Bike suggestions.

Edinburgh Bikes get good write-ups in the cycling press as providing very good
value bikes. Haven't got one myself though.

Cheers, helen s

--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers said:

Edinburgh Bikes get good write-ups in the cycling press as providing very good
value bikes. Haven't got one myself though.

I have 2. My first "proper" bike was an EBC Country tourer I bought in
'89 (EBC was my LBS at the time) and was my only steed for 8 years. Now
very much a spare, but I did a lot on it, including commuting, tours
and, errr, mountain biking! When the frame cracked a weld, well out of
warranty, EBC replaced the frame FOC and also transferred all the bits
over for the princely sum of nothing, and threw in a new headset too.

My other EBC bike is a Contour 400 MBT from '97. I don't do that much
offroad but it's never let me down, with my limits always cutting in
before the bike's. They seemed to have spent money in all the right
places for what the bike was for and how much it cost. Only complaint
was the "comfort gel saddle" was in no way about comfort, but a B17
solved that and it's hardly the only bike that's ever been sold with a
torture device to sit on.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Brian said:

Hello.

I've got a bit of money coming to me in the future, and I've been
thinking of investing it on a new bike - I currently have a Townsend
Peak MTB (1997 or so), but I find it very heavy.

So I'm looking for suggestions on what to go for - I'd like to use
the bike for rough trail riding (Cairngorms, Breamar etc), and
possibly even use the bike for some camping trips so I'd need one
which can be fitted with a decent rear rack.

Looking to spend at most £300, preferably £250

I have been browsing the Edinburgh Bicycle online shop,

EDINBURGH CUILLIN 3HT '04 (£229.95)

http://www.edinburgh-bicycle.co.uk/catalogue/detail.cfm?ID=19063

Is this a good bike? Anyone got one?

I don't think I'll need a full suspension bike.

Failing that, any other bikes I should have a look at?

I'd have a look in the ad-mag for a few weeks. I often see decent sounding
hardtail MTBs in there for not a lot of money, with things like "Ridden
twice" in the advert. Generally at bargain prices too.

Today I popped into my local bike shop, who have the following bikes:

Claud Butler Stone River at £259.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=331

Claud Butler Rock at £299.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=332

and Claud Butler Cape Wrath at £399.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=334

I'm leaning towards the Claud Butler Rock at £299, although I could afford
the Cape Wrath I don't see what extra I'm getting for £100 - I'd rather
have the extra £100 to put towards accesories such as a decent rear rack /
panniers etc.

Are Claud Butler bikes decent? Or should I look towards a different brand?

thanks in advance

--
Brian

Rudely following up my own post:

Well, seems the Cape Wrath doesn't come in 22inch frame size - which is
what the bike shop advised, so looks like I'll be going for the Claud
Butler Rock.

--
Brian

in message <[email hidden]>, Brian

(') said:

Today I popped into my local bike shop, who have the following bikes:

Claud Butler Stone River at £259.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=331

Claud Butler Rock at £299.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=332

and Claud Butler Cape Wrath at £399.99:

http://www.falconcycles.co.uk/product.php?c.id=3&s.id=1&p.id=334

I'm leaning towards the Claud Butler Rock at £299, although I could
afford the Cape Wrath I don't see what extra I'm getting for £100 -
I'd rather have the extra £100 to put towards accesories such as a
decent rear rack / panniers etc.

Are Claud Butler bikes decent? Or should I look towards a different
brand?

The Cape Wrath certainly reviews extremely well for such a cheap bike.
And, indeed, has amazingly good kit for such a cheap bike (those Cane
Creek asymmetric brakes, for example, are very nice and pretty
expensive). Don't know about the others, but the Claud Butler brand is
generally reasonably well regarded in the VFM stakes.

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

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care
in the community for you. -- Ben Evans

Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> wrote in news:ec9tt1-e31.ln1
@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk:

Quoted message said:

The Cape Wrath certainly reviews extremely well for such a cheap bike.
And, indeed, has amazingly good kit for such a cheap bike (those Cane
Creek asymmetric brakes, for example, are very nice and pretty
expensive). Don't know about the others, but the Claud Butler brand is
generally reasonably well regarded in the VFM stakes.

Only problem with the Cape Wrath is that it only goes up to 20" frame,
where I've been advised I need a 22" one.

Pretty sure that the Claud Butler Rock is a Good Bike For The Money.

--
Brian

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Cape Wrath certainly reviews extremely well for such a cheap bike.
And, indeed, has amazingly good kit for such a cheap bike (those Cane
Creek asymmetric brakes, for example, are very nice and pretty
expensive). Don't know about the others, but the Claud Butler brand is
generally reasonably well regarded in the VFM stakes.

