Need more advice on getting a bike

Greg, I am a bicycle master mechanic. I have been riding mountain bikes
seriously since 97'. This is what I can tell you: Do not get a comfort
bike for mountain riding. First of all, the frame geometry (the angles
on the frame relative to each other) is all wrong for mountain biking.
It would make it hard for you to shift weight from the front to the
back wheels, which is crucial for bike traction control. Also, the
suspension seat post (if its the kind I think) changes the height of
the seat as youre riding, which is extremely bad for your legs (uneven
pedaling will hurt your legs and make you more tired, faster). Also,
think about this: The only time youre going to need shocks would
probably be on sections where youre going to be standing on the pedals
anyway.

Giant is a good brand, though, but i think for the price youre looking
at try to find a very basic mountain bike with a front shock only. This
will ensure that the most amount of money is going toward parts that
you need rather than gimmicks you dont. I would really suggest the
Giant Rainer, or the Iguana. They might be a little above your price
range, but you get good parts and a basic bike you can modify later. As
far as your third question, at that price range most bike maufacturers
will crank out bikes that are pretty much the same with no clear
advantages over one another.

Material: Steel is honestly a great material for frames, but only if
its well welded with good tubes (like a truetemper platinum OX), but
that makes it much more expensive. Aluminum is great to learn on but it
will kick your ass in tough sections. Youre really looking for 7005
aluminum (as opposed to 6065), which is the best aluminum for frame
making. And yes, I ride an aluminum frame (7005) and I am 250 lbs.

Ok on to the final question: FS versus hardtail (no shocks in the
back). This is the biggest debate in the bike industry. Let me list the
benefits of each:
Hardtail: Lighter bike, less upkeep, more control over traction.
Hardtails are also great to learn on because they teach you much better
how the bike responds to a certain obstacle. You can always tell when
someone learned on a hardtail because their riding is much more refined
and smooth. Also, you get better parts for the money.
FS (full suspension): Smoother ride, automatic traction control
(regulated by the shock), more confidence, more customizable.
Downfalls:
Hardtail: Much harder on your legs, your back, and your arms. And your
butt. If youre not very good your traction can suck if you dont know
how to regulate it. Did i mention its hard on your butt?
FS: Heavier, more expensive, has a tendency to rob pedaling energy,
(specially up hills, the "pogo" effect where the whole bike will bounce
with your pedaling as opposed to moving forward), much more upkeep, If
you dont get the right one youre totally screwed because of all the
designs available.

The thing with Fs vs Hardtail is that the cheaper the bike, the more
the negatives you get. Notice for the FS the negatives are a lot, and
you really have to spend at least about $2000 to get a FS that will
actually benefit you. My suggestion: GO HARDTAIL. and yes thats what I
ride. You'll get way too many problems if you get a FS, not to mention
it could fall apart. Ill give you some examples of good bikes though,
just in case you wanna run a search for these:
Hardtail: Schwinn Homegrown, any Curtlo frame, Marin Juniper trail, The
supergo Access frames are good (supergo.com), Specialized Stuntjumper,
Gary Fisher classic advanced, and many other ones.
FS: Intense anything, specialized FSR, Giant DS series, Marin full
suspensions, and others.

I hope I have answered your question and more, email me if you have any
further questions. Happy bike hunting!

Ps Sorry I might have bored you to death but I know too much for my own
good.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like

a
road bike?<<
It's basically a mountan bike with less aggressive tires, a seatpost
shock, and more comfortable handlebars

Quoted message said:

2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?<<

They are the same as any bike mass produced in Asia.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands

for less money?<<
Better brands naturally cost more money.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go

offroad?<<
Aluminum is basically the only choice at your price point. Will be
fine with suspension but a steel road bike is the only way to go.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear

shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing
hills?<<
A low end rear suspension does more harm than good. For <$1000 stay
away from full suspension.
Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

Greg

Quoted message said:

I greatly appreciate all the advice I've been given here, and it's
helped alot. I went to an LBS last weekend, and now I have a few more
questions.

To recap, I am looking for a mountain bike with a more upright seating
position. My idea is to go exclusively offroad. At this point, I
won't worry about attaching racks to it for camping gear.

