Originally Posted by Mr23779

Yes, I saw it in another thread...but thanks for posting it here. Very nice! I looked into getting one of those but my LBS was out of them. I had the option of ordering one, but I'm the type of guy who likes to test things out.

Originally Posted by capolover

I rode an 07 that I got off craigslist, So I figured the 08 would be nothing but gold.

I threw one of these on it for the commute:



I'll probably get some better pedals for sure, and eventually just some bullhorns since I don't use the drops at all really.


It's a really strong light frame and a prefect commuter if you dig fixed gear.

Originally Posted by capolover

Oh its a WTB speedV gel.

Sorry.
About 60 bucks. It's a mountain saddle but it makes my ass sing.

Originally Posted by d2create

What follows is just MY opinion. Based on commuting and general riding. That said....




FOR REALZIES?

Rolling works of art? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Give me a lugged steel frame with classic brooks seat and bar tape and day of the week. It's like hardcore porn to me.

Latest components? Any bike can have that and the latest is not always the greatest. The big brands like Shimano make great stuff but they are just giving the public what they THINK they need and not really what's best. 10 speeds? Now 11 coming out? Do you realize what has to be done to get extra cogs in the same amount of space? They have to be thinner and therefore wear out quicker. Other than cassettes and cranks, there isn't anything else component wise that's any better from anything ten years ago or more, and I still wouldn't say those are better anyway.

Meant to be ridden long distances? No. They are meant to go fast like Lance. Or make you think you go fast like Lance. Bikes meant to go long distances (touring bikes) are the complete opposite of racing bike. They are built stronger, built to take heavy loads, the geometry sits you in a more upright and comfortable position so you can actually stand up straight when you get off. They have clearance for tires that let you tackle almost any terrain and fenders for the ever changing weather during long/far rides. The only thing that makes road bikes better for long distance is they are lighter and there for somewhat easier to pedal. When every second counts and you need ever last bit of energy while racing, that's a good thing. For commuting, who cares?

Originally Posted by d2create

...(snip)...I just thought some of your reasoning was a bit out of whack.

Originally Posted by Mr23779

"Self, these are rolling works-of-art and have the latest/greatest components, etc...and since these are magnificent machines and are meant to be ridden long distances, built like tanks but weigh next to nothing, are effecient, and are the epitome of cutting-edge design...wouldn't they make great commuting machines, too?"

Originally Posted by Mr23779

This thread is a bit tongue-in-cheek and not meant to be judgemental in ANY way, but I am curious as to why more folks don't use road bikes as their daily commuter.

Originally Posted by d2create

What follows is just MY opinion. Based on commuting and general riding. That said....




FOR REALZIES?

Rolling works of art? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Give me a lugged steel frame with classic brooks seat and bar tape and day of the week. It's like hardcore porn to me.

Latest components? Any bike can have that and the latest is not always the greatest. The big brands like Shimano make great stuff but they are just giving the public what they THINK they need and not really what's best. 10 speeds? Now 11 coming out? Do you realize what has to be done to get extra cogs in the same amount of space? They have to be thinner and therefore wear out quicker. Other than cassettes and cranks, there isn't anything else component wise that's any better from anything ten years ago or more, and I still wouldn't say those are better anyway.

Meant to be ridden long distances? No. They are meant to go fast like Lance. Or make you think you go fast like Lance. Bikes meant to go long distances (touring bikes) are the complete opposite of racing bike. They are built stronger, built to take heavy loads, the geometry sits you in a more upright and comfortable position so you can actually stand up straight when you get off. They have clearance for tires that let you tackle almost any terrain and fenders for the ever changing weather during long/far rides. The only thing that makes road bikes better for long distance is they are lighter and there for somewhat easier to pedal. When every second counts and you need ever last bit of energy while racing, that's a good thing. For commuting, who cares?

Built like tanks? This is a joke, right? Especially if it has any carbon. That stuff is light and flexible but it can only take so much before it snaps. Bend or dent your steel frame and it may still be rideable. At least to get you home. Crack carbon and you're screwed. Break a spoke on a racing wheel and again you are screwed. I Hope you have a cell phone. Those thin tires are also more prone to flats. The only thing I would relate to a tank is the road-feel if the pavement is anything but uber smooth.

Efficient? Well, ok... i'll give you that... in one sense of the word. Light and fast = pedaling efficiency.
But I wouldn't say they make an efficient commuter.

Epitome of cutting edge design? Mmmmmaybe... so is Lamborghini but I don't think I'd want one as a daily commuter.

Great commuting machines? No. See above.

I used to be a roadie. Then I started commuting and woke up.
I still have a road bike but I only ride it once in a blue moon if I happen to ride with someone else that has one and I want to match their "pedaling efficiency". Lots of people commute on them which is cool it's just not my cup of tea. I just thought some of your reasoning was a bit out of whack.

Originally Posted by Mr23779

Of course! This part of my original post was not meant to be taken seriously:

Originally Posted by d2create

Yup, I happen to be one of the lucky few that can read sarcasm and jest in a post.

