Mighty Amsterdam lock - a product review

This is a terrible lock. It won't keep your bicycle secure. If
you insist on buying one of these, you can do so here, but I
recommend that you look elsewhere for a secure design
of permanently fitted lock instead.

We recently received a sample of the "Mighty Amsterdam" lock.

It's a bicycle look which looks a bit like the sort of wheel lock used on virtually every utility bike in the Netherlands, but it's not actually a real one.. Amazon describe it as "Straight from the Bicycle Capital of the world", but it's not really that either. If you use this to secure your bicycle in Amsterdam it'll likely be stolen. I've only ever seen one of these locks - our sample. Some retailers say it comes from Germany. I suspect it may really be made in China. In any case, it's merely a pretend "Dutch" lock and really not the same as a proper one.

How "not the same" ? Well, I'll show you. H@rry made a video of me at work a few days back demonstrating the lock. "Lost" your key ? No problem. A little bit of effort and it pops open without one:



The next day, my colleague Roelf found a slightly faster way to open it. Upward pressure is enough every time:


OK, so you can argue that perhaps it's a little less easy if it's mounted on the bike. That might be so. However, I still think it won't be difficult to open. And besides, why take the risk ?

A proper, secure, Dutch wheel lock

This is a real Dutch bike lock. It's very secure. Optional extra
cables and chains can be used with it to secure your bike to
fixed objects for even more security.

If you want a lock which mounts permanently on your bike and is actually secure, then what you need is a proper Dutch lock. The AXA Defender and AXA Victory are amongst the very best.

These are what we fit by choice to our own bikes. They're robust and reliable. Well made.

Optional cables and chains fit to a socket on the side for additional security without having to fumble around for a key.

We sell only reliable, tried and tested parts
not gimmicks which don't really work

You can buy the AXA Defender, AXA Victory and a wide range of add on cables and chains (including the ART approved DPI 110) in our shop. We don't, and won't, sell the Mighty Amsterdam or similar not quite real products.

Many quality products are made in China these days. The "Mighty Amsterdam lock" isn't one of them... Oh, and AXA aren't completely blameless. While the "Defender" really is very good indeed, a few of their earlier models had a fatal flaw and should be replaced.

The most dangerous cycle crossing in the UK ?

Freewheeler recently pointed out to me that the London Cycling Campaign had used some of my photos in this video. They asked before-hand and were polite enough to include credit. This makes a difference. Also, it's a very good thing that they are publicizing the danger due to this dreadful infrastructure.

The video shows what is a remarkably common situation in the UK - of cyclists having a choice of riding along a horrifically busy road or of taking to a narrow, badly designed cycle path with crossings of the same road. Sometimes the speed limits on such roads are 70 mph (112 km/h) and they are not well enforced. Indeed, the new government in the UK says it is ending the "war on the motorist" - something which never actually existed, of course.


There are very similar situations all over the UK. This one is near where we used to live in Cambridge. While I lived there I tried both riding on the road, and on the shared use path. Neither could be described as pleasant experiences:

View Larger Map

This example is on the A3, a dual carriageway road which in most countries would be classified as a motorway. However, cycling is legal on this road, and indeed it gives the most direct route, so some cyclists use it. Note the cycle symbol in the remarkably narrow on road cycle lane on the left hand side of the road:


View Larger Map

But what happens when you get to that upcoming junction on a bridge ? Well, you have a choice. Either have nerves of steel and carry on in a straight line, or join the slip-road exiting the dual carriageway as suggested by the cycle lane marking:


View Larger Map

There is then some help for cyclists who want to go straight ahead. Part way along the exit ramp, cyclists can pull into a waiting area on the left before crossing the slip road, and re-joining the main road. Very small signs warn drivers that they may find cyclists doing this:

View Larger Map

The Wikipedia article about this road puts it as follows: "Between Thursley and Milford (near Guildford), cycle crossings of the slip roads have been constructed on both sides of the carriageway for the few cyclists travelling on this dual carriageway." It is of course no surprise that "few cyclists" would use such a route ? It's hardly a glowing example of subjective safety.

Indeed, this lack of comfort when cycling is exactly the reason why cycling is flatlining in the UK.

Thursley and Milford are just four miles (six kilometres) apart. However, the direct route means taking a trip along this road. Who but the most dedicated cyclist is going to do that ? It may as well be a thousand miles, and indeed people often believe as a result that the distance is "too far to cycle". Such infrastructure is extremely effective at preventing cycling.

Also read an article which compares the most dangerous junctions in London and the whole of the Netherlands.

Britain has many problems with cycling. Cycling there has flat-lined for years and conditions remain hostile while policies continue to fail. And the rest of the English speaking world is doing much the same...

Another type of bike...

One of the things Assen is most famous for is the Motorcycle TT. It's a huge event in the city, attracting around a hundred thousand visitors for the racing, and many who camp for a few days beforehand as well. It's easily the biggest event in Assen, and visitors outnumber the 65000 people who live here. This happens with remarkably little disruption of city life, except that supermarket shelves are stripped clean of some items.

