help with bike selection?
Pete Greenwood
more experienced cyclists will be willing to help me figure it all out.
Here's my story: I'm 36 years old, 6' tall, 215 lbs., and carrying about 25
lbs. of excess baggage that I'd like to shed. I'm not really a workout kind
of guy but I have always enjoyed riding my bike around town here in Chicago.
So a few months ago I tuned up the old Rockhopper Comp and started hitting
the streets and park bike paths. I've been riding 40-50 miles a week since
the spring, and am already beginning to feel healthier.
I'd like to start increasing the distance of my rides, but the discomfort of
the mountain bike is really hindering me. I feel too hunched over [spare
tire gets in the way], and have been experiencing some hand, elbow and seat
pain.
So I've decided it's time to get a new bike. I plan to do some test rides
this week, and would like to be armed with a bit of knowledge in advance.
I've set my maximum budget at $1000. I have all the accessories I need
already, and will be keeping the MTN bike as a spare/loaner.
I ride mostly on asphalt and crushed paths. The closest I ever get to
off-roading is some minor city potholes and curb jumping; cutting across the
grass from one path to another; and the occasional sand-blown beach path.
My distances range from quick trips to the store, to around 15-mile park
cruises. I want to increase my range to around 25 miles.
I'd like a ride that is comfortable and fairly upright, but I don't want
anything too heavy or slow. I'd like my bike to ride smoothly and quietly,
and be generally reliable and durable. Lastly, I'd like a bike that makes
it a little easier to keep up with some of my younger, healthier friends
[mostly MTN bikers].
I don't need anything flashy or loaded with gimmickry, and I'm not stuck on
brand names. I just want the best, most appropriate bike that my budget will
afford.
So, now that you know the story of my life, here's what I'd like to know:
What style of bike should I be looking for?
What materials?
What features?
Which brands/models?
What else should I know?
Any help would be very much appreciated. Happy trails!
Pete
Rosey
> So I've decided it's time to get a new bike. I plan to do some test rides
> this week, and would like to be armed with a bit of knowledge in advance.
>
> I'd like a ride that is comfortable and fairly upright, but I don't want
> anything too heavy or slow. I'd like my bike to ride smoothly and quietly,
> and be generally reliable and durable. Lastly, I'd like a bike that makes
> it a little easier to keep up with some of my younger, healthier friends
> [mostly MTN bikers].
>
> I don't need anything flashy or loaded with gimmickry, and I'm not stuck on
> brand names. I just want the best, most appropriate bike that my budget will
> afford.
>
> Any help would be very much appreciated. Happy trails!
>
> Pete
Bicycling Magazine had an article in their Jan-Feb. issue about a contest in
which 50 people were given Trek bicycles to use for 3 months. The people were
all levels of ability. For the most part they all really liked the bikes. I
can't remember the particular model, maybe someone else in this newsgroup can
contribute that, but I remember thinking that it was a good compromise for an
around town bike for a person who was into recreational cycling. And from what I
remember, is similar to what you are describing you want.
Can anyone add any info?
Good luck!
Nita
Claire Petersky
news:40D75922...@email.sjsu.edu...
> Pete Greenwood wrote:
>
> > So I've decided it's time to get a new bike. I plan to do some test
rides
> > this week, and would like to be armed with a bit of knowledge in
advance.
> >
> > I'd like a ride that is comfortable and fairly upright, but I don't want
> > anything too heavy or slow.
How upright do you have to be? I'm seeing you on a road bike with drop bars.
You can ride with your hands on the tops most of the time and be upright,
and only go down to the drops on descents. When you go to the bike store,
make sure they know you want to be in a more upright position for a lot of
your riding. They might make some adjustments in the bike (a spacer in the
headset?) to meet your needs.
> Bicycling Magazine had an article in their Jan-Feb. issue about a contest
in
> which 50 people were given Trek bicycles to use for 3 months. The people
were
> all levels of ability. For the most part they all really liked the bikes.
I
> can't remember the particular model, maybe someone else in this newsgroup
can
> contribute that, but I remember thinking that it was a good compromise for
an
> around town bike for a person who was into recreational cycling. And from
what I
> remember, is similar to what you are describing you want.
