Buying a bicyle

Roadhog <[email hidden]> wrote:

: What I'd like is some good, sensible advice on what kind of bike to buy.
: I live in a very flat part of the world, so will one of those Tesco
: specials be fine for my purposes?

It'll be slow, annoying and fall to bits quickly. That said, they are
very cheap and may well be sufficient for you to find out how you go
and if you want to then get a more expensive bike, you'll be able to
make an informed decision.

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
Don't get me wrong, perl is an OK operating system, but it lacks a
lightweight scripting language -- Walter Dnes

Roadhog said:

It might seem ironic, given my nickname and posting history, but I'm
considering buying a bike.

I'm not on some "road to Damascus" conversion, nor am I on the
wind-up. I'll still be commuting to work in the car, as work is 15
miles away on a rather fast and twisty A road and public transport is
completely impractical for the shift pattern I work.

However, I do want to take up cycling again for health reasons,
particularly for trips into town (couple of miles away - no, I don't
drive that distance, usually walk, but cycling would be a lot
quicker).

What I'd like is some good, sensible advice on what kind of bike to
buy. I live in a very flat part of the world, so will one of those
Tesco specials be fine for my purposes? I'm told that the really
cheap bikes use steel frames rather than alloys and so are much
heavier. Will this really matter when I live in an area that is
pretty devoid of hills anyway?

Remember, this will be for fairly casual use, I won't be commuting
with it.

A mate of mine bought an £80 bike a few months ago. He rode to work and back
on it (probably 5 miles 3 or 4 times a week). From his description of what's
wrong with it, the bearings in the rear hub have let go, though whether or
not that's down to his lack of maintenance (didn't even take it for the free
service at the bike shop) or the quality of the bearings is unknown.

IMO, your best bet for a low end bike is something like a Ridgeback. They do
one that costs £200 or so, complete with mudguards and rack (they may look
naff, but you'll be glad for them). It won't be the lightest thing in the
universe, or the fastest, but they're made out of vaguely decent components
if my mate's experience of his is anything to go by (said mate has limited
his efforts on maintenance to oiling the chain and adjusting brake cables,
no visits to the bike shop at all). And they're comfy 😄.

Other options:

Find a decent make of mountain bike with front suspension / no suspension
second hand for not much £, fit slick road tyres and ride it on the road.
Plenty have rack fittings, but plenty have been thrashed off road. I
wouldn't buy an ex hire machine as my experience of hire bikes is that
they're not looked after at all.

Buy the cheap bike from Tesco, ride it, see if you like riding a bike, and
if you do, you'll probably want to spend a bit more on something decent. If
you don't, you've only lost £40. Avoid suspension like the plague on all
cheap bikes BTW.

BTW: My new steel bike is lighter than my old alloy bike 😉. And cost rather
a lot more...

doki said:

Find a decent make of mountain bike with front suspension / no
suspension second hand for not much £, fit slick road tyres and ride
it on the road. Plenty have rack fittings, but plenty have been
thrashed off road. I wouldn't buy an ex hire machine as my experience
of hire bikes is that they're not looked after at all.

Of course, there's no reason not to buy a second hand road bike (and some
good reasons to buy one, ie, not having been covered in mud every ride), but
IME they're much rarer in the ads papers than MTBs.

In article <[email hidden]>, doki

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't buy an ex hire machine as my experience of hire bikes is
that they're not looked after at all.

Mine are!

--
A T (Sandy) Morton
on the Bicycle Island
In the Global Village
http://www.millport.net

in message <[email hidden]>, Roadhog

(') said:

It might seem ironic, given my nickname and posting history, but I'm
considering buying a bike.

<URL:http://www.jasmine.org.uk/urcautofaq/jsp/Wiki?GoBuyBike>

Quoted message said:

What I'd like is some good, sensible advice on what kind of bike to
buy. I live in a very flat part of the world, so will one of those
Tesco specials be fine for my purposes? I'm told that the really cheap
bikes use steel frames rather than alloys and so are much heavier.
Will this really matter when I live in an area that is pretty devoid
of hills anyway?

Remember, this will be for fairly casual use, I won't be commuting
with it.

The very, very cheap ones mostly are pretty unpleasant to ride and with
a fairly short service life before they're uneconomic to repair. If
you're anywhere near an Edinburgh Bicycle Co-op branch, several of
their own-brands are good quality at about £200; otherwise, I'd
recommend a look at the Claud Butler Classic, also about £200.

Also, don't ignore second hand - there are bargains to be had.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

my other car is #<Subr-Car: #5d480>
;; This joke is not funny in emacs.

Try Decathlon, they have some decent looking budget bikes of all kinds.

Many more than on their crappy website BTW.

hth,

Tony B

doki said:

Roadhog wrote:
Other options:

Find a decent make of mountain bike with front suspension / no
suspension second hand for not much £, fit slick road tyres and ride
it on the road. Plenty have rack fittings, but plenty have been

Woudn't it be better to keep the knobblies on if the guy is using it for
health reasons?

--

Burning_Ranger

To email: [email hidden]

Burning_Ranger said:

Woudn't it be better to keep the knobblies on if the guy is using it for
health reasons?

....and rubbing brake blocks and frame that weighs a tonne?

Tony ;-)

"Burning_Ranger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Woudn't it be better to keep the knobblies on if the guy is using it for
health reasons?

Not really. For example, I got a shiny new bike last year, and, yes, it was
faster than the previous one. However I arrived home more knackered too,
indicating that at least some of the reason it was faster was that it
encouraged me to pedal more.

The other thing a nicer bike can do is encourage you to do more riding.

So I'd say having a machine which is fun and rewarding to ride is a good
thing, and deliberately hampering its performance is not a great idea.

cheers,
clive

Burning_Ranger said:

Woudn't it be better to keep the knobblies on if the guy is using it for
health reasons?

I think that's a fallacy. A bike that's always hard work is simply
unpleasant and not likely to be ridden as much as one that's enjoyable.
A bike with less rolling resistance can be ridden with just as much
effort as one that's hard to pedal except that you go further and
faster, and you also have the option to take it easy when you want a
breather.

--
Dave...

Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the
future of the human race. - H. G. Wells

Dave Kahn <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Burning_Ranger said:

Woudn't it be better to keep the knobblies on if the guy is using it for
health reasons?

I think that's a fallacy. A bike that's always hard work is simply
unpleasant and not likely to be ridden as much as one that's enjoyable.
A bike with less rolling resistance can be ridden with just as much
effort as one that's hard to pedal except that you go further and
faster, and you also have the option to take it easy when you want a
breather.

I agree.

Captain Sensible doesn't ride knobblies on road (or on hogged tracks)
because the vibration's uncomfortable, they don't give the best control
of your bike, and don't wear particularly well.

--
Sue ];(🙂