FXjohn
05-20-08, 08:25 AM
how about the cannondale bad boy?
http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/08/cusa/model-8BS.html
http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/08/cusa/model-8BS.html
Living Car Free - Hybrids are dorky
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.Gustavo
05-26-08, 03:39 AM
Five pages and I still don't understand the purpose of these ugly looking bikes. If you want to ride to work, and the roads are good, why not use a ROAD bike? The are optimized for use on smooth roads, and will cheerfully accept reasonable gravel paths and even some grass. If road or conditions are rougher, use a 'cross or even a mountainbike. I do all my fair weather commuting, bicycle holidays and leisure rides on my '84 Chesini 12 speed. When it's really snowy, I want to go offroad or I anticipate lots of cobblestones, I take the mountainbike (which accepts fenders). Why would you even consider a 'hybrid'? It's like getting the worst of two worlds, plus you look dorky.
gascostalot
05-26-08, 02:47 PM
From my research it appears that the Hybrid bike is a complicated thing.
Originally the Hybrid bike was introduce for the more casual bicyclist. Why they didnt bring back the English 3-speed is beyond me, but I imagine they just wanted to save money by using frames that they have in stockpiles and modify them for a more upgright and comfortable ride. So essentially you have road bikes with flat bars and mountain bikes with skinnier tires.
Some hybrid bikes are a great value, because they're essentially the same frame of a previously high end bike with different components. Others were crappy, because the manufacturer didnt know what to do and they created something that's a compromise in every possible way.
Nowadays the Hybrid bikes are being sold as 'Commuters' or 'Urban' bikes. Personally I think they would be more successful selling Dutch Bikes, which is probably the most comfortable bikes to ride outside of bents. But I think the market isnt there yet, because most of the money in Bicycles in the States is in road bikes, mountain bikes, and the fixed gear sub-culture.
Originally the Hybrid bike was introduce for the more casual bicyclist. Why they didnt bring back the English 3-speed is beyond me, but I imagine they just wanted to save money by using frames that they have in stockpiles and modify them for a more upgright and comfortable ride. So essentially you have road bikes with flat bars and mountain bikes with skinnier tires.
Some hybrid bikes are a great value, because they're essentially the same frame of a previously high end bike with different components. Others were crappy, because the manufacturer didnt know what to do and they created something that's a compromise in every possible way.
Nowadays the Hybrid bikes are being sold as 'Commuters' or 'Urban' bikes. Personally I think they would be more successful selling Dutch Bikes, which is probably the most comfortable bikes to ride outside of bents. But I think the market isnt there yet, because most of the money in Bicycles in the States is in road bikes, mountain bikes, and the fixed gear sub-culture.
rickyaustin
05-26-08, 10:42 PM
If a crackhead needs a fix, he'll steal a Huffy or a Colnago.
Black Bud
05-26-08, 11:24 PM
It seems to me that 'hybrid' is more of a marketing buzz-word for commuter / utility bikes than anything else.
You have got it!
As for all of you who are complaining that "hybrids" are "ugly"? Who in the heck cares what the bike looks like, as long as it does the job one wants it to when one wants to do it?
Think of a "hybrid" as the often the best "tool for the job at hand" for everyday use when speed and looks may not be a factor, but urban "toughness" and load bearing capacity is (not everyone feels comfortable on a full-out heavy load touring bike, after all).
You have got it!
As for all of you who are complaining that "hybrids" are "ugly"? Who in the heck cares what the bike looks like, as long as it does the job one wants it to when one wants to do it?
Think of a "hybrid" as the often the best "tool for the job at hand" for everyday use when speed and looks may not be a factor, but urban "toughness" and load bearing capacity is (not everyone feels comfortable on a full-out heavy load touring bike, after all).
Gustavo
05-27-08, 07:16 AM
You have got it!
As for all of you who are complaining that "hybrids" are "ugly"? Who in the heck cares what the bike looks like, as long as it does the job one wants it to when one wants to do it?
Think of a "hybrid" as the often the best "tool for the job at hand" for everyday use when speed and looks may not be a factor, but urban "toughness" and load bearing capacity is (not everyone feels comfortable on a full-out heavy load touring bike, after all).
Well, many people do actually care about how things look. "Beauty saves the world" as Stepan Trofimovich put it. I for one enjoy looking at beautiful things, like an Italian high-end vintage lightweight.
The problem is that not only are the hybrids ugly, they AREN'T fit for purpose. If the purpose is to ride in the street, a road bike is quicker, lighter and looks better. If you want to ride to work through a rough forest or something, you might want to get a cyclocross. Most people, at least around here, don't carry any loads, except their generously proportioned behinds, on their dorkomobiles. The only thing that hybrids are optimized for is dorkiness...
As for all of you who are complaining that "hybrids" are "ugly"? Who in the heck cares what the bike looks like, as long as it does the job one wants it to when one wants to do it?
Think of a "hybrid" as the often the best "tool for the job at hand" for everyday use when speed and looks may not be a factor, but urban "toughness" and load bearing capacity is (not everyone feels comfortable on a full-out heavy load touring bike, after all).
Well, many people do actually care about how things look. "Beauty saves the world" as Stepan Trofimovich put it. I for one enjoy looking at beautiful things, like an Italian high-end vintage lightweight.
The problem is that not only are the hybrids ugly, they AREN'T fit for purpose. If the purpose is to ride in the street, a road bike is quicker, lighter and looks better. If you want to ride to work through a rough forest or something, you might want to get a cyclocross. Most people, at least around here, don't carry any loads, except their generously proportioned behinds, on their dorkomobiles. The only thing that hybrids are optimized for is dorkiness...
FXjohn
05-27-08, 07:28 AM
Gustavo do you just oppose flat handlebars?
Bikepacker67
05-27-08, 08:03 AM
I haven't read thru this whole thread, but I was just wondering if anyone pointed out to Gustavo, the similarity between opinions and azzholes.
ObjectAgnosia
05-27-08, 08:24 AM
Five pages and I still don't understand the purpose of these ugly looking bikes. If you want to ride to work, and the roads are good, why not use a ROAD bike? The are optimized for use on smooth roads, and will cheerfully accept reasonable gravel paths and even some grass. If road or conditions are rougher, use a 'cross or even a mountainbike. I do all my fair weather commuting, bicycle holidays and leisure rides on my '84 Chesini 12 speed. When it's really snowy, I want to go offroad or I anticipate lots of cobblestones, I take the mountainbike (which accepts fenders). Why would you even consider a 'hybrid'? It's like getting the worst of two worlds, plus you look dorky.
If you own a road bike, I suggest you take a closer look at it. Does it have room for fatter tires? Space for full fenders? Mounts for racks? Room for panniers? My road bike sure doesn't, It barely has enough room to remove the rear wheel when the rear tire is inflated. My commute is 34 mi r/t and I would be stupid to carry a full panniers worth of work clothing, food, and tools on my back for that distance. Yes I'll go faster on my road bike, but my back will pay for it the whole time. I can mount fenders and racks on my hybrid/commuter and ride comfortably to work, letting my bike carry the load.
