9 July 2011

Pialligo bike heist

| johnboy
Join the conversation
46

ACT Policing is investigating the theft of two bicycles valued at $18,000 on Beltana Road in Pialligo yesterday morning (Thursday, July 7).

Around 9.30am the victim parked his vehicle on Beltana Road, near the Pialligo and Fairbairn Avenue intersection. The victim had two bicycles secured to the top of his vehicle. He returned to his vehicle about 30 minutes later to find both bicycles had been stolen.

The first bicycle is an Orbea Orca (brand and model) full carbon fibre road racing bicycle. It is black with white lettering and white stripes down each side of the frame.

The second bicycle is a Specialized Epic (brand and model) full carbon fibre cross-country mountain bike. The bike is primarily black in colour.

Anyone who may be able to assist police in locating either of these bicycles is asked to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000, or via the Crime Stoppers website on www.act.crimestoppers.com.au

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

Join the conversation

46
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

dvaey said :

KB1971 said :

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Im not ignoring those points at all. So you point out that revenue from rego doesnt go towards roads, then point out that youre doing your part by leaving your registered vehicle at home? Does that mean youd also happily ride a motorbike without rego, because your 2-ton road-destroying car is sitting at home?

KB1971 said :

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

KB1971 said :

II also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

Because it is then understood to be a privellige, not a right. And with the privellige, comes the responsibility. The ‘rego’ is a token amount, to receive an indication to show other road users that you understand the road rules and the laws applying to your vehicle. The whole point wouldnt be to raise money, it is to be able to identify those who should be on the road and those who shouldnt, the same way the rego costs for cars, bikes, trucks, etc doesnt cover the cost of roads (but is still legally required).

Others have pointed out that Pedal Power members have insurance (and obviously although not guaranteed, more knowledge of bike laws). Maybe theres a place for Pedal Power to issue some form of card or plate to members, which they can affix to their bike to show other roadusers that they too know the rules and are insured. It wont change the number of idiots on bikes on the roads, but at least it might make it easier for people to report illegal/dangerous cyclist activities.

I see now where you are coming from, you want bikes outlawed from the road unless they pay rego?
I am not sure that is going to happen as there is a fatal flaw in this plan. Where do you propose that they ride? While Canberra has a fantastic range of bike paths, they dont go everywhere.

What you are really talking about is a licencing system, just because a bike has rego, it doesnt mean that the operator has a great grasp of the rules. I see merit in what you are saying, roadcraft education should be taught to school kids but there will never be a liciencing nor a registration system.

One thing you seem hell bent on is saying that cyclists are the bane of society & the only people who do wrong on our roads. This is incorrect, no matter what your from of transport, if you are going to break the rules, you are going to break the rules.

To answer your question about the motorbike, I was riding a motorbike (registered of course) to work daily but many near misses with inattentive motorists has made me reconsider. Ironically the nail in the coffin was I had an accident with a cyclist where Cotter Road joins Adelaide Ave. No one was really hurt but he could have easily been a car that turned across in front of me. Cycling has so fan not provided me with those moments & its is fun even at -4.1 & in the fog.

I would not ride a motorbike unregistered as it is a requirement by law for it to be registered.

The point about me leaving my car at home while it is registered? Counter argument to the silly argument of “bikes must pay rego”.

One of the big reasons there is such responsibility placed on having a licence & registration is that anything that is 250kg & above travelling at 100km/h can cause a lot of collateral damage if something silly happens & plows into a group of school kids waiting at a crossing. A pushy at 40km/h? Not so much. People are so easily killed by cars its not funny.

I am a Pedal Power member so I have insurance. I like my house too much.

Come for a ride with me sometime, you might like it 🙂 (I am making an ass out of u & me here & assuming you dont…….).

troll-sniffer said :

Your entire attitude throughout this forum demonstrates one of the basic anti-social tenets held by quite a large section of the population, that having a car somehow confers rights of passage and abuse simply because of the potential for speed.

Or maybe because of the bull bar?

+1 on that post. I couldn’t be bothered trying to formulate a response as it was so totally irrational.

troll-sniffer10:00 am 19 Jul 11

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

dvaey… you’ve consistently demonstrated an anti-cyclist bias that i have consistently let through to the keeper, but now you’re starting to get on my wick. Since when has access to the roads system been a privilege? Driving a car is considered a privilege, that’s why you need a licence. Other forms of access aren’t considered a privilege, they are a right.

