1. Yes
2. Some
3. I don't expect the market to implode

I'm trying to get a handle on who buys these bikes. I'm sure there is a market, I just don't know how big it is. I doubt I'd buy a bike strictly with commuting in mind even though that's probably 70% of the miles (or more) that I put on a bike. I never bought a car with commuting in mind either.

I think people select cars and bikes based on their lives outside of work, or maybe what they'd like their lives outside of work to be. Any car will work for commuting, though some are better than others. Same is true of bikes. Even a decent road bike designed to appeal to aspiring racers will often have eyelets for a rear rack, - mine does anyway.

Having said that, I know of two people who bought bikes specifically for commuting. These are not the type of people who'd walk into a bike shop and ask what kind of bike they should get. These are the kind of people who spend weeks researching first. These are also the type of people who will, and can afford to spend $1,000 or more.

Interestingly enough, neither of them chose a "commuter" bike like the ones listed at the site. One got a trike (trice) and the other got a Rans (crank forward).

I agree that cycling in the U.S. is thought of as a sport or fitness/recreational activity, not as transportation. Where do you find bikes in a 'Mart? The sporting goods department. What other kind of store can you buy them at? A sporting goods store or bike shop.

Maybe having a category of bikes designed for use as transportation will help change that perception.

If Lexington is anything like it was 20 years ago it's no surprise. There are a damn lot of cop cars as I remember.....

Zorba, I added the Biria line to my page. Thanks for the heads-up.

Other than seeing just one commuter on a townie, all the very few commuters I've seen in Austin, TX (which was voted one of the best bike friendly towns by a "major" bicycling magazine-what a laugh) have very old roadie/fixie or just as some others people posted, cheap wally-world crap bikes. Some LBS here sell some of the commuter models listed posted by one forum user. I have the 2006 Fuji Crosstown, like the one posted here, which I love and a older TREK Sport 800 MTB that I've turned into a great commuter by adding fenders, lights, road/city tires and a comfortable wide seat.

I have a problem with the term "commuter bike."

It implies that there is a specific kind of bike needed to commute, when the fact is that it all depends on how far one has to go and what type of terrain one faces on their commute.

Someone who rides 4 miles in deep snow is probably best served by a rigid mtb, while someone who's commute is 50 miles each way might actually consider a time-trial bike to be a "commuter."

The bike that the OP describes is basically a hybrid or "city" bike which tends to be very well represented in most bike shops I see.

I think the real problem facing bike commuters isn't really about what the bike shops stock or don't stock, but rather what the bike industry is actually not producing. That is a wide variety of different kinds of bikes that will accommodate racks, fenders, and wider tires.

For example, I see a lot of single speed 29er mountain bikes on the market, yet many, if not most, of them do not have rack or fender eyelets. That's ridiculous considering that a single speed 29er is probably a very good commuter for many people.

For many other people, fixed gear is the best option. I know for me, if I had an urban commute I'd prefer to have a fixed gear. Yet very few off the shelf fixed gear bikes come with the ability to mount racks or fenders.

Yes, I know that Surly, IRO, and a few others make frames and bikes that have the things I've mentioned. But it bugs me that those are my only choices. And the reason it bugs me is that I see no actual cycling reason that a high-end road frame can't be built with a few eyelets and a little bit of tire clearance. The long-distance commuter must either limit their choices to an entry-level bike, which may have some tire clearance and some rack and fender eyelets, or go with a cyclocross or touring model.

But not everyone wants to ride cyclocross or touring bikes. If a rider wants to commute on a bike with real road bike geometry and nice componentry and take that bike to races or club rides on the weekend, they're out of luck.

Maybe companies like Merlin, Seven, or Cervelo don't want to see their fancy titanium frames going around with fenders and panniers. But I think the real reason is that they are catering to the OCP wannabee racer market who's consumers want to ride a bike exactly like the one that raced in the last TDF. The problem is that they're keeping me from having the perfect bike.

I applaud your efforts, but I think you need a broader definition of commuting bikes. I commute on road/racing frames and see little advantage to riding most of the dedicated "commuting" bikes you've reviewed. The only things that my bikes lack, that would be helpful for commuting, are eyelets and braze-ons for racks and fenders. I've gotten around that issue by using a Carradice bag on my commuter and clip-on fenders (SK RaceBlades) as needed. I live in a very hilly area, so the weight of a bike is an important consideration due to the all the climbing on my commute route, and that rules out many of the commuter bikes you've listed.