If you own a road bike, I suggest you take a closer look at it. Does it have room for fatter tires? Space for full fenders? Mounts for racks? Room for panniers? My road bike sure doesn't, It barely has enough room to remove the rear wheel when the rear tire is inflated. My commute is 34 mi r/t and I would be stupid to carry a full panniers worth of work clothing, food, and tools on my back for that distance. Yes I'll go faster on my road bike, but my back will pay for it the whole time. I can mount fenders and racks on my hybrid/commuter and ride comfortably to work, letting my bike carry the load.
Gustavo
05-27-08, 01:20 PM
If you own a road bike, I suggest you take a closer look at it. Does it have room for fatter tires? Space for full fenders? Mounts for racks? Room for panniers? My road bike sure doesn't, It barely has enough room to remove the rear wheel when the rear tire is inflated. My commute is 34 mi r/t and I would be stupid to carry a full panniers worth of work clothing, food, and tools on my back for that distance. Yes I'll go faster on my road bike, but my back will pay for it the whole time. I can mount fenders and racks on my hybrid/commuter and ride comfortably to work, letting my bike carry the load.
It doesn't have room for fat tires, but why would I want that? I use it on asphalt. There is always room for fenders, on all road bikes. Also, you can always mount racks if you want, perhaps not using standard mounts, but it is always possible. But that is not really an issue here, because most people I see don't use panniers or racks on the hybrids.
I work in an office, so I don't carry tools. The clothes are on my back, in the sense that I wear them. If it is raining, I sometimes wear jeans and put the suit trousers in the bag. But my commute is very much shorter than yours, as is most people's. Also, since bicycling is so much more common here, and not seen as a "lifestyle choice", most people just ride in their normal clothes.
To be honest, I think that people often buy hybrids because they are afraid of road bikes. Growing up, I never liked the look of drop bars, and thought road bikes were uncomfortable. Now I know I was wrong, but most people tend to believe that you need to be really serious about biking to ride a road racer. Even the more athletic people around me would never even consider using one, just because they haven't tried. Somehow they feel it's more natural to ride around on perfectly smooth asphalt on a mountain bike designed for rough off-road conditions. To be fair, a lot of people do ride racing bikes, perhaps 20% or so.
It doesn't have room for fat tires, but why would I want that? I use it on asphalt. There is always room for fenders, on all road bikes. Also, you can always mount racks if you want, perhaps not using standard mounts, but it is always possible. But that is not really an issue here, because most people I see don't use panniers or racks on the hybrids.
I work in an office, so I don't carry tools. The clothes are on my back, in the sense that I wear them. If it is raining, I sometimes wear jeans and put the suit trousers in the bag. But my commute is very much shorter than yours, as is most people's. Also, since bicycling is so much more common here, and not seen as a "lifestyle choice", most people just ride in their normal clothes.
To be honest, I think that people often buy hybrids because they are afraid of road bikes. Growing up, I never liked the look of drop bars, and thought road bikes were uncomfortable. Now I know I was wrong, but most people tend to believe that you need to be really serious about biking to ride a road racer. Even the more athletic people around me would never even consider using one, just because they haven't tried. Somehow they feel it's more natural to ride around on perfectly smooth asphalt on a mountain bike designed for rough off-road conditions. To be fair, a lot of people do ride racing bikes, perhaps 20% or so.
FXjohn
05-27-08, 01:28 PM
It doesn't have room for fat tires, but why would I want that? I use it on asphalt. so.
yeah, so? Some people ride rough roads or gravel. what do you care if they use fatter tires or carry tools? What's wrong with non drop bars? *(nothing)*
yeah, so? Some people ride rough roads or gravel. what do you care if they use fatter tires or carry tools? What's wrong with non drop bars? *(nothing)*
Gustavo
05-27-08, 02:41 PM
I am not saying you shouldn't use non-drop bars, I am just saying that hybrids are an expensive way to get something that is not optimal for anything. I live in the city and I see lots of people on hybrids, even mountain bikes. Most of them carry no loads at all, except their backpack. Most of them only ride smooth asphalt. I think they should get a road bike, or a three speed or a single speed granny bike. If you are only going to ride in the city, at a leisurely pace, you don't need a shiny new expensive "hybrid". If you are in a hurry and more athletically inclined, get a road bike... It is a marketing ploy. "Hybrid" sounds cooler, to some people, than "rusty old grandmother bike I found in the shed". Having said that, riding a hybrid is infinitely better than driving a car, and can be a stepping stone to getting a proper bike.
Dahon.Steve
05-27-08, 08:06 PM
Well... I just bought a brand new hybrid. I'll post pictures just to make you guys envious! ;-)
Why would I buy a hybrid if I already own a road bike? Here's why.
1. My road bikes are too expensive to take out in the rain. They are nice day bikes.
2. I refuse to put fenders or a rear rack on my road bikes. Not so with my new hybrid.
3. My new Hybrid will come with rack and fenders. They will remain on.
4. My $700.00 dollar hybrid was purchased at $400.00 dollars
5. My new hybrid comes with the Sram Dual Drive! Need I say more. ;-)
6. My hybrid will be my new shopper and won't be so painful if it gets stolen or damaged. Not so with my road bikes.
7. My hybrid will be far more efficient than a mountain bike.
8. I fully expect to receive many good comments on my new hybrid.
9. The engine will enable my hybrid to past many road and mountain bikes.
10. I bought a hybrid because I like bikes. A new bike is like Christmas day!
That's all.
Why would I buy a hybrid if I already own a road bike? Here's why.
1. My road bikes are too expensive to take out in the rain. They are nice day bikes.
2. I refuse to put fenders or a rear rack on my road bikes. Not so with my new hybrid.
3. My new Hybrid will come with rack and fenders. They will remain on.
4. My $700.00 dollar hybrid was purchased at $400.00 dollars
5. My new hybrid comes with the Sram Dual Drive! Need I say more. ;-)
6. My hybrid will be my new shopper and won't be so painful if it gets stolen or damaged. Not so with my road bikes.
7. My hybrid will be far more efficient than a mountain bike.
8. I fully expect to receive many good comments on my new hybrid.
9. The engine will enable my hybrid to past many road and mountain bikes.
10. I bought a hybrid because I like bikes. A new bike is like Christmas day!
That's all.
FXjohn
05-27-08, 08:11 PM
what bike make and model is it exactly?---^
sykerocker
05-27-08, 08:55 PM
I consider the hybrid the successor to the traditional English roadster. I used a Raleigh Sports at work for lunch time running until the wife found me the GT Passage. The Raleigh was sold a short time later. It definitely couldn't compete.
Actually, I see the compromises in a positive light. A fairly responsive frame, but will take a lot more inner city beatings than the average quality road bike. The tyres (700x35's on mine) are narrow enough to take reasonable air pressure and give fair responsiveness, but are still better over rough city streets than the usual 700x23's or 25's. I prefer the flat bar riding position for errand running, as I'm never going to go more than 4-5 miles in any one direction. Cantilever brakes are a big plus in my book. And there's plenty of room for mudguards on the frame.
