Allow riding on footpaths
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:22 pm
This is indeed the difficulty with many road rules. Indicating is virtually impossible to prove in court without witnesses. Without 3rd party evidence like eyewitnesses, a lot of laws are totally unenforceable and that's just dumb, because a crime without evidence in many situations is essentially pointless. There are many serious crimes like sexual assault which can have the same he said she said stalemate. Really, the appropriate action is to provide enough education and support to both parties to prevent the problem from happening in the first place.
All people really need to be told "cyclists communicate their intentions, and you need to respect their space, because they have limits on what they can do in some situations". We claim the lane when it is plain unsafe for a car to pass, we move over to let them past once it is safe. That is not understood by motorists or pedestrians. I'm shocked by the number of peds who think I must be some psycho carbon sniffer who demands to thunder down the path as I ding the bell... I'm just trying to make sure I don't make them brown their trousers by ducking through a gap (between prams for example!!!). Consideration has to go both ways, the problem is that cyclists taking control of a situation is not something that most people are ready for. (This could be a society generalist issue though, it might not be restricted to the footpath or the road)
-
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:33 pm
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby DarrylH » Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:44 pm
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby il padrone » Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:54 pm
Give way?Xplora wrote:I CANNOT support any initiative that defends vehicles doing 15kph that aren't actively seeking to give way to faster vehicles.
I'll say it again - the rules are completely clear on this - regardless of speed, the contrary is the case. It is the obligation of overtaking vehicles to 'give way' to cyclists (really make their overtake move safely) at all times.
Any other claims that cyclists must somehow give way to vehicles overtaking from behind are totally spurious - both legally and morally incorrect!
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:08 pm
Give way was a loaded choice of words... perhaps a better choice would be "get out of the way/make way". Trucks are not legally obliged to stay in the slow lane, but they do to improve traffic flows for everyone. This is particularly pertinent in the bumper to bumper traffic where a truck trying to climb a hill is going to cause enormous delays for all. A bike in traffic is like a manual car that only has one gear. Some situations they create a disaster, others they do not. I hazard a guess that many of the commuters using this forum are pretty quick, but they do not form the whole population of riders. The pootlers would benefit from legal support for their footpath riding... I think that's the important thing to me - you can't say something is acceptable if it is illegal according to the law. The fact that MHL isn't really policed anymore doesn't change the fact that extremely few serious commuters would go without, because it's asking for trouble.il padrone wrote:Give way?Xplora wrote:I CANNOT support any initiative that defends vehicles doing 15kph that aren't actively seeking to give way to faster vehicles.
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby il padrone » Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:02 pm
One of the major causes of cyclist collisions and deaths in urban areas - entering the roadway.DarrylH wrote: My wifes brother (and two mates) were killed riding on the road and there is no way she would ever ride on the road, so if we ever moved to Sydney her bike would immediately be up for sale.
You do this much more frequently when riding footpaths, at every minor side street. This is arguably much more dangerous than the risk of being hit from behind, but so many people don't (or can't) conceptualise this.
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:19 pm
I think the presence of a "reasonable speed" in the road rules would suffice. Then the courts can have a chance to fail us againOxford wrote:so who and how do we decide are the pootlers and not? and I mean any form of transport, not just cyclists? the driver who is doing less than the speed limit in the right lane but is legally allowed to be there, should they have to get out of my way because I can and want to do the speed limit (no matter my choice of transport)? should all the non fast accelerating traffic get out of my way when I'm riding the moto because I can hit the 60km/h speed limit in first gear in seconds?
its simple, the laws are already there, the vehicles that wish to pass must do so safely no matter what type of vehicle is ahead of them.
Honestly, if you are riding the same speed as a pedestrian walking/jogging, you should be allowed to use the footpath. You are no greater risk to the public than a ped. Once you are at running speed, 20+ kph you should be on the road.
A lot of the frustration directed at cyclists is simply venting because asserting your right to ride and making everyone's else's life miserable doesn't help. There are many occasions where a driver fails to appreciate just how slow they actually are - we need to educate these people. I'd imagine that most of your "fast commuters" would not be hogging the road without cause.
