Hybrid Bicycles - How much should a hybrid cost?

Because Saddle Up hasn't started it yet, I felt I would:


Just so that this thread does not get derailled any further if that's even possible I'll start a "How Much Should a Hybrid Cost?" thread. Feel free to contribute meanwhile.

Please, contribute!

It depends on the class of Hybrid. Commuter or recreational models can go for three to six hundred. FlatBar rod bikes providing a more aggressive, forward leaning position can cost a few hundred to almost two thousand. These days hybrids can be very upright. I suggest that you read the Jamis site, it's a very simple site and will show you the types. Other sites can be viewed also. Anything can be called a hybrid, yet hybrids can be called other names ; cross trainers, street bikes as well as those I'd stated. Clicking on the pictures will help you sort it out.

I'm not sure if this fits the exact purpose of this thread. I've found someone selling a 2007 Specialized Sirrus Comp for around $350 and was wondering if that was a good price?

I bought my Fuji Absolute 4.0 at Performance (retail) for $250 at an end of season sale last year. I think you can get a decent bike to start with that will allow you to upgrade to better components over time and still get that initial feel for riding the bike up front.

Like many things inb life, if you walk into a sales floor and ask how much XXX should cost, the salesperson will try to diplomatically find out how much you have...


Just go to your local acar dealer and ask the same question about a car, and you will probably be asked how much you have for a down payment, and how much you want to pay monthly... then they will start to sell you a car that sells for a little more than that.

For a hybrid, I would personally try to set a budget of at least $300 to get a fairly robust and durable bike if I was buying new. If you can afford more, you will get a better bike.

It all boils down to how much money you have, and how much you are willing to part with???

If it's new, or in exceptionally good shape, I'd jump in on that Sirrus, if it fit! I'd tell my wife, later.......

I think the better question ought to be: "why is there so much apparent scorn for people willing to spend a $1,000 or more on a hybrid?"

I mean if that is the type of ride we like and want the "best" we can afford, how is it any different than spending that or more on any other type of bike? Don't quite grok the hostility.

$2,000 :d

If it's new, or in exceptionally good shape, I'd jump in on that Sirrus, if it fit!
Yeah, I've basically told the guy I want to buy it. It has less than 150 miles on it and appears to be in like new condition. Perfect size, too. Thought the price was good, but wasn't sure. Thanks.

Yeah, I've basically told the guy I want to buy it. It has less than 150 miles on it and appears to be in like new condition. Perfect size, too. Thought the price was good, but wasn't sure. Thanks.

What size is it? Is it close to Chicago????? LOL

Getting back on subject, much of the price is determined by how thge bike is equipped. Alivio grade components or lower will be relatively inexpensive at $300 to $400. Something like the Civia Hyland Rohloff equipped with dynamo hub, rack, fenders, Alfine level hydraulic disc brakes, Thompson components and Fizik saddle etc is in the $3500 price range.

Like almost any category of bike, except possibly cruisers, the price range is at least 10 to 1 from most to least expensive within the category. And this excludes true custom made bikes.

I think the better question ought to be: "why is there so much apparent scorn for people willing to spend a $1,000 or more on a hybrid?"


I guess unlike road bikes or MTBs, hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way (not subjected to harsh conditions like MTBs or max velocity required for roaddies). By and large, hybrid riders usually go on MUPs or paved roads for commutes and leisure rides. So with that in mind, the components and frame do not need to be in high-grade. Hence the notion of not wanting to spend $xxxx amt for one.
Then one might say that alot of mtb and roadies are being used leisurely and one is correct too. However it is the intended purpose of the bicycles that drive the acceptable price bracket.
For me, I wouldn't want to spend more than $700 on a hybrid. Why because the bike will not need such exacting quality for day to day riding around. YMMV of course.

I guess unlike road bikes or MTBs, hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way
False. Maybe in your case, but I doubt that you can speak for all others.

To the OP, the guy with the wallet gets to decide.

What size is it? Is it close to Chicago????? LOL

lucky you. i wish i was close to chicago. i could bargain that 7.5 fx (http://villagecycle.com/product/09-trek-7.5-fx-47873-1.htm)i wanted for under $700.

the 7.5s are all out of stock here in philly. i want it in white - not the 2010 colors :( maybe next august. do my wallet some good.

