Clueless Newbie Seeks Bike

Quoted message said:

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I

could

Quoted message said:

ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of saddle post
sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to be *too* fat because

in

Quoted message said:

the past I've found extra the rolling resistance a real chore. Oh, and a
comfy seat would be nice. Budget £300.

At 6ft 0ins and 23.5 stone, I bought a Carrera Kraken SE from Halfords. It
has served me well since April last year and I've cycled over 100 miles on
it both on and off road. The tyres were half way between road and knobbly
and are about to be replaced. The bike got quite a positive review in one
of the recent cycling comics. It's got disc brakes ans 27 gears (24 with
the slightly cheaper Kraken), Shimano Deore Derraileurs and a functional
front suspension fork.

Go an have a look at one and use it as the bench mark when trying to find
alternative bikes.

Quoted message said:

PS. Are disc brakes worth having?

In my opinion, yes.

New User said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what
mountain bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e.
10 miles on tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes
I could ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft
of saddle post sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to
be *too* fat because in the past I've found extra the rolling
resistance a real chore. Oh, and a comfy seat would be nice. Budget
£300.

Any helpful / serious suggestions? I don't know where to start.

Thanks.

My Giant's not bad compared to lots I see in pictures for lots of seatpost
out. That said, I'm not terrifically long in the leg despite being 6'1, and
so I only ride a medium frame IIRC. Schwalbe makes slick MTB tyres, which
will increase your speeds on road. The saddle on my bike isn't brilliantly
comfy for me, but they're a pretty personal thing.

Quoted message said:

PS. Are disc brakes worth having?

Not on a £300 bike.

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

Quoted message said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what mountain
bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e. 10 miles on
tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I

could

Quoted message said:

ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of saddle post
sticking up from it.

Quoted message said:

PS. Are disc brakes worth having?

No, not at your price point and for the sort of riding you're proposing.
But if you were going to do serious off-roading with long and/or wet
descents and had a bigger budget then for someone of your weight I'd say
they're a must.

With your budget I'd seriously consider this Norco, even available in 21" as
well as 18.5".
For sizes measure your inside leg from the ground (not like when measuring
for trousers) to your crotch then deduct at least 15" to come up with your
mtb frame size (different for road bikes). Using this formula the 21" would
suit if your inside leg is 36" e.g.
http://www.leisurelakesbikes.com/ProductDetails/mcs/ProductID/7129/GroupID/7/CategoryID/76/v/05bec941-48b7-4580-a450-d696c33fae9b
It has good quality forks and other components for it's price, the only weak
area may be the hubs but not neccessarily so.

Other useful links:

Quoted message said:

http://www.bikemagic.com/review/reviewproduct/mps/RGN/1/RCN/56/RPN/15469/v/2/sp/

http://www.leisurelakesbikes.com/ProductDetails/mcs/ProductID/7684/GroupID/7/CategoryID/74/v/05bec941-48b7-4580-a450-d696c33fae9b

http://www.evanscycles.com/dept.jsp;jsessionid=C32044A4F711D7888C002F8978FB17A9?dept_id=1002

Good luck and enjoy the summer ;-)

Following on from New User's message. . .

Quoted message said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what mountain
bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e. 10 miles on
tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

Are you aware that there isn't quite the black-and-white distinction
between road and mountain? All sorts of names for tougher than road
bikes without suspension. Some are going to be convenient as
maid-of-all-work bikes eg with brazes and muguard options. So take a
good look around at the /sorts/ of options.

Wheel (rims) need to be tough enough to take the odd tree root etc.
Obviously road bikes are built on the light side and mountains much
tougher - The inbetweenies you'll have to check.

I believe ('cos I don't really know) MTB gears can sometimes be lower
than hybrid/city/road bikes. If you have lots of flat tarmac then a
bike designed for throwing up and down assault courses will have your
little hairy legs catching fire 'cos they're going round so fast.

£300 is a reasonable budget. Don't forget lights and clothing etc.
This isn't nanny-speak, but why have to leave the pub before it gets
dark?

There are lots of tyres to chose from. Some have various puncture
protection mechanisms which many find valuable.

There are various ways of measuring up frames to suit bodies. (Each one
of which is /supposed/ to be reliable.) It's a matter of trying some
with the assistance of LBS staff.

