Saddleless bikes and the law

Mike Sales

Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me this, and
whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers that anyone
would
be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
Mike Sales.

soloriens

En message <41e59711$0$2651$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net>, Mike Sales
<mike.sales@zetnet.co.uk> ecrit
>Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me this, and
>whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers that anyone
>would
>be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
>Mike Sales.
>
>
>
>
The only reference to saddles in the Pedal Cycles Construction and Use
Regulations 1983 is in Reg 7 where the size of bicycles, measured by the
height of the saddle above the ground, determines how many braking
systems must be fitted.

--
Soloriens

Martin Bulmer

In news:41e59711$0$2651$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net,
Mike Sales <mike.sales@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me
> this, and whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers
> that anyone would
> be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
> Mike Sales.

I've seen bikes without a hole for a seat post, so no possibility of a
saddle. These are some kind of trick bike? I don't know, youth is not on my
side. How could you have a law requiring a saddle?
--


Martin Bulmer

Richard Bates

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:49:22 +0000, soloriens <soloriens@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

>The only reference to saddles in the Pedal Cycles Construction and Use
>Regulations 1983 is in Reg 7 where the size of bicycles, measured by the
>height of the saddle above the ground, determines how many braking
>systems must be fitted.

Could the absence of a saddle (which therefore makes the above law
unworkable) be a loophole for fixies who prefer not to have a front
brake?
--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?

elyob

"Mike Sales" <mike.sales@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:41e59711$0$2651$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net...
> Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me this,
> and
> whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers that anyone
> would
> be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
> Mike Sales.

There is a "don't sit down" unwritten law.

Call me Bob

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:26:44 +0000, Richard Bates
<usenet01@artybee.net> wrote:

>Could the absence of a saddle (which therefore makes the above law
>unworkable) be a loophole for fixies who prefer not to have a front
>brake?

I don't think fixies need a front brake to be road legal. Isn't the
requirement that the bike shall have two independent braking
mechanisms, which the rear brake and fixed drive train provide.

--

Call me "Bob"

"More oneness, less categories,
Open hearts, no strategies"

Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.

soloriens

En message <k9rbu0tviilqn2fp1p0g1r1sof6bv7se14@4ax.com>, Call me Bob
<usenetCOFFEE@toomanypenguins.co.uk> ecrit
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:26:44 +0000, Richard Bates
><usenet01@artybee.net> wrote:
>
>>Could the absence of a saddle (which therefore makes the above law
>>unworkable) be a loophole for fixies who prefer not to have a front
>>brake?
>
>I don't think fixies need a front brake to be road legal. Isn't the
>requirement that the bike shall have two independent braking
>mechanisms, which the rear brake and fixed drive train provide.
>
No. Fixies must have a front brake. A cycle [of a defined size] cannot
be used on the road unless

"... if the cycle is so constructed that one or more of the
wheels is incapable of rotating independently of the pedals, it is
equipped with a braking system operating on the front wheel"

for bikes made since 1984 the saddle height is the definition of size.
Before that it was the wheel size (Mr Moulton spoiled that rule).
--
Soloriens

David Hansen

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:32:30 +0000 someone who may be soloriens
<soloriens@wanadoo.fr> wrote this:-

>No. Fixies must have a front brake.

Why would the rider of one not want a front brake?


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Jon Senior

David Hansen wrote:
> Why would the rider of one not want a front brake?

"It's all about the purity, man! It's like. Thing. Zen. Y'know?"

Jon

dkahn400

soloriens wrote:

> No. Fixies must have a front brake. A cycle [of a defined size]
> cannot be used on the road unless
>
> "... if the cycle is so constructed that one or more of the
> wheels is incapable of rotating independently of the pedals, it is
> equipped with a braking system operating on the front wheel"
>
> for bikes made since 1984 the saddle height is the definition of
> size. Before that it was the wheel size (Mr Moulton spoiled that
> rule).

What is the specified saddle height, and how would that relate to, say,
a Trice Micro?

--
Dave...

bugbear

David Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:32:30 +0000 someone who may be soloriens
> <soloriens@wanadoo.fr> wrote this:-
>
>
>>No. Fixies must have a front brake.
>
>
> Why would the rider of one not want a front brake?
>

Beat me - my main-means-of-transport fixed has cantilevers
front and back (it was built in the 80's before discs were common)

BugBear

spademan o---[\) *

"Martin Bulmer" <martin@bulrner.fleeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cs5bbl$orn$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> In news:41e59711$0$2651$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net,
> Mike Sales <mike.sales@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me
> > this, and whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers
> > that anyone would
> > be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
> > Mike Sales.
>
> I've seen bikes without a hole for a seat post, so no possibility of a
> saddle. These are some kind of trick bike? I don't know, youth is not on
my
> side.

Probably a 'Trials' bike used exclusively as you say for trick type riding.

Steve.

spademan o---[\) *

"Martin Bulmer" <martin@bulrner.fleeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cs5bbl$orn$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> In news:41e59711$0$2651$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net,
> Mike Sales <mike.sales@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Does the law require a saddle on a bike? A neighbour has asked me
> > this, and whilst my guess is that it never occurred to the law makers
> > that anyone would
> > be daft enough to make a bike like that, I have no idea really.
> > Mike Sales.
>
> I've seen bikes without a hole for a seat post, so no possibility of a
> saddle. These are some kind of trick bike? I don't know, youth is not on
my
> side.

Probably a 'Trials' bike used exclusively as you say for trick type riding.

Steve.

Richard Bates

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:32:30 +0000, soloriens <soloriens@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

>No. Fixies must have a front brake. A cycle [of a defined size] cannot
>be used on the road unless
>
> "... if the cycle is so constructed that one or more of the
>wheels is incapable of rotating independently of the pedals, it is
>equipped with a braking system operating on the front wheel"

I don't know for certain, since I just heard this from a tricyclist,
but it is apparently legal for both brakes to work on the same wheel
so long as those two brakes operate independently.

In the case of a trike, however, having the brakes on the front wheel
gives a more powerful brake than two brakes on the rear wheel (of a
bicycle).

I was just curious for the purpose of being curious. I too think it
would be daft not to have a front brake.
--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?