I think it would definitely be reasonable to say "if you demand a 70kph limit, we have to put in a PSP/bike path to reduce cyclist impact on the road". This kind of idea has actually been remarkably successful in the Hills area with the Tway/M7 and linking paths. My little patch of the world has tons of really good paths. Very little cyclist impact on these roads. But these were also associated with remarkable infrastructure changes.... the bike paths were an afterthought, not the primary objective.
I know the rules are there, but the rules can be changed, and they currently suck hard, because they have not mitigated driver angst or reinforced cyclist rights on the road very much at all. I don't want to be "dead right".
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:39 pm
Has a couple useful implications. Many won't bother going to the car because their need for transportation and freedom is completely met at 16. Remember, the moto L plater doesn't have supervision next to them! Plus, we don't let the car driver have sole control until 18, when they are legally an adult. Parents still control the process, and it does introduce a lot more potential riders into the system. I can't imagine having to drive to work anymore. I drive now because my baby son can't sit up in the babyseat yet
I think this could help suppress a lot of angst throughout the system. The added benefit that you could start stealing away class time for the year 9-10 students to teach them road rules as part of a civics course. Everyone uses the road. If the public education system doesn't have time to train citizens, they need to cut out some BS like PE or one of the many peripheral subjects that isn't going to prepare the kid for real life.
-
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:08 pm
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby myforwik » Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:22 pm
You have to take into account the definition of "intersection" which is: " the area where 2 or more roads (exceptDavid_G wrote:I think you'll find the stop signs and lights apply to the boundaries of the carriageway, whic inludes the footpaths. Sorry to spoil you fun on that one.
any road-related area) meet".
A road-related area of course includes a footpath and the shoulder of the road. So any regulation that involves an intersection does not apply to someone in the shoulder or on the footpath. For a stop and giveway signs (which only exist at intersections) they are specifically worded to only apply to intersections. So you can ride straight past a stop sign in the shoulder of the road (of course you still have to give way if you enter/cross the road - as any vehicle enterting the road from a road related area is required to do.)
The question of traffic lights is a little more complicated. Consider a T intersection where you want to go straight through. if you are on the foot path no one would claim you should have to stop in line with the red light. But a footpath and the shoulder of the road are the same thing, both road related areas. So if it applies to one it applies to the other.
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:56 pm
Oxford, you ARE the politician... just not a professional one You think this proposal is refined enough to go on my "list of proposed changes"?Oxford wrote:exactly, people will learn that there are alternatives and as you say not move on because their needs are satisfied.
now what politician is brave enough to propose it?
Funnily enough, more than MHL removal, I think 10 years of this particular proposal would have dramatic impacts on our roads. Increasing numbers of young cyclists would have a distinct cohort effect that would change the approach to bikes, as people realised that they were mowing down their relative's and neighbour's kids. I would imagine a lot more interest in protecting vulnerable cyclists if we push a bunch of 13 year olds onto the road.
- damhooligan
- Posts: 3409
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:16 pm
- Location: melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby damhooligan » Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:00 pm
Oxford wrote:you've hit the nail on the head, it is education and as I have long held, I think all license holders should have to graduate to holding a license through stages such as log book hours on a bicycle (from age of 16), then hold a motorcycle/scooter license, then a car license then they can get a heavy vehicle license. when every road user has experienced every form of transport, they will appreciate it more.
plus we need better enforcement in the courts and loss of license means starting the process described above from the beginning.
Forcing education on people is already present as 'driving tests'.
These test are not suficient and need to improve, as it clearly is not sufficient.
But giving the goverment permission to dictate wich mode of transport you have to use is ridiculous and wil never happen.
Forcing people to do things, wil teach them nothing, especially if the education that goes with it is not sufficient.
And seeing that the latter is the current issue, I suggest working on that first before trying anything else...
People already ride on the footpaths where they need to/want to,some legally ,some not.
That on it's own is not a problem, and I have nothing against this.
The problem by making it legal is , it wil become another way of the goverment saying; you do not belong on the road.