Do you need suspension - front/back/full (my guess is not for what you
have in mind). It adds to the manufacturing cost but often not as much
to the price - the bit that suffers is overall quality.

My first bike (£100 mountain) came with a knife edge saddle! I then
went to the other extreme with a huge softy thing which was a brilliant
investment at the time. However I _eventually_ came to use an everyday
saddle. So while a whopper saddle may not be cool, or what you'll
eventually use, it may be a luxury worth having for a year.

So it is a case of mix and match. Eg. I'll like this bike with those
tyres and mudguards etc.

Finally - Standard newbie info
*
LBS is "local bike shop". These are usually have more depth of
knowledge than Ha***rds. Also their advice can be invaluable. Also
they may have suggestions for local rides and places worth
visiting/avoiding on a bike.
*
Purchase Cyclecraft by John Franklin HMSO ISBN 0117020516. £10 very well
spent.
*
If you can find a buddy or get into commuting you'll boost your miles,
speed, endurance etc.
*
Four essential cycling tips
<http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk/pedalpoints.htm>
*
Have fun. You'll soon extend your horizons.

Quoted message said:

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I could
ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of saddle post
sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to be *too* fat because in
the past I've found extra the rolling resistance a real chore. Oh, and a
comfy seat would be nice. Budget £300.

Any helpful / serious suggestions? I don't know where to start.

Thanks.

PS. Are disc brakes worth having?

There are better things to spend your money on. Some bikes have really
feeble brakes. Just compare a £100 one with a £300 one and the
difference should be obvious. (But they weren't to me 'cos I didn't have
this advice when I started.)

Quoted message said:

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the deckchair business folded
[email hidden]
www.eminent.demon.co.uk/wcc.htm Witham Cycling Campaign
www.eminent.demon.co.uk/rides East Anglian Pub cycle rides

My advice to anyone buying a bike is:

Go to a good independent bike shop; the staff will measure you up an
make sure you get the right frame size

For £300, you're not going to get anything wonderful; if you can affor
to stretch your budget, you should; it will pay in the long run

Go for something with a good strong well-built frame (everything els
can be upgraded at a later date if wished but a [censored] frame means a cra
bike) A good strong well-built pair of wheels is also called for. Th
shop will be able to advise on both of these

There is no point in going for fancy brakes and gears. You don't nee
disc brakes. Also don't waste you money on other fancy add-ons. You ca
always add bits later

Tell the shop what kind of tyres you want. They will fit them for yo
but you will have to pay for the privilege

Saddles are very individual things; how comfortable they are depends o
your anatomy and the type/duration of riding. Don't assume a nic
squidgy one will be comfortable. It's a matter of trial and error, I'
afraid. Don't choose the bike on the basis of the saddle; that ca
always be change

Any finally, try before you buy

Ia

-

New User said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what mountain
bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e. 10 miles on
tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I could
ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of saddle post
sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to be *too* fat because in
the past I've found extra the rolling resistance a real chore. Oh, and a
comfy seat would be nice. Budget £300.

Any helpful / serious suggestions? I don't know where to start.

Have a read of the guide produced by Myra - a former resident of this
newsgroup.

http://www.myra-simon.com/bike/mtb-advice1.html

You don't need disc brakes, at that price point they are heavier and work less
well than V-brakes and the benefits of discs are not relevant tothe sort of
riding you are considering.

Tony

in message <[email hidden]>, New User

(') said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what
mountain bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e.
10 miles on tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

If you're looking for a bike for tarmac and canal path use, by
definition you don't want a mountain bike. A hybrid will do you much
better.

Quoted message said:

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I
could ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of
saddle post sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to be
*too* fat because in the past I've found extra the rolling resistance
a real chore. Oh, and a comfy seat would be nice. Budget £300.

Sounds like a job for the Edinburgh Bicycle Co-op Courier

<URL:http://www.edinburgh-bicycle.co.uk/>

Quoted message said:

PS. Are disc brakes worth having?

Not at £300 for the bike, no. Good disc brakes are excellent in very
muddy conditions but they cost more than £200 a pair just for the
brakes. V brakes are better than cheap disks.

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

;; Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.

