Fiat Coupe Forum
- Funded by the Club for the benefit of all owners
- Please consider joining the Club to help keep the Forum running
- Or you can choose to make a Donation
Fiat Coupe Club UK
join the club
Fiat Coupe Forum
 
» Club Members only
    Workshop manual


» Announced
    Posting images


» Related sites
    Main club site
    fiatcoupe.net

 
Who's Online Now
2 registered members (carmine, 1 invisible), 733 guests, and 6 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums48
Topics103,770
Posts1,170,654
Members1,682
Most Online39,516
Apr 15th, 2026
Top Posters(All Time)
barnacle 33,794
stan 32,123
Theresa 23,349
PeteP 22,314
bockers 21,083
Edinburgh 19,092
JimO 17,919
Nigel 17,387
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #371759
08/06/2007 00:05
08/06/2007 00:05
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 21,083
Chertsey in the Thames
bockers Offline
Hon Club Member 007
bockers  Offline
Hon Club Member 007
Forum Fossil

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 21,083
Chertsey in the Thames
oh what a load of tosh. There are always two sides to every story.

If you truly believe cycle helmets work than why not walking and running helmets?

Real evidence of marketing power over common sense. But if you feel safer than fine. Personally I'll go without thanks laugh

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #371859
08/06/2007 02:51
08/06/2007 02:51

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Tried cycling to work once. It took me over 2 hours to get there, and 2 hrs 45 to get back. Not done it again since...

(true story)

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372028
08/06/2007 13:52
08/06/2007 13:52

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by Vickster
Originally Posted by Hedge
4.5 miles on a bike and no shower?

Yuk.

Soap-dodger......!


I shower before I leave home, I take fresh clothes and deodorant with me...remember we women glow, or at the worst perspire...we don't sweat wink No-one has complained yet crazy


Silly me, forgot women "glow" or "perspire". Boys sweat, of course. And stink!....

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372054
08/06/2007 14:23
08/06/2007 14:23

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



And it's only 25 minutes and never that warm in the morning even in the height of summer smile

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372056
08/06/2007 14:25
08/06/2007 14:25

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



25 mins of cycling used to get me in all sorts, even in Winter.

Keep cycling. It's the best feeling.

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372062
08/06/2007 14:33
08/06/2007 14:33

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



I didn't today due to the threat of rain (I shall go to the gym instead) - I'm a fair weather cyclist only on a work day, otherwise end up filthy with no shower!

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372071
08/06/2007 14:47
08/06/2007 14:47

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Fair weather cyclist? Pah! You big, er, girl.

That doesn't work.


Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372076
08/06/2007 14:58
08/06/2007 14:58

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Why would I want t get wet when I have a coupe? laugh

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372147
08/06/2007 16:45
08/06/2007 16:45

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Fair point, smarty-pants...

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: bockers] #372153
08/06/2007 16:58
08/06/2007 16:58

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



Originally Posted by bockers
oh what a load of tosh. There are always two sides to every story.

If you truly believe cycle helmets work than why not walking and running helmets?

Real evidence of marketing power over common sense. But if you feel safer than fine. Personally I'll go without thanks laugh


A load of tosh? He fell of his bike doing about 15 mph and hit his a head on a pretty large boulder (one of those annoying ones people use to stop you driving over the corner of their garden) leaving a big dent on the temple of the helmet. (he might not of dies but he certainly would of been a lot worse had he not been wearing a helmet)

As far as the graph shows on the web site it is a bit misleading, the amount of time spent riding on designated cycle paths away from traffic must play a huge factor. Also, it isnt solely from head injuries so its not exactly relevant.

I believe cycle helmets work and the question of why not walking and running helmets? Its not that often that i walk at 20 mph, and forgive me if i'm wrong (i'm going on memory here) but aren't the most serious injuries caused in a pedestrian/car accident to the head hitting the bonnet or windscreen??? Finally, if helmets are so useless than why wear them on a motorbike??? Surely its the same principle.

As i said they're not going to be much help when you're run over by a bus, but if i ever decide i want to head-but a pavement, rock or something harder than my head, i'd like to have a little extra padding.

Rant over laugh wink

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372156
08/06/2007 17:07
08/06/2007 17:07

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A



i never used to wear a helmet but after years i now feel wierd without one.
only a short commute for 5.5 miles which takes me roughly 15-19 mins. hit 39.5mph this morning laugh best way to travel innercity.

Re: Quicker to cycle?? [Re: ] #372262
08/06/2007 18:50
08/06/2007 18:50
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 333
London
dazzle Offline
Making a profit
dazzle  Offline
Making a profit

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 333
London
It's never going to be possible to 'prove' cycle helmets reduce injury beacuse unlike seat belts and cars cycle accidents are thankfully much less frequent. However it's common sense that if you land on your head a helmet will reduce the injury to your head.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1
(Release build 20190129)
PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.015s Queries: 15 (0.010s) Memory: 0.6367 MB (Peak: 0.7563 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2026-11-11 18:20:42 UTC