Fifty Plus (50+) - Boomer Bikes?

It is obvious to me that the "baby boomers" are coming back to cycling after our initial introduction in the 70's. Many folks who used to ride regularly (and enjoy it greatly) got away from it for several decades and are now returning. Most of us are heavier and slower than we used to be, and the bike manufacturers haven't yet twigged to what a lucrative and loyal market we can be. "Geezer bikes" are NOT what we want to buy.. Nobody yet makes the type of bikes we'd prefer, but that'll change soon. For the sake of any manufacturer's reps who may ghost this forum, there is a large market of relatively flush older guys who would prefer the following:

1. Comfortable frame angles but still light (think Specialized Roubaix..)
2. Double front chain rings with some range rather than flaky-shifting triples
3. DISC BRAKES - rim brakes are **SO** last-century (Really take this suggestion to heart!)
4. Durable but light parts groups that rekindle the stuff we wanted back when (think Campy Veloche or even Chorus)
5. STRONG WHEELS that won't taco (remember I said we were heavier now..) Think 36 spoke units with deep V rims and 23 to 28 mm 700c tires to match our various durability needs
6. Adjustable stem and bar options for comfort but still with lightness.
7. Target prices between $1,500 and $2,500 for entry level - up to $3,500 for upscales.
8. No more than 18 gears - 14 is even better - durability and smoothness are more important than "wow."

By the bye.. If anyone knows of any current models that fit ALL the above criteria, please let me know.

I'm sure I've offended many with even the suggestions above - if so, please feel free to send me your own opinions - you may have excellent points that I'm wrong on or haven't thought of that would be of use to other forum folks. If you just want to flame me on the disc-brake issue, don't bother - you're wrong! <G>

Thanks!

I like my triple 105 and it isn't flimsy. Has taken me thousands of miles, and we have hills here in Colorado.

And 28mm tire is too slow. I like 25 mm or even 23.

And I like my 27 gears.

And my brakes work fine!

Your brakes may work fine BUT:

If you get any bend in the rim, your brakes don't work so well
The aluminum rim is exposed to dirt, water, and the continued abrasion of the brake pads
The aluminum rim is soft metal that will become scored by the brake pads
On hard decents, the aluminum rim can become excessively heated, transferring heat to the tire & tube
Tires have (and will continue) to blow out from rim heat

Disc brakes also generate heat, but the heat transfers to a rotor that is far from the tube
The hub structure and even the forks can assist in heat dissipation
Disc brakes are also exposed to the elements, but you don't have to change your wheels when worn - only the rotor or pads
The steel rotor of a disc brake is far more wear-resistant than an aluminum rim
The weight penalty for discs is insignificant
With disc brakes, wheel truing becomes less critical.

Let's talk about seats. My husband swears by his ergo seat. In fact I think we should get a kickback from the manufacturer, because everytime we stop, at least one guy asks him where he got his seat.
Myself I swear by my Terry Liberator, which doubles as a handle. I don't ride pure road bike as I can't
handle the drops anymore. I ride upright. So I ride a hybrid and yes we both like big fat panniers,
for snacks, jackets, stashing wine bottles, etc. We're much more into comfort than speed.

Your brakes may work fine BUT:

If you get any bend in the rim, your brakes don't work so well
The aluminum rim is exposed to dirt, water, and the continued abrasion of the brake pads
The aluminum rim is soft metal that will become scored by the brake pads
On hard decents, the aluminum rim can become excessively heated, transferring heat to the tire & tube
Tires have (and will continue) to blow out from rim heat

Disc brakes also generate heat, but the heat transfers to a rotor that is far from the tube
The hub structure and even the forks can assist in heat dissipation
Disc brakes are also exposed to the elements, but you don't have to change your wheels when worn - only the rotor or pads
The steel rotor of a disc brake is far more wear-resistant than an aluminum rim
The weight penalty for discs is insignificant
With disc brakes, wheel truing becomes less critical.

Hmm!

Must be a manufacturer's rep! :D

My husband swears by his ergo seat.

Cool! What seat, exactly, does hubby use? Thanks!

Must be a manufacturer's rep!

Nope - just a safety engineer.

7. Target prices between $1,500 and $2,500 for entry level - up to $3,500 for upscales.



During the 1980's I thought little of spending $1500 to $3500 on a high end stock or custom built bike, and I thought the several I bought were well worth the price. Nowadays, I am most impressed by the great value one can get in the $250 to $400 price range. I think these newer Taiwan imports exceed the quality of my expensive bikes of the 80's. So my views of bicycle values don't fit with the price range you are suggesting.

You do have an interesting post, but it puzzles me.