New User said:

A familiar kind of post I guess...I'm looking for advice on what mountain
bike I should be looking at, just for fitness purposes i.e. 10 miles on
tarmac or gentle off-road (canal towpath etc.).

The thing is, I'm 6ft 3" and 18 stone - are there any mountain bikes I could
ride without looking stupid i.e. small frame with about 2ft of saddle post
sticking up from it. Also, I don't want the tyres to be *too* fat because in
the past I've found extra the rolling resistance a real chore. Oh, and a
comfy seat would be nice. Budget £300.

Any helpful / serious suggestions? I don't know where to start.

I'd agree with others who have replied and said that a mountain bike
isn't what you are looking for - a hybrid would suit your needs
better.

However, if it MUST be a mountain bike, my son has had five years good
service from his Saracen N-zyme, and it looks good for a few more
years use yet. It's bang on your budget at £300. When he bought it,
the mountain bike mags reckoned it was best £300 mountain bike on the
market - I don't know if that's still the case. It's held up well
though.

He's 6ft 2", BTW. With road type tyres (Specialized Nimbus) and a
seat post rack, he uses it for touring these days, though it's crashed
through a few forests in its time as well.

http://www.saracen.co.uk/nzyme.html

refers

--
Best regards
Richard

http://www.ceresgames.co.uk/

Ambrose Nankivell said:

=A3100 quid a pair for Avid cable discs recently at Cyclesurgery. And t=

hey're

Quoted message said:

certainly good brakes.

But on a =A3300 bike these still represent a third of the cost of the=20
whole thing, which I'd say is a distorted sense of priorities since well =

adjusted rim brakes are perfectly adequate and you could spend the =A3100=
=20
on a better frame and/or transmission which will make a much bigger=20
difference. A better frame will prolong the useful working life of the=20
bike by being readier to take upgrades like, errr, disc brakes in the=20
future.

V brakes ain't broke, so needn't be fixed until you've got a whole pile=20
of other things sorted as well as possible. I just traded in mine after =

3 years, but that's on a =A31600 bike and didn't /need/ to be done.

Pete.
--=20
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/

in message <[email hidden]>, Ambrose Nankivell

(') said:

In news:[email hidden],
Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

Not at £300 for the bike, no. Good disc brakes are excellent in very
muddy conditions but they cost more than £200 a pair just for the
brakes. V brakes are better than cheap disks.

£100 quid a pair for Avid cable discs recently at Cyclesurgery. And
they're certainly good brakes.

Probably. V brakes are good brakes as well, and weigh less. What you get
from hydraulically actuated brakes is more sensitivity because you
don't have cable friction. Disk brakes are usually only earning their
keep anyway when the going is very slimy and muddy, and in those
conditions sensitivity is at a premium.

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

;; When all else fails, read the distractions.

in message <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch

(') said:

Ambrose Nankivell said:

£100 quid a pair for Avid cable discs recently at Cyclesurgery. And
they're certainly good brakes.

But on a £300 bike these still represent a third of the cost of the
whole thing, which I'd say is a distorted sense of priorities since
well adjusted rim brakes are perfectly adequate and you could spend
the £100 on a better frame and/or transmission which will make a much
bigger difference.

To be fair

(i) The V brakes also cost; and
(ii) The manufacturer doesn't pay full retail for cable operated disks

So the difference to the manufacturer isn't a third of the total.
Nevertheless, if he's spending an extra X on essentially cosmetic
brakes, he isn't spending it on the frame or transmission, so your
argument is essentially correct.

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

;; When your hammer is C++, everything begins to look like a thumb.

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

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch

(') said:

Ambrose Nankivell said:

£100 quid a pair for Avid cable discs ...they're certainly good brakes.

But on a £300 bike these still represent a third of the cost of the
whole thing,...£100 on a better frame and/or transmission which will make a much
bigger difference.

To be fair
(i) The V brakes also cost; and
(ii) The manufacturer doesn't pay full retail for cable operated disks
So the difference to the manufacturer isn't a third of the total.
Nevertheless ...your argument is essentially correct.

and, in any case, by the same token you should be comparing the

Quoted message said:

gbp100 oem cost of the brakes to the >gbp300 oem cost of the rest of

the bike if you are going to look at a cost ratio. I suspect that oem
v brakes are a *lot* less than gbp100

best wishes
james