Your entire attitude throughout this forum demonstrates one of the basic anti-social tenets held by quite a large section of the population, that having a car somehow confers rights of passage and abuse simply because of the potential for speed. Until attitudes such as yours that roads are for cars and everyone else in an invitee are changed, society continues to suffer.

KB1971 said :

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Im not ignoring those points at all. So you point out that revenue from rego doesnt go towards roads, then point out that youre doing your part by leaving your registered vehicle at home? Does that mean youd also happily ride a motorbike without rego, because your 2-ton road-destroying car is sitting at home?

KB1971 said :

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

If you break the law, do you lose that hospital care like youd lose a car licence? Medical care is more of a basic right, when compared to the privellige of driving on a public roadway.

KB1971 said :

II also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

Because it is then understood to be a privellige, not a right. And with the privellige, comes the responsibility. The ‘rego’ is a token amount, to receive an indication to show other road users that you understand the road rules and the laws applying to your vehicle. The whole point wouldnt be to raise money, it is to be able to identify those who should be on the road and those who shouldnt, the same way the rego costs for cars, bikes, trucks, etc doesnt cover the cost of roads (but is still legally required).

Others have pointed out that Pedal Power members have insurance (and obviously although not guaranteed, more knowledge of bike laws). Maybe theres a place for Pedal Power to issue some form of card or plate to members, which they can affix to their bike to show other roadusers that they too know the rules and are insured. It wont change the number of idiots on bikes on the roads, but at least it might make it easier for people to report illegal/dangerous cyclist activities.

dvaey said :

… and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules.

Interesting point. Other road users have to demonstrate competency, why not cyclists? Don’t have an answer or a viewpoint (yet), just wondering. Maybe because incompetent cyclists usually only seriously damage themselves and the occasional pedestrian.

Watson said :

dvaey said :

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

I can’t believe you actually made the effort to respond to that in such detail!

I cant belive he is ignoring the valid (& correct) points about consolidated revenue, GST, the minimal amout that rego fee’s go to roads & having a car sitting there not destroying roads while people like myself are riding to work.

Its a bit like me trying to say that I dont want people less fortunate than me to get free hospital care because they dont pay the medicare levy.

I also dont get how a bicycle paying rego will stop cyclists riding in 100km/h zones. this would give use MORE entitlement to be there.

dvaey said :

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

I can’t believe you actually made the effort to respond to that in such detail!

Watson said :

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings.

A pedestrian walking a footpath with other pedestrians at 3km/hr is a different kettle of fish to someone riding a bike in an on-road bike lane at 20km/hr with traffic 1-2m away travelling at upto 100km/hr. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see this, although judging by some comments, some fail to see the difference. Bikes and pedestrians have their own designated paths, which cars are not allowed to travel on.

Watson said :

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

As far as Im aware, there are no laws restricting anyones use of public bbq’s like there are laws restricting the use of public roads. If you think Im wrong, feel free to point me to the ACT Public Barbecue Act that covers the relevant laws. Or maybe you think Im wrong that there are laws restricting public roads? Either way you chose a bad argument.

dvaey said :

I pay rego for 2 cars, also pay rego for 2 trailers and a caravan, and have also paid GST (and stamp duty) on all of them, plus Im legally required to demonstrate that theyre safe and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules. I accept the fact that if I wish to take any of these vehicles on the road, it is my responsibility to ensure that the item I am using is registered and insured, regardless of the number of vehicles I have at home or the insurance cover of any of them.

vg, are you advocating that if you pay appropriate taxes, and have some registered vehicles in your name, you dont need rego on them all?

My comment wasnt in regards to the usual lycra bandits who ride their $200 bikes and chirp on about saving the planet, it was in regards to this particular situation that someone will spend exorbitant amounts on a vehicle, but if asked to pay .1% of that to contribute to the paths and tracks they use will kick up a stink as demonstrated by the replies above. I know cyclists will never pay rego, they will never be identifiable or accountable, there will never be a way to remove dangerous cyclists from the roads/paths (other than natural selection), but that doesnt mean we cant hold out hope that one day they might be partly held to account like the rest of the users of the roads.

