Usually that’s about nine months but let physical development rather than age be your guide

Usually that’s about nine months, but let physical development rather than age be your guide.”RoSPA’s advice is that rear-mounted child seats are much safer than those mounted on the handlebars, which can alter the weight balance of your bike so much that it becomes difficult to steer.Seats with the BS EN 14344 safety mark are designed to carry children who weigh between nine and 22 kilos – roughly nine months to five years of age.The most common injuries suffered by children riding in bike seats are when feet get caught in the spokes of the wheel. “Riding with your children, from the earliest possible age, is the best way to introduce them to cycling,” says Yannick Read, of CTC, the cycling organisation.”An infant is old enough for a child seat when she can sit up unsupported – like in the middle of the floor. Parents sending kids on the second and third tiers need to be happy about their children riding on roads, albeit supervised.If you want to give younger kids a headstart, get them used to cycling while they’re still little. A full list of training providers is available at www.ctc .uk, or by calling 0870 607 0415.There’s no requirement to take a test at the end of each stage of the course, though instructors will give children feedback on their performance – and advise parents on whether their kids are ready to move on to the next tier.But children do get a certificate to say they’ve had the training, as well as a set of high-visibility stickers they can proudly plaster to bikes and bags.There is no minimum age for training, though children will need to be able to ride a bike. Level one covers the basics – including how to get on and off a bike – in an off-road setting. The next two levels cover more advanced skills and teach cyclists to cope with a range of different traffic conditions.The courses cost around £15 a session, though many local authorities offer free or subsidised places.

And while parents might not like the idea of yet another test for kids already facing Sats practically before they make it out of nappies, the new National Standard for Cycle Training is worth having.Roger Vincent, of RoSPA, says that while no research has been done specifically into whether cycle training reduces accident rates, there is clear evidence that “it improves knowledge, attitudes and observed behaviour”.The National Standard is a three-tier training scheme devised by Cycling England and the Department for Transport. The basic idea was that if you could weave in and out of a line of strategically placed traffic cones you’d get a certificate to say you were safe on a bike. It was hardly the ideal preparation for real-life roads on which motorists wage a daily war of attrition against pedal power, but for generations of children the tests were better than nothing.
Happily, cycle training has been comprehensively overhauled in recent times. Remember cycling proficiency tests? For cyclists of a certain age, the tests were a rite of passage – a bizarre ritual conducted on school playgrounds by someone from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) and any teacher who happened to have a free period at the time. You get 260bhp and a 0-60mph sprint in three seconds and that’s enough to justify its existence.I’d prefer the 1.4 version, which gives you most of the thrills for considerably less, about £15,000: a fine alternative to the dearly departed MG TF.It might frighten the odd pigeon, too.. If it only wants to sell 500 cars a year, and it can sell these CSRs for £37,000 a pop, I don’t suppose that lack of modernity matters really. A few years ago Caterham tried to reclothe its sports car and the attempt, which was called the “21″, flopped.

The Caterham looks the business all right, but it doesn’t look as aggressive or brutish as its competitors. The Caterham’s bug eyes look just a little bit too cute, too much like a 2CV, say, to suit the pit-bull generation.Which is a shame. Not archaic like a Morgan, but a bit quaint.Now, those who know their cars know that this can devour virtually any Porsche or Ferrari or TVR, but I’m not sure it’s sending that message out visually to the non-cognoscenti. But even though this car has got every possible bit of modern technology, from its inboard F1-style front suspension to the carbon-fibre seats, it looks old-fashioned. Funnily enough, the Caterham firm was itself recently bought out by ex-managers from the Lotus Group and production will soon be moving to better premises, but still near the old factory. The roof is a canvas hood top riveted to the body and which, with a little practice, ought to be easy to use, but it defeated me more than once.No suprise, this minimalism, because the CSR is a descendant of the original Lotus 6 of 1953, as developed by the legendary Colin Chapman, and his slightly more civilised Lotus Seven of 1957 Rights to the Seven were sold to Caterham cars in 1973. Note the absence of doors, for example, replaced by detachable plastic flaps No wings either, or even a proper boot.

By the way, there are no “driver aids” such as antilock brakes or stability control – you’re on your own out there.The “bodywork” is just the closest wrapping of metal (mostly aluminium) they can get away with legally. There’s a powerful Cosworth engine, some sophisticated suspension bits, four wheels and, er, that’s about it, except for the glass-fibre tub for the two occupants ( if you’re big-boned think carefully about the sacrifices you’ll have to make if you want to enjoy the Caterham experience). It gets photographed a lot.
The problem with this Caterham, though, is that it doesn’t look the part To most people, I reckon I think it looks wonderful It represents the opposite of silly, fussy “styling” This is about function. Like those distinctive looks, it’s fun, that racket, in a bird-frightening sort of way, but you have to get very used to the attention it attracts.

You sit very low in this rare little British sports car (only 500 a year are made), and the exhaust is fitted to the side of the car, inches from your ears. What’s blue, does 155mph and scares pigeons? A Caterham CSR, that’s what Scares its driver too. I should explain about the pigeons, which I didn’t mean to scare, exactly, but a blip on the Caterham’s throttle produces a backfire that is so spectacularly burbly and loud that it’s like the noisiest Guy Fawkes night that you (or indeed a pigeon) have ever experienced. This explains why a Nissan Bluebird was nudging £200 and another had bid up to £89 with a day to go.I did find a free caravan, but you also had to bid for a Chrysler Grand Voyager which had risen to £3,800.