Only problem with the Cape Wrath is that it only goes up to 20" frame,
where I've been advised I need a 22" one.

There're normal frames and new, even better[1] compact frames. The compact
frames have weird sizes 'cos the bar between saddle and handlebars starts
lower down. Dunno what the equivalent to a 22" is in compact, but my money
is on it being somewhere between 16-22" :-)

[1] Possibly better for the manufacturer too... [2]
[2] Actually, is there a benefit to compact frames for the cyclist?
Lighter? Greater chance of a better fit? Less chance of crushing your
balls if you slide off the front of the saddle?

Mark Thompson [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

[2] Actually, is there a benefit to compact frames for the cyclist?
Lighter? Greater chance of a better fit? Less chance of crushing your
balls if you slide off the front of the saddle?

Lighter predominantly. Since the MTB world introduced the small frame,
long stem & seatpost concept there was an incentive to produce sturdy
lightweight, long tubes. Since the forces that propel you forward are
contained within the diamond, accessories outside it (saddle?) can
suffer a loss of stiffness.

This is supposition on my part based on my (limited) reading of the
literature.

Jon

Mark Thompson <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

There're normal frames and new, even better[1] compact frames. The
compact frames have weird sizes 'cos the bar between saddle and
handlebars starts lower down. Dunno what the equivalent to a 22" is
in compact, but my money is on it being somewhere between 16-22" :-)

So you think a 22" bike would be too big?

--
Brian

Brian [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

So you think a 22" bike would be too big?

I think you should get on one and try it. It really is the only way
you'll know.

Jon

Quoted message said:

So you think a 22" bike would be too big?

Unless they're selling childrens bikes, they've given the compact frame
size on the website rather than the 'normal' frame equivalent, so yes you'd
want smaller than 22" in compact, or a 22" normal frame.

On the other hand I don't know your inside leg measurement, so you might be
unfeasibly large and actually need a huge 22" compact frame!

Mark Thompson <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So you think a 22" bike would be too big?

Unless they're selling childrens bikes, they've given the compact
frame size on the website rather than the 'normal' frame equivalent,
so yes you'd want smaller than 22" in compact, or a 22" normal frame.

On the other hand I don't know your inside leg measurement, so you
might be unfeasibly large and actually need a huge 22" compact frame!

Just measured my inside leg from crotch to floor, 34" (not sure if thats an
accurate measurement - kind of difficult to measure ones own inside leg!)

So a 22" frame bike should be OK?

Sorry for so many questions, but I want to make sure I buy the correct
bike.

--
Brian

Quoted message said:

Just measured my inside leg from crotch to floor, 34" (not sure if
thats an accurate measurement - kind of difficult to measure ones own
inside leg!)

So a 22" frame bike should be OK?

Sorry for so many questions, but I want to make sure I buy the correct
bike.

Ooh, you are gangly then :-)

Have a stroll down to <URL:http://www.edinburgh-
bicycle.co.uk/resource/size_charts.htm> for lots of information on size.
If you're buying from a shop then they will make sure you get the correct
sized frame. If you're buying mail order then emailing/phoning with your
measurements might be an idea before you order.

The above site suggests that 22" is indeed what you want in a non-compact
frame, but does suggest that if you're riding mainly on the road you might
want a 24" frame (higher handlebars give a more upright, comfier riding
position, whilst the increased risk of cracking your nuts when you come off
the saddle is lessened by roads being devoid of nasty tree roots etc. The
quesiton is how do these translate into compact frame sizes?

Mark Thompson <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Ooh, you are gangly then :-)

Yes, skinny malinky long legs, big bananna feet.

Quoted message said:

Have a stroll down to <URL:http://www.edinburgh-
bicycle.co.uk/resource/size_charts.htm> for lots of information on
size. If you're buying from a shop then they will make sure you get
the correct sized frame. If you're buying mail order then
emailing/phoning with your measurements might be an idea before you
order.

The above site suggests that 22" is indeed what you want in a
non-compact frame, but does suggest that if you're riding mainly on
the road you might want a 24" frame (higher handlebars give a more
upright, comfier riding position, whilst the increased risk of
cracking your nuts when you come off the saddle is lessened by roads
being devoid of nasty tree roots etc. The quesiton is how do these
translate into compact frame sizes?

The chap in my local bike shop did suggest a 22" frame - just thought
it'd be best to double check with people on uk.rec.cycling

Not planning to do much in the way of road riding, prefering to use the
bike for trail riding (nothing too serious - Ochil hills, Pentlands etc)

I don't believe that the Claud Butler Rock frame is a "compact frame"

(according to http://www.bikecare.co.uk/lpb/sizing.html only Claud Butler
sport / Road bikes use compact frames)

cheers

--
Brian