What do you think it the best bike for the city



"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Doki wrote:
>
>> I don't find the racer unduly uncomfortable, as whilst the saddle is
>> hard, the steel frame is fairly flexy and your weight is further
>> forward, so you tend not to have so much weight on the saddle.
>
> Discomfort can be places other than one's backside. I particularly
> prefer more upright positions because I tend to suffer discomfort in my
> arms and wrists rather than my ****, for example. Dutch bikes, built
> for utilitarian comfort, have bolt upright seating positions... and
> comfortable saddles if the owner uses it much!

Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the racer,
until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one type of bike is
always comfier than another.
 
On 23 Apr, 15:12, lardyninja <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 23, 11:34 am, TerryJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >  I sometimes consider plaintively calling
> > after them ''oh, but I have just done 70miles and I'm not home yet''
>
> Respect!!! That's one hell of a commute.
>
> LN

well, yes it would be.
I forgot to mention solid build and big tyres mean that you can
survive the potholes that you have to crash through when you are
surrounded by traffic, and being able to look around easily is a big
plus.
This is usually recommended by someone:
http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/ebw...QRY=C105&f_SortOrderID=1&f_bct=c003155c002910
 
Doki writtificated

> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one type
> of bike is always comfier than another.

In the uncomfy corner we have the time trial bike. In the comfy corner we
have the dutch roadster.

That said, something as simple as an extra inch of reach to the bars,
saddle 10 degrees out etc can make riding a bike into a form of torture,
and I'd be more comfy trying to hold 25mph for 10 miles on a time trial
bike than doing the same on a roadster. Plenty of swings and roundabouts
to whizz around on this topic.
 
TerryJ wrote:
> On 23 Apr, 15:12, lardyninja <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Apr 23, 11:34 am, TerryJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I sometimes consider plaintively calling
>>> after them ''oh, but I have just done 70miles and I'm not home yet''
>>
>> Respect!!! That's one hell of a commute.
>>
>> LN
>
> well, yes it would be.
> I forgot to mention solid build and big tyres mean that you can
> survive the potholes that you have to crash through when you are
> surrounded by traffic, and being able to look around easily is a big
> plus.

There is that. My road bike wheels need truing a hell of a lot.
 
Doki wrote:

> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one type of
> bike is always comfier than another.

Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both basically
sports machines designed with comfort as a distant priority behind going
over their respective terrains quickly. Throw in a bike where comfort
is one of the design priorities and it's a rather different case.

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 protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> Doki wrote:
>
>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
>> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one
>> type of bike is always comfier than another.
>
> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both
> basically sports machines designed with comfort as a distant priority
> behind going over their respective terrains quickly. Throw in a bike
> where comfort is one of the design priorities and it's a rather
> different case.

Indeed. MTBs seem to be regarded as the standard basic transport for some
reason, rather than a comfort / utility bike.
 
spindrift wrote:
>
> I see more and more people on fixies and although I'm not prejudiced
> most fixie riders are mental.

Of the 3 fully working adult bikes in the shed [1], when I reach for the
steed to take me to work, it is invariably the fixed that I select. To
those that have never ridden fixed for any length of time [2], it is
difficult to express the experience. To those that have, it is not
necessary.

For most urban trips, and possibly many rural ones, you do not need any
gears. My commute is 6 miles each way with a change in elevation of
330ft. I am probably as fast on the fixed as I would be on either of the
geared bikes.


[1] As opposed to the 4 that are not working and the kids bikes.
[2] i.e. enough to get used to the differences.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Turn on, log in, fight spam.
 
Dan Gregory wrote:
>
> http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/ebw...1&f_SortOrderID=1&f_bct=c003155c002912m003020

I'll see your Langster & raise you a Touche

<http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/index.html?action=97>

Looking around their site I see that they have a new singlespeed out
that is built to a steel frame.

http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/page/113/Pearson_Hanzo


--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

The media finally figured out that their "paying customers"
(i.e. advertisers) don't WANT an intelligent, thoughtful
audience. And they no longer have one." (Rich Tietjens)
 
Mark T wrote:
> Plenty of swings and roundabouts
> to whizz around on this topic.

Roundabouts I have ridden, yet to try a swing.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I've noticed that the press tends to be quite accurate, except
when they're writing on a subject I know something about."
(Keith F. Lynch)
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> Doki wrote:
>
>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
>> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one type of
>> bike is always comfier than another.
>
> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both basically
> sports machines designed with comfort as a distant priority behind going
> over their respective terrains quickly. Throw in a bike where comfort
> is one of the design priorities and it's a rather different case.