I consider this a major step in the wrong direction.
It wil only add to confusion...
What is a cyclist?, is it a 'fast pedestrian?, a slow car?
where am i 'supposed to ride' ?, footpath? road?
Do I have to ride on the footpath ? (wil become a common question...)
Currently by law, a bicycle is a vehicle, allowing vehicles on a footpath is really not a good idea..
I don't believe doing this wil create an opportunity for new cyclist to start riding.
And if they do, then that is where thy stay.
SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:49 pm
I think a discussion about defining the bicycle would be very helpful. I honestly don't feel like a fast pedestrian, I feel like a highly maneuverable car who can duck in and out of traffic. I like being nimble. On a rat run, I'm only slower than the cars when we're on a long uphill run. Slower vehicle is a better definition for me.
- damhooligan
- Posts: 3409
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:16 pm
- Location: melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby damhooligan » Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:17 pm
Would ...Xplora wrote:some idiots in cars don't understand how to share and would force riders to the paths
I would like to think of it as they would try...
Oh, they would suceed if we listen and and go back to the footpaths...
I would rather look at it as they try to get us off the roads, and they FAIL. !!!
P.s., interesting read here..
http://theconversation.edu.au/wide-open ... ities-3944
SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:50 pm
I should add that they have definitely succeeded. Biking to work is an activity for an extreme few. I work in one of the largest buildings in western Sydney, and there are a couple hundred full car spots, compared to a dozen bikes on a busy day - the bike rack is free, and secure. The car spots are probably 5-10 grand a year to hire each. There is no way that we are winning the war. The main excuse for people not riding is danger - that means most people think we're not on the road. Either way... I will have a read of the link.damhooligan wrote:Would ...Xplora wrote:some idiots in cars don't understand how to share and would force riders to the paths
I would like to think of it as they would try...
Oh, they would suceed if we listen and and go back to the footpaths...
I would rather look at it as they try to get us off the roads, and they FAIL. !!!
P.s., interesting read here..
http://theconversation.edu.au/wide-open ... ities-3944
-
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby diggler » Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:37 pm
Postmen ride footpaths and you don't hear about a lot of them being hit. As long as you ride slow i.e. under 15 km/h it is pretty safe.il padrone wrote:One of the major causes of cyclist collisions and deaths in urban areas - entering the roadway.DarrylH wrote: My wifes brother (and two mates) were killed riding on the road and there is no way she would ever ride on the road, so if we ever moved to Sydney her bike would immediately be up for sale.
You do this much more frequently when riding footpaths, at every minor side street. This is arguably much more dangerous than the risk of being hit from behind, but so many people don't (or can't) conceptualise this.
-
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 8:59 pm
- Location: Tregear, NSW
- Contact:
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby ruscook » Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Spot on! Lverpool council recently completed a shared bike path along Elizabeth Drive (basically from opposite Bonnyrig H.S. to Liverpool Rd North). Totally inappropriate for commuting. It has a driveway for EVERY house, and they are all normal 1960's building blocks, and MANY side streets. The pic il padrone has posted sums up the dangers of this shared path perfectly.il padrone wrote:Significant safety risks on most roads, unless you're really just pootling and yielding at every cross-street. Going by a range of overseas experience of such systems.
http://www.bikexprt.com/bikepol/facil/s ... dfc173.htm
Drivers don't look, driveways are always a hazard, then there's the problems of a confined path that will need to be two-way. Poor man's orange.
It's really frustrating as Fairfield council had built a great on road cycleway AND an off road cycleway on the rest of Elizabeth Drive, but you can't 8e it to get rom the M7 into Liverpool due to the inadequacies of the Liverpool council section (7km into the CBD)....
