++1:) So many of these threads get started; kinda fun to read through, but a few irritating themes always seem to emerge:D

1. "Serious cyclists" don't ride mtb's on road. Sez who:rolleyes:? What on earth qualifies one as a 'serious cyclist' -- owning/riding an 'approved' brand or kind of bike? -- or, riding a lot/taking one's cycling 'seriously', and realizing (as per, e.g., Richard Hurst) that each kind of bike (road, or mtb) brings its own set of +/- to the commuting/urban table).

2. "mtb's are sooooo heavy/sluggish/unresponsive" blah blah blah. Oh, really?? Take any decent mid-range hardtail, swap out the susp. fork for rigid, add good slicks, and viola -- a (more or less) 25/26 lb. road-going mtb (or, more accurately perhaps), 'atb' (= French 'velo tout terrain'). Apparently, such a bike is 'heavy, piggish, sluggish, unresponsive', whereas a 25/26/27 lb. steel frame cross, or touring, bike is not:rolleyes: And, as said elsewhere here, not that hard to get well under 25 lb working off a decent mtb base.

3. "My roadbike is sooooo much faster than a mtb". Is that so, 'Lance'? Maybe slightly better elapsed time/distance on a long commute over open roads (and/or into a headwind), but otherwise not likely: laws of physics etc. are rather against this one. (We're not talking group rides/paceline here -- those are different conditions). All depends on the rider, and on prevailing conditions on one's commute. I know, beyond doubt, that my blue-pig atb is in fact slightly quicker over my route than my roadie; if my route were different (more 'open'), the converse might well be true -- it all depends. In either case, for MOST OF US, there's not a h_ll of a lot in it.

Here endeth my rant:)

[QUOTE=badger1;5829562]"My roadbike is sooooo much faster than a mtb". Is that so, 'Lance'? Maybe slightly better elapsed time/distance on a long commute over open roads (and/or into a headwind), but otherwise not likely: laws of physics etc. are rather against this one. (We're not talking group rides/paceline here -- those are different conditions). All depends on the rider, and on prevailing conditions on one's commute. I know, beyond doubt, that my blue-pig atb is in fact slightly quicker over my route than my roadie; if my route were different (more 'open'), the converse might well be true -- it all depends. In either case, for MOST OF US, there's not a h_ll of a lot in it.
QUOTE]

Yeah, I am going to have to agree with this one. I am almost solely a road/cross bike commuter. My friend commutes on his mid 1990's raleigh mtb with slicks and fenders. We rode 13 miles home together the other day at 25 mph and he had no problem whatsoever keeping up. I think the key to making an mtb fast is to drop the handlebar relative to the seat and put some good slicks on there. Presta......a fast mtb commuter.

In another instance, we like to consider ourselves some hard core roadies but we rode the last 100 miles of a 200 mile day (Seattle to Portland 2006) at 21-23 mph with a GIRL on a gary fischer MTB with slicks. She did not hang on the front very much but neither did most of the folks in our group. She was incredibly strong, but that gave me a new respect for the versatility of the mtb chasis a foundation for all kinds of possibilities.

For me, I simply prefer the drop bars and I like the bigger wheels. My cross bike can do just about anything as well. Heck, for that matter, my 23 mm road tires actually perform pretty well off road as long as I maintain reasonable expectations about their traction in turns.

Sawtooth: that's about my take on all this:) You're a 'roadie' at heart, I'm an xc rider at heart -- but recognize/appreciate different bike kinds for what they can do in particular applications. I just prefer flat bars/discs in traffic and on the trail, but love drops on the open road over long distances. Others like drops etc. for 'street' -- whatever works!

Sweetness!
My bud and I did the STP last year on 30-lb full-sussers with slicks. We did not go very fast ;) But it was a ton of fun!! we did do some pacelining, and caught some crap for being on the mtb's instead of a "real" bike, but overall it was very cool. I think the roadie types who said mean things were mostly concerned about wide handlebars in a group.

on the mtb/roadie efficinecy standpoint, there have been / continue to be some tandems and tri bikes using 26" and 650c wheels. They figure the smaller wheels, eveything else being equal, have about 4% more rolling resistance due to shorter contact patch=wider contact patch=more sidewall flex=less efficient. Don't remeber who ran the test but it was a tandem maker. fwiw.

now go ride!!:D:D

Can't go ride -- I'm old and don't want to break a collarbone or hip on our ice-laden roads, so just for fun here's a different perspective on the 'wheel size/efficiency' issue:)http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/why26inchwheels.html

That was tongue in cheek. Imagine MTB shifters on road bike style drop bars. Might be great shifters, but wrong for a road bike. Same for the brake levers, -weird for a road bike.

