle lane but it's not clear that you can get to the front, and there is absolutely no space to lever yourself between any two vehicles, a better option is to sit next to the gap (in the cycle lane) than alongside a vehicle. As a driver you will be able to visualise where you look when turning left/right and see that a rider in front of the car would be unmissable, unlike one alongside.
This is why you see people who get to the front to find a car sitting right in the ASL, just move onto the pedestrian crossing in front of the car rather than wait beside the railings of death. One is legal but you might be crushed to death, one is naughty but safe.
Re: looking at hi-viz, I think it's very difficult because nobody disputes that it is more visible (that's the whole point, after all). The point is that how much you contrast with the background is not a determinant of road safety, not that you don't contrasy more strongly (sorry if I'm not articulating it well).
Here's a counter-example. All the time I see people without lights, whom I love to curse. Why is it that I see them all, from considerable distance, even against the backdrop of other lights? I honestly can't tell you of a time that I was surprised by someone whizzing past unlit - I believe it's because a cyclist without lights is actually quite conspicuous (just not very visible).
Because they're breaking the law, my brain is wired into recognising, and shouting at, them where the nice little commuters riding in the gutter with their high-viz and blinky lights are filtered out as "scenery". It is in this sort of area that the reality of safety lies, the lab can only measure your brightness.
Posted 14 years ago # -
@spytfyre there are blind spots in door mirrors, vans and other long vehicle drivers have difficulty in see cyclist filtering up the nearside in particular, no amount if Hi-Viz will change this. There is no requirement for cyclist to filter to front at traffic lights. If the ASL is not clear or there are large vehicles to filter past, just wait with the traffic, in the primary position. Once you are clear of the junction and it is safe to do so, you can move to a secondary position to allow following traffic to pass.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Have to agree with Kim on this. I often use the lead vehicle at traffic lights to clear a way through the junction for me, which lets me stay in primary position as long as necessary. The only exception is heading west from Braidburn Terrace, which is very narrow, has lots of parking, and a green light phase that lasts about six seconds. If I can get to the ASL box safely, I will use it, but more often than not it's full of car, so either I'll have to sit in front of it, or hedge my bets in line and hope I don't have to wait for the next phase.
My riding style is assertive when necessary but quite relaxed or defensive the rest of the time. I don't own any hi-viz clothes, actually, other than ankle bands.
Posted 14 years ago # -
@Kim - love the use of italics so I will use some of my own...
"wait with traffic" - where? how far back is considered safe? 2/3 cars? Do I wait next to the front bumper of one and the rear bumper of another?
Or do I assume everyone is turning left and not indicating and not cross the junction at all?
I would request you explain primary and secondary positions to me with diagrams please
"no requirement for cyclist to filter to front at traffic lights"
Yes there may not be but that is what makes cycling a faster way to work... if you are seriously suggesting I sit on my bike as I would in a car, in the centre of the lane and wait behind everybody then I may as well sell the bicycle and buy a parking permit...@Dave - yes, hindsight is 20/20. I should have pulled in front of the van and sat between the the pedestrian crossing and the ASL and probably made the driver pretty mad in the process. I think I am being a tad persecuted here when I was the victim (as so very well put on another thread),
I am starting to think I can't win no matter what I say...
Posted 14 years ago # -
@Dave - yes, hindsight is 20/20. I should have pulled in front of the van and sat between the the pedestrian crossing and the ASL and probably made the driver pretty mad in the process. I think I am being a tad persecuted here when I was the victim (as so very well put on another thread),
I think it's important to understand that nobody thinks a driver should be able to turn without checking *and* signalling. It goes without saying.
Nevertheless there are things which we, as victims of bad driving, can do to reduce the chances of being in an accident. The reason I picked up your tale in the first place was simply that on the list of "ways to stop a bad driver crushing you", wearing high-viz is much much lower down the list than not being beside a vehicle at the junction, but it wasn't clear from your *first post* that you understood that (I think we're in agreement now though).
No diagram can really articulate primary and secondary position that well. Primary position means "to make it physically impossible for following traffic to pass". Secondary position is "as close to the kerb as is safe" (usually about where they paint the white line of a cycle lane is as close as I am comfortable with).
If you boil it down one of the greatest maxims of cycle safety is that "being safe means being unpopular". Even if the van was going straight on, the safer course would have been to sit in front, yielding space only when it was safe. Do people beep at you, certainly, but you can only beep at someone you've seen, which is the essense of it.
If you think this discussion is bad you should never post footage of yourself cycling, where on some forums your position to the inch will be disassembled with brutal hindsight! :-)
Posted 14 years ago # -
@spytfyre I don't have a diagram to hand (and my drawing is not great) but I can give a quick description based on Cyclecraft (which is well worth reading) the Primary riding position means riding in the centre of the lane in which you are travelling. The Secondary or Standard riding position means that you ride where the near side wheel track of a motor vehicle would be. These positions are used to increase your margin of safety. Good road positioning is not about keeping out of the way of other traffic as much as possible. Drivers give the most attention to the part of the road where there is the most risk to themselves, this is the zone of maximum surveillance, outside this area you are far less likely to be seen.