False. Maybe in your case, but I doubt that you can speak for all others.

To the OP, the guy with the wallet gets to decide.

Then find me an internationally recognized event that hybrids are used? Last I check TDF and the like are all road bikes. And X-Games had not a single hybrid in it.

I have no idea what you're talking about. You go from one thing to another and offer no connection or clarification along the way. How did we get from "hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way" to "find me an internationally recognized event that hybrids are used"? Weird.

At any rate, this has nothing to do with the topic of this discussion (which is actually taking place in another thread).

I guess unlike road bikes or MTBs, hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way (not subjected to harsh conditions like MTBs or max velocity required for roaddies). By and large, hybrid riders usually go on MUPs or paved roads for commutes and leisure rides. So with that in mind, the components and frame do not need to be in high-grade.

Well, I dunno. Even on a MUP I can still appreciate an XT drivetrain over an Alivio one. Good brakes are awfully good to have when pedaling fast downhill on the streets in town. And will anyone blame me for choosing the saddle that fits my sit-bones, even though it's a bit spendy?

A Trek 7.2 is an adequate bike. It will go faster and ride better with $80 spent on decent tyres and $20 on Kool Stop brake pads. If you want the bike to go faster, then you can swap the stem for a longer one and get better aero - this will cost about $40. BMX pedals are more secure and provide better power transfer for about $20. Ergon grips are always a good option.

So the question a rational person will ask himself or herself is How much extra does a bike costing more than an upgraded 7.2 give me, and do I need it?

What you can't buy is substantially more speed - manufacturers like to imply you can, but other than going to a drop handle or bull horn bike this isn't true. Even cheap frames and powertrains are very efficient; once you've cutting rolling resistance by fitting good tyres there is nothing left to optimize. Yes, if you've got cash handy a 7.5 might feel a little "nicer" and there's nothing wrong with that.

Comfort is a matter of tyres, fit, and the saddle - so nothing to be done there.

Probably the best upgrades you can buy are:

- Internal gear hubs for reduced maintenance (but make sure your LBS is competent to trouble shoot an IGH - this is new technology)

- Disc brakes, if they're good ones. Maybe/depending.

- A tougher frame if you're going adventure touring - this probably means a boutique cromo bike like a Roadrat, Cross Check or Karate Monkey. An average LBS won't stock them.

If you have money left after buying a 7.2 or 7.5 Disc and upgraded tyres, then my suggestion is to think about buying the best possible cycling clothes - premium merino wool T's, an Event rain shell (much better than Goretex if you can afford it), a Paramo Velez for riding in the autum or winter, Sealskinz gloves and socks. And good lights if you're riding at night and a hydration pack if you're planning all-day rides.

Don't forget a chain cleaner and a good pump with a tyre gauge - using both regularly will have more of an effect on speed then spending any amount of cash on carbon fibre.

>> I guess unlike road bikes or MTBs, hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way

False. Maybe in your case, but I doubt that you can speak for all others.


If you rode a hybrid to the limit of a real MTB there would be nothing left but shrapnel. There's a reason MTB's and hybrids are different bike classes.

As for "hard like a road bike" - sure. You're just as fit as those guys who train 15 hours a week with power meters doing hill intervals to raise their lactate levels, and who spend their off bike time stretching, reading their coaches emails, and sending blood samples to their lab. Obviously! You could probably enter a Cat 1 race and win any time you like! So there is no doubt at all that your frame takes the same sort of hammering that a real athlete will give to a racing frame. None. Completely!

Seriously: while by definition not as tough as an MTB, a decent hybrid should survive anything that a road bike can. But that doesn't require as much engineering as the road bike needs - because the hybrid doesn't have the same design restrictions on weight, frame angles, tyre type, etc. I know a guy who rides a 1950's club racer (basically a Sirrus like hybrid - but rather nicer) as his main bike. It's still fine after half a century of thrashing because the frame wasn't pared down to the absolute minimum to reduce weight.