This discussion has been had many a time on here, but I’m always up for some more fun!

I think we shouldn’t stop at cyclists. We should also force pedestrians to pay registration to use bike paths and pedestrian crossings. Do you have any idea how expensive a pedestrian traffic light is???! But if you were to ask them to pay even 1% of the value of their flash sneakers, they’d find a way out of it.

We shoudl tax the crap out of pedstrians! They are a hazard on the road and they slow down traffic too much! And kids are the worst, they should pay double rego because they are barely visible from a car. And they are the reason for those annyong school zones and school crossings. Those orange flags look expensive too.

Now don’t get me started on people using public parks and bbq facilities! Bludgers, all of them!

ThisIsAName said :

It could have been a lockable roof rack, but they aren’t totally secure. I know someone else who had a bike flogged from one of these. If I recall the details (probably incorrectly), the thief cut was able to cut/saw through it to steal the goods. Unfortunately, I can’t recall how long the bike was out for.

Well, someone will always be able to cut through things, but on a public road at 9:30am youd be pretty brave to be there with tools long enough to cut the rack, especially if you knew the owner could come back at any second. Sure, you can buy poor quality bike racks, but that was my whole point, the more your valuables are worth, the more you should be prepared to spend. If you want to stop someone stealing a kite, you tie it off with string, but if you want to secure 20k worth of bike, you dont use a simple piece of string, you should use a rack worthy of the task.

Deckard said :

Jeez, been a while since you brought this old chestnut up. You keep crapping on like a broken record but never pay any attention to the answers.

So, which is it.. has it been a long time since it was brought up, or is it brought up all the time? I never pay attention to the answer, which is why I dont bring it up except in cases like this. I would say the same thing if someone was in a new $100k sports car that was unrego’d.. theyre still an idiot for thinking that because they can drop a wad of cash at the car dealers, they dont need to pay the same as the rest of us.

Deckard said :

This guy would have paid $1,800 in GST on those 2 bikes. GST is collected by the Federal Govt and then allocated back to State and Territories to build things like roads for everyone to use.

vg said :

Along with my 2 bikes I also pay 2 car regos and, I can almost guarantee, a lot more tax than you. Your logic just flew out the broken record window

I pay rego for 2 cars, also pay rego for 2 trailers and a caravan, and have also paid GST (and stamp duty) on all of them, plus Im legally required to demonstrate that theyre safe and that I am qualified and knowledgable in the control of the vehicle and the road rules. I accept the fact that if I wish to take any of these vehicles on the road, it is my responsibility to ensure that the item I am using is registered and insured, regardless of the number of vehicles I have at home or the insurance cover of any of them.

vg, are you advocating that if you pay appropriate taxes, and have some registered vehicles in your name, you dont need rego on them all?

My comment wasnt in regards to the usual lycra bandits who ride their $200 bikes and chirp on about saving the planet, it was in regards to this particular situation that someone will spend exorbitant amounts on a vehicle, but if asked to pay .1% of that to contribute to the paths and tracks they use will kick up a stink as demonstrated by the replies above. I know cyclists will never pay rego, they will never be identifiable or accountable, there will never be a way to remove dangerous cyclists from the roads/paths (other than natural selection), but that doesnt mean we cant hold out hope that one day they might be partly held to account like the rest of the users of the roads.

“My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.”

Along with my 2 bikes I also pay 2 car regos and, I can almost guarantee, a lot more tax than you. Your logic just flew out the broken record window

dvaey said :

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

Jeez, been a while since you brought this old chestnut up. You keep crapping on like a broken record but never pay any attention to the answers.

This guy would have paid $1,800 in GST on those 2 bikes. GST is collected by the Federal Govt and then allocated back to State and Territories to build things like roads for everyone to use. The rego fees alone would cover sweet FA of the cost of roads in this country.

Hopefully you pay attention and this will be the last time we have to hear it.

alaninoz said :

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked?

I was wondering about that, but couldn’t tell from the post. If unlocked, I wonder what the insurance company will have to say?

It could have been a lockable roof rack, but they aren’t totally secure. I know someone else who had a bike flogged from one of these. If I recall the details (probably incorrectly), the thief cut was able to cut/saw through it to steal the goods. Unfortunately, I can’t recall how long the bike was out for.