You love racing machines as much as I love the classics and that's awesome, but I'm sure there was still some seriousness to the underlying question of "wouldn't they make great commuting machines, too?" and "I am curious as to why more folks don't use road bikes as their daily commuter." That's what I responded to with my own personal opinions/experience.

Originally Posted by tjspiel

Personally, I think "lugless" looks cleaner than lugged. Although I can appreciate the artistry that went into some lugs, most didn't and don't really appeal to me.

A bike doesn't need to be designed for long distance loaded touring to be well suited to commuting long distances. They are different things. A "serious" road bike would certainly be designed to cover longer distances than most people commute and I think that's what the OP meant.

I'd say wheel and frame technology has evolved in the last decade or so along with drivetrains. A deep V, lower spoke count wheel doesn't necessarily have to be flimsy, in fact, they can be pretty bomb proof. As far as carbon goes, Boeing used it extensively in their "Dreamliner". I think that means it's tough enough for a bike. I don't know how common it was to see Aluminum and Carbon in the same frame a decade ago, but it is common now. My carbon fork has slammed into a few nasty potholes and is just fine.

It is easy to make generalizations about people who buy certain types of bikes. You can say that "serious" road bike buyers are just Lance wannabes and I can say that Rivendell bike buyers are just like those folks who spend a fortune to see a Rolling Stones concert, - paying a premium for nostalgia.

The reality is that Rivendell makes fine bikes and that many people buy "serious" road bikes because they enjoy riding them. I personally don't even follow the Tdf and I don't know if I'd recognize Lance if he walked by me wearing a yellow jersey.

Originally Posted by d2create

...here's just one example of carbon falling under rare circumstances but it's not the first time this exact thing has happened.
https://picasaweb.google.com/dbiked/B...ey=iOs1rM3MJzo

Originally Posted by rmp5s

Originally Posted by rmp5s

NoRacer...what specific model is that?

Originally Posted by MedLine

Thanks, I've tried several of the Planet Bikes fenders but can't get the fit right on my road bike. I've heard that the SKS don't stay put, but seems like they work fine in your case, I'll have to try it out.

Originally Posted by d2create

There's two different thoughts in your post.

1, just to get it out of the way, you're talking about Riv vs Road and generalizations. Nothing was said about that in my post. I never mentioned any specific companies, just styles of bikes. The only thing I eluded to was "people that want to go fast like Lance" and you know for a fact that there are plenty of newbs out there that buy their first serious bike because of that. They have an image of cycling in their head and that's what they want. I don't care, but it's true.

2. My post wasn't about what you can or can't do with a road race bike. It was about what they were BUILT to do. The main purpose of a road race bike is to race. Fact. Plain and simple. It's also one of the few sports where something is designed specifically for an athlete like Lance, and then the next year it's available to the general public with no changes. Imagine if it worked that way with Indy cars? But speaking of fast cars, you can go out and buy a BMW M5 and have all the speed and handling in a more comfortable, long distance package better suited for the average joe.

But yeah, that's all I was comparing... what bikes were built for what duty. Luckily we live in a world where we can choose which ever one we want to do whatever we want with it. More power to ya.

Now if you want to talk about carbon vs steel... here's just one example of carbon falling under rare circumstances but it's not the first time this exact thing has happened.
https://picasaweb.google.com/dbiked/B...ey=iOs1rM3MJzo
If it was a steel fork, it probably would have bent and it probably would have broke a bunch of spokes. But the bike would not have just dropped out from under the rider. I've heard of this exact same thing happening with a steel fork and standard wheels and the rider was able to get the bike to come to a stop and emerge relatively unscathed. The chances of carbon failing are slim... but when it does fail, it fails HARD. But this is a whole other argument that's been done to death and not really pertinent to the OP's original question.

Originally Posted by Mr23779

I've been to the Road Cycling sub-forum and have seen some absolutely gorgeous road bikes and say to myself, "Self, these are rolling works-of-art and have the latest/greatest components, etc...and since these are magnificent machines and are meant to be ridden long distances, built like tanks but weigh next to nothing, are effecient, and are the epitome of cutting-edge design...

Originally Posted by meanwhile

For a truly cutting edge bike look at a Moulton.

Originally Posted by meanwhile

For a more conventional but somewhat innovative commuter look at a Cotic Roadrat.

Originally Posted by caloso

Meanwhile, I'm curious. Have you ever raced?

Originally Posted by tjspiel

I'm not sure about meanwhile, but at my last race the majority of the course was not even closed to traffic. There were cops at the intersections but otherwise commuting on those roads would have been the same, -except there would have been a lot fewer cyclists to worry about crashing into and I'd be wearing a messenger bag.

I'm sorry, I don't think my road bike is any less agile at 15 mph than any other bike I've ridden in the last decade. I have an easier time balancing my road bike at 0 to 1 mph than I do my mountain bike.

Originally Posted by caloso

Here's another guy riding over a mud covered cobblestone path on a "fragile" road bike.

Originally Posted by caloso

Thanks, tjspiel. My point exactly. Here's a few guys on road bikes making "full on turns" on wet pavement to boot.



Here's another guy riding over a mud covered cobblestone path on a "fragile" road bike.