cycling705

Whether it's 5 MPH or 15 MPH, surely the Roam can handle quicker rides, right? Wouldn't it offer me more flexibility, not less?

cycling705

I love the idea of the ToughRoad, but as ColonelSanders mentioned, it's starting to go above what I was looking to spend. Thanks for the suggestion though - awesome looking bike.

cycling705

Makes complete sense. I appreciate you walking me through that. Very helpful.

MRT2

No, and no. About 4 years ago, I purchased a used Trek 930 mountain bike converted to an urban cruiser for, you guessed it, shorter, lower speed family rides. At the time, I convinced myself that on rides shorter than, say, 20 miles my drop bar road bike with relatively narrow tires would be a problem, I would be better off going with a more upright style of riding, flat bars, and fat tires. I even mounted a rack on the bike for utility use. In 4 years, and 5 seasons of use, that bike was ridden, maybe twice a year, and that includes one day where I rode it because the I broke a spoke on my road bike, one day where I lent the bike to my niece's husband for the day. In a nutshell, it was just as enjoyable to ride my road bike with drop bars 10 miles as it was the flat bar comfort bike. And on rides of 20 miles or longer, it was no contest. I want the road bike. So, the mountain bike sits in the garage (actually not anymore. A LBS is selling it on consignment) And it was if not exactly expensive, more money than I needed to spend.

So no, I don't agree that you need a new bike just for slower, family rides.

So, if money is just burning a hole in your pocket and you cannot resist the allure of a shiny new bike, then go for it. But just be honest with yourself as to why you are doing it.

finch204

On a casual ride, no it wasn't a problem or annoyance at all. It was only when I tried to sprint out of the saddle (yeah I know, who does that on a Trek Verve) that I noticed it. I obviously was losing some power then but I also was using the wrong bike for what I was trying to do.


I think Trek would not have removed the suspension fork if the new model wasn't going to be up to the task of soaking up the bumps. That said, I've never tested the new model nor have I ever rode a bike with 45mm tires, so I cannot answer that for sure.

If I were in your position and you foresee riding at least 50% off-road, I would get the Roam. I see the Verve as purely a recreational bike. Ride around the neighborhoods and bike paths at a leisurely pace. The Roam will be more versatile than the Verve, though probably won't be as comfy on slow rides.

cycling705

Fair assessment. Appreciate your advice.

I just assumed that a Giant Roam with an adjustable stem is more comfortable and flexible than a flat-bar road bike.

On the Sirrus (32mm tire), I'm limited to paved paths, and typically a faster (harsher) ride. That's not a bad thing. In fact, there are some days I want to ride faster and longer, to which that bike works perfectly.

But, for a slightly more comfortable ride with my young son (which will eventually include some "exploration" rides on dirt paths or country gravel roads as he gets older), wouldn't the Roam work much better than the Sirrus?

Whether it's 5 MPH or 15 MPH, don't these two bikes offer different ride types? Or, am I wrong?

fietsbob

Merida Makes Specialized, Giant makes many other brands too.

Big OEM factories.

AU Tiger

With 35mm cyclocross tires on my Fuji Absolute (a road-oriented hybrid with a rigid carbon fork), I am plenty comfortable on dirt roads and shallow gravel. Like I mentioned before, my second bike is a mountain bike. The logic being, if the terrain is too much for my Fuji, then it's probably more than the Roam is cut out for also. That's not to say that I don't use the Kona sometimes on a rail trail, but it's definitely not needed for them. I mainly got it for riding trails with lots of roots, big bumps and ruts, and deeper gravel than a typical rail trail has.

