Bike for Obese Rider



G

George

Guest
Hi all,

I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
(reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
brands/models or personal experience would be great.

Thanks
 
On 31 May 2004 20:15:03 -0700, [email protected]
(George) wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
>current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
>can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
>(reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
>brands/models or personal experience would be great.
>
>Thanks


Dear George,

It won't be just the bike. You'll likely be looking into a
saddle built to handle your weight.

If I were in your shoes, I'd listen politely to anyone who
replies and then find out what Chalo Colina has to say. He's
a huge man, has been riding all sorts of bicycles for years,
and would be well worth listening to about what might break
and what kind of saddles he's found comfortable.

Good luck,

Carl Fogel
 
You might want to look into a Greenspeed Recumbent Trike. They are very
comfortable and can custom make a heavy duty model that has a wider seat and
is designed for more weight. www.greenspeed.com.au

Recumbents give you the exercise, without the pain.
 
Tandem spec wheels ( deep section, at least 36 spokes) are a sensible
upgrade, otherwise, a hardtail MTB with a rigid fork.
Tom

--
Bruni Bicycles
"Where art meets science"
brunibicycles.com
410.426.3420
Jonathan Kaplan <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You might want to look into a Greenspeed Recumbent Trike. They are very
> comfortable and can custom make a heavy duty model that has a wider seat

and
> is designed for more weight. www.greenspeed.com.au
>
> Recumbents give you the exercise, without the pain.
>
>
 
"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi all,
>
> I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
> current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
> can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
> (reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
> brands/models or personal experience would be great.
>
> Thanks


Your best bet is to buy an entry level (ie., cheap) mountain bike from a
local bike shop and pay a little extra for a good set of wheels. 400 lbs is
not a problem. After all, tandems carry this much weight and more. You
should be on the road for less than $500.
 
I'm 325 pounds and I have a Cannondale Super v 500. I use a Bi-Saddle seat
and find it the most comfortable. I have not had a problem with the bike or
the saddle.

Regards,

Jim
"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi all,
>
> I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
> current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
> can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
> (reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
> brands/models or personal experience would be great.
>
> Thanks
 
>current weight of 382lbs.

Congratulations, George. I wish I had a recommendation on a bike for
you. I had GBP also at 415, and am now down to 195. I started riding a
Trek hybrid at about 250 pounds and had no trouble with it at all. I'm
currently riding a Trek 5200 road bike, and love it to pieces.

-- Jim F.
 
[email protected] (George) wrote:

> I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
> current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
> can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
> (reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
> brands/models or personal experience would be great.


I am in the 400 lb. class, give or take, and I've put a lot of miles
on a lot of bikes, as Carl pointed out.

You must decide whether you are going to ride a little, and you just
want a bike that will withstand a bit of easy cruising, or whether you
are going to rack up some serious or adventuresome miles and therefore
need a heavy-duty ride.

The first category of bike can be bought at any bike shop (from the
"comfort" or "mountain bike" categories), with some intelligent
upgrades to the saddle and wheels a cost-effective measure to increase
comfort and reduce maintenance. For the second type of bike, the
heavy-duty kind, you should have special tandem-type wheels
custom-built, and consider using a tubular welded cromoly steel crank.

36-spoke wheels (rather than 32-spoke) are a good idea, and should be
tensioned and stress-relieved by hand by an experienced wheelbuilder.
Trying to get by with the marginally built wheels that work OK for
most folk will have you returning to your bike dealer with annoying
frequency to have them "trued" (straightened). If you go so far as to
have custom wheels built, have the builder use 48-spoke hubs and rims
for the utmost in durability.

Try to find a bike that uses an ISIS or other tubular-axle crank, as
the ordinary square-taper type is apt to break if you get too athletic
with it. Worry about this when you buy, so you won't have to worry
about it every time you ride. Better yet would be to use a BMX-type
cromoly crank with an adapter spider. Here are examples:
http://www.danscomp.com/cgi-bin/hazel.cgi?action=DETAIL&item=451050
http://profileracing.com/loader.php?load=shop&productid=67

Narrow saddles have become the fashion for most bikes, and those which
come standard on bikes in the "comfort" category usually don't pass
muster under a lot of weight. One readily available exception is the
stock saddle from Electra:
<http://www.electrabike.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=EP&Category_Code=SE>
Although you may have to fool around with the springs to make them
stay put, the shell and padding are very intelligently designed and
well worth the effort to find. A local hardware or bolt supply can
furnish you with a stack of large-diameter rubber washers to
substitute for the coil springs for a hassle-free solution.