I like a lot of older stuff and have managed to do some of what you're talking about by retrofitting a 1980s sports bike--but it has been a labor of love. For example, with the help of Harris Cyclery (www.sheldonbrown.com) and Rivendell bicycle works (www.rivbike.com) I've managed to get a new crank, derailieur and freewheel combination (yes freewheel) that gives me a double chainring with wide-ranging gearing. I also bought a Nitto quill stem and handlebar combo that is taller and more comfy to my older back than my Cinelli bars and stem were.

Having said that, I don't see most boomers having a problem with triple chainrings. I've had them on a touring bike and a mountain bike of a similar vintage and never found their shifting to be flaky. For better or worse, in an age when people seem to think more is better in the cog department (30 speeds and rising!), I can't imagine any manufacturer going in the other direction.

But I do think we will see more and more bikes with the kind of boomer geometry you are talking about. Specialized Roubiax, Lemond Big Sky, Trek (can't remember the model number), Breezer come to mind. And you can find disc brakes entering the road bike world (Cannondale Bad Boy Ultra and Kona Sutra among others in your price range). Getting most of the features you're looking for in one bike may be another story.

Don’t know if this is quite what you have in mind, but the Dutch bike maker Koga-Miyata offers this very comfortable, unusual but classy-looking, bike which has strong--36 spoke--wheels, adjustable handlebars and interesting (thought not disc) brakes. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/koga/liteace8.html It ain't light weight, but I can see certain boomers going for it who want an alternative to the Lance wannabe crowd and the ride-around-the-block-comfort-bike-crowd. And it's in your price range.

By the way, I’m not selling anything. Never worked in the bike industry. Just a bike junkie. Good luck in your quest.

The original poster makes some good points. There are some bikes that fit some of his criteria but not others. There may be some bikes coming in the future that are closer to his likes. It really does make sense. Anything that gets people riding more is a good thing for the health aspects as well as the enviornment. You notice that his price range does not start at $500. I didn't think he was a manufacturer rep. He's too fwd thinking. He acknowledges THE FACT that Boomers have bucks and that segment needs to be addressed.
Disks are the brakes of the future. Not so much on pure performance bikes but on a class of inbetweeners. The Hybrid market is dying, comfort bikes are the fastest growing section of the market, mostly because of the aging population using them as recreational health riding vehicles.

Bike riding is good for most everyone. What you ride is irrevelent, that you ride is pertinent. Some are stuck in one venue to the exclusion of others. I was like that but I've become multivenued. No one bike fits all needs.

Jude

Bike riding is good for most everyone. What you ride is irrevelent, that you ride is pertinent...
Jude


Well stated. I bought a $53 Roadmaster the other day just to give it a try.

The original poster makes some good points. There are some bikes that fit some of his criteria but not others. There may be some bikes coming in the future that are closer to his likes. It really does make sense. Anything that gets people riding more is a good thing for the health aspects as well as the enviornment. You notice that his price range does not start at $500. I didn't think he was a manufacturer rep. He's too fwd thinking. He acknowledges THE FACT that Boomers have bucks and that segment needs to be addressed.
Disks are the brakes of the future. Not so much on pure performance bikes but on a class of inbetweeners. The Hybrid market is dying, comfort bikes are the fastest growing section of the market, mostly because of the aging population using them as recreational health riding vehicles.

Bike riding is good for most everyone. What you ride is irrevelent, that you ride is pertinent. Some are stuck in one venue to the exclusion of others. I was like that but I've become multivenued. No one bike fits all needs.

Jude

Not all of us have available cash to spend on what would be pretty good bikes. Some of us will be trying cycling for the first time, or on a budget, so will not want to spend a great deal initially. Discs may be the brakes of the future, but a good set costs a lot of money. Cheap disc brakes may work as well as Rim brakes, but that is doubtful. Plus the fact fact, there is a lot of development to go on yet for disc brakes for road bikes.. Then on the gearing side, AS MANY AS YOU CAN GET helps. Hills get steeper as you get older, and I will not swop my 22/ 32 for anything else.


What do I ride? A bianchi mountain bike, that gets used most weekends, that works. is five years old, gets maintained as required and does not cost a great deal to run, and is used most weeks of the year. The other is a mountain bike set up for heavy duty, That does have disc brakes, top rate hydraulics at that, heavy duty wheels, heavy duty forks, and all the parts are made for the job. Trouble is, how many of you want to spend $6,000 on a bike, even if it is a Tandem, and this ones works even better, but cost's a fortune to keep in good condition.

Good ideas mind you, but we have to think of Custom building at this time. That is the only way you will get a bike as you want it, and Yes I have done it, but Budget restraints and Biking capabilities nowadays mean that I cannot warrant the amount of money my ideal bike would cost.

Going onto the disc brake issue. A good disc brake works and works well. Cable brakes are not up to grade so you have to think Hydraulic. I have yet to see a road bike with Disc-- must be a reason? However on Mountain bikes, It is now about 50/50. Nothing wrong with rim brakes, except for the rim wear that I will agree with, but That can be overcome with ceramic rims. Top rate Hydraulic brakes will cause problems. They work very effectively, so much so that you HAVE to think about stronger forks, and head tubes, and headsets, and 20mm Bolt through axles. How Do I know? note the Tandem above that has gearly benefitted from Hope Mono M4 disc brakes, and I would not revert back to Rim brakes on this bike. Cost of this effective system on the Tandem was not just the Brakes, it was also the wheels that would take this power, the forks to take the strain of them working at full capacity, and the loss of warranty on my frame if the headtube breaks.

I know that a New bike built to take this Disc Brake Punishement would be built stronger, but the weight would go up, and the cost of the better quality parts would also have to be included. I think that for the average person, this bike would not be up to speed standard, and would be too pricey.

Do we really have to have the absolute best (and most expensive) of everything, even if we can afford it? I'll take your word that disk brakes are the way to go, but I have 7 bicycles, all with rim brakes, non with any dents or serious scratches in their rims and they all stop me each and every time I have ever used them. Of the 7 bikes, I most often ride the one that happens to have cost the least, an old Centurion that I bought for $50 and put new rims and a new seat on. It's simply the most fun to ride, period. Works for me, anyway.

Jim

I'm another one that disagrees with the assertion that triples are Bad. With age should come the wisdom to recognize that your knees aren't 20 years old anymore. Triples are a Good Thing(tm) if you ever have to climb double-digit grades.

Triples are a Good Thing(tm) if you ever have to climb double-digit grades.

You're right, of course. I live in the flatlands where the tallest hills are less than 100' high.. To each his own. Other posters have made fascinating points that I'd like to address too:

The rim-brake vs. disc brake debate is already dead. Yes, rim brakes work adequately most of the time, but discs (even Avid road mechanicals) are VASTLY superior in every way. The cost of discs will drop radically very soon, and most bikes (yes, even most ROAD bikes) will have discs. Road bikes that have them now include the Specialized Sirrus Disc, the Schwinn Super Sport DBX, and the Kona Sutra. Others will follow within the next year. Luddites can keep their rims - the future is disc.

There will always be a market for $400 bikes, but the average boomer now has enough cash to want a fancier bike, whether it is "better" or not. Quality has, indeed, improved throughout the market, and today's $400 bike probably is the equivalent of a $1,000 bike from 1975. However, perception, not performance, is what drives bike sales. Very few boomers want to own what they percieve as an "entry level" bike. This may not make sense, but it is reality.

For mountain dwellers, triples may be chainring heaven, but for us flatlanders, two chainrings is plenty (even with our decaying knees). The trick to using two is to have a wide range. The old "52-42" isn't what is needed. A "50-36" range gives all the usable gears of a 30-speed with less duplication. Face it - how many "real" gears do you get with 30 speeds? About 18 if you're lucky!

It must also be said that with narrower chains, cogs, and chainrings, the nine and ten speed chains stretch more. These systems are also more likely to break, to bend, or to jam. Even the manufacturers tacitly admit this with their replacement schedule recommendations. Give me reliability!

Thanks to all who have replied. I've enjoyed your feedback and will continue to read and respond to future posts on this thread.

Regrettably (I guess) I must agree with some of what you state.

As I view the panoply of Excursions, Expeditions, Navigators, Lexi, and whatever in our local grocery store parking lot, I am overwhelmed with all of the money, and have no clue from whence it cometh, except I suspect they are all selling drugs. And they are all equipped with a Cell-phone talking soccer mom - it gets to be laughable - and they live in 7,000 sq ft houses.

Yes, these folks have money - so who cares about Social Security? Just sell a Navigator or Escalade or Hummer and you will be rich the rest of your life.

So, the demand will be for disc brakes (against which I have nothing - if they are beter, so be it).


And, they will likely start with hybrids or something similar, but in the competition to see who can spend the most money, will quickly demand something more "prestigious."

And faster.

As to the gearing, you are right, I seldom use the grannys, but around here in Colorado, there are times when they are necessary. But my 21 speed mtn bike (3x7) has plenty of gears for me, and I likely could use less, as long as I had the range in gearing i needed.

In fact, I have installed lower gears on my triple - for those "ouch" hills (at least "ouch" for me at 65yo).

So your prognostication is not too far off, IMHO.

You're exactly correct about the evils of conspicuous consumption for its own sake, but this malady is not limited to baby boomers. I believe the demand for "above entry level" bikes in the over-50 crowd is not so much about conspicuous consumption, but rather about an appreciation of quality. Having owned many items that were the cheapest money could buy, I have learned that it's sometimes wise to spend more on things I use heavily. Appliances, which to me include cars, are a prime example. The "use a lot" catagory includes my bike. Will a $1,500 bike be better built, more reliable, and more pleasurable than a $300 "entry-level" bike? I think so. Others may disagree, and are welcome to vote with their pocketbooks. Thanks for your participation in the thread - I've enjoyed your perspective.

Lighter, faster, older here. Speak for yourself.

Speak for yourself.

I do. I also express my opinions about my contemporaries. If you don't fit my generalizations, good for you. Differences are good.

It's slowly dawning on me about your points on disc brakes. Taking away the rim as the braking surface lightens it up considerably, tranferring more of the overall wheel weight to the hub, which has less rolling resistance. Rims can be designed purely for holding the tire. They don't even need vertical sidewalls anymore. Just go with a lighter and stronger V shape.

Rivendell bikes come close to the ideal of a comfortable, versatile, lightweight, enjoyable mount that can go anywhere with aplomb. They're strong, dependable, comfortable, simple to maintain. The new "comfort" roadbikes, like the Trek Pilot and Giant OCR, are a step in this direction, more upright riding position, shallower angles for straight line stability and curved chainstays for comfort over long distances.

I've been riding two lugged steel frames for 20 years. They have fully adjustable ball and cone BBs, headsets and wheel bearings. No sealed bearings. Toe clips and straps, so I can ride without cleated shoes if I want, or with cleated shoes (except slotted cleats are rarer than 6 speed freewheels!). 52-42 up front, 13-22 or 13-26 in back. 12 or 14 gears. No need to double shift--ever. The gears are close enough to pick up the cadence easily when shifting.

One bike weighs 24 pounds with fenders and 28C tires. The other weights 22 pounds with 25C tires. Climbing steep grades in 42-22 has always been character building. I even have down tube friction shifters. They have never jammed up or broken. 36 spoked wheels haven't needed truing for 5 years.

Pushing 62 years of age, competition is no longer the main thing, so I don't have to have a sub 18 pound bike. But I think a modern carbon-aluminum or carbon-steel combo bike could come in under 20 pounds with 32 spoked wheels and 25C tires, like the "comfort" bikes mentioned above. The Giant OCR2 weighs slightly over 20 pounds. I've had my eye on a Redline cyclo-cross bike with disc brakes that comes in at about 20 pounds with knobby tires. That's good enough for me. I'd give up some lightness for comfort and durability.

Going onto the disc brake issue. A good disc brake works and works well. Cable brakes are not up to grade so you have to think Hydraulic. I have yet to see a road bike with Disc-- must be a reason?


The Giant OCR touring has disc brakes. It is the reason I got this bike, I wanted disc brakes. I love not having to wonder if I will have any problem slowing down in less than ideal weather. Price point is good at about 1100. It is a tad heavier than most road bikes as it is made for going and going and going.

Is it perfect, no. It's a compromise. Biggest problem is the bike makers have set an artifical limit of 24 teeth difference between lower number of teeth and highest number of teeth. Going to 10 speeds does not solve that problem. It's just a lot of money down the toilet. I'm waiting for the makers to get smart and support a triple with something like 20-39-54. They have come up with great solutions for bents, when will there be something for an all in one comfortable road bike? I don't want to mess with multiple bikes: one for loaded riding, one for speed and tooling along, and one for comfort family rides.

Here in CO, we don't only have mountains, but in the spring and fall riders will face wind gusts of 50+++ mph. This can be a real ride joy breaker. Since these are gusts, you may start your ride and find out about them too late. Riding a bike at near walking speeds is a bummer. I'm not a mechanical engineer, but there must be a better marketable solution than we have seen. Bikes have come a good ways since the 70's, and there is still good room for improvement.

So I've been thinking that aging boomers may want to try a tricycle. The risk of serious problems from "going down" becomes greater with old age. I don't want an 18 month recovery period after shattering my hip when I couldn't clip out at a traffic light (or even just losing balance with platform pedals and falling over). Not sure what that tricycle design should be. Those low ones seem too easy to get run over by an SUV. But I'd like to think I can cruise around the neighborhood (or retirement community, or whatever) even when I'm 75, or 85, or 95.

[QUOTE=FarHorizon]You're exactly correct about the evils of conspicuous consumption for its own sake, but this malady is not limited to baby boomers. I believe the demand for "above entry level" bikes in the over-50 crowd is not so much about conspicuous consumption, but rather about an appreciation of quality. Having owned many items that were the cheapest money could buy, I have learned that it's sometimes wise to spend more on things I use heavily. Appliances, which to me include cars, are a prime example. The "use a lot" catagory includes my bike. Will a $1,500 bike be better built, more reliable, and more pleasurable than a $300 "entry-level" bike? I think so. QUOTE]

I think you make a good point--especially about equipment that one will use a lot. It may be less painful to think of the outlay as an investment instead of simply a cost. In my own case, I spent $700 on a pretty good road bike two decades ago. Believe me, that was a big bite at the time! However, I've really enjoyed that bike for 20 summers and hope to continue to enjoy it for 20 more. At $35 per year (plus related expenses like new tires, etc.) I consider this perhaps the best investment I ever made. That isn't to say you can't enjoy a less expensive bike. Just that sometimes it's really worth it to suck it up and lay out the cash for something you're planning to make very good use of over a long period of time.

That list makes me want to turn in my Junior - AARP card.

I want the highest-tech, hottest, fastest, sexiest, lightest bike my slush funds can accomodate. And that's exactly how I have built my small collection. I'm not overweight, fatigued or listless. I've worked hard to avoid those things. I want go fast, now.

I spent last evening out in my Bike House installing the major items (at least those requiring a stand and a torque wrench) on a Moots Vamoots. Record, FSA Superlight, Chris King, Deda and Thomson. 24/28 spoke custom wheels tipping the scale at 1400 grams. It's going to be a rocket. Even with my tired old knees turning the pedals.


So, all you bike reps listening to this - remember, not everyone wants a wide gel seat and an adjustable stem.

That list makes me want to turn in my Junior - AARP card.

I want the highest-tech, hottest, fastest, sexiest, lightest bike my slush funds can accomodate.

Are you sure you're not talking about your inflatable girl friend?

Is it perfect, no. It's a compromise. Biggest problem is the bike makers have set an artifical limit of 24 teeth difference between lower number of teeth and highest number of teeth. Going to 10 speeds does not solve that problem. It's just a lot of money down the toilet. I'm waiting for the makers to get smart and support a triple with something like 20-39-54.

The limiting factor of 24 teeth is actually on the front derailler. It will not cope with a difference of more than 22T, as quoted on the Pamphlet, but this can be stretched to, and will cope with 24T.
On the Tandem, we have a problem in that we either go for Speed with Higher gears on the front Crankset or go to gears that are usable off road. Naturally there is a compromise, and we have settled on 9 Speed rear cassette with 11/32T. There is a 12/34 made, but it is not strong enough for the power we put in and bends on the first hill.
On the front we could use 44/34/22, but this means that we just do not have a high enough gear even for off road, or we could use a 52/40/28, but a 28 would not give a low enough gear, even for some of our 20% road hills, let alone offroad.
The compromise has come in that the rear is 11/32 and the front is 48/36/24. We have yet to find a hill that beats us on 24/32, although cadence up some of them is quite low, and to be quite honest 48/11 is plenty fast. At the highest gear on the flat, we hold our own up against the road Tandems, although our cadence is very high at around 120. and when it comes to fast downhills, where every one will be coasting, we are generally the fastest around. (Disc brakes do work, but we don't use them untill we have to).

Hate to say it but unless you have a variety of bikes, for different uses, you will always have to compromise on something. I have 3 bikes. Never use the road bike as I do not go on road. Tandem gets used on the Bigger events, randonnees, or special occasions, so the Mountain bike is my bike of choice for most things. Jack of all trades but only master at one--the original use it was built for getting muddy

Funny, even with all the slang I'm familiar with, I've never heard the word "bike" used to describe an inflatable girlfriend.

Guess we run in different circles.

You're right. We do run in different circles. I don't use words like hot and sexy to describe any object without a pulse.

I guess so my friend. I reckon the day I stop seeing bikes as hot and sexy is the day I start spending all my time in the 50+ forum.

Hey, my bike has a pulse! When we get warmed up, it beckons on the first hill, "C'mon wimp, hit it! Let's roll!" The bike's hot, lugged steel lovingly brazed by hand, tight wheels, light crank, firm seat! I'm perfectly positioned on it! So I'm hot, too. Cialis? Viagra? Keep 'em. Riding is the best aphrodisiac for anyone, regardless of age! The sexual metaphors apply! ;)

I'm 53 and going to hang in there with my "regular" road bike as long as I can. It's funny I bought a used bike last fall and never once even considered a comfort bike. Might be a little short sighted on my part but I hope not.

Hey, any bike that fits, that you can be comfortable on, will provide years of cycling pleasure. Love inspires indulgence, however! It's natural to want more of what gives you pleasure. Often having more goes to your head, gives you a sense of entitlement. The retro or single speed mindset is a reaction against that snobbishness. The bike may reflect one's choices in life, but do not define the man. That's something lots of riders have to get over, initially.

Enjoy what you have! I've been doing for 20 years.

That list makes me want to turn in my Junior - AARP card. I want the highest-tech, hottest, fastest, sexiest, lightest bike my slush funds can accomodate.

I'm glad you enjoy racing. Most "Baby Boomer" guys don't. The point I make is that the available bike selection is out of touch with the potential market. For example:

Since you like to race, you want the hottest race bike you can get. Almost every manufacturer makes such a bike, giving you a choice of perhaps 60 available models.

The majority of us Boomers don't want to race. We want a durable, low maintenance, lightweight, comfortable, all-around road bike (with disc brakes - although many of us don't know that yet). The number of such bikes that I can find currently equals one - the Kona Sutra. I don't count cyclo-cross bikes because their high bottom braket makes them less comfortable. I also don't count "Specialized Roubaix" type bikes because their spoke count and lack of disc brakes make them less than durable. Since Giant has dropped their OCR-Touring model for 2005, there is virtually nothing in this class.

For every guy like you who races, there are several hundred like me who don't want a racing bike. Yet, the availability is skewed toward racers. I don't begrudge you the wonderful selection you have available, I just wish bike makers would recognize me. If makers recognized me (and fellow Boomers) as the market we are, and MARKETED to us the type of bike I've described, then they (the bike makers) would grow RICH!

I don't want to limit your bike selection nor deny you the right to ride greased lightning if that is your predeliction. I only want bike makers to twig to the fact that they are missing a LARGE and PROFITABLE potential market.

Let's all turn in our AARP cards and form out own organization - the ABBR - American Boomer Bicycle Riders!

The majority of us Boomers don't want to race. We want a durable, low maintenance, lightweight, comfortable, all-around road bike (with disc brakes - although many of us don't know that yet). The number of such bikes that I can find currently equals one - the Kona Sutra.


Gunnar makes this--Could be a possibility along the lines you're thinking of. It's not exactly a road bike, but it could be set up with narrow slicks, and the moustache bar configuration is very comfy in my experience. In fact, when my back was hurting, I took an old mountain bike, set it up somewhat similar to this (including the moustache bars). It allowed me to ride weeks before I could get back on the road bike. I like it so much, I still ride it all the time Just a thought to keep the dialogue flowing....

http://www.gunnarbikes.com/rocktour.php

I'm glad you enjoy racing. Most "Baby Boomer" guys don't. The point I make is that the available bike selection is out of touch with the potential market. For example:

Since you like to race, you want the hottest race bike you can get. Almost every manufacturer makes such a bike, giving you a choice of perhaps 60 available models.

The majority of us Boomers don't want to race.

You continuously "speak" for Baby Boomers.

Have you done surveys? Polls? How do you know what kind of bikes others want?

Please clue us in on your perfervid attempts to represent this generation.

I hate it when people tell me what I want, I will tell you what I want! Far's posts are somewhat condescending IMHO.

You continuously "speak" for Baby Boomers. Have you done surveys? Polls? How do you know what kind of bikes others want? Please clue us in on your perfervid attempts to represent this generation.

I speak for myself AND my perception of my contemporaries. I have done no surveys other than meet and work with many others my age throughout the country. I meet these folks in my "real" job. I notice that the majority of men my age are more than a few pounds overweight. The Surgeon General of the United States and every major sampling/marketing organization in this country agree with me. If you're an exception to this, good for you!

I speak for my own preferences on what type of bike is wanted AND my perception of my contemporaries' preferences. How do I know these preferences? I keep a bike photo as a wallpaper on my computer, and whenever I do presentations, other men seem to strike up conversations with me about bikes.

As I've said before - most of these guys used to ride extensively in the 70's but have gotten away from it. They want to road ride again (NOT race!) for fitness and pleasure (and to rekindle their lost youth?). Many say that they've even gone so far as to visit a local bike shop (LBS), but that the racing stuff on display fits neither their riding style nor their durability needs. They aren't ready for a comfort bike, either.

I'm not trying to be condescending with this thread, despite y'all's attempts to put words and intentions in my mouth <G>. I'm just saying that (I think) there is a large and lucrative market of potential bike buyers that is being overlooked by the manufacturers. I, myself, am one of this market, although the average "BikeForums" guy (you?) is less likely to be. Keep in mind that the population who reads this network is severely "skewed" toward the "enthusiast" crowd, who take cycling and fitness in general more seriously than the general public.

I don't expect you to want the bike that I want. I don't even expect you to agree with me about market potentials. I only ask that you consider that there may be more like me out there than you might suspect if you consider "BikeForums" posters the typical American.

Thanks for the feedback - I enjoy it even if I am overly condescending..

Thanks for the feedback - I enjoy it even if I am overly condescending..

I wouldn't accuse you of condescension - and I haven't.

Perhaps you are simply more prescient then the rest of us ergo your handle "FarHorizon."

Perhaps we need a "Happy Medium" here. Anyone seen one lately?

(DnvrFox, claiming only to be lost in he world of the past, unknowing in the world of the present and totally incognizant of the world of the future. Hey gas prices are going WAY up - and just how will that change the future, FarHorizon? I anxiously await your response, as I need to buy and sell some stock, I think!)

I'm beginning to feel like I'm in the wrong forum, too. Baby boomer bikes... :rolleyes:

Hey gas prices are going WAY up - and just how will that change the future, FarHorizon? I anxiously await your response, as I need to buy and sell some stock, I think!)

At our age you shouldn't own stock - only VERY diversified mutual funds (both stock and bond, national and international) and a limited amount of paid-for real estate. As to the energy future, look to no-meltdown-potential nukes and green energy (wind, solar, etc.) Also, consider divesting anything within a hundred miles of a shoreline or any low-lying properties anywhere. If global warming is a fact (and at this point, the odds are favoring it), then stronger hurricanes will affect all coasts, and storm surges and inland floods will go where no waters have gone before.

If our government were smart, they'd invest heavily in reviving the rail system, in public transportation of all types, and in bike paths. Demand is growing as we (Boomers) get old and can't drive any more. Needless to say, this is all IMHO..

By the bye (and back on topic), I'm strongly considering buying a Kona Dew Deluxe, and modifying it with road bars. This will satisfy my desire for durability, upgradability, speed, lightness, disc-brakes, and comfort. I rode it this afternoon with the flat bars and liked it fine. The price ($600) is also very attractive. There will be some conversion issues with the Shimano brakes and the road levers, but the LBS thinks they can come up with something. The Kona Sutra is nice, but more than twice the price of the Dew. Of course, the Sutra already has Avid road discs, road bars, and road levers/shifters.

Thanks again to all who participate in this thread. It has been FUN!

At our age you shouldn't own stock - only VERY diversified mutual funds (both stock and bond, national and international) and a limited amount of paid-for real estate. As to the energy future, look to no-meltdown-potential nukes and green energy (wind, solar, etc.) Also, consider divesting anything within a hundred miles of a shoreline or any low-lying properties anywhere. If global warming is a fact (and at this point, the odds are favoring it), then stronger hurricanes will affect all coasts, and storm surges and inland floods will go where no waters have gone before.

I knew I could count on a sober, serious and considered response from you!

Where in my post did I say I liked to race? I have never raced, have no intention of racing and the closest I ever come to a race is watching the Tour on OLN.

I don't think the bike market is out of touch with Boomer needs and desires. It might be out of touch with your needs, but it's not out of touch with mine. And that is exactly my point - the Boomer market is huge, and not easily defined. For every one of your group - wanting easier geometries, less gears, retro stuff, there is one from mine - in love with the newest technology and in love with bikes that look and go fast.

Simply put, there is no "right" bike for our generation. And all I'm saying is what you've described in your list is the furthest thing from any bike I would ever consider.

Simply put, there is no "right" bike for our generation. And all I'm saying is what you've described in your list is the furthest thing from any bike I would ever consider.

Understood. The converse is also true. Your bike is not one that I would ever consider.

The main point I attempt to make is that bike manufacturers already make MANY models for you - few or none for me. Why not try for my money too?

Thanks for the feedback.

Where in my post did I say I liked to race? I have never raced, have no intention of racing and the closest I ever come to a race is watching the Tour on OLN.

I don't think the bike market is out of touch with Boomer needs and desires. It might be out of touch with your needs, but it's not out of touch with mine. And that is exactly my point - the Boomer market is huge, and not easily defined. For every one of your group - wanting easier geometries, less gears, retro stuff, there is one from mine - in love with the newest technology and in love with bikes that look and go fast.

Simply put, there is no "right" bike for our generation. And all I'm saying is what you've described in your list is the furthest thing from any bike I would ever consider. You never did say you raced, Far just thought you must because you didn't want a "wheel chair" with disc brakes to ride.

I think FarHorizon's right on a few items. First, very few 50+ riders are racers. This doesn't take a psychic to figger out, overall racers represent less than 5% of cyclists, and that's true virtually across all age groups. Anyone who belongs in a racing-oriented club probably has a skewed perception of this, but it's very true. For every racer out there, there's two dozen recreational cyclists. So what do the big names offer as a road bike for this group? They stick 28mm tires and a slightly taller stem on a racing bike and call it a 'comfort' model!

Second, disc brakes. I'm not sure that this is a 50+ issue. I believe that eventually discs will be common on all styles of bikes, except for maybe racing bikes where weight is still a primary consideration. Disc brakes offer more reliable stopping in all conditions, and there's no rim wear. When discs mature more and perhaps become more standardized, we'll start seeing them everywhere.

Of course FarHorizon doesn't speak for all of us. I know plenty of 50+ riders who happen to like their racing bikes, complete with hard little saddles and agressive geometry. And rim brakes are 'good enough' for now, so I don't think that's really an important selling point yet. And I think doubles are for youngsters. There's nothing wrong with triples, and they shift just fine, thank-you. I want it all: a 25" gear for climbing 20% grades and a 135" gear for blasting downhill. Unfortunately, even a triple won't do that, but that's another story... And I have no intention of going back to riding an upright anytime soon; and since he didn't mention recumbents he's not speaking for me there, either. But it's a valid question: Why don't the big names offer more variety???

Wasn't that many years ago that there was no comfort bike and it is more than just a longer stem and 28 mm tires so I do believe they are making bikes for us old folks with many more to follow.

You have seen my signature, which lists what I ride. I have four classic lugged steel road bikes with 40 to 44 inch low gears and 96 to 104 inch high gears, drop handlebars, and toeclips. Two have Brooks saddles (Pro and Competition), one has a Serfas ARC saddle, and the Peugeot UO-8 really needs a Brooks saddle. :) My old school mountain bike is geared 28 to 96 and just got a nicely broken in Brooks Team Pro saddle, courtesy of eBay. As long as my old workhorses hold together, I have no desire to spend any money on something more contemporary.

There are tons of slacker, easier, more body friendly bikes on the market. There are comfort bikes, MTBs, touring bikes, cruisers, whatever you want. There are even "racing" bikes that offer most of those attributes. When I walk into any LBS here in ABQ, the lions share of offerings are those types of bikes. Bikes with racing geometry occupy much less floor space.

The reason for that I presume is that the builders watch their sales numbers very closely and build to what the consumers want. I don't think that Trek or Specialized or Cannondale are particularly stupid when it comes to targeting the spending market. If your friends who spend their time admiring your screensavers are not buying because of lack of a product, they're either not looking hard enough or they're blowing smoke. Because any bike, even the one you've described is available right now.

Taking your list one at a time:

1. Comfortable frame angles but still light (think Specialized Roubaix..)

Many possibilities and then there's custom. No one should have a hard time finding a bike because of frame angles.

2. Double front chain rings with some range rather than flaky-shifting triples

Compact cranks are now widely available and offer a close approximation to a triple. Campy triples are not flaky, they shift just as well as a double. A well-set up Shimano will too.


3. DISC BRAKES - rim brakes are **SO** last-century (Really take this suggestion to heart!)

I really don't understand this at all - more maintenance, more complicated to stop you just as well as rim brakes. I hope this never comes to pass.

4. Durable but light parts groups that rekindle the stuff we wanted back when (think Campy Veloche or even Chorus)

What's wrong with Centaur? Chorus is still beautiful, although I agree I liked it better before the switch to carbon. But then here again we have market forces. Record, in it's carbon incarnation since 1999(?) has been wildly successful. Among all age demographics.

5. STRONG WHEELS that won't taco (remember I said we were heavier now..) Think 36 spoke units with deep V rims and 23 to 28 mm 700c tires to match our various durability needs

Available now - Mavic CP33, Mavic Ksyrium - tough as nails. Tires? what's not available in tires. There are more tires on the market than one could buy in a lifetime.

6. Adjustable stem and bar options for comfort but still with lightness.

Every major stem MFGR has an adjustable product. If you don't like adjustable, there are 100s of risers in every imaginable length.

7. Target prices between $1,500 and $2,500 for entry level - up to $3,500 for upscales.

Available now.

8. No more than 18 gears - 14 is even better - durability and smoothness are more important than "wow."

What's with this? My 20 speed gear trains work better than any 10 or 14 or 16 speed system I ever owned. Why would one want less gears when more works better.

You see, I think you're not looking clearly at the market. Any of the things you've listed above could be on your bike rack by the end of the week.

Well stated Trogon and I agree 100%.

I'm 57 and have ridden traditional racing geometry road bikes for years. I purchased a specialed Sirrus and ride it almost exclusively(my Colnogo C-40's tires are flat). The relaxed geometry and more upright, horizonal bars are very comfortable, the triple chain ring is great for the steep hills in the foothills of NC. There is more wind resistance in the more upright position, but there are almost no flats here. The bike was$700 a year ago and the bike shop says this style is the most popular with "Baby Bomers." It may not have curb appeal of my C-40, but it is a pleasure to ride.