The only thing I don't like about the modern hybrids is the effort to clutter them with sprung forks and seatposts. C'mon, no city street is THAT bad. Save that stuff for the trails.
Actually, I see the compromises in a positive light. A fairly responsive frame, but will take a lot more inner city beatings than the average quality road bike. The tyres (700x35's on mine) are narrow enough to take reasonable air pressure and give fair responsiveness, but are still better over rough city streets than the usual 700x23's or 25's. I prefer the flat bar riding position for errand running, as I'm never going to go more than 4-5 miles in any one direction. Cantilever brakes are a big plus in my book. And there's plenty of room for mudguards on the frame.
The only thing I don't like about the modern hybrids is the effort to clutter them with sprung forks and seatposts. C'mon, no city street is THAT bad. Save that stuff for the trails.
sykerocker
05-27-08, 08:57 PM
10. I bought a hybrid because I like bikes. A new bike is like Christmas day!
+1. And Christmas is better when you get a variety of presents. ;)
+1. And Christmas is better when you get a variety of presents. ;)
talleymonster
05-27-08, 09:15 PM
I love my hybrid!
But I'm scouring Craigslist for a road bike:D
But I'm scouring Craigslist for a road bike:D
ObjectAgnosia
05-27-08, 10:01 PM
There is always room for fenders, on all road bikes. Also, you can always mount racks if you want, perhaps not using standard mounts, but it is always possible.
I must be mistaken then, I apologize. :roflmao2: There is less than 1 cm clearance between my tires and the frame, I can't even fit my pinky finger in between those spaces. Please be careful when you make general assumptions in the future. I may take your post seriously the next time around.
I must be mistaken then, I apologize. :roflmao2: There is less than 1 cm clearance between my tires and the frame, I can't even fit my pinky finger in between those spaces. Please be careful when you make general assumptions in the future. I may take your post seriously the next time around.
bragi
05-28-08, 12:12 AM
I love my hybrid (it's actually an old hardtail MTB with road tires and newer trigger shifters), but I can understand why some people don't like them. Modern cheap hybrids with heavily sloping top bars and shocks are possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen, and you're carrying around a lot of weight you don't need. Right now, I'm on the verge of breaking down and getting a touring bike. Touring bikes have the advantages of hybrids, and then some. They can accommodate racks and fenders, can handle heavy loads, and they are better on hills and in headwinds than hybrids. I still think that hybrids are a good choice for utility riding, though; they're certainly better than most road bikes.
Sixty Fiver
05-28-08, 12:29 AM
I am planning on riding a century this weekend and the ride of choice will be my hybrid which I will admit, has been pretty heavily modified to make it a great long tour bike.
As far as city streets go... being able to run higher volume tyres that can take hits and still roll fast is a definate plus as our streets can be a minefield... the Canadian winter is not kind to pavement.
I also have to agree that some road / race bikes will not take fenders due to the tight clearances between the wheels and the frame.. I built one up for a customer the other day and there is simply not enough clearance between the tyres, frame, and brakes to accommodate fenders.
A touring bike or sport bike will usually have the room and eyelets for mounting fenders, racks, etc.
As far as city streets go... being able to run higher volume tyres that can take hits and still roll fast is a definate plus as our streets can be a minefield... the Canadian winter is not kind to pavement.
I also have to agree that some road / race bikes will not take fenders due to the tight clearances between the wheels and the frame.. I built one up for a customer the other day and there is simply not enough clearance between the tyres, frame, and brakes to accommodate fenders.
A touring bike or sport bike will usually have the room and eyelets for mounting fenders, racks, etc.
Gustavo
05-28-08, 01:16 AM
I must be mistaken then, I apologize. :roflmao2: There is less than 1 cm clearance between my tires and the frame, I can't even fit my pinky finger in between those spaces. Please be careful when you make general assumptions in the future. I may take your post seriously the next time around.
There are fenders for all bikes, believe me! if you can't find one, modify one. Clearance is only an issue at that particular point. You can always take a regular fender and cut it in two, reattach at each side. It's been done! I assure you it is possible, with some imagination.
Of course, I realize you can't expect everyone to buy vintage road bikes and start making their own fenders.
But this is really beside the point, because good old three-speeds usually have fenders too.
I remember ten years ago or so, when they tried to peddle "city-bikes" to the unsuspecting public. Hybrids are just city-bikes with some unneeded extras. To me it seems like just another way to sell us expensive things we don't really need. For most people, a good old three-speed, which they already have in the garage, would do just as well.
There are fenders for all bikes, believe me! if you can't find one, modify one. Clearance is only an issue at that particular point. You can always take a regular fender and cut it in two, reattach at each side. It's been done! I assure you it is possible, with some imagination.
Of course, I realize you can't expect everyone to buy vintage road bikes and start making their own fenders.
But this is really beside the point, because good old three-speeds usually have fenders too.
I remember ten years ago or so, when they tried to peddle "city-bikes" to the unsuspecting public. Hybrids are just city-bikes with some unneeded extras. To me it seems like just another way to sell us expensive things we don't really need. For most people, a good old three-speed, which they already have in the garage, would do just as well.
wahoonc
05-28-08, 04:03 AM
I consider the hybrid the successor to the traditional English roadster. I used a Raleigh Sports at work for lunch time running until the wife found me the GT Passage. The Raleigh was sold a short time later. It definitely couldn't compete.
Actually, I see the compromises in a positive light. A fairly responsive frame, but will take a lot more inner city beatings than the average quality road bike. The tyres (700x35's on mine) are narrow enough to take reasonable air pressure and give fair responsiveness, but are still better over rough city streets than the usual 700x23's or 25's. I prefer the flat bar riding position for errand running, as I'm never going to go more than 4-5 miles in any one direction. Cantilever brakes are a big plus in my book. And there's plenty of room for mudguards on the frame.
The only thing I don't like about the modern hybrids is the effort to clutter them with sprung forks and seatposts. C'mon, no city street is THAT bad. Save that stuff for the trails.
Maybe...but it sure doesn't ride the same. I have been searching for an updated version of the old Raleighs, the closest I have come so far is my Redline R530 (http://www.redlinebicycles.com/adultbikes/R530.html). Most hybrids I have ridden have to aggressive a position for my tastes. I agree on the assesment of suspension seatposts and forks. The bicycle industry would be well served by making those optional, along with the ability to chose saddles and pedals. FWIW I bought a R530, first thing to go was the VeloPloosh saddle and the suspension seat post. Replaced with a fixed alloy post and a Brooks B67, not sure what I am doing with the fork yet.
Aaron:)
Actually, I see the compromises in a positive light. A fairly responsive frame, but will take a lot more inner city beatings than the average quality road bike. The tyres (700x35's on mine) are narrow enough to take reasonable air pressure and give fair responsiveness, but are still better over rough city streets than the usual 700x23's or 25's. I prefer the flat bar riding position for errand running, as I'm never going to go more than 4-5 miles in any one direction. Cantilever brakes are a big plus in my book. And there's plenty of room for mudguards on the frame.
