Which Bike?

Quoted message said:

Any thoughts? The Subway seemed to have really tiny tyres which doesn't
strike a chord with my youth, though something like the Saracen or the
Dawes seemed familiar, while the Carrera Vulcan had tyres which were too
fat.

Am I looking more for a hybrid type then?

You are unlikely to get a concensus of opinion on the choice of model.

Disc brakes are not essential - v brakes are up to the job of stopping you,
they certainly haul my 20+ stone carcase to a halt in everyday use on my
Trek MTB.
Front suspension is not necessary either for the type of riding that you
have described.

You might like to consider bikes from the Ridgeback range too just to muddy
the waters further.

vernon said:

Quoted message said:

Any thoughts? The Subway seemed to have really tiny tyres which
doesn't strike a chord with my youth, though something like the
Saracen or the Dawes seemed familiar, while the Carrera Vulcan had
tyres which were too fat.

Am I looking more for a hybrid type then?

You are unlikely to get a concensus of opinion on the choice of
model.

Disc brakes are not essential - v brakes are up to the job of
stopping you, they certainly haul my 20+ stone carcase to a halt in
everyday use on my Trek MTB. Front suspension is not necessary either
for the type of riding that you have described.

They do look good though... but I just remember back to my days
of cycling to and from school, the mountain bike I had then was more
than adequate for my pavement/road/park use. It had V Brakes, no
suspension, 21 gears. Perfect. Fine. Just want that, no fluff. Im
guessing the more important aspect, is going to be choice of tyre/wheel?

Everything now comes with suspension.

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but does
have disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and only 16
gears, a bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and country"

Carrea Vulcan 06 seems nice, but a bit too "long" for my liking, with
huge knobbly tyres and front suspension. But at least it's £250.

Dawes Discovery 301 is a hybrid. Seems like a nice solid standard bike
with an average price of £270. No suspension or discs.

Saracen Venturer, more standard bikes at Standard prices, but with
suspension.

Giant range... didn't like the handlebars and the cheap look to them.

Those are my thoughts.

I can happily ignore Discs and Suspension, but what about:

Hybrid vs Mountain? Or at least making sure I got the right tyres? What
kind of bike did I have 10 years ago? Im just remembering back to that I
trying to get the same and then Im being confused by Hybrids vs
Mountains, and Mountains now seem to have huge tyres while Hybrids have
pathetic tyres.

Actually, found a picture (almost) of my last bike:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sjdean/3521088/in/set-67861/

Quoted message said:

You might like to consider bikes from the Ridgeback range too just to
muddy the waters further.

They look quite good actually.

Though Im in Birmingham, so not easy to get hold of one of those.

Cheers
Simon

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

Quoted message said:

vernon wrote:

Quoted message said:

They do look good though... but I just remember back to my days
of cycling to and from school, the mountain bike I had then was more
than adequate for my pavement/road/park use. It had V Brakes, no
suspension, 21 gears. Perfect. Fine. Just want that, no fluff. Im guessing
the more important aspect, is going to be choice of tyre/wheel?

Looks aren't everything. It took a while for that to sink in with my
purchasing aspirations.

Quoted message said:

Everything now comes with suspension.

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but does have
disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and only 16 gears, a
bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and country"

Thin and balding they might be but they have served my son well on his
Carerra Subway 1. As for 16 gears, the range might not be low enough for
serious off road grunting but they are more than enough for most on road
conditions. My son has no problems hauling his butt up long steep hills
putting me to shame on my 27 speed MTB with fat knobbly tyres. The Carrera
has had good write ups. The Subway 1's tyres coped OK with off road riding,
admittedly in dry conditions. Tread patterns are not that critical for bike
tyres - you'll have to be going at some rediculous speed before aqua-planing
ever becomes a problem.

Quoted message said:

Carrea Vulcan 06 seems nice, but a bit too "long" for my liking, with huge
knobbly tyres and front suspension. But at least it's £250.

Cheapness, performance and quality - you'll probably get two out of three
within your price range.