Well, I dunno. Even on a MUP I can still appreciate an XT drivetrain over an Alivio one.


"Appreciate" = "I can't think of any functional difference, but it cost more so it must be better".

(I ride a cross bike with a very expensive Italian power train - and I know exactly why. "Appreciation" is not the reason!)



Good brakes are awfully good to have when pedaling fast downhill on the streets in town.


The cheapest Shimano v-brake has more braking power than is required to lock a front wheel - and just as much power as the rim braked MTBs that people have ridden down 45 degree downhills for two decades. Any more power is pointless, because it will initiate a braking skid. If you haven't worked this out then you probably don't know how to use any sort of brake correctly and should learn how before you get hurt:

www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html

(Although discs are better in the wet.)



And will anyone blame me for choosing the saddle that fits my sit-bones, even though it's a bit spendy?

No one. However, experienced riders will tell you that fit isn't related to price. Some expensive saddles do have a rationale - Blackburns for longevity, some racing saddles for low weight. But equating fit and price is a nonsense.

Then find me an internationally recognized event that hybrids are used?

Bike polo.

(yes,internationally recognized event,do your own Googling)

Also,I dare say that city living(commuting,exercise,grocery hauling,being locked up outside) in all weather is prolly just as abusive over time as any road or MTB race. The average rider also keeps their machine for many 'seasons',and doesn't have a team of professional mechanics going over the bike after every ride and sponsors to upgrade the components every year.

To the OP, the guy with the wallet gets to decide.
So if the guy with the wallet asks for opinions, states he wants a hybrid, but intends to use it for something that another class of bikes would be more well suited, are we allowed to tell him, don't get a hybrid?

Bike polo.

(yes,internationally recognized event,do your own Googling)


You can play bike polo on any bike, but the preferred machine is track bike with an ultra short stem and flat bars.



Also,I dare say that city living(commuting,exercise,grocery hauling,being locked up outside) in all weather is prolly just as abusive over time as any road or MTB race.


No. Not even courier work hammers a bike as hard as being pushed properly off road. (Don't confuse repeated durability doing wussy stuff with hardcore toughness.)



The average rider also keeps their machine for many 'seasons',and doesn't have a team of professional mechanics going over the bike after every ride and sponsors to upgrade the components every year.

Neither does an amateur MTBer.

Really - I hope I'm not just being grumpy with flu, but there is a reason why hardtail MTBs cost more and weigh more than hybrids. It's the cost of more and (ideally) tougher metal and first rate welding, tougher quality control. There's nothing wrong with a hybrid because it is made lighter and cheaper - lighter and cheaper is better for what hybrid customers need. But you shouldn't expect epics of endurance like:



This is not a garage queen, it is a daily rider, and is showing the signs of twenty years of use, and is a Frankenbike, so the purists might want to look away now.

I have owned this bike since 1992 (ish), I paid the princely sum of £35 and two pints of cider for it, and it came in bits in a box. The seat post was stuck solid, and even then it was a hotchpotch of bits.

This bike has seen service as a weekend rider and everyday commuter (30 miles a day for a while). It has sported racks and panniers and been used as a tourer, and was ridden from Tel Aviv to Cairo years ago. It has seen service as a courier bike in London, the only change I made was putting a road crank on it, so its paid for itself and the bits that have gone on it over the years.

Its been used as a pub bike, left out in the rain and even jumped into the sea from the harbour wall at Lynmouth. Its been crashed, bashed and generally mistreated, but has never let me down.

It is currently painted in a very unflattering shade of 'too fugly to steal' rattle can black, which seems to be effective, as the last colour it sported was 'to fugly to steal' rattle can red, and that was on the bike for over ten years, and it never got stolen, despite being left in some dodgy areas including being left unlocked outside a bar in Eilat for over 24 hours before I remembered where I had been drinking the night before.

It is still used almost daily, only last week it was towing a trailer full of live chickens back to our house.

I have other bikes, but they all seem to stay in the garage, I love this bike and just don't want to ride the others. Its far from perfect, the top tube is dented and its too small for me, but its been that way since I bought it, and I still love it.

