I'm riding a $60 craigslist purchase while I figure out what I want. I have a picture in my mind. I think it is a hybrid I want. Am I describing a hybrid or a horse designed by a committee?

tires - 1.5"? Not the really narrow and not the 2" of the mtb i have
shock absorbing front fork and maybe seat
front and rear fenders
gears - somewhere around 7-14. my current cycle has 18 or 21 but i rarely shift out of one particular range. i ride on mostly flat roads.
handlebar - the one i have now is straight and I find myself wishing for a bit of curve in toward me. that could be from a less than ideal fitting bike.
right now I want a more upright riding position. I'm riding to burn calories and enjoy the ride. Comfort over distance capabilities.

The term hybrid is a broad term. I think mainly the term hybrid mainly describes what the bike is not. It's not a road bike, not a mountain bike or not a beech cruiser, or not . . . any type of bike that has a definite classification. I wouldn't worry about classification or type, just get what you want and ride it. As you ride it more and more you will soon learn of what you really need, and this bike may be it, or something else.

Anyway, good riding!

when i read hybrid in the description or title of a bicycle, I expect to see a front suspension equipped fork & a fix tail.. Flattish bars, 700c, from 8 to 10 sprockets in the cassette, at least a double fsa, non fat tire, & aluminum frame.

Actually hybrid, any hybrid, is a cross between two things. It's not an mtb or road bike, yet it's both.

Yes, it's a comfort hybrid that you're describing. Something like a 2017 Giant Cypress DX. Except it has more gears than you'd like. They have a 1x7 version, except it doesn't have the front suspension.

Just a heads up - distance capabilities and comfort are extremely related as it is extremely difficult to go long distance if your bike is uncomfortable. Upright riding position is uncomfortable unless your rides are very slow and very short and on flat roads. Good for enjoying the ride - very easy to look around with head high. Very bad for burning calories though, practically useless.

I'm interested in this last part. Why is an upright riding position practically useless for burning calories - seems to me that there would be more resistance, drag, etc needing more effort to accelerate and keep moving.

You can burn plenty of calories with an upright riding position if you're riding hard.

It's not useless. Bike how you feel comfortable biking. Are you burning as many calories as someone riding in Le Tour? Definitely not. Are you burning more calories than sitting on the couch watching Fixer Upper? Absolutely.

That doesn't even begin to make sense. Plenty of people doing centuries on flat bar bikes, done lots of fifties myself and I get better all the time. I've burned off fifty pounds worth of calories on this "practically useless" form of bicycle.

Well, I don't know the real explanation behind it, something in our human physiology, but the fact is, more upright is your position on the bike, the more difficult it becomes to "ride hard", it is simply impossible to put down the same effort on the pedals compared to angled body position. It is not about aerodynamic drag, it just seems that purely upright posture doesn't allow muscles to work full power for some reason, like you have some kind of power limiter applied. You'll find out that if you'll try to pedal hard, you will incline your body forward even on a bike designed for upright posture - you'll start to bend your hands more, so that upper body will angle towards the bars. At which point you'll be better of (feel more comfortable) on a bike that is designed with less upright position in mind.

So, basically, the way I see it, too upright posture is working as a power limiter, prevents you reaching your peak power output, so it is not efficient for burning calories fast - in short but hard rides. It'll be "hard" ride as in "feel tired and uncomfortable" but not from the perspective of how much calories you actually managed to burn. And if you think that you can ride at relaxed pace (for which upright posture works great) but much longer distances then you'll find out that such position sucks for long rides as well because there is too much weight on your buttocks and spine, they'll get tired and stressed - especially if the road surface is of bad quality. I'm not saying that you want to ride as a racer but you don't really want to be too upright either. And riding short distances at relaxed pace (for which upright position works quite well) will not burn much calories simply because bike is a pretty efficient machine, it doesn't require much effort to ride.

As for "needing more effort to accelerate and keep moving" part, this is quite common and very flawed argument. For some reason it is quite a popular belief that horrible quality heavy BSO with heavy wheels, knobby tires etc. is better for exercise because it is quite difficult to make this thing move fast, if at all. The reality, however, is that your power output is your power output, effort you are comfortable with is the effort you are comfortable with, so on a better bike you'll not spend less efforts - you'll just move faster. Probably actually be slightly more efficient in calorie burn on a better bike simply because of less time wasted dealing with various issues.

