Recommendations for on- & off-road commuting

Simon Waldman said:

-Ridgeback MX series. Probably MX35 or MX45 (are disc
brakes worth it, =

Quoted message said:

and are disc brakes at 300 quid going to be any good?)

Discs at =A3300, probably not. Or at least not really any
better than an= y=20 half-decent Vs, but more expensive to
replace pads and more of a future=20 thievery target (i.e.,
IMHO don't bother).

Quoted message said:

There's something on Ridgeback's site indicating that you
can't attach =

a=20

Quoted message said:

rear rack to the MXs. Is this true, or does it just mean
that Ridgeback=

=20

Quoted message said:

don't make one of their own?

Rear racks often require braze-on eyelets, and the bike may
not have=20 them. But you could always use something like a
Carradice SQR, or a=20 saddlebag.

Quoted message said:

One thing that I have noted is that all of the above are
heavier than m=

y=20

Quoted message said:

old Specialized. Is this an inevitable consequence of the
fact that the=

y=20

Quoted message said:

all have front suspension these days? Or am I looking
lower down the=20 ranges due to inflation?!

Very probably the former, I'd think. If you liked your old
Specialized, =

though, why not look at another?

Quoted message said:

[1] I still have my old lights, but the brackets were
nicked. I'm told =

Quoted message said:

that Cateye won't sell replacement brackets?

Sounds odd, as I've certainly sourced replacement Cateye
brackets in the =

past from my LBS. They were a silly price relative to the
whole set of=20 lights and brackets, but still far less than
new lights.

Pete. --=20 Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382
660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44
1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email hidden] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 14:06:11 +0100, Simon Waldman
<[email hidden]> wrote:

I can't comment on the specific bikes but some general
points:

Quoted message said:

-Ridgeback MX series. Probably MX35 or MX45 (are disc
brakes worth it, and are disc brakes at 300 quid going to
be any good?)

Disc brakes are worth it, but probably not at this price
point. A halfway decent mechanical disc brake will cost
around 80 on it's own for one brake.

Quoted message said:

There's something on Ridgeback's site indicating that you
can't attach a rear rack to the MXs. Is this true, or does
it just mean that Ridgeback don't make one of their own?

It probably can't be fitted because of the rear disc brake.
The brake occupies the place where the mount would be at the
join of the seat and chain stays.

Quoted message said:

One thing that I have noted is that all of the above are
heavier than my old Specialized. Is this an inevitable
consequence of the fact that they all have front suspension
these days?

Very likely. Suspension at this price point is something
else you want to avoid if possible. It's little more than a
pair of springs ad very heavy. If you find a rigid bike
you'll get a lighter bike with better finishing kit for
around the same price.
--
"We take these risks, not to escape from life, but to
prevent life escaping from us." bensales.combensales.comOpen ↗

As other have said, going for front suspension in this
bracket would possibly be a mistake as other components and
frame will be downgraded or the forks won't be much cop. All
3 companys you mention tho' make decent bikes as I'm sure
you are aware, so I doubt they would put total [censored] on. If
I was buying in your range for a 10mile on/off road commute,
I go rigid front or look at second hand and pick up a
bargain as suspension does save the wrists quite a bit. Have
a look at places like Edinburgh bicycles, Merlin Cycles (not
the titanium American frames) and other internet shops to
see what bargains you can get in last years models and keep
a close eye on Ebay and your local papers.

You've only got 15mins to go, but if you could get this for
your £300 it would be quite a deal. cgi.ebay.co.ukwOpen ↗
s/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3669835454&category=729 7

Hurry hurry :o)

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

Quoted message said:

Some googling seems to indicate that this group doesn't
mind giving recommendations for peoples' individual
situations, so I hope you won't mind me asking this.

-Ridgeback MX series. Probably MX35 or MX45 (are disc
brakes worth it, and are disc brakes at 300 quid going to
be any good?)

-Gary Fisher "Comfort" series (Capitola or Napa)

-Trek 4100 or 4300.

There's something on Ridgeback's site indicating that you
can't attach a rear rack to the MXs. Is this true, or does
it just mean that Ridgeback don't make one of their own?

One thing that I have noted is that all of the above are
heavier than my old Specialized. Is this an inevitable
consequence of the fact that they all have front
suspension these days? Or am I looking lower down the
ranges due to inflation?!