GT Avalanche 1.0 | TCR Alliance 0 | Giant Bowery | BMW K1300R
Two wheels good, Four wheels bad
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Sat Dec 24, 2011 3:06 pm
You realise this is a stupid comparison? Seriously? Cyclists are almost silent unless they have a seriously clacky rear hub. Postie bikes are revved over and over again in between houses, so the noise is loud, really hard to ignore or get used to because it is so unusual. They are about the easiest thing you can possibly imagine to put on a footpath and have no concern they will be hit. They also don't go very fast. I would go about twice the peak speed of a postie bike as they go between houses. The postie bike also has the benefit of enormous acceleration as they cross the street compared to a cyclist. I can't beat a motorbike's horsepower at any speed. They can adapt to an emergency situation better.diggler wrote:Postmen ride footpaths and you don't hear about a lot of them being hit. As long as you ride slow i.e. under 15 km/h it is pretty safe.il padrone wrote:One of the major causes of cyclist collisions and deaths in urban areas - entering the roadway.DarrylH wrote: My wifes brother (and two mates) were killed riding on the road and there is no way she would ever ride on the road, so if we ever moved to Sydney her bike would immediately be up for sale.
You do this much more frequently when riding footpaths, at every minor side street. This is arguably much more dangerous than the risk of being hit from behind, but so many people don't (or can't) conceptualise this.
You have to compare apples with apples. Postie motor bikes and cyclists aren't even close to the same league (and the road rules reflect this very well).
Either way, 15kmh is too slow for my bike. I'd be genuinely worried about riding that slow along a path with cleats, because you aren't really going quick enough to allow enough distance to unclip for emergencies. You need to go quick to mess with cars, and that doesn't work well on footpaths in many situations.
- wombatK
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 pm
- Location: Yagoona, AU
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby wombatK » Sat Dec 24, 2011 5:33 pm
There is absolutely no way you will convince anyone who's visited the orthopaedic ward of their local hospital of this.Oxford wrote:I think all license holders should have to graduate to holding a license through stages such as log book hours on a bicycle (from age of 16), then hold a motorcycle/scooter license, then...
http://www.carrsq.qut.edu.au/publicatio ... ety_fs.pdfPer distance travelled, the Australian rate of motorcyclist deaths is approximately 30 times the rate for car occupants.
The corresponding rate for a serious injury is approximately 41 times higher.
Similar elevated rates are also found in other developed countries.
Log book hours can and are easily fudged. Training isn't the issue - because you can't train attitude or respect for others.
Well, strictly, good parents can and do achieve this - but its a process that takes 15 to 20 years.
FWIW, I'm with Il Padrone - the collision risks at driveway exits and intersections are unacceptable. Footpaths are for pedestrians and kiddies riding under appropriate adult supervision, and no place for other cyclists.
Cheers
Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us -Jerry Garcia
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Sat Dec 24, 2011 8:35 pm
Funnily enough, the raised levels of danger on a motorbike is exactly WHY you force them to do it. It is high because it is presumed that motorbikes are ridden by rebels, hoons and drug dealers. The culture feeds into the attitude and it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. You need people on bikes because it IS a scary thing to do. You can switch off and be a murder machine with wheels with very little personal physical consequence in a SUV soccermum special. You can't do that on a motorbike. Your appreciation of that difference feeds into your driving, and you learn to deal with differences on the road better. Somehow millions of people manage to share roads in Asia. Why not here?wombatK wrote:There is absolutely no way you will convince anyone who's visited the orthopaedic ward of their local hospital of this.Oxford wrote:I think all license holders should have to graduate to holding a license through stages such as log book hours on a bicycle (from age of 16), then hold a motorcycle/scooter license, then...
FWIW, I'm with Il Padrone - the collision risks at driveway exits and intersections are unacceptable. Footpaths are for pedestrians and kiddies riding under appropriate adult supervision, and no place for other cyclists.
Cheers
I think it would be helpful to designate certain footpaths as share paths. They aren't all littered with driveways, and sometimes it is helpful to move the bike off the road. The RTA thinks it can designate speed limits effectively, they could easily designate share paths. LOL
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby human909 » Sat Dec 24, 2011 8:59 pm
I completely agree with Xplora here. There are three reasons why motorcyclists have such terrible safety records in Australia.Xplora wrote:Funnily enough, the raised levels of danger on a motorbike is exactly WHY you force them to do it.wombatK wrote:There is absolutely no way you will convince anyone who's visited the orthopaedic ward of their local hospital of this.Oxford wrote:I think all license holders should have to graduate to holding a license through stages such as log book hours on a bicycle (from age of 16), then hold a motorcycle/scooter license, then...