My point is that by the time you've spent serious money on a light MTB and made the changes you've suggested, you've basically got a beefy road bike with a straight bar instead of drops. Rather than spend a fortune on a really light mountain bike and modify it to make it more road worth, my point is that you're better off just get a decent road bike or an XC bike.

I used to commute year round on an MTB. It's a decent bike for its vintage, - double-butted chromoly so the frame isn't all THAT heavy. It works fine. I still use it in the winter. It's just slower. Sure I could put slicks on it, and that would help. But the riding position is not very aero and it's geared lower for offroad use, not for moving quickly on a flat surface. I could change some or all of those things but to me it makes more sense to leave the mountain bike set up for its intended purpose (offroad or really bad road conditons) and use a road bike for its intended purpose.

Um? Shall we start throwing mud next?

Anyhow, I prefer road bikes for the road. It's not to say that MTBs are ill suited but the ride quality is better in a road bike IMHO. That and being a roadie...
Every tool has its purpose. While you can modify a MTB generally you would be better off with a road style bike on decent roads. There are plenty of instances where a MTB would be preferable on the road. Bad roads, snow, ice, etc

Ride what you want to ride.

Fair enough, from YOUR perspective/tastes/needs; the problem is not with that, but with the tendency to draw unwarranted, generally applicable 'rules' from what are, after all, just one's particular preferences. I could do the same thing: e.g. 'why ANYONE would choose/spend the money etc. to ride a road or cross bike for commuting is beyond me; the relatively weak braking, awkward-in-traffic restricted visibility aero position; the relatively weak rims/tires; uselessly high gearing which reduces acceleration 'snap' at intersections etc. etc.; road and cross bikes should be reserved for their original intended functions: riding/racing on the open road or racing 'cross' -- that kind of thing:)

Unless, of course, all you have is a MTB. In which case you can convert a MTB into a commuter cheaper than buying a new roadbike.

I have a friend who had a hardtail with Fr. suspension. He had full XT on it and didn't want to spend extra on a new bike. He got Ritchey Tom Slicks for $15 a piece (on sale) a rack for ~$20 (I think it was Blackburn...not great, but it worked) and put a rigid fork on for ~$50 then added fenders he found for $30. Zammo he know has a commuter, too, that he spend $130 on. Show me a commuter bike with XT level components and disc brakes. The only thing he really spent money on that you wouldn't spend money on with converting a road or 'cross bike is the rigid fork! FWIW this guy commutes 25 mi. RT on this setup. Yeah, he works in a corporate monkey-show where he doesn't have to worry about thievery, but he spent more freakin' money on his commuting clothing than he did on his bike upgrade!

What's better? They all have their virtues. Nice thing about my friend's MTB is when things get super snowy he can throw on 2.1 fatties with or without studs. I can't on my road bike, so I have to take my MTB anyways. Yes I could have bought a single 'cross bike to begin with, but I didn't. And would a 'cross bike have been better anyways? I think it would do well enough in the snow for me, and well enough on the road, but I love my MTB in the snow and I love my road bike on the road!

And I don't care what you naysayers say about snow...I'd rather have fatties. Most of the time the snow in CO is packed on the roadway and thin tires don't cut through it at all...they just slip slide around on it. I can get some WTB Velociraptors with soft tread and pump 'em low and feel like I'm riding on pavement with 'em! In slush it can get squirrely, I'll grant that, but more often than not I'm dealing with ice and packed snow where I'd rather have fat, soft tires and/or studs.