Nah, he's graduated from that sort of thing. He's going to keep his old
Rockhopper comp for mountain biking and maybe as his rain, around-town, or
commuter bike. But for his real rides, he's going to get a good, standard
road bike.
If I were you, Pete, I'd be looking at something like maybe a Jamis or
Giant, that don't have the cache of the fancier road bike brand names. I'd
go no lower than Shimano 105 components. Maybe something like this?
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/jamis/ventura.html. This will carry you
through your next level of cycling -- you'll ride this sort of bike for your
first metric century, and your first 100 mile century, no problem.
--
Warm Regards,
Claire Petersky
Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato and .net for .com
Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky
Reid Priedhorsky
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:05:03 +0000, Claire Petersky wrote:
>
> If I were you, Pete, I'd be looking at something like maybe a Jamis or
> Giant, that don't have the cache of the fancier road bike brand names.
> I'd go no lower than Shimano 105 components. Maybe something like
> this? http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/jamis/ventura.html. This will
> carry you through your next level of cycling -- you'll ride this sort
> of bike for your first metric century, and your first 100 mile
> century, no problem.
I second the recommendation for Jamis. I just bought a Jamis Aurora
(http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/jamis/aurora.html) and so far (100? 150?
miles) it's great. Not the lightest bike in the world, but it's solid
and plenty nimble. I am always surprised by how difficult it is to pick
up and carry (note however that this includes a great deal of junk in
the trunk bag, not just the bike). $730 which IMO was a good deal.
For me, spending the money to buy 105 was not necessary, but you should
consider the tradeoffs for yourself.
One suggestion I do have is to try to find a rear cassette that eschews
the very small cogs. 14 or mayyyybe 13 is the smallest I need, and I'd
rather have more choices in the middle range. Most riders that aren't
sure if they need 11 or 12-tooth cogs don't. However, this may require
an aftermarket cassette. Myself, I have my eye on one of Harris
Cyclery's 14-34 custom cassettes.
HTH
Reid
Pete Greenwood
> How upright do you have to be? I'm seeing you on a road bike with drop
bars.
> You can ride with your hands on the tops most of the time and be upright,
> and only go down to the drops on descents. When you go to the bike store,
> make sure they know you want to be in a more upright position for a lot of
> your riding. They might make some adjustments in the bike (a spacer in the
> headset?) to meet your needs.
>
Hi Claire. I'm not sure how upright I need to be. I guess I'll know better
after I've ridden a few different styles.
I know that I feel way too hunched over on my Rockhopper, which has a
particularly aggressive MTB stance [high saddle; long zero-rise stem]. I
don't like having to lean on my hands that much, and wish I was able to turn
my head a bit easier to see the city traffic around me.
I guess I always assumed that drop-bar road bikes were even more of a
'hunched' ride... for the athletic cyclist who wants the aerodynamics to go
really fast; and who doesn't need to worry about their gut getting in the
way. Plus, those skinny saddles look downright painful. Am I wrong?
I don't really have the true need for speed. I'm just looking for something
that's a bit more efficient on pavement than my heavy, fat-tire mountain
bike. I certainly won't rule out the drop-bar road bike until I try it; but
I must admit to being a bit skeptical on the comfort factor. Your thoughts
on this would be appreciated.
<s>
> If I were you, Pete, I'd be looking at something like maybe a Jamis or
> Giant...
<s>
Thanks for the tip. I took a look at their websites. I'm particularly
intrigued by the Jamis Coda, which seems to be basically a road bike with
flat handlebars. I'm wondering if this type of setup would give me the more
upright posture I'm looking for, while also offering less rolling resistance
than the MTB. Opinions?
Thanks again for your input.
Pete
Pete Greenwood
> I second the recommendation for Jamis. I just bought a Jamis Aurora
> (http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/jamis/aurora.html) and so far (100? 150?
> miles) it's great. Not the lightest bike in the world, but it's solid
> and plenty nimble. I am always surprised by how difficult it is to pick
> up and carry (note however that this includes a great deal of junk in
> the trunk bag, not just the bike). $730 which IMO was a good deal.
>
The extra weight on the bike's frame is nothing compared to the extra weight
on MY frame! Something tells me I could use something a bit more solid
until I trim down a bit.
