Motorised unicycle

cluffy

cluffy

Striker
someone went past me this morning on one going about 30 mph! (Could have been slower but I’m cycling and he’s going much faster than any car that passes me)
He had a crash helmet on but surely these are just death traps? Seems really stupid imo
 


WhoAreYa73 said:
No cycle should be on a road imo. Not until they pay insurance and road tax.
Click to expand...

Plenty cars on the road these days that don't pay road tax either and that's just the legal ones I am talking about. They will do far more damage to them than a bike.

cluffy said:
someone went past me this morning on one going about 30 mph! (Could have been slower but I’m cycling and he’s going much faster than any car that passes me)
He had a crash helmet on but surely these are just death traps? Seems really stupid imo
Click to expand...

Obviously illegal.
 
I saw a bloke riding around Northumberland on what I can only describe as a double decker bike. The part he was sat on looked like a normal bike but instead of wheels, there were two additional frames underneath which had the wheels on.

Proper zany.
 
Roger said:
Plenty cars on the road these days that don't pay road tax either and that's just the legal ones I am talking about. They will do far more damage to them than a bike.
Click to expand...

Road tax isn’t really an issue, I just threw that in there. Insurance however should be the law if you’re gonna use something that can either damage or injure someone. If a cyclist doesn’t look and hits my car and damages it, who’s paying for it?

What annoys me more is they won’t even use the cycle paths that have been made for them, they still use the road. The perfect example would be the Nissan road, they widened the path and put nice fancy blue signs up to say pedestrians and cyclists can use it.
 
WhoAreYa73 said:
What annoys me more is they won’t even use the cycle paths that have been made for them, they still use the road. The perfect example would be the Nissan road, they widened the path and put nice fancy blue signs up to say pedestrians and cyclists can use it.
Click to expand...

I must admit that as a cyclist and a car driver, that bugs me too. The majority of cycle lanes are nothing more than a white line intermittently painted along the road and are full of parked cars making them unusable. However when there is a proper dedicated cycle path alongside a busy road I fail to comprehend why so many cyclists choose the road.

Road tax isn’t really an issue, I just threw that in there. Insurance however should be the law if you’re gonna use something that can either damage or injure someone. If a cyclist doesn’t look and hits my car and damages it, who’s paying for it?
Click to expand...

Obviously the cyclist is responsible and should pay for the damage. I don't think 3rd party insurance is a bad idea for cyclists, but not sure the insurers want to insure 4 year olds with stabilisers on their bikes.
 
A lot of cycle paths and lanes appear to be places for the council to store broken glass.

If they were designed, implemented and maintained with cyclists in mind rather than painted in random places, suggesting the council is just trying to meet a ‘total miles of cycle infrastructure’ quota I’m sure they would get more use.
 
cluffy said:
someone went past me this morning on one going about 30 mph! (Could have been slower but I’m cycling and he’s going much faster than any car that passes me)
He had a crash helmet on but surely these are just death traps? Seems really stupid imo
Click to expand...

I saw something very similar, about 5 days ago, but it looked like it was a wheelbarrow ( the fat ones) wheel, with the rider standing astride it, and he was facing straight forward. Was doing a fair speed too. He was heading west on the track that runs parallel to Scotswood rd.

WhoAreYa73 said:
Road tax isn’t really an issue, I just threw that in there. Insurance however should be the law if you’re gonna use something that can either damage or injure someone. If a cyclist doesn’t look and hits my car and damages it, who’s paying for it?

What annoys me more is they won’t even use the cycle paths that have been made for them, they still use the road. The perfect example would be the Nissan road, they widened the path and put nice fancy blue signs up to say pedestrians and cyclists can use it.
Click to expand...

The highlighted bit, i would, with my insurance, if i was at fault.
The second bit about the Nissan rd typical made up anti cyclist rubbish. I use that path a lot and see many other cyclists using it. I rarely see roadies on that rd.
 
Last edited:
WhoAreYa73 said:
Road tax isn’t really an issue, I just threw that in there. Insurance however should be the law if you’re gonna use something that can either damage or injure someone. If a cyclist doesn’t look and hits my car and damages it, who’s paying for it?

What annoys me more is they won’t even use the cycle paths that have been made for them, they still use the road. The perfect example would be the Nissan road, they widened the path and put nice fancy blue signs up to say pedestrians and cyclists can use it.
Click to expand...
Cycling is generally covered under your home insurance for third party liability.
 
I'm not a fan of cyclists on roads, I always think they must have some kind of death wish, its bad enough driving about in a car with all the maniacs on the roads.
 
WhoAreYa73 said:
Road tax isn’t really an issue, I just threw that in there. Insurance however should be the law if you’re gonna use something that can either damage or injure someone. If a cyclist doesn’t look and hits my car and damages it, who’s paying for it?

What annoys me more is they won’t even use the cycle paths that have been made for them, they still use the road. The perfect example would be the Nissan road, they widened the path and put nice fancy blue signs up to say pedestrians and cyclists can use it.
Click to expand...

Although you back tracked since someone pointed out that some cars are tax free here are some pointers ;)

There is no such thing as road tax. It (road fund) was abolished around 1937.

General taxation pays for roads so most people pay for the roads,
Vehicle Excise Duty - Wikipedia


roads were originally built for cyclists and it is legal to ride a bicycle on a road whether there is a cycle path adjacent or not.
19th century cyclists paved the way for modern motorists' roads | Carlton Reid

As has been said, home insurance etc covers cycling.

Frequently Asked Questions | www.cyclenation.org.uk


Finally it is usually wise to educate oneself on a subject before submitting some random opinions and making oneself look a complete arse ;) :p
 

Back
Top