One day it will be returned to its pistachio coloured glory and be hung in my lounge as remembrance of its greatness, but only after I get too decrepit to ride it any more, and only if my son won't ride it.

http://f8pnnq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pTX8av72x0xaDot3btLBUcBUmIv1XhDd07HceCPbCtn0m-3VYRU6-jG25faEWTWEbu79eCtrDNSLPuPWgAdSGqMY4SbNjhZFx/DSCF1241.JPG


Or:



awesome.

I plan to trail and XC race this frame 'till end of time.

we have survived many fine crashes together on big mountains, the most painful from Butchers Creek and Second Divide (the lesser known trail than Third Divide, yet satisfying). I dig all the paint scratches and scars on my stout and lively frame. I don't mind buffing out the rust and coating with varish. I keep it inside (and locked).

I have replaced all part from the frame at least twice...

Considering Rohloff hub geared drive train, Magura Thor 100/140mm 20mm TA fork, and ceramic bearing UST disk wheelset.

Best "upgrade" so far -- local builder Bernie Mickelson brazed on disk tabs, YEAHH :) and did a masterful job. Thank you, Bernie.

While I'm shopping for a 140~160mm light AM bike and will, in good time, a Kona StabDelux bike for WC level DH bike to supplement, my main ride, Lava Dome, can handle majority of my off-road saddle time.

If you can find a used steel Lava Dome or a similar steel Kona HT (or Vodoo, both are designed by Joe Murray) then grab it.


These bikes take rides that would cripple a hybrid in a single brutal day - and they go on doing it for decades. The likely life of a good cromo MTB is literally decades of off roading - if it doesn't get ridden off a cliff. Hybrid riders don't need this - and wouldn't know what to look for to make sure they got it - and it is expensive, so they don't get it. But there's no reason to devalue hybrids for that reason, anymore than you should look down on a Miyatta because it isn't a Toyota pickup truck.

My own Lava Dome is an 88, btw. When I bought it the bike was on its way to finishing at least its second groupset of high end off road components - the hell had been beaten out of them by wear and corrosion, which takes a hell of a lot. Except for paint worn off by chain slap and greying lacquer, the frame is still perfect.

If you rode a hybrid to the limit of a real MTB there would be nothing left but shrapnel. There's a reason MTB's and hybrids are different bike classes.
But riding a hybrid is not riding a mtn bike. If someone rode a hybrid like a mtn bike it would surely fail. Just like if I drove my Porsche 911 alongside of my 4x4 buddy's up an old logging road, it would be inadequate for a purpose that it was not designed for -- it doesn't mean that the Porsche is any less a vehicle or that it's not capable for it's intended purpose, just that it's designed for a specific purpose. It's hardly apples to apples. In the case of hybrids, it's not reasonable to expect the bike to perform as a full on mtn bike. Not sure what the point of your post is.

So if the guy with the wallet asks for opinions, states he wants a hybrid, but intends to use it for something that another class of bikes would be more well suited, are we allowed to tell him, don't get a hybrid?
Geez. Where did I say anything contrary to that?

Ultimately, even if it's the wrong bike for the guy, if he wants it and he has the money for it, he's fine to buy it. The purchaser is ultimately responsible for how his money is spent, whether you think it's the best decision or not. That's the way it works.

"Appreciate" = "I can't think of any functional difference, but it cost more so it must be better".

No, actually, I was using the word correctly.

But riding a hybrid is not riding a mtn bike. If someone rode a hybrid like a mtn bike it would surely fail. Just like if I drove my Porsche 911 alongside of my 4x4 buddy's up an old logging road, it would be inadequate for a purpose that it was not designed for -- it doesn't mean that the Porsche is any less a vehicle or that it's not capable for it's intended purpose, just that it's designed for a specific purpose. It's hardly apples to apples. In the case of hybrids, it's not reasonable to expect the bike to perform as a full on mtn bike. Not sure what the point of your post is.

the point of meanwhile's post is the same point mine. hybrids does not have the same intent as a mtb or rb. They are just used for day to day riding activities. It's not difficult to understand. ;)
Since you are attempting to use a car analogy, just think of a hybrid as a Honda CRV. It is neither a true off roader like that 4X4 Land Rover (MTB) that your buddy has nor a sports car like a Porsche 911 (road bike). The CRV does many things well. But excels in neither. Clear as mud?
Don't get me wrong, i am not a hybrid hater. In fact my next bike will likely be a rigid forked regular brakes hybrid. But recognizing that it will only take me from A to B commute, I will not spend alot on it. It's just MUPs and roads... not the Rubicon Trail nor Nurburgring. :)

the point of meanwhile's post is the same point mine. hybrids does not have the same intent as a mtb or rb.
Who said that they do? You're arguing with yourself. And what does it have to do with how much a hybrid costs?

