Why is it that the commuters have the bikes that are all miss matched and have the bizarre components and just look so "personalized." I will refer you to this thread, of which I view religiously.
I'll offer my opinion: It's that we have a special relationship with these guys. They HELP us. They are not just something we do for fun. Or to be more fit or whatever. They are highly personalized because they are personal. They are the means by which we are able to do what we have to do to function. So they become part of ourselves. We develop a special affection for them. And I would rather do that then spend boatloads of money on something that would not be near as personal. As in a car.

I commute on a Huffy frame/fork combo running the stock Ashtabula one piece crank upgraded with Shimano indexing, Diacomp brakes, Araya 700c wheels, and other upgrades. Then you commute, you are not trying to show off what you ride. You are trying to make your commute as cool as possible..............

the goal fr commuting is to get there safely and on time, and then get home. not trying to impress anyone.

sometimes we need o carry loads of stuff. sometimes we deal with rain, fog, sno, ice, darkness, bad drivers, so we have to have our bikes deked out with all sorts of gadgets.

we are not just weekend warriors, fairweather riders, or weight weenies.

we are commuters.

I agree with ya. But there is the rare occasion when I can impress someone. It happens when I pass a car on the left side. And I'm still legal and legit and don't make anyone mad.

"Personalized" isn't normally the term used for a powder blue Pinto with a green fender, primer hood, plastic drop cloth for windows and a back bumper made from a wired-on piece of pipe, so I wonder why we apply it to the bicycle equivalent.

Sorry...but no special relationship here. My bikes are appliances and recreational equipment. Think -- Vacuum Cleaner or Tennis Racket. They serve their purpose, get used up, and then I recycle them. I don't name them, I don't gaze at them lovingly, and I certainly do not talk to them. And frankly, if I were to total one of them, the only emotional response would be mild annoyance at the loss of utilitarian/financial value. (I'd probably also be excited about the new replacement frame.)

So what do you call a weekend warrior, fairweather rider, or weight weening riding their bike to work? Are they posers who give the "real" commuters a bad name...

When I took my commuter to an after work ride, it stood out. But what made it different was what made it functional for commuting: fenders for wet roads, wider/heavier tires for better traction on those wet roads and better shock absorption on some not-so-nice roads; a rack to hold the panniers with my clothes and other stuff that needed to be transported; lights (and a dyno wheel) to ride at night.

Of course, when I started riding brevets, I looked around and thought, "Those bikes are just like mine! (only cleaner)."

My mismatch of parts bikes exist because I have my fancy plastic fred sled and the wife would kill me if I kept buying expensive bikes. So I come across a bike I like on the cheap and I'll raid the parts bin and use as many used parts as I can before I start buying new stuff. I have more gadgets on my fred sled than my commuter, as I don't count fenders and a rack and panniers as gadgets.

I put a rubber duck on my bike rack because my kids left the poor thing in the yard for a month. My nephew tried to pull it off the rack. Ziptie held I have a couple stickers on my bike. One says "all lanes are bike lanes" and the other is my college symbol.
that is the extent of my personalization.

I run a very weird setup for two reasons - I bought all the parts cheap and I like to experiment with different setups. Clearance frame and wheels, NOS fork, used crank, NOS derailleurs and TT barend shifters on a base bar. Very inexpensive for a light bike which only cost me about 1/3 the price of either a new comparable complete bike or all new, matching parts.

This is misguided when applied to all. There are plenty out there who ride race-ready setups to work and get there faster than you could if you rode the same route, and there is nothing wrong with that. What we ride is a function of what is important to us; those who value comfort ride comfortably. I value going as fast as I can; consequently my ride is light, I don't use a rack, I keep most my gear at work and I strive to pass every person I can find. Since I ride like a weekend warrior, but instead throughout the week, what does that make me?

Well, first of all, if you are a weekend warrior, then obviously you do not ride your bike to work during the week.

And second of all, I wrote we're not just these things. You can be a w-weenie who rides his 16-lb bare-bone bike to work with a backpack. In fact, there's a current thread for just such a person. You can be a fairweather rider who only rides to work when it's warm, when it's sunny, when it's dry, when it's not too dark.

I don't know anything about posers. I ride my bike to work, so I'm a commuter. Everything else is irrelevant.

Misguided in what way? The point of the OP was that we have weirded out bikes. I pointed out that because of the conditions under which we ride, and yes that includes -20 with a 20mph wind in the middle of January, that we find ways to make our commute easier, or perhaps less hard would a better descriptor.

I don't see what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that you could ride my route faster than I can? Now it's a pissing contest? You try riding that 16-lb'er in a blizzard in the middle of winter and see how far you get.

Now who's misguided?

You explicitly stated two things in your post:

"the goal fr [sic] commuting is to get there safely and on time, and then get home. not trying to impress anyone."

You also gave this the qualifier of "we," implying that you group all commuters together and apply your post to all of us.

If you are confused, re-read the part of my statement where I say:

"What we ride is a function of what is important to us"

Let me break that down for you, Barney style:

Obviously, functionality is important to you so your cycling mentality is pragmatic. You apply this to everyone who commutes according to your qualifier "we." However, this is simply not the case. I am a commuter, i.e., I am a part of your "we" population, yet I do not share your pragmatic cycling paradigm. My own paradigm gives much less importance to functionality and much more to going as fast as I can.

You are misguided to assume that all of us share your mentality and reasons for commuting.

To answer your question, this isn't a pissing contest. Again, re-read my post and you will see that I was not referencing that I could ride faster than you - for all I know you're faster on a mtb than I am on a cf roadie - instead I was making a hypothetical comparison to illustrate an argument. You took it personally instead of reading critically.

Additionally, why am I misguided by riding my rig (not 16lbs, that would be quite an expensive ride. I said my rig was light, but I did not give a reference...again you are assuming) through a few whiteout blizzards this past winter? The key is to ride slowly and generally stay off the brakes as much as possible. Lately I've been riding through thunderstorms, tornado warnings, flooded roads...that makes me misguided as well?

You would be much less butt-hurt if you took time to read with a critical eye instead of just skimming a post and assuming you know what is actually being said.

In point of fact, one can be a weekend warrior on the weekends and then commute on work days. Its bad form to stereotype others but not be clear on what those stereotypes mean.

I think it reflects a different mindset with regard to bicycles: One of transportation rather than recreation.

Here in the USA, the majority of people who own bicycles use them exclusively for recreational purposes, so their bikes are generally suited to specific types of recreational riding on specific types of terrain in specific types of conditions, and they are not likely to be used for load-carrying. Within such a narrow scope, a stock-equipped bike generally gives the recreational cyclist everything they need. But commuters are more likely to face varied terrain, all sorts of conditions and weather, and are likely to carry a load of some sort. So they tend to bolt on all this extra stuff to address these different factors.

Another factor is time in the saddle. A bike commuter likely spends a lot more time in the saddle than the average recreational rider, so they become well aware of which parts of the bike are working for them and which parts need to be changed or improved, so they are more likely to make component changes and use add-ons. More riding time also means parts will wear out sooner, further causing that "mismatched" look with replacement parts.

(Hopefully, I included enough qualifiers to placate the nitpickers.)

I could be wrong, but I think that the misguided comment was only in reference to you using the word "we" instead of I.

My commuter is weird enough stock.

That's a awesome looking rig. A little scary going down a hill carrying that though I bet.