Help on choosing new bike

There are so many different bicycle options these days that I'm
completely lost.

But before I decide on specific models I need to figure out what type
of bike I need. I've cycled when I was in my youth on a road bike
(mostly on dirt trails!) and recently with a Full MTB (mostly on
asphalt!!). I know, I made poor choices but I misjudged what kind of
riding I was going to do. This time around I know exactly how I'm
going to use it so hopefully I'll be better equiped.

I ride mostly to keep fit and because I enjoy it a lot. And by keeping
fit it doesn't have anything to do with loosing weight, just a good
heart rate. I train daily on city trails (flat asphalt) and there is a
weekend mountain climb (asphalt) that I really like. It's about 3km
long with an average climb rate of 8%. I'm addicted to mountain climbs
and wish I could do it more often. There are some monthly group day
trips I participate which can stretch to 100Km but always on asphalt
and relaxed pace.

With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me? I
hear a lot of talk about "frame geometry", how important is that for
me and how do I make the right choice? If you can suggest some models
that would be sweet. Money is not an issue but I'm no pro so high-end
models are out.

tks!

On May 25, 10:30 am, Shark wrote:


With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me?

An all purpose road bike with drop bars at saddle height and tires
around 30mm is comfy all day, fast, and can go anywhere from asphalt
to the occasional dirt road. Such bikes come under the stealth names
such as "cyclocross" bikes which sometimes just need some pavement
specific tires, or "touring" bikes. This is the kind of bike that
people rode for years and years until the industry decided otherwise.
However--if you really don't get along with drop bars--a fully rigid
"hybrid" bike is a good option, and there are plenty that are very
decent quality and quite affordable. You don't need a suspension on
the road, you don't need knobby tires, and you don't need overly
skinny tires. The only scenario where a hardtail mtb might be a good
option, and that's if it's retrofitted with street tires, is if you're
a heavier person, as they're quite sturdy, otherwise, steer clear.

In article
,
landotter wrote:

On May 25, 10:30 am, Shark wrote:


With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me?

An all purpose road bike with drop bars at saddle height and tires
around 30mm is comfy all day, fast, and can go anywhere from asphalt
to the occasional dirt road. Such bikes come under the stealth names
such as "cyclocross" bikes which sometimes just need some pavement
specific tires, or "touring" bikes. This is the kind of bike that
people rode for years and years until the industry decided otherwise.

The industry didn't decide otherwise. Somewhere in the early 1980s the
modern mountain bike was commercialized, and basically became the
cycling industry for about 15 years. There were several motivations for
buying these bikes, all pretty defensible.

Even today, department-store bikes almost all look like bad copies of
last year's MTBs. The psychic dominance of the road bike has not yet
been re-established.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Shark wrote:
There are so many different bicycle options these days that I'm
completely lost.

But before I decide on specific models I need to figure out what type
of bike I need. I've cycled when I was in my youth on a road bike
(mostly on dirt trails!) and recently with a Full MTB (mostly on
asphalt!!). I know, I made poor choices but I misjudged what kind of
riding I was going to do. This time around I know exactly how I'm
going to use it so hopefully I'll be better equiped.

I ride mostly to keep fit and because I enjoy it a lot. And by keeping
fit it doesn't have anything to do with loosing weight, just a good
heart rate. I train daily on city trails (flat asphalt) and there is a
weekend mountain climb (asphalt) that I really like. It's about 3km
long with an average climb rate of 8%. I'm addicted to mountain climbs
and wish I could do it more often. There are some monthly group day
trips I participate which can stretch to 100Km but always on asphalt
and relaxed pace.

With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me? I
hear a lot of talk about "frame geometry", how important is that for
me and how do I make the right choice? If you can suggest some models
that would be sweet. Money is not an issue but I'm no pro so high-end
models are out.

Sounds to me like maybe you need TWO bikes, one for on the road and one
for off.


Bill

__o |Weaning our nation from fossil fuels should be understood as
_`\(,_ |the most patriotic policy to which we can commit ourselves.
(_)/ (_) | -Robert Redford

wrote in message
...
Shark wrote: Sounds to me like maybe you need TWO
bikes, one for on the road and one
for off.

Sounds to me like he need a Specialized Tricross sport

http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=32209

I used to have only a hard tail mtb (Marin nail trail) but realized that as
95% of my riding was on road, forest trail or river towpath that was not the
best option.

