fastest bike for 7 mile commute

Simon Brooke wrote:
in message , stupot
') wrote:


What would be the fastest type of bike for a 7 mile(ew) commute.
Dont care about luggage - just carry a wallet down to work.
It is downhill on the way in, so dont get sweaty - just shower
at home at the end of the day.
Do I need a fast road bike?

A time trial bike will be fastest; if you get a road bike, fit tribars.

One of these should be pretty nippy, though a little over the original
budget: http://silverstone.fortunecity.com/cosworth/633/108b.jpg.

--
Dave...

Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the
future of the human race. - H. G. Wells

Dave Kahn wrote:
One of these should be pretty nippy, though a little over the original
budget: http://silverstone.fortunecity.com/cosworth/633/108b.jpg.
:-)

stupot wrote:
What would be the fastest type of bike for a 7 mile(ew) commute.
Dont care about luggage - just carry a wallet down to work.
It is downhill on the way in, so dont get sweaty - just shower
at home at the end of the day.
Do I need a fast road bike? Does ~£400 get a reasonable one?
And the silly question, can I spend less? :-)

I ride a Trek roadbike with Tribars fitted and am in the same situation
as you Downhill in and uphill home, I have an MTB and a racer, the racer
is definitely much more fun but the quality of the roads on your route
is a factor, I can only get down on the bars for a short section of the
journey in and even then have to watch out for potholes in the road
(epsom) which are fairly deteriorated.

All Trek road bikes seem to offer really good value perhaps thanks in
part to trek's ownership of Bontrager who are the source of many of the
lightweight components, mine is a 2001 5200 full carbon model which you
may be able to pick up second hand for around your budget.

I saw the '05 £1000 Trek 1400 on offer for about £600 in a thread the
other day which may be worth a look, I know it's slightly over the
budget but it has a full shimano 105 setup and seems to offer a lot of
bike for the money if you can still find one at the £600 mark.

Regards

Tim

Simon Brooke wrote:
********. This guy knows what he wants. He's said so. Furthermore, I
agree. In the days when I commuted, I always commuted on the fastest,
lightest road bike I could afford. At the end of the day, it's great to
burn off all the frustration with a real blast.

Did you look at the bike I recommended for him? Would you call that a
plodding utility bike? And do you really think he is going to go any
faster on a super-lightweight racing bike?

But if someone wants the fastest possible
bike, he wants the fastest possible bike - and no matter who the rider
is, he'll be faster on a lighter, more aerodynamic bike with a more
efficient transmission than on a hub geared utility.

What's this "more efficient transmission" of which you speak? How much
more efficient is a derailleur system going to be than hub gears on a
£400 bike?

I take your point, though. I may have been answering a slightly
different question to the one he asked. :-)

d.

in message om, davek
') wrote:

Simon Brooke wrote:
********. This guy knows what he wants. He's said so. Furthermore, I
agree. In the days when I commuted, I always commuted on the fastest,
lightest road bike I could afford. At the end of the day, it's great
to burn off all the frustration with a real blast.

Did you look at the bike I recommended for him? Would you call that a
plodding utility bike? And do you really think he is going to go any
faster on a super-lightweight racing bike?

Yes, about 15% faster, mainly due to better rider aerodynamics. With
tribars, a little better than that.


But if someone wants the fastest possible
bike, he wants the fastest possible bike - and no matter who the rider
is, he'll be faster on a lighter, more aerodynamic bike with a more
efficient transmission than on a hub geared utility.

What's this "more efficient transmission" of which you speak? How much
more efficient is a derailleur system going to be than hub gears on a
£400 bike?

About 9%. Gears are about 95% efficient, and there are two gear trains
involved in an epicyclic hub, giving a total loss of 9.75% in each gear
except the direct drive gear. Of course the chain is only about 98%
efficient, but as both systems use chains that makes no difference.

I take your point, though. I may have been answering a slightly
different question to the one he asked. :-)


--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

A message from our sponsor: This site is now in free fall

davek wrote:
What's this "more efficient transmission" of which you speak? How much
more efficient is a derailleur system going to be than hub gears on a
£400 bike?
I take your point, though. I may have been answering a slightly
different question to the one he asked. :-)
Here is a photo of the current (part assembled) commuting machine.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6...-cplevel30.jpg
My current thoughts are that maybe I could just change the wheels/tyres
from the existing touring style to a more narrow higher pressure.
Rear tyre is a panaracer and the front is a schwalbe marathon both at
~28mm and ~60psi.

stupot wrote:
My current thoughts are that maybe I could just change the wheels/tyres
from the existing touring style to a more narrow higher pressure.

That would certainly be the cheapest way forward and you would notice a
significant improvement in performance.

Really it depends how badly you want to spend your money - I'm sure
Simon is right, that a super lightweight racing bike would be lots of
fun to ride. But don't assume it would necessarily make you go that
much faster.

You might find this website interesting:
url:http://www.analyticcycling.com

Rear tyre is a panaracer and the front is a schwalbe marathon both at
~28mm and ~60psi.

Schwalbe Marathons are excellent tyres, good for fast-ish
touring/commuting and pretty much bombproof. But definitely not the
fastest tyres around.

Bear in mind that slick, high pressure tyres might give you extra
speed, you might be stopping more often to fix punctures, which is not
so much fun.

d.

I run conti gator skins at 25mm and 120psi and have had one puncture in
4400 km over all kinds of surfaces. I'll probably use 28mm marathons in
the winter though.

My current bike is half the weight of my old one, has dropped bars
instead of flat, thinner tyres, better components, etc, etc.

My commute is now over 12% faster on average - but I'd bet most of that
is down to increased fitness, and a lot of the rest is the
aerodynamics. But it is a lot more fun to ride - because I like to go
fast.

In article , Dave Kahn wrote:

What would be the fastest type of bike for a 7 mile(ew) commute.

Do I need a fast road bike?

A time trial bike will be fastest; if you get a road bike, fit tribars.

One of these should be pretty nippy, though a little over the original
budget: http://silverstone.fortunecity.com/cosworth/633/108b.jpg.

You aren't going to get a fast new recumbent for £400 either, but one
might be faster.

in message , stupot
') wrote:

davek wrote:
What's this "more efficient transmission" of which you speak? How much
more efficient is a derailleur system going to be than hub gears on a
£400 bike?
I take your point, though. I may have been answering a slightly
different question to the one he asked. :-)
Here is a photo of the current (part assembled) commuting machine.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6...-cplevel30.jpg
My current thoughts are that maybe I could just change the wheels/tyres
from the existing touring style to a more narrow higher pressure.
Rear tyre is a panaracer and the front is a schwalbe marathon both at
~28mm and ~60psi.

Well, that's kind of the point. My last commuting machine (on which I was
commuting about 120 miles per week) had 20mm tyres at 110psi. Different
strokes for different folks.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Error 1109: There is no message for this error