If that's the type of riding you're looking to do, I would seriously consider a simple mountain bike like the Giant Talon, just for the better fork. But if you're just talking about crushed limestone and fairly smooth dirt roads, then I don't really think you NEED a second bike. If you just want one, great -- go for it. It's definitely fun to have a second bike. But honestly, before you spend the money, I'd recommend you try CX tires on the Sirrus first. Since switching to them last fall, I've been extremely happy with the ride on all surfaces. I lose very little speed on the roads, and it performs great on dirt and crushed gravel.

hokiefyd 

I would say that it largely depends on how and where you ride. If you ride ONLY smooth paved paths, then the absorption offered by the larger tires (as long as you air them down some) will likely be about the same as you'd get with a suspension fork.

For example, if you assume that a tire that is 45mm wide is also 45mm tall (not necessarily true, but good enough for this discussion), then you have a maximum of 45mm of "travel". That is, the tire can deform up to 45mm against an object in the road (like an uneven concrete joint, for instance). Your effective range isn't near that much, though, as a full 45mm of deformation will likely pinch flat the tube and could impact your rim. In practice, you'll have the tire aired up so that it never fully deforms. I would say you could estimate that you could have as much as 20-25mm of deformation, though.

In contrast, most hybrid-type suspension forks offer 63mm of travel. You'll rarely achieve all of that travel, as you'll sag the fork some when you sit on the bike. You could probably estimate that you have a good third of it, though (40mm). Tire pressure is completely independent of suspension travel, though the tires will still deform some. Physics demand that you will have more total deformation available with a suspension fork than with thicker tires alone (at least on a hybrid -- the fat bikes and their 4" wide/tall tires may be a different story).

Going back to where and how you ride. I ride "improperly". You're supposed to get out of the saddle and use your arms and knees as shock absorbers. This is reasonable to achieve on fast rides, but not so relevant, at least in my opinion, to slower rides with the family. When I say that I ride improperly, I'm not looking to get up out of the saddle for various bumps -- I ride right through them. My focus when on a family bike ride is different than it would be if I'm downhilling on a singletrack. We're blessed to have the large county park across the road from our neighborhood, and we effectively have miles of wide multi-use paths that connect our house to the park's trails, the park's many playgrounds, etc. So it's many times a week that we're out biking in the park and on these trails. We bike between 6 and 10 miles each ride, depending on the loop we take that time.

As most of my riding is at slower speeds, and on very mixed surfaces (paved, gravel, light two track and singletrack), I find that tires alone are not as comfortable, in terms of shock absorption, as a suspension fork. My other bike is a mountain bike with 1.75" tires (47mm). I keep them aired down to 40-50 psi, and they certainly do deform over bumps, but not like my suspension fork does.

If my riding situation were different, the suspension fork might be less relevant for me. As it is today, though, I'd likely not buy a bike with a rigid fork for my primary family rider, if I had to replace my 2015 Verve. I'd look at something like another earlier Verve, a Giant Cypress, or Roam, etc.

MRT2

If you were buying a bike just for slow speed family rides and exploring dirt or gravel, perhaps you would pick the Roam over the Sirrus. (but maybe not. I hate suspension forks and strongly believe that anything surface short of really rough terrain can be dealt with by switching out tires) But in general, bikes are pretty adaptable and 32 mm isn't that narrow for a tire. Again, if you are talking 23 mm, you might have a point. And even if it is, your Sirrus has clearance to go up to 35, and maybe as much as 37 or 38 mm and that is plenty wide for what you want to do. Additionally, if you are really concerned with performance on dirt, limestone, packed gravel or anything short of technical single track (not sure how rustic your rides are likely to be with a 5 year old), the Sirrus can certainly be adapted to those surfaces with a change of tire.

What sort of tires? Something 32 to 38 mm or so with a semi knobby tread. Examples. Panaracer Gravel king (the cyclocross tread), Kenda Kross, Schwalbe Marathon Mondial, Continental Speed King, Clement X'Plor USH, or Michelin Protek Cross. There is a price to be paid, in terms of weight compared to a slick pure road tire, but it is a lot cheaper to swap out tires than it is to buy an entirely new bike.