The only thing I don't like about the modern hybrids is the effort to clutter them with sprung forks and seatposts. C'mon, no city street is THAT bad. Save that stuff for the trails.
Maybe...but it sure doesn't ride the same. I have been searching for an updated version of the old Raleighs, the closest I have come so far is my Redline R530 (http://www.redlinebicycles.com/adultbikes/R530.html). Most hybrids I have ridden have to aggressive a position for my tastes. I agree on the assesment of suspension seatposts and forks. The bicycle industry would be well served by making those optional, along with the ability to chose saddles and pedals. FWIW I bought a R530, first thing to go was the VeloPloosh saddle and the suspension seat post. Replaced with a fixed alloy post and a Brooks B67, not sure what I am doing with the fork yet.
Aaron:)
Cyclaholic
05-28-08, 04:50 AM
If hybrids are dorky..... what are commuter recumbents? :twitchy:
KrisPistofferson
05-28-08, 05:07 AM
I think the OP was true...about 5 years ago. The bicycle industry has really stepped up to the plate as far as good, non-fugly options for practical commuters in the last few years. I remember when I was first car-free, it was either a mountain bike, a road bike or something like a Giant Sedona, (even the Sedona looks pretty cool nowadays, BTW.) It's a good time to be a cyclist.
Gustavo
05-28-08, 05:10 AM
Maybe...but it sure doesn't ride the same. I have been searching for an updated version of the old Raleighs, the closest I have come so far is my Redline R530 (http://www.redlinebicycles.com/adultbikes/R530.html). Most hybrids I have ridden have to aggressive a position for my tastes. I agree on the assesment of suspension seatposts and forks. The bicycle industry would be well served by making those optional, along with the ability to chose saddles and pedals. FWIW I bought a R530, first thing to go was the VeloPloosh saddle and the suspension seat post. Replaced with a fixed alloy post and a Brooks B67, not sure what I am doing with the fork yet.
Aaron:)
Those bars look so high you'd fall over backwards...
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2251/2252928078_ae520a86f1.jpg?v=0
Aaron:)
Those bars look so high you'd fall over backwards...
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2251/2252928078_ae520a86f1.jpg?v=0
wahoonc
05-28-08, 06:18 AM
Those bars look so high you'd fall over backwards...
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
I have several old Raleighs and ride them regularly. The picture you posted looks like the handle bar stem has an extender on it, favorite trick of tall riders. Raleigh only made the Sports in 2 or 3 frame sizes, I ride both a 21" and a 23" but really need a 25". I don't particularly like the sloping top tube design of the current bikes, but can live with it. FWIW I considered upgrading my old Raleigh to a more modern hub, but the price of the new wheels was going to be 2/3+ the cost of the Redline.
Where did you get the "specially designed for utilitarian use"? Any bike can be used for "utilitarian use". I just happen to prefer the upright style of riding over the head down stiff neck try to go fast and look cool style. Also I figure a few million Chinese, Dutch, and Danes can't be all wrong.
Aaron:)
Here is my Redline as currently set up...still have a ways to go on the accessories. Note the handle bars in relationship to the saddle, spells comfort in my book!
http://inlinethumb63.webshots.com/39486/2724114990066886751S600x600Q85.jpg
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
I have several old Raleighs and ride them regularly. The picture you posted looks like the handle bar stem has an extender on it, favorite trick of tall riders. Raleigh only made the Sports in 2 or 3 frame sizes, I ride both a 21" and a 23" but really need a 25". I don't particularly like the sloping top tube design of the current bikes, but can live with it. FWIW I considered upgrading my old Raleigh to a more modern hub, but the price of the new wheels was going to be 2/3+ the cost of the Redline.
Where did you get the "specially designed for utilitarian use"? Any bike can be used for "utilitarian use". I just happen to prefer the upright style of riding over the head down stiff neck try to go fast and look cool style. Also I figure a few million Chinese, Dutch, and Danes can't be all wrong.
Aaron:)
Here is my Redline as currently set up...still have a ways to go on the accessories. Note the handle bars in relationship to the saddle, spells comfort in my book!
http://inlinethumb63.webshots.com/39486/2724114990066886751S600x600Q85.jpg
FXjohn
05-28-08, 06:51 AM
Those bars look so high you'd fall over backwards...
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
why would you really care about the top tube sloping or not? do you spend all your time looking down at the top tube when you ride?
So they are "specially designed for utilitarian use"? As opposed to non-utilitarian use? Anyway, why not just get an old Raleigh then? Why the "update"? Do you actually think that this sloping monstrosity looks better than this?
why would you really care about the top tube sloping or not? do you spend all your time looking down at the top tube when you ride?
Gustavo
05-28-08, 06:57 AM
I have several old Raleighs and ride them regularly. The picture you posted looks like the handle bar stem has an extender on it, favorite trick of tall riders. Raleigh only made the Sports in 2 or 3 frame sizes, I ride both a 21" and a 23" but really need a 25". I don't particularly like the sloping top tube design of the current bikes, but can live with it. FWIW I considered upgrading my old Raleigh to a more modern hub, but the price of the new wheels was going to be 2/3+ the cost of the Redline.
Where did you get the "specially designed for utilitarian use"? Any bike can be used for "utilitarian use". I just happen to prefer the upright style of riding over the head down stiff neck try to go fast and look cool style. Also I figure a few million Chinese, Dutch, and Danes can't be all wrong.
Aaron:)
Here is my Redline as currently set up...still have a ways to go on the accessories. Note the handle bars in relationship to the saddle, spells comfort in my book!
I was actually referring to the Redline when I talked about bar height. I guess my point is that the Raleigh looks so much better (I, unlike you, can't live with the sloping top-tube!) and for "utilitarian use" (form the Redline ad, strange in that all use would seem "utilitarian" to me) it doesn't fall short of Redlines and other expensive, not very good looking, hybrids.
Three things about bar height: first, to me having bars that are lower than 10 cm below the saddle is quite uncomfortable, both in terms of posture and aerodynamics (that play a role even on a three-speed) but that is of course personal. (I recently bought a 'cross and the stem was not at its lowest, felt very weird and impractical when out of the saddle.)
Secondly, wouldn't a tall rider have an equally high seat? Tallness can't really explain the bar to saddle drop, can it?
Thirdly, I don't mind upright riding positions, at least not for others. I personally am too lazy to fight the added wind resistance, and I always go as fast as I can, even when not in a hurry. I guess that is the effect of having a racing bicycle, it wants to race! Like the brain of Sherlock Holmes, it needs to fulfill its purpose.
To me, a hybrid screams "I spent a decent amount of money on my bike, but I won't get more performance than on my old three-speed that is just decomposing in the garage, and it's much slower than the gorgeous vintage lightweight I could have bought for less, given a little effort and willingness to try something new"...