Quoted message said:

Dawes Discovery 301 is a hybrid. Seems like a nice solid standard bike
with an average price of £270. No suspension or discs.

Disabuse yourself of the notion that either is necessary. I had a disc
braked Carrera and when it was stolen I repalced it with a v-braked Trek.
Not noticed any difference in performance of the brakes.

Quoted message said:

Saracen Venturer, more standard bikes at Standard prices, but with
suspension.

Only one of my four bikes has suspension. It's not a necessity for mainly
road riding.

Quoted message said:

Hybrid vs Mountain? Or at least making sure I got the right tyres? What
kind of bike did I have 10 years ago? Im just remembering back to that I
trying to get the same and then Im being confused by Hybrids vs Mountains,
and Mountains now seem to have huge tyres while Hybrids have pathetic
tyres.

There's also the category, 'City Bike' As for tyres, size isn't
everything.....

My hybrid's tyres are even thinner than those of the Subway 2. Not stopped
me from enjoying tow path riding and moerate off road trail riding as well
as spirited on road riding. The fat knobblies fitted to my mountain bike
are fine for off road riding but are seriously enrgy sapping for on road
riding. I could fit slicks/semi slicks if I was determined to do more on
road riding.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You might like to consider bikes from the Ridgeback range too just to
muddy the waters further.

vernon said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Everything now comes with suspension.

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but
does have disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and
only 16 gears, a bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and
country"

Thin and balding they might be but they have served my son well on
his Carerra Subway 1. As for 16 gears, the range might not be low
enough for serious off road grunting but they are more than enough
for most on road conditions.

I was thinking of steering clear of this, but your review has made me
think again. Thanks for the info.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Dawes Discovery 301 is a hybrid. Seems like a nice solid standard
bike with an average price of £270. No suspension or discs.

Disabuse yourself of the notion that either is necessary. I had a
disc braked Carrera and when it was stolen I repalced it with a
v-braked Trek. Not noticed any difference in performance of the
brakes.

Sorry, I meant to use that more as a bonus, the great thing about this
bike, meaning there's no suspension or discs to worry about. As far as
Im concerned, I don't need them. I didn't need them 10 years ago, I
don't reckon I'll need them now.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Saracen Venturer, more standard bikes at Standard prices, but with
suspension.

Only one of my four bikes has suspension. It's not a necessity for
mainly road riding.

And I sure don't plan on doing anything differently than I did last
time, so i don't see suspension as necessary for me!

Quoted message said:

My hybrid's tyres are even thinner than those of the Subway 2. Not
stopped me from enjoying tow path riding and moerate off road trail
riding as well as spirited on road riding. The fat knobblies fitted
to my mountain bike are fine for off road riding but are seriously
enrgy sapping for on road riding. I could fit slicks/semi slicks if I
was determined to do more on road riding.

That energy zapping is putting me off the MTB.

Im wanting to get a bike like I had before. Familiar territory. But it
seems most MTB's have just gone ridiculous. Maybe I should look at
buying a 10 year old bike and fitting new parts?

So...

if I went with an MTB, I could fit smaller tyres on if I wanted? And if
I went with a hybrid (or the Subway 2), Im presuming I could fit
larger tyres?

Thanks
Simon

Simon Dean said:

Im looking to get myself a bike, mainly for going around on the
road/pavement, maybe cycling through some parks or over grass. Doubt
I'll be trekking across fields or hills and mountains and such.

<snip>

I bought a Revolution Courier from Edinburgh Bicycle Cooperative, and
like it very much. I've been informed by people who know more about
bikes than me that the spec is very good for the price. I'd say
certainly worth having a look at:

http://www.edinburgh-bicycle.co.uk/catalogue/item.cfm?ID=3558

boglin

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

Im looking to get myself a bike, mainly for going around on the
road/pavement, maybe cycling through some parks or over grass. Doubt
I'll be trekking across fields or hills and mountains and such.

Im looking to get one to basically get some exercise and strengthen my
knee after surgery.

I have a budget of £300. Maybe a little more, but preferably less.