I recognize the advantages of bikes/frames that are more adaptable for commuting. However, to me the primary differences that are important are additional eyelets and braze-ons for racks and fenders. Along those lines, it seems like your review of commuter bikes/frames omit some excellent candidates, namely:
-- Salsa Casseroll
-- Soma Smoothie and ES
-- Gunnar Sport
-- Rivendell Bleriot
-- Surly Long Haul Trucker

https://www.redlinebicycles.com/adultbikes/925.html

What about the Redline 9-2-5?

Yep. Catering to the club cyclist types that proudly label themselves as the "Experienced Cyclists" or better yet the "Experienced High Mileage Road Cyclists" is not just a trait of the LBS market, but also a certain contingent of bicycling advocates and self appointed cycling experts who view their own "experienced" preferences in equipment as the appropriate equipment for all others, no matter what their experience or situation.

When I got a new job that was within what I considered "bike commutable" distance, I specifically went out to looking for a "commuter bike". Just 2 years ago (in this area) it was hard to find. I purchased a leftover Trek T-80 (which Trek does not sell in the US any more ).

I bought it mostly because it had everything I wanted out of the box (mostly the chain guard). Knowing what I know now, I wish I went for an internal hub.


Trek T80

Actually, I do just that.

Fender and rack eyelets are not *required* for commuting. I commute year round on bikes that have neither.

They're keeping you from calling Seven/Waterford/Moots/etc and having them build you the bike you want?

If you're waiting for Trek to put eyelets on the Madone you'll be waiting a long time. Sales would plummet and I don't blame these companies for selling what the customers are buying.

During the 70's and up until the mid 80's, road bikes were less of a niche item and they came with more eyelets and better clearances. Then mountain bikes took over and ever since road bikes have been relegated to "racers" and high-end tourers. Because of that, today's road bikes, as a class, are less suited to the everyday commuter than they used to be. It's not that you can't commute with them, it's just that they're less versatile.

In my opinion, the bicycle market, like other markets, is way more specialized than it used to be. On the one hand it's good because you get more choices, on the other hand, it's way more confusing for somebody who's new to cycling. And since bikes are more specialized it's harder to find one that's truly multi-purpose without making a lot of compromises, although I think a cyclocross bike is pretty close.

I get what he's saying but I agree with you in that I don't think it's the manufacturers fault. It would be great if a higher end fender and rack enhanced road bike would also be suitable for a brisk club ride. Problem is that roadies can be a snooty bunch from what I understand and that sort of bike wouldn't exactly be welcomed with open arms.

I know a lot of commuters that have at least two bikes, one to commute on and one or more for their cycling hobbies.

FWIW, my Specialized Allez (road bike) has eyelets on it and I'm amazed to the extent that Specialized went to hide them ;-)

I was agreeing with you until I got here...

My thought is that maybe your definition of multipurpose has changed over the years as well.

Remember, that a road bike from the 70's wouldn't be a road bike today, because of the geometry. They would be much closer to some of the touring bikes of today. That the industry is calling it a touring bike seems to be throwing you off. I mean, if it's a very similar geometry with a different label, what's the problem?

Remember, that RACE bikes of that era often didn't have eyelets either.

We definitely still strongly identify a race bike as one that has drop bars, although a growing majority of riders (especially at the club level) do not use the drops. If you want versatility, many of todays hybrids provide just that. They'll carry your racks, fenders, and keep pace with the club ride (given similar bar heights).

The mental objections people have to anything other than a drop bar is more about the looks you'll get from the other riders than about the bike itself. If you wanted to, you could set a bike up to be just as aero with flatbars, bullhorns, even north road bars.

I would also include the Specialized Sirrus as if you study both the utility bike and this forum they make for an extensive part of the representative contingent. Granted, the do require some fitting out before they can be utilized to their full potential, but we're discussing commuter platforms here.

Well, I know a Peugeot PX-10 from the 70's had rear eyelets and it's very much a racing bike, though not a custom one. I'm pretty sure it could handle a wider range of tire selection than most of today's road bikes can.

Road bikes from that period were sold with a variety of different geometries, some geared towards touring and some towards racing, so I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.

The hybrids I've seen usually have a fairly upright riding position. I wouldn't want to try to keep up on a club ride with one. I know you said "given the same bar height", but they typically don't have the same bar height, it's often even higher than what you'll find on a MTB. Yes, you can change the bars but if we're talking about stock bikes readily available for purchase, then that doesn't really qualify.

Why do you find it acceptable to lump all the old bikes into the "road bike" category, but not do the same with current bikes. A touring geometry from then is a road bike, but a touring geometry from today is a touring bike?

Regarding hybrids (and mtb), you're simply misinformed. You can EASILY get your hand position as low or lower on them (at least most of them) as you can on a road bike - without a bar change. I stand by my comments.
[edit] at least I can... maybe it really is complicated and I just haven't realized it yet.

I feel like most of the complainers just haven't done their research. Name your criteria and I will find at least one bike/frame to fill it - and my guess is that if I debadged it and didn't tell you what "category" of bike it was, you'd never know. Most of the people longing for the good ole' days aren't buying new bikes anyway... they're pulling them out of dumpsters.

I did want to comment on this. There is a strong identification between drop bars and racing bikes, although it didn't used to be that way, and it's a shame that they're identified that way now.

Drop bars are versatile in that they give you three different hand positions. Cyclocross bikes with Interrupters provide braking from all three positions. This is one reason I see cyclocross bikes as good all-weather commuters. From what I understand in the early days of the sport they frequently raced with old road bikes.

Old or new, touring and racing bikes are all road bikes in my book, but there is a wider gulf between touring and racing today vs yesterday. Just look at the brakes.

I have an old road bike hanging in my office right now. It's actually my wife's bike so that the handle bars are set higher than mine, but the drops are about 2 inches below the top of the head tube. On this bike it could easily be adjusted so that the TOPS are just slightly above the top of the head tube and the drops would be about 5" below. How do you do that on a flat bar MTB or a hybrid with risers?

I'm not really complaining about what's available. All I'm saying is that in years past it seems to me there were fewer types of bikes available and therefore they were designed to do more things. Today there are more types of bikes more often designed to fit a particular need.

6-Miler,

Love the name and the website!

I'm with you a hundred percent.

Comments some make that they see no need for commuter/city/utility/ bikes since you can add all that you need to make any bike suitable for transportation are misguided, imo. There is nothing like having a bike that has good quality components designed into it. They look and fit better. I've never seen better fenders, kickstand, or a chainguard than that built into my Breezer bike.

I've got a set of new fenders I bought for my kid's mountain bike still hanging in my garage. They wouldn't fit, and I took too long to put them on so I can't return them. The fenders I put on my hybrid are at a wheel diameter plus 3/4 inch, plus or minus 1/2 inch. They look like crap next to my Breezer's fenders. My kickstand on my hybrid seems to move regularly, so that my leg hits it when I pedal. It doesn't matter how hard I tighten it down.

My other main gripe with that comment is that to significantly change society to increase interest in bikes for transportation, you can't sell bare bikes and expect everyone to go out and buy all the equipment needed for commuting or transportation, such as a kickstand, bell, fenders, mudflaps, lights, a rack, and a chainguard. That's a lot of gear and assembly.

Bottom line--we need functional bikes for most modest bike rides. We need to encourage people using bikes to get from point a to point b, while having the capacity to carry something along with them.

Regarding your survey-- our LBS carries the Electra Amsterdam. I don't see anyone riding commuter bikes but me. I think it really can become the "in" thing, especially if we get kids interested, but I still think it's a few years away from serious growth.

Yes
No
No
OP, why would you bother with these other bikes when you already posses the greatest commuter bike of all time? Rock the Bstone and be done with it.
-Plosive

While I wouldn't use most of these to commute on, I can see these as entry level commuters. They'll fill the less than 8 mile ride well. Which is about the entry level rider's limits. None of us jumped onto a bike and pounded out 100 plus miles in a week. Some of us still won't. These bikes will get people out of cars and into riding, and mostly seem capable of handling winter. After a year or two noob's know what they want and can decide if they want to build it themselves. The bike I would've built Nov 06 (when I went carfree) is very different from what I was riding Nov 07. Besides how many people (outside of us) ogle bikes that have 40 watts of lighting, racks, GPS, computer, twelve bottle holders, coffee cup holder, fenders w/plastic bottle mud flaps, 35 lbs of battery, studded tires, a mile of reflective tape, pump rack, milk crate, and "one less car" sticker all built around a beloved and battered mid 90s rigid MTB? Let's wean them in slowly.

old Peugeut UE8 Fenders, Rack, Chain guard, and Light all included

My bike is porky, upright and built like a panzer. It came with fenders, chain case, generator light (which unfortunately works like crap under 40F), a rack, a rear frame lock (perfect for a quick pop in) and eight sweet, sweet internal gears. It's a Trek L200 which was imported into this country for a while, but Trek stopped selling due to lack of interest. Trek still makes these, and bikes like it, for the Dutch market.

Basically, I see my bike as a short distance car replacement. It's reliable, low maintenance, tough, it can haul crap (better now with a double leg kickstand so it doesn't tip over when the rear rack is loaded down with beer), and I'm pretty well able to use it for just about any short distance trip I used to use my car for.

I originally bought this bike to replace my old rigid frame Specialized HardRock for commuting. Knowing what I do now, I might be tempted to get a cross bike instead for just commuting. But this bike works out great as a car replacement. Honestly, the relaxed and upright geometry, chain case and the ability to wear normal clothes on this bike plays a huge part there.

It's true, though, you can use any bike for commuting. Use what you like and what feels comfy to you. If wearing bib shorts and your team jersey gets you out of your car and onto your Litespeed, great! If being able to wear a suit and tie and pedal along at a relaxed pace does it, good for you! If you get yourself from home to work on it, it's a commuter bike.

Getting my butt out of a car and onto my bike for my commute has been one of the most positive experiences in my life, probably right behind getting married and having kids. It's opened up a completely new way of thinking for me and if someone needs some different motivation to have that same door opened for them, the let 'em do it.

That said, I like city bikes and utility bikes. Personally, I think that a lot of people are a bit turned off thinking that they'll have to wear bike shorts and a jersey to hop on a bike. I don't think it occurs to most people that they can eliminate a large number of their under two to five mile trips by using a bike because of the perception that they have to change clothes to get on a bike, unlike their car where they can just turn the key and go.

Personally, I don't expect people who live more than three miles away from work to be converted to biking to work. Yes, the 6.75 each way I do is easy and enjoyable for me but it's a perception thing for lots of people. But maybe, just maybe, people could be convinced to use their bike for a trip to the drugstore, to pick up a few items at the grocery store (the one closest to my house has a crappy bike rack, but I always get great parking) and then maybe they'll start to expand their horizons.

The mindset of driving everywhere has tremendous inertia. I don't expect sudden changes, just little ones over time. But if I can be talked out of my car and onto a bike, pretty well anyone can. Maybe bikes that espouse a simple 'get on and ride' idea can be a part of that.

[QUOTE=dave.lloyd;6084974]

snipx

Getting my butt out of a car and onto my bike for my commute has been one of the most positive experiences in my life, probably right behind getting married and having kids. It's opened up a completely new way of thinking for me and if someone needs some different motivation to have that same door opened for them, the let 'em do it.

That said, I like city bikes and utility bikes. Personally, I think that a lot of people are a bit turned off thinking that they'll have to wear bike shorts and a jersey to hop on a bike. I don't think it occurs to most people that they can eliminate a large number of their under two to five mile trips by using a bike because of the perception that they have to change clothes to get on a bike, unlike their car where they can just turn the key and go.

snip
[QUOTE]

That's a great, well written post.

I feel similarly. I'm such a typical person in my regular life, in terms of being the average engineer with a desk job. There's 500 of us at my place of work. Plus, I'm married with kids, like many. But the one thing I do differently is bike. Yeah, I do it like an engineer, in that I don't wear bike clothes and I ride a utility bike. I'm not going fast. But I ride that thing most every day. Plus I've sustained this for a long time. And I love it.

On my epitath, this (biking) will be there. Along side mention of my family, my career, and my church. I treasure it.