Where did you get the "specially designed for utilitarian use"? Any bike can be used for "utilitarian use". I just happen to prefer the upright style of riding over the head down stiff neck try to go fast and look cool style. Also I figure a few million Chinese, Dutch, and Danes can't be all wrong.
Aaron:)
Here is my Redline as currently set up...still have a ways to go on the accessories. Note the handle bars in relationship to the saddle, spells comfort in my book!
I was actually referring to the Redline when I talked about bar height. I guess my point is that the Raleigh looks so much better (I, unlike you, can't live with the sloping top-tube!) and for "utilitarian use" (form the Redline ad, strange in that all use would seem "utilitarian" to me) it doesn't fall short of Redlines and other expensive, not very good looking, hybrids.
Three things about bar height: first, to me having bars that are lower than 10 cm below the saddle is quite uncomfortable, both in terms of posture and aerodynamics (that play a role even on a three-speed) but that is of course personal. (I recently bought a 'cross and the stem was not at its lowest, felt very weird and impractical when out of the saddle.)
Secondly, wouldn't a tall rider have an equally high seat? Tallness can't really explain the bar to saddle drop, can it?
Thirdly, I don't mind upright riding positions, at least not for others. I personally am too lazy to fight the added wind resistance, and I always go as fast as I can, even when not in a hurry. I guess that is the effect of having a racing bicycle, it wants to race! Like the brain of Sherlock Holmes, it needs to fulfill its purpose.
To me, a hybrid screams "I spent a decent amount of money on my bike, but I won't get more performance than on my old three-speed that is just decomposing in the garage, and it's much slower than the gorgeous vintage lightweight I could have bought for less, given a little effort and willingness to try something new"...
FXjohn
05-28-08, 08:50 AM
I
To me, a hybrid screams "I spent a decent amount of money on my bike, but I won't get more performance than on my old three-speed that is just decomposing in the garage,
Who are you to judge anyone else's "performance" and why do you think everyone has an old rust bucket in the garage they'd rather ride?
To me, a hybrid screams "I spent a decent amount of money on my bike, but I won't get more performance than on my old three-speed that is just decomposing in the garage,
Who are you to judge anyone else's "performance" and why do you think everyone has an old rust bucket in the garage they'd rather ride?
Gustavo
05-28-08, 10:23 AM
Who are you to judge anyone else's "performance" and why do you think everyone has an old rust bucket in the garage they'd rather ride?
Performance obviously refers to the bicycle, not the rider, who would be the same in both cases. Even if you don't have an old Raleigh in your garage, I am willing to bet that you can always find a second-hand three speed for a better price than the hybrid.
As to sloping top tubes, I suppose some people are not concerned with how things look. I am, I like beautiful things, and I don't think a bike with a sloping top-tube looks good. I have a mountain-bike with that geometry, it rides perfectly well and looks awful.
Performance obviously refers to the bicycle, not the rider, who would be the same in both cases. Even if you don't have an old Raleigh in your garage, I am willing to bet that you can always find a second-hand three speed for a better price than the hybrid.
As to sloping top tubes, I suppose some people are not concerned with how things look. I am, I like beautiful things, and I don't think a bike with a sloping top-tube looks good. I have a mountain-bike with that geometry, it rides perfectly well and looks awful.
wahoonc
05-28-08, 11:45 AM
Performance obviously refers to the bicycle, not the rider, who would be the same in both cases. Even if you don't have an old Raleigh in your garage, I am willing to bet that you can always find a second-hand three speed for a better price than the hybrid.
As to sloping top tubes, I suppose some people are not concerned with how things look. I am, I like beautiful things, and I don't think a bike with a sloping top-tube looks good. I have a mountain-bike with that geometry, it rides perfectly well and looks awful.
I wouldn't take that bet...My Superbe had to be shipped to NC from Boston, MA. It has been over 2 years since I last saw a 3 speed at a garage sale, thrift shop or flea market. Most of what is showing up now are broken Next MTB's at 90% of full retail.
Also on the Redline website...I have no clue why the handle bars are that high, looks like ape hangers to me.:lol:
Aaron:)
As to sloping top tubes, I suppose some people are not concerned with how things look. I am, I like beautiful things, and I don't think a bike with a sloping top-tube looks good. I have a mountain-bike with that geometry, it rides perfectly well and looks awful.
I wouldn't take that bet...My Superbe had to be shipped to NC from Boston, MA. It has been over 2 years since I last saw a 3 speed at a garage sale, thrift shop or flea market. Most of what is showing up now are broken Next MTB's at 90% of full retail.
Also on the Redline website...I have no clue why the handle bars are that high, looks like ape hangers to me.:lol:
Aaron:)
Black Bud
05-28-08, 06:07 PM
Performance obviously refers to the bicycle, not the rider, who would be the same in both cases. Even if you don't have an old Raleigh in your garage, I am willing to bet that you can always find a second-hand three speed for a better price than the hybrid.
Ok...we now know where you are coming from re. suitable bicycle for utility use:
You are a cheapskate who is way too concerned with what a bike looks like and less with how suitable it is for the task, which can be something else altogether. The advice to not pay for a new bike and save money on someone else"s "garage queen" three-speed? Hardly the "slam-dunk" you like to think it is:
1.) Those legendary "second-hand three-speeds" are not all that commonly available. In addition, these "classics" nearly always weigh a lot more than they need to, have lousy brakes and steel-rimmed wheels (which make them less than satisfactory in hilly country or when there is more than two raindrops in the air and coming down on the rider). On top of that, the old-fashioned sizing is virtually guaranteed to fit almost nobody no matter who manufactured the bike originally.
And since bike performance largely depends on how well it FITS the rider...'nuff said.
2.) Never mind that, after all those years of almost certain neglect, the purchase price of the bike may well be only the beginning of the "out-of-pocket" expenses, especially if that geared hub is in real need of a rebuild. The truth is, at this time, many LBS' service shops cannot even begin to service internal gear (planetary) hubs since nobody on staff likely knows squat about them and a newbie at "do-it-yourself" bike repair would be well advised to NOT take one of those things apart!
In my case, my favorite local LBS DOES have such expertise available, but I would not count on that elsewhere, even if they sell NEW internal-geared hub bikes (assembling one of those out-of-the-box does not involve having to assemble the hub from scratch, which a rebuild/extensive service would require).
3.) As for "looks"? Just because "traditional" frames look better to you personally does not mean that the "ugly" (in your eyes) bike is not actually more functional for utility and commuting purposes than your "pretty" bike. Depends on the bike and the setup...and the condition of the roads where you are! You want "art"? Go buy it and show it off.
(An example of "function" over "form"? How about your suggestion in an earlier post on how to add fenders to a bike without the clearance for them, in essence creating a home-made "moto-style" fender? I would say that is not calculated to make a bike prettier, is it? More functional? Yes, just ask certain mountain bikers who want both fenders (mudguards) AND suspension...but it won't make your bike any better looking...:p )
In short, "art" and "bike" are not necessarily one and the same thing and need not be. Besides, would you would not really want to risk something that is at the level of "fine art" for day-to-day riding?
