Big & Tall Rider ISO Bike

Big & Tall Rider ISO Bike

I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can recommend
any particular model or maker that might fit my needs due to size and height? My inseam is 34' and
most of my extra weight is in the stomach (hence wanting a bike to help reduce that) etc.

Riding would be on flat smooth surfaces (forest preserve type paths) nothing off road etc, I am
guessing I will be needing to go to a "REAL" bike shop not a Target or Kmart $79 Huffy special (due
to my size and height).

I was looking at a infomercial for a bike called the LAND RIDER and checked out their webpage, seems
like a decent concept yet I would almost prefer to RIDE one vs order, ride and return if I didn't
like it (any input on these bikes in general?) www.landrider.com Was looking at their Men's Deluxe
22" 6'4" and up $399.80

Just wondered if there were any other big and tall riders out there who could recommend a certain
brand or frame size for me, the style of bike I was looking at getting would be a cross between a
cruiser and a mountain bike but I am open, my budget would be $200-$600 price range.

Thanks

Bill steveperryfan2001 (at) yahoo.com

 

On Thu, 29 May 2003 16:07:36 +0000, FTLOSM wrote:

> I am guessing I will be needing to go to a "REAL" bike shop not a Target or Kmart $79 Huffy
> special (due to my size and height).

Good guess -- but this is true for anyone who really plans to ride the bike.
>
> I was looking at a infomercial for a bike called the LAND RIDER and checked out their webpage,
> seems like a decent concept

Many things seem better than they are. This is one. Cheap bike, with a very marginal shifting
gimmick to fix a problem no one has. Modern shifting is literally push-button, not something to
worry about.

You can do far better at a real shop.

yet I would almost prefer to
> RIDE one vs order, ride and return if I didn't like it (any input on these bikes in general?)
> www.landrider.com Was looking at their Men's Deluxe 22" 6'4" and up $399.80

These bikes have gotten terrible reviews. They are a scam. Besides, no 22" frame is big enough for
you. I ride a 23" frame, and I am 5' 11".

You will need to get a well-built bike to support your weight. You will need strong wheels and a
sturdy frame. Mail order is not appropriate. You also need to have the bike the right size, and that
is not a stand-over-the-bar thing.

> Just wondered if there were any other big and tall riders out there who could recommend a certain
> brand or frame size for me, the style of bike I was looking at getting would be a cross between a
> cruiser and a mountain bike but I am open, my budget would be $200-$600 price range.

There are bikes that will work for you.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster. --Greg LeMond _`\(,_ | (_)/ (_) |

 

"FTLOSM" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can
> recommend any particular model or maker that might fit my needs due to size and height? My
> inseam is 34' and most of my extra weight is in the stomach (hence wanting a bike to help reduce
> that) etc.

Man, you are in a tough spot unless you are committed enough to spend some serious effort or some
real money. I'm about your size, a little taller, but I've had a long hard road figuring out what
will work for
me. It cost me half a dozen front teeth, among other things.

Foremost I have learned that it does not pay to mess around with ordinary bikes that ordinary-sized
salesmen will tell you are plenty strong. Some folks in this very group might tell you the same, but
they would be wrong.

There are a few bikes out there that are built strong enough for you, but they won't be available in
appropriate sizes. And there are a few-- very few-- bikes out there that will be tall enough to
work, but most will not withstand your weight. I assume that at this stage of the game, you are not
certain enough about cycling to want to spend a couple thousand clams on a made-to-measure custom
job. So you are going to have to improvise.

Look for a 1980s or early '90s vintage mountain bike-- these used to be offered in 24" and 25" frame
sizes. One of those is what you want. You might only be able to use the frame, but that's the hard
part to find. Do what you have to to get one. The good news is that it will be relatively cheap, not
more than $100 for a nice specimen.

Heavy is good. Stay clear of any lightweight frame no matter the material.

Ditch the crank and bottom bracket or face the consequences. This is serious business! Ignore any
advice to the contrary coming from anyone less than 300 lbs! Get a BMX pinch-bolt crank for a
threaded bottom bracket shell; a good example is the Redline "Dual Slalom" crank any good bike shop
should be able to get for you. If you're buying other parts to build up your bike, this crank should
cost not more than about $160. If that number discourages you, save your teeth and find another
sport, 'cause you're not done yet.

To go with that crank, get some sturdy BMX pedals like those fitted on bikes for jumping. Cheap,
maybe $20.