At the LBS, they recommended a bike made by Giant, saying they were a
reputable bike maker ala Raleigh or Schwinn. They recommended a
"comfort bike," which apparently is a mountain bike that has higher,
adjustable handles, allowing a more upright position. They'd have to
put tougher tires on it. It has front shocks and a shock under the
saddle, but no rear shocks.

Basically he's suggesting you take a comfort bike and refit it for off-road.
I'll disagree and suggest you get a mountain bike and adjust the fit to suit
your riding posture. Something with a sloping top tube in as large a size as you
can stand and get some lift from the stem and bars.

Quoted message said:

He said aluminum would be better for a big guy like myself (240 lbs),
because steel tends to flex, and aluminum would better withstand my
weight over rough terrain.

Horseshit. I cannot imagine a rookie out-riding a good steel frame.

That said, for the prices you're talking good steel's out of the question and
cheap aluminum will have to do. It ain't bad for the cost and weight.

Quoted message said:

The bike is about $300. For an additional $200, I can get a similar
bike that has rear shocks. According to the salesman, this would make
the riding easier and safer. He said that an inexperienced rider with
rear shocks can keep up with an experienced rider with a hardtail bike,
because the hardtail rider has to position his bike more carefully.

Get the hard tail and learn how to ride. It's part of the game i'n it?

Quoted message said:

I wanted to check this information with you all. Specifically:
1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like a
road bike?

Sorta like perfect for cruising around the park and not being afraid to ride in
the grass like on a drop bar road bike (well a lot of people are anyway) and not
as slow on the road as a real MTB..

Quoted message said:

2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?

Yes.

Quoted message said:

3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?

At a given price point they are as good as anybody. And it really is about price
point these days.

Quoted message said:

4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?

For an inexpensive bike, yes. For a bigger budget, or ironically for a cheapo
project, I'll prefer steel. Then again I'm old and just like steel.

Quoted message said:

5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?

They do cause problems if they aren't high quality and well suited to the rider
and bike. That costs a bomb.

Quoted message said:

Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

I'll boil down to get a decent bike store MTB that fits as best it can get a
bunch of miles in and you'll know a lot more then.

Ron

Quoted message said:

Greg

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

Quoted message said:

At the LBS, they recommended a bike made by Giant, saying they were a
reputable bike maker ala Raleigh or Schwinn.

I would trust a Giant before I'd trust a Schwinn, based totally on brand
reputation.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/

I'm doing the Big Climb for my friend Dena! See:
http://www.active.com/donations/campaign_public.cfm?key=cpetersky

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?
Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

All the responses you've gotten so far are very good info.

As for rear suspension, my thinking is that it's basically
for riders who like to catch a lot of air, and do high drops.
Since it's important to land on the rear wheel first, it's
good to have some shock absorption back there -- but it had
better not crumble and break on impact, and that means /good/
rear suspension will be well-engineered, and priced accordingly.
If you're going to mostly have both wheels on the ground at once,
you won't need rear suspension.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Quoted message said:

The bike is about $300. For an additional $200, I can get a similar
bike that has rear shocks. According to the salesman, this would make
the riding easier and safer. He said that an inexperienced rider with
rear shocks can keep up with an experienced rider with a hardtail bike,
because the hardtail rider has to position his bike more carefully.

I wanted to check this information with you all. Specifically:
1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like a
road bike?
2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?
3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?
4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?
5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?
Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

Greg

The short answer:

Do more research http://www2.trekbikes.com/Bikes/Mountain/Index.php

Go to the LBS and test ride more bikes, and test them out riding like
you expect to ride off-road - do some jumps, etc. (may we presume you
have the experience and bike handling skill?)

Assess your motivation, fitness, and goals as accurately as possible;
if you're serious about those, get the best bike you can afford. For
instance, you'll save yourself the trouble of realizing 2 months from
now that you need to go back and buy a 'real' MTB if the low end bike
is not really doing the job for you. IOW, a larger rider, who does a
lot of jumping and singletrack, will put a fair amount of stress on
the bike and the parts.

jj

Quoted message said:

Greg, I am a bicycle master mechanic. I have been riding mountain bikes
seriously since 97'. This is what I can tell you: Do not get a comfort
bike for mountain riding.

