|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
just looking around at marin and trek's webpage alone, i've found
cyclocross, hybrid, city, urban, ALP ("performance of road bike w/ positioning of mountain bike"), road, time trial, triathlon, hybrid performance, hybrid performance, touring, road comfort, etc etc etc the categories are endless... how are these bikes classified? i've always saw bikes as either mountain--beefy, rugged, durable, or road--thin, light, fast. i've seen some bikes with half mountain bike componentry (deore front derailer, for etc) and road componentry (105 rear derailer)... etc... why would they come like that? i assume that TT bikes are for ultimate speed.. plain and simple... but wouldn't triathlon racers want the same thing?? i think the parts for cyclo bikes were mainly road stuff, with knobby mountain tires... wouldnt that be counter intuitive? similar to having a mountain bike with slick tires... or if you were to do a bit of both (pavement + dirt riding), then would you want the former or latter? if someone could clarify all these bikes and give example of their uses, i'd be grateful. lastly, the reason for my interest is because i might replace my first "real" bike. its a mountain hardtail. i put on some 1.3" semi slicks because i was primarily commuting to/from school. after realizing that i will rarely go on weekend trails, i wonder if another bike would be suitable for me. i ride a few miles to and from school each day... 5-10 miles for chores/errandas...and 15-30 miles on weekend rides with friends. as it is right now, i really like the feel of my mountain bike alot..perhaps it is because of familiary of mountain frames as a kid? maybe there is something even more suitable for me... an "urban" or "commuter" bike? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
tsp wrote:
: the categories are endless... how are these bikes classified? i've always : saw bikes as either mountain--beefy, rugged, durable, or road--thin, light, : fast. Whenever they see a new customer segment, the marketing comes up with a new trendy concept :-) : i've seen some bikes with half mountain bike componentry (deore front : derailer, for etc) and road componentry (105 rear derailer)... etc... why : would they come like that? On my trike I have road front for higher gears but mountain rear derailleur for wider gear range. : i assume that TT bikes are for ultimate speed.. plain and simple... but : wouldn't triathlon racers want the same thing?? In upright racing there are detailed rules about what you can ride in an event. TT and triathlon bikes might be illegitimate in the other sport. : i think the parts for cyclo bikes were mainly road stuff, with knobby : mountain tires... wouldnt that be counter intuitive? similar to having a : mountain bike with slick tires... or if you were to do a bit of both : (pavement + dirt riding), then would you want the former or latter? A selection of a certain component makes your bike fit for a certain condition. Cyclo bikes are for going fast on hilly dirt, slick-equipped MTBs work better (?) for urban commuting. : lastly, the reason for my interest is because i might replace my first : "real" bike. its a mountain hardtail. i put on some 1.3" semi slicks : because i was primarily commuting to/from school. after realizing that i : will rarely go on weekend trails, i wonder if another bike would be suitable : for me. i ride a few miles to and from school each day... 5-10 miles for : chores/errandas...and 15-30 miles on weekend rides with friends. as it is : right now, i really like the feel of my mountain bike alot..perhaps it is : because of familiary of mountain frames as a kid? maybe there is something : even more suitable for me... an "urban" or "commuter" bike? Why replace it if it's good? Just get the accessories you need like lights etc. If you want much more speed you could consider a road bike or a recumbent as a secondary bike. -- Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/hpv/hpv.html varis at no spam please iki fi |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
tsp wrote: just looking around at marin and trek's webpage alone, i've found cyclocross, hybrid, city, urban, ALP ("performance of road bike w/ positioning of mountain bike"), road, time trial, triathlon, hybrid performance, hybrid performance, touring, road comfort, etc etc etc the categories are endless... how are these bikes classified? i've always saw bikes as either mountain--beefy, rugged, durable, or road--thin, light, fast. i've seen some bikes with half mountain bike componentry (deore front derailer, for etc) and road componentry (105 rear derailer)... etc... why would they come like that? i assume that TT bikes are for ultimate speed.. plain and simple... but wouldn't triathlon racers want the same thing?? i think the parts for cyclo bikes were mainly road stuff, with knobby mountain tires... wouldnt that be counter intuitive? similar to having a mountain bike with slick tires... or if you were to do a bit of both (pavement + dirt riding), then would you want the former or latter? if someone could clarify all these bikes and give example of their uses, i'd be grateful. Do you want someone to write an essay for you? Nice thought... lastly, the reason for my interest is because i might replace my first "real" bike. its a mountain hardtail. i put on some 1.3" semi slicks because i was primarily commuting to/from school. after realizing that i will rarely go on weekend trails, i wonder if another bike would be suitable for me. i ride a few miles to and from school each day... 5-10 miles for chores/errandas...and 15-30 miles on weekend rides with friends. as it is right now, i really like the feel of my mountain bike alot..perhaps it is because of familiary of mountain frames as a kid? maybe there is something even more suitable for me... an "urban" or "commuter" bike? There ARE a lot of bike styles out there. Take a look at any crowded transit station bike rack, you will see a lot more variety than in the car park. Consider keeping your practical and well liked mtn bike, and adding something new(er) that strikes your fancy. You might like a fast light street hybrid or a racing bike or a touring style bike. It's nice to change bikes now and then. They never fit or feel the same, and changing bikes helps you think about your next acquisition . In a more practical vein, different bike styles get you thinking out of the box. You realize you can use a triple chainring on your "racing" bike, or skinny slicks on your "mountain" bike etc. I mean, if you can find the room, how many bikes are too many anyway? Regards, Bernie |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:58:24 -0700, ,
Bernie wrote: It's nice to change bikes now and then. Yeah, I'd been riding the Norco almost exclusively and forgotten how great the Witcomb climbs. The clipless pedals on it now make it a nuisance to use for my regular utility runs to Kits and downtown. The rims still need replacement so I've been scared to ride it but it's the next best all around bike I've got. The average speed, after a week of running around, is one KmH faster than the mountain bike with slicks that I usually ride to the same destinations. I really appreciated the drop bars on those windy days last week. -- zk |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
"tsp" wrote in message ... just looking around at marin and trek's webpage alone, i've found cyclocross, hybrid, city, urban, ALP ("performance of road bike w/ positioning of mountain bike"), road, time trial, triathlon, hybrid performance, hybrid performance, touring, road comfort, etc etc etc the categories are endless... how are these bikes classified? i've always saw bikes as either mountain--beefy, rugged, durable, or road--thin, light, fast. i've seen some bikes with half mountain bike componentry (deore front derailer, for etc) and road componentry (105 rear derailer)... etc... why would they come like that? i assume that TT bikes are for ultimate speed.. plain and simple... but wouldn't triathlon racers want the same thing?? i think the parts for cyclo bikes were mainly road stuff, with knobby mountain tires... wouldnt that be counter intuitive? similar to having a mountain bike with slick tires... or if you were to do a bit of both (pavement + dirt riding), then would you want the former or latter? if someone could clarify all these bikes and give example of their uses, i'd be grateful. lastly, the reason for my interest is because i might replace my first "real" bike. its a mountain hardtail. i put on some 1.3" semi slicks because i was primarily commuting to/from school. after realizing that i will rarely go on weekend trails, i wonder if another bike would be suitable for me. i ride a few miles to and from school each day... 5-10 miles for chores/errandas...and 15-30 miles on weekend rides with friends. as it is right now, i really like the feel of my mountain bike alot..perhaps it is because of familiary of mountain frames as a kid? maybe there is something even more suitable for me... an "urban" or "commuter" bike? Some of the terms relate to bikes built for certain types of competition. Some of them relate to a marketing person's description of the intended use. You should ride some bikes. I started with a "city" bike which most would term hybrid. It is heavier than a road bike with a more upright riding position, larger tires and mostly mountain bike hardware. It's really very nice and smooth. Pleasant to ride. But my riding is all done on country roads around my home, not in a city. I later bought a road bike and now I hardly ever ride the hybrid. The road bike, as you might expect from the name, is really better suited to how and where I ride. I wouldn't worry about terminology. Ride bikes and find what fits your riding habits best. The answer might be the bike you have and like now. Fred |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