> For me, spending the money to buy 105 was not necessary, but you should
> consider the tradeoffs for yourself.
>
So what are the tradeoffs? Does more money buy better quality components,
or just a few ounces less weight?
> One suggestion I do have is to try to find a rear cassette that eschews
> the very small cogs. 14 or mayyyybe 13 is the smallest I need, and I'd
> rather have more choices in the middle range. Most riders that aren't
> sure if they need 11 or 12-tooth cogs don't. However, this may require
> an aftermarket cassette. Myself, I have my eye on one of Harris
> Cyclery's 14-34 custom cassettes.
>
So are you saying I should sacrifice some top-end speed for a little more
'fine tuning'? I guess that makes sense... particularly for city riding,
where I never really get that much speed going anyways.
Thanks, Reid.
Pete
R15757
<< I know that I feel way too hunched over on my Rockhopper, which has a
particularly aggressive MTB stance [high saddle; long zero-rise stem]. I
don't like having to lean on my hands that much, and wish I was able to turn
my head a bit easier to see the city traffic around me. >>
You might try a rise bar, or a stem with some rise.
Buying a new bike is almost never a bad idea though. I would get an honest road
bike because you already have a trail bike.
Robert
David Kerber
peteS...@HAMpetegreenwood.com says...
From your description, I'd recommend a mid-range touring bike, such as a
Fuji Touring ($800). It has somewhat wider tires than a pure road bike,
making it easier to ride on the crushed stone paths and grass cut-
throughs. It has a rear rack, eyelets for fenders if you so choose, a
sturdy steel frame with comfortable, stable geometry and 27-speed
drivetrain with STI shifters. Because of the drivetrain, if you decide
you want to go faster all you need to do is remove the rack and put on
smaller, higher-pressure tires, and you've got a decent road bike for
riding with your faster friends or entering the occasional citizen's
race.
There are plenty of other bikes out there from reputable manufacturers
which would work just as well, but I have experience with the Fuji,
which is why I mentioned it.
--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
Claire Petersky
news:lbicnef9-66...@speakeasy.net...
> "Claire Petersky" <cpet...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> I know that I feel way too hunched over on my Rockhopper, which has a
> particularly aggressive MTB stance [high saddle; long zero-rise stem]. I
> don't like having to lean on my hands that much, and wish I was able to
turn
> my head a bit easier to see the city traffic around me.
Just because your handlebars have drops doesn't mean you have to use them
but a small percentage of the time. Most of the time you'll have your hands
on the tops. If you want to be in a more upright position, you can get your
handlebars raised. When I got my bike I had them do that. They also put a
shorter stem on the bike so I wouldn't have to lean too far to reach the
handlebars (I've got a short waist). I think if you shop at a bike shop that
*listens* to you (as opposed to pushes on you what they want to sell you),
and will take the time to fit the bike to you, you should be able to get
something comfortable that you don't feel "hunched" on, or have too much
weight on your hands.
> I guess I always assumed that drop-bar road bikes were even more of a
> 'hunched' ride... for the athletic cyclist who wants the aerodynamics to
go
> really fast; and who doesn't need to worry about their gut getting in the
> way.
You don't feel hunched, you feel elongated. Your back feels nicely stretched
out. If I've hurt my back with say, too much gardening -- I almost wrote,
"too much housework", but then you'd know I was making this all up -- going
for a ride feels good, because my back gets unkinked. The drop bars are
there because you might want different hand positions on a long ride. This
increases comfort, not decreases it.
Plus, there's nothing wrong with going really fast. Look, us middle-aged
ladies have to get our adreniline rushes somehow.
> Plus, those skinny saddles look downright painful. Am I wrong?
Again, the saddle has to fit. Many people find fat and padded saddles
painful, just as painful as you're imagining a skinny one to be. Finding the
right saddle for you is another part of the fitting process. On a recent
thread there was a discussion of how to measure how far apart your sit bones
are -- you might want to look at that. Finding a saddle that matches the
size of your heinie is important.
If you're riding all day, participating in an event like a century, you
don't want to be in an uncomfortable position for hours, you don't want your
tuchis rubbing on some sharp ass hatchet the wrong way all day. Road bikes
(as opposed to racing bikes) are meant to be all-day comfortable.
