Selecting a Bike

On Jul 11, 1:42*pm, Will wrote:
Katuzo wrote:
When I talked to the people at
work, they all seem to like low end mountain bikes...

Don't go there... Go he

http://www.bianchiusa.com/08_milano_alfine.html

FWIW, on that same shopping expedition I described upthread, I took a
test ride on a Milano. I had a hard time NOT buying one for myself!
Very sweet!

- Frank Krygowski

On Jul 11, 3:11*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Jul 11, 1:42*pm, Will wrote:

Katuzo wrote:
When I talked to the people at
work, they all seem to like low end mountain bikes...

Don't go there... Go he

http://www.bianchiusa.com/08_milano_alfine.html

FWIW, on that same shopping expedition I described upthread, I took a
test ride on a Milano. *I had a hard time NOT buying one for myself!
Very sweet!

The Milano could be what most of northern Europe rides daily with a
couple hundred bux worth of upgrades, check out that sexy internal
cable routing!:


http://www.crescent.se/cyklar/city/1401

or for you chain case fetishists:

http://www.crescent.se/cyklar/classic

Chalo wrote:
Katuzo wrote:

Doctor told me to get a bike. Consumers Reports say Giant FCR3 is
good for exercising ( I'm 57, 5'7", 170 pounds). When I went to
the
LBS, and told them I wanted a bike that was also comfortable, and
could take some bumps (be easy on my butt + back), handle curbs,
be
fitted with baskets and perhaps even be ridden in a campground
occasionally or a dirt path, they told me to go with something
like
a Giant Sedona or a Cannondale Comfort 5 instead.

The difference between the Giant FCR3 and the Giant Sedona is that
the
latter bike has 26" wheels. Such wheels can be fitted with fatter
tires, and they are naturally stronger.

When I talked to the people at
work, they all seem to like low end mountain bikes like the Iron
Horse Warrior 3, except for one buddy who got a $100 dual
suspension
bike whose bearing failed in a coupled of yrs. So right now, I
basically confused with conflicting advice. It seems that big
tires
are the way to gain comfort but exercise bikes don't seem to have
them, and if the bike isn't comfortable I know I won't ride it.

Whether you'll be more comfortable on a so-called mountain bike or
a
comfort bike is a matter of personal preference and how far you
intend
to ride at one time. Comfort bikes are great for short rides at
low
effort levels, but they impede the process of strong athletic
riding.

Stay away from department store bikes of any kind. They are
generally
made in only one size, so you most likely won't be able to find
one
that fits you properly. They are almost always incompetently
assembled and made of the cheapest parts and materials available.
Many worthy bike shops won't service them because they are more
trouble than they are worth.

I really would like a
dual suspension, even if it's used + a little scratched.

No you wouldn't. It's not worth it unless you intend to ride on
very
harsh surfaces. You'll waste a lot of muscle power bouncing the
bike
on its suspension, but you probably won't find the ride much more
pleasant than a normal fat-tire bike on a normal road surface.
Dual
suspension bikes require a lot more service over time than rigid
frame
bikes do, and they cost a lot more for any given level of quality.

Simple is better. For comfort, fat tires at low pressure are
beneficial, but large diameter wheels are also helpful. You can
have
both if you get a bike with 29" wheels (that's a 700c
road-bike-sized
rim with a 2"+ mountain bike sized tire on it). The Redline D440
29er
is a good and cost-effective option if you want multiple gears.
The
Redline Monocog 29er is good if you are interested in a single
speed
bike.

Make sure the bike fits you acceptably well. You should see to it
that the handlebars are no lower than the height of the saddle,
and
preferably a few inches higher, if comfort is of paramount
importance. Lower handlebars are for efficiency at high speeds at
the
expense of comfort. And take care to get a saddle you can live
with;
most originally equipped saddles are terrible.

Chalo's advice is pretty much mine. The Sedona's not a bad
recommendation at all. My daughter has one.

After you ride that for a while, if you start riding longer
distances / want to go faster you will probably want to get a road
bike (drop handlebars), but that's a bigger investment. Even then,
you will find the Sedona may work better in the winter / in the rain
/ for errand trips.

