New Rider: Hyrbid or Comfort, Trek or Raleigh - Help!
Rich Clark
> I want to start riding this season. I'd ride in my neighborhood's
> streets and sidewalks, and on pretty well-paved bike paths in our
> local parks.
Please don't ride on the sidewalk; it's the most dangerous place for an
adult on a bike. Often illegal in commercial districts, too.
> Maybe some gravel paths and across a field or two
> occasionally. There's no place where I live where I'd be riding down
> mountains, over tree roots, across rivers, etc. I'd like to be able
> to go some distance too, and maybe pick up some occasional speed down
> a long stretch.
[snip]
> I'm getting tangled by the comfort vs hybrid marketing - which is for
> me? I still am thinking hybrid. 7100 vs 7200? Should I be looking
> at Raleigh, and if so which ones?
Hybrids are appropriate for riders who will stick mostly to pavement but are
unwilling to buy a road bike. The Treks are fine. Raleigh's equivalent bikes
are indeed the "C" bikes (C30, C40 etc; Raleigh's "C" is for "Cross;" they
don't use the term "hybrid," and they don't seem to understand that the rest
of the cycling world means "cyclocross" when they say "cross"). Raleigh's
comfort bikes are "SCxx" (for "sport comfort"); Trek's are the Navigator
series.
The distinguishing feature of a hybrid is that it has 700c wheels, the same
diameter as a road bike, vs. the 26" wheels of a mountain or comfort bike.
However, Trek's and Raleigh's hybrids, especially at the low end, tend to be
very similar to comfort bikes except for the wheel size.
The two worst things about the typical entry-level hybrid, including the
Trek 7200 and the Raleigh C40, are the use of a cheap suspension fork
(instead of a good chro-moly rigid fork) and a wide, plush, springy saddle.
Suspension forks offer little benefit when riding on pavement, and instead
simply introduce extra weight and maintenance issues (especially the cheap
ones on these bikes). Cushy saddles cause much chafing and soreness in most
riders as they begin to extend the time and distance of their rides.
Fortunately, saddles are easily replaced.
Most manufacturers -- Trek, Raleigh, Specialized, Giant, Cannondale,
Bianchi, etc. -- make hybrids. It's a very competitive market segment. More
expensive hybrids tend to take on more of the characteristics of road bikes;
they're lighter, with more aero wheels and thinner tires; they often have
clipless pedals and serious saddles; they have fewer "comfort" features.
It pays to shop around, and as you do I urge you to pay more attention to
the level of service offered by the shops than to the specific features of
comparable bikes. The most important feature of any bike is that it fits
you, and even in a hybrid fit is more than just standover clearance. The
geometry of the bike should put you in the proper seating position relative
to the bottom bracket when you legs are extended correctly. The reach to the
handlebars should be appropriate to your torso and arm length. Etcetera. Be
wary of a shop that tries to sell you a wrong-size frame just because it's
what's in stock.
As for the Treks and Raleigh, I'd generally agree with the shops that the
bottom-of-the-line bikes (7100 and C30), while perfectly adequate, are a
noticeable step down from the next models in their respective lines... but
I'd add that in the long run it's the after-sale service provided by the
shops that makes the real difference.
Many people get back into cycling via hybrids and discover a passion for it.
It's hard to feel passionate about something that hurts, however, and other
than the "happy pain" of sore muscles that are getting much-needed exercise,
cycling shouldn't be painful. Most of the pain people get from riding comes
from ill-fitting bikes, which they then hang up in the garage and forget
about. Don't let that happen; find a shop that won't let you leave on less
than a perfectly-fitting bike.
Best,
RichC
Peter Cole
news:5sUb8.51988$X64.17...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
>
>
> Hybrids are appropriate for riders who will stick mostly to pavement but are
> unwilling to buy a road bike.
[great post snipped]
Wow! What a great post! Have you ever thought of writing for a magazine? Of
course not a cycling magazine, your post is much to informative and accurate for
them...
Rich Clark
"Peter Cole" <pete...@nospamatallmediaone.net> wrote in message
news:U4Yb8.9700$jj4.8...@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net...