> I certainly won't rule out the drop-bar road bike until I try it; but
> I must admit to being a bit skeptical on the comfort factor.
Try it, you'll like it! Plus, you'll kick the ass of your mountain bike
riding friends. They'll eat your dust. Heh.
Badger_South
<peteS...@HAMpetegreenwood.com> wrote:
>Thanks for the tip. I took a look at their websites. I'm particularly
>intrigued by the Jamis Coda, which seems to be basically a road bike with
>flat handlebars. I'm wondering if this type of setup would give me the more
>upright posture I'm looking for, while also offering less rolling resistance
>than the MTB. Opinions?
>
>Thanks again for your input.
>
>Pete
I probably sound like a broken record on this but avoid the fork
suspensions. It adds weight and nothing else to the ride. Plus the forks
can eventually degrade, the rubber rot, etc.
-Badger
Reid Priedhorsky
>
> The extra weight on the bike's frame is nothing compared to the extra
> weight on MY frame! Something tells me I could use something a bit more
> solid until I trim down a bit.
Me too. ;) However, at your stated weight, any bike that isn't
stupid-light will work fine, and those are out of your price range anyway.
You don't need to worry about major parts breaking under you.
>> For me, spending the money to buy 105 was not necessary, but you should
>> consider the tradeoffs for yourself.
>
> So what are the tradeoffs? Does more money buy better quality
> components, or just a few ounces less weight?
As far as I know, both or either. In fact, once you get into the
very-high-end stuff, it's less durable because buyers at that level are
more interested in weight than durability. I'm not sure which upgrades get
you what, however.
I think that you may have to break your $1K limit to get 105 or better
*and* a decent frame. IMO, a good frame is more important because you can
always replace or upgrade parts later.
>> One suggestion I do have is to try to find a rear cassette that eschews
>> the very small cogs.
>
> So are you saying I should sacrifice some top-end speed for a little
> more 'fine tuning'? I guess that makes sense... particularly for city
> riding, where I never really get that much speed going anyways.
Basically, yes. But you'll be sacrificing top-end speed which is not
really useful to you anyway. I can briefly sprint at 30 MPH in 52x14. One
consideration is that if you spend a lot of time in the middle chainring
(I don't), you may want smaller cogs available. But at the same cadence as
before, in my middle chainring (42x14) I'd still be going 24 MPH.
You might check out: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/index.html
> Thanks, Reid.
Glad to help. I agree with the other comments about drop bars -- on the
road, you'll probably be happier once you get used to them. One big
advantage is the greater number of hand positions. I have three not
counting variations, and I can shift from two. This is a good comfort tool
after an hour in the saddle. Straight bars will give you one, or maybe two
if you add extensions. This is a good comfort tool after an hour in the
saddle. Another consideration is that if you get drop bars, and decide you
don't like them, you can swap in a straight bar, though this does cost
time and money. Going from straight to drops is also possible, but AFAICT
much less common.
Also, try these websites:
Sheldon Brown's fabulous bicyle pages (perhaps start with the Glossary):
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/articles.html
rec.bicycles.* FAQ:
http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/
HTH
Reid
Steve-o
>You might try a rise bar, or a stem with some rise.
I agree this would be a good and much cheaper first step, and one that
has worked for me so far.
I'm getting back into bicycling for health and fun despite my dodgy
wrist, knee, and neck. My first step was to spruce up my old, steel,
rigid Rockhopper by adding a stem with longer quill, shorter reach,
and higher rise. Then I installed North Road bars from Harris:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/handlebars.html
The bars plus shipping plus a used stem from Recycled Cycles put the
total bill at about $40.
So far my bicycling has been short-ish trips and relatively
non-strenuous in order to ease my way into the activity, and for my
needs this setup (with slick tires) fits the bill. The bars lack the
many hand positions of road bars, but the position offered is
supremely comfortable for trips of the duration that I ride. Road
bars might be in my future, but I won't go back to flat bars.
I was prepared and actually hoping to get some flak from bike snobs
for using these bars, but none has yet come. :(
Cheers,
Steve
Bernie
>
>
>Thanks for the tip. I took a look at their websites. I'm particularly
>intrigued by the Jamis Coda, which seems to be basically a road bike with
>flat handlebars. I'm wondering if this type of setup would give me the more
>upright posture I'm looking for, while also offering less rolling resistance
>than the MTB. Opinions?
