Why do BMW and Audi owners often seem to drive like idiots?

[A380]

I have a three series because I wanted a low milage plug in hybrid that I could keep for at least 10 years and that was the car with specifications that fitted our requirements most closely.

I brought the M Sport version in bright red because I have a small penis.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

I have a three series because I wanted a low milage plug in hybrid that I could keep for at least 10 years and that was the car with specifications that fitted our requirements most closely.

I brought the M Sport version in bright red because I have a small penis.

And they are fucking quick

 

[DownwardDog]

Anyway, what is a square taper back bracket, I want to know if my bike has one and whether I've been making a knob of myself to the proper cyclists

It is the bearings and housing that attaches the cranks to the frame. The 'bracket' part of the name is an anglicisation of braquet which is French for gear ratio. Although, the French actually call it la boîte de pédalier.

A square taper one is a rather antiquated and heavy variation with a solid steel axle where the cranks bolt on to each side. The square taper refers to the mating surface between the cranks and the axle. If your bike has one then throw it in the woods.

 

[Steel Icarus]

Can't believe some of the minutiae people seem to care about tbh

 

[two sheds]

shoes are important

 

[not-bono-ever]

To me / to you

It is the bearings and housing that attaches the cranks to the frame. The 'bracket' part of the name is an anglicisation of braquet which is French for gear ratio. Although, the French actually call it la boîte de pédalier.

A square taper one is a rather antiquated and heavy variation with a solid steel axle where the cranks bolt on to each side. The square taper refers to the mating surface between the cranks and the axle. If your bike has one then throw it in the woods.

do you have to thump those on with a rubber mallet ? I had a viscount aerospace back in the day that had this setup. fell off alot

 

[DownwardDog]

To me / to you



do you have to thump those on with a rubber mallet ? I had a viscount aerospace back in the day that had this setup. fell off alot

No, you just tighten the crank bolts to 35-45Nm torque to attach them. To remove them (properly) you need a threaded crank extractor.

 

[Saul Goodman]

A square taper one is a rather antiquated and heavy variation with a solid steel axle

This is something I can't get my head around. Why do some cyclists go out and spend a fortune on the lightest carbon bike, and retrofit the lightest of everything they can throw money at. Then they tell you they're cycling to keep fit...
GTFO! If they were doing it to keep fit, they'd be riding the heaviest piece of shit they could find, Riding something that weighs less than a good turd isn't going to keep them anywhere near as fit as riding around on an old butcher bike.

 

[editor]

This is something I can't get my head around. Why do some cyclists go out and spend a fortune on the lightest carbon bike, and retrofit the lightest of everything they can throw money at. Then they tell you they're cycling to keep fit...
GTFO! If they were doing it to keep fit, they'd be riding the heaviest piece of shit they could find, Riding something that weighs less than a good turd isn't going to keep them anywhere near as fit as riding around on an old butcher bike.

Make you wonder why people sign up gyms that make keeping fit as pleasant as possible, eh?

 

[Calamity1971]

This is something I can't get my head around. Why do some cyclists go out and spend a fortune on the lightest carbon bike, and retrofit the lightest of everything they can throw money at. Then they tell you they're cycling to keep fit...
GTFO! If they were doing it to keep fit, they'd be riding the heaviest piece of shit they could find, Riding something that weighs less than a good turd isn't going to keep them anywhere near as fit as riding around on an old butcher bike.

I enjoy long walks, maybe I should I should start carrying sacks of coal to make the make the health benefits better ?
And again, you're taking the piss.

 

[mauvais]

Nah, there's some truth to that. I was always happy riding a MTB everywhere because as well as the benefits, inefficiency is fitness. However I simultaneously wanted my bike to be as good as possible, not weight saving as such but reliability and quality, and that often correlates with lighter.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Thing is if your bike is heavier and shitter you just get everywhere slower. It doesn't mean you actually work harder, you just don't get as far. Like you can run in trainers or hobble up the road with bin lids strapped to your feet

 

[Saul Goodman]

Make you wonder why people sign up gyms that make keeping fit as pleasant as possible, eh?