You will need a long seatpost, but it must also be unusually strong. The cheap solution is the
Poverty Shaft cromoly seatpost that runs $13 from Dan's Competition mail-order. If it is not long
enough, or if you need an unavailable diameter, I recommend a Thomson seatpost ($60-$80), or else
turn your own from solid aluminum on the lathe.

At the outset you'll want to be sitting fairly upright, so get a BMX handlebar and compatible stem.
Such a handlebar will add 7 or 8 inches in height and allow you to adjust your reach by tilting the
bar forward or backwards somewhat. It will also be reinforced with a crossbar which is a safety
feature in your case.

The items I've already covered are the most important for your physical safety. There are others
which are more a matter of durability.

The wheels are your number one durability issue, and there are two different approaches you can take
to getting what you need. Either get wheels that are set up for tandem use, or get wheels that are
built for abusive riding (downhill racing or jumping). Either you will have wheels made of
relatively ordinary components and an unusual number of spokes (48), or you will have wheels with an
ordinary spoke count (32/36) and extraordinarily strong components. Figure suitable wheels will cost
$200 at least. Accept no gimmicks here-- no funny spokes, low spoke counts, "lighter yet stronger",
or carbon fiber anything. More is more; you already know this.

Use the fattest tires that will fit in your frame. You can't hydroplane a bike, so just get the
slickest tires you can find for maximum traction and wear life. Knobbies won't help you unless you
go riding in mud, and at your size I don't recommend that.

Cantilever brakes or linear-pull brakes ("V-brakes") should be adequate for your purposes. If you
don't get too picky about having lots of stopping power, you won't bend your forks from braking and
have to solve that problem. I do recommend the use of quality brake pads (Mathauser, Kool-Stop, or
Aztec) and brake booster reinforcing arches.

Feel free to contact me by email for any more information.

Chalo Colina

 

On Thu, 29 May 2003 16:07:36 GMT, "FTLOSM" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Big & Tall Rider ISO Bike
>
>
>I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can recommend
>any particular model or maker that might fit my needs due to size and height? My inseam is 34' and
>most of my extra weight is in the stomach (hence wanting a bike to help reduce that) etc.

As also big & tall, though slightly less so (if I convert correctly to & from metric, I'm about 6'4
and 280 lbs or so), on various bikes, the most critical thing is keeping your tires inflated to a
higher pressure than most can get away with, and rear wheel spoke breakage. If you get a factory
bike (of any kind, except perhaps the $2000+ handbuilt works of art), make sure you get a good bike
shop to retension your wheels. Factory built wheels are built with far too little tension,
especially for bigger people. The second thing, tire pressure: I'd not want to ride any really
narrow tires, and either way you *need* a *good* pump. Buy one when you buy the bike.

Oh, and the saddles with the metal springs at the rear might be a bit weak. I broke mine after only
a year or two, and replaced it with a no-brand model that uses a sort of cast-rubber ball instead of
metal springs, and haven't broken that one yet. You might also need a fairly wide one, cause if
you're that tall, your sitbones are gonna be farther apart than the 5-foot-nothing horse jockey
guy's are.

>Just wondered if there were any other big and tall riders out there who could recommend a certain
>brand or frame size for me, the style of bike I was looking at getting would be a cross between a
>cruiser and a mountain bike but I am open, my budget would be $200-$600 price range.

I'd try looking at second hand bikes, from a reputable bike shop that has a workshop attached,
preferably one you can see through the back door, which is nice and greasy and has racks & racks of
tools and parts on the wall. Tools should be dirty & greasy in preference to brand new and gleaming
& unused. There's no shame in the "new bikes" section being sparkly and clean, but if the entire
store is, odds are they're no more a bike shop than Walmart, and they just Sell Stuff.

Frame size, I usually do well for an old fashioned style of bike with a 61 cm frame, which
conveniently is pretty available here secondhand. If you need it, a longer saddlepost and handlebar
stem are fairly cheap. Various other styles of bikes, hybrid/MTB/touring etc. use different frame
geometry which means that an xx cm frame in one style corresponds to a yy cm frame in the other, and
different styles are in vogue in the US and Europe, near as I can tell, so it's hard to compare.

Probably the best thing you can do is find a good Local Bike Store (ask here and/or on .tech with
your location, maybe someone knows one, or ask around your friends &c), and when you walk in there,
they will know you're big & tall, unless they're blind, and can hook you up with the correct stuff,
or at least vaguely correct. Do ride the bike they're trying to sell you around a few blocks to see
how it fits. Any reputable bike shop will allow this.