For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.

<http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html>

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I've noticed that the press tends to be quite accurate, except
when they're writing on a subject I know something about."
(Keith F. Lynch)
 
Don Whybrow wrote:
> Peter Clinch wrote:
>> Doki wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
>>> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one
>>> type of bike is always comfier than another.
>>
>> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both
>> basically sports machines designed with comfort as a distant
>> priority behind going over their respective terrains quickly. Throw
>> in a bike where comfort is one of the design priorities and it's a
>> rather different case.
>
> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>
> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html

Almost 20 kilos!
 
Doki wrote:
> Don Whybrow wrote:
>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>> Doki wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than the
>>>> racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say one
>>>> type of bike is always comfier than another.
>>>
>>> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both
>>> basically sports machines designed with comfort as a distant
>>> priority behind going over their respective terrains quickly. Throw
>>> in a bike where comfort is one of the design priorities and it's a
>>> rather different case.
>>
>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>>
>> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>
> Almost 20 kilos!

You want it light! Go fixed and join the light side. Suggestions are up
the thread a bit.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"There is a wicked pretense that one has been informed. But no
such thing has truly occurred! A mere slogan, an empty litany.
No arguments are heard, no evidence is weighed. It isn't news at
all, only a source of amusement for idlers." (Gibson-Sterling,
The Difference Engine)
 
Don Whybrow wrote:
> Doki wrote:
>> Don Whybrow wrote:
>>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>>> Doki wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than
>>>>> the racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say
>>>>> one type of bike is always comfier than another.
>>>>
>>>> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both
>>>> basically sports machines designed with comfort as a distant
>>>> priority behind going over their respective terrains quickly. Throw in
>>>> a bike where comfort is one of the design priorities and
>>>> it's a rather different case.
>>>
>>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>>>
>>> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>>
>> Almost 20 kilos!
>
> You want it light! Go fixed and join the light side. Suggestions are
> up the thread a bit.

Even a steel MTB with disk brakes would be 5 kilos lighter... I reckon
Ridgeback or Gary Fisher would be the route to take for a comfort bike.
 
On 23 Apr, 19:23, "Doki" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Don Whybrow wrote:
> > Doki wrote:
> >> Don Whybrow wrote:
> >>> Peter Clinch wrote:
> >>>> Doki wrote:
>
> >>>>> Yep, but my mountain bike had a less comfy position for me than
> >>>>> the racer, until I got a high rise stem for the MTB. I'd not say
> >>>>> one type of bike is always comfier than another.
>
> >>>> Poor comparison pieces though, because your examples are both
> >>>> basically sports machines designed with comfort as a distant
> >>>> priority behind going over their respective terrains quickly. Throw in
> >>>> a bike where comfort is one of the design priorities and
> >>>> it's a rather different case.
>
> >>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>
> >>>http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>
> >> Almost 20 kilos!
>
> > You want it light! Go fixed and join the light side. Suggestions are
> > up the thread a bit.
>
> Even a steel MTB with disk brakes would be 5 kilos lighter... I reckon
> Ridgeback or Gary Fisher would be the route to take for a comfort bike

Comfortable commuting? Strip down a tourer- designed for long stints
in the saddle, tough, plenty of gears etc.
I wouldn't want to be riding a 20Kg + roadster away from traffic
lights every two minutes, let alone into a headwind!

If you want fast- get fixed and get fit!

Cheers,
W.
 
Doki wrote:
> Don Whybrow wrote:
>> Doki wrote:
>>> Don Whybrow wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>>>
>>> Almost 20 kilos!
>>
>> You want it light! Go fixed and join the light side. Suggestions are
>> up the thread a bit.
>
> Even a steel MTB with disk brakes would be 5 kilos lighter... I reckon
> Ridgeback or Gary Fisher would be the route to take for a comfort bike.

There are lots of alternatives for comfort. Some would say to go
recumbent, or even semi-recumbent like the RANS Fusion.


--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"The POP3 server service depends on the SMTP server service,
which failed to start because of the following error: The
operation completed successfully." (Windows NT Server v3.51)
 
On 23 Apr, 11:02, Rob Morley <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <e442ca95-99e9-4273-be3d-4ca8ab9b2049
> @d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, bornfree
> [email protected] says...
>
> > Hmm. I like your points very much! I must say what you describe sounds
> > an awful lot like my current bike. It's a Raleigh Boardwalk lite.
> > (Folding bike with Dahon technology, apparently)
>
> > Here's a picture of it.http://i25.tinypic.com/2uf4zk4.jpg
>
> > I really fell in love with this bike when I got it. Comfy, light,
> > fast, fairly priced, lots of features. The only thing is I don't much
> > like being overtaken by Roadies whizzing by at twice my speed.
>
> That's probably more about the rider than the bike. Having said that, I
> wonder if your bike setup is right - it looks to me that either your
> seat is much too low or your bars are much too high. Also make sure you
> keep the tyres properly inflated, as that can make quite a difference to
> efficiency - get a track pump with pressure gauge if you don't already
> have one.

Yes I know how important tire pressure is.

Nope - that's how folders are meant to be. It's a more upright
position. A LOT more comfy - and easier to look over your shoulders as
Mark pointed out.
 
In article <ac11f436-0a31-417d-bdfb-
[email protected]>, bornfree
[email protected] says...

> Nope - that's how folders are meant to be. It's a more upright
> position.

Obviously it's more upright, but it's not "how it's meant to be" - a
folder is a bike like any other upright (although perhaps more honest
about its utilitarian nature than some with sporting pretensions).

> A LOT more comfy - and easier to look over your shoulders as
> Mark pointed out.
>
And a fair bit less aerodynamic. Are you sure the saddle is high enough
for optimal pedalling efficiency?
 
Doki wrote:
> Don Whybrow wrote:

>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>>
>> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>
> Almost 20 kilos!

One of the problems of "sportive" concentration is one tends to become a
weight weenie...

My recumbent tourer is /much/ more comfortable than most other bikes,
and weighs in at... about 20 kg. And that's really not a problem if you
don't want super acceleration.

My freight bike (more comfy than any racer I've ever sat on) also weighs
20 Kg unladen, and nips around the place without any great problems.

Both of these are getting use in Dundee, which isn't short on hills.
Neither has persuaded me that I must get a lighter bike, because the pay
back from the weight is worth more to me than the loss in outright speed
and acceleration.

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 protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
bornfree wrote:

> Nope - that's how folders are meant to be. It's a more upright
> position.

Hmmmm, see http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/pix/saddleheight.jpg

That's a folder and I'm in an upright position (my head is a bit forward
as it was just the state of balance leaning on the wall while the shot
was taken, look at the body rather than head and neck)

> A LOT more comfy - and easier to look over your shoulders as
> Mark pointed out.

But the shot of your bike, unless you have /very/ short legs, suggests
the saddle is a bit low. The rule of thumb of heel on pedal when it's
at 6 o'clock and a /little/ bent at the knee is still a good place to
start irrespective of whether it's a folder or not. A folder doesn't
make it more desirable to have a low saddle, and the most upright bikes
there are (Dutch style roadsters and Pedersens) have saddle more or less
the same height as the bars.

Too low a saddle will make for very inefficient pedalling, which will be
part of the reason you keep getting left behind!

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 protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Doki wrote:
>> Don Whybrow wrote:
>
>>> For a comfort bike I would look at something like this.
>>>
>>> http://www.theoldbicycle.co.uk/velorbis.html
>>
>> Almost 20 kilos!
>
> One of the problems of "sportive" concentration is one tends to become a
> weight weenie...
>
> My recumbent tourer is /much/ more comfortable than most other bikes,
> and weighs in at... about 20 kg. And that's really not a problem if you
> don't want super acceleration.
>
> My freight bike (more comfy than any racer I've ever sat on) also weighs
> 20 Kg unladen, and nips around the place without any great problems.
>
> Both of these are getting use in Dundee, which isn't short on hills.
> Neither has persuaded me that I must get a lighter bike, because the pay
> back from the weight is worth more to me than the loss in outright speed
> and acceleration.

An orbis is a fairly normal bike though. For that money they could easily
produce a bike under 30lbs. I can't see how the weight adds anything to the
experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VincentAugust
Best way to transport luggage on bike?
Replies
5
Views
5K
UK and Europe
googlebike
G
B
Best time to buy a new bike?
Replies
9
Views
636
UK and Europe
Marz
M
B
Best value mountain bike
Replies
6
Views
2K
UK and Europe
Roger Merriman
R
P
Best Bike Buys searches online bike stores to help you find bicycles,bikes, bicycle parts, bicycle c
Replies
1
Views
740
UK and Europe
LeeG
L
N
Best bike for a long commute
Replies
48
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Andy Leighton
A
Top Bottom Back