>> If you rode a hybrid to the limit of a real MTB there would be nothing left but shrapnel. There's a reason MTB's and hybrids are different bike classes.


But riding a hybrid is not riding a mtn bike.


No, it's not. That's why you don't have to build them as tough.


Not sure what the point of your post is.

That you were being a touch unrealistic when you told that wunderkind that you do ride a hybrid as hard as an MTB. You might pedal hard and get sweaty, but it's unlikely that your power output is half as much as the athletic riders that MTBs were designed for; you might roll down a hill at 40 - but it will be paved; and I certainly don't think you and hybrid will be routinely taking "big air". Or the frequent crashes that are part of MTB fun.

A hybrid is an "MTB lite" - the performance envelope is inside a hardtail MTBs in every way. If it wasn't then it would be a hardtail MTB... Even on the measure of speed on a flat road, hardtails are often configured with longer top tubes and longer and or lower stems (just look how low the stem is compared to the saddle on that Explosif) and so more aerodynamic positions than almost any hybrid - which makes sense, because almost any rider with the upper body strength and commitment to ride with that much weight on his hands would be on drops on the road. (It's actually easier riding a fast position on drops than flat bars, because of the wrist angle.)



Just like if I drove my Porsche 911 alongside of my 4x4 buddy's up an old logging road, it would be inadequate for a purpose that it was not designed for


Well, yes. But in this case the 4x4 would also be faster - hybrids are configured for convenience and to ridden by riders who aren't athletes. There's nothing wrong that. Not everyone has to be an athlete and there is little sillier than pretending to be one when you're buying a bike - it will cost you money and serious pain. A good hybrid is a sensible, comfortable design for the 90% of the population who aren't athletes, masochists, or maniacs. Being faster or tougher would actually make it 'em worse for this role - faster would mean a more demanding riding position, and tougher would cost and/or weigh more.

>> "Appreciate" = "I can't think of any functional difference, but it cost more so it must be better".

No, actually, I was using the word correctly.

So we're agreed that you still can't think of any functional difference, but you know that it costs more. Splendid.

That you were being a touch unrealistic when you told that wunderkind that you do ride a hybrid as hard as an MTB.
No, I didn't say that. I said nowhere that I ride my hybrid as hard as a mtn bike. I said that I don't ride my hybrid in a "gentle way". That doesn't go to say that I ride the crap out of it, or think that it's a mtn bike. You guys should read a bit more carefully and/or stop twisting what is written into something else.

And as I mention in my last post, I fail to see what this has to do with the how much a hybrid costs.

I see no need for contention. People should simply buy what they want. If they can afford a $200 bike, go for it. If they can afford a $2,000 bike, go for it. Setting a standard or an 'ideal' price point for a commodity is trivial since the price varies as much as the need varies as much as the options vary.

fwiw. im not looking into jumping into this convo but i feel that no one can assign a value to this sort of thing.

You can play bike polo on any bike, but the preferred machine is track bike with an ultra short stem and flat bars.

Really? :rolleyes: Must be why my team lost at ESPI.


No. Not even courier work hammers a bike as hard as being pushed properly off road. (Don't confuse repeated durability doing wussy stuff with hardcore toughness.)

Yaroight,ok.

So we're agreed that you still can't think of any functional difference, but you know that it costs more. Splendid.

No. I said only that I used the term correctly.