Others had good suggestions as well.

Chalo Colina wrote:
Katuzo wrote:
...
I really would like a
dual suspension, even if it's used + a little scratched.

No you wouldn't. It's not worth it unless you intend to ride on very
harsh surfaces. You'll waste a lot of muscle power bouncing the bike
on its suspension, but you probably won't find the ride much more
pleasant than a normal fat-tire bike on a normal road surface....

If you put a jack-shaft concentric with the suspension pivot and
position the rider so the reciprocal motion of his/her legs while
pedaling is orthogonal to the direction of the suspension motion,
pedaling related suspension bob is eliminated.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon.

Roger Zoul wrote:

Why do you want a comfort bike but yet want to hop curbs or ride dirt paths?

Consider a recumbent bike and ride centuries on the road! Put some 1.5-inch
tires on a LWB like this one:
http://www.ransbikes.com/SXP07.htm
And you'll be in comfort all day...

The RANS Stratus frame is stiff enough torsionally for power transfer
and handling, but quite vertically compliant. Randy and John Schlitter
got the Stratus frame right from the start 3 decades ago.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"People who had no mercy will find none." - Anon.

My advice is to not focus too much on what seems like comfort. Soft
saddles feel better at first, but can cause havoc once you are riding
more than a few miles at a stretch. Dual suspension seems like it will
smooth over the bumps, but it is heavy, and the suspension prevents you
from climbing well out of the saddle, so you will have more trouble on
hills. The knobby tires slow you down, without giving you that much
advantage unless you are riding in dirt and sand.

"Some bumps" suggests you want to ride on roads. Mountain bikes are
ill-suited to that. I can't imagine why you would want to jump curbs.
Avoid them, don't ride over them.

I figured curbs where just a part of life when you road on major
streets with traffic. I just didn't want to stop the bike and get off
at every curb to lift it up.

Road bikes work fine for occasional dirt paths. You might also consider
a hybrid, but again suspension has more negatives than positives.

Would you mind stating some of the negatives.


Your commitment to exercise should carry you through the first hurdle,
where your butt becomes conditioned to the saddle. What's really
comfortable in the long run is NOT the same as what is comfortable on
the first ride.

Don't get skinny tires, but you don't need balloon tires to be
comfortable. Road-bike sized tires with 32mm width are very
comfortable, as would be mountain-bike slicks 1 1/4" wide.

-- George Fox.


I went to the LBS today, and the girl was kind enough to explain tires
to me. It seems to me that selecting a bike is really all about
selecting the tires, and their capability. Tires seem to increase in
width as their performance decrease and their comfort increase. To get
more comfort, but still have some of the characteristics of a road
bike, a 700x38 tire (Giant Cypress) or a 26x1.95" tire (Giant Sedona)
seems to be a good compromise. I was tending towards the Sedona
because of the width of the tires, but you're saying that maybe the
Cypress tires are wide enough for comfort. Must have some truth in
that because today at the LBS, I saw a old guy, who was riding a
Cypress come in for a seat change,and he said the ride was
comfortable .

BTW, the FCR3 is nowhere to be found

Test ride some bikes and see what you like.

Go to a couple of bike stores and try different machines. Including, but not
limited to, what they recommend. Tell them you don;t know what you like and
are there to find out.

I am doing that, but I really don't trust the stores that much. From
my own previous experience, whatever they
have is exactly what you need.

After a short while you'll be able to say things like, This one was very
comfortable but hard to ride uphill, and learn from the LBS what the
tradeoffs are.

I don't know if the bike stores I go to will actually let you ride the
bike. Even if you do, it will only be for a few minutes.


Your experience is the best teacher.

Problem is that experience is a costly teacher. I'd much rather
learn from your mistakes, then to make them myself.

A couple years ago, I advised on exactly the same question for an
acquaintance (who's now a very good friend of mine). He's an
electrical engineer, and he had done what he thought of as
"considerable research" online, which was mostly visiting manufacturer
websites and reading an article here or there.