> Wow! What a great post! Have you ever thought of writing for a magazine?
Of
> course not a cycling magazine, your post is much to informative and
accurate for
> them...
Thanks. I do write, but not about bikes; it's not my field of professional
expertise.
RichC
Rich Clark
"Erik" <s...@the.bottom.com> wrote in message
news:3c706c0...@news-central.giganews.com...
> One more question...you say:
>
> > As for the Treks and Raleigh, I'd generally agree with the shops that
the
> > bottom-of-the-line bikes (7100 and C30), while perfectly adequate, are a
> > noticeable step down from the next models in their respective lines...
>
> When you say "noticable"...what types of things would I notice? Like
> smoother braking/shifting, or wearing out of components, or...? I
> don't mind paying an extra $80 to go up to the 7200, but I want to
> feel good in the fact that I'm not getting snowed :-)
The biggest difference that you'll notice (in both the Treks and the
Raleighs) is that the low-end bikes (C30 and 7100) have 7-speed cassettes
and bottom-of-the-line rear derailleurs, while the next ones up have the
8-speed cassette and corresponding derailleur upgrade. There are other
drivetrain differences that might contribute to smoother shifting or
longevity, but frankly I wouldn't worry about premature parts wear on any of
these bikes -- that's why you're establishing a relationship with a bike
shop, and buying a brand name bike rather than going to *Mart.
It's too bad, IMO, that some of the money for the step up goes into that
silly suspension fork, but the damn things are nearly impossible to avoid
anymore so maybe I should just shut up about it. <g>
When you allocate your budget, be sure to provide for a few important
accessories; often you can get worthwhile discounts on these things if you
buy them together with the bike. For example, you should always be able to
fix a flat (so a pump, a patch kit, a spare tube, and tire irons are
needed). A water bottle and bottle cage (or two) are critical if you're
riding in summer heat. A method of carrying a few tools and whatever else
you always take along. Riding gloves (perhaps not a necessity, but I find
them so). There are lots of other useful accessories, but that'll get you
started.
RichC
Preston Crawford
> Wow! What a great post! Have you ever thought of writing for a magazine? Of
> course not a cycling magazine, your post is much to informative and accurate for
> them...
Not cliche or soundbite-riddled enough to write for Bicycling Magazine.
:-)
Preston
Preston Crawford
> The two worst things about the typical entry-level hybrid, including the
> Trek 7200 and the Raleigh C40, are the use of a cheap suspension fork
I think this is one key to remember, for sure. A lot of the low-end
suspension forks seem to have problems. When I bought my hybrid, a Trek
7500fx, I specifically bought the model that came with the rigid fork.
Partly because I knew it would be stronger and more hassle-free and partly
because I feel I'm getting an overall better value if they're not charging
me, in part, for the implied value of a cheap suspension fork.
Preston
Rich Clark
"Preston Crawford" <pres...@REMOVESPAMBLOCKcrawfordsolutions.com> wrote in
message news:slrna711kn....@serpentor.cobrala...
And it's one of those odd marketing-driven phenomena that you can get a
rigid fork on the bottom-of-the-line model (because the bike is too "cheap"
to come with such an upscale feature), or on the top-of-the-line model
(where a rigid fork is a performance feature, "just like our racing bikes"),
but not on any of the models in between.
It makes you wonder if the manufacturers have any faith at all in their
dealers' ability to explain things to their customers.
RichC
Christopher R. Law
>"low end". To me, entry level is about $250 to $350 - NOT $450 and
>above.
Considering how much time you will be spending on the bike, an extra $100
really is not all that material over the 5-10 years that you will ride the
bike.
If you can wait about a month, many LBS's have spring sales where they
introduce their new 2002 models. 2001 models are offered at a reduced price -
that $450 model will be on sale for $375 or less.