Jasper

 

On Thu, 29 May 2003 17:50:48 -0400, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>These bikes have gotten terrible reviews. They are a scam. Besides, no 22" frame is big enough for
>you. I ride a 23" frame, and I am 5' 11".
>
>

David, The rest of your advice is spot on, but you ride a 23" @ 5'11"? What brand?

I'm 6'1" and ride a 22" Jamis MTB bike as a commuter, a 20.5" Giant off-road, a 59cm Litespeed road
bike, and a 58 cm Trek road bike.

What size road bike do you ride?

Barry

 

I am the one who started this thread (interested in finding a bike for a 6'7' 375lb guy), was
reading around online at various websites and reviews on bikes that interested me and the Trek
Navigator 400 looked like a candidate???

http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2003/citybike/navigator400.jsp

The XXL frame size on this bike is 21' however it's a totally different style bike (sit more upright
than leaning forward), my inseam is 32'-34' (more like a 33') depending on the brand of pants I buy,
I plan to go to the local bike shop and just see what they say and have in general but the style I
am looking for is a more upright riding position like a comfort bike etc, so the navigator 400
looked pretty interesting...

Any comments on this bike? I don't plan to go offroad or anything crazy, just around the forest
preserve paths locally, all smooth trails and nothing fast (I will be riding with my wife and little
girl) etc etc.

I wrote an email to Trek about that model asking if there is a weight limit for the frame etc but
haven't got a response yet, thanks so much for all the feedback I have been getting here it's nice
to get some input from folks who KNOW bikes...

Bill

 

On Fri, 30 May 2003 10:43:25 +0000, B a r r y B u r k e J r. wrote:

> On Thu, 29 May 2003 17:50:48 -0400, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>These bikes have gotten terrible reviews. They are a scam. Besides, no 22" frame is big enough for
>>you. I ride a 23" frame, and I am 5' 11".
>>
>>
>
> David, The rest of your advice is spot on, but you ride a 23" @ 5'11"? What brand?
>
> I'm 6'1" and ride a 22" Jamis MTB bike as a commuter, a 20.5" Giant off-road, a 59cm Litespeed
> road bike, and a 58 cm Trek road bike.
>
> What size road bike do you ride?

Oops -- I did a rough calculation from memory. I ride a 56cm road bike (Habanero), which as my
calculator just told me is a 22", not 23". You ride a 23" road bike. I believe my old road bike was
a bit larger, which is probably where that came from.

Of course, height is not sufficient to determine seat-tube length; I guess my legs are
proportionally longer than some people my height. There is also fashion in terms of bike size; these
days people tend to get smaller frame sizes than in the past, and raise the seat up higher.

Of course, compact frames and mountain bikes are a totally different game, but all in all it would
be a very oddly-proportioned 6'4" man who fit a 22" frame of any design. Since I have 5" or so of
seat post showing, you'd have to assume someone 6'4" would have nearly 10" of post exposed

--

David L. Johnson

__o | This is my religion. There is no need for temples; no need for _`\(,_ | complicated
philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our (_)/ (_) | temple. The philosophy is kindness.
--The Dalai Lama

 

On Fri, 30 May 2003 13:35:38 +0000, FTLOSM wrote:

> I am the one who started this thread (interested in finding a bike for a 6'7' 375lb guy), was
> reading around online at various websites and reviews on bikes that interested me and the Trek
> Navigator 400 looked like a candidate???

You really need to listen to Chalo (Bluto). He not only knows a thing or two about bikes, but he is
in your size class. He is highly critical of the advice us smaller guys give about this topic, and
with reason. We do not have the experience.

Another group with the kind of experience you need to seek out are those riding tandems. A tandem
team of averge-size people is about your weight, and no one would ride a tandem with wheels like
this bike you point out has.

Three critical areas of concern are (probably in order) 1) strength of the wheels, 2) strength of
the frame, and 3) the fork. A suspension fork on a $300 hybrid will not be adequate for you. I
(guessing here) would assume that unless you can find a tandem-specific suspension fork that will
fit the bike you want, you would be better off with a rigid steel fork. A cheap aluminum frame that
would not be stressed near its yield point with a 200 pound rider will be past it with you,
especially on a rough road or trail. Again, steel would have some extra capacity.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Let's not escape into mathematics. Let's stay with reality. -- _`\(,_ | Michael Crichton
(_)/ (_) |

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...

...

