Sunday Fun linkpile

“Ahhh, the refreshing splash of road-grime-infused water, gently caressing your booty regions or invading your pursed lips, culminating in an awesome gritty/crunchy sensation that keeps on giving.” Burke’s Cycles provide an explanation of why you need mudguards.

The Architecture Centre (the people who brought us Option X) looks at the Power of Paint when it comes to road markings. I’m starting to like these guys.

Celia’s been checking out electric bikes, and so have my friends and I. Burke’s have a Wisper or two and a Giant – lots of fun and ideal for the hills.

Not sure about the product but I quite like the ad.

The Waffenrader Archive.

Singapore bloggers are starting to call for better bike facilities. If you’ve ever driven there you’ll think that’s a good idea too.

I was saving this fashionable hi-viz link (thanks, Jack!) for a post about whether hi-viz gear is effective, but, dammit, I lost the link to the Guardian article that argues against it.

Sunday at the market



4 thoughts on “Sunday Fun linkpile

  1. Malcolm

    The Architecture centres document points out an annoyance of mine – When there are advanced stop boxes for cyclists, but to get to them you have to squeeze past at least one lane of stopped traffic. Makes them kind of pointless. I only really cycle in the eastern half of Wellington, and I can’t think of any stop boxes on this side which have cycle lanes as well.


    1. atom

      also… reflective stuff only works under very specific circumstances. low-beams from a car are unlikely to light-up any reflective material higher than pedals. ambient lighting at night does NOTHING to improve visibility from reflectives or hi-viz.

      i wouldn’t say that reflectives are useless, they are PART of being seen but, like helmets, they are NOT a substitute for being aware, paying attention, and riding smart and safely.


      1. The article I wanted to link to argued very persuasively (based on research) that wearing hi-viz makes you less visible because of people’s perceptions of it’s function. I tend to agree with that.

        In my view, hi-viz says three things: 1) the wearer is doing something dangerous, 2) they are highly trained for this dangerous work, and 3) they are carrying it out so as not to endanger others and so can safely be ignored. I think these three points are exactly the wrong message for bike riding.


Your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s