Be flexible about brandnames. Most of the major decent brands - Trek,
Cannondale, Raleigh etc, offer hybrids that are pretty much the same at this
price range. Instead look for consistent use of the same grade components
throughout the bike. By components I mean deraileurs, cranks and brakes. Spend
a little time at the Shimano website looking at the mountain
bike/comfort-recreational component sets so you know the different names for
the entry level vs medium priced components.
http://bike.shimano.com/comfort/index.asp
However, the most important thing is fit. The basic bike must fit you and it
must be adjusted to further fine tune it for you. If the store help is willing
to let us wheel the bike out of the store without doing this adjustment, run -
do not walk - out of there without the bike. They should spend half to one hour
adjusting it for you and should ask you to wait to pick up the bike in a couple
of days so they can do a final inspection and tuneup. They should also ask you
to return the bike in 30 days to do an inspection and readjustment. Cables
stretch and bolts work loose.
While you are waiting for the sale, read John Allen's Street Smarts. You can
link to an on-line version at:
Bill & Barbara Ruh
central.giganews.com:
> Based on a visit to a LBS, it sounds like I don't want a true mountain
> bike, but rather a hybrid (a road bike isn't the style or ride I'm
> going for). So they showed me a Trek 7100 and 7200, and pushed me
> towards the 7200 based on the quality of components. Not sure how
> much of a real-world difference there would be?
>
> Then I visited another LBS shop who carries Raleigh. He showed me the
> C30 and C40, which looked good. But later I found out these are
> "comfort" bikes, which I guess aren't the same class as the Trek
> hybrids. So I don't even know if I should be looking at those.
>
> I'm getting tangled by the comfort vs hybrid marketing - which is for
> me? I still am thinking hybrid. 7100 vs 7200? Should I be looking
> at Raleigh, and if so which ones?
Last summer I looked at a 2001 Trek 7300 and a 2002 Raleigh C30 (both rigid
fork). The Trek had better components and was more expensive, but
surprisingly, I liked the Raleigh better. Perhaps the biggest difference
was that shop that set up the Raleigh (Harris, btw) did a better job of
fitting it and finding a seat that I liked. I did family rides (5-15 road
miles) and even commuted on and off (38 miles round trip). No regrets,
especially at that price. I like the rapid-rise (low-normal) rear
derailer; I appreciate help from the spring when downshifting more than
upshifting. It is not a fast bike (I averaged 14.1mph to 15.9mph
commuting), but that may say more about the rider than the bike. :-)
For modest riding, I'd focus more on fit and feel than brand or segment or
components...
--
Peace,
Bill Ruh
Brillig
central.giganews.com:
> I want to start riding this season. I'd ride in my neighborhood's
> streets and sidewalks, and on pretty well-paved bike paths in our
> local parks. Maybe some gravel paths and across a field or two
> occasionally. There's no place where I live where I'd be riding down
> mountains, over tree roots, across rivers, etc. I'd like to be able
> to go some distance too, and maybe pick up some occasional speed down
> a long stretch.
>
> Based on a visit to a LBS, it sounds like I don't want a true mountain
> bike, but rather a hybrid (a road bike isn't the style or ride I'm
> going for).
That last phrase is the key. What is it about a road bike that you don't
want? From what you describe in the first paragraph, I would have put you
on a road bike (but not a racing bike -- something with a more relaxed
geometry, something closer to a touring bike).
To me, a hybrid is a great starter bike. Gives you lots of flexibility,
costs very little, and you can learn what you are doing before you spend
money on a good bike.
> So they showed me a Trek 7100 and 7200, and pushed me
> towards the 7200 based on the quality of components. Not sure how
> much of a real-world difference there would be?
Someone mentioned how important fit is because if the bike doesn't fit
right, you won't want to ride. Well, I would say the same about
components. Believe me, if everytime you ride you are getting frustrated
with shifts not happening correctly, the chain jumping off the rings, etc.
you're going to loose your desire to ride.
I might avoid the C30/40. I bought a 1999 C200 and my wife got a 2000 C40.
I couldn't be happier with mine. No suspension anywhere, adequate
components that just need to be tuned from time to time. The C40 is a pain
in the butt. I tune that thing constantly and after two rides it's not
shifting right again. As soon as we started doing rides over 20 miles we
had to replace the large cushy saddle.
Meanwhile my C200 is still stock and I'm happy with it. Unfortunately, now
a C200 is full of suspension and a *way* more relaxed geometry.