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked?

I was wondering about that, but couldn’t tell from the post. If unlocked, I wonder what the insurance company will have to say?

Clown Killer3:20 pm 12 Jul 11

I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it

The Hume Hilton, roadside art and the Al Grasby statue become exemplars of government expenditure when compared to an idea like making cyclists pay $5 (or $10, or $15 or $50) a year to use roads. Despite what the fcuktards with the “I drive and I vote” sticker will try and tell you.

amarooresident33:17 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey said :

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked? Even cheap $20 bike-carriers can have a padlock put on them. You lock up a $200 bike to a bike rack in a public area, why wouldnt you lock up 20k worth of bikes in a public area?

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

You did read the bit where the bikes were stolen from on top of his vehicle didn’t you?

OpenYourMind said :

dvaey, a lot of us regular cyclists already pay the expensive component of rego by being members of Pedal Power. Pedal Power membership includes 3rd party insurance. If a rego fee included this component I think many cyclists would consider it. I don’t think its in the interests of our local Government to charge such a fee – in fact there’s so many benefits to our local govt of greater cycling participation that they are probably better off paying an allowance to each regular ACT bicycle commuter. Well, that would get my vote 🙂

Its already happening in Europe:

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2011/06/23/2003506502

In other parts of the world:

http://www.commutebybike.com/2009/01/16/get-paid-to-commute-by-bike/

dvaey said :

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

‘Broken record’ is an apt description, dvaey.

Two words: Consolidated Revenue. Look it up, understand it.

OpenYourMind2:02 pm 12 Jul 11

dvaey, a lot of us regular cyclists already pay the expensive component of rego by being members of Pedal Power. Pedal Power membership includes 3rd party insurance. If a rego fee included this component I think many cyclists would consider it. I don’t think its in the interests of our local Government to charge such a fee – in fact there’s so many benefits to our local govt of greater cycling participation that they are probably better off paying an allowance to each regular ACT bicycle commuter. Well, that would get my vote 🙂

Felix the Cat1:22 pm 12 Jul 11

The Frots said :

Henry82 said :

The Frots said :

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

At $23/tonne, its a pretty good deal. More expensive than water, but thats about it.

Sounds great – I’ll take three.

Reddogincan said “Well, trees are essentially carbon fibre so it would be cheapest just to make a bike out of wood.

LOL for that one. I can see it now! A nice piece of kit.

http://www.bikebamboo.com/

Why would you leave 18k worth of bike unlocked? Even cheap $20 bike-carriers can have a padlock put on them. You lock up a $200 bike to a bike rack in a public area, why wouldnt you lock up 20k worth of bikes in a public area?

My other thought (slight tangent to a broken record), is this guy is prepared to spend 18k on a bike, but I bet if he was asked to pay $5/year towards the cost of using the road he commutes on he’d find any way out of it.

Henry82 said :

The Frots said :

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

At $23/tonne, its a pretty good deal. More expensive than water, but thats about it.

Sounds great – I’ll take three.

Reddogincan said “Well, trees are essentially carbon fibre so it would be cheapest just to make a bike out of wood.

LOL for that one. I can see it now! A nice piece of kit.

I have an expensive road bike, an expensive mountain bike, and use both to commute and race…..and I look superb on both.

troll-sniffer said :

Oi be constantly amazed at da moneys dat pipples in dis town chuck at bike shops. Oi be sure there be a few road racin’ types who could actually benefit from the few milliseconds afforded a sprint to the line, but for the remainder of the ‘look at moi’ brigade, you’re just victims of a giant con.

Especially the tosser brigade who buy the $6000+ bikes to commute to work! Recently a scientist in Pommyland released a study into the difference between an old steel-framed treadlie and the same commute on a fancy wank-bike. The result? The old faithful steel treadlie was actually slightly faster over the course of the trial. He’s not claiming it was a science experiment, and didn’t need to be, it did prove that over the long term, by the time road and weather conditions, personal well-being and other factors were taken into account, there’s no significant advantage in a lightweight treadlie outside a racing situation, where the finer points of acceleration come into play.