> Oops -- I did a rough calculation from memory. I ride a 56cm road bike (Habanero), which as my
> calculator just told me is a 22", not 23". You ride a 23" road bike. I believe my old road bike
> was a bit larger, which is probably where that came from.
>
> Of course, height is not sufficient to determine seat-tube length; I guess my legs are
> proportionally longer than some people my height. There is also fashion in terms of bike size;
> these days people tend to get smaller frame sizes than in the past, and raise the seat up higher.
>
> Of course, compact frames and mountain bikes are a totally different game, but all in all it would
> be a very oddly-proportioned 6'4" man who fit a 22" frame of any design. Since I have 5" or so of
> seat post showing, you'd have to assume someone 6'4" would have nearly 10" of post exposed

I would have guesses about 7 - 8" showing: less than half of the height difference in the legs, and
more than half in the upper body.

--
David Kerber An optimist says "Good morning, Lord." While a pessimist says "Good Lord,
it's morning".

Remove the ns_ from the address before e-mailing.

 

On Fri, 30 May 2003 12:00:22 -0400, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Three critical areas of concern are (probably in order) 1) strength of the wheels, 2) strength of
>the frame, and 3) the fork. A suspension fork on a $300 hybrid will not be adequate for you. I
>(guessing here) would assume that unless you can find a tandem-specific suspension fork that will
>fit the bike you want, you would be better off with a rigid steel fork. A cheap aluminum frame that
>would not be stressed near its yield point with a 200 pound rider will be past it with you,
>especially on a rough road or trail. Again, steel would have some extra capacity.

Like I said upthread, I'm not quite as heavy as Bill, but at least 3/4 of the way there, and I've
never had any issues riding steel un-fancy (as in no suspension) frames (in some cases for 5 years
of light to moderate commuting before they got stolen. Damn this country.). Obviously, this does not
mean someone heavier than me will not have any either, but it seems an indicator that oldfashioned
steel frames are pretty strong.

You have to be a bit careful standing up on pedals because you develop a huge amount of force when
you do, in some cases a bit more than the drivetrain can handle without skipping, and definitely
enough that wear will be an issue, both on the drivetrain, and rather more dangerously on the
cranks, pedals, and bottom bracket.

I *have* had problems with spoke breakage, saddle spring breakage (even that only after a few years,
and not a catastrophic failure), and tire pressure. Spoke breakage with a properly tensioned
36h/622/#15 wheel has been favorable, though, so.. Well, it would probably still be an issue, but in
cost versus convenience versus repair costs, I still think a standard 36h wheel (don't go for 32h..)
with a new spoke or two every so often will edge out 40 or 48h tandem wheels. That also depends on
the length of rides though -- if you still have to ride far (as in more than a mile or two) when the
spoke plings, you better have the skillz to put a repair spoke in trailside, rather than waiting for
returning to the bike store. This is a good skill for anyone to pick up, but it's more critical for
heavy loads on relatively light wheels. 26 inch wheels would be inherently stronger, but they are
generally speaking much smaller, thus requiring long saddleposts and stems, which can bend or break,
which is bad. When I took out the 6 inch chromed steel saddlepost from my old bike, I discovered it
was slightly bent, despite only having like 3.5 inches exposed.

Bill, if you were in the Netherlands, I'd tell you to go down to the nearest big city, visit the
bike storage associated with the main train station, and ask if they have secondhand bikes or if
they know who does, and spend $180 or less on a 61 cm (common, especially in older bikes -- 24 to
24.5 inch) frame Gazelle or Batavus bike: heavy steel frames, 35x622 or so wheels, sturmey archer
drum brakes & 3 geared hub, luggage rack on rear that you can carry a person on (perhaps not one
like yourself though, and you might (well, almost certainly would) overload the wheel), fenders to
keep surface water mostly from splashing onto you. Very practical bikes.

The non-derailler nature of those things helps with drivetrain wear (in the sense that I can't
remember *ever* encountering one that even needed a new chain (except for ones ridden without the
usual fully enclosed chaincases), let alone a new sprocket or chainwheel), Sturmey Archer gear hubs
are damn near indestructible, no matter how much you load them, ditto for the brakes (though I used
to wear out brake cables (inner) at the rate of one every few months, to try and stop the mass that
is me at a reasonable rate). You most likely wouldn't find one of those brands at your local
secondhand shop, but you might find an old Raleigh of similar specs. It should also be insanely
cheap compared to any (especially new) decent quality serious bike with lots of gears &c.