Yes filtering is one of the things which make cycling in town faster, but it has to be done with care, you can not assume that all drivers will look in their mirrors or give the appropriate signal. I hope that doesn't come across as patronising it is not meant to be.
Posted 14 years ago # -
This is all straying rather from What is Cycle Chic. Although there is an element to Cycle Chic which emphasises style over speed. This something the Australian film maker Mike Rubbo is rather keen on, he advocates the just of upright bikes for more civilised riding.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Cycle Chic = "standard" Chic but whilst on a bicycle ;-)
ie. If I look across and think "gosh they look smart/stylish/chic" and they happen to be on a bicycle then it is cycle chic, (and if they are on foot then it is just chic) if I look across and think "Gosh what a state" then it is not (imho ;-))Whether the individual is dressed in "sports" clothes or anything else isn't really the issue to me.. but then maybe I miss the campaigning point, I just like cycling and seeing people looking attractive is more pleasant than the alternative!
As to the filtering/road positioning/visibility debate, from my experience, anyone who has not made a mistake which with 20/20 hindsight was avoidable/open to criticism, has not ridden on the road!
Most crush against the railings type incidents I've seen reported (or nearly had when driving!) were HGV's or similar where a cyclist/motorcyclist/car (yes really) has come up the inside into a blindspot without an understanding of where the HGV has to go to complete their manouvre.
IMHO (and no offence to anyone), most left hooks with cars/vans are bad car driving, most left hooks with Large vehicles are bad riding/driving from the victim. Unless you have spent a bit of time driving or passenger in an LGV I would advise against ever going up the inside of one, but if you must, have an airzound or similar and use it earlier rather than later!Here endeth Smudge's safety rant ;-))Posted 14 years ago # -
It's true, outrageous though it looks, 38 tonnes barely feels the bump when it meets half a tonne of car :-/
I once had a Ford Escort get up my inside at a roundabout, I had swung to the middle lane to leave room for the trailer (full size tri-axle box) to clear the kerb as I swung left (although I was going straight ahead it was a tight turn and I needed to move right to avoid kerbing the trailer wheels as i entered the roundabout, because of traffic trying to force through on the right I was taking regular looks in my right mirrors especially and at some point as I looked right/forward an Escort squeezed up my left (must've been tight!), despite looking in my left mirrors (Main and kerb) he was in my blind spot and the first I knew of his presence was when I started to move onto the roundabout and he popped out on my inside all outrage and horn beeping. Berk. Another couple of seconds and the trailer wheels would have gone over him as on entering a busy roundabout looking to the right to judge roundabout traffic/cars trying to force round your outside is often done before the glance in the left mirror, there are only so many places I can look at once(!)
Anyone who hasn't and who gets a chance to sit in the cab of even a small truck, please do so and get your mates to wander the outside so you can get to see the (huge) blindspots, even better if you can get a driver to show you where the cab has to go to get an artic trailer to follow.
We're not all evil road hogs*, we try to drive safely, but it's not as easy as it may first appear and different trailers can require wildly different amounts of road to get around :-/*though some are! and I'm not in a wagon often myself these days.
Posted 14 years ago # -
yes, trucks are fun
Posted 14 years ago # -
Another interesting exercise is to sit in the driver's seat of a car, look at the road ahead and then visualise just how much of your view would be obscured if you were stupid enough to stick a sat nav to your windscreen.
I hate seeing sat navs stuck on the windscreen. I think it's dangerous and I think the police should do something about it.Posted 14 years ago # -
All it takes is to sit in the seat, identify a position where all the sat nav obscures is bonnet for example (easy in swmbo's car) and put it there. I am genuinely amazed when I see car drivers with sat navs stuck in the middle of the screen, obviously the car in gear and mind in neutral :-(
The laws are there if the police choose to enforce them... :-/Posted 14 years ago # -
@Smudge - "I just like cycling and seeing people looking attractive is more pleasant than the alternative!"
Wow
Sorry if I disgust you, being a "state" and all. If it pleases master I can avoid your chosen routes? Or maybe purchase a pretty floral bonnet?Posted 14 years ago # -
That would be nice hen
/end mockingly patronising voice
Sorry spytfyre only joking.
Posted 14 years ago # -
@steveo - I'll be sure to get one that matches my beard ;)
Posted 14 years ago # -
@Spytfyre, who mentioned disgust?
Anyway, how do you know I wont find your appearance tres chic, perhaps even devlishly handsome?? ;-)Posted 14 years ago # -
*goes into hiding*
Posted 14 years ago # -
lol, you've seen me then! :-o :-D
Posted 14 years ago # -
"@steveo - I'll be sure to get one that matches my beard ;) "
Rofl....
Posted 14 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