Cheers
-Terrible awareness of car drivers due to poor skills and lack of understanding
-Selection bias.
Most people who ride motorcycles in Australia are bigger risk takers than the average person. Thus their behaviour doesn't help. Yesterday I was shaking my head at a motorcyclist lane splitting at 80kph on a busy road with many cars changing lanes.
-Lower levels of protection
Sure motorcyclists have less protection than cars, but not to the degree that the stats show in Australia
- wombatK
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 pm
- Location: Yagoona, AU
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby wombatK » Sat Dec 24, 2011 10:26 pm
crumple zones around them. There's a vast difference in stopping distance and collision energy
when you are riding at 60 kph on a motor-bike compared to 30 kph on a bicycle.
Your point about risk is a bit of a chicken and the egg debate.
The riskiness of motorcycling is well-perceived in the community, so its probably true that
motorcyclers tend to be risk-takers. But the majority aren't the lane-splitting idiots that
will ride down the double lines against on-coming traffic just to get to the next traffic
light a few seconds earlier.
Cheers
Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us -Jerry Garcia
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby human909 » Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:17 pm
- damhooligan
- Posts: 3409
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:16 pm
- Location: melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby damhooligan » Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:53 am
http://www.northernstar.com.au/story/20 ... -to-share/
SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!
-
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 pm
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby diggler » Sun Dec 25, 2011 12:59 pm
When I posted this, I was referring to postmen on pushbikes which of course are silent.Xplora wrote:You realise this is a stupid comparison? Seriously? Cyclists are almost silent unless they have a seriously clacky rear hub. Postie bikes are revved over and over again in between houses, so the noise is loud, really hard to ignore or get used to because it is so unusual. They are about the easiest thing you can possibly imagine to put on a footpath and have no concern they will be hit. They also don't go very fast. I would go about twice the peak speed of a postie bike as they go between houses. The postie bike also has the benefit of enormous acceleration as they cross the street compared to a cyclist. I can't beat a motorbike's horsepower at any speed. They can adapt to an emergency situation better.diggler wrote:Postmen ride footpaths and you don't hear about a lot of them being hit. As long as you ride slow i.e. under 15 km/h it is pretty safe.
You have to compare apples with apples. Postie motor bikes and cyclists aren't even close to the same league (and the road rules reflect this very well).
Either way, 15kmh is too slow for my bike. I'd be genuinely worried about riding that slow along a path with cleats, because you aren't really going quick enough to allow enough distance to unclip for emergencies. You need to go quick to mess with cars, and that doesn't work well on footpaths in many situations.
I wouldn't ride faster than 15 km/h on a footpath in case of cars on driveways.
If you are concerned about getting out of your pedals, you could ride clicked out. I always click out when I am in a situation that can turn ugly very quickly e.g. heavy traffic.
You obviously travel fast, so the footpath is not for you. I am thinking in terms of people under 15km/h.
- Xplora
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:33 am
- Location: TL;DR
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby Xplora » Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:00 pm
I'm in favour of a paradigm shift for various speeds meaning various areas are acceptable - 15kmh on the footpath, up to 40kmh on the PSP, and above on the road. But you have to specifically relate any comment to all vehicles on a particular area for me to think it's acceptable. I don't have a problem with a motorbike doing 10kph down the footpath. But I'm a rare person where common sense is more important than being a lawyer.diggler wrote: I am thinking in terms of people under 15km/h.
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Allow riding on footpaths
Postby il padrone » Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:48 pm
I'm in favour of a paradigm shift for various speeds....... whereby a child riding a BMX or kids bike at 12-15k kmh, or an elderly person cruising along on their city bike at 10 kmh are entirely acceptable on the roads, and drivers of other vehicles overtake safely and with plenty of room (ie. preferably full lane), so these cyclists feel safe on our roads.Xplora wrote:I'm in favour of a paradigm shift for various speeds.
Call me a dreamer
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.