I opted for the Tricross that covers everything from road to trail/towpath
and now use the mtb only for rough off road or mud

pk

"Shark" wrote in message
...
There are so many different bicycle options these days that I'm
completely lost.

But before I decide on specific models I need to figure out what type
of bike I need. I've cycled when I was in my youth on a road bike
(mostly on dirt trails!) and recently with a Full MTB (mostly on
asphalt!!). I know, I made poor choices but I misjudged what kind of
riding I was going to do. This time around I know exactly how I'm
going to use it so hopefully I'll be better equiped.

I ride mostly to keep fit and because I enjoy it a lot. And by keeping
fit it doesn't have anything to do with loosing weight, just a good
heart rate. I train daily on city trails (flat asphalt) and there is a
weekend mountain climb (asphalt) that I really like. It's about 3km
long with an average climb rate of 8%. I'm addicted to mountain climbs
and wish I could do it more often. There are some monthly group day
trips I participate which can stretch to 100Km but always on asphalt
and relaxed pace.

With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me? I
hear a lot of talk about "frame geometry", how important is that for
me and how do I make the right choice? If you can suggest some models
that would be sweet. Money is not an issue but I'm no pro so high-end
models are out.

tks!

Landotter is heading in the same direction I would given your riding
preference. Rather than, as someone else suggested, getting two bikes, get
two sets of tires: one more roadable and the other with a deeper tread for
off road.

Cyclocross is a good way to go. Another option, one that I recently went
with, is a 29er. These are more mountain bike oriented frames than a
cyclocross, hence a more upright position, than cyclocross. The rim is a
700c, but the tires have a very high sidewall, thus the 29 inch wheel size.
I can't speak for all the rims on all inchers, but wine will also
accommodate 35mm width on a standard 700c. I've not gone that skinny, but I
do have two sets of tires: one really aggressive off road and one about a ¼
inch narrower with a raised center for more road / hard pack /
rails-to-trails type riding. They fly on the pavement!

Just the forks have suspension and this is the first bike I've owned with
any suspension. I am now spoiled. Unless it is a pure road trip, and even
then it had better be very well maintained pavement, I love the way the
front shock makes the ride much more enjoyable. YMMV

Whatever you pick, get a good bike and enjoy the ride!

cyclocross bikes are the best for all around. 29'ers are just hype
trying to get p;eople to buy a new bike.

On May 25, 4:44*pm, "emanon" wrote:
"Shark" wrote in message

...





There are so many different bicycle options these days that I'm
completely lost.

But before I decide on specific models I need to figure out what type
of bike I need. I've cycled when I was in my youth on a road bike
(mostly on dirt trails!) and recently with a Full MTB (mostly on
asphalt!!). I know, I made poor choices but I misjudged what kind of
riding I was going to do. This time around I know exactly how I'm
going to use it so hopefully I'll be better equiped.

I ride mostly to keep fit and because I enjoy it a lot. And by keeping
fit it doesn't have anything to do with loosing weight, just a good
heart rate. I train daily on city trails (flat asphalt) and there is a
weekend mountain climb (asphalt) that I really like. It's about 3km
long with an average climb rate of 8%. I'm addicted to mountain climbs
and wish I could do it more often. There are some monthly group day
trips I participate which can stretch to 100Km but always on asphalt
and relaxed pace.

With all that in mind I was considering a hardtail MTB but I don't
know if I really need the front suspension (and additional weight).
What kind of configuration do you guys think is best suited for me? I
hear a lot of talk about "frame geometry", how important is that for
me and how do I make the right choice? If you can suggest some models
that would be sweet. Money is not an issue but I'm no pro so high-end
models are out.

tks!

Landotter is heading in the same direction I would given your riding
preference. Rather than, as someone else suggested, getting two bikes, get
two sets of tires: one more roadable and the other with a deeper tread for
off road.

Cyclocross is a good way to go. Another option, one that I recently went
with, is a 29er. These are more mountain bike oriented frames than a
cyclocross, hence a more upright position, than cyclocross. The rim is a
700c, but the tires have a very high sidewall, thus the 29 inch wheel size..
I can't speak for all the rims on all inchers, but wine will also
accommodate 35mm width on a standard 700c. I've not gone that skinny, but I
do have two sets of tires: one really aggressive off road and one about a ¼
inch narrower with a raised center for more road / hard pack /
rails-to-trails type riding. They fly on the pavement!

