njkayaker

(Slow.) The range of gears is smaller (higher low and lower high).

DX Rider

Nice analogy, but I do use my hybrid for commuting.

On the other hand, my "Roger Clemens" Reebok cross trainers were worn maybe a dozen times and have since sat in my closet since 1993. I've kept them thinking maybe someday I'd wear them, I probably won't though. They were expensive, over $100, but they suck.

Timber_8

I look so much better on an ugly bike than a pretty bike, That way I get all the attention.

mijome07

I've heard of an ugly bike, but not a 'pretty' bike.

chipcom 

LarDasse74

What about a Bike Friday?

mijome07

Now that's adorable. Which BF member owns that?

Luddite

I thought I regretted getting my hybrid, then I rode down 10th Ave and some other extremely rough bike-friendly routes and realize this is the perfect bike for this city. I had to go off curbs/go on grass even today. Not to mention going over very bumpy embedded train tracks.

I have a classic steel bike but I never ride it, partly due to the fact it's too big, I find the downtube shifting a PITA etc. The rims on that bike could never put up with the abuse my hybrid does. I also load my hybrid down with huge panniers and have even strapped a heavy bag of dog food to the rear rack. Bike didn't so much as sneeze.

I can't afford a modern road bike (who the hell can?) so I got the best bike for my needs with what $ I could afford. 1000 km and going strong.

chipcom 

I don't know her name, but she drops me every day on my commute. I'll catch that little girl yet.

meanwhile

A classic worst of all worlds bike. Delicate, second rate brake modulation, poor tyre clearance, poor low speed agility, poor ultimate adhesion and hence full-on turn and brake, delicate, but no drops.

Otoh a decent cyclocross bike would be tough, fast, light, allow wide tyres and fenders when needed, have excellent brake modulation if set up right, and could be started off with moustache style uprights and then trivially changed to drops. Or vv.

njkayaker

Interesting. How does the Quick or the Trek 7.5 series compare?

I think cyclocross bikes are great because they are versatile without any real significant downsides.

meanwhile

Another "I don't understand ANYTHING about bike design or engineering, so I'll rubbish about shoes. Yeah, using a meaningless analogy is bound to make me look smart!"

Anyway, to discuss the specific form of dreck this poster has committed himself to:

Using the shoe analogy, modern racing bikes are actually the most specific and narrowly function bikes in wide production. They're designed to be ridden in conditions that only obtain in a UCI governed race, with every element of safety and comfort than can be traded for a minor edge in speed lost. Even their ability to get extra speed is marginal to non-existent in typical urban conditions, especially when ridden by a clown with half the power output and a minute fraction of the bike handling ability they were designed for. A typical decent hybrid otoh *is* designed for commuting - the frame angles handle pot hole shock better and need less correction, the greater tyre room allows fenders and 38mm tyres that can eat pot holes while still rolling fast, the upright position gives the best traffic view. (Although personally I prefer drops and a cross bike.)

Dumb analogy.

DataJunkie

I regretted my hybrid but I can't speak for the OP.
Heck, I'm pondering a cruiser to go along with my geared CF road bike, my fixed gear road bike, and my mountain bike. I prefer tools for specific tasks. Multi tool like bikes don't do it for me.

meanwhile

To the Sirrus? I don't know. I haven't had either. I'd look at the tyre clearance and whether the frame uses carbon in gimmicky locations - the fork and minor tubes. My idea of the perfect hybrid is the Cotic Roadrat - rim or disc brakes, tough cromo, sloping top tube, lots of tyre clearance and every braze-on known. Oh - and frames with short and long top tubes for drop and flat bar builds.

Agreed. But they aren't really very different to some hybrids. A lot of hybrids would convert to drop handle cross bikes in an about half an hour - tyre clearance is the main thing.

The only thing I'll say against crossers as road bikes is that the BB is high. Some people don't like this - they feel it makes the bike less stable and that it is harder to get your feet down. I prefer it - I like the ability to pedal through hard corners and the lively feel of a higher BB.

njkayaker

What's a "decent" hybrid?

The following is OK but fairly heavy and has an unnecessary (in my opinion) suspension fork. This kind of bike is fine for shorter rides and for people who aren't going to be that careful about potholes and curbs. It would seem that the following would not be a good match for the original poster.

https://www3.cannondale.com/bikes/09/...odel-8AS4.html

caloso

I suppose you're right that I don't know much about bike engineering. But I do know that if you make the compromises to be a "do it all" bike, it's likely to be a "but doesn't do any of it very well" bike. Hybrids are neither as fast or maneuverable as a road bike nor as robust as a mountain bike. And that's fine, there's obviously a market for them.

And I do know that if my road bike is robust enough for Copperopolis and Leesville Gap, it's robust enough for commuting on city streets.

wunderkind

This thread rivals the GMC Denali review. Who'd thunk.

agc1976

Isn't a better analogy the new crossover cars? People want the space of an SUV but don't like riding high or want to save money on gas... It doesn't handle as good as a sedan nor it can handle the rough tasks that an SUV can but there's a market for them.

In bikes there's people who want some of the features of a road bike and some of the features of a mountain bike but don't need the more extreme features of each design.

I finally settled on the Cannondale Quick 3. The gear ratios of the Quick 3 are more suited to the type of riding that I'll be doing than those on the Quick 2. I've also read that mountain bike gear ratios are better suited for beginners for when going up hills and there are quite a few hills here that it may come in handy. I guess that If I ever need the gear ratios of the Quick 2, I'd be better off with a true road bike which I may or may not decide to buy in the future.

meanwhile

You're absolutely correct. A decent hybrid lacks a suspension fork - its part of the definition. Suspension is most effectively left to the tyre, except for hardcore MTBs and small wheel bikes like Moultons.