If you find that you like riding a lot, and want a more serious bike with more gears, and a better
size and fit, that one could remain a backup bike for if the new one breaks down for whatever
reason. Just make sure you always remember that it wasn't made for that kind of weight, and be
gentle with it. Don't try the zero to 30 in 10 seconds, or any significantly unsmooth surfaces at
significant speeds, and with what Bluto says about the bottom bracket, you might want to avoid
standing on the pedals at all.

I do know of one bike, though, that is actually designed for people like you and me, right from the
get-go. The german-made Schauff Sumo. http://www.schauff.de/schauff2002.de/index.php?language=e&act-
ion=fahrrad&typ=XXL%2FXXS&id=185&jahr=2003 or http://makeashorterlink.com/?O23E121C4 . It is
designed for people up to 200 kilos, which is 440 pounds. It even comes in up to a 70 centimeter
frame size. Uses tandem designed gear in certain critical places. The bad news? It's 2000 euros
recommended retail, or at current exchange rates about 2350 dollars, plus possibly importation costs
and what not.

P.S.: When I'm saying a sturdy old 3speed might do, for the money, I'm assuming very sedate riding,
especially for this group. This includes but is not limited to not standing on the pedals, not
accelerating too vigourously, and not going terribly fast (20, 25 kph -- 14-18 mph or so max).
That all will reduce wear on significant parts, as well as dangers inherent in losing a part
while riding. From what Bluto writes, it looks like he's approaching it from the other side --
if you want to do all the radical stuff that bikes are only barely designed for at normal
weight riders, you will need some serious gear to do it safely.

I would especially appreciate a reply from Bluto on these points.

Jasper "Wow, that's a lot of text" Janssen

 

"FTLOSM" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am the one who started this thread (interested in finding a bike for a 6'7' 375lb guy), was
> reading around online at various websites and reviews on bikes that interested me and the Trek
> Navigator 400 looked like a candidate???
>
> http://www.trekbikes.com/bikes/2003/citybike/navigator400.jsp
>
> Any comments on this bike? I don't plan to go offroad or anything crazy, just around the forest
> preserve paths locally, all smooth trails and nothing fast (I will be riding with my wife and
> little girl) etc etc.

The suspension components will be a problem. You will bottom them out routinely, making them
effective "anti-comfort" features. A bike with a rigid fork and post would be better. Avoid any
suspension fork that doesn't have "air assist" (so that you can pump it up as stiff as necessary).

The rear wheel will fail quickly unless it just doesn't see much use. Not a huge deal; you just have
it rebuilt when it fails.

Adjustable handlebar stems like this bike has are not for you either, sorry to say. They are not as
strong as a solid stem, and they trade off between height and extension. You need both height and
extension, hence my recommendation of a BMX bar. One could be fitted to the bike you suggest, but it
would require replacing the stem too.

The crank is of a type which will cause you grief if you pedal out of the saddle over a long enough
period of time. You could make a pact with yourself to keep your butt planted on the saddle at all
times, or you could replace the crank. That raises the effective price somewhat.

In the same price category you could get a bike like the Kona Scab
http://www.konaworld.com/2k3/2k3_scab.cfm , or the discontinued Trek Bruiser One, which would be
plenty strong but just doesn't come in an appropriate tall size. But you would be better off
sticking a BMX bar and custom-made seatpost on a bike like that, though, than trying to get by with
a bike that will fail to cope with the strain.

I still think the best idea would be to bag a bike like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3610417757 Then swap the crank for something
safe, and replace the wheels with stronger ones when they crap out.

Chalo Colina

 

Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Like I said upthread, I'm not quite as heavy as Bill, but at least 3/4 of the way there, and I've
> never had any issues riding steel un-fancy (as in no suspension) frames (in some cases for 5 years
> of light to moderate commuting before they got stolen. Damn this country.). Obviously, this does
> not mean someone heavier than me will not have any either, but it seems an indicator that
> oldfashioned steel frames are pretty strong.

Sometimes very strong. Even with weak-looking small tube diameters, older frames often contain
plenty of steel to support any single rider. I have an old '70s Schwinn touring frame which I have
converted into a chopper. It has given me many reliable miles under my 165kg even with a long
seatpost (250mm exposed) and the added strain of a 64cm fork!

> You have to be a bit careful standing up on pedals because you develop a huge amount of force
> when you do, in some cases a bit more than the drivetrain can handle without skipping, and
> definitely enough that wear will be an issue, both on the drivetrain, and rather more dangerously
> on the cranks, pedals, and bottom bracket.

