New bike

"JohnB" wrote in message ...


Budgie wrote:

Hoping to take up cycling to keep (relatively) fit. At present I walk
around
20 miles a week, so the legs aren't too bad.

Any suggestions for a light hybrid-style bike as near to £100 as I can
get?

For £100 you will get something that might last until you get home, if you
are
lucky. You might get more reliability from a bike from your local tip.

Best to look for a secondhand bike - shop windows, and other usual places.

John B

Budgie, regards the statement above, it's a load of Bollox (tm) - sorry
John!!. You can get a perfectly light serviceable bike for road riding that
will last an acceptable level of time, given the cost and can have
components replaced as they wear out, with equal or superior as you
progress. I bought a rigid (i.e., no suspension) Universal pseudo-mountain
bike (i.e. pretending to be to those who don't do mountain biking.) in 1999.
I rode it daily for 6 months (i.e. loss of licence) and had absolutely no
problems. It has a Cromoly frame, V-brakes and 21 gears. Since then I've
increased the number of bikes I've got to 10 (don't ask why, but beware ;-).
All of them are second hand, best bargain was an old (27 years) Raleigh Sun
'racer'. This was an entry level bike when it came out and cost me £25 from
someone that my wife knew at work. I use it for most of my road riding,
along with a recumbent (the dark side!!).
It's largely dependant on what kind of riding you want to do - on road,
off-road a bit, off-road scary, all of the above.
My Universal is perfectly good, following the purchase and fitting of a
sprung saddle, for a mix of on-road / canal towpaths / bridleways and fire
roads.
This question has been asked many, many times and always gets a similar
range of answers. I suggest a Google search might reveal a lot of facts.
Don't be swayed into spending excessive amounts of money to begin with. Save
that for later when you are sure you are comfortable with cycling and have
an idea of how far you wish to go with it ;-)
Use your local press. If you live in a highly populated area there should be
a bicycle section in the sales that will provide you with opportunities to
pick up a bargain.
If you know anyone who is into cycling locally, it is always prudent to take
them along when viewing (stating the obvious, I know)
HTH,
Dave.

Dave wrote:

Budgie, regards the statement above, it's a load of Bollox (tm) - sorry=

John!!.

Well sorry Dave, I think John's on the money. At =A3100 new you'll get a=
=20
gaspipe clunker which is a chore to ride, double to =A3200 and you'll get=
=20
something which you actually might *want* to ride.

will last an acceptable level of time, given the cost and can have
components replaced as they wear out, with equal or superior as you
progress.

Unlikely to work on the frame though...

If =A3100 is all you can afford I'd go second hand. I've yet to ride a=20
really cheap bike which I considered a pleasurable experience after a=20
few minutes.

Don't be swayed into spending excessive amounts of money to begin with.=
Save
that for later when you are sure you are comfortable with cycling and h=
ave
an idea of how far you wish to go with it ;-)

Agreed, though IMHO you're more likely to be comfortable to *any* extent =

with a =A3200 new bike of =A3100 second hand bike than you are with a new=
=20
=A3100 example. A =A3200 rigid hybrid like the Ridgeback or Dawes should=
=20
last as a competent basic bike for years, and will be quite serviceable=20
before you've replaced any grotty bits on it. =A3100 new bike is a false=
=20
economy IMHO.

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 http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:

Budgie, regards the statement above, it's a load of Bollox (tm) - sorry
John!!.

Well sorry Dave, I think John's on the money. At £100 new you'll get a
gaspipe clunker which is a chore to ride, double to £200 and you'll get
something which you actually might *want* to ride.

will last an acceptable level of time, given the cost and can have
components replaced as they wear out, with equal or superior as you
progress.

Unlikely to work on the frame though...

If £100 is all you can afford I'd go second hand. I've yet to ride a
really cheap bike which I considered a pleasurable experience after a
few minutes.

Don't be swayed into spending excessive amounts of money to begin with.
Save
that for later when you are sure you are comfortable with cycling and have
an idea of how far you wish to go with it ;-)

Agreed, though IMHO you're more likely to be comfortable to *any* extent
with a £200 new bike of £100 second hand bike than you are with a new
£100 example. A £200 rigid hybrid like the Ridgeback or Dawes should
last as a competent basic bike for years, and will be quite serviceable
before you've replaced any grotty bits on it. £100 new bike is a false
economy IMHO.

Pete.
--
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 http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter, I'm responding from personal experience and recognise everyones right
to their views. Unfortunately I think a lot of people are put off cycling by
the initial large outlay.

I really wish I'd have had the knowledge / confidence to go and buy second
hand straight away. I bought cheap new with the view that I would have a
certain amount of consumer rights backing me up if anything went wrong in
the first few months prior to picking up the relevant knowledge once more
and becoming familiar with good and bad LBSs. Now, several years later, I
have the confidence and technical knowledge to pick out the bargains and
make the most of them.

Technical progress, whilst in the main is probably 'a good thing' is not
necessarily so in all cases. Take gear changing for example. I was bought up
on downtube friction shifters, never had any problem at all. I then left
cycling for 20 odd years and by the time I came back to it, indexed shifters
were all the rage. I have several bikes with variants of both, upto Shimano
Deore XT on the mountain bike (proper not pseudo). To be very honest, and
I've given them both a fair crack of the whip here, I still prefer the
friction.

Keeping in mind the basic raison d'etre for the bike is to get the rider
from a-b, a bit quicker than walking and in a friendlier fashion than
driving, as long as it's relatively light, has a useable gear range and
effective brakes, it'll be fulfilling it's basic requirements.....anything
else is just the icing on the cake.

I do appreciate that giving a child a cheap (heavy) steel bicycle will
probably have the undesired effect of putting them off cycling for life.
However, there are effective cheap adult bikes available that will do the
job for the price.

Dave.

"Dave" wrote in message
...

best bargain was an old (27 years) Raleigh Sun
'racer'. This was an entry level bike when it came out and cost me £25
from
someone that my wife knew at work.



If you mean "Sun GT10", I bought one of those last week off Ebay for
£6.50, it even had lights and a rack on it.

Snafu

Dave wrote:

Peter, I'm responding from personal experience and recognise everyones =
right
to their views. Unfortunately I think a lot of people are put off cycli=
ng by
the initial large outlay.

I'm responding from personal experience too: I find =A3100 budget bikes t=
o=20
be awful, and I quite understand why so many of them get put in garages=20
and never ridden much.
We must get "large outlay" into perspective. My next door neighbour=20
bought a Brompton a wee while back (=A3459), he wasn't a cyclist before h=
e=20
got it. And he thinks it paid for itself in pure financial terms within =

a year. Sure, if you haven't got the money, you haven't got the money,=20
but for a lot of people, especially people who can afford PCs and an=20
internet habit, =A3200 really is *not* that much compared to all sorts of=
=20
other things. That's only a little more than a year's car tax, don't=20
forget, and substantially less than petrol and insurance over a year.

I really wish I'd have had the knowledge / confidence to go and buy se=
cond
hand straight away. I bought cheap new with the view that I would have =
a
certain amount of consumer rights backing me up if anything went wrong =
in
the first few months prior to picking up the relevant knowledge once mo=
re
and becoming familiar with good and bad LBSs.

Problem with consumer rights is that plain "not very much fun" isn't=20
covered.

Technical progress, whilst in the main is probably 'a good thing' is no=
t
necessarily so in all cases. Take gear changing for example. I was boug=
ht up
on downtube friction shifters, never had any problem at all. I then lef=
t
cycling for 20 odd years and by the time I came back to it, indexed shi=
fters
were all the rage. I have several bikes with variants of both, upto Shi=
mano
Deore XT on the mountain bike (proper not pseudo). To be very honest, a=
nd
I've given them both a fair crack of the whip here, I still prefer the
friction.

I can work with either, but it misses the point that where you used to=20
get pretty clunky 5 speeds you now get far better produced 8 speeds if=20
you spend just a little more money. Whether you use downtube friction=20
of bar mounted rapidfires doesn't alter the fact that the transmission=20
is better.
But do you *really* prefer downtube friction shifters when you're on an=20
MTB? AFAICT indexing largely evolved from MTB-ers need to quickly and=20
accurately change gear without taking hands off the bars or end up=20
getting thrown off their bikes. Changing gear on radical terrain is=20
very different from doing it on the road.
But now it's evolved that way then it's getting everywhere, even where=20
it's money spent on chrome rather than basic sound engineering. And=20
=A3100 bikes are sold on how many marketing bullet points can get crammed=
=20
in under a =A399.99! splash price, not on how good a basic piece of sound=
=20
engineering can be built for the price. So we get bargain bikes with=20
suspension forks and disc brakes because they're perceived to be good.=20
And they *are* good, *if* you spend serious money on the engineering,=20
but of course that's not happening. Go to =A3200 and though there's even=
=20
*more* "never mind the quality, feel the width" machinery (full=20
suspension and discs now!) there's also sensibly built and specced=20
machinery designed for people looking for a working bike. And it's a=20
better working bike now than you'd have paid =A3200 for in 1990, showing =

that in real terms prices are *very* much lower than they used to be.