Wednesday, Thursday and Friday night have had live music on stages around the city. I had work to do on Thursday and Friday so couldn't stay out late (as a result I've still not seen Mooi Wark live - they were at half past midnight on Friday morning). However, no work today so we did go along last night.

An excellent event. As usual with a big event in the city there was simply not enough cycle parking to go around, even in places like that shown which are not actually bicycle parks at all. Bicycles are overwhelmingly the method used by locals to get into the city for events.

However, the focus of this event was another type of bike...

This jet bike was demonstrated on streets in the centre of the city. We watched the demonstration. Someone videoed it during the day and put it on youtube. It takes a while to start, and then it makes an awesome racket. So much so in fact, that the camera used to make the video seemed to give up the will to record sound:


Also there were people doing stunt riding in the city streets. Very impressive it was too. We were standing in the crowd on the other side of the landing ramp from this video:



And we spent a bit of time drinking a few beers and listening to music before riding our bikes home in the early hours. A great night out, in the company of around 40000 others who were also enjoying the evening's events.

For the next post I'll return to bicycles with pedals...

Thanks to sybrand2 and MetalMike50 for the videos

Cycle paths are "too expensive"

A few posts ago I pointed out that the Netherlands spends around 487 million euros per year on cycling infrastructure. That is what is spent in this country of 16 million people. The world's best cycling infrastructure costs: 30 euros per person per year.

It perhaps sounds like a lot - especially in these days of "austerity". British people, and those from the USA, Australia and other countries with little cycling, often claim that a lack of money is the reason why proper cycling infrastructure cannot be built. It's not true, of course. It's just one of many excuses.

By the standards of most government expenditure, this is actually not such a huge amount of money.

Britain's budget, just announced, is full of cuts to services. However, while 4 billion pounds has been cut from the transport budget, that still leaves 22 billion pounds allocated to transport.

There was no increase in the cost of fuel for motor vehicles. Such an increase may come later due to the rising cost of oil, but the British government is trying to minimise its effect on drivers by keeping the price of motor fuel down.

Meanwhile, cycling will be expected to continue on virtually no funding at all. Around 0.3% of the transport budget in the UK is spent on cycling. This continued under-investment is what has lead to the hostile environment for cyclists, and the bad safety record of cycling in the UK.

However, even now, investment in cycling should not be seen as a cost. Cycling has many benefits for society as a whole. If people cycle, this helps the economy by reducing the requirement to import oil and has many health benefits. Encouraging cycling is good economics. It's been shown that even in the UK, investing one pound in cycling brings four pounds of benefits.

In 1949, British people travelled 23.6 billion kilometres by bicycle vs. only 20.3 billion kilometres by car and taxi combined. In the Netherlands now, people cover about a tenth of the kilometres each year by bicycle that they cover by motor vehicle.

Instead of trying to keep the cost of motoring down, Britain's drivers could instead be helped by reducing their dependency on cars. British people were not always so dependent on cars. Rather, over the last 60 years the British public has been forced to drive for an increasing proportion of journeys due to there being few other good options (i.e. options which are attractive, offer direct journeys, have a high status and good subjective safety). If it were made easier for people to make a choice other than the private car, more could / would cycle.

Yes, I know people make other excuses, but mostly the concerns are simply about safe conditions for cycling. I've dealt with most of the common excuses before.

Of course, even when we're supposedly short of money, some things are immune to budget cuts. While there is "not enough money" for proper infrastructure, other more "important" things continue to have plenty of funding.

For instance, Britain may be heavily in debt, but the country is still keeping its nuclear deterrent, upgrading of which is expected to cost 65 billion pounds over the next few years.

I also recently learnt that Britain's adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost 20 billion pounds over the last 9 years. That amount is in addition to the usual defence budget (around 40 billion a year, and not being cut with the budget), and does not include either troops' salaries or care for the wounded. This alone comes to 37 pounds per person per year for that period - a larger amount than the Dutch spend on cycling infrastructure.

I'm not even slightly convinced that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are justified. In 2003 I marched in in London together with a million other people and all our voices were ignored. It's part of the reason I grew disillusioned with the UK. The reason given for starting the war in Iraq was bogus, and obviously so from the beginning, the cost in human lives has been enormous, and it seems that violence simply continues to escalate in Afghanistan. So what exactly is the point ?

If money is short, which is the best use of it ? Destroying another country's infrastructure and killing hundreds of thousands of people, storing up hate for the future, or building up ones own infrastructure and saving lives in the process ?

For more cycling, what Britain, and the other countries with little cycling, need is very simple. More decent quality cycle paths.

Update May 2014
Quite apart from all the wasted lives, resources and political good-will, we now know that the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost 30 billion pounds. i.e. enough to fund cycling at Dutch levels for at least 25 years. Well managed, that could have been enough to catch up with the Netherlands.

Of course, to talk about cycling as a cost at all is actually short-sighted. The Dutch have repeatedly shown that GOOD cycling infrastructure is cheaper to build than not to build. What's more, cycling has been shown again and again to have many positive effects both in society and even for business, all of which lead to cycling having an overall positive effect on the economy.

Britain isn't alone in spending more than it can afford on the military. I made a comparison of several countries a little while back.