Yeah but can you imagine the howls of laughter if you went to the gym and removed all of the weights from the bar, then replaced the bar with a mop handle and started bench pressing a Vileda?

 

[editor]

Yeah but can you imagine the howls of laughter if you went to the gym and removed all of the weights from the bar, then replaced the bar with a mop handle and started bench pressing a Vileda?

You'll have to help me with this weird comparison. If you knew anything about cycling, you'd know there's good reasons for spending money on a good bike and appropriate gear for long rides.

 

[Saul Goodman]

You'll have to help me with this weird comparison. If you knew anything about cycling, you'd know there's good reasons for spending money on a good bike and appropriate gear for long rides.

Good gear doesn't have to weigh nothing. There are plenty of bikes made from steel, and if you're cycling to keep fit, the greater the resistance the better. So buying a carbon bike with carbon everything is like removing all the weights from the bar at the gym. The less resistance, the less effective it is as an exercise.

 

[editor]

There are plenty of bikes made from steel, and if you're cycling to keep fit, the greater the resistance the better.

Pedalling a heavy, uncomfortable, lumbering bike is less enjoyable and it takes you far longer to get where you want to go - so you're far more likely to give up and get in your polluting car instead or sit on a bus garnering zero health benefits (and inhaling toxic fumes from cars).

And just like I said before (although the point seem to fly right over your head), it's the same reason why people are far more likely to keep going back to the gym if it's an enjoyable experience rather than battle with ancient equipment and spartan facilities in a dingy warehouse.

And why should you care what bikes people choose to use anyway? The more people getting off their arses and pedalling to work rather than polluting the streets with cars, the better.

 

[8ball]

I know a few keen cyclists who ride steel bikes. Had a go on one of them and it was surprisingly light compared to the hunks of metal I rode round on as a kid. Horses for courses.

I thought carbon bikes were only for really competitive stuff, really (like my sister's triathlon bike).

 

[Proper Tidy]

Good gear doesn't have to weigh nothing. There are plenty of bikes made from steel, and if you're cycling to keep fit, the greater the resistance the better. So buying a carbon bike with carbon everything is like removing all the weights from the bar at the gym. The less resistance, the less effective it is as an exercise.

This argument also works for wearing clogs

 

[Proper Tidy]

I know a few keen cyclists who ride steel bikes. Had a go on one of them and it was surprisingly light compared to the hunks of metal I rode round on as a kid. Horses for courses.

I thought carbon bikes were only for really competitive stuff, really (like my sister's triathlon bike).

Most road bikes are carbon frame these days, steel are good and sought after though, tends to be tourers and stuff that are steel as it's tougher and more durable

 

[editor]

I know a few keen cyclists who ride steel bikes. Had a go on one of them and it was surprisingly light compared to the hunks of metal I rode round on as a kid. Horses for courses.

I thought carbon bikes were only for really competitive stuff, really (like my sister's triathlon bike).

You won't find many people using a carbon bike to commute into work. I rode a steel bike frame for years - with modern equipment they're not heavy at all.

 

[editor]

Most road bikes are carbon frame these days, steel are good and sought after though, tends to be tourers and stuff that are steel as it's tougher and more durable

I rode a Reynolds 653 frame for ages - bloody lovely bike. I tried a 753 tubed bike, but the metal felt dangerously thin! There must be millions of people out there still riding 531 frames - they're incredibly durable frames.

 

[8ball]

You won't find many people using a carbon bike to commute into work. I rode a steel bike frame for years - with modern equipment they're not heavy at all.

Yeah, that gels with my impression. While Saul Goodman was being a little hyperbolic, if you're largely commuting and citing fitness as part of the reason, then getting obsessive about shaving a few grams off does seem a bit mad. I think most people are too sensible for this, and the minority that aren't are probably the same people who have little plinths at home to keep their stereo speaker cables off the floor.