Like me, I'm also an electrical engineer.

He was all set to get a bouncy comfort bike - suspension fork,
suspension seatpost, soft saddle, high handlebars - until I told him
some of the tradeoffs. He and I went shopping together.

Like me, except, I have no one to guide me, hence I'm here. Would you
mind mentioning the tradeoffs again for me.



After trying the bikes he had in mind, he ended up with a different
one entirely: a good quality, brand name, bike shop mountain bike, but
with smooth tires and no springs anywhere. It was so much better
riding that it was no contest.

So far my views, just from listening to you guys, has changed quite a
bit.

Keep in mind that hopping curbs, riding even fairly rough dirt paths,
carrying loads, etc. is something that anything but the most delicate
road racing bike will handle easily. I do all that and more with my
standard road bikes.

I don't really plan on riding on dirt alot, however, I'd just like to
be sure that it is capable of doing so if need be. However, carrying
loads are another story. I do plan on riding into town to do shopping
occasionally, so I do plan on putting baskets on the back, and buy
some sort of lock that attaches to the bike when the lock isn't in
use.

How well do road bikes handle rain or grass, only talking about riding
a hundred feet or so?

Are disc brakes worth the extra money?

Tom Sherman wrote:

Chalo Colina wrote:

Katuzo wrote:
...
I really would like a
dual suspension, even if it's used + a little scratched.

No you wouldn't. *It's not worth it unless you intend to ride on very
harsh surfaces. *You'll waste a lot of muscle power bouncing the bike
on its suspension, but you probably won't find the ride much more
pleasant than a normal fat-tire bike on a normal road surface....

If you put a jack-shaft concentric with the suspension pivot and
position the rider so the reciprocal motion of his/her legs while
pedaling is orthogonal to the direction of the suspension motion,
pedaling related suspension bob is eliminated.

That would require that you ride a distorted bike in the manner of
some kind of upended insect. It would be undignified, even if it were
technically feasible. :^)

Chalo

Katuzo wrote:

How well do road bikes handle rain or grass, only talking about riding
a hundred feet or so?

"Road bikes" have been with us since the 19th century; "mountain
bikes" since about 1980. A lot of us have been riding long enough to
remember when off-road riding was a matter of location, not type of
bicycle.

Just about any bike fit for life on the road can tolerate being ridden
over the occasional gravel road, empty lot, or grassy field. If you
want to ride rock gardens, you may be happier with both fat tires and
dual suspension.

Are disc brakes worth the extra money?

At the low end? No. For mostly road riding in mostly dry
conditions? No. For nasty-weather riding at $1000 bike purchase
prices, maybe. For being able to switch between different wheel sizes
on the same bike (with handling implications), sure. For riding
routinely in mud and snow, definitely.

A bicycle rim constitutes a brake rotor of larger mass, larger surface
area, larger radius, and better thermal conductivity and heat capacity
than any disc brake rotor. Tradeoffs include their tendency to foul
the bike with smut during wet weather riding and the necessity to keep
rims running true.

Chalo

Katuzo wrote:

How well do road bikes handle rain or grass, only talking about riding
a hundred feet or so?

"Road bikes" have been with us since the 19th century; "mountain
bikes" since about 1980. A lot of us have been riding long enough to
remember when off-road riding was a matter of location, not type of
bicycle.

Just about any bike fit for life on the road can tolerate being ridden
over the occasional gravel road, empty lot, or grassy field. If you
want to ride rock gardens, you may be happier with both fat tires and
dual suspension.

Are disc brakes worth the extra money?

At the low end? No. For mostly road riding in mostly dry
conditions? No. For nasty-weather riding at $1000 bike purchase
prices, maybe. For being able to switch between different wheel sizes
on the same bike (with handling implications), sure. For riding
routinely in mud and snow, definitely.

A bicycle rim constitutes a brake rotor of larger mass, larger surface
area, larger radius, and better thermal conductivity and heat capacity
than any disc brake rotor. Tradeoffs include their tendency to foul
the bike with smut during wet weather riding and the necessity to keep
rims running true.

Chalo