Trek 4100

Deeg said:

Hi all - pretty much a newbie question here. I rode pretty avidly when
I was much younger, but I'm late 30's now and have a back to match.
I'm trying to get back into cycling as a good form of low-impact
excercise. I have a chance to pick up a good condition Trek 4100 very
cheap - it meets my limited budget, anyway. I plan to ride it mostly
as a city bike and I think its fine for that, but because of my back
(disk problems) I need something where my posture is going to be pretty
upright. Is the 4100 a good choice? I'm also looking at a Raleigh C40
as a possibility. I know the 4100 is at the lower end of Trek's range,
but I'm not planning on beating the [censored] out of this thing or doing any
serious trail riding.

First of all, it's a mountain bike, not a city bike, why not get a
proper city bike? You'd lose the pointless and low quality front
suspension and get some nice smooth tires. For the same price as a new
4100 you could get something mainstream like a Marin Belvedere that's
got nice rolling 700c tires, no front suspension, matching charcoal
fenders, and a look that's very adult.

Now if the deal on the 4100 is too good to pass up, then you can mount
up some smooth rubber, and it'll do great duty as a city bike.

It's already a very upright bike by anybody's standards. Personally I
consider any handlebars above saddle to be upright. You could get a new
stem and go higher, but be warned that sitting perfectly upright isn't
too nice to your back either, as it compresses as you hit each bump. A
bit of forward lean is good for most folks. Learn to lean forward at
the hips, don't hunch your back, and you'll be fine.

landotter said:

Deeg said:

Hi all - pretty much a newbie question here. I rode pretty avidly when
I was much younger, but I'm late 30's now and have a back to match.
I'm trying to get back into cycling as a good form of low-impact
excercise. I have a chance to pick up a good condition Trek 4100 very
cheap - it meets my limited budget, anyway. I plan to ride it mostly
as a city bike and I think its fine for that, but because of my back
(disk problems) I need something where my posture is going to be pretty
upright. Is the 4100 a good choice? I'm also looking at a Raleigh C40
as a possibility. I know the 4100 is at the lower end of Trek's range,
but I'm not planning on beating the [censored] out of this thing or doing any
serious trail riding.

First of all, it's a mountain bike, not a city bike, why not get a
proper city bike? You'd lose the pointless and low quality front
suspension and get some nice smooth tires. For the same price as a new
4100 you could get something mainstream like a Marin Belvedere that's
got nice rolling 700c tires, no front suspension, matching charcoal
fenders, and a look that's very adult.

Now if the deal on the 4100 is too good to pass up, then you can mount
up some smooth rubber, and it'll do great duty as a city bike.

It's already a very upright bike by anybody's standards. Personally I
consider any handlebars above saddle to be upright. You could get a new
stem and go higher, but be warned that sitting perfectly upright isn't
too nice to your back either, as it compresses as you hit each bump. A
bit of forward lean is good for most folks. Learn to lean forward at
the hips, don't hunch your back, and you'll be fine.

Yeah, I know its a mountain bike - but as I said, the deal is pretty
darn good so I'm just contemplating my options. You've answered my
main question - it's a pretty upright - and as you said, a rigid
position doesn't do the vertebrae any good either. Sounds like with
some mild tweaks this could be a decent fit for me... Thanks for the
advice.

Deeg said:

Hi all - pretty much a newbie question here. I rode pretty avidly when
I was much younger, but I'm late 30's now and have a back to match.
I'm trying to get back into cycling as a good form of low-impact
excercise. I have a chance to pick up a good condition Trek 4100 very
cheap - it meets my limited budget, anyway. I plan to ride it mostly
as a city bike and I think its fine for that, but because of my back
(disk problems) I need something where my posture is going to be pretty
upright. Is the 4100 a good choice? I'm also looking at a Raleigh C40
as a possibility. I know the 4100 is at the lower end of Trek's range,
but I'm not planning on beating the [censored] out of this thing or doing any
serious trail riding.

The 4100 and the Raleigh are pretty similar in my opinion, but a cheap
4100 might be a better value, depending on the condition of the bike.
One other comment; the C40 comes with street tires, while the 4100
comes with knobbies. For city use, you will definitely want to swap
the 4100 tires out for some 26 x 1.4 or 26 x 1.5 slicks, as the
knobbies will both slow you down and generate vibration that your back
will not appreciate.

