It took three weeks before someone tried to nick my main bike after I got it. I tried to make my spare bike (http://lethargic-man.dreamwidth.org/318460.html) look less nickable, and someone still tried to make off with the front wheel the first time I went out in the evening with it, before discovering it was locked to the frame. (I discovered when I found the quick-release lever open halfway home: I had checked it was closed before initially setting out.)
Shiny new bikes are nice, but attract magpies: Make sure you've got good locks, preferably a high-security D-lock and a chain long enough to go through both wheels, the frame, and around a lamppost.
Yes, I have a beastly D-lock for it (ergonomically speaking I much prefer chains; but they are less secure). I suspect I should get a second for securing the front wheel.
I did take the precaution of not having quick release wheels.
Yes, quick-release also means quick-nick... unless you've got the quick-release spindles bluepork has: they only open when they're upside-down. When the bike is locked, it can't be turned over, so the wheels can't be removed. Cunning, eh?
Ah, not having a choice is annoying. I had all the choices; which at times was a little overwhelming (what? there are different sorts of peddle? what kind? well, er, the cheap kind?)
A friend of mine has the Abus Bordo Granit for his moderately-high-end bike. It looks like a sensible compromise: less rigid than a D-lock, but more secure than a chain.
Admittedly I'm aware that, in security engineering, there's a huge gulf between "looks more secure" and "is more secure". Though I'm then also aware that "looks more secure to a potential bike thief" may be enough to stop your bike straying.
Actually my top priority in bike-lock technology is that I need to have a 'sold secure gold rated' lock in order to keep my insurance company happy. (and that one isn't; although some chains are they are really very heavy chains)... I'm not really convinced that these locks are genuinely better than other locks, but they surely can't be worse?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-20 08:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-20 08:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-20 09:19 pm (UTC)And a new lock?
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-20 09:39 pm (UTC)shiny!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 10:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:11 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 08:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 09:09 am (UTC)Shiny new bikes are nice, but attract magpies: Make sure you've got good locks, preferably a high-security D-lock and a chain long enough to go through both wheels, the frame, and around a lamppost.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 09:43 am (UTC)I did take the precaution of not having quick release wheels.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 09:47 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 09:52 am (UTC)I don't really have any use for QR; the wheels come off only rarely and having to use the hex key isn't exactly a hardship.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 09:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 10:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 12:18 pm (UTC)Admittedly I'm aware that, in security engineering, there's a huge gulf between "looks more secure" and "is more secure". Though I'm then also aware that "looks more secure to a potential bike thief" may be enough to stop your bike straying.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-08-21 12:28 pm (UTC)