|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Howdy
Having not cycled for 30 years, having had a couple of 3speed bikes as a teenager, I bought a bike earlier this summer. I wasn't sure that i was going to make much use of it, so bought a very cheap (sub £100) 'mountain bike'. Good news is that I've been out a lot on it, enjoying it hugely. I now know that mountain biking isn't for me, as I like to give it some wellie on the road. Bad news is of course, I need to buy a racer/road bike. The MTB is fine for round the town, but out on the flat country roads around Colchester I get into 'top' gear on the flat and just can't get any more resistance on the pedals to go faster. And coming downhill there's no resistance until I've slowed down a lot. I -never- get into 1st gear, and only drop to 2nd gear on steep hills (not many around here!) So I'm wondering what the relevant things I should be looking for, and how to balance them 1 - a much lighter bike (the one I've got is chunky tyres, chunky frame) 2 - a much lighter me (the one I've got is chunky) 3 - very thin tyres 4 - better gears 5 - better fit bike (this one is I believe 19" frame and just feels a bit too small, as I have to push my backside off the back of the seat to get into a good position to push the pedals) 6 - get a better riding position (I get the feeling I'm suited to what I believe is the Superman time trialling position - stretched out and pumping those pedals) Any suggestions? URLs I should be looking at? Mark |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Mark W wrote:
Howdy Having not cycled for 30 years, having had a couple of 3speed bikes as a teenager, I bought a bike earlier this summer. I wasn't sure that i was going to make much use of it, so bought a very cheap (sub £100) 'mountain bike'. Good news is that I've been out a lot on it, enjoying it hugely. I now know that mountain biking isn't for me, as I like to give it some wellie on the road. Bad news is of course, I need to buy a racer/road bike. The MTB is fine for round the town, but out on the flat country roads around Colchester I get into 'top' gear on the flat and just can't get any more resistance on the pedals to go faster. And coming downhill there's no resistance until I've slowed down a lot. I -never- get into 1st gear, and only drop to 2nd gear on steep hills (not many around here!) Unless you have a particularly low top gear -- and that is possible on a very cheapo bike with a stupid mix of components -- I suspect your cadence may be rather slow and you could and should go faster simply by spinning your legs round faster: something that you can gradually build up to and get used to. You don't need a great deal of "resistance". How many teeth on the largest chainring on the front and the smallest cog on the rear? If you have 44 / 11 or a similar ratio, that's more than high enough for flat road cycling. So I'm wondering what the relevant things I should be looking for, and how to balance them 1 - a much lighter bike (the one I've got is chunky tyres, chunky frame) That'll be nice and will help overall, but won't necessarily increase top speed. 2 - a much lighter me (the one I've got is chunky) That might involve going on a diet -- something I have no experience of! :-) 3 - very thin tyres A bit thinner would help. Don't have to be the thinnest. Slick or slickish is definitely good though. 4 - better gears Yes it's important to have gears that suit you, but they can be customised if the bike you want doesn't come with them. Well worth doing, in my experience. 5 - better fit bike (this one is I believe 19" frame and just feels a bit too small, as I have to push my backside off the back of the seat to get into a good position to push the pedals) Make this the top priority. 6 - get a better riding position (I get the feeling I'm suited to what I believe is the Superman time trialling position - stretched out and pumping those pedals) Potential for a better riding position will of course come with a bike that fits better. A road bike may well be for you, but you won't know until you'be bought one and given it a good chance (ie. a couple of hundred miles at least). I suggest finding a good bike shop asap and taking their advice. Best of luck. ~PB |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Mark W surely@hometyped
1 - a much lighter bike (the one I've got is chunky tyres, chunky frame) Within reason. You can pay a huge amount for something *very* light and this last kilo or so won't make as much difference as the first few kg. Try to reduce rotating weight as this has more effect on the effort needed both to start and stop the bike. 2 - a much lighter me (the one I've got is chunky) Go for it but don't expect anything overnight. Don't defer getting your road bike until you're lighter cos you may never get and enjoy it. 3 - very thin tyres Go for slicker tyres, rather than knobblies; thin ones make less difference. Make sure you pump up your tyres *hard*. This makes a huge difference to rolling resistance at minimal cost. 4 - better gears Go for range as well as good engineering. If your current gears work OK, don't rush to change them. 5 - better fit bike (this one is I believe 19" frame and just feels a bit too small, as I have to push my backside off the back of the seat to get into a good position to push the pedals) 6 - get a better riding position (I get the feeling I'm suited to what I believe is the Superman time trialling position - stretched out and pumping those pedals) Any suggestions? URLs I should be looking at? My personal preference is to prioritise 5 & 6, which go together really. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Mark W wrote: Howdy Having not cycled for 30 years, having had a couple of 3speed bikes as a teenager, I bought a bike earlier this summer. I wasn't sure that i was going to make much use of it, so bought a very cheap (sub £100) 'mountain bike'. Good news is that I've been out a lot on it, enjoying it hugely. I now know that mountain biking isn't for me, as I like to give it some wellie on the road. Bad news is of course, I need to buy a racer/road bike. The MTB is fine for round the town, but out on the flat country roads around Colchester I get into 'top' gear on the flat and just can't get any more resistance on the pedals to go faster. And coming downhill there's no resistance until I've slowed down a lot. I -never- get into 1st gear, and only drop to 2nd gear on steep hills (not many around here!) Any suggestions? URLs I should be looking at? Mark If you want to go fast on-road, but not do (mainstream) competition, take a look at recumbents - www.bentrideronline.com - several places in the UK do tuition / try-out sessions (DTek and Future Cycles to name but 2). For all things (regular) bike it has to be http://sheldonbrown.com/ (http://sheldonbrown.com/beginners/index.html is a good place to start) Have fun |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
in message , Mark W
('surely@home') wrote: 1 - a much lighter bike (the one I've got is chunky tyres, chunky frame) Yes 2 - a much lighter me (the one I've got is chunky) This will follow. Not inevitably, and possibly not as much as you'd expect - muscle is heavier than fat (but usually more shapely). 3 - very thin tyres Yes 4 - better gears Yes 5 - better fit bike (this one is I believe 19" frame and just feels a bit too small, as I have to push my backside off the back of the seat to get into a good position to push the pedals) Yes 6 - get a better riding position (I get the feeling I'm suited to what I believe is the Superman time trialling position - stretched out and pumping those pedals) Yes Any suggestions? URLs I should be looking at? This depends on what you want to spend. Where I would start is a mass-market racer - something like a Specialized Allez series, Claud Butler Milano, Vicenza or Strada, Giant OCR series. These are things in the £300-£1,000 area - if you want to spend more, read on. Get advice on sizing, which essentially means find a /good/ local bike shop to help you select the size you need. Someone here can recommend a good LBS in your area. Essentially the name on the bike is usually only the name of the frame maker or assembler; equally important is the component set. Prefer a bike with a full groupset from either Shimano or Campagnolo (or, now, SRAM) over one with an anonymous collection of bits and pieces; at least all the transmission components (shifters, front derailleur, rear derailleur, crankset, cassette, chain) should ideally be part of the same groupset. I would /slightly/ recommend Campagnolo over Shimano. Obviously the top of the range Shimano kit is better than the bottom of the range Campagnolo kit, but Campagnolo ergonomics are a bit better across the range and at any given price point I think the Campagnolo components are a bit better. Significantly, you can get /any/ spare part for Campagnolo components; with Shimano you can usually only get complete components. However, neither Campagnolo nor SRAM produce very cheap components, so 'entry level' road bikes will tend to have Shimano. Things which are worth extra are * Carbon forks - greatly improve comfort over aluminium ones, slightly over steel ones; * Carbon seat-stays - ditto; * Full carbon monocoque frame - nice if you can afford it, but gets pricey; For your use I think you want a double chainset rather than a triple - you are in a fairly flat part of the world and say you don't use your low gears. If you want to try a time trial position you can add 'clip on' aerobars like these: http://www.wiggle.co.uk/Default.aspx?ProdID=4000000916 You could also go the whole hog and replace your handlebars with a full aero set, but that gets expensive and most people don't find them comfortable for ordinary riding so you'd be better trying clip-ons first. If you find that time-trialling is what you enjoy - and personally, I enjoy it - then specialist time trial machinery is out there. One of the things I like about cycling is that you can afford to own a bike identical to what the top pros are racing - the equivalent of a Maclaren F1 car - but particularly in time trial the prices can get eye-watering. If you're serious, time trial bikes don't come full built up - you choose your components. Frames to look at include Cervelo P3C Isaac Joule Dolan Pallotola -- (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; making jokes about dyslexia isn't big, it isn't clever and ;; it isn't furry. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 23:32:42 +0100, "Pete Biggs"
