Best bike for a long commute

[Pete Biggs]

Simon Brooke wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Pete Biggs
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> newsgroup wrote:
>>> OK. Now that I've dipped my toe into the pool thought I'd try
>>> another.
>>>
>>> For health reasons I have to increase my level of exercise. I
>>> already cycle at weekends off road at a local forest centre (about
>>> 20 miles) and use a gym semi regular. I want to incorporate
>>> exercise as a part of my day.
>>> I currently drive 31 miles each way to work. It is my aim to start
>>> cycling part then all of that as my fitness increases.
>>>
>>> My question? Well what bike would fit the bill for such a commute?
>>> Dont think my mountain bike will do the trick!
>>>
>>> The roads are mainly country A roads with some hilly sections. I'm
>>> no youngster so a more "relaxed" riding position would be ideal.
>>>
>>> Have seen touring bikes such as the Dawes Galaxy in the past, is
>>> this a suitable beast?
>>>
>>> Your views will be most welcome.
>>
>> I suggest a Tifosi CK7 or any audax style bike like that.
>>
>> Remember that you can make the riding position more upright with any
>> bike by replacing the handlebar stem for a shorter one with a
>> steeper rise angle, for example.
>
> While I'd generally bow to Pete's greater wisdom, if you're seriously
> talking about commuting 62 miles round trip with any sort of
> regularity, you want those bars down, not up. Every scrap of
> aerodynamic advantage you can gain is going to make your commute more
> comfortable.

The OP fancied "a more relaxed position" so I explained that this possible
with this kind of bike. I'm not suggesting that he should do that or should
not do that because it's a matter of personal preference, in my opinion.

Of course having the bars low is more arodymanic, but not everyone is
comfortable like that, especially when not cycling fast or hard all the
time. The harder you pedal, the more weight is effectively put through your
legs instead of hands and upper body.

Some touring cyclists manage those kind of distances day after day with a
more upright position, so a racing position is certainly not essential.
Aerodynamics is less important at lower speeds after all.

What I do suggest - with a bike with a threadless headset - is to leave the
fork steerer as long as reasonaly possible so there is scope to raise the
stem if desired. A low position can be tried first with spacers on top of
the stem.

~PB

 

[dkahn400]

Simon Brooke wrote:

> While I've a great admiration for the downhill folks, any sport which uses
> a motor to get the bike up the hill is motor sport in my book. It's great
> spectacle, and they're both brave and skilled, but it isn't really
> cycling.

How about roadies who use a motor to get themselves and their bikes to
the start line?

--
Dave...

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Pete Biggs
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Simon Brooke wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Pete Biggs
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>>> newsgroup wrote:
>>>> OK. Now that I've dipped my toe into the pool thought I'd try
>>>> another.
>>>>
>>>> For health reasons I have to increase my level of exercise. I
>>>> already cycle at weekends off road at a local forest centre (about
>>>> 20 miles) and use a gym semi regular. I want to incorporate
>>>> exercise as a part of my day.
>>>> I currently drive 31 miles each way to work. It is my aim to start
>>>> cycling part then all of that as my fitness increases.
>>>>
>>>> My question? Well what bike would fit the bill for such a commute?
>>>> Dont think my mountain bike will do the trick!
>>>>
>>>> The roads are mainly country A roads with some hilly sections. I'm
>>>> no youngster so a more "relaxed" riding position would be ideal.
>>>>
>>>> Have seen touring bikes such as the Dawes Galaxy in the past, is
>>>> this a suitable beast?
>>>>
>>>> Your views will be most welcome.
>>>
>>> I suggest a Tifosi CK7 or any audax style bike like that.
>>>
>>> Remember that you can make the riding position more upright with any
>>> bike by replacing the handlebar stem for a shorter one with a
>>> steeper rise angle, for example.
>>
>> While I'd generally bow to Pete's greater wisdom, if you're seriously
>> talking about commuting 62 miles round trip with any sort of
>> regularity, you want those bars down, not up. Every scrap of
>> aerodynamic advantage you can gain is going to make your commute more
>> comfortable.
>
> The OP fancied "a more relaxed position" so I explained that this
> possible
> with this kind of bike. I'm not suggesting that he should do that or
> should not do that because it's a matter of personal preference, in my
> opinion.
>
> Of course having the bars low is more arodymanic, but not everyone is
> comfortable like that, especially when not cycling fast or hard all the
> time. The harder you pedal, the more weight is effectively put through
> your legs instead of hands and upper body.
>
> Some touring cyclists manage those kind of distances day after day with a
> more upright position, so a racing position is certainly not essential.
> Aerodynamics is less important at lower speeds after all.

Absolutely, Pete. But this guy is commuting, so presumably he's spending
seven or eight hours per day at his place of work. Suppose he averages
20mph commuting - which I never could - that's another three hours every
day, and probably an hour and a half a day more than commuting by car. If
he averages 16mph, as I used to on my 21 mile commute, it's four hours
every day. And, in either case, on really horrible days - wind, rain, fog,
snow - it's going to be longer. If he has a family, it eats into family
time; if he doesn't, it eats into his social life (when I was commuting 21
miles a day I had neither).

Pootling along at 12mph, stopping at tea-shops, and covering 60mph in a
full day is very pleasant and relaxing. But if he pootles at 12mph on a 60
mile round trip commute, then he's going to be out of the house for
thirteen hours every day. Add to that seven hours sleeping, and that
leaves four hours a day for having his meals, doing his chores, seeing his
friends and watching the telly.

> What I do suggest - with a bike with a threadless headset - is to leave
> the fork steerer as long as reasonaly possible so there is scope to raise
> the
> stem if desired. A low position can be tried first with spacers on top
> of the stem.

