dynodonn 

In areas with little elevation differences, they're probably ideal, but on commutes like mine where everyday is a 400 ft climb to home, one can only guess at how long the "cool" factor would last.

seafood

What is the purpose of such a statement? It seems this thread has gone from one Dutchman's perspective on American cycling to how to improve American cycling state of affairs to what the optimum mode of cycling is or should be. Who cares, frankly? Humans are naturally myopic in their discourse and it takes a bit of extra effort to pull yourself out of your own little circumstance and discuss something on a higher plane. I often find that looking at things in a broader context pushes many differences of opinion into differences of circumstance.

Without falling into this trap of stating yet another personal view of how one individual chooses to live their own life, I believe the following are fairly universal truths about human endeavors:

1. Different levels of skill dictate different preferences, both for comfort and performance.
2. Skill is developed through time and effort.
3. Many people choose not to pursue advanced mastery in favor of finding a "good enough" plateau.
4. Those who do choose continued conscious improvement often claim that this pursuit has tangential benefits, but are also undoubtedly biased by their own enjoyment of the art itself.

I-Like-To-Bike

Your "universal truths" in points 2-4, represent your own bias that developing bicycling skill, advanced mastery, and continued conscious improvement are the primary considerations of transportation cyclists ( cyclists with a goal of getting from one place to another destination by bicycle).

Your biased view of universal bicycling truth gets further perverted by others who view that only road bikes demonstrate that the owner has developed sufficient bicycling skill, advanced mastery, and continued conscious improvement to ride a bicycle "properly" or "efficiently" no matter how appropriate/inappropriate road bike selection is for the cycling situation.

Perhaps some cyclists just want to get on their bikes and ride without trying to emulate the enthusiast's objective of advanced mastery and continued conscious improvement.

the fly

After having my spine fused due to a crushed vertebrae after a fall, I don't have all those shock absorbers. No upright bike for me. Also, my facial hair is very sporadic. No bent for me, I can't grow the required beard. Anyway, I'm comfortable enough on my drop bar road bike to do the occasional century, even with a gut that won't seem to go away.

But seriously, I take issue with the condescending nature of the speaker on the video regarding road bikes, lycra, racing, all completely off topic to what he was commenting on, which is infrastructure, (and his ridiculous need to see people actually commuting, rather than just out riding for enjoyment). Personally, I'd like to see more people on bikes, whether it's a $$$ carbon fiber racing bike, or a BSO from the local big box. I also don't care what people wear (although I throw on the lycra pretty much every time). I don't get the same feeling from the speaker in the video. IMO, the tone of the video is at a minimum divisive, and without much of a stretch can be seen as downright hostile to certain riders.

I-Like-To-Bike

Why is that? I must not have continued my conscious improvement to have the advanced mastery to recognize the benefits of using this bicycling skill more often.

seafood

My view of universals is not about any one thing and it's certainly not about bicycling or any one aspect of it. To be honest, I get overwhelmed with the myriad of terms aimed at very specific categorization of bicycling and by the vitriol that ensues surrounding what feels like non-differences. I do not claim that there is mastery in road bicycling and no mastery in non-competitive transportation-oriented cycling. With respect to this thread, I only wanted to point out 2 things:

1. If an individual is satisfied with their approach and results, it probably doesn't matter very much what anyone else (or the rest of the world for that matter) does or doesn't do. And furthermore, if said individual represents a specific self-selecting group, their behavior should not be expected to be "in the norm" in a wider context of the given activity or population.
2. If we are collectively concerned over barriers to entry for a wider population and reasons why more people don't plunge into something, then we should think about those people, not the people already doing said thing.

GamblerGORD53

WTF is a FLAT bar ??? Other than a totally useless derogatory term invented by some lazy LBS bozo who only likes drop bars. Brake levers as far from the rider as possible ?? Goofy. Turkey levers ?? Dorky Ever see grocery bags hanging on racetoy bike drops ??? ha It is correct to say that palms FLAT down MTB bars are the fastest way to numb hands, and Ergons don't solve the problem. I have no problem with my swept back 70d Raleigh bars at seat height and angled down about 20d. I can grab the bends just fine for going up hills or into a wind. Sure, sometimes I could have used aerobars. On the highway doing centuries, most of my miles are One handed which are also some with my other hand behind my back for aero. Only exception is with a wind close to head on. Your weight needs to be on the heel of your hand to avoid numbness.

Blue jeans are tighter and slower, but I've never had chaffing problems on 80/90 mile rides. I usually will be wearing them on non-Hawaii weather days. Lots of those here and in Europe.

Load bikes are NOT Road bikes. Those are Clubman bikes.

Jaywalk3r

Someone riding with zero cargo is not an obvious commuter.