Both bikes are, as you note, at or near the low end for the maker, but
for the kind of use you describe, I think they're good enough.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

|> ...Is the 4100 a good choice? I'm also looking at a Raleigh C40
|> as a possibility. I know the 4100 is at the lower end of Trek's range,
|> but I'm not planning on beating the [censored] out of this thing or doing any
|> serious trail riding.
|>
|
|First of all, it's a mountain bike, not a city bike, why not get a
|proper city bike? You'd lose the pointless and low quality front
|suspension and get some nice smooth tires. For the same price as a new
|4100 you could get something mainstream like a Marin Belvedere that's
|got nice rolling 700c tires, no front suspension, matching charcoal
|fenders, and a look that's very adult.

I'm also a newbie, but I would not call the front shocks on the 4100
pointless. I believe they considerably improve my control as I go down
a steep, bumpy, gravelly, unpaved road on my route. I haven't gone down
that road WITHOUT shocks, however, so I do not have a true basis for
comparison.

Also about half the roads I go on are unpaved, so I believe the fat tires
help me, but again, I haven't tried skinny tires.

|It's already a very upright bike by anybody's standards. Personally I
|consider any handlebars above saddle to be upright. You could get a new
|stem and go higher, but be warned that sitting perfectly upright isn't
|too nice to your back either, as it compresses as you hit each bump. A
|bit of forward lean is good for most folks. Learn to lean forward at
|the hips, don't hunch your back, and you'll be fine.

Gee I wonder if I'm doing that? Usually when I'm going downhill it's all
I can do to man the brakes and keep an eye out for potholes and oncoming
cars.

David J Bush said:

I'm also a newbie, but I would not call the front shocks on the 4100
pointless. I believe they considerably improve my control as I go down
a steep, bumpy, gravelly, unpaved road on my route. I haven't gone down
that road WITHOUT shocks, however, so I do not have a true basis for
comparison.

Can you lock off the shocks? If you can, you could try it with and
without to see which way you like the bike setup.

David J Bush said:

|> ...Is the 4100 a good choice? I'm also looking at a Raleigh C40
|> as a possibility. I know the 4100 is at the lower end of Trek's range,
|> but I'm not planning on beating the [censored] out of this thing or doing any
|> serious trail riding.
|>
|
|First of all, it's a mountain bike, not a city bike, why not get a
|proper city bike? You'd lose the pointless and low quality front
|suspension and get some nice smooth tires. For the same price as a new
|4100 you could get something mainstream like a Marin Belvedere that's
|got nice rolling 700c tires, no front suspension, matching charcoal
|fenders, and a look that's very adult.

I'm also a newbie, but I would not call the front shocks on the 4100
pointless. I believe they considerably improve my control as I go down
a steep, bumpy, gravelly, unpaved road on my route. I haven't gone down
that road WITHOUT shocks, however, so I do not have a true basis for
comparison.

Well, I don't mean to totally dismiss them--if they work for ya, that's
great! I suspect they just put them on a lot of bikes as it's expected.
For regular road riding, tires are float enough and save you a bobbing
front end.

Quoted message said:

Also about half the roads I go on are unpaved, so I believe the fat tires
help me, but again, I haven't tried skinny tires.

Don't bother on rough roads, or try some smoothish but moderate volume
tires. The Performance atb slicks are super for the price, and I'm in
love with the WTB Slickasaurus tires that came on my city bike--they
roll like a magic carpet if you keep them at 60psi or so.

Quoted message said:

|It's already a very upright bike by anybody's standards. Personally I
|consider any handlebars above saddle to be upright. You could get a new
|stem and go higher, but be warned that sitting perfectly upright isn't
|too nice to your back either, as it compresses as you hit each bump. A
|bit of forward lean is good for most folks. Learn to lean forward at
|the hips, don't hunch your back, and you'll be fine.

Gee I wonder if I'm doing that? Usually when I'm going downhill it's all
I can do to man the brakes and keep an eye out for potholes and oncoming
cars.

Once your back learns the form, you'll do it automatically. Just focus
on having a flat back, and your hips will likely do their thing
automatically. If you don't have back pain, don't worry about it. I've
got scoliosis and find that a little discipline in form really helps
prevent pain.