I have avoided drivetrain problems by using big rings with big sprockets e.g. 47t/14-38 or 44t/13-32
rather than the "compact" sizes that have come into use.

I cannot overemphasize how inadequate I feel the square taper crank is for heavy riders. I have
broken two of them and I feel fortunate that it was only two. If for whatever reason I felt comelled
to use a square taper crank again, I would certainly use the nutted type as its taper contains a
much larger cross-sectional area.

Tubular spindle cranks like Bullseye and ISIS are much more confidence-inspiring, and 19-22mm solid
splined spindles like Profile, Primo, or Redline seem comparatively unbreakable.

> I *have* had problems with spoke breakage, saddle spring breakage (even that only after a few
> years, and not a catastrophic failure), and tire pressure. Spoke breakage with a properly
> tensioned 36h/622/#15 wheel has been favorable, though, so.. Well, it would probably still be an
> issue, but in cost versus convenience versus repair costs, I still think a standard 36h wheel
> (don't go for 32h..) with a new spoke or two every so often will edge out 40 or 48h tandem wheels.

I suppose a 36 spoke 700c wheel could be built to support a 400lb rider, but it would take an
uncommonly strong rim for that size-- perhaps the Sun Rhyno Lite would suffice. That rim is
unsuitable for many 700c tires though, due to its width.

For a heavy rider I believe 26" wheels are the best option, and the choice of strong rims in that
size makes reliable 36 spoke wheels a possibility. For my part, I have a wheelset built on 700g Sun
Mammoth rims that has proven reliable with 32 spokes in the front and 36 in the rear. The rear
features a gearhub though, and is of dishless construction.

> 26 inch wheels would be inherently stronger, but they are generally speaking much smaller, thus
> requiring long saddleposts and stems, which can bend or break, which is bad.

A 559-60 tire is the same outside diameter as a 622-28. The diametral wheel clearance built into a
mountain bike is about the same as that of a road bike. The chief difference is that MTBs are
designed for more standover clearance and therefore require a longer seatpost.

I have been making special seatposts for longer than I have been making any other bike parts.

> Bill, if you were in the Netherlands, I'd tell you to go down to the nearest big city (...) and
> spend $180 or less on a 61 cm (common, especially in older bikes -- 24 to 24.5 inch) frame Gazelle
> or Batavus bike

Good idea. I got my sister a Gazelle bike which was so heavily built that I would have had no
hesitation to ride it myself. Dishless wheels, wide and heavy steel rims, 38mm tires, effective drum
brakes-- all good for a big rider.

> Just make sure you always remember that it wasn't made for that kind of weight, and be gentle with
> it. Don't try the zero to 30 in 10 seconds, or any significantly unsmooth surfaces at significant
> speeds, and with what Bluto says about the bottom bracket, you might want to avoid standing on the
> pedals at all.

This is the heart of the issue. If the OP chooses to ride like a sedate little granny, he may be
able to get trouble-free service from any sort of bike. But to do so is in effect betting against
oneself; it's starting with the assumption that one will not become so interested as to want to ride
long and hard!

Chalo Colina

 

On 30 May 2003 19:27:10 -0700, [email protected] (Bluto) wrote:
>Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

>I have avoided drivetrain problems by using big rings with big sprockets e.g. 47t/14-38 or
>44t/13-32 rather than the "compact" sizes that have come into use.
>
>I cannot overemphasize how inadequate I feel the square taper crank is for heavy riders. I have
>broken two of them and I feel fortunate that it was only two. If for whatever reason I felt
>comelled to use a

Did you break the cranks around the square hole, or the bottom bracket axle? Most cranks seem fairly
strong at that point, but BB axles seem relatively flimsy, even though they're generally made out of
strong stainless steel. Especially with the bolt usually only going in partway, and the axle in most
pictures I've seen shearing off at that point.

>Tubular spindle cranks like Bullseye and ISIS are much more

ISIS isn't always good, a google turned up this: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/fsabb.html . I do like
the idea, though. Open Standards can't be anything but good.

>confidence-inspiring, and 19-22mm solid splined spindles like Profile, Primo, or Redline seem
>comparatively unbreakable.