Like many things in life, if you walk into a sales floor and ask how much XXX should cost, the salesperson will try to diplomatically find out how much you have.
That's a perfectly logical way to go about finding the level of quality that the buyer expects. If you don't know how much the buyer has budgeted, you've no way (as a salesperson) to know where to start showing your product. It's not a rude question. It eliminates showing a customer the top of the line product if they only have money to buy a middle of the road product, or showing bottom of the line if their budget allows for more. Your salesperson is probably not doing their job correctly if they're not asking about your budget. It's factual and helps to narrow the start of the search down -- nothing nefarious about it.


For a hybrid, I would personally try to set a budget of at least $300 to get a fairly robust and durable bike if I was buying new. If you can afford more, you will get a better bike.
That's exactly what the salesperson needs to know. :thumb:

That's a perfectly logical way to go about finding the level of quality that the buyer expects. If you don't know how much the buyer has budgeted, you've no way (as a salesperson) to know where to start showing your product. It's not a rude question. It eliminates showing a customer the top of the line product if they only have money to buy a middle of the road product, or showing bottom of the line if their budget allows for more. Your salesperson is probably not doing their job correctly if they're not asking about your budget. It's factual and helps to narrow the start of the search down -- nothing nefarious about it.


That's exactly what the salesperson needs to know. :thumb:

It's called qualifying the customer, as you've indicated, there's nothing "wrong" with it.

I use a Trek 7.5 that has Tiagra and Deore components.Great bike.I think now you have to go to a 7.6 to get equal components.That will set you about $1200.Get the best you can afford because if your serious about riding you will want good components.A good sales person has to know what you intend to spend so as to lead you in the right direction.

Like many things inb life, if you walk into a sales floor and ask how much XXX should cost, the salesperson will try to diplomatically find out how much you have...


Just go to your local acar dealer and ask the same question about a car, and you will probably be asked how much you have for a down payment, and how much you want to pay monthly... then they will start to sell you a car that sells for a little more than that.

For a hybrid, I would personally try to set a budget of at least $300 to get a fairly robust and durable bike if I was buying new. If you can afford more, you will get a better bike.

On a busy day in the summer I don't have time to talk about $2000 bikes to someone that is shopping for a bike that cost $300, that buyer did not come to talk about $2000 bikes. Just as pointless as showing $300 bikes to the guy looking to spend $2000. People know what their budget is before coming to the store.

A Trek 7.2 is an adequate bike. It will go faster and ride better with $80 spent on decent tyres and $20 on Kool Stop brake pads. If you want the bike to go faster, then you can swap the stem for a longer one and get better aero - this will cost about $40. BMX pedals are more secure and provide better power transfer for about $20. Ergon grips are always a good option.

So the question a rational person will ask himself or herself is How much extra does a bike costing more than an upgraded 7.2 give me, and do I need it?

What you can't buy is substantially more speed - manufacturers like to imply you can, but other than going to a drop handle or bull horn bike this isn't true. Even cheap frames and powertrains are very efficient; once you've cutting rolling resistance by fitting good tyres there is nothing left to optimize. Yes, if you've got cash handy a 7.5 might feel a little "nicer" and there's nothing wrong with that.

Comfort is a matter of tyres, fit, and the saddle - so nothing to be done there.

Probably the best upgrades you can buy are:

- Internal gear hubs for reduced maintenance (but make sure your LBS is competent to trouble shoot an IGH - this is new technology)

- Disc brakes, if they're good ones. Maybe/depending.

- A tougher frame if you're going adventure touring - this probably means a boutique cromo bike like a Roadrat, Cross Check or Karate Monkey. An average LBS won't stock them.

If you have money left after buying a 7.2 or 7.5 Disc and upgraded tyres, then my suggestion is to think about buying the best possible cycling clothes - premium merino wool T's, an Event rain shell (much better than Goretex if you can afford it), a Paramo Velez for riding in the autum or winter, Sealskinz gloves and socks. And good lights if you're riding at night and a hydration pack if you're planning all-day rides.

Don't forget a chain cleaner and a good pump with a tyre gauge - using both regularly will have more of an effect on speed then spending any amount of cash on carbon fibre.


Some people choose to have things in their life that are more than just "adequate".

Hybrid = Jack of all trades, master of none.