I keep being interested in Disc Brakes while being put off by
suspension. But most bikes now come with suspension don't they! And
most I see are suspensison with V-Brakes.

You do not want disk brakes except for highly technical mountain biking
in wet weather, or heavy touring tandems on long descents. In any other
conditions they are just heavier, and tend to be noisy. They're also
thief magnets.

You don't want suspension either for the sort of riding you're planning
to do. It adds weight and increases the amount of effort you have to put
in.

Quoted message said:

Dawes Discovery 301 (or maybe 401)

Yup, maybe. Look also at Claud Butler Urban series e.g.
http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/CORP/cb/urban300.html

or the Specialized Crossroads or Sirrus series:
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=06Crossroads
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=06Sirrus

Quoted message said:

Giant Yukon
Giant Rinkon
Giant Rock

None of those. If you want a Giant look at the FCR series:
http://www.giant-bicycles.com/uk/030.000.000/030.010.000.asp?range=241

Quoted message said:

Am I looking more for a hybrid type then?

Yes.

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

;; All in all you're just another hick in the mall
-- Drink C'lloid

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but does
have disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and only 16
gears, a bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and country"

You /want/ thin, slick tyres. They're worth about 5%-10% less effort on
the road. The only time slick tyres are a disadvantage is on mud or
snow.

You don't need more than 16 gears - more is more complexity, more weight,
worse chain line, more to go wrong. This is where the Edinburgh
Revolution Courier is a win: eight gears is as many as many people need,
provided they're the /right/ gears, and you end up with a bike that's
simpler, lighter, more reliable.

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

;; All in all you're just another nick in the ball
-- Think Droid

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

You do not want disk brakes except for highly technical mountain biking
in wet weather, or heavy touring tandems on long descents. In any other
conditions they are just heavier, and tend to be noisy. They're also
thief magnets.

Good point...

Quoted message said:

You don't want suspension either for the sort of riding you're planning
to do. It adds weight and increases the amount of effort you have to put
in.

Something else to go wrong when, I don't need it!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Dawes Discovery 301 (or maybe 401)

Yup, maybe. Look also at Claud Butler Urban series e.g.
http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/CORP/cb/urban300.html

or the Specialized Crossroads or Sirrus series:
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=06Crossroads
http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=06Sirrus

Interesting bikes.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Giant Yukon
Giant Rinkon
Giant Rock

None of those. If you want a Giant look at the FCR series:
http://www.giant-bicycles.com/uk/030.000.000/030.010.000.asp?range=241

Im not too taken by Giant in all honesty.

But Athelete? Hrm. Im a 17 stone porker just looking to have a bit of a
fun, get out a bit on a bike with a few friends, combine with a bit of
exercise... :-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I looking more for a hybrid type then?

Yes.

People keep recommending that I get a MTB. If I could duplicate
everything exactly as it was on my old bike, then fair enough. But MTB's
seem to have moved on too much since then. It seems hard just to get a
standard MTB like I used to have!

A friends suggested about getting an MTB and just fitting smaller tires,
which I figure might give me some flexibility in case I did change my mind?

Sorry if Im coming across negative. It's just ten years away from riding
a bike, Im having trouble fitting back in as it were. Everythings
changed, and Im not sure what I want. And too many friends spoiling the
broth! :-)

Thanks
Simon

In article <[email hidden]>

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but does
have disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and only 16
gears, a bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and country"

You /want/ thin, slick tyres. They're worth about 5%-10% less effort on
the road. The only time slick tyres are a disadvantage is on mud or
snow.

You don't need more than 16 gears - more is more complexity, more weight,
worse chain line, more to go wrong. This is where the Edinburgh
Revolution Courier is a win: eight gears is as many as many people need,
provided they're the /right/ gears, and you end up with a bike that's
simpler, lighter, more reliable.

Except that a single-chainring setup has a worse chainline in the low
and high gears than a double or triple.

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

People keep recommending that I get a MTB. If I could duplicate
everything exactly as it was on my old bike, then fair enough. But
MTB's seem to have moved on too much since then. It seems hard just to
get a standard MTB like I used to have!