Oi not be sayin’ like that the victim here ain’t some fancy pants Tour de France contender moind, oi just be sayin’ if he or she not be, there be a lot of dollars pointlessly placed in the hands of a local boike shop what be rubbin’ there hands in glee at a new sale.

I would dispute this, I had a high quality Carrera steely then upgraded to a 2k++ Cannondale. I could not believe the difference between the two. The Cannondale (7 kgs) feels like it is on a rail, absolutely stable through any corner. Wish I was good enough to max it out, definitley money well spent. I tend to agree with Watson, in that further $s would be for the bling.

OpenYourMind5:40 pm 11 Jul 11

As a long distance ride-to-work communter, the owner of a $5k roadbike (for racing), a $1k roadbike for commuting, a collection of hard tail and dual suspension mountain bikes, I have a little more experience on this topic than most. I am a little scientific about this as well and regularly track my ride to work with a GPS app on a smartphone. Firstly, the difference between a roadie and a fatter tyred mountain bike for a standard commute is enormous. A mountain bike is slower for commuting. The difference between my ride-to-work roadbike and my race bike is very small. The carbon-fibre framed bike is a nicer machine to ride, but a little less robust, whereas a mountain bike can be ridden over bumps and drops and such with a little more gusto.

I’ve ridden to work on an old steel framed clunker and it was much slower and much harder work.

The law of diminishing returns certainly works against the bicycle. As others have said, the difference between a standard and a top of the range bike is minute. This is a good thing because for most people, a decently set up bike can be purchased for a relatively small amount of money. Apart from the winter chill, Canberra really is a wonderful city to cycle in.

The Frots said :

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

At $23/tonne, its a pretty good deal. More expensive than water, but thats about it.

The Frots said :

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

Well, trees are essentially carbon fibre so it would be cheapest just to make a bike out of wood.

dungfungus said :

Rollersk8r said :

dungfungus said :

What is this “carbon fibre” stuff that the bikes are made of? My bike is made from steel.
We were repeatedly told yesterday that anything with carbon in it is now evil so is it possible some well meaning greenies have taken matters into their own hands to pre-emptively destroy these two wheeled threats to our environment?

That’s where you’re wrong – wouldn’t have this problem if everyone went out and bought a carbon fibre bike! Carbon capture!

So this means that if everyone grows more plants & trees in their gardens and captures this carbon gas stuff (I can’t afford one of these carbon fibre bikes) we won’t have any more problems for the enviroment? I know fibre is good for us but what does it taste like with carbon? Is it harmful?

It might be cheaper if you simply bought a box of carbon itself – without the rest of the bike!

Rollersk8r said :

dungfungus said :

What is this “carbon fibre” stuff that the bikes are made of? My bike is made from steel.
We were repeatedly told yesterday that anything with carbon in it is now evil so is it possible some well meaning greenies have taken matters into their own hands to pre-emptively destroy these two wheeled threats to our environment?

That’s where you’re wrong – wouldn’t have this problem if everyone went out and bought a carbon fibre bike! Carbon capture!

So this means that if everyone grows more plants & trees in their gardens and captures this carbon gas stuff (I can’t afford one of these carbon fibre bikes) we won’t have any more problems for the enviroment? I know fibre is good for us but what does it taste like with carbon? Is it harmful?

troll-sniffer said :

Oi be constantly amazed at da moneys dat pipples in dis town chuck at bike shops. Oi be sure there be a few road racin’ types who could actually benefit from the few milliseconds afforded a sprint to the line, but for the remainder of the ‘look at moi’ brigade, you’re just victims of a giant con.

Especially the tosser brigade who buy the $6000+ bikes to commute to work! Recently a scientist in Pommyland released a study into the difference between an old steel-framed treadlie and the same commute on a fancy wank-bike. The result? The old faithful steel treadlie was actually slightly faster over the course of the trial. He’s not claiming it was a science experiment, and didn’t need to be, it did prove that over the long term, by the time road and weather conditions, personal well-being and other factors were taken into account, there’s no significant advantage in a lightweight treadlie outside a racing situation, where the finer points of acceleration come into play.

Oi not be sayin’ like that the victim here ain’t some fancy pants Tour de France contender moind, oi just be sayin’ if he or she not be, there be a lot of dollars pointlessly placed in the hands of a local boike shop what be rubbin’ there hands in glee at a new sale.

