All these "commuter" bikes are labelled thus under a set of very restrictive assumptions, such as that a commute can only be short(ish), flatt(ish), and that the commuter will prefer to ride in an upright position wearing his work clothes while having a ton of stuff in the panniers. There are a helluva lot of commutes out there that don't fit that description. There are commutes that involve riding on beat-up dirt roads and would be best served by an MTB; there are commutes that span dozens and dozens of miles and involve brutal climbs - gotta be a masochist to attempt it on an Electra Townie (every day!). There are commuters who hate panniers and prefer to wear a backpack or a messenger bag, and there are commuters who don't even need to carry anything that won't fit into their pockets. Some commuters can keep their bikes in their offices, so they use their $5 K babies to commute and train at the same time. Others have to lock the bike outside in an area famous for an abundance professional bike thieves and thus will never ride anything more expensive than a dependable beater. Suggesting that all commuters can be served by one particular style of bike is just silly. I bet you most people on this forum do not use that kind of bike to commute to work, and it's definitely not due to ignorance.

Edit: As I see, someone's already covered this. Well, great minds think alike. :D

Ah, a reincarnation of ILTB! New nick and avatar, same old song. Gosh, it has to be tiresome to go from thread to thread and say the exact same thing, in exact same words over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...

*ahem*

I've heard this about the clothing before and I'm sure there must be something to it, but honestly I'm surprised. Most commuters around here don't wear bike shorts and a jersey.

Twenty years ago when I first started commuting (very sporadically), I rode my 8 miles with a tie flapping in my face on a decent but not high end road bike. I was a fair weather commuter so no fenders, no lights and I didn't carry anything but me, so no rack. I'm sure I rolled up my pant leg or used a rubber band to keep stuff out of the chain.

Are people really thinking they need to dress like they're going to a race?

Incidentally I was still commuting on that same road bike up until this winter.

I said this way early in the thread but if having this type of specialized bike helps motivate people to commute I'm all for it. I just hope it doesn't get to the point where people think they have to go out and get a special bike designed for commuting when it's likely that the bike they already have sitting in the garage will do just fine.

Whaa, Whaa, Whaa! Yep, same old tiny group of Road Warriors specifying that their bicycling niche and preferred equipment is the paragon of bicycling virtue, that any and all Real Commuters would be wise to emulate under all conditions and scenarios. And always repeating it over and over in oh-so-many threads in oh-so-many variations of the same self satisfied smugness; and always objecting when their parochialism is noted.

Of course, no one needs a bicycle designed for city riding/commuting; Listen to the Road Warriors, they have the Experience - every one who wants to commute properly (i.e. like a Road Warrior) needs a bike designed for racing with the right LBS provenance. Yeah that's the ticket!

Carry On.

I don't doubt such commuters could be found somewhere but I doubt if there are "a helluva lot of" them. Beat up dirt roads and commutes of 24 miles or more each way with brutal climbs? Just what percentage of bicyclists or potential cyclists do you believe regularly commute under those or similar conditions? 1/1000? 1/10,000?

Of course it is possible to alter the equation if you should choose to only consider the more righteous cyclists like yourself, and ignore all those pesky immigrants, college students, school kids etc. who cycle daily to their work or school or chosen destinations but don't fit the "Experienced Cyclist" profile.

1. Yup.
2. Yup, although I see all kinds of bikes.
3. Implosion? Nope.

Yeah, I see all kinds of bikes out there. Eventually, though, consistent commuters seem to add many of the same things to their bikes, such as lights, fenders, maybe a rack, etc. The resulting bikes end up looking like a ready-made "commuter bike", differing only in frame geometry and handlebar style.

In Japan, the land of Shimano and Sugino, they still have what I think is the a real city bike

http://www.city.edogawa.tokyo.jp/for...g/bycicles.jpg

People ride them everywhere and really commute on them. But somehow the regular Japanese commuter is not obsessed with getting there too fast or having performance options. 9 miles and hour is probably fast enough. Here I heard people commute and go fast as 40 mph (gasp).

People commute on all type of bikes but I think generally a hardtail MTB is a great commuting format in the US at least psychologically . The problem with the US market is that the manufacturers are treating it like a car market... new models every year. So just like we have crossover SUV's we have to have crossover bikes as well..

Old but well kept road bikes are the best IMHO..

Dude, she just said that comuting bikes can be a wide variety of contraptions based on need/want. You're just putting words in her mouth.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. No

If you're going to include the Raleigh Sojourn, toss in the Novara Randonee, Novara Safari, Trek 520, Jamis Aurora, Rocky Mountain Sherpa and a few other touring bikes.

Good point about the touring bikes, I forgot to add that to my post. Also many people commute on flat bar road bikes (really kind of plat bar 'cross bikes) and I think many shops sell them as comuters.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. No idea

Gosh darling, you don't even bother to read what's there, do you? I guess not - what would be the point when you already know ahead of time what you're gonna say? You probably just copy-paste from your old posts.

I never said that I disagreed with that point of view. Quite the opposite, in fact. You'd see it if you bothered to read. What's amusing is that you always say the same old stuff. Using exact same expressions. Even if it's perfectly correct, doesn't it get a little tiresome? Don't you ever want to inject a little variety in your speeches?

If you consider the world at large, most people who ride bikes for transportation probably ride them on dirt roads. Well - a nontrivial portion of them anyhow.

Dude, my whole point (which you're gonna miss) is that each commute is different, and labelling one type of bike as "commuting" bike is pushing the same "I know what will work for you" philosophy that you yourself criticize. I never said that bikes of that type were a bad idea, or useless, or uncool, or "not serious", or impractical. They'll work great for a certain set of situations. However, it's silly to label them "commuting" bikes because in the majority of cases, they will not make for the best commuting vehicle (nor will any other kind of bike).

Let's consider those "pesky" immigrants (funny that I should find myself pesky, but I suppose some people do have a negative self-image; perhaps you're projecting). Do you think they (the ones you have in mind anyway - working at minimum wage jobs - BTW, don't you think you're kind of offending immigrants here and in your other posts?) will shell out five hundred to a thousand bucks for a "commuting" bike just to have fenders and a dynamo-powered light? And leave it locked outside all day. And what kind of high school kid will want to be caught riding a grandma bike - wouldn't he rather ride an impractical but "cool" BMX biek? You're just as patronizing here as those "experienced cyclists" you take so much pleasure in despising.

They don't seem to have any proper commuters here in Australia. But thanks for the web link. I like that Raleigh with the bar end shifters.

In my case I have three bikes. MTB, two racing bikes. I ended up commuting on the MTB then the racer as I grew into cycling. If I had known what I was doing I would have bought a commuter up front. As it is my last racer does not have anywhere to put a pannier.

I think that this is typical of a lot of people - they don't really know what they want, so they buy something general. By the time they work out what they really need, it is too late.

To be honest, I would like one of each genre (MTB, Commuter, racer, training racer) - that would be perfect for any ride I choose to do.

Dude/Dudette,

I responded to her criticism of the nature of my posting and I referenced that specific post, not some other post she made before or after. As a matter of fact, the other post does jive with mine as far as one size/one type of commuting equipment does not fit all. If I had read the other post first, I would have also commented on her hypocrisy in that it is apparently A-OK for her to make a point but not for me to do the same.

See http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...5&postcount=63

Dudette,

The OP was about commuter bikes offered for the North American market, not the "world at large". I again point out that I doubt that many North Americans or First World residents) are contemplating bike commuting regularly for any serious distance on mountain trails or dirt roads. I suspect that the type of commuting bikes bragged on by their proud "experienced bicyclist" owners on BF's commuting forum would be hard to find being used by commuters anywhere else but North America (and maybe the English speaking world at large that is not in Asia or Africa).

Baloney, you had no problem identifying who are the Non "experienced" cyclists that I was discussing. The commuting cyclists that do not fit the profile of the BF brand "Experienced Cyclist" commuter are unlikely to be doing any shopping at the typical LBS found in the US. Their kind, seeking basic inexpensive rides, over typical commuting/utility distances have been unwelcome at such establishments for decades. When was the last English or American brand inexpensive one or 3 speed prominently displayed or marketed at an American LBS' - the late 70's?

The OP pointed out the trend for the LBS' to at least consider offering bikes for a consumer that is not necessarily interested in bikes optimized or designed for competition (i.e comfort over speed, convenience/reliability over bling, glitz and gee whiz materials). The next step, and the big step, is for the mass marketeers of North America to offer and promote at the big box stores the equivalent of the English/Schwinn 3 speed of decades past, or an Electra Townie type bike at half the price (or less) found on less practical "commuting" bikes at the toney LBS.

Yet another good thread tainted by bickering. :(

Even in this Commuting forum, many prefer speed over function. There's definitely a bias against north road bars. But I agree with the comment that most transportation bicyclists doing most of their rides would be better off with one of the OP's listed bikes than a roadie.

I can say that that statement applies to me, at least somewhat. Almost a year ago, I was just getting back into biking and got myself a Bad Boy after a few test rides. I got some new lights for it within another week, but I didn't find out about dynamo hubs until a few months later (after seeing how popular they were in Germany, and why, I think they make a lot of sense for urban commuting -- so now I'm trying to find good prices for dynamo setups). It didn't come with any fenders, but I soon got a clip-on rear fender because I found that I sometimes wanted to ride when it was wet. I don't mind the 27 speeds that its drivetrain has, but I also wonder if I could do just fine with an internal geared hub, too.

Stock, it's a heck of a bike, and it's even marketed as an "urban" bike -- but I'm left wondering if I would have gotten something different if I knew then what I know now. My LBS recently got a couple of these Bianchi Valles -- they look like what I'd get now:
http://bianchiusa.com/08_valle.html

I'm one bike short of that stable. ;)

For me speed = function as I don't have very much time to get to work. What works for me may well not work for you. Also, as a college student I don't have the money for a massive stable of bikes, so the one I use is also my "fun" bike.

It's all a moot point, anyways. I like a lot of the bikes posted and think that they're exactly what some people want or need. The Milano has always struck me as particularly classy.

With that I will take my leave from the coming flame war.

Whatever you think of the new Raleighs, it's really nice to see Raleigh making bikes that could not just as easily have been BikesDirect bikes. New Schwinn was in that boat until they caught onto the retro/custom market that they're perfect for and now they're something much more than another old name on outsourced bikes.

If you want to mass-produce a bike, you have to aim it at a substantial market. The longer, hillier, worse paved, and special-clothes-needed a commute becomes, the fewer people that will be willing to do it, so the assumption is reasonable.

Yes, I agree. The question is at what point does a comfort/upright style bike become less of an advantage and more of a disadvantage. I don't know where that point is and it probably varies per person. What I do know that in my office of about 45 people, only 2 or 3 live within 3 miles. One of them could just as easily walk.

If you go out to 10 miles, now you've got a pool of 14 potential commuters. I fall within this group and so do all the other people who commute with any regularity.

As somebody else mentioned, for me speed is part of function. I didn't intentionally move so close to work so that I could spend an hour and a half on the road each day. A 40 minute one way commute is about the limit for me and I'd much rather keep it under 30. I'm guessing I'm not the only one and that time spent on the commute is a barrier that keeps a significant amount of people off a bike.

A criteria the OP used for bike selection was whether or not the bike came with fenders. I don't really have a problem with the criteria and it did yield one road bike suitable for longer commutes (the Raleigh). It's too bad that that criteria didn't yield a wider variety of bike styles to cover a wider variety of commutes.

"Commuter bike" is a bit incongruous, because any bike can be used for commuting---and commuting is defined as riding to work. I know a guy who commutes on a Madone, another who does it on a 'mart MTB. My Gunnar is set up pretty functionally---lights, fenders, rack, panniers, but nobody would classify it as a "commuter bike". It's a road bike, and a fairly high end one, at that.

"City bike" makes it seem as if these bikes are only useful for short hops in an urban setting.

What would be a better term? "Utility bike"? "Practical bike"?

OK, I'll tell you one reason these wonderful machines for short pleasant rides in your work clothes are not popular and can't be popular: the price. People don't want to spend that much money on a bike to begin with, and even if they're willing to shell out the dough, they're not willing to take the risk of having their perfect commuting machine stolen. Hence, at the moment, craigslist serves the market far better at the moment than any so-called commuter bike.

There is a reason why virtually no one rides such bikes for transportations in Toronto. However, the old 10-speeds, older MTBs, and department store bike-shaped objects rule.

Sorry - your words have zero connection with the passage it's supposed to be a reply to. Anyway, I doubt I (or anyone else on this board) will hear anything from you that I haven't already. Good thing this forum has an Ignore list. Good night.

I'll bet a lot of drivers would say the same kind of thing thing -- regardless of mileage, it's the time that they're really paying attention to.

I think the description of a "commuter bike" goes the other way around -- you'd look at it and think, "Well, that's not a mountain bike, it's too upright to be a racy road bike, it's already got lights & fenders... Looks like something that a commuter would ride."

It's like how people would drive anything to work, whether it's a Civic, Corvette, or F-150 pickup. But, the Civic would quickly get labeled as a "commuter car", because it's not a high-powered sports car like the 'Vette, nor is it a stump-pulling beast like the F-150. The Civic was built with commuting in mind, not drag racing or bale hauling.

Maybe a more apt term would be "errand bike", although running errands isn't always entertaining, either.

To go from what chephy is saying, I wouldn't ride a nice bike to work if I couldn't take it inside.

The need to drop everything into a category is part of the reason why the LBS is so intimidating to the non-cyclist.

That said, I have no problem with City bike. You're not going to find many people cruising through the country on these -- and I think most suburbanites would say they live in the city.

--------

chephy, I don't believe that the people who been riding around on cheaper used bikes are the target market for manufacturers anyway. Most of these people have made their decision and few will be swayed by model design, regardless of price.

I haven't bought a new bike since the 90's, so I'm somewhat in that category as well. That said, both of the bikes I ride to work were purchased used (at a good deal) for more than the most expensive bike in this list.

If, and it's a big if, the time comes when transportational cycling becomes more mainstream, I do not believe that cost will be a problem. Compared to what people are currently spending on transportation, even the most expensive "commuter" bike is affordable.

Hey another self appointed BF spokesperson. Swell, use that ignore feature and then maybe you won't be telling me or anyone else whose ideas and opinions you want to read or exclude from your reading.

BTW try not to be like the other ignoramuses who brag about whom they ignore yet fell compelled to continue offering gratuitous smug comments (like your http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...9&postcount=52) on the "ignored" poster and his posts (invariably taken out of context) for their failure to conform to the Conventional Wisdom of the BF Group Think Posse. Goodnight Ms Hypocrite.