Unlike members of this forum, most commuters are not bike enthusiasts. They just want to get to work and lock up their $49 mountain bikes at their usual parking spot.
As a bike enthusiast, I take bike efficiency and practicality into consideration when choosing and setting up my bike as a commuter.......whether it be a mountain bike, road bike, or whatever....:)

Well, my name's not Lance, but I average about 2-3 mph more on my 26 lb 80's road bike than I do on my 30 lb 90's road bike. I picked up a newer road bike late in the fall so it's too early to tell what effect that will have on my commute speeds (I ride the MTB in the winter). I've also changed my route a bit so that I
spend less time at intersections. There's a couple of long unbroken stretches of trail where I can ride flat out for a mile or two. I expect with the new bike and the new route there will be an even greater speed differential.

Slicks would help the MTB for sure but it doesn't change the upright riding position and the lower gearing.
A number of posts have talked about weight but that's probably not that big a factor when it comes to speed unless you have a hilly commute. Aerodynamics do play a big role.

I've no opinion about what a "serious cyclist" chooses to ride. To me anyone who commutes is a serious cyclist although they may not be into bikes anymore than someone who drives to work is into cars.

A MTB has its pluses and may be preferred for certain types of commutes but as to the original question, - why do so many commute with them? I would guess it's because MTBs are inexpensive and what people tend to have vs being the ultimate commuting platform.

interesting read - and I found the article I was looking for earlier:
http://www.gtgtandems.com/tech/700-26.html

Written by another tandem company. Seems thay have done a lot of work (and speculation) on various wheel sizes.

yep that would be awkward - i thought you were taking a shot at the quality level of my beloved Sram x.0 twisties;)

"the relatively weak braking" -Many cross bikes come with disc brakes now. Up until a few years ago, cantilever brakes which are the cyclocross standard were also standard on MTBs.

"awkward-in-traffic restricted visibility aero position" -Cross bikes have brake levers on the tops so you have the same position as a mtb available as well as having 2 other viable positions(on top of the briefters and in the drops).

"the relatively weak rims/tires" -Sorry, many MTBs have the same problem. They make plenty of strong wheels, rims and tires for 700c / 29er. Hell even Industry 9 makes 700c/29er wheels.

"uselessly high gearing which reduces acceleration 'snap' at intersections" -What? I don't understand this one. MTBs have uselessly low gearing for the road. I run out of gears on my 44/32/22x34-11 MTB when I used it for commuting. My cross bike with 50/34 front and 34-11 rear cassette seems perfect for commuting.

A cross bike is basically a 29er mountain bike with in-between(road and mtb) gearing, drop bars, slightly narrower tires, braze ons for racks and fenders and a rigid fork. I will say though, if all your commuting is in-town with lots of stop signs and traffic signals, a rigid 29er MTB would probably be better. My commute is about 8 miles of rolling hills on rural roads and about 4 miles of in-town so for me, a cross bike really is perfect.

Tjspiel: fwiw, I don't think you and I really disagree all that much!:) I don't think there IS a universal 'ultimate commuting platform;' there probably is one for each rider given his/her preferences, age, fitness, and prevailing commute conditions -- the basic 'type' of bike defining that platform will depend on those conditions. For me, it's atb; for you, road. What I was/am reacting to (as light-heartedly as possible) is simply the tendency we all of us have to universalize our own preferences.
Commuters can ride atb's (or a road bike) for all kinds of reasons, some related to economic necessity, some to convenience, and -- yes -- some to experience/experimentation/conscious decision that that kind of bike works best for the given rider in a given set of conditons.
Having said that, I stand by my further general point that for most non-pro riders, the 'speed' difference, on pavement, between drop-bar road and flat-bar atb (assuming road tires) is not as great as is sometimes stated.

Oh dear:eek: Sorry, but I did think I had made my intention clear there?? I was trying to create a caricature-comment, from the "atb proponent" perspective, which makes silly statements about road/cross which parallel the often serious kinds of statements about on-road atb's made by the DarkSide -- oh well:)

But that's the problem. Road bikes were originally intended for the road, not just racing. Back in the 70's a road bike is what people got for everything, so the idea that a road bike is too flimsy for commuting doesn't make a lot of sense. You don't have to ride in an aero position on a road bike. You have multiple positions. Gearing for road bikes have plenty snap at an intersection but not so much for going over rocks up a hill. Who drops down to their lowest gear for intersections?