> Then I visited another LBS shop who carries Raleigh. He showed me the
> C30 and C40, which looked good. But later I found out these are
> "comfort" bikes, which I guess aren't the same class as the Trek
> hybrids. So I don't even know if I should be looking at those.
>
> I'm getting tangled by the comfort vs hybrid marketing - which is for
> me? I still am thinking hybrid. 7100 vs 7200? Should I be looking
> at Raleigh, and if so which ones?
Ignore the branding and get to know what you are looking for. Understand
the different geometries and components. Figure out what you really will
be using it for, forget about style and buy the bike that best fits your
plans.
~
Brillig
Change yipee to yahoo to reply
ilovebritishbeef
> I'm getting tangled by the comfort vs hybrid marketing - which is for
> me? I still am thinking hybrid. 7100 vs 7200? Should I be looking
> at Raleigh, and if so which ones?
Test ride them both. When I compared them ~1.5 months ago, I found that
the Raleighs gave a more upright position, which I didn't like.
-Mike
Preston Crawford
> I'd just as well do w/o the suspension, but I'd have to "bottom out"
> and compromise other features as well.
>
> Wow, I thought this would be pretty simple, too :-)
I'm not sure what you mean exactly. All I'm saying is to stay away from
the suspension forks because my experience has been that they cut
corners on other parts of the bike, because of the perceived value of
having a suspension fork, when really the cheaper suspension fork isn't
worth it.
It is true, though, that at the shops where I go you'd be hard pressed
to find a hybrid bike for less than $600. Same thing with road bikes. I
know there are shops where this "might" be different, such as the
Performance store, but I'm not certain.
All the same, another approach might be to go for a mountain bike.
Depending on what you truly want from this bike, a mountain bike might
fit the bill with some modifications.
Preston
Pierre
would probably end up liking a nice, medium-level touring bike a lot more in
the long run. You should have a look at "expedition" style touring bikes
under $1000. These are basically very similar to hybrids except they have
better wheels, better components, sometimes the same frame, but road bike
drop bars instead of mountain bike bars. But don't let that scare you off.
These bikes often have adjustable height stems of some form, and, if you can
get the bars even with the seat, or even a bit higher if you like, you
basically get the same hand position as the hybrid would give you, plus
several more. These touring bikes aren't meant to stretch you out on the
torture rack like a racing road bike might feel to you. They are sort of
like hybrids with drop bars - which for many, may very well be the best of
both worlds.
Pierre
Rich Clark
> See, that's just it - I need to feel good about what I'm buying for
> "low end". To me, entry level is about $250 to $350 - NOT $450 and
> above. I know we can extoll the virtues of a well built bike for that
> kind of money, but that seems like a lot to spend for a beginner. It
> feels like, in my price range, that I'm already having to make
> compromises. Maybe I'm just getting used to the $$ in this market,
> but I thought I was doing good in not settling for a department store
> bike!
>
> I'd just as well do w/o the suspension, but I'd have to "bottom out"
> and compromise other features as well.
>
> Wow, I thought this would be pretty simple, too :-)
Perspectives change. In a newsgroup like this, you're talking with people
who spend, easily, 10-15 hours a week or more on their bikes, riding many
thousands of miles per year. From that point of view, subtle differences are
worth talking about and a few hundred dollars is trivial compared to the
importance of our bikes in our lives.
It's easy to forget how expensive $300 seems to a newcomer. In my initial
replies I tried not to get into this, because you were being quite clear
what you wanted -- an entry-level hybrid, not a road bike, for $300 or so --
and I think that's a legitimate thing to want. And if you find yourself
hooked on riding a couple of years from now, it's not too much to have spent
on a bike you choose to replace with something better.
Hybrids, as currently marketed, are sort of like "comfort touring bikes." A
touring bike is a road bike with drop handlebars and none of those
suspension components, but like a hybrid it has a longer wheelbase, beefier
wheels and tires, a more relaxed geometry designed for stability rather than
speed, triple chainrings and gearing designed to get you up hills, and
places to mount fenders and racks. There are varieties of such bikes, for
loaded touring, for light ("credit-card") touring, for general non-race road
riding; road bikes exist in a continuum of designs with carbon-fiber racers
at one end and extremely utilitarian loaded-touring models at the other.