Oh, definitely - couldn't agree more.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other
;; languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and riffle their
;; pockets for new vocabulary -- James D. Nicoll

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message
<eee76f48-14e1-4f45-b879-4fe6c7f72bea@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
dkahn400 ('[email protected]') wrote:

> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> While I've a great admiration for the downhill folks, any sport which
>> uses a motor to get the bike up the hill is motor sport in my book. It's
>> great spectacle, and they're both brave and skilled, but it isn't really
>> cycling.
>
> How about roadies who use a motor to get themselves and their bikes to
> the start line?

I believe there's a time trial course in East Anglia where the startline is
higher by the height of a flyover bridge than the finish line. That's
sort-of in the downhilling league - you get a gravity assist that you
didn't pay for in effort. But in any other road race I know of, every hill
you come down you had to go up first. Except in the big Grand Tours, of
course - but while these days they tend to have several
mountain-top /finishes/, they never have a mountain-top /start/, so the
total climbing is still equal to or greater the total descent.

Roadies /earn/ their descents.

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

Morning had broken. I found a rather battered tube of Araldite
resin in the bottom of the toolbag.

 

[Pete Biggs]

Simon Brooke wrote:

>> Of course having the bars low is more arodymanic, but not everyone is
>> comfortable like that, especially when not cycling fast or hard all
>> the time. The harder you pedal, the more weight is effectively put
>> through your legs instead of hands and upper body.
>>
>> Some touring cyclists manage those kind of distances day after day
>> with a more upright position, so a racing position is certainly not
>> essential. Aerodynamics is less important at lower speeds after all.
>
> Absolutely, Pete. But this guy is commuting, so presumably he's
> spending seven or eight hours per day at his place of work. Suppose
> he averages 20mph commuting - which I never could - that's another
> three hours every day, and probably an hour and a half a day more
> than commuting by car. If he averages 16mph, as I used to on my 21
> mile commute, it's four hours every day. And, in either case, on
> really horrible days - wind, rain, fog, snow - it's going to be
> longer. If he has a family, it eats into family time; if he doesn't,
> it eats into his social life (when I was commuting 21 miles a day I
> had neither).
>
> Pootling along at 12mph, stopping at tea-shops, and covering 60mph in
> a full day is very pleasant and relaxing. But if he pootles at 12mph
> on a 60 mile round trip commute, then he's going to be out of the
> house for thirteen hours every day. Add to that seven hours sleeping,
> and that leaves four hours a day for having his meals, doing his
> chores, seeing his friends and watching the telly.

Fair point, but some compromise can be found. I can average 15 mph for 30
miles with a significanly more upright position than a racer would use. I
wouldn't want to do it twice a day every day though! Actually the OP says
he wouldn't do it every day either, if the full distance by bike at all.

Good luck to Mr Tired. Certainly try it with a low position, but rest
assured that that won't be the only option with this kind of bike.

~PB

 

[Tired]

"newsgroup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> OK. Now that I've dipped my toe into the pool thought I'd try another.
>
> For health reasons I have to increase my level of exercise. I already
> cycle at weekends off road at a local forest centre (about 20 miles) and
> use a gym semi regular. I want to incorporate exercise as a part of my
> day.
>
> I currently drive 31 miles each way to work. It is my aim to start cycling
> part then all of that as my fitness increases.
>
> My question? Well what bike would fit the bill for such a commute? Dont
> think my mountain bike will do the trick!
>
> The roads are mainly country A roads with some hilly sections. I'm no
> youngster so a more "relaxed" riding position would be ideal.
>
> Have seen touring bikes such as the Dawes Galaxy in the past, is this a
> suitable beast?
>
> Your views will be most welcome.

Thank you everyone who has taken the time to reply in this thread. I've
picked up a lot of good advice.

I have found somewhere to park my car about half way and as soon as the
weather picks up I'll be starting to commute the 15 miles from there. A
couple of days a week at first and see how we go.

Some advice I've received off group was to wait a little until spring before
starting as they thought bad weather starting out might put me off before I
begin! Maybe.

Anyway I'm going to give it a go with my old mountain bike on slick tyres to
start with. The route from half way is mostly cycle paths along the seaside
so its pretty flat. Just the wind to deal with when its blowing.

Who knows as my firness increases (and I justify the spends on a shiney new
toy) I might get to do the whole lot.

Thanks again

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Simon Brooke <[email protected]>:
>dkahn400 ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>How about roadies who use a motor to get themselves and their bikes to
>>the start line?
>I believe there's a time trial course in East Anglia where the startline is
>higher by the height of a flyover bridge than the finish line. That's
>sort-of in the downhilling league - you get a gravity assist that you
>didn't pay for in effort.

It's _sort of_ in that league, but the energy input from gravity over that
course must be a trivial fraction of the human input. Conversely, as
mentioned before, _if_ a downhiller was as powerful as Lance and _if_ they
could pedal at full power all the way down the course (which is obviously
false), 2/3 of the energy input would be from gravity.

DH is more akin to motocross than cycling, which is probably why their
bikes look more and more like motorcycles.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Aponoia, December.

 

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-12-07, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
> Furthermore, a bike weighing over 20 Kg with a range of 50 miles on a
> round-trip commute of 61 miles means 11 miles each day lugging that 20Kg,

Why? If the workplace has electricity, it's only 30.5 miles between
charges.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

 

[Andy Leighton]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:37:38 +0000 (UTC),
Dylan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-12-07, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Furthermore, a bike weighing over 20 Kg with a range of 50 miles on a
>> round-trip commute of 61 miles means 11 miles each day lugging that 20Kg,
>
> Why? If the workplace has electricity, it's only 30.5 miles between
> charges.

Not all workplaces would be happy with someone recharging a battery for
a bike.

--
Andy Leighton => [email protected]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_