Download “Language Matters: Non-standard and adapted cycles” as a Word document

Download “Language Matters: Non-standard and adapted cycles” as a pdf

In brief

We use words and images to communicate, educate and persuade.

Using precise, inclusive words and images helps to improve the chances that strategies, policies and schemes will be created in ways that meet everyone’s accessibility needs.

We believe that saying “standard cycles” and “non-standard cycles” instead of “bikes” and “adapted bikes” helps designers, decision-makers, campaigners and members of the public to understand and work towards inclusive access for people using a full range of cycles and mobility aids in all public spaces.

Cycles vs bikes

“But everyone knows what I mean when I say “bike” – why be picky about it?”

It’s fine to use whatever words you like in casual conversation – many of us who use non-standard cycles will often call our cycles “bikes”, even when they’re technically not!

But designers and decision-makers will only generally plan schemes to be accessible for the types of people they remember to think about. For cycling, people will too often be thinking of a non-disabled working-age man travelling alone, without luggage, wearing lycra and on a sporty bike, because that’s the stereotype of a person who cycles in the UK – but this stereotype excludes most of the population!

So when we’re campaigning or working on policies and schemes, we need to be really careful to make sure that everyone involved knows about and remembers to design for the full diversity of people who cycle and the types of cycles we use.

If we always create schemes to include Disabled people using non-standard cycles and travelling in accompanied groups, then our schemes will work for everyone else, too.

That means making sure we’re saying “cycles” not “bikes” when we’re working – and it means making sure non-standard cycles and both visibly and invisibly Disabled people are included in all images, too.

Standard vs non-standard cycles

Yes, “standard cycle” does just mean a bike! And yes, it’s a clunky term.

Saying “standard cycles” instead of “bikes” reminds everyone that non-standard cycles exist, and that users of non-standard cycles, including Disabled people, must always be included in all strategy, planning and designs.

When we talk about “bikes”, it’s very easy for many people to forget about those who need to use non-standard cycles – including trikes, recumbents, tandems, triplets, cargo cycles, side-by-sides, tag-a-longs, trailers, and more. Many people who use non-standard cycles are Disabled, and many have other minoritised or protected characteristics too.

Adapted cycles vs non-standard cycles

“Adapted” and “non-standard” mean different things, although the division between the terms is sometimes not completely clear.

Both non-standard and standard cycles can be adapted or non-adapted.

Different Disabled and non-disabled people use a huge range of standard, non-standard, adapted and non-adapted cycles.

• Non-standard cycles are any cycle which isn’t “an ordinary bike”.

That includes any cycle that is made to carry more than one person, any cycle with more (or less) than two wheels and any cycle with a non-upright seating position. Trikes, tandems and recumbents are all non-standard cycle types. A non-standard cycle will often be used exactly as it comes from a manufacturer – it will not be adapted by its user in any way, other than maybe altering the seat settings.

• Adapted cycles are cycles of any kind that have been altered away from the default shop or manufacturer settings.

Adaptations can be as simple as adding stabilisers, a child seat or rear-view mirror, or can be more technical changes such as moving brakes and gear levers all to one side. Many adaptations are used by both Disabled and non-disabled people – including e-assist conversions, electric gear shifters, crank shorteners and more.

Wheels for Wellbeing Language Matters

The Wheels for Wellbeing Language Matters series provides information and guidance on terms that are important for equitable active travel. We need campaigners, decision-makers and designers to understand these ideas so we can develop the policies and infrastructure that will result in equal mobility for all.