Discs on a 300UKP bike are either going to be no good or
mean that other things have been sacrificed. V-brakes
are generally fine. The weight issue is probably down to
the rather heavy suspension forks in this price range.
If you could find a rigid it would probably be
comparable with the Hardrock. I bought my daughter a
Trek 4300 and it is a nice enough bike, the components
are reasonable and all upgradeable should you want to. I
like Treks and the way they handle - I've not been so
impressed with Ridgbacks, never tried a "comfort" Fisher
(but the name puts me off somehow).

--
Pete
===
850 Le Mans II, Marin Mount Vision, Onza Muni Remove your
spleen to reply by email.

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 14:06:11 +0100, Simon Waldman
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

(are disc brakes worth it, and are disc brakes at 300 quid
going to be any good?)

If they are Magura Julies, then no. In any case you'll
probably be better off with good V-brakes than cheap discs
for commuting, not least because disc pads are made of gemstone-
quality diamonds set in 24ct gold. They must be, just look
at the price!

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

Peter Clinch said:

Discs at £300, probably not. Or at least not really any
better than any half-decent Vs, but more expensive to
replace pads and more of a future thievery target (i.e.,
IMHO don't bother).

Cool. I suspected as much.

Quoted message said:

Very probably the former, I'd think. If you liked your old
Specialized, though, why not look at another?

Because there didn't seem to be anyone nearby who sold them.
However, Specialized's website has just revelaed to me a
nearish dealer, so I shall wander over and have a look. It's
only Another Possibility, since I very much doubt that
today's Hard Rock has anything in common with the Hard Rock
of 8 years ago, except the name...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[1] I still have my old lights, but the brackets were
nicked. I'm told that Cateye won't sell replacement
brackets?

Sounds odd, as I've certainly sourced replacement Cateye
brackets in the past from my LBS. They were a silly price
relative to the whole set of lights and brackets, but
still far less than new lights.

I'll try then. Thanks!

--
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains fr-
om giving words in evidence of the fact."
-- George Elliot
------------------------------------------------------------
---
Simon Waldman, UK email: [email hidden]
firecloud.org.uksimonOpen ↗
------------------------------------------------------------
---

OK. Thanks for all the comments.

After trying a few out, I'm down to two. I like both, and
would probably be happy with either, but unfortunately can't
compare them side-by-side as the shops that have them are
ten miles apart.

They are Trek 4300, and Specialzed Hard Rock Sport.

Anyone have any comments on these two in particular?

They are both 300 quid. They both have front suspension
forks but are otherwise both no-frills, lightweight (for the
price), and feel nice.

There are minor component differences[1][2], and the
Specialized has weirdly-shaped tubes. The man in the shop
tells me that these are wonderful and stronger, but I
suspect for my use the main difference is that they look
snazzy and so are more likely to get nicked.

In the end I guess it will come down to choosign on
colour ;-)

Thanks again for your help. -Simon.

[1] Shimano Acera vs. Alvio, anyone? Significant difference?
[2] One has 21 gears and the other 24, but the ranges look
similar and I can't really see myself caring about a few
more steps in the middle...

--
101 Dalmatians and Peter Pan are the only two Disney
animated features in which both the parents are present and
don't die throughout the movie.
------------------------------------------------------------
---
Simon Waldman, UK email: [email hidden]
firecloud.org.uksimonOpen ↗
------------------------------------------------------------
---

Simon Waldman said:

Some googling seems to indicate that this group doesn't
mind giving recommendations for peoples' individual
situations, so I hope you won't mind me asking this.

My last bike was a Specialized Hard Rock, about 8 years ago
(cost around 250UKP back then), which I liked. That got
nicked a year back.

They still make them, and the price hasn't changed much.
Mine cost £300 in 1991.

Quoted message said:

I have a budget of around 250-300UKP. Or, to put it another
way, an absolute max of 350UKP to include lights[1] & lock,
and possibly a rear rack and front mudguard - though these
last two can potentially wait.

Hardrock with front suspension - £299.99. Rigid version -
£259.99. I leave it to others to say whether the forks are
worth £40.

Quoted message said:

There's something on Ridgeback's site indicating that you
can't attach a rear rack to the MXs. Is this true, or does
it just mean that Ridgeback don't make one of their own?

I can't tell from the pictures in the catalogue whether
there are mounts for racks, but the frames of the two
Specialized bikes are different.