I agree that for "mountain" riding a comfort bike would be a bad choice,
but if his idea of "off-road" is a fairly smooth trail, perhaps with
gentle ups and downs, then maybe the comfort bike would be OK. Note
that I have zero experience on a comfort bike, so this is pretty much
pure speculation.

Quoted message said:

Giant is a good brand, though, but i think for the price youre looking
at try to find a very basic mountain bike with a front shock only.

As someone who road up until last year with no shocks, I can say that
the front shock makes riding off-road far far more pleasent. I shold
have replaced my old bike years ago....

Rich

Rich <[email hidden]> wrote in news:10vj84vks03lr81
@corp.supernews.com:

You've got a lot of very good and consistent advice. One thing I would add
because of your weight is to pay a bit more for good wheels. The $300 bikes
usualy do not have very strong wheels. It is hard to tell a strong wheel
from a weak one by looking at them, but a good mechanic will be able to
point you to a good wheel.

You got the point that comfort bikes are not designed for more than casual
off road riding on dirt roads and well groomed paths.

Alan Acock

Thank you for asking these questions. I got a lot of good information
from the answers. I ride a Giant Hardtail and had been thinking about
getting a new bike with dual suspension. Don't think I will, now.
I'll stick with what I have. I might see if they can add front
suspesion to it, though. That sounds like it would take some of the
jarring out of my rides off-road. Good questions, thanks again.
Kumen.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Kumen said:

I might see if they can add front
suspesion to it, though. That sounds like it would take some of the
jarring out of my rides off-road.

Front suspension is great for stuff like riding over
really bad gravel roads with washboarding and lots of
potholes (like abandoned logging roads, or fire access
roads,) or rocky/bumpy/rutted singletrack. It gives
you a marked handling improvement via the handlebar
so that steering is so much less of a fight, in rough
terrain. Then you can enjoy the ride all the more.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Quoted message said:

1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like a
road bike?

Depends upon the brand. There's no standard definition for what a "comfort"
bike is. But this brings up an important question- where are you going to
ride it? You say "offroad" but does that mean bike paths or something
nastier with the likelihood of gnarly ruts, gravel, steeper grades &
descents etc? If you need something for "real" off-road/trail riding, then
your $300 "comfort" bike isn't going to cut it. For that matter, at 240lbs,
you're going to discover the limitations of just about any bike rather
quickly in that sort of environment. $400 or so is where you first get into
highly-capable "mountain" bikes (for hard trail use), in my opinion. And
that's for a front-suspension-only rig, Cheap dual suspension is more show
than go, and more oriented towards a comfortable around-town ride or perhaps
for the person that wants "the look."

Quoted message said:

2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?

Giant's reputable, as are Trek, Specialized, and several others. But far
more important than the brand is the quality of shop you buy it from. Make
sure they're not just there to sell you the bike, but to take care of you
down the road. Ask yourself, "How are they going to react when I come
through the door with my bike in two pieces?" Ask yourself if they
understand *your* dreams of how you'd like to ride, rather than yak about
their own grand expeditions.

Quoted message said:

3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?

Decent-quality bikes are fairly similarly priced across the different
brands. I have a strong preference for Trek, because I've dealt with them
for about 20 years and have a great amount of respect for how they design
their product and take care of their customers. Even so, as pointed out
earlier, there will be greater differences between dealer than between
brands, and pricing is probably the least important of those differences.

Quoted message said:

4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?

Aluminum has progressed to the point where manufacturers can build
relatively light, outrageously strong frames with it, for less money than it
would cost to build a frame from steel. There's no real downside to it in
moderately-priced bikes, especially on a mountain bike where your tires have
far more to do with shock & vibration-absorbing qualities than the frame.

Quoted message said:

5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?

Don't even consider a rear suspension bike in the price range you're looking
at. At $800 you can get a very nice dual-suspension bike that will hold up
well to your weight and whatever use you might throw at it. At $400 you're
getting a look-alike almost "toy" bike, without enough engineering and
quality materials to ensure that it will last. Stick to a nice
front-suspension-only bike, possibly with a suspension seatpost if you're
looking for added comfort.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

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

Quoted message said:

I greatly appreciate all the advice I've been given here, and it's
helped alot. I went to an LBS last weekend, and now I have a few more
questions.