I can't easily find pictures of all of those, but some of them (the last three, particularly) seem
to have a chainring attachment consisting of only one bolt, which is presumably some kind of BMX
thing? For comfortable road riding, I'd like to have at least a double and preferably a triple, I'm
not sure if that's possible with those. But how about the newer Shimano splined BB/cranks and
similar? (though those apparently have their own set of problems)
>
>I suppose a 36 spoke 700c wheel could be built to support a 400lb rider, but it would take an
>uncommonly strong rim for that size-- perhaps the Sun Rhyno Lite would suffice. That rim is
>unsuitable for many 700c tires though, due to its width.

700c is a 622 mm wheel, right? 700 what is that, anyway? 700 mm outside diameter including tire?

>> 26 inch wheels would be inherently stronger, but they are generally speaking much smaller, thus
>> requiring long saddleposts and stems, which can bend or break, which is bad.
>
>A 559-60 tire is the same outside diameter as a 622-28. The diametral wheel clearance built into a
>mountain bike is about the same as that of a road bike. The chief difference is that MTBs are
>designed for more standover clearance and therefore require a longer seatpost.

Ah, OK. I see. I was thinking of completely different 26" wheels..

>Good idea. I got my sister a Gazelle bike which was so heavily built that I would have had no
>hesitation to ride it myself. Dishless wheels, wide and heavy steel rims, 38mm tires, effective
>drum brakes-- all good for a big rider.

Yup. And they're as common as dirt around here, them and other similar manufacturers. I believe we
have a little more bikes here than citizens (17 million versus 16, or so), and the vast majority of
them are of that design. I just bought a new one, Gazelle, built '85, slightly rusty from being
outside in the rain a lot, €142.50. Now considering whether I shouldn't have gotten a cottered
one, instead of a square-taper cotterless.

>> Just make sure you always remember that it wasn't made for that kind of weight, and be gentle
>> with it. Don't try the zero to 30 in 10 seconds, or any significantly unsmooth surfaces at
>> significant speeds, and with what Bluto says about the bottom bracket, you might want to avoid
>> standing on the pedals at all.
>
>This is the heart of the issue. If the OP chooses to ride like a sedate little granny, he may be
>able to get trouble-free service from any sort of bike. But to do so is in effect betting against
>oneself; it's starting with the assumption that one will not become so interested as to want to
>ride long and hard!

Well, that's one way of looking at it. Personally, especially when I'm not sure yet whether I'm
going to enjoy an activity enough to want top-notch gear (and the dremel isn't going to languish in
the cellar, or whatever..), I try to buy a cheap clone or secondhand one first. If I use it enough
to wear it out, I know I need to buy a good one. Also means that beginner mistakes go on the
cheapie, rather than the expensive one.

For bicycles, the principles need to be adapted a bit, because of obvious safety issues, but I don't
think it's a good idea to tell the guy he needs to spend a thousand bucks before he can even think
about riding. Besides, he mentions he wants to ride Sunday afternoons with his kid.. that's not
gonna be terribly arduous riding in any case.

Jasper

 

On 30 May 2003 15:14:27 -0700, [email protected] (Bluto) wrote:

>I still think the best idea would be to bag a bike like this:
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3610417757 Then swap the crank for something
>safe, and replace the wheels with stronger ones when they crap out.

Ooh. That is a nice big bike. Now where do I find one of those on this side of the Atlantic..

Jasper (Shipping probably 2-300 bucks, aka not worth it.)

 

Bill wrote:

> I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can
> recommend any particular model or maker that might fit my needs due to size and height? My
> inseam is 34' and most of my extra weight is in the stomach (hence wanting a bike to help reduce
> that) etc....

There's a guy in Fremont OH about your size. Name's Dave. It should be easy to find him via the
online presence of the local shop or club. And what's the name of that former RAAM racer who's
now in the custom frame biz? Leonard Nitz? Might be a NG of his customers where they sell old
frames/bikes. (We've got one for Counter/Viewpoint tandems, anyway.) Also try alt.support.tall,
my "little" brother's favorite NG. HTH --Karen M.

 

In article <[email protected]>, Karen M.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Bill wrote:
>
>> I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can
>> recommend any particular model or maker that might fit my needs due to size and height? My inseam
>> is 34' and most of my extra weight is in the stomach (hence wanting a bike to help reduce that)
>> etc....
>
> There's a guy in Fremont OH about your size. Name's Dave. It should be easy to find him via the
> online presence of the local shop or club. And what's the name of that former RAAM racer who's
> now in the custom frame biz? Leonard Nitz?

I think you're thinking of http://www.zinncycles.com/

I think the original poster was imagining something less expensive than a Zinn.