4.) You are wrong on "performance" being specific to the bike and not the rider. BOTH the bike and the rider have to be able to perform well (within reason) in order to accomplish the given task. Even the world's best bike for the task will not perform well if the rider can't or won't, and vice-versa.
A "hybrid" can perform perfectly well for a lot of people, as long as it is well-designed. The fact that a lot of them are not well-designed does not prove your point that they never are.
Ok...we now know where you are coming from re. suitable bicycle for utility use:
You are a cheapskate who is way too concerned with what a bike looks like and less with how suitable it is for the task, which can be something else altogether. The advice to not pay for a new bike and save money on someone else"s "garage queen" three-speed? Hardly the "slam-dunk" you like to think it is:
1.) Those legendary "second-hand three-speeds" are not all that commonly available. In addition, these "classics" nearly always weigh a lot more than they need to, have lousy brakes and steel-rimmed wheels (which make them less than satisfactory in hilly country or when there is more than two raindrops in the air and coming down on the rider). On top of that, the old-fashioned sizing is virtually guaranteed to fit almost nobody no matter who manufactured the bike originally.
And since bike performance largely depends on how well it FITS the rider...'nuff said.
2.) Never mind that, after all those years of almost certain neglect, the purchase price of the bike may well be only the beginning of the "out-of-pocket" expenses, especially if that geared hub is in real need of a rebuild. The truth is, at this time, many LBS' service shops cannot even begin to service internal gear (planetary) hubs since nobody on staff likely knows squat about them and a newbie at "do-it-yourself" bike repair would be well advised to NOT take one of those things apart!
In my case, my favorite local LBS DOES have such expertise available, but I would not count on that elsewhere, even if they sell NEW internal-geared hub bikes (assembling one of those out-of-the-box does not involve having to assemble the hub from scratch, which a rebuild/extensive service would require).
3.) As for "looks"? Just because "traditional" frames look better to you personally does not mean that the "ugly" (in your eyes) bike is not actually more functional for utility and commuting purposes than your "pretty" bike. Depends on the bike and the setup...and the condition of the roads where you are! You want "art"? Go buy it and show it off.
(An example of "function" over "form"? How about your suggestion in an earlier post on how to add fenders to a bike without the clearance for them, in essence creating a home-made "moto-style" fender? I would say that is not calculated to make a bike prettier, is it? More functional? Yes, just ask certain mountain bikers who want both fenders (mudguards) AND suspension...but it won't make your bike any better looking...:p )
In short, "art" and "bike" are not necessarily one and the same thing and need not be. Besides, would you would not really want to risk something that is at the level of "fine art" for day-to-day riding?
4.) You are wrong on "performance" being specific to the bike and not the rider. BOTH the bike and the rider have to be able to perform well (within reason) in order to accomplish the given task. Even the world's best bike for the task will not perform well if the rider can't or won't, and vice-versa.
A "hybrid" can perform perfectly well for a lot of people, as long as it is well-designed. The fact that a lot of them are not well-designed does not prove your point that they never are.
ccd rider
05-28-08, 06:20 PM
I wouldn't even be riding if it wasn't for a hybrid, so you can't say it doesn't serve a purpose. I have a ruptured disc in my back......if it wasn't for the upright design of the hybrid there's no way I could ride the 26 miles in one day on my commute.
Johnny_Monkey
05-29-08, 06:50 AM
Who are you to judge anyone else's "performance" and why do you think everyone has an old rust bucket in the garage they'd rather ride?
Only a week to go now John.
Only a week to go now John.
KrisPistofferson
05-29-08, 07:09 AM
Only a week to go now John.
:beer:
:beer:
Sixty Fiver
05-29-08, 10:25 AM
I love my English three speeds... they are practical, robust, can take a hell of a lot of punishment, and with the right set up braking is not problematic... they make these things called Kool Stop salmon pads now that work much better than any other brake pad on steel wheels.
They are also exceptionally comfortable bikes and have a certain style that appeals to many people.
This is my 1948 Rudge Whitworth roadster... it is the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden, is deceivingly fast, and sails over the crappiest of road surfaces on those 28 inch tyres.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/1948rudgebench.JPG
This is my 1978 Raleigh Superbe 3 speed and compared to the Rudge, it is downright sporty although it is a little heavier and the ride is not quite as plush which means it is still better than most bikes I have ridden.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Superbe2008side.jpg
And they fit me really well.
They are also exceptionally comfortable bikes and have a certain style that appeals to many people.
This is my 1948 Rudge Whitworth roadster... it is the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden, is deceivingly fast, and sails over the crappiest of road surfaces on those 28 inch tyres.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/1948rudgebench.JPG
This is my 1978 Raleigh Superbe 3 speed and compared to the Rudge, it is downright sporty although it is a little heavier and the ride is not quite as plush which means it is still better than most bikes I have ridden.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Superbe2008side.jpg
And they fit me really well.
FXjohn
05-29-08, 10:57 AM
Only a week to go now John.
Fill me in on what's happening in P&R lately?
Fill me in on what's happening in P&R lately?
Johnny_Monkey
05-29-08, 03:46 PM
Fill me in on what's happening in P&R lately?
Apart from the usual election stuff it's mostly McClellan and someone called Rachael Ray or something at the moment.
I've been only skimming it recently anyway - I just spent a week in Kazakhstan.
Apart from the usual election stuff it's mostly McClellan and someone called Rachael Ray or something at the moment.
I've been only skimming it recently anyway - I just spent a week in Kazakhstan.
KrisPistofferson
05-29-08, 03:49 PM
Oddly enough, there's another "Boycott Dunkin Donuts" -thread, too.
gerv
05-29-08, 08:20 PM
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/1948rudgebench.JPG
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Superbe2008side.jpg
And they fit me really well.
The rake on those forks is astounding. I've never seen a modern bike like these. It must seem like you are steering behind, rather than on, the front wheel. Does that even out the bumps?
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Superbe2008side.jpg
And they fit me really well.
The rake on those forks is astounding. I've never seen a modern bike like these. It must seem like you are steering behind, rather than on, the front wheel. Does that even out the bumps?
Dahon.Steve
05-29-08, 09:45 PM
The rake on those forks is astounding. I've never seen a modern bike like these. It must seem like you are steering behind, rather than on, the front wheel. Does that even out the bumps?
I miss my old Univega hybrid from the 80's because it had a rake very smilar to his green roadster. I was crazy to sell that bike.
I miss my old Univega hybrid from the 80's because it had a rake very smilar to his green roadster. I was crazy to sell that bike.
Sixty Fiver
05-29-08, 11:27 PM
The rake on those forks is astounding. I've never seen a modern bike like these. It must seem like you are steering behind, rather than on, the front wheel. Does that even out the bumps?
When one is riding this bike one's hands are behind the front wheel and over your knees, the wheelbase is astounding (it turns like a bus), and the set back position utilizes your glutes and hamstrings for power more than it does your quads and it handles with the lightest of touches.