I think the SUV analogy is a good one. For some people an SUV makes a lot of sense, but there are plenty of other people who bought SUVs that don't need really need the increased utility and they live with the lost efficiency. There are of course sportier SUVs and smaller SUVs and cars that have some SUV like features. The prevalence of the SUV is a fashion trend.

In the case of mountain bikes, they became all the rage in the 80's and 90's to the point that you have to go out of your way not to buy one. This is why so many people commute with MTBs, not their inherent suitability for commuting.

Again, the question was why so many people commute with them. Some postulate that its because they're ideal commuters. I disagree. I don't disagree that they can be good commuters or better than road bikes for certain types of commutes.

Nice....any plans to do it this year? I am going to do so.
I love riding my full-susser but hate it when I stand and try to sprint or climb standing.
I have also noticed that the slower I am riding, the less I notice a big performance difference between my mountain bikes and my road bikes. If I am just crusing at 15 mph, I see no reason why I would not want my super comfortable NRS1. Anything over 17 mph, though, and I start longing for my road bikes.

I started commuting in college (WV) and the roads in the tiny little town where the school was located were horrible, to the point that I popped a tire hitting a pothole on more than one occasion. I bought a MTB (Trek 930 rigid) to ride there because I wanted to ride to/from school and also trail ride. When I started commuting in CA after graduation I just used that bike and upgraded - went to semi-slicks in a smaller size, got fenders, etc. I was debating a bar change, but the bike was stolen. When I replaced (the Schwinn in the sig) I went with something that met my commute needs at the time, which are short distance and crappy weather.

Hmmm -- food for thought! Again, I really don't disagree much at all -- in fact (out comes my 'self-critical reflective intellectual geek' side), to an extent, I see your point. I wonder: perhaps another factor ('mtb on road') is that here in N.A. a modified mtb is the easiest way to get to a 'bike type' very common in U.K./Europe, but not so much here: the flat-bar, 26" wheel, 'fast-touring/commuting bike, such as this one from Thorn in the U.K.

Here, I'm obviously referring to those of us who do choose a 'roadified' mtb for commuting purposes; I have to admit, this kind of bike (pref. with discs) is pretty close to my 'dream bike' (though I'll never be able to afford it:(

I imagine most commuters would prefer road bike on the road in a lot of cases (I do), but when I'm commuting or running errands, I never know what I may face. One day my usual route on the MUP led me to a section that was flooded. I would never have expected this in this particular spot, and I wouldn't have wanted to subject any of my "nice" road bikes to 12" deep water. Yes, they could have gone through it, but in that case I was glad to be on my old mtb that I don't mind abusing. And I love riding my Nishiki, Univega, and Bertoni, but there's no way I'm locking them up at Kroger while I go inside and shop. I don't want anything to happen to them. Plus only the Univega could carry much of anything anyway. For me it comes down to cargo capacity and which bikes I'm willing to put through hell and which ones I want to go easy on. It also depends on what bikes a person owns. If I were building up a bike for commuting I'd probably go with something like a Surly LHT which of course is a road (touring) bike. But bikes like that are designed for rough stuff, and so are mountain bikes.

quite possibly so. I have a friend in Seattle, he & his girlfriend are both into bikes & we all may make the trip again.
I've noticed the same thing on the road - the road bike feels good going fast. starting & stopping sucks. I average about 16mph but have 52 stops in 12 mile commute. on the road bike, the total time doesn't change much if at all, and i get beat up pretty bad.

Does this mean I can't top 10 in any more alleycats on my Thin Blue Line Hardtail with Micheline slicks? Drat...

:D:D That is correct; you are neither permitted, nor are you able (whether or not you think so) to ride 'fast' on anything built off an atb platform, if the riding surface is paved. To do so is presumptuous on your part; alternatively, to think you can is a fanciful illusion itself evidence of a form of psychosis requiring professional help.

I think it's simple. mtn bikes are generally (for most ppl) more comfortable than road bikes due to the position and cushier tire. For day to day use, I don't want a race car with stiff tires and tight suspension, I want something that's reasonably comfortable and still gets the job done.

Ppl buy suvs because they rationalize that they need the room, when in fact they just think minivans and sedans are uncool/clash with how they want their personalities to be perceived.


in the end, as long as ppl are riding, who cares?