FWIW, I am putting my money where my mouth is this summer, as I am planning a multi day family ride on mixed surfaces including mostly paved, but also some dirt, and crushed limestone. My plan is to switch the front tire from my trusty Panaracer Ribmo to a Panaracer Gravel King. 32 mm size. My wife cannot go up past 28, so I will likely just mount a 28 mm Clement or a Gravel King on her road bike. And the same for my son. Slick tire on the back of his road bike, 28 mm Panaracer Gravel king on the front.

cycling705

Fair points. I appreciate your feedback and help. It makes a lot of sense. Just out of curiosity, how many bikes do you own currently?

cycling705

Makes sense. How should this play into my decision?

cycling705

Thanks again for your input above.

Based on the specs of the 2010 Sirrus Sport...

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bi...russport/22980

...does it have a threadless headset (like the Giant Roam 3), or could I use an use an adjustable quill stem on the Sirrus Sport?

cycling705

You guys may have me convinced to try an adjustable stem and bigger tires on my Sirrus Sport first. It currently has 32mm (Specialized All Condition Sport, 700x32c, wire bead, 60TPI, w/ Flak Jacket protection), but they just feel really fast and harsh when I ride = every bump transfers right through my body.

I like the looks of several of the tires you both recommended, and they are reasonably priced.

Decisions, decisions.

cycling705

I just saw locally a 2017 Trek Verve 1 on Craigslist for $300. It sounds like the reason for selling is personal (i.e. financial-related). From all indications, the bike is like new (which would run me $475 new with tax).

If you were in my shoes, would this be enough of a bargain for you to buy if you were in the market for this type of bike?

I could keep my Sirrus as is (fast, long rides / original stem), and have a Trek Verve for casual path / neighborhood rides (upright / comfortable).

I'm still not opposed to changing up my Sirrus Sport as MRT2 and AU Tiger mentioned, but I'm still gathering last-minute info to make a final decision.

Specs: https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b.../1310000-2017/

MRT2

Four. My main bike is a Salsa Casseroll, which is a drop bar sport touring bike. My backup bike is a 90s era Bianchi hybrid. I would sell it, but it probably isn't worth much, so it sits in my garage.

I also have a Kona Blast that I recently got just for mountain bike trails. Finally, I have an old Trek 930 that I am looking to sell.

finch204

If your budget is tight, it seems to be a good deal. Test ride the bike and make sure you like it.

If budget is not an issue, I would spring for the Verve 2. It has a suspension seatpost, adjustable stem, better drivetrain and I think a much better looking paint job.

AU Tiger

I know exactly what you mean about feeling every bump. The biggest factor for the tires is being able to run lower pressure. The original tires on my Fuji were 28mm with a range of 80-100 PSI. My current tires are 35mm with a range of 40-65 PSI. So even running them towards the higher end of the range is vastly more comfortable than the low end of the range on the other tires. I had been told that would be the case, but I was still surprised at how much of a difference they made when I actually got them on.

Most of my riding is on the road, so I usually keep them around 60 PSI for lower rolling resistance. And when I'm going to ride less smooth terrain, I can easily drop it to 45 or 50 for comfort.

cycling705

Using your tires as the example, would I run into any issues being a bigger guy (240 lbs) if I try to ride at 45-50 PSI? In other words, do I need higher pressure to support my weight?

MRT2

Trial and error. You need to play around with different pressures, though you can run a lower pressure on the front as the back tire supports about 70% of your weight.

cycling705

I tend to agree with you. If I bought the Verve 1, it would mainly be due to it's discounted price = wrong reason.

therealjoeblow

Yep, don't buy a bike just because it's a good deal... figure out what bike you want/need, and then try to find a good deal on it.