Put the same rider on a road bike, and he'll be quicker on asphalt.
Put the same rider on a mtn bike and he'll be quicker on the trails.

IMO, it's a great all around bike for most city riders who aren't looking to win any races or bomb down any trails. I personally would not pay more than $500 for one.

IMO, the advantages of a hybrid are:
- racks & fenders make a great commuter
- lighter than most mtn bikes
- comfortable geometry compared to most road bikes
- inexpensive compared to most road or mtn bikes

But....
- if I lived in a large city, I would much rather buy a pair of 1.5" slicks and slap them on my mtn bike.
- if I lived in the suburbs where traffic lights aren't 250ft apart, I would throw 28 tires & a high rised stem on the road bike for comfort (if that's what I'm looking for).

For me, a hybrid solves a problem I never had. But for others, I can definitely see why they're so popular.

A hybrid is a bike built for the way people actually ride. Why even have a mountain bike if you live in a large city nowhere near the mountains? Why have a road bike if you live in the suburbs and are riding in the city?

No, I didn't say that.

Actually, read literally, you did:

>>
I guess unlike road bikes or MTBs, hybrids are generally ridden in a more gentle way
False. Maybe in your case, but I doubt that you can speak for all others.
>>

- because you denied that you rode a hybrid "more gently" than an MTB. But I don't want to pick minor semantic nits.


You guys should read a bit more carefully and/or stop twisting what is written into something else.


..Unlike some people, apparently. Anyway, the substantive point is that few hybrids are as tough as comptent hardtail MTBs. So you shouldn't pay for this toughness.



And as I mention in my last post, I fail to see what this has to do with the how much a hybrid costs.

Tougher materials and building standards cost money. Especially while keeping weight down. I know a guy with a full-on tough 17lb MTB; he has it built as a single speed, but added gears should only whack on 3lbs or so. (Which he had to add anyway, because 17lb was so light the bike was unstable on fast descents.) Engineering like that costs real money. (The bike is the pre suspension fork Kona Hei Hei with modern components - almost impossible to find, curse it.)

Good grief.

Firstly, meanwhile, I did not say that I ride a hybrid as hard as a mtn bike or a road bike. You said that. I said that I don't ride my bike "gently". Once again, you distort what's being said to fit your needs (whatever they might be).

And yes, you should read more carefully as you don't quite get it in many posts. Perhaps if you stopped and actually digested what is being said we could dispense with these idiotic and senseless rebuttals from you and your ilk. Dictionary.com is your friend.

btw: we're not talking about why hybrids (or mtn bikes, or road bikes) cost what they do (most of us understand that mtn bikes are built tougher requiring more cost), we're talking about how much should a hybrid cost? There's a difference. Read, pal, read, and then comprehend before contributing your argumentative drivel.

Hybrid = Jack of all trades, master of none.
False. The hybrid does what a mtn or road bike can't -- it can cross over the boundaries from one to the other. In the case of the hybrid, the bike can go where others can not. A hybrid can go beyond the pavement, when a road bike has to stop. A hybrid can go beyond the dirt trail to pavement, where a mtn bike does not excel.

I'd say it's a master of the middle ground. Seems to me that this shows that the road and mtn bike are a bit compromised for all purpose work, don't you? In the situation where one wants to ride on both pavement and light off-road conditions, the hybrid is indeed the master.

A hybrid is a bike built for the way people actually ride. Why even have a mountain bike if you live in a large city nowhere near the mountains?

Ask the couriers who prefer them to hybrids...

A hybrid is built to be marketed, a hardtail MTB to people who going to use it hard under very difficult circumstances. I skipped back from a high end Sirrus to a 20 year old Lava Dome - the canonical hard tail - and difference is extraordinary. The Lava Dome can keep traction going in circumstances when the Sirrus would have given up all hope. And this does matter if you live in a city and ride hard - or if you know how to in a emergency - because it lets you throw countersteer, hard front brake, body English and rear brake skid turn together into the melange that defines superior bike handling.

Partly this is the grip of 1.5 slicks made out of racing grade rubber instead of 30mils, but the bike's angles are also famously right - it was designed by a racer for racing, brutally tested and refined, and then sold on word of mouth - and finally copied, copied, and copied, so that you see diffused Lava Dome genes in virtually all hybrids and even a lot of racers. (This was the bike that popularized the sloping top tube and straight fork.)