Keeping in mind the basic raison d'etre for the bike is to get the ride=
r
from a-b, a bit quicker than walking and in a friendlier fashion than
driving, as long as it's relatively light, has a useable gear range and=

effective brakes, it'll be fulfilling it's basic requirements.....anyth=
ing
else is just the icing on the cake.

The basic requirements should include being a nice enough experience for =

the rider to want to do it again and again and again. Garages the=20
length of the land contain =A3100 bikes that don't get used, even though =

they can get from A to B. And quite what you think "relatively light"=20
is I'm not su most =A3100 bikes weigh quite a bit, because they're mad=
e=20
of low quality, reasonably thick steel tubing (and because fat tubes are =

trendy, often heavier than they even need to be given the poor materials)=
=2E

I do appreciate that giving a child a cheap (heavy) steel bicycle will
probably have the undesired effect of putting them off cycling for life=
=2E

No, not really that likely, as kids have little viable alternative to=20
what they're given and can't drive instead. Also the case that they're=20
generally pratting around on them rather than using them for A to B=20
travel, so if it gets a chore they just stop and play at something else.

However, there are effective cheap adult bikes available that will do t=
he
job for the price.

Not new for =A3100, that I've seen yet.

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 http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
Garages the
length of the land contain £100 bikes that don't get used, even though
they can get from A to B. And quite what you think "relatively light"
is I'm not su most £100 bikes weigh quite a bit, because they're made
of low quality, reasonably thick steel tubing (and because fat tubes are
trendy, often heavier than they even need to be given the poor materials).


I've had a couple of Universal clunkers from insurance companies in the
past and they were truly dreadful. I didn't know anything about bikes then,
but I knew I didn't want to ride one of those. The Raleigh Pioneer hybrid
I've now got with a 4130 Cro-Moly frame is a pleasure to ride and it only
cost UKP 350.

The frame is good enough to upgrade round, whereas a cheap nasty frame is
not worth spending money on, re. better gears, saddles or wheels in the
future. If 100 quid is your limit, then 2nd hand is best, like the others
have already said.

--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:

Peter, I'm responding from personal experience and recognise everyones
right
to their views. Unfortunately I think a lot of people are put off cycling
by
the initial large outlay.

I'm responding from personal experience too: I find £100 budget bikes to
be awful, and I quite understand why so many of them get put in garages
and never ridden much.
We must get "large outlay" into perspective. My next door neighbour
bought a Brompton a wee while back (£459), he wasn't a cyclist before he
got it. And he thinks it paid for itself in pure financial terms within
a year. Sure, if you haven't got the money, you haven't got the money,
but for a lot of people, especially people who can afford PCs and an
internet habit, £200 really is *not* that much compared to all sorts of
other things. That's only a little more than a year's car tax, don't
forget, and substantially less than petrol and insurance over a year.

I really wish I'd have had the knowledge / confidence to go and buy
second
hand straight away. I bought cheap new with the view that I would have a
certain amount of consumer rights backing me up if anything went wrong in
the first few months prior to picking up the relevant knowledge once more
and becoming familiar with good and bad LBSs.

Problem with consumer rights is that plain "not very much fun" isn't
covered.

Technical progress, whilst in the main is probably 'a good thing' is not
necessarily so in all cases. Take gear changing for example. I was bought
up
on downtube friction shifters, never had any problem at all. I then left
cycling for 20 odd years and by the time I came back to it, indexed
shifters
were all the rage. I have several bikes with variants of both, upto
Shimano
Deore XT on the mountain bike (proper not pseudo). To be very honest, and
I've given them both a fair crack of the whip here, I still prefer the
friction.

I can work with either, but it misses the point that where you used to
get pretty clunky 5 speeds you now get far better produced 8 speeds if
you spend just a little more money. Whether you use downtube friction
of bar mounted rapidfires doesn't alter the fact that the transmission
is better.
But do you *really* prefer downtube friction shifters when you're on an
MTB? AFAICT indexing largely evolved from MTB-ers need to quickly and
accurately change gear without taking hands off the bars or end up
getting thrown off their bikes. Changing gear on radical terrain is
very different from doing it on the road.
But now it's evolved that way then it's getting everywhere, even where
it's money spent on chrome rather than basic sound engineering. And
£100 bikes are sold on how many marketing bullet points can get crammed
in under a £99.99! splash price, not on how good a basic piece of sound
engineering can be built for the price. So we get bargain bikes with
suspension forks and disc brakes because they're perceived to be good.
And they *are* good, *if* you spend serious money on the engineering,
but of course that's not happening. Go to £200 and though there's even
*more* "never mind the quality, feel the width" machinery (full
suspension and discs now!) there's also sensibly built and specced
machinery designed for people looking for a working bike. And it's a
better working bike now than you'd have paid £200 for in 1990, showing
that in real terms prices are *very* much lower than they used to be.

Keeping in mind the basic raison d'etre for the bike is to get the rider
from a-b, a bit quicker than walking and in a friendlier fashion than
driving, as long as it's relatively light, has a useable gear range and
effective brakes, it'll be fulfilling it's basic requirements.....anything
else is just the icing on the cake.

The basic requirements should include being a nice enough experience for
the rider to want to do it again and again and again. Garages the
length of the land contain £100 bikes that don't get used, even though
they can get from A to B. And quite what you think "relatively light"
is I'm not su most £100 bikes weigh quite a bit, because they're made
of low quality, reasonably thick steel tubing (and because fat tubes are
trendy, often heavier than they even need to be given the poor materials).

I do appreciate that giving a child a cheap (heavy) steel bicycle will
probably have the undesired effect of putting them off cycling for life.

No, not really that likely, as kids have little viable alternative to
what they're given and can't drive instead. Also the case that they're
generally pratting around on them rather than using them for A to B
travel, so if it gets a chore they just stop and play at something else.

However, there are effective cheap adult bikes available that will do the
job for the price.

Not new for £100, that I've seen yet.

Pete.
--
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 http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/


Oh, ok ;-)
Dave.
(must introduce you to my cheapo £100 new bike one day...it really sounds
like a revelation ;-)

Dave wrote:

"JohnB" wrote in message ...

For £100 you will get something that might last until you get home, if you
are
lucky. You might get more reliability from a bike from your local tip.

Best to look for a secondhand bike - shop windows, and other usual places.

John B

Budgie, regards the statement above, it's a load of Bollox (tm) - sorry
John!!. You can get a perfectly light serviceable bike for road riding that
will last an acceptable level of time,

Sorry, but I think you are wrong. I have yet to see a bike at that price point
that is at all reasonable to ride. It will be a complete waste of money and a
false economy.
Any 'dealer' selling such bikes will probably be rubbing their hands with glee
at the prospect of return chargeable visits by the purchaser.
Spend £200-£300 new and you may be in with a chance of something that will be
enjoyable to ride.


given the cost and can have
components replaced as they wear out, with equal or superior as you
progress.

*If* the rider persevere's with such a machine and is not put off by the ride,
this is likely to be necessary sooner rather than later.
yes, you can upgrade components - at a price - but you will not change the
basic gas-pipe tubing frame.

Since then I've
increased the number of bikes I've got to 10 (don't ask why, but beware ;-).
All of them are second hand, best bargain was an old (27 years) Raleigh Sun
'racer'.

So you too chose secondhand.
Sensible and one that Budgie should seriously consider.

Use your local press. If you live in a highly populated area there should be
a bicycle section in the sales that will provide you with opportunities to
pick up a bargain.

Exactly what I advised.

John B

Agreed, though IMHO you're more likely to be comfortable to *any* extent
with a £200 new bike of £100 second hand bike than you are with a new
£100 example. A £200 rigid hybrid like the Ridgeback or Dawes should
last as a competent basic bike for years, and will be quite serviceable
before you've replaced any grotty bits on it. £100 new bike is a false
economy IMHO.

I have sourced three bikes from small ads

Two Raleigh 21" frame 12 speed racers, one free!!! one for 25 quid, did the
C2C on the free one though I had to have the wheels replaced on its
completion. Still comes to less than sixty quid though.

Got a mint Ridgeback hybrid for £70 five years old and about 3 miles done on
it. Off out on it today.

Keep your eyes peeled and you will get a quality bargain.

Vernon Levy
Leeds