The roads that would beat me to death on my road bike, shake me up a little on my Superbe and my 7500 hybrid are nothing when you are riding the Rudge... those high volume 28's and the bike's geometry smooth out the worst of roads.
It is seriously the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden.
Took this today on my ride in to work as I have done a little work to the old chap... I built a new rear wheel, swapped the Dunlop rubber saddle for my Brooks B66, replaced the brake pads and got things properly adjusted (the bike stops really well), and polished things up a little.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Nevilleside.jpg
When one is riding this bike one's hands are behind the front wheel and over your knees, the wheelbase is astounding (it turns like a bus), and the set back position utilizes your glutes and hamstrings for power more than it does your quads and it handles with the lightest of touches.
The roads that would beat me to death on my road bike, shake me up a little on my Superbe and my 7500 hybrid are nothing when you are riding the Rudge... those high volume 28's and the bike's geometry smooth out the worst of roads.
It is seriously the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden.
Took this today on my ride in to work as I have done a little work to the old chap... I built a new rear wheel, swapped the Dunlop rubber saddle for my Brooks B66, replaced the brake pads and got things properly adjusted (the bike stops really well), and polished things up a little.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Nevilleside.jpg
bragi
05-29-08, 11:37 PM
I've been wondering: why on Earth do they make bikes with sloping top bars? I, like Gustavo, think they're rather ugly. Is there a reason for them, other than to save money on steel? My bike has a very, very slight slope in the top bar, and I consider even this slight slope to be a bit of an annoyance.
BTW, I like handlebars to be higher than the seat. Yes, it's a bit tough in a strong headwind, and you'll never go much faster than 20 mph that way, but it sure is comfy, you can see what's around you, and you don't put pressure on certain parts of your anatomy that I'd rather leave well enough alone.
BTW, I like handlebars to be higher than the seat. Yes, it's a bit tough in a strong headwind, and you'll never go much faster than 20 mph that way, but it sure is comfy, you can see what's around you, and you don't put pressure on certain parts of your anatomy that I'd rather leave well enough alone.
Richard_Rides
05-30-08, 12:41 AM
I bet the average net worth of a top line hybrid owner exceeds the average net worth of a high end road bike owner. More of the former are gainfully employed part time riders who don't ride enough to become fanatics.
Not to be a party pooper, but where on the economic food chain do you think the "living car free" types reside? The correct answer is: At or near the bottom.
Not to be a party pooper, but where on the economic food chain do you think the "living car free" types reside? The correct answer is: At or near the bottom.
wahoonc
05-30-08, 04:14 AM
I've been wondering: why on Earth do they make bikes with sloping top bars? I, like Gustavo, think they're rather ugly. Is there a reason for them, other than to save money on steel? My bike has a very, very slight slope in the top bar, and I consider even this slight slope to be a bit of an annoyance.
BTW, I like handlebars to be higher than the seat. Yes, it's a bit tough in a strong headwind, and you'll never go much faster than 20 mph that way, but it sure is comfy, you can see what's around you, and you don't put pressure on certain parts of your anatomy that I'd rather leave well enough alone.
The sloping top bar allows them to fit more people on fewer frame sizes. In the 70's decent bikes came in about a 6-8 sizes, typically in 2-4 cm increments. Now...on a good day you may get 4-5, a lot of bikes, the lower end Breezers come to mind, don't come in an XL which is what I ride. Old British bikes like the Raleigh typically only came in 2-3 frame sizes. So not everything truly is progress.
Aaron:)
BTW, I like handlebars to be higher than the seat. Yes, it's a bit tough in a strong headwind, and you'll never go much faster than 20 mph that way, but it sure is comfy, you can see what's around you, and you don't put pressure on certain parts of your anatomy that I'd rather leave well enough alone.
The sloping top bar allows them to fit more people on fewer frame sizes. In the 70's decent bikes came in about a 6-8 sizes, typically in 2-4 cm increments. Now...on a good day you may get 4-5, a lot of bikes, the lower end Breezers come to mind, don't come in an XL which is what I ride. Old British bikes like the Raleigh typically only came in 2-3 frame sizes. So not everything truly is progress.
Aaron:)
Black Bud
05-30-08, 04:46 PM
I've been wondering: why on Earth do they make bikes with sloping top bars? I, like Gustavo, think they're rather ugly. Is there a reason for them, other than to save money on steel? My bike has a very, very slight slope in the top bar, and I consider even this slight slope to be a bit of an annoyance.
The sloping top bar allows them to fit more people on fewer frame sizes.
To answer the first question:
The sloping top tubes for "universal"/"men's" frames originated--in modern bikes--with mountain bikes and is intended to provide extra clearance between the top tube and the "dangly bits"/"sensitive crotch stuff"/"privates" just in case of a sudden, often totally unplanned-for rough dismount on the trail (and helps in remounting on that same trail). The sloping top tube then got adopted into other styles of bikes because of the "cool" factor in most peoples' eyes (mountain bikes have been considered to be more "up-to-date" and "stylish" the last couple of decades among most folk). That means more styles of bike will sell better.
There is also the theory that the "compact" frame is a stronger frame (desirable in practical everyday bikes and off-road bikes), but that extra strength may be really more a result of construction methods and frame materials than frame geometry. (For those who don't know: Early mountain bikes (even the mass-manufactured ones) often did not have sloping top tubes and were certainly strong enough. The prototypes of what became the mountain bike were purpose-built for riding anywhere but rough off-road trails and were "MacGuyvered" into off-road machines and most were "conventional" in frame style unless they were redone "cruisers".)
Manufacturing savings? Not an issue, really; in terms of materials, the "compact" frame is probably not going to save much material, if any, in the manufacture of the individual frame. The savings at the manufacturers' end, I concede, does come from being able to get away with making fewer sizes. This is, however, not fit oriented (they don't care about that), but rather is tied to costs of doing business in terms of on-hand stock items and shipping costs (more bikes can be shipped in less truck space hence lower shipping costs).
The really "lazy" part of the "fewer frame sizes to fit more people" idea is at the retail end: Fewer sizes means less work to the sales people since they need to try fewer frames to get that "fit". So what if the mechanics then have to be busy changing out parts to "dial-in" fit? That's not the sales force's problem (unless they are doubling as mechanics!) and can well mean extra sales (of parts) depending on the shop.
The fact that fewer bikes must be tried to get the "fit" desired is also a benefit when dealing with the customer; few people in search of a "steed" are bike aficionados who have the patience to try bike after bike to find the "one" that feels and fits properly. Most people would rather come as close to "grab-and-go" as possible, and the compact frame--because exact fit is less of an issue--can speed up the bike purchase. The unavoidable fact of "throughput" at the LBS end is this: The faster each sale can be made, the happier both the shop owner and the customer can be. In other words, think: More sales, more money earned, customer "on the road" faster.
The sloping top bar allows them to fit more people on fewer frame sizes.