I didn't go into this initially because there are no new touring bikes of
any kind in (or really even near) your price range, and because you seemed
quite certain that you don't want a road bike. But if that changes, buying a
good brand-name hybrid and maintaining it well will help assure you get a
good part of your investment back if you decide to replace it later.
This is a perfectly legitimate strategy. The bikes you're considering will
take you from the "new-rider-just-getting-his-legs-back" stage to the
"I-think-this-bike-is-holding-me-back" stage quite nicely. From there you'll
be in a much better position, just from having ridden for a while, from
having been "bike conscious" and reading and talking and watching other
riders, to know what you want as a next step.
If you stay focused on the important thing -- that the bike fit properly --
you can safely set your budget and make a choice based on how well the
dealer treats you and how hard he works on getting the bike fitted.
I wouldn't worry about spending more money on a better bike if that feels
wrong to you; the money you spend on a 7200 or some such won't be wasted. I
wouldn't worry about not being able to avoid the suspension fork, either; it
won't hurt anything, and the dealer will fix it if it breaks.
Focus on fit, and then focus on the main thing, which is getting out there
and having a good time.
Cheers,
RichC
Ted Elston
wrote:
I ride a 1999 Trek 7200 hybrid-enjoy it thoroughly-it has been a
very low maintenance bike-( keep the chain clean and lubed)
When I ride I normally do 15-25 miles.
It has been a very comfortable bike-postion is great and my LBS is
great. They did a excellent job of fitting ( Which is very important).
We take them with us when we travel-last year we did the Cape Cod
rails to trail-enjoyed it very much.
This year they will go with us as we travel to Canada and Alaska.
Enjoy whatever you get.
Ted
Pierre
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2002 12:39:35 -0500, "Pierre" <pier...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >When you really get down to it, if you think you would like a hybrid, you
> >would probably end up liking a nice, medium-level touring bike a lot more
in
> >the long run. You should have a look at "expedition" style touring bikes
> >under $1000.
> >
>
>
I know, but, if you're like most of us, a couple of months down the road,
you will probably wish you had bought a more expensive model to begin with -
not that there's anything wrong with the cheaper one : )
I wouldn't overestimate the resale value of a slightly used hybrid.
Pierre
Preston Crawford
> To be honest, the hybrid looks more sporty and fun. Again, it's the
> look and style that appeals to me.
It may "look" more sporty and fun, but IMHO the road bike IS more sporty
and fun.
Preston
(Proud owner of a Trek 1000 road bike and a Trek 7500fx hybrid, which is
unfortunately gathering dust except on the days the 1000 is in the shop
or when he has to haul a lot of stuff to work)
Ken Steinhoff
>On Mon, 18 Feb 2002 20:47:53 -0500, "Pierre" <pier...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>I know, but, if you're like most of us, a couple of months down the road,
>>you will probably wish you had bought a more expensive model to begin with -
>>not that there's anything wrong with the cheaper one : )
>>
>
>I know, I say that half in jest. Just like any other hobby or
>recreation - the prices shock the newcomer to the field!
Erik,
I had to smile when I saw the suggestion for you to
immediately move to a sub-$1,000 (barely) touring bike.
I remember well the sticker shock I had when I bought a Trek
Navigator 300 for $300. Geez, that was about four times what I used to
buy a bike for at yard sales.
I put 5,200 miles on it before I moved up to a used road bike
so I could spend less time in the saddle covering a given distance.
Buy a less expensive, well-fitting starter bike. Ride it until
you have explored everything that it - and you - can do. By then,
you'll have a better idea of the type of riding you like and the kind
of bike that will do it most efficiently.
That's not knocking touring bikes. In a couple of years,
that's the direction I'm heading. Sooner, if any of these darned
lottery tickets hit.
Kent Kester
Any opinions on the higher-end Raleigh hybrids--C500 and C700?
Kent Kester