 

[Proper Tidy]

I rode a Reynolds 653 frame for ages - bloody lovely bike. I tried a 753 tubed bike, but the metal felt dangerously thin! There must be millions of people out there still riding 531 frames - they're incredibly durable frames.

I had a raleigh racer when I was a teenager with a 531 frame, my brother gave it me, loved it

 

[Saul Goodman]

Pedalling a heavy, uncomfortable, lumbering bike is less enjoyable and it takes you far longer to get where you want to go - so you're far more likely to give up and get in your polluting car instead or sit on a bus garnering zero health benefits (and inhaling toxic fumes from cars).

And just like I said before (although the point seem to fly right over your head), it's the same reason why people are far more likely to keep going back to the gym if it's an enjoyable experience rather than battle with ancient equipment and spartan facilities in a dingy warehouse.

And why should you care what bikes people choose to use anyway? The more people getting off their arses and pedalling to work rather than polluting the streets with cars, the better.

But I'm not talking about people using a bike to commute. It makes perfect sense to use a lighter bike for that. It's people who buy a bike for exercise and for no other reason. They're the subject matter. And just because a bike weighs more, doesn't mean it's crap.

And why should I care what bikes people choose to ride? I don't care what they ride. I just want to help them to find the correct bike for their exercise regimen. Although I don't ever see you questioning those here who assert that motorists shouldn't be allowed to drive certain cars.

 

[Proper Tidy]

But I'm not talking about people using a bike to commute. It makes perfect sense to use a lighter bike for that. It's people who buy a bike for exercise and for no other reason. They're the subject matter. And just because a bike weighs more, doesn't mean it's crap.

And why should I care what bikes people choose to ride? I don't care what they ride. I just want to help them to find the correct bike for their exercise regimen. Although I don't ever see you questioning those here who assert that motorists shouldn't be allowed to drive certain cars.

If people are cycling for exercise they probably want to do it for cardio reasons so being able to go faster for longer and get heart rate up not for muscle mass through resistance. Honestly I think you are down a dead end here

 

[Saul Goodman]

If people are cycling for exercise they probably want to do it for cardio reasons so being able to go faster for longer and get heart rate up not for muscle mass through resistance. Honestly I think you are down a dead end here

Faster just means changing down a gear, then your legs go faster. Road speed has zero correlation to fitness.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Faster just means changing down a gear, then your legs go faster. Road speed has zero correlation to fitness.

Not really because on a big heavy bike even in lowest gear you're gonna struggle up hills etc, having a bike that is quick and light is going to mean more time in saddle and more distance covered

 

[sleaterkinney]

Good gear doesn't have to weigh nothing. There are plenty of bikes made from steel, and if you're cycling to keep fit, the greater the resistance the better. So buying a carbon bike with carbon everything is like removing all the weights from the bar at the gym. The less resistance, the less effective it is as an exercise.

Carbon is more comfortable and stiffer. Thinking a heavy bike will make you fitter is daft, it's about the amount of time you spend in the saddle, not muscle mass.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

If people are cycling for exercise they probably want to do it for cardio reasons so being able to go faster for longer and get heart rate up not for muscle mass through resistance. Honestly I think you are down a dead end here

tbf if they want to get their heart rate up by going fast they should get an RS6 and rag the fuck out of it.

 

[editor]

And just because a bike weighs more, doesn't mean it's crap.

Could you point me in the direction of anyone in this thread who has claimed that a slightly heavier bike is "crap."

And why should I care what bikes people choose to ride? I don't care what they ride. I just want to help them to find the correct bike for their exercise regimen.

And what makes you think you're in any person to hand out advice to cyclists - especially after you called all of them 'knobheads'? How many types of bikes have you ridden? How often do you go cycling? Have you been touring recently? Racing?

Although I don't ever see you questioning those here who assert that motorists shouldn't be allowed to drive certain cars.

I've absolutely no idea what you're on about.