Anyone else buying a bike for the spring?

bbbrisco · Post by **bbbrisco** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:40 am

Fit is an interesting issue. I've read a lot of info on it on the web, and still feel no where near competent to size my own bike. But everyone seems to agree that correct fit is vital. I was surprised in that I'm 5'10" so I thought I'd be bog standard, but when trying out some 19" frames with similar geometry to the KHS they were almost too big (only 1" or so stand-over clearance). The KHS only comes in 17", 19", 21" and 23" sizes, whereas similar bikes like the Surly LHT have 2cm differences, so in the end we went with the 19" and my LBS guaranteed that if it wasn't comfortable they'd replace it with a 17" no questions asked. If I end up using their smallest frame at 5'10" I have no idea what a 5'2" dude would ride for the KHS TR-101.
So far the fitting is a bit of a laugh, just standing over various frames, so I'm not sure if my LBS is phoning it in or whether the real magic comes in adjusting bar stems and seats. Perhaps the fitting is simpler in that my chosen bikes has large gaps between sizes, and perhaps it'd be fussier if I was buying a brand with 2cm gaps.
As far as frames, you have choices of steel, aluminum and carbon. Steel is comfortable but heavy, and can be welded by any schmo with a torch if something cracks or breaks off. The other two are much lighter, but aluminum I've heard gives a stiffer ride, so people were recommending against it for long trips. My LBS guy seemed to be recommending aluminum with a carbon fork (for comfort) but I wanted to stick to steel for my first bike.
Two things that really helped me were the previous thread on groupsets recommended by Jacob, and the book Effective Cycling. Great book.

hickchick · Post by **hickchick** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:46 am

Shortly after posting this I found a used Cannondale hybrid on craigslist. Sorry, no pics. I think I might have waited too long though. By the time I bought it I had passed the tipping point from anticipation into impatience.
Ah well, if nothing else I'm sure I will make my gas money back on it shortly.

KevinW · Post by **KevinW** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:01 pm

@rePete

OK, we can throw BMX in there...then again maybe that's a variant of mountain bike?

@bbbrisco

Bike sizes are a mess. Usually the seat tube is measured, but different frame geometries will have very different relationships between seat tube lengths and standover heights. For example a 21" 1980s road bike with horizontal top tube will be a much smaller bike than a 21" comfort bike with a sharply angled top tube.
I'm a little skeptical that sizing is intentionally kept as a voodoo art in order to force people to patronize retail bike shops. If there was a standard sizing system, as in shoes, it would be a lot easier to buy everything online.
IMO the differences between frame materials are real but often overblown. Yes they feel a little different but it isn't night-and-day. Yes carbon is lighter but not that much. An aluminum Felt F75 weights 18.89 lb and a carbon F5 with similar hardware weighs 17.45 lb. In everyday use you wouldn't obsess about 1.44 lb of body weight, or carrying a water bottle which weighs about that much. The frame is only a small fraction of the total weight of a loaded bike and rider, so I think the focus on frame materials is a little misplaced.

SF · Post by SF » Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:18 pm

IMO the differences between frame materials are real but often overblown.

Perhaps only noticeable by those with lots of time in the saddle. I believe I can feel the difference between a hardtail cross country bike with a carbon fiber frame vs aluminum vs steel. There's the weight difference, the vibration transfer, and the power transfer.
For me, the weight difference is a big deal. Sure my body weight might vary by more than 1.44 lbs depending if I ate an extra helping the night before. But the lighter bike responds better to the body english.
Now that I've taken us down this rat hole -

Disclaimer: I don't own a full carbon fiber bike and won't get one, due to the expense. Except for pro racing, and maybe even there, what matters most for performance is fitness and time in the saddle. This takes us back to ERE.

SF · Post by SF » Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:10 pm

@KevinW - These things depend on the lenses through which you see the world. But I don't agree with these poles, I see it as more of a spectrum. No one expects a 50lb downhill bike to work like 20lb cross country bike. But they are both in the mountain category. Cyclocross is a hybrid of mountain and road, yet if I could only own one bike for my daily travels it would probably be a CX bike* (see also rePete's post). I was originally going to recommend CX to bbbrisco, given that he/she wants to ride on paved and gravel roads (didn't because they are hard to find, come with drop bars). CX fits that pretty well. Sure, you could get a touring bike that comes close, but the handling would be all different, especially unloaded.
Just a note that swapping handlebars from drops to flats can be an experience. It could involve switching the brakes levers and calipers. And the new brakes might not stop/modulate as well as those the bike was designed for, especially if you talking about changing from side pull to V or cantilever. Many new road bikes come with brifters now, which would mean having to change the shifting mechanism too.
Personally, I vastly prefer cross country mountain components over road components, for the durability. But by now you know my set of lenses.

* a hardtail cross country mountain bike with slicks would be a really close competitor, depending on local road and trail conditions.

BeyondtheWrap · Post by **BeyondtheWrap** » Mon May 09, 2011 11:46 pm

So, do you people wear a helmet when you ride?
I personally grew up never using a helmet, but common wisdom seems to consider it a necessity when you ride. Thoughts?