A friends suggested about getting an MTB and just fitting smaller
tires, which I figure might give me some flexibility in case I did
change my mind?

People who don't know much about bikes do frequently suggest this sort of
nonsense. You wouldn't buy a submarine for sailing on the boating lake.
You wouldn't buy a Unimog for commuting into London. A mountain bike is
a specialised device for tackling extremely difficult, technical trails.
As such, it has a whole range of special features which not only don't
help on tarmac or well-made tracks but actually hinder.

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

in message <[email hidden]>, Rob Morley

(') said:

In article <[email hidden]>

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

Carrera Subway 2 is in there... it has no front suspension, but does
have disc brake. Tyres are thing and balding, and at £300 and only
16 gears, a bit crabby. Also advertised as a "town and country"

You /want/ thin, slick tyres. They're worth about 5%-10% less effort
on the road. The only time slick tyres are a disadvantage is on mud or
snow.

You don't need more than 16 gears - more is more complexity, more
weight, worse chain line, more to go wrong. This is where the
Edinburgh Revolution Courier is a win: eight gears is as many as many
people need, provided they're the /right/ gears, and you end up with a
bike that's simpler, lighter, more reliable.

Except that a single-chainring setup has a worse chainline in the low
and high gears than a double or triple.

People who are new to cycling frequently spend a great deal of time
either in small-small or large-large combinations, because they don't
understand about chainline. Nothing on a single chainring setup is
anywhere near as bad as large-large or small-small.

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

Do not sail on uphill water.
- Bill Lee

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

Quoted message said:

But Athelete? Hrm. Im a 17 stone porker just looking to have a bit of a
fun, get out a bit on a bike with a few friends, combine with a bit of
exercise... :-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Am I looking more for a hybrid type then?

A mountain bike is not the best choice for what you want. The geometry and
set up is not optimised for your intended use.
I'm a 20+ stone porker who gets around a bit on my four bikes. The bike
that's best suited to your needs is a hybrid. I have a Ridgeback that is
nimble, can be used for rough stuff and it eats miles with ease. My
mountain bike is best when used off road. I find it to be tiring when used
on the road for anything over ten miles. I'm not intending to fit slicks to
it as I intend to use it for mainly off road.

Quoted message said:

People keep recommending that I get a MTB. If I could duplicate everything
exactly as it was on my old bike, then fair enough. But MTB's seem to have
moved on too much since then. It seems hard just to get a standard MTB
like I used to have!

If you are looking at MTBs then yes things have moved on and there is a
bewildering choice.

Quoted message said:

A friends suggested about getting an MTB and just fitting smaller tires,
which I figure might give me some flexibility in case I did change my
mind?

A lot of your friends are likely to have only ridden mountain bikes and have
not experienced any of the alternative choices. A hybrid will meet your
needs perfectly.

Quoted message said:

Sorry if Im coming across negative. It's just ten years away from riding a
bike, Im having trouble fitting back in as it were. Everythings changed,
and Im not sure what I want. And too many friends spoiling the broth! :-)

At the risk of repeating myself too many times:
A hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid will do the job.

:-)

vernon said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A friends suggested about getting an MTB and just fitting smaller
tires, which I figure might give me some flexibility in case I did
change my mind?

A lot of your friends are likely to have only ridden mountain bikes
and have not experienced any of the alternative choices. A hybrid
will meet your needs perfectly.

Just to put one issue to bed if I may, if we were back 12 years ago,
with the MTB designs from back then, where there were solid forks, V
Brakes, straight(er) frames, and smaller tyres, would an MTB have been
the perfect choice in that situation?

Im just trying to figure out what's changed and why they had to mess
with a good product. I have a lot of nostalgia!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry if Im coming across negative. It's just ten years away from
riding a bike, Im having trouble fitting back in as it were.
Everythings changed, and Im not sure what I want. And too many
friends spoiling the broth! :-)

At the risk of repeating myself too many times: A hybrid, a hybrid,
a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid will do the job.

:-)

A hybrid you reckon then? :-)

Thanks
Simon

In article <[email hidden]>
Simon Dean <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Just to put one issue to bed if I may, if we were back 12 years ago,
with the MTB designs from back then, where there were solid forks, V
Brakes, straight(er) frames, and smaller tyres, would an MTB have been
the perfect choice in that situation?

A rigid ATB with rim brakes and modest tyre width is fine for pootling
around on, although if you listen to some advice given here it's totally
inappropriate and you should be riding a full-blown tourer or hybrid-
style city bike instead.

Quoted message said:

Im just trying to figure out what's changed and why they had to mess
with a good product. I have a lot of nostalgia!

Once the market for a particular product is saturated someone needs to
come up with a "new improved must-have" product to start the cycle
rolling again ...

In article <[email hidden]>

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Rob Morley
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Except that a single-chainring setup has a worse chainline in the low
and high gears than a double or triple.

People who are new to cycling frequently spend a great deal of time
either in small-small or large-large combinations, because they don't
understand about chainline. Nothing on a single chainring setup is
anywhere near as bad as large-large or small-small.

The laat time I looked, new bikes came with a manual that told you how
to use the gears.

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
Simon Dean <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Just to put one issue to bed if I may, if we were back 12 years ago,
with the MTB designs from back then, where there were solid forks, V
Brakes, straight(er) frames, and smaller tyres, would an MTB have been
the perfect choice in that situation?

A rigid ATB with rim brakes and modest tyre width is fine for pootling
around on, although if you listen to some advice given here it's totally
inappropriate and you should be riding a full-blown tourer or hybrid-
style city bike instead.

Pootling around? That's all I want to do really, and I don't necessarily
mind things being more cumbersome if they are more flexible and maybe
helps with my knee recovery.

I have taken on advice and am looking at a Hybrid, either a Dawes or
Saracen. Im leaning towards the Saracen though.

As I've said earlier though, im just a little put off by the 700c tyres
of hybrids. I just get concerned in case I decide to do anything out of
the ordinary. I live in Hall Green, Birmingham. There's a few smallish
hills, but lots of parkland, rivers, some mud and dirt tracks and
things. I'm not sure if there are any cycle paths or anything, but I do
envisage some sort of uneven, bumpy ground, with some protruding stones,
slight hills and river crossings are a distinct possibility.

Not saying they're likely though.

Im just not going to go around climbing any moutains and going down
boulders, thrashing my way through farmland and stuff.

Sincerely hoping therefore that those tyres on a hybrid would be
suitable, because I don't see that you can change them for anything
chunkier if needs be.

I am put off by the thought that the hybrid could be limiting to what I
might want to do. And Im also not necessarily put out by the thought
that a MTB is going to be more cumbersome.

But I understand vernon says that hybrid tyres will be fine, and he uses
his for what I have in mind. So. fair enough. Decision made :-)

Do you guys offer a guarantee? :-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Im just trying to figure out what's changed and why they had to mess
with a good product. I have a lot of nostalgia!

Once the market for a particular product is saturated someone needs to
come up with a "new improved must-have" product to start the cycle
rolling again ...

Ahh.

The "New and Improved" washing powder gimmick? Which one is it? Either
it's new, or it's improved!

Thanks
Simon

Simon Dean said:

As I've said earlier though, im just a little put off by the 700c
tyres of hybrids. I just get concerned in case I decide to do
anything out of the ordinary. I live in Hall Green, Birmingham.
There's a few smallish hills, but lots of parkland, rivers, some mud
and dirt tracks and
things. I'm not sure if there are any cycle paths or anything, but I
do envisage some sort of uneven, bumpy ground, with some protruding
stones, slight hills and river crossings are a distinct possibility.

Not saying they're likely though.

Im just not going to go around climbing any moutains and going down
boulders, thrashing my way through farmland and stuff.

Sincerely hoping therefore that those tyres on a hybrid would be
suitable, because I don't see that you can change them for anything
chunkier if needs be.

Depending on mudguard and frame clearance, you may be able to fit wider
tyres than the bike comes with, maybe 38mm, which are fat enough for a
comfy ride on rough ground. Narrow wheel rims will take them.

But the tyres won't strictly need to be wide or mega-knobbly for the
ground you describe. I go down the odd track like that myself on 28mm
lightweight touring tyres (sometimes even on 23mm slick road tyres when
desperate for a "natural break"!). It is a bumpy ride but nothing bad
happens. If you have minimal grip/suspension, you naturally ride with
that in mind and end up OK. It's just that you can't go thrashing along
at MTB-race speed. You won't get pinch-punctures or wheel damage as long
as the air pressure isn't too low and you take care.

Quoted message said:

I am put off by the thought that the hybrid could be limiting to what
I might want to do. And Im also not necessarily put out by the thought
that a MTB is going to be more cumbersome.

A rigid MTB would be fine and good value for a mixture of short-distance
road cycling and off-roading. But if you get a bike that's better on the
road, like an "audax" bike (have they been mentioned in this thread yet?),
you might easily end up doing much much more road cycling than you are
imagining now -- because it'll be that much easier and more enjoyable.

~PB

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Dean

(') said:

vernon said:

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

Quoted message said:

A friends suggested about getting an MTB and just fitting smaller
tires, which I figure might give me some flexibility in case I did
change my mind?

A lot of your friends are likely to have only ridden mountain bikes
and have not experienced any of the alternative choices. A hybrid
will meet your needs perfectly.

Just to put one issue to bed if I may, if we were back 12 years ago,
with the MTB designs from back then, where there were solid forks, V
Brakes, straight(er) frames, and smaller tyres, would an MTB have been
the perfect choice in that situation?

No. The MTBs of twelve years ago were mainly (with some wonderful
exceptions) gas-pipe specials, much heavier than they needed to be; and
their geometry was not adapted to road use.

Quoted message said:

Im just trying to figure out what's changed and why they had to mess
with a good product. I have a lot of nostalgia!

I've ridden gas-pipe specials up (and down) mountains. It's feasible, but
it's hard work, and there will be lots of sections you can't ride so you
either have to run pushing the bike or stick it on your shoulder ina
cyclocross stylee. My fairly modern full suspension mountain bike is
much lighter, has better traction, better transmission, better handling,
and consequently is fairly easy to ride through sections and up slopes
which would be impossible for someone of my skill on a gaspipe special.

Modern mountain bikes are genuinely very, very good - at this kind of
thing:
7stanes.gov.uk7stanes2.wmvOpen ↗
(this is my local track). If you want to do this:
7stanes.gov.ukkillo1.wmvOpen ↗
(my favourite track) you need a mountain bike. If you don't, you don't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry if Im coming across negative. It's just ten years away from
riding a bike, Im having trouble fitting back in as it were.
Everythings changed, and Im not sure what I want. And too many
friends spoiling the broth! :-)

At the risk of repeating myself too many times: A hybrid, a hybrid, a
hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid, a hybrid will do the job.

:-)

A hybrid you reckon then? :-)

Yup.

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

;; So, before proceeding with definitive screwing, choose the
;; position most congenital.
-- instructions for fitting bicycle handlebars

in message <[email hidden]>, Rob Morley

(') said:

In article <[email hidden]>

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Rob
Morley ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Except that a single-chainring setup has a worse chainline in the
low and high gears than a double or triple.

People who are new to cycling frequently spend a great deal of time
either in small-small or large-large combinations, because they don't
understand about chainline. Nothing on a single chainring setup is
anywhere near as bad as large-large or small-small.

The laat time I looked, new bikes came with a manual that told you how
to use the gears.

Yup. Which gets chucked either in the bin or the back of the filing
cabinet. Watch 'ordinary' cyclists actually cycling, and observe how
often you see small-small or large-large combinations. I pretty much
guarantee that, on an ordinary street, a third of the cyclists you see
will be in one or the other.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; "If I were a Microsoft Public Relations person, I would probably
;; be sobbing on a desk right now" -- Rob Miller, editor, /.