Hmm, did I write something about flat bars here? No, I didn't!

sure you can call it a hybrid. I used to have one you would have loved. but I don't think it had the bars you want. but you can probably swap bars. I think you would like these North Road handlebars

& the bike doesn't have to be a "comfort" bike



would think bikes like these would be OK.

https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...yABEgJFRvD_BwE

Bikes Direct Windsor Rover Mens Matte Black

forget that this one is called "ladies bikes"

Nishiki Women's Anasazi Hybrid Bike

I used to ride imperial centuries on a comfort bike, and I don't agree with any of that. I've since switched over to a "fitness bike" with a neutral position, but the comfort bike wore out before I did. Comfort simply wasn't an issue--they're called comfort bikes for a reason.

People make all sorts of broad statements about what can't be done on certain types of bikes--comfort bikes make great commuters, and are fine for long distances. They're just not fast.

I've ridden past way too many crouched riders when I was on fully upright bikes to let that go past. I rode them hard, and I could maintain about 16-18 mph over hours. It was a huge effort, but there's no way you wouldn't describe what I was doing as anything other than riding hard. The same level of effort just isn't capable of producing the same amount of speed I can do on a neutral position bike. On my FX 3, which is a road bike hybrid, I regularly pass riders on racing bikes who are half my age, and I easily do 24-25 mph in the flat..

A lot of this posture stuff is basically nonsense, fitness beats equipment.

No argument here, it is good to be strong. Except that you'll be even faster on a racing bike.

Also, to be fare to "crouched riders", as strange as it may sound to someone who never did it, one reason to ride in drop bars can be actually to rest and relax, so they were not necessary riding hard if they were in the drops. I don't want to speak for everyone but I, personally, do use drops to rest periodically on the long rides. It is a very comfortable position to me in case I don't need to raise head too much (e.g. while going downhill or on a familiar safe piece of road) - otherwise neck becomes tired after some time.

I used to ride crouched. It causes me some physical problems in my nether regions I'd rather not discuss. Even without those, there is absolutely no way I'd find it more comfortable over distance than an upright or semi-upright position.

On the paths and roads, I enjoy playing the "World's Fastest Upright Rider". I occassionally encounter riders faster than myself, but not that often, so I'm pretty happy with my speed. I'm definitely faster on hills than the racing bikes I encounter. I probably would be a few MPH faster on a racing bike, but I would hate it and wouldn't stick with it. Being able to stick with something is, by far, the most valuable thing in a fitness program.

My first rule of fitness is "don't make yourself miserable". How to do that varies drastically from person to person.

I'm not going to argue to comfort vs distance as I agree they are directly related as you have stated. However, your claim of practically useless for burning calories leaves me scratching my head. The industry has classified some of these hybrid bikes as "fitness bikes". Maybe it goes back to the comfort issue (a bike that is uncomfortable doesn't get ridden) or maybe it is pure marketing. Either way, any bike that gets ridden is far from useless when it comes to turning calories into energy.

Hmm, I'll try again, may be my opinion will be clearer this time. Any bike that is ridden short distances at relaxed pace will not burn much calories, you'll need quite long rides for this. And original poster explicitly told that he is not interested in long rides. So, if he really wishes to burn calories (which he wrote) and not ride long distances (which he also wrote as not interested), he'll need to ride hard. And yes, I strongly believe that riding fast is much more comfortable and efficient if your position is somewhat angled and not strictly upright, you'll not be able to put down much effort if you'll sit completely straight even if you wished so. So this is something to consider during bike selection. It doesn't mean that this can't be a hybrid - but hybrid is such a loosely defined bike type that you can get pretty much anything, so you probably want more sporty type of a hybrid, if your goal is to ride fast on it.

One needs to have realistic expectations from bike ride calorie burn. If you ride relaxed, calorie burn is quite small, probably around 300 - 400 calories an hour. Yeah, if you spent few hours like this, this is something. 30 minutes and then ate one Snickers - congratulations, you just got more new calories than burned during the ride.

In my experience, there's not much difference between a hybrid bike and a road bike as far as burning calories go. What matters is, how high my heart rate goes and how long I can keep my heart rate elevated. The idea being, you put out the same amount of effort into exercising regardless of the bike you are riding. What ends up happening is, for the same amount of effort, you will end up going faster on your road bike than the hybrid bike. But for the same amount of effort, the amount of calories burned should be the same. If you are doing a relaxing ride on the hybrid bike and going all out when on the road bike, of course the amount of calories burned will not be the same. But the calories are still burning... compared to say... me right now... sitting at the office typing out this reply...