To recap, I am looking for a mountain bike with a more upright seating
position. My idea is to go exclusively offroad. At this point, I
won't worry about attaching racks to it for camping gear.

At the LBS, they recommended a bike made by Giant, saying they were a
reputable bike maker ala Raleigh or Schwinn. They recommended a
"comfort bike," which apparently is a mountain bike that has higher,
adjustable handles, allowing a more upright position. They'd have to
put tougher tires on it. It has front shocks and a shock under the
saddle, but no rear shocks.

He said aluminum would be better for a big guy like myself (240 lbs),
because steel tends to flex, and aluminum would better withstand my
weight over rough terrain.

The bike is about $300. For an additional $200, I can get a similar
bike that has rear shocks. According to the salesman, this would make
the riding easier and safer. He said that an inexperienced rider with
rear shocks can keep up with an experienced rider with a hardtail bike,
because the hardtail rider has to position his bike more carefully.

I wanted to check this information with you all. Specifically:
1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like a
road bike?
2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?
3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?
4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?
5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?
Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

Greg

I really recommend you look at Marzocchi or at Fox for front
suspension, and plant to get at least 80mm travel. A must is rebound
dampening and preload adjustability. Look for something real stiff (ask
your local dealer) and reliable, dont worry about real high end stuff
like inertia valves or anything like that, but get the basics. Plan to
spend at least $400 for something good. Also, I recommend Coil over Air
suspension.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Stick to a nice
front-suspension-only bike, possibly with a suspension seatpost if you're
looking for added comfort.

This is just my own (possibly cockamamie) opinion, but I
think suspension seatposts are the work of the devil; they
imply that the saddle is some sort of chair.

Now, if someone really wants to sit on a shock absorber
while going over humps, bumps & dips, I figure that's
their beeswax, and all power to 'em. But there's a
certain satisfying pleasure in just setting the cranks
horizontal, straightening one's gams a little to lift off
the saddle, and gliding over that rough stuff (and thinking:
"Hey, I don't need devices with springs or oil or compressed
air or elastomers for this,"😉 and I don't want to see anyone
denied that pleasure. Also, while off the saddle, a rider
can more easily shift weight between the front and rear
wheels, thereby possibly saving a wheel-truing later on.

Well <blush>, I just think suspension seatposts detract
from developing good riding technique. But then again,
I'm blushing because I'm guilty of some things that might
be perceived as transgressions, myself, like mixing spinning
and mashing, and probably more coasting than I should be
doing. But at least to commit those transgressions I
didn't have to buy something I didn't really need. And if
anyone's watchin', I can clean up my act ;-)

But I think suspension seatposts have no more place on
a mountain bike than on a road bike.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

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

Quoted message said:

This is just my own (possibly cockamamie) opinion, but I
think suspension seatposts are the work of the devil; they
imply that the saddle is some sort of chair.

...
Well <blush>, I just think suspension seatposts detract
from developing good riding technique. ....

But I think suspension seatposts have no more place on
a mountain bike than on a road bike.

Are you a candidate for "retro-grounch of the year"? 😉

I'm sort of with you. I'm not convinced suspension seatposts
do much.
After mine cracked, I replaced it with a standard seatpost and
can't tell a bit of difference.
I think the Brooks saddle was probably more effective as a
shock absorber than the suspension seatpost on this $300 bike.

Quoted message said:

I greatly appreciate all the advice I've been given here, and it's
helped alot. I went to an LBS last weekend, and now I have a few more
questions.

To recap, I am looking for a mountain bike with a more upright seating
position. My idea is to go exclusively offroad. At this point, I
won't worry about attaching racks to it for camping gear.

Hard to add to much of what has been written, but I wont let that stop
me.

It depends on what you mean by "off road". To some that could mean
biking up and down hills where there is no path or road; or it could
just mean 'not on streets' but on paved and/or gravel bike paths.
Your definition would bear significantly on recommendations.

Generally though, the only way a comfort bike makes sense to me, is if
you are thinking street and paved bike paths. Since you are
considering the spectrum from Comforts to Hardtail to Full Suspension,
I'd take the middle ground with a nice HT.

If you find a HT you like except for the agressive position, you could
buy an after market bar with more rise for $30 or less. It wouldnt be
like a a Comfort bike, but with 30, 50 or 70mm of rise it would be
less aggressive.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

He said aluminum would be better for a big guy like myself (240 lbs),
because steel tends to flex, and aluminum would better withstand my
weight over rough terrain.