Hybrids are made to be sold to people who don't need that much from a bike, so with very few exceptions they're designed for show room appeal and low production cost. And of course hybrids are typically made to be ridden from a position that requires little arm strength - while the best urban MTBs are evil XC bikes with long tubes and stems that require real upper body strength because of the sustained load on the hands. But that same position is part of the reason the bike performs so well.

But this is almost completely irrelevant to what a hybrid's mission should be - rather liking judging a Toyota family car's excellence on its potential for hot-rodding. Still, you raised it: for a small minority of riders an urbanized MTB is a better city bike than a milk and water hybrid.

Dude. You so don't get it.

I use a Trek 7.5 that has Tiagra and Deore components.Great bike.I think now you have to go to a 7.6 to get equal components.That will set you about $1200.Get the best you can afford because if your serious about riding you will want good components.A good sales person has to know what you intend to spend so as to lead you in the right direction. -- bolding mine.

To me, this is the long and short of this whole "discussion." Once you've settled on a form of hybrid as your bike of choice, the only limiting factor is how much you want to spend on it. Is there some sort of ceiling on how much one "should" spend on one? Well, I've been reading all sorts of opinions on this topic since I started lurking here four months ago, and no, I haven't found any of the "against" arguments the convincing -- disdainful, yes, convincing, certainly not.

Guess the disdain merits some sort of psychological analysis that I am simply unable to provide. Then again, I can always go:

:::shrug:::

...and tell people to buy (myself included) whatever hybrid they please/can afford. Hell's bells, go nuts, buy the best possible saddle you can as well as Ergon grips and a cadence 'puter cycle while you are it. Yes, on a lowly hybrid no less.

I'd say it's a master of the middle ground.

I love that line, and the perspective that goes with it.

False. The hybrid does what a mtn or road bike can't -- it can cross over the boundaries from one to the other. In the case of the hybrid, the bike can go where others can not. A hybrid can go beyond the pavement, when a road bike has to stop.


Actually touring bikes handle the same terrain as hybrids - often rather better due to lower centre of gravity, as they're not crippled to suit riders who are insist on an upright position.



A hybrid can go beyond the dirt trail to pavement, where a mtn bike does not excel.


The hardtail XC MTB can do this too, and tougher and faster. It just costs more. Because it is the same sort of bike, built to a higher standard and without compromises for unathletic riders.



I'd say it's a master of the middle ground. Seems to me that this shows that the road and mtn bike are a bit compromised for all purpose work, don't you? In the situation where one wants to ride on both pavement and light off-road conditions, the hybrid is indeed the master.

You're also forgetting cyclocross bikes - another sort of bike that does everything a hybrid does without the constraint of being designed for a rider who is pudgy, weak armed, scared of strangely shaped handle bars, or (quite sensibly) just not that interested. The cross bike, like the XC bike, just does everything better.

Really - there's nothing wrong with having the cycling equivalent of sensible shoes! But trying to pretend that they're ideal for some bizarre of pot holing and arctic exploration is just embarrassing...

But you are distracting me from the state of my sinuses, so thank you.

meanwhile, as I said, you so don't get it.

Oh and for "athletes" needing a dedicated bike, well, in theory, sure. But to take the analogy to sports in general, the best athletes are often found amongst the less than fortunate and they excel, at first anyway, not due to their equipment but rather despite of it: talent and hard work are first and foremost. Sure, to compete against the very best they'll need better gear and most find sponsors/kindred spirits to help them on their way -- others don't, but they could still beat 90% of the participants in their chosen sport.

Couple of examples:

1-Long time raquetball player here; coached as well though now retired. Used to seeing talented players with middle of the road gear spank any number of club players using the latest/best/most expensive rackets.

2-Been riding for four months. I regularly see a couple of kids on clunker-looking, generic bikes, not only keep-up with a number of roadies in expensive gear, but leave quite a few of them in the dust.

Conclusion: I guess in the end, we all make our OwnRules. :thumb: