Originally Posted by
tjspiel
I've heard the term "city bike" too and I'm not sure how they differ.
I suppose it's good that they think there's a large enough market to target a specific type of bike at. Also if a non-cyclist were to decide that commuting by bike was something they wanted to do, this category gives them an idea of what they might want to look for in a bike (racks, etc).
On the other hand, I don't think that style of bike is the best choice for somebody with a longish commute, but that's probably not the group they're aiming at.
That makes sense... It's hard to see things from the perspective of the non-cyclist. I do wish that these manufacturers would not label these bikes as "commuters". I just think that's misleading. I believe that a commuting bicycle is chosen based upon the length of the commute, road conditions, rider fitness, cargo hauling capacity; etc. It just doesn't make sense that a genre of bikes called "commuters" could be the answer for everyone. In fact, most experienced cyclists see the upright riding position afforded by these bikes as a hindrance on a "commuter". Riding bolt upright is hard on the back, and riding in this position can get uncomfortable on any ride longer than a few miles. Plus, it's inefficient. Then there' s the flat bars... and the corresponding lack of multiple hand positions.
I just hope that bikes like this don't turn would-be commuters off on the idea. I think that they are often purchased with great ambitions, but end up gathering dust in people's garages.