Driving a Porsche probably won’t get you to work any faster either – but people are able to pursue their interests and spend their money how they like.

troll-sniffer said :

Especially the tosser brigade who buy the $6000+ bikes to commute to work! Recently a scientist in Pommyland released a study into the difference between an old steel-framed treadlie and the same commute on a fancy wank-bike. The result? The old faithful steel treadlie was actually slightly faster over the course of the trial. He’s not claiming it was a science experiment, and didn’t need to be, it did prove that over the long term, by the time road and weather conditions, personal well-being and other factors were taken into account, there’s no significant advantage in a lightweight treadlie outside a racing situation, where the finer points of acceleration come into play.

Oi not be sayin’ like that the victim here ain’t some fancy pants Tour de France contender moind, oi just be sayin’ if he or she not be, there be a lot of dollars pointlessly placed in the hands of a local boike shop what be rubbin’ there hands in glee at a new sale.

I think if it gives them pleasure to ride an expensive bike, who are we to deny them that? The 50-something guy who buys a midlife-crisis-red porsche, could have saved his money and bought a Ford Falcon instead.

Ok, maybe there is less difference between an expensive and cheap bike than there is between a Porsche and a Falcon, but they’re both just status symbols nevertheless. You might awell tell women that polished glass looks just as pretty as diamonds.

As for the English study… I’ve never cycled in England, but in other European countries like Holland and surrounds, cyclists commute in a very different way than we do in Canberra. There is no lycra in sight anywhere, you cycle in your work clothes and therefor it is very uncool to get sweaty, so you cycle slowly but steadily. The surface is quite rough too, so if they compared it to racing bike, they were immediately disadvantaged there.

So if you cycle for speed like most do in Canberra, you’d probably benefit from something slightly better than your grandma’s old bike. Though I also agree that once you’ve gone over $2000 any differences will be totally superficial.

That rant was way off topic, but I enjoyed it. 😉

dungfungus said :

What is this “carbon fibre” stuff that the bikes are made of? My bike is made from steel.
We were repeatedly told yesterday that anything with carbon in it is now evil so is it possible some well meaning greenies have taken matters into their own hands to pre-emptively destroy these two wheeled threats to our environment?

That’s where you’re wrong – wouldn’t have this problem if everyone went out and bought a carbon fibre bike! Carbon capture!

troll-sniffer11:58 am 11 Jul 11

Oi be constantly amazed at da moneys dat pipples in dis town chuck at bike shops. Oi be sure there be a few road racin’ types who could actually benefit from the few milliseconds afforded a sprint to the line, but for the remainder of the ‘look at moi’ brigade, you’re just victims of a giant con.

Especially the tosser brigade who buy the $6000+ bikes to commute to work! Recently a scientist in Pommyland released a study into the difference between an old steel-framed treadlie and the same commute on a fancy wank-bike. The result? The old faithful steel treadlie was actually slightly faster over the course of the trial. He’s not claiming it was a science experiment, and didn’t need to be, it did prove that over the long term, by the time road and weather conditions, personal well-being and other factors were taken into account, there’s no significant advantage in a lightweight treadlie outside a racing situation, where the finer points of acceleration come into play.

Oi not be sayin’ like that the victim here ain’t some fancy pants Tour de France contender moind, oi just be sayin’ if he or she not be, there be a lot of dollars pointlessly placed in the hands of a local boike shop what be rubbin’ there hands in glee at a new sale.

What is this “carbon fibre” stuff that the bikes are made of? My bike is made from steel.
We were repeatedly told yesterday that anything with carbon in it is now evil so is it possible some well meaning greenies have taken matters into their own hands to pre-emptively destroy these two wheeled threats to our environment?

I think it was a general motorist who, not being able tolegally smash into cyclists and get away with it, saw an opportunity to take two bicycles off the road!!

If it were me owning them, I’d have a look in cash converters! And yes, I’m joking!!

eyeLikeCarrots9:03 am 11 Jul 11

RedDogInCan said :

dtc said :

I seriously doubt the thief knew the bikes were worth $18k – they were probably just seen as looking nice and reasonably available (unless we now have thiefs with a good understanding of carbon fibre).

