bidaci

Fixed

Sixty Fiver

Alex Moulton is also the designer of the Austin Mini, a car with very small wheels that rides and handles incredibly well.

He recognized that the benefits of smaller wheels were lesser weight and better aerodynamics but to use them at speed they needed damping... you have to experience a Moulton firsthand to appreciate the brilliance of the design and these are extremely fast bicycles that give up nothing to their big wheeled cousins.

But the Moulton does not use a full on suspension and it's system is not that weighty.

Poppaspoke

Ride whatever makes you feel comfortable and keeps you on the bike. If you end up doing a lot of road riding you may eventually end up with a road or touring frame...but don't let that keep you from what you're doing now. The main downside for me when I started riding with a group (many years back) was the extra energy required to keep my big tire hybrid at the same speed as the other riders.

meanwhile

The Moulton has GOOD suspension. Which is why the bike costs a lot of money. Good suspension engineering isn't cheap. The suspension system on a Moulton is completely unlike that a suspension hybrid. The hybrid will have a (usually cheap and nasty) version of MTB suspension, which is designed to absorb big knocks at the cost of road holding and thus efficiency.

wunderkind

I think you are confused with Sir Alex Issigonis 65er.

To me, suspension helps in maintaining road contact on less than optimal pavements. Even Formula 1 cars have some sort of suspension built into it considering they run on purposed built ultra smooth tarmac. Maintaining tire contact with the road surface on a high speed vehicle is important to ensure power is transferred effectively. The degree of suspension travel varies however.
For bicycle which travels much slower and also less power than a vehicle, the flexibility of tires is enough to maintain adequate surface contact on regular roads. So for most real suspension is not needed to the same degree as if you are riding off-road where tire to surface contact is for traction. On paved roads, if you want more comfort, get one of those springy saddle post or fit the wheels with fat chummy tires.
Bike mfg is out to make money... currently disc brakes and suspension are to bicycles what white plastics with a fruit logo are to gadget geeks. So they sell whatever that makes money.

CornyBum

I was disappointed when I read around these forums and realized what a drawback my hybrid's front suspension fork probably is. I'll probably use the knowledge for my eventual second bike and just get my current bike's front suspension locked out (since I don't know how to do this, I'll probably ask a LBS to do it while performing a tune-up) and settle for the small improvement.

meanwhile

Strictly speaking, Moulton designed the Mini's suspension system. But this was arguably the car's key component in making the design work.

This is actually a pretty summary of the engneering issues. I'll add that the Moulton system is car-like and improves road holding. Otoh MTB suspensions, even the good ones, are modelled after those on aircraft undercarriage - they're designed to absorb sudden shocks at the cost of road holding.

And I suspect that the Moulton system is obsolete - now that faster wide tyres are available a small wheel bike could could get adequate suspension and excellent speed from 20" Schwalbe Big Apples.

You forgot carbon fibre.

meanwhile

If the bike is otherwise a nice one, you could have the fork swapped. New forks aren't expensive - look on ebay. Post or PM me if you want help.

And, depending on the type of riding you do, a fork isn't necessarily a handicap - it's mostly that money went into the fork that could have gone elsewhere on the bike. (Obviously this depends on the quality of the fork.)

zoodude

x3

meanwhile

No, this is wrong - you don't understand the meaning of the word "efficiency". It isn't the same as "fast". A technology is efficient if it gets the benefit aimed at if it does so at the lowest cost.

An upright position IS the most efficient way of getting a riding position with a comforting all round view and low demands on flexibility and upper body strength, for example. Suspension forks, as fitted to hybrids, are NOT an efficient solution - because they cost more and steal more speed than high quality fat tyres do. Tyres like the Big Apple also give better suspension and improve braking and cornering, which cheap suspension systems make worse.