Just the forks have suspension and this is the first bike I've owned with
any suspension. I am now spoiled. Unless it is a pure road trip, and even
then it had better be very well maintained pavement, I love the way the
front shock makes the ride much more enjoyable. YMMV

Whatever you pick, get a good bike and enjoy the ride!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On May 25, 9:51 pm, wrote:
cyclocross bikes are the best for all around.

Not at all--they are designed for cross. Touring bikes are the best
bikes for all round. Cross bikes with racks and panniers and size 44s
can mean heel strike, and even fender flap/toe interference. They get
pushed out the door--especially at my local LBS, as they're "edgier"
than touring bikes--but sold to folks for the same uses. Shame that to
get them out the door with all that "edge", they're getting a steeper
geometry and short stays--while fine for unloaded riding, and indeed
great for cross, they're really not going to be all that fun for
loaded touring, despite the fact that you can mount up racks.
Certainly, cross bikes are a better option, especially mounted up with
some nice 28-35mm skinwall nominal slicks compared to the race bikes
people are using for crouching over simply to get exercise. FWIW, my
LBS has never had a normal touring bike on the sales floor.

On Sun, 25 May 2008 21:23:17 -0700, landotter wrote:

On May 25, 9:51 pm, wrote:
cyclocross bikes are the best for all around.

Not at all--they are designed for cross. Touring bikes are the best
bikes for all round. Cross bikes with racks and panniers and size 44s
can mean heel strike, and even fender flap/toe interference. They get
pushed out the door--especially at my local LBS, as they're "edgier"
than touring bikes--but sold to folks for the same uses. Shame that to
get them out the door with all that "edge", they're getting a steeper
geometry and short stays--while fine for unloaded riding, and indeed
great for cross, they're really not going to be all that fun for loaded
touring, despite the fact that you can mount up racks. Certainly, cross
bikes are a better option, especially mounted up with some nice 28-35mm
skinwall nominal slicks compared to the race bikes people are using for
crouching over simply to get exercise. FWIW, my LBS has never had a
normal touring bike on the sales floor.

I agree, a touring bike would be an excellent choice, they are
designed for a less cramped position than a road bike and are more
comfortable on long trips. Touring bikes are usually equipped with a
triple chainring and wider gearing in the cassette that allows a better
range of gears for carrying heavy loads up and down mountains. The
chainstays on touring bikes are designed to allow wider clearance so you
can mount wider tires (mine are usually 32mm but I have mounted 38mm
tires in the past).

I ride a REI Randonee touring bike on my daily commute (Panniers loaded
with laptop, accessories, change of clothes, lunch, rain jacket, inner
tube, etc) and I have ridden this bike on tour also.
In 11,000 miles on the road I have replaced my bottom bracket and had the
headset replaced, this bike has served me well. The going price at REI is
just short of $1000 but if you sign up for a membership you can get 20%
off.

If you want to check out at another touring bike I have not seen
mentioned, check out Bruce Gordon bikes; they are custom or semi-custom
built and are more expensive than most bikes but not as expensive as
Rivendell. The web-page is http://www.bgcycles.com/

Happy Shopping, Rich

--
Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy

On May 25, 10:30 am, Shark wrote:

I ride mostly to keep fit and because I enjoy it a lot. And by keeping
fit it doesn't have anything to do with loosing weight...

Sound to me like a bike that can ride the path and perhaps do useful
errands might be nice. That's not an easy bike to buy... the bike
shops don't sell good riding bikes that can also haul stuff. (they
tend to sell bikes with carbon accessories and disk brakes and 32
gears) But hauling groceries, or doing weekend chores, is a great way
to make your bicycling habit more than just exercise. You can get
great benefit by simply riding to and from the grocery store several
times a week. (and still do the daily path stuff) I'm not suggesting a
cargo/work bike. I'm thinking of a 22-25 pound machine that will go
fast, go far, ride a lot of surfaces... and carry stuff. Rivendell's
Atlantis is an example (but expensive). You might go over to
kogswell.com and look at the pictures. He's got a really good concept.
It's better than your typical touring rig, since the handling is
livelier.

In any case... the best way to get a good bike (not necessarily a big $
$$ bike) is to select a frame and have your local mechanic build it
up. That way you get the right wheels (very important) and right
gearing for your geography and fitness level. A used high-end road
frame (from the days of lugged, butted steel) is often the best
solution...