Post by **jacob** » Mon May 09, 2011 11:50 pm

I wear a helmet when I go on my road bike. I don't wear a helmet for sub 15mph speeds.

S · Post by S » Tue May 10, 2011 12:19 am

Yes, in unfamiliar places, when going fast or far, and when riding with other people. No, when I'm on roads I know to be reasonably safe and I'll be going a relaxed pace. Following these rules meant I was wearing my helmet in the only two serious crashes I've had which resulted in broken bones and could have also been concussions had I not been wearing it.

dragoncar · Post by **dragoncar** » Tue May 10, 2011 12:33 am

It doesn't matter how fast you are going when a car hits you, right?
I'm trying to cycle more right now (starting from scratch), and am wondering what kind of injury rate I can expect at various speeds. At some point, I think the benefits of cycling are curtailed by the risk of injury. Any ideas where this cutoff is?

Post by **jacob** » Tue May 10, 2011 12:49 am

@dragoncar - http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm

dragoncar · Post by **dragoncar** » Tue May 10, 2011 1:10 am

Thanks, I think the numbers are a bit skewed by the fact that cycling is more dangerous in areas where it is most useful for ERE (dense urban). The injuries per mile supports my anecdotal experience (many cycling injuries in SF compared to auto injuries, but maybe I have reckless acquaintances).

Post by **jacob** » Tue May 10, 2011 1:30 am

The stats are also skewed by cyclists who think stop signs and red lights are just a suggestion.

mikeBOS · Post by **mikeBOS** » Tue May 10, 2011 6:28 am

Wikipedia has a pretty good article on helmet use. The discussion page is full of informative debate on the issue as well.
If I were gonna race or do intense downhill mountain biking, I'd wear a helmet. But for casual transportation, I'm firmly in the no-helmet camp.

Freedom_2018 · Post by **Freedom_2018** » Tue May 10, 2011 7:37 pm

I'm used to wearing a helmet at all times (bicycle and motorcycle). It is mostly to protect the pavement in case I have a fall

I remember though that as kids, we never wore helmets and indulged in far more tom foolery then...wouldn't have the courage to do most of that stuff now...we all survived.
A side benefit of wearing a helmet to me is that it keeps the sun from burning my scalp (follicularly challenged) and on cold days, keeps my head warm.
I think this guy said it best! :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6zj5nhASk0

SF · Post by SF » Fri May 20, 2011 3:13 am

I can't resist this controversial little diversion from the OT.
I know the stats on how beneficial helmets are can be sliced both ways. And I realize that the plural of anecdote is not data. But having watched a number of riders do endos (including myself - both on and off road) over the bars, I wear a dorky looking brain bucket - off-road or not. Based on my experiences, I figure either the anti-helmet stats are fudged (although why?) or my experience is in the tail of the bell curve. See also Conditional Risk.
However, I can see the point of not wearing one for slow speeds, with wide tires, on a path away from motorized traffic.

dragoncar · Post by **dragoncar** » Fri May 20, 2011 7:06 am

Well, that anti-helmet stats aren't really anti-helmet stats. They are anti-helmet LAW stats. I don't think anyone disputes that you are safer wearing a helmet, just whether the difference makes sense compared to the other risks in life. For my part, I already own a helmet and keep it on the seat. So there's really no reason not to wear it.

Arrrrrgh · Post by **Arrrrrgh** » Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:05 pm

I'm doing the bike thing. 32-34 mile round trip commute to work. Was lucky enough to get 3 bikes for free--all in various states of disrepair (mostly due to lack of use). They are the Wal-Mart variety mountain bikes. Best bikes ever? Far from it, however, they were free and I'm making them work. $120 in parts, tools, repair supplies, return favor from brother-in-law, accessories and I'm rolling w/ 3 bikes. Need to upgrade saddle on one--just plain painful to ride. Have big comfy saddles on the other two bikes.

My commute takes anywhere from 1.5 hours to 2 hours. Just started this week.

C40 · Post by **C40** » Sun Jun 12, 2011 2:34 am

@Arrrgh -- might want to hold off for a while on replacing the saddle. If you're riding that much, then after a while, "big and comfy" might not be anywhere as near as comfortable as a smaller saddle.

SF · Post by SF » Sun Jun 12, 2011 3:55 pm

Thirty-odd miles on a Wal-Mart mountain bike (heavy, suspended, and with knobby tires?) ought to get you quite ready for a "recovery weekend", especially at 17 mph.

My hat is off to you for doing this commute!

Arrrrrgh · Post by **Arrrrrgh** » Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:02 pm

@tmiller9909--2 of the 3 bikes already came w/ big & comfy saddles. I just swapped one of 'em to bike w/ the "regular" saddle. At least in the immediate short term, the large saddle has made a world of difference.
@SF--in rehabbing one of the bikes, got a road tire on the front of one, else, just like you said, knobby tires all around, suspended. Thank you for being so generous with the mph! I think my pace is a bit more leisurely--will have to get a bike computer to find out for sure.