 

Yeah those do look awesome but I was hoping to stay within a budget of aprox $500 give or take a few
extra if needed,

Thanks again for all the replies I have been reading them all,

Bill "Paul Southworth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:445Ca.35562$A%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Karen M.
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Bill wrote:
> >
> >> I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can
> >> recommend any particular model or maker that
might fit
> >> my needs due to size and height? My inseam is 34' and most of my extra weight is in the stomach
> >> (hence wanting a bike to help reduce that)
etc....
> >
> > There's a guy in Fremont OH about your size. Name's Dave. It should be easy to find him via
> > the online presence of the local shop or club. And what's the name of that former RAAM racer
> > who's now in the custom frame biz? Leonard Nitz?
>
> I think you're thinking of http://www.zinncycles.com/
>
> I think the original poster was imagining something less expensive than a Zinn.

 

go to ebay.com put in item # 2176444383 28" wheels (canadian or english?) are bigger than
american wheels

maybe you can find a bike with 28" wheels

"FTLOSM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Big & Tall Rider ISO Bike
>
>
> I am looking at getting a bike but I am big and tall 6'7' 375 lbs & curious if anyone can
> recommend any particular model or maker that might
fit
> my needs due to size and height? My inseam is 34' and most of my extra weight is in the stomach
> (hence wanting a bike to help reduce that) etc.
>
> Riding would be on flat smooth surfaces (forest preserve type paths)
nothing
> off road etc, I am guessing I will be needing to go to a "REAL" bike shop not a Target or Kmart
> $79 Huffy special (due to my size and height).
>
> I was looking at a infomercial for a bike called the LAND RIDER and
checked
> out their webpage, seems like a decent concept yet I would almost prefer
to
> RIDE one vs order, ride and return if I didn't like it (any input on these bikes in general?)
> www.landrider.com Was looking at their Men's Deluxe 22" 6'4" and up $399.80
>
>
>
> Just wondered if there were any other big and tall riders out there who could recommend a certain
> brand or frame size for me, the style of bike I was looking at getting would be a cross between a
> cruiser and a mountain bike but I am open, my budget would be $200-$600 price range.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bill steveperryfan2001 (at) yahoo.com

 

Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Did you break the cranks around the square hole, or the bottom bracket axle? Most cranks seem
> fairly strong at that point, but BB axles seem relatively flimsy, even though they're generally
> made out of strong stainless steel. Especially with the bolt usually only going in partway, and
> the axle in most pictures I've seen shearing off at that point.

I broke two spindles under pedaling loads only, with the fracture emanating from the root end of the
taper flats. Both the spindles in question were drilled for 8mm crank bolts, and the cross-sectional
area at the break was disturbingly small.

> ISIS isn't always good, a google turned up this: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/fsabb.html . I do
> like the idea, though. Open Standards can't be anything but good.

FSA have revised their design, with a pressed-on ring providing the positive stop feature. In my
experience with ISIS cranks, the only problem I encountered was loosening of the left crank. I no
longer use ISIS cranks, though I don't have any problems with them in principle.

> I can't easily find pictures of all of those [Profile, Primo, Redline cranks] but some of them
> (the last three, particularly) seem to have a chainring attachment consisting of only one bolt,
> which is presumably some kind of BMX thing? For comfortable road riding, I'd like to have at least
> a double and preferably a triple, I'm not sure if that's possible with those.

BMX cranks are heir to the one-piece-crank method of chainring attachment, meaning that the
"chainwheel" or spider is sandwiched at the spindle and driven by a single pin or bolt located about
32mm off center.

Double or triple spiders can be obtained which use this method of attachment:
http://shop.airbomb.com/site/intro.cfm?PageID=37&SKU=CR7013

> 700c is a 622 mm wheel, right?

Yes. It's the French term now in general use in the USA.

> 700 what is that, anyway? 700 mm outside diameter including tire?

The "c" size at one time implied the original ~40mm wide tire which would give the wheel a 700mm
diameter. The 622mm rim diameter has prevailed and now fits a large variety of tires from 18mm to
60mm wide.

> I don't think it's a good idea to tell the guy he needs to spend a thousand bucks before he can
> even think about riding. Besides, he mentions he wants to ride Sunday afternoons with his kid..
> that's not gonna be terribly arduous riding in any case.

True. But neither will it effect the weight loss the OP stated was his goal. I think the guy can get
set up for less than $300 if he starts with an appropriate secondhand bike.

Chalo Colina