Oh - and you're wrong to assume that fat tyres are slow. Rolling resistance is a property mostly of tyre compound quality, for example.

bidaci

The first time I read this is was dumbstruck, as I was the 3rd, 4th and 5th time as well. The 6th time I think I get it and you are right. The hybrid is the most efficient bike to ride in a comfortable yet less efficient manner. Your definition of efficient must not come from a source that I can find.

https://www.allbusiness.com/glossarie...4953421-1.html

https://www.answers.com/topic/efficiency

Yet your definition, if applied to a bike, does agree somewhat to what I stated. "A technology is efficient if it gets the benefit aimed at if it does so at the lowest cost." The lowest cost would be the least amount of fractional horsepower put into moving the bike forward by a person for a given speed. Now the resistance of air is the greatest drag on a cyclist and since aerodynamic drag increases exponentially as speed increases and pedal induced bobbing in a fork would more then likely decrease, then the upright position would be less efficient then a suspension fork.

To take this further. Do an 18 mile loop in an hour on a hybrid and then on a road bike and tell me which one was easier to do. If you say hybrid you are delusional.

Now to the fat tire argument. Nowhere did I say fat tires where not efficient (although compared to similar yet skinnier tire they are). I myself run 2.5 Hookworms and only at about 30psi.

Now my rant is probably all over the place and maybe it makes sense and maybe it doesn't. I do stand behind my original statement, you quoted, as applied to the topic at hand.

meanwhile

Actually it agrees with several of those definitions, eg "the conservation of scarce resources," "The ratio of the effective or useful output to the total input in any system." You do know what a synonym is, yes?

As I said, efficiency does not equal speed! An upright riding position is the best way of achieving the benefit of good visibility and low upper body stress - it is an efficient way of achieving these goals because it costs little in terms of money cost and speed.

Sorry: while possibly not delusional you don't seem to be able to master abstract thought.

My cyclocross racer is faster than a typical hybrid - but it requires much more upper body strength to ride (the aerodynamic position places more weight on the hands), more torso flexibility, *much* more neck flexibility,gives less traffic visibility, and generally requires more acceptance of discomfort. A hybrid with a more upright position minimizes these things - that's a benefit. Doing so by changing the geometry of the bike is an extremely efficient way of achieving these benefits - the hybrid will be a couple of mph slower at cruising effort, but require far less upper body strength to ride and give a better traffic view. There might be other solutions (like giving the rider a wide view camera to look behind him) but they're not as efficient. Minimum cost; maximum result = efficient. "Scarce resources" (cash, comfort, speed) are conserved.

Now, suspension forks are NOT efficient - on a hybrid rather than a real MTB - because they don't conserve scarce resources. Compared to high quality balloon tyres they perform poorly on every count. So resources (speed, cash, handling) wasted = not efficient.

Something is maximally efficient if it is the cheapest way of achieving a particular goal - it's that simple. Stopping confusing efficient with going fast - that isn't always the goal. If it was, all bicycles would be fully faired $10,000 carbon fibre recumbents - death traps to ride in crosswinds, horrors in traffic, and amazingly inefficient in terms of conserving those scarce resources cash and safety.

Or, at the risk of making this so simple that you feel patronized, there are two bikes. One has suspension forks. The other has balloon tyres. The balloon tyre bike is 1mph faster, corners and brakes better, is more comfortable, and costs $50 less. So - in this hypothetical example it's more efficient, yes? Because the scare resources of cash, handling, and speed have been conserved in reaching the goal of comfort.

Ok: you can't read what you wrote, as well as being unable to read a dictionary.

bidaci

I reread this entire thread and the original statements regarding converting energy in to forward motion (prior to my post) lend itself to my usage of the term efficient in my reply as it was posted. You are answering based on a very subjective comfort usage of the term. What is comfortable to you may not be comfortable to me. 60 degrees may not be a comfortable temp in Aruba but in Boston right now it would be shorts weather.

I stand by my original statement as it is my opinion and therefore I cannot be "wrong" in it. You are correct in that my usage of the term efficient is based on a non abstract thought process yet it is still correct given it's intent and usage (power in vs power output).

I apologize to everyone for letting this thread get derailed and my hastily replied message last night (which I deleted).

Now as to if I can read, interpret what I read and any other negative you wish to throw my way. Again, your opinion which I can accept.

qmsdc15

Hookworm 2.5 is the heaviest, slowest tire I've ever used. I gave mine away after a few weeks. If that's what you're running on your hybrid, I understand why you think hybrids are dogs. Trust me, lots of people are riding fast on light weight hybrids with narrow tires and aggressive riding position.

bidaci

Nope, never said hybrids are dogs. I said they are a compromise between comfort and efficiency. As far as the Hookworms, they are almost 2.5 pounds each and is why I chose them. They are a high volume slick tire that is just about bulletproof and are perfect for my build. That is why I said...