At that weight, instead of considering bouncy seats and even rear
suspension, be sure to get very good wheels. A high quality double
wall rim would be a much better expediture. If you dont, the mere act
of riding will shred the hub in 1500 or so.

Quoted message said:

I wanted to check this information with you all. Specifically:
1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like a
road bike?

Not in my opinion. They are more upright, have the kitchy bouncy seat
and some even have narrower wheels.

Quoted message said:

2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?

Yes

Quoted message said:

3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?

Trek, Specialized, Trek and Gary Fisher

Quoted message said:

4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?

See "wheels" above

Quoted message said:

5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having rear
shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing hills?

Rear shocks absorb your pedaling power and are not like shocks on cars
to smooth the ride. They do that incidentally, but seem more intended
to protect the frame when you go /racing/ down a hill and across
hidden gullies, rough logging roads, ditches, exposed tree roots etc.

[email hidden] wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

At the LBS, they recommended a bike made by Giant, saying they were a
reputable bike maker ala Raleigh or Schwinn. They recommended a
"comfort bike," which apparently is a mountain bike that has higher,
adjustable handles, allowing a more upright position. They'd have to
put tougher tires on it. It has front shocks and a shock under the
saddle, but no rear shocks.

He said aluminum would be better for a big guy like myself (240 lbs),
because steel tends to flex, and aluminum would better withstand my
weight over rough terrain.

Your weight will have much more bearing on the suspension than the
frame material. Frames are made to be extremely stiff vertically
(there's a lot of strength in the geometry of a triangle). You will
have much more vertical compliance in the tires and suspension than the
frame will ever contribute. Getting back to your weight - you are a big
guy (like me) and you must keep in mind that the suspension is designed
for someone smaller than you. Any suspension component needs to be
recalibrated for your weight by adding stiffer springs or more air in
the case of an air-spring shock. My Cannondale was ridiculously bouncy
until I made the requisite suspension corrections.

Quoted message said:

The bike is about $300. For an additional $200, I can get a similar
bike that has rear shocks. According to the salesman, this would

make

Quoted message said:

the riding easier and safer. He said that an inexperienced rider

with

Quoted message said:

rear shocks can keep up with an experienced rider with a hardtail

bike,

Quoted message said:

because the hardtail rider has to position his bike more carefully.

As other posters have pointed out, you get what you pay for, and the
suspension on lower-end bikes leaves a lot to be desired. Suspension is
a great thing when you are in rough terrain. But it can reveal your
terrible pedaling technique, especially on the road. When you see
someone bobbing up and down on a full-suspension bike, you are seeing
someone who needs to work on pedaling smoothly. Rear suspension really
does soak up the bumps. Have you ever ridden on washboards? When the
trails get like this, my hardtail buddies have to stand. I can stay
seated and let the suspension take the hits - which means I can keep
more power on and pass them.

Quoted message said:

I wanted to check this information with you all. Specifically:
1. Is a "comfort bike" really a modified mountain bike, or more like

a

Quoted message said:

road bike?
2. Is Giant a reputable manufacturer?
3. Are there better brands for the same money, or equivalent brands
for less money?
4. Is aluminum really the better material for a big guy who will go
offroad?
5. For level riding at safe speeds, is there a benefit to having

rear

Quoted message said:

shocks? Do they cause any problems, like difficulty in climbing

hills?

Quoted message said:

Again, thank you kindly for your responses.

Greg

The comfort bikes I have seen really do look like mountain bikes with
their edges softened. "Hybrids" tend to look like road bikes with a set
of flat bars.

Rear shocks on the road can be redundant, but it really depends on the
roads you are riding. For a few years my daily commute took me down
roads that were covered more by road patches than the original
pavement. My favorite bike for that commute was a full-suspension
mountian bike with slicks mounted. It looked silly, but was so much
more comfortable and was considerably faster since I wasn't being
bounced around by the rough pavement.

Since I don't ride those roads any longer, I now commute on a road bike
when it is sunny and a no-suspension mountain bike with slicks and
fenders when the roads are wet (which seems to be most of the time this
year).

-Buck