Cheers
TRJB

hokiefyd 

I never advocate shopping bikes based on price. I've said as much in other threads and I say it here as well. For a purchase that could be in your family for decades, even a few hundred dollars' difference today will mean nothing after 20 years of satisfaction and enjoyment. Assuming the components are basically what you want (freewheel vs. cassette, etc), then buy based on fit and appearance (color scheme, etc). Ever get into a car and it JUST FITS? That's what the right bike should feel like. You get on the bike and everything just feels like it's in the right place. You could buy a less expensive bike and spend money on different saddles or stem extensions or pedals and all sorts of other stuff to make it right, or you could buy something that's right the first time.

I would not buy that Verve 1 if the price is the only thing attracting you to it, especially if you KNOW you'll be sacrificing something else just for the low(ish) price. I say "ish" because I don't even think that's a screaming deal to begin with. My new condition Verve 3 cost me $250 on Craigslist and it was one model year old. A $300 Verve 1 isn't THAT far off the base price of a Verve 1 brand new. Have you ridden a Verve and know it's what you want? Were you going to buy a Verve 1 model, or were you wanting a 2 or a 3? If the Verve 1 is already at the top of your short list, then sure...why not save money on one? But if you really want a Roam or something else, then don't buy the Verve just because it's less money.

cycling705

First and foremost, thanks to everyone for your answers and input in this thread. I can't thank you enough for all of your advice. It has been tremendously helpful.

I just have a few final questions as I close in on making a final decision to either buy a 2017 Giant Roam 3, or convert my existing Sirrus Sport. Please feel free to offer your thoughts on any or all topics.

1. How can I tell if I'm able to use an adjustable quill stem on a 2010 Sirrus Sport, or any bike for that matter? Is there a link or resource that explains how to determine which stems work on various bikes? I'm confused in this area, but I do like what the adjustable quill stem offers (changes in both angle and height).

2. For those that own a Roam (or other front suspension hybrid bike), when you stand up to pedal out of the saddle, how much play is there in the suspension? Is it considerable, or not a big deal?

3. After watching the YouTube videos that TheRealJoeBlow posted previously (thank you), front-suspension hybrids seem to offer the best of both worlds - solid and firm fork action on flat pavements, and a much-desired cushioning effect when you encounter an occasional pavement bump or hole. If someone chooses to go that route, I can't see a single reason for not wanting the flexibility that the suspension fork provides, ESPECIALLY if the fork offers a lock-out feature. For me personally, at 45 years old, and 240 pounds, an additional 2 lbs in fork weight pales in comparison to the benefits it provides.

Regardless of which side a person prefers, it's not like either choice is wrong. Why is there such a fervant disagreement on this topic across the forum?

Thanks again for everyone's help.

therealjoeblow

Quill stems and Threadless stems are different. There are both fixed and adjustable versions of each.

A Quill stem is smaller in diameter and slides inside your larger diameter, hollow headset:



Photo above is a fixed quill stem. It uses a wedge at the bottom to "jam" it into place and lock its height and orientation.

This is an adjustable quill stem, showing the wedge at the bottom which is common to both fixed and adjustable types:




A threadless stem has a larger diameter clamp that just clamps around the upper part of your headset, it does not slide inside:



Photo above is a fixed threadless stem.

Here is an adjustable threadless stem:



From those pics you should be able to determine which type you have. In either case, you can replace a fixed stem with an adjustable type on any bike.

Your 2010 Sirrus Sport has a fixed threadless stem. You can use any brand or model of stem like in the last picture above to convert it, no problem.

If you wanted to gain a bit more height, this particular brand that you can buy from vendors on eBay has a riser built into its clamp to give you an extra 1.25" height right off the bat, without even adjusting it yet. You should be able to tell the difference between the "standard" adjustable type above and the clamp on this one:



Finally, if you have a quill stem and want to use threadless stems on it instead, you can get a quill to threadless adapter from Jenson and other vendors (you don't need that with you Sirrus, but if you had an older bike with a quill and wanted to convert it this is the ticket):

https://www.jensonusa.com/Dimension-Quill-Stem-Adaptor



That's about as comprehensive a guide to stems as I can make...

Cheers
TRJB