My current bike has been through many kinds of builds.
Rigid MTB
SS Rigid MTB
Suspended MTB
Urban with Tom Slicks and a rigid fork
Urban with 700x23 wheels and tires with modified V-brakes
Urban with Hookworms and rigid fork
Urban with suspension and Tom Slicks
Urban with suspension and Hookworms
Urban SS with suspension and Hookworms

Which is how it stands now. It is built for my purpose, roads, singletrack, RR tracks and the occasional staircase. Whatever gets in my way I ride. Beyond that I built it with heavy components on purpose and am happy that it borders on 38lbs.

I have fun on it and get a great workout!! Now when I want to go for a long ride I use my road bike that is more comfortable, quicker and less tiring for me.

qmsdc15

Ugh, I understand why you think hybrids are dogs. I bet you put over 95% of your miles on your roadies. Which of the rides in your signature line is the one you have set up as the Urban SS with suspension and Hookworms?

bidaci

Nope, never said hybrids are dogs. I said they are a compromise between comfort and efficiency.

pacificaslim

Usually it's a mis-adjusted seat that is causing the need for much more upper body strength. Riders really shouldn't be supporting much, if any, of their weight with their arms! Move the seat back into the proper position and try again...

qmsdc15

I understand why you THINK hybrids are dogs (because yours is a dog). (Does that make my statement easier for you to understand?)

Which of the bikes in your signature line is the hybrid???

qmsdc15

Moving the saddle rearward to address arm strength issues is wrong and can lead to knee problems. A rider's ideal position is dependent on upper body strength, among other things. All else being equal, stronger arms allow a lower handlebar, more aggressive position.

pacificaslim

Says who? A more flexible, stronger core helps one attain a lower, more aggressive position, but arms shouldn't factor into it. Not a lot of arm wrestling champions in the pro peloton, you know!

Yes, there is a possibility a rider might go to where his seat is so far back it would cause knee problems. But it's much more commonly seen that people will move their seat forward to lessen the reach to the bars so that they are more upright and they think this will lessen the weight on their hands: in reality, moving that seat forward just increased the weight on their hands!

If the seat is set properly for the legs, then weight will be on the sit bones and not much arm strength will be needed to support your upper body. Unless one is fat maybe, in which case, he'll have to correct that problem before being able to position himself correctly.

meanwhile

The only way that suspension contributes to comfort is by providing cushioning. If high quality fat tyres like Big Apples reduce the typical shock problems and vibration you get on the road better than suspension - which is something that can be physically measured and is not subjective - then yes, they provide more comfort than suspension forks, if your definition of comfort includes reduced shock. And if it doesn't, then you're an idiot to be riding with suspension forks!

meanwhile

Again, you're not very good at thinking.

An aggressively low bike position places more weight on the arms - about a third of body weight on the level. Holding that weight all day takes static strength that some people don't have. Again this isn't a matter of opinion - read a book, hmm? The lower the position, the more the weight on your hands.

(And in steep descents, weight on the hands can get much higher again - which is why long and low Age Of Steel hardtails require hardbodies to ride them.)


You are utterly ignorant of bike ergonomics and basic physics. If you think that your hands aren't taking weight when you in the drops in a modern racing bike, stay in that position while riding and let go of the bars. Don't forget to have a friend tape this, because what happens will be worth good money on America's Funniest Home Videos, and you'll need the help to pay for your dental and hospital bills.

The major design motivation for more upright designs is that they reduce weight in the hands! It's impossible for all your body weight to be supported by the saddle, because in a racing position your centre of mass is in front of the saddle. The lower and further forward you are, the more this is true.

bidaci

Nope, never said I THINK hybrids are dogs. I said they are a compromise between comfort and efficiency. Is that easier for you?

qmsdc15

Is there an echo in here? I understand what you think, regardless of what you said. You've made it clear.

Which of your bikes is the hybrid, by the way, if you don't mind me asking?