I'd say that the best hybrid design, on paper at least, because I haven't had a chance to ride one, is the Cotic Roadrat. Every braze-on known, disk and rim brake mounts, wide tyre clearance, sloping top tube, tough cromo, two frames lengths available for each of the three sizes. Can be built up with flats or drops as a crosser, messenger bike, fixie, tourer, winter trainer, run 26 or 700c wheels.

Very few hybrids are cromo, but as commuter bikes they should be designed to resist being bashed around by imbeciles trying to lock their bike next to yours - and cromo is good at this. It's the best material for a commuter or courier bike, but you have to go boutique brands like Surly and Cotic to get it, unfortunately.

More prosaically I say that the Trek 7 series look like reasonable designs. More so the low to mid end bikes. Unless you're buying a boutique small production speciality like a Roadrat or a bike for adventure touring or an ice road bike with IGH and discs, a hybrid has no excuse costing more than, oh, £500. Trying to marginally increase the performance of a commuter bike by throwing money at it is silly. If you want tougher you need a hardtail MTB, if you want faster you need a bike with drops.

No one is that careful about pot holes when they are dodging a truck. Safety should never be "one deep". As for "shorter rides", well that's usually down to multiple hand positions - and European trekking bars are the king there and easily fitted.

If it has a suspension fork it should be taken out and melted and the design team - and evil marketeers - shot.

meanwhile

Except for the marketing, hybrids pre-date MTBs and modern racers. Modern racers are close to 1980's crit bike designs - they're inbred, narrow focus pains in the ass. Road bikes with hybrid-ish frame angles were the standard bikes of even cycling club members once. Some of them were even fitted with drops and called racers. All that's really changed is that hybrids have inherited senisble sloping top tubes from MTBs - but so have many racers - and use v-brakes because they are now cheap, unlike cantis in the 1950s, 60s, 7os or 80s.

njkayaker

The Quick line appears to be in-between a "true" hybrid (like the Adventure series) and a road bike.

While people buy a particular bicycle for all sorts of reasons, a hybrid, like the Adventure series appears to be appropriate for somebody who wants a fairly "cushy" ride and doesn't want to have to be "overly" careful about what they ride on and are fairly casual riders.
https://www3.cannondale.com/bikes/09/...odel-8AS3.html

It appears that the Quick line appears to be more appropriate for somebody who is a bit more serious (ie, interested in longer rides) and wants a bike that is more efficient than the "classic" hybrid. These kinds of bikes probably won't take the abuse that a hybrid would but (hopefully) their riders will be a bit more skilled.

The top (highest) gear of the Quick 2 is really no different than that of the Quick 3. The low gear of the Quick 2 is just "one" higher than the lowest gear of the Quick 3. That is, the Quick 3 is geared a littlle bit lower but not by a lot.

================

The lines between bicycle types are fuzzy. It appears that, now, "classic" hybrids are "tamer" than mountain bikes for more casual riders. And that "performance hybrids" like the Quick are more for less casual riders who (for some reason) need or want a more upright position than a road bike or don't like dropped bars. (Note that the default position of the Quick is less upright than the Anventure.)

I like the looks of that!
https://www.cotic.co.uk/product/roadrat

Note that it looks like the frame geometry is spec'd differently for the flat bar versus the dropped bar bikes. It looks like the prices of bicycles in the US is generally higher.

(Looks sort of like a more expensive version of my touring bike.)

There's the 7.x series and the 7xxx series.

The 7.x FX series looks OK to me and appears to be very similar to the Quick line.

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/bike_path/fx/75fx/

The 7xxx series appears to be similar to the Cannondale Adventure line (except the Cannondales have a more "aggressive" suspension fork).

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes...h/hybrid/7500/

A bike with drops isn't faster unless you ride in the drops, which most people appear to do only occasionally.

But a more-skillful rider is hopefully going to make this occurance a rare one!

(Maybe!) I think the a suspension fork on a hybrid appeals to people who think that it will make the bike more comfortable.

Timber_8

I understand your analogy, Jack of all, master of none & too a degree you are correct. Hybrids cover many tasks. They are geared to pull trailers or loaded panniers great for shopping, kid hauling, the same bike can be used for commuting to work or school at a decent speed. Flat bars offer better control when carrying extra loads. Clearer view and comfort with there upright position. It's ability to cover many terrains and climb hills with a load. I agree it is not a choice for everyone but these characteristics are valuable to many, People living car free, Commuters, Couriers, Homemakers, not to mention it is the ultimate 2nd bike for people running carbon. But then there are always going to be people that feel that because they have no use for it that nobody should have a use for it, Go Figure

mijome07

If that was the case, then all of these bikes (not some) all of them would have 'flat' bars.

Timber_8

Why would they have flat bars, it isn't a requirement to have flat bars to carry extra wt. but you can't change the fact that a wider flat has greater stability, the wider the tripod the greater the stability that is basic geometry my friend It also offers greater leverage to power a heaver load again not a requirement but an advantage

mustang1

I ride a drop bar road race bike. I commute on this, have fun on it, and train on it. Recently I was in the market for a winter commuter and test rode a few bikes one of which was a hybrid (Marin Lucas Valley). I didn't like it. So I opted for another drop-bar'd bike (Tricross, which I'm picking up tomorrow ).

I rode MTBs for about 20 years and... rephrase, I *had* MTBs for 20 years, but now I'm back onto drops and it'll take a lot for me to get back to flat bars. But everyone's different, I know plenty of people who hate drop bars. YOu do what you gotta do.