>On 6 Aug, 10:10, Boltar yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> On Aug 5, 8:10 pm,Squashmegmail.com> wrote:
>>

>>> Very true. The argument is not just based on logic and reason, but
>>> also on emotions. As a cyclist, I just wish that people did not need
>>> to bring so many of their unnecessary ornaments, furniture and gadgets
>>> out to travel in close formation and at speed on the Queen's Highway.

>>
>> So do you ride around on the latest whizzy bike with suspension ,
>> fancy tyres and magnesium crank (or whatever)? If so , whats wrong
>> with some 20 year old clunker from Oxfam? It would do the same job.
>>

>
>Good Lord, no. Hate whizzy bikes (and their rideers). Titanium pedals
>seen years ago for =A370 shocked me (and that was when =A370 was worth
>=A370, not 3s 6d.). Bikes are for use, not poncing. Last year paid =A3300
>for a Ridgeback, after final collapse of 25 year old drop-handle-
>barred Holdsworth (=A3120 in 1981). Expect that the Ridgeback will see
>me out, as I will probably become part of the sad, but necessary,
>costs of motorised traffic in the next few years.
>
>NB. The tinker-bell, lights (yes!), pannier bags and rack are
>necessary self-indulgences, I feel. Pump, too. Oh, luxury living. I do
>not even mention the optional helmet and ugly hi-vis waistcoat that
>help motorists to drive faster in confidence.