The attitude towards cycling infrastructure varies with its quality.

This is a guest post written by Mark Wagenbuur:

The attitude towards separate cycle infrastructure varies as much as the quality of it. In Germany some cyclists feel ‘pushed off the road’ by their separate ‘on-sidewalk’ mandatory cycle paths. In English speaking countries some cyclists are also reluctant to give up their ‘right to use the roads’, a feeling which is enhanced by a strong ‘them versus us’ culture.

There is a very different attitude in the Netherlands. The conflict of interests is just not there. First of all because the Dutch don’t think in terms of drivers versus cyclists (everybody can be both) but also because they feel each type of traffic has the infrastructure it needs and deserves. And many Dutch think ‘it has always been this way’.

Early 20^th century cyclist on a cycle way separated from the road by a hedge.

It is impossible to single out one reason to explain this. There are complex cultural, political, financial and historical reasons that all contributed to today’s attitude. But it is interesting to focus on one of the historic reasons.

When mass cycling became common in the Netherlands from the 1890s the cyclists had to deal with roads that were totally inadequate for cycling. Most roads were not paved at all. The state highways had been constructed for horses and carriages and they had been neglected because of cuts in maintenance in favour of what was considered more modern rail transport. In order to make cycling possible at all new roads for cyclists were necessary. And they were indeed built. At first next to the highways, but then an interesting problem arose. Since the cycle paths were so much better than the roads they were soon invaded by horsemen and carriages. This lead to protests and eventually in 1905 to a new Road Law that was very specific in the protection of cycle paths. It forbade non-cyclists to use them. And it also gave the cycle paths the legal status of ‘road’, to be used by cyclists only.

Separate cycle path in Breukelen in 1955

It was only after this law was in force that cars became common. They too were forbidden to use the cycle roads. But it was hard to enforce with the smooth cycle ways that were so much more comfortable for those early cars too, directly next to the poor roads. So the pragmatic Dutch simply created a division. A hedge or a line of trees between the road and the cycle way and the matter was settled. By the 1920s it had been laid down in National Law that the construction of these separate cycle paths was mandatory on roads with more than 500 cyclists passing per day. When the cyclists’ union looked back in the 1930s to three decades of practise, they were very satisfied that this solution had also improved overall road safety. Implementation in cities was interrupted by WWII but from the early 1950s the separated cycle paths became more common in city streets too.

Much has changed since the early 20^th century. Motorised traffic now has its own good roads, and there was a decline in cycling that was overcome again, but that ground attitude has always remained. It were not the cyclists who were sent off the roads. It was motorised traffic that was sent off the cycle paths for the benefit of all. This basic attitude has been such a long tradition that it is incorporated in the way of building and thinking about roads. No driver will ‘invade’ a cycle path, not even now, not even if he can.

Please note that this is not a safe roundabout design. The basic design has been shown to be seven times more dangerous than the preferred Dutch design, and multiple motor lanes shown leading into the roundabout will further degrade safety leading to similar situations as have prompted protests in the Netherlands.

Modern infrastructure planning in the Netherlands always includes cycle paths

What has been a growing tradition in the Netherlands for over a hundred years can be adopted by other countries too. On highways and through streets with a high volume of motorised traffic at increased speed you need smooth, wide, clear and well maintained cycle paths separated from that motorised traffic to improve overall traffic safety. In city streets with moderate traffic volumes and low speed differences you can create complete streets which are fit to be used by all types of traffic including cyclists and pedestrians.

Fietsparade Groningen

On Sunday, 20th of June (i.e. this Sunday coming) there's a Fietsparade in Groningen at the Vismarkt. This includes a tour through the city. The event lasts from one in the afternoon until about 4.

This comes after the opening of an exhibition about the Groninger bike manufacturer Fongers, who built bikes in the city from 1884 through to 1971. There will be demonstrations by unicyclists, BMX riders, cycle racers, cycle couriers and bakfietsen. There will also be a group of 100 old bikes ridden by members of De Oude Fiets, a nice group of people who preserve old bicycles. I made a video of one of their rides locally a couple of years ago:


What's more, the Fietsharmonisch Orkest is coming along. I saw this lot at SPEZI earlier this year:


And of course you're welcome on your bike too.

These days there is just one bicycle manufacturer left in Groningen. Sinner Ligfietsen, building a range of recumbent bikes and trikes including the rather wonderful Mango velomobile, and of course we'll be there too.

Update 21/6/2010
I didn't get any particularly good photos or videos. However, Wilfred did. This is his video, and there are photos on his blog.

LOFAR - world's biggest radiotelescope

Drenthe, the province of the Netherlands in which we live, is the least densely populated in the Netherlands. There is a lot of beautiful countryside here, and a lot of farming. However, it's not just a farming area.

A few days ago, Queen Beatrix officially opened the world's largest radiotelescope, LOFAR, based here in Drenthe, but spread across Europe, is the biggest in the world. The individual parts all link with a supercomputer in Groningen.

It's one of those many surprises you find when cycling across the province. And of course the video about the radiotelescope can't help but include bikes here in the "cycling province".

The Wikipedia page on LOFAR has more details, and there's another video showing some of how it works.