To answer the first question:
The sloping top tubes for "universal"/"men's" frames originated--in modern bikes--with mountain bikes and is intended to provide extra clearance between the top tube and the "dangly bits"/"sensitive crotch stuff"/"privates" just in case of a sudden, often totally unplanned-for rough dismount on the trail (and helps in remounting on that same trail). The sloping top tube then got adopted into other styles of bikes because of the "cool" factor in most peoples' eyes (mountain bikes have been considered to be more "up-to-date" and "stylish" the last couple of decades among most folk). That means more styles of bike will sell better.
There is also the theory that the "compact" frame is a stronger frame (desirable in practical everyday bikes and off-road bikes), but that extra strength may be really more a result of construction methods and frame materials than frame geometry. (For those who don't know: Early mountain bikes (even the mass-manufactured ones) often did not have sloping top tubes and were certainly strong enough. The prototypes of what became the mountain bike were purpose-built for riding anywhere but rough off-road trails and were "MacGuyvered" into off-road machines and most were "conventional" in frame style unless they were redone "cruisers".)
Manufacturing savings? Not an issue, really; in terms of materials, the "compact" frame is probably not going to save much material, if any, in the manufacture of the individual frame. The savings at the manufacturers' end, I concede, does come from being able to get away with making fewer sizes. This is, however, not fit oriented (they don't care about that), but rather is tied to costs of doing business in terms of on-hand stock items and shipping costs (more bikes can be shipped in less truck space hence lower shipping costs).
The really "lazy" part of the "fewer frame sizes to fit more people" idea is at the retail end: Fewer sizes means less work to the sales people since they need to try fewer frames to get that "fit". So what if the mechanics then have to be busy changing out parts to "dial-in" fit? That's not the sales force's problem (unless they are doubling as mechanics!) and can well mean extra sales (of parts) depending on the shop.
The fact that fewer bikes must be tried to get the "fit" desired is also a benefit when dealing with the customer; few people in search of a "steed" are bike aficionados who have the patience to try bike after bike to find the "one" that feels and fits properly. Most people would rather come as close to "grab-and-go" as possible, and the compact frame--because exact fit is less of an issue--can speed up the bike purchase. The unavoidable fact of "throughput" at the LBS end is this: The faster each sale can be made, the happier both the shop owner and the customer can be. In other words, think: More sales, more money earned, customer "on the road" faster.
Black Bud
05-30-08, 04:59 PM
Where did you get the "specially designed for utilitarian use"? Any bike can be used for "utilitarian use". I just happen to prefer the upright style of riding over the head down stiff neck try to go fast and look cool style. Also I figure a few million Chinese, Dutch, and Danes can't be all wrong.
Very true, ANY bike can be utilitarian. However, a purpose-built bike can do the job better with less hassle. And why worry? Unless one is living in one's bathroom and is stuck with just a "Thieves select your bike here." common/public storage area, there is almost certainly room enough for storing more than one bike between rides!
That "utilitarian" bike can be one of them.
When one thinks of a bicycle as their "car" (or "other car"), the rule of "which bike to ride" really reduces to "Choose the tool for the job". For a lot of people, the "hybrid" is the "tool" they want. Others find that classic old three-speed works for them (and some people can even find one that fits properly!). Others find something else works as the proper "tool".
So why are we fussing for pages and pages about what makes a "proper" utility bike? "Tool for the job" really says it all, doesn't it?
Very true, ANY bike can be utilitarian. However, a purpose-built bike can do the job better with less hassle. And why worry? Unless one is living in one's bathroom and is stuck with just a "Thieves select your bike here." common/public storage area, there is almost certainly room enough for storing more than one bike between rides!
That "utilitarian" bike can be one of them.
When one thinks of a bicycle as their "car" (or "other car"), the rule of "which bike to ride" really reduces to "Choose the tool for the job". For a lot of people, the "hybrid" is the "tool" they want. Others find that classic old three-speed works for them (and some people can even find one that fits properly!). Others find something else works as the proper "tool".
So why are we fussing for pages and pages about what makes a "proper" utility bike? "Tool for the job" really says it all, doesn't it?
FXjohn
05-30-08, 07:54 PM
gustavo just got owned at least twice. woops
gerv
05-30-08, 10:00 PM
When one is riding this bike one's hands are behind the front wheel and over your knees, the wheelbase is astounding (it turns like a bus), and the set back position utilizes your glutes and hamstrings for power more than it does your quads and it handles with the lightest of touches.
The roads that would beat me to death on my road bike, shake me up a little on my Superbe and my 7500 hybrid are nothing when you are riding the Rudge... those high volume 28's and the bike's geometry smooth out the worst of roads.
It is seriously the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden.
Took this today on my ride in to work as I have done a little work to the old chap... I built a new rear wheel, swapped the Dunlop rubber saddle for my Brooks B66, replaced the brake pads and got things properly adjusted (the bike stops really well), and polished things up a little.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Nevilleside.jpg
My modern-day hybrid shares a few things with this bike. I removed the MTB handlebars and added Nitto Albatross bars. I also decked it out with fenders, racks and lately some pretty heavy-duty Schwalbe tire.
http://bikes.javazoid.com/images/bianchiAvenue.JPG
Above is an older picture from the days when I used an Easy-Seat.
You notice there is a bit more rack than a typical road-bike but nothing like older style bikes. The ride feels a lot more stable, but slower, than my faster Bianchi Volpe however and I really look for it in road conditions that are less than ideal.
The roads that would beat me to death on my road bike, shake me up a little on my Superbe and my 7500 hybrid are nothing when you are riding the Rudge... those high volume 28's and the bike's geometry smooth out the worst of roads.
It is seriously the most comfortable bike I have ever ridden.
Took this today on my ride in to work as I have done a little work to the old chap... I built a new rear wheel, swapped the Dunlop rubber saddle for my Brooks B66, replaced the brake pads and got things properly adjusted (the bike stops really well), and polished things up a little.
http://www.ravingbikefiend.com/bikepics/Nevilleside.jpg
My modern-day hybrid shares a few things with this bike. I removed the MTB handlebars and added Nitto Albatross bars. I also decked it out with fenders, racks and lately some pretty heavy-duty Schwalbe tire.
http://bikes.javazoid.com/images/bianchiAvenue.JPG
Above is an older picture from the days when I used an Easy-Seat.
You notice there is a bit more rack than a typical road-bike but nothing like older style bikes. The ride feels a lot more stable, but slower, than my faster Bianchi Volpe however and I really look for it in road conditions that are less than ideal.
Gustavo
06-01-08, 05:33 AM
Very true, ANY bike can be utilitarian. However, a purpose-built bike can do the job better with less hassle. And why worry? Unless one is living in one's bathroom and is stuck with just a "Thieves select your bike here." common/public storage area, there is almost certainly room enough for storing more than one bike between rides!
That "utilitarian" bike can be one of them.
My point was actually this: given that utilitarian basically means "for use", how can a any use fail to be utilitarian? It was just a language point, nothing more.
That "utilitarian" bike can be one of them.
My point was actually this: given that utilitarian basically means "for use", how can a any use fail to be utilitarian? It was just a language point, nothing more.