wrote: Unless you have a particularly low top gear -- and that is possible on a very cheapo bike with a stupid mix of components -- I suspect your cadence may be rather slow and you could and should go faster simply by spinning your legs round faster: something that you can gradually build up to and get used to. You don't need a great deal of "resistance". Thing is, if I'm on the flat, and not in top gear, my little legs whizz round much faster, but don't give me extra speed - less so in fact. I do get my legs going round pretty fast in top gear. And coming down a hill, whenit starts to level out, even in top gear, I physically can't pedal because the wheels spin round so fast, but give absolutely no extra speed (and I look like a tit) How many teeth on the largest chainring on the front and the smallest cog on the rear? If you have 44 / 11 or a similar ratio, that's more than high enough for flat road cycling. It appears to be 42 on the big one at the front and 14 on the little one at the rear. Mark |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
On 7 Sep 2006 00:18:26 -0700, "squeaker" wrote:
If you want to go fast on-road, but not do (mainstream) competition, take a look at recumbents - www.bentrideronline.com - several places in the UK do tuition / try-out sessions (DTek and Future Cycles to name but 2). Ahh, I forgot to mention, I prefer not to look like a tit! ;-) For all things (regular) bike it has to be http://sheldonbrown.com/ (http://sheldonbrown.com/beginners/index.html is a good place to start) Have fun These are really useful - thanks :-) Mark |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 09:58:09 +0100, Mark W surely@home wrote:
On 7 Sep 2006 00:18:26 -0700, "squeaker" wrote: For all things (regular) bike it has to be http://sheldonbrown.com/ (http://sheldonbrown.com/beginners/index.html is a good place to start) Have fun These are really useful - thanks :-) Actually, particularly useful on the Sheldon Brown pages are the mention that whilst 20years ago the design of bikes was such that having the seat just high enough to get a tippytoe on the floor when at a stand, the design of bikes is such that this isn't the case now, and that seats should be higher. (I had wondered why some cyclists seem to have seats way higher than I would have expected - I thought that maybe they had exceptionally long legs!) Mark |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Mark W wrote:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 23:32:42 +0100, "Pete Biggs" wrote: Unless you have a particularly low top gear -- and that is possible on a very cheapo bike with a stupid mix of components -- I suspect your cadence may be rather slow and you could and should go faster simply by spinning your legs round faster: something that you can gradually build up to and get used to. You don't need a great deal of "resistance". Thing is, if I'm on the flat, and not in top gear, my little legs whizz round much faster, but don't give me extra speed - less so in fact. I do get my legs going round pretty fast in top gear. And coming down a hill, whenit starts to level out, even in top gear, I physically can't pedal because the wheels spin round so fast, but give absolutely no extra speed (and I look like a tit) Up to a point, it is possible to increase the speed you can physically whizz your legs round through practice, but I see from what you say below that your gears are indeed what I call stupid, so I can't blame you!.... How many teeth on the largest chainring on the front and the smallest cog on the rear? If you have 44 / 11 or a similar ratio, that's more than high enough for flat road cycling. It appears to be 42 on the big one at the front and 14 on the little one at the rear. They've given you a modern style crankset that's designed to be used with a modern cassette that start at 11 teeth, but with an old style freewheel that's normally used with larger chainrings. You won't get that nonsense with a better bike -- a road or mountain one. ~PB |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
relevant importance of variables when choosing a new bike
Mark W wrote:
Ahh, I forgot to mention, I prefer not to look like a tit! ;-) As the group's resident recumbent riders will tell you, the comments they get from passers-by are usually of the "cool bike" kind. And as someone who has struggled to keep up with one of the group's resident recumbent riders, I can vouch for how fast they are on the flat - even when they have an extra wheel to slow them down. d. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Control petrol prices | [email protected] | Australia | 9 | April 20th 06 09:11 PM |
Bike Weight redux | Doug Taylor | Techniques | 100 | March 25th 06 09:29 PM |
May 6 NYC NBG Day to Honor Fallen Bike Activist | Cycle America | General | 0 | April 11th 05 04:15 PM |
Windosr Tourist Bike Revisiited | Earl Bollinger | General | 16 | February 13th 05 08:04 PM |
Street Bike | Devlin | UK | 44 | March 17th 04 10:28 AM |