Zoot Katz wrote: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:58:24 -0700, , Bernie wrote: It's nice to change bikes now and then. Yeah, I'd been riding the Norco almost exclusively and forgotten how great the Witcomb climbs. The clipless pedals on it now make it a nuisance to use for my regular utility runs to Kits and downtown. The rims still need replacement so I've been scared to ride it but it's the next best all around bike I've got. The average speed, after a week of running around, is one KmH faster than the mountain bike with slicks that I usually ride to the same destinations. I really appreciated the drop bars on those windy days last week. Eggzackery My old rigid mtb (now a commuter) is heavy but smooth and stable, climbs slowly like a determined old goat, and downhills safely and fast as I want to go; the Marin (when not loaded with commuter bags etc) just jumps down the street when I'm feeling great. Each has it's moments. I love the Marin when I am in the mood for speed and using Kingsway instead of the routes on the Vancouver cycling map and appreciate the old Norco very much in January dark and rainy, commuting home in the N of 49th winter evenings. You ride a Witcomb, eh? Will look it up. The variety out there is endless... Best regards, Bernie |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
tsp scribed in :
lastly, the reason for my interest is because i might replace my first "real" bike. its a mountain hardtail. i put on some 1.3" semi slicks because i was primarily commuting to/from school. after realizing that i will rarely go on weekend trails, i wonder what about just having a second set of rims with knobblies on for those rare trail rides? same bike, quick change tyres swarf, steam and wind -- David Forsyth -:- the email address is real /"\ http://terrapin.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/welcome.html \ / ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail - - - - - - - X If you receive email saying "Send this to everyone you know," / \ PLEASE pretend you don't know me. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
tsp wrote:
just looking around at marin and trek's webpage alone, i've found cyclocross, hybrid, city, urban, ALP ("performance of road bike w/ positioning of mountain bike"), road, time trial, triathlon, hybrid performance, hybrid performance, touring, road comfort, etc etc etc the categories are endless... how are these bikes classified? i've always saw bikes as either mountain--beefy, rugged, durable, or road--thin, light, fast. Most of the categories are just marketing speak. A road bike today seems to mean a racing bike, and most bikes on the market seem to resemble either a road bike or a mountain bike. Hybrids are, as the name suggests, hybrids between these two main types. They always have a flat handlebar, but other than that, some are much closer to a road bike than a mountain bike. At least in Europe you can see "fitness bikes" on the market, which are essentially hybrids with fancy wheels and the narrow, hard tyres of a racing bike. "Road comfort" is most likely a road bike with the handlebar set higher and perhaps fatter tyres. i've seen some bikes with half mountain bike componentry (deore front derailer, for etc) and road componentry (105 rear derailer)... etc... why would they come like that? It can make sense for hybrids, I guess, as they are a cross between a mountain bike and a road bike by definition. Hybrids must use the shift and brake levers of mountain bikes because of the flat handlebar, but the drivetrain of a road bike might be more suitable for the intended use. i assume that TT bikes are for ultimate speed.. plain and simple... but wouldn't triathlon racers want the same thing?? The differences between TT bikes used by cyclists and the bikes used by triathletes are partly explained by rules. In road racing the rules for TT bikes are more strict and the most advanced triathlon bikes would be illegal. In general, competition rules have a significant effect on the bikes you see on the market. i think the parts for cyclo bikes were mainly road stuff, with knobby mountain tires... wouldnt that be counter intuitive? similar to having a mountain bike with slick tires... or if you were to do a bit of both (pavement + dirt riding), then would you want the former or latter? That's a good question. I think both hard-tail mountain bikes and cyclocross bikes make great all-around bikes. The relevant difference is the handlebar shape. Cyclocross bikes might seem awkward in the age of mountain bikes, but their existence is explained by a long (racing) tradition that predates mountain bikes. -as |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
so many bike types - which is which?
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:01:03 -0400, David Kerber
wrote: For most manufacturers, TT and triathlon bikes are usually the same ones, though sometimes tirathlon bikes have higher gears because those guys don't like to turn quite the cadences that road bikers do. Also, Tri-bikes commonly have steeper seat tube angles and other geometry differences (for different muscle utilization). -- Rick Onanian |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
buying my first road bike | Tanya Quinn | General | 28 | June 17th 10 10:42 AM |
Single Speed Cruiser vs. Mountain/All Terrain Bike for Commuting? | Luigi de Guzman | General | 2 | August 21st 03 05:02 PM |
It's Already Starting-- The Timeline of My Bike Purchase | William Blum | General | 7 | August 19th 03 01:27 AM |
Best Way to Travel with a Bike on an Airplane | F1 | General | 5 | August 14th 03 10:39 PM |
Looking for a cheap road bike | Mike Jacoubowsky | General | 8 | August 7th 03 12:12 AM |