>
>Thanks again for your input.
>
>Pete
>
I took a Jamis Coda for a test ride this spring. It's a pretty slick
bike to ride. I'd definitely consider it a nice city bike. Very
responsive, shifts well, slick tires for pavement. Fast too.
The feel was smooth and quick. I didn't buy it because I had my heart
set on a drop bar tourer, but still have thoughts... I'd say it would
make a fabulous commuting bike.
<legal disblamer> All bikes feel pretty good when they are brand new
and grit free.
Best regards, Bernie
Alan Braswell
> particularly intrigued by the Jamis Coda, which seems to be
> basically a road bike with flat handlebars. I'm wondering
> if this type of setup would give me the more upright
> posture I'm looking for, while also offering less rolling
> resistance than the MTB. Opinions?
As the baby boomers age, a market for "road bikes with flat
bars" has definitely begun to develop. For example, Shimano has
added a line of shifters specifically for road bikes with flat
bars. http://bike.shimano.com/Road/FlatHandleBar/index.asp
A number of brands are also carrying bikes outfitted this way.
The mail order Ibex brand Corrida series has been discussed on
this group lately and is such a bike. Link to:
http://www.ibexbikes.com/Stacks/Series_Corrida.html
Specialized also carries their Sirrus line of road bikes with
straight bars. Link to:
http://www.specialized.com/SBCBkFamily.jsp?sid=04Sirrus
Fuji has thier "Royale" model: http://www.fujibikes.com/
Felt has their SR Series: http://www.feltracing.com/SR71.html
And Cannondale has their Road Warrior series:
http://www.cannondale.com/
I'm sure there are others but these are some pages I have
bookmarked recently as I have been researching the same subject.
Drop bars are obviously still the standard for road bikes, but
it is fair to say that the straight bar has become an option for
those who want road bike performance but still prefer the more
upright position of a straight bar.
Hope this helps.
Best,
Alan
(remove the x's in the email address)
BanditManDan
> Bicycling Magazine had an article in their Jan-Feb. issue about a
> contest in which 50 people were given Trek bicycles to use for 3 months.
> The people were all levels of ability. For the most part they all really
> liked the bikes. I can't remember the particular model, maybe someone
> else in this newsgroup can contribute that, but I remember thinking that
> it was a good compromise for an around town bike for a person who was
> into recreational cycling. And from what I remember, is similar to what
> you are describing you want.
> Can anyone add any info?
> Good luck! Nita
The bike was a Trek 7300 Hybrid. I own one but rarely use it now that I
have a road bike. I started out with the 7300 as my primary bike but
quickly wanted more speed so I upgraded to a road bike. I ride it
occationally on slow family rides, overall it's a great bike but I
prefer a road bike for fast or longer rides.
Dan.
--
BanditManDan
> From your description, I'd recommend a mid-range touring bike, such as
> a Fuji Touring ($800). It has somewhat wider tires than a pure road
> bike, making it easier to ride on the crushed stone paths and grass
> cut- throughs. It has a rear rack, eyelets for fenders if you so
> choose, a sturdy steel frame with comfortable, stable geometry and 27-
> speed drivetrain with STI shifters. Because of the drivetrain, if you
> decide you want to go faster all you need to do is remove the rack and
> put on smaller, higher-pressure tires, and you've got a decent road
> bike for riding with your faster friends or entering the occasional
> citizen's race.
> There are plenty of other bikes out there from reputable manufacturers
> which would work just as well, but I have experience with the Fuji,
> which is why I mentioned it.
> --
> Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
> newsgroups if possible).
I would second this opinion.
I would stick with a road type bike with an adjustable stem for a
more upright position, many touring bikes come standard with this
type of stem.
I would suggest getting a road/touring bike rather than a hybrid due to
the fact that they are designed for long distance riding (comfortably)
and yet are still pretty fast and very durable. You don't want to make
the costly mistake of buying a hybrid to only find out later that you
would be happier with a better bike (been there done that).
In my opinion hybrids are good/comfortable for around 25 mile rides but
not much more.
Just my .02 worth.
Dan.
--