Jaywalk3r

Sure it is. It's right there in your state's statutes, freely available for you to read:

I've underlined the relevant passage. It's the equivalent of a "when practicable" clause. Paragraph (2) also provides an exception that may or may not be relevant to bike lanes in your area.

Jaywalk3r

Did you read his post? He was quite clear that having one's arms wide makes one less aero.

Jaywalk3r

That would require using the hands to absorb weight, something that is undesirable if comfort is a priority.

dynodonn 

All nicely said, but you forgot to realize with a mandatory bike lane law, an LEO can still issue you a citation, then you have to take the time and energy to fight it out in court.

Jaywalk3r

Relative comfort need not be constant with distance. In other words, if Bike A is more comfortable than Bike B for a 100 mile ride, that does not imply that bike A is more comfortable than Bike B for a 10 mile ride.

Wow! That's just wrong! If your bike were more comfortable, perhaps you wouldn't need to come out of the saddle as often. You certainly don't need to come out of the saddle for a panic stop. In fact, doing so isn't desirable, since it raises your CG, which is something you do not want when stopping quickly. One can move their CG back, if necessary, without coming out of the saddle.

Jaywalk3r

To start with, E = mc^2 is a consequence of Einstein's special relativity theory, not the theory itself. It's not even the most interesting consequence of the theory. Further, Einstein started with two postulates, and mathematically derived special relativity from those. It's easy enough to check his mathematical logic, so, no, guys like me (math guys) would not be calling him non-sensical.

Calling you non-sensical, on the other hand, would be perfectly justified!

spare_wheel

Ironically, both my A and B commuters are "hybrids" with flat bars. Nevertheless, I acknowledge the attraction of a sturdy steel drop bar utility bike. The salsa vaya and surly crosscheck are very fine all around utilitarian bikes. If I had room for an n+1 I might even own one. I also see the attraction of dutch style bikes in a dense, flat, and high-theft urban setting.

spare_wheel

There are many thousands of daily trips on those routes and the vast majority of these are commutes or utility trips. In fact, on some of those routes bike traffic greatly exceeds car traffic. I hope this helps you understand how absurd your fanciful image of a Portland filled with dutch-style city bikes is.

Jaywalk3r

You're far different from some other posters in this thread, in that you don't assert that a Dutch city bike is too heavy to be ridden in the USA.

Currently, my only bike is a steel singlespeed 29er. I'm car-free, so it's my commuter, as well as my recreational ride.

Don't get me wrong, the bike is more fun than any other bike I've ever owned. I love it. However, had I realized that it would be my primary transportation when I bought it, I would have purchased something completely different. It certainly works as a commuter, in conjunction with a big backpack, but it isn't ideal by any stretch of the imagination. (I would argue that it's far better suited to the task than a road bike, but that isn't saying much.)

Since my primary use for a bike is commuting, my next bike will be a purpose built commuter. That will allow me to use my singlespeed for only recreational riding, which in turn will allow me to make small adjustments that make it even better at the stuff that it's good at.

If I'm buying a bike for a specific task, I'm not going to make any compromises with it. It won't have derailer gears or rim brakes, its chain will be fully enclosed, it will have plenty of cargo capacity, it will have plenty of clearance for wide tires and fenders, it will have a dynamo hub, and it won't require stretching out over the bike to ride. In other words, it will be optimized for commuting and utility riding.

I'm under no illusions that such a bike is ideal for other kinds of riding. Would it work? Absolutely, but other bikes would be better suited. But those other kinds of riding aren't why I'm interested in that kind of bike. I'm interested in that kind of bike because, after a few years of being car-free, I recognize that those features are quite desirable for a commuter/utility bike, something the Dutch figured out long ago.

spare_wheel

nice rant. but its quite snobby to assume that what works for you works for everyone. i, for example, never have problems with hand numbness. i did, however, have problems with foot numbness, hot spots, and knee pain, at least until I switched to clipless racing shoes ().

Jaywalk3r

If you can't make a 400 foot climb on a heavy bike, you won't be able to do it on a light bike, either. It's the engine, not the bike, that matters. My daily load often varies by as more than the difference between a light and heavy commuter, and makes no noticeable difference in my commute.

spare_wheel

nice strawman.

Jaywalk3r

Welcome to the USA. In many jurisdictions, the LEOs are fairly clueless about bike laws, so that's a risk you take regardless of the location or laws. It doesn't mean that the exceptions to the "use the bike lane" laws aren't there.

Jaywalk3r

It isn't a straw man at all. There have been a few posters in this thread that claim that city bikes are too heavy to be practical.

spare_wheel

Bollocks. No one has argued this.

Jaywalk3r

Read the thread for yourself, and you'll see that that has been the crux of a few arguments, dynodonn's, for example.

The argument is bollocks, but that hasn't stopped people from making it.

dynodonn 

I wasn't referring to weight, just the standard one speed many Dutch bikes come with.