Oh, I think you’ll find the thieves knew exactly what they were worth, who owned them, how they were secured, and where the owner was going to be that morning.

Yeah.. weirder things have happened but this one does quack a bit like a duck.

OpenYourMind9:49 pm 10 Jul 11

The Darwin award comment deserves it’s own special RiotACT award. Maybe as well as the Mully, we could have the Merlin Bodega for making statements without fully understanding what they mean. I remember during the Mully kerfuffle, one of the Mully clan piped up and said “Those Police, they just take the law into their own hands”. See, that statement deserved a Merlin Bodega!

dtc said :

I seriously doubt the thief knew the bikes were worth $18k – they were probably just seen as looking nice and reasonably available (unless we now have thiefs with a good understanding of carbon fibre).

Oh, I think you’ll find the thieves knew exactly what they were worth, who owned them, how they were secured, and where the owner was going to be that morning.

“Around 9.30am the victim parked his vehicle on Beltana Road, near the Pialligo and Fairbairn Avenue intersection. The victim had two bicycles secured to the top of his vehicle. He returned to his vehicle about 30 minutes later to find both bicycles had been stolen.’

‘Spending that much on two bikes, leaving them in a dark place at night expecting them to be there when you get back and expecting the ACT police to find them has to be the trifecta of Darwin awards. ‘

Didn’t do particularly well in English comprehension in school, did you Einstein

insurance job

I seriously doubt the thief knew the bikes were worth $18k – they were probably just seen as looking nice and reasonably available (unless we now have thiefs with a good understanding of carbon fibre). Given that the thief didnt know they were worth $18k, would you claim a ‘darwin award’ if the bikes had only been your standard $500 bike? It probably would have made little difference to the thief.

That said, anyone who can tell the difference between a $800 gear set and a $1500 gear set (let alone more exxy ones) is seriously misled. And even if they can tell the difference, unless you are a professional and it actually means something, why bother. I’m not one for telling people what to spend their money on, but a bit of reality is usually worthwhile.

merlin bodega said :

Eighteen grand for two bikes!?! Evolution fails us again. Spending that much on two bikes, leaving them in a dark place at night expecting them to be there when you get back and expecting the ACT police to find them has to be the trifecta of Darwin awards. Wise thinking tells me though that the buyer of the said bikes is likely to be the taxpayer in one form or other.

I stayed tuned to see how long it takes one or other of the sports organisations around town to stump up for the next bikes.

Your whole rant about darwinism and evolution failing is just stupid.

Someone, who obviously has more money then you, probably makes a living or part living through their bikes, they get stolen so you say it’s their fault?

Race car’s cost hundred’s of thousands of dollars, they still get stolen, so it is now the owner’s fault for having a life?

Your comments are what is wrong with the world, the people who should be being slagged off are the lowly maggot infested, dead coyote scrotum’s that can’t keep their hand’s to themselves.

Thoroughly Smashed12:32 pm 10 Jul 11

merlin bodega said :

Eighteen grand for two bikes!?! Evolution fails us again.

Methinks you don’t understand what evolution means.

merlin bodega said :

…has to be the trifecta of Darwin awards.

Except that the (ex-)owner of these bikes hasn’t taken himself out of the gene pool…

merlin bodega said :

Spending that much on two bikes, leaving them in a dark place at night

Agree with the poor decision of leaving 18K worth of bikes unattended in public, but it was at 930am, not at night in a dark place. By the sounds of it, it was daylight on a busy intersection. Being the entry road for the nursuries in that area, there would have been a few car driving by on Beltana Road.

merlin bodega10:08 am 10 Jul 11

Eighteen grand for two bikes!?! Evolution fails us again. Spending that much on two bikes, leaving them in a dark place at night expecting them to be there when you get back and expecting the ACT police to find them has to be the trifecta of Darwin awards. Wise thinking tells me though that the buyer of the said bikes is likely to be the taxpayer in one form or other.

I stayed tuned to see how long it takes one or other of the sports organisations around town to stump up for the next bikes.

Frustrating that this type of opportunistic theft is more frequent in Canberra; If it were me I probably wouldn’t leave close to $20k worth of carbon-fibre machinery strapped to the roof of my parked car.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.