If you are willing to invest a chunk of money for the best big-guy
saddle available, the English-made Brooks B90/3 is it. Accept no
substitutes, as they say:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/saddles/brooks-b90-3.html

Be careful when buying a bike that is equipped with a suspension fork.
Although a suspension fork increases rider comfort, and saves the
front wheel and other parts from some of the beating they would
otherwise receive, not all of them can be tuned to work properly under
your weight. Be sure that the fork can be made to work for you before
you buy, or else just get a bike with a rigid steel fork.

Another issue to consider is frame size. You'll want to minimize
seatpost extension, to prevent bending. Also, you will need to limit
the amount of weight you carry on your hands, so you'll have to have
the bars somewhat above the level of the seat. Both these factors
will put you on a bigger frame than what most bikemongers will first
suggest. It's better to get a frame that's "too big" for you, and
substitute a shorter-than normal handlebar stem, than to cope with the
ramifications of a fashionably too-small frame. Find a bike with a
sloping top tube that's tall enough to give you just an inch or so of
crotch clearance. That will get your handlebars up where you need
them without resorting to long, flexible stems or weak high-rise bars.
Swap the stem for a shorty if the forward reach is too much--stems
come as short as 50mm these days, and shorter equals stiffer. If you
are much taller than average, you might be best served by a BMX
handlebar (7-8" tall and reinforced) and stem in place of the stock
items.

Many bike dealers are going to want to put you on a bike that has disc
brakes, because they have a reputation for increased stopping power
over rim brakes. My experience tells me that disc brakes have good
lever response, but that the best rim brakes will usually stop you
harder if you are a super-heavyweight. This matters if there are
steep hills where you live. Also, disc brake front wheels are dished,
making them quite a bit weaker than regular front wheels of similar
construction. Use linear-pull brakes with booster arches and high
quality pads if braking is important in your particular circumstances.

Kona's "Hoss" is built for big riders and priced reasonably:
http://konaworld.com/2k4bikes/2k4_hoss.cfm

The German manufacturer Schauff makes what is probably the best
off-the-shelf bike for a heavy rider ("weight allowance 200kg"), but
finding an importer could be a real problem:
<http://schauff.de/schauff2002.de/index.php?language=e&action=fahrrad&typ=XXL%2FXXS&jahr=2004&id=227>

Best of luck!

Chalo Colina
 
> Many bike dealers are going to want to put you on a bike that has disc
> brakes, because they have a reputation for increased stopping power
> over rim brakes. My experience tells me that disc brakes have good
> lever response, but that the best rim brakes will usually stop you
> harder if you are a super-heavyweight. This matters if there are



Hey Chalo,
I rode my MTB doing trials today in the rain, and as expected, my V-brakes
did absolutely nothing for me. I rode a while longer with the rotten
performance, and as I stopped on campus for a minute, I noticed some fine
clay mud nearby. Just for fun, I smeared some onto the rim surfaces front
and rear, and rode with SCEEERRRRKKKKKK the whole time, but noticed a
dramatic increase in braking power. I smeared more and more mud on the
rims, and the friction increase a little more.

The rain had stopped by now, and I had called my friend to come riding with
us. I wanted to show him my discovery, so I figured that I'd wash off the
rims in a local display fountain to get them to their crappy performance
from before. After washing off the mud and scraped-off brake pad material,
I expected the brakes not to work, but to my surprise, they worked just as
well as before. The big surprise came when the wheels and pads dried off -
they're comparable to my disc brakes! They may not be quite as linear and
therefore more grabby, but they definitely had more power than I needed.

My theory is that the sheen of deposited rubber on the rim and the glaze on
the pad had been scraped away by the fine-grit mud and thus allowed a clean
pad-rim interface.

So I apologize for my previous assertions of disc superiority and support
your claim that properly-adjusted *quality* rim brakes and pads are
sometimes comparable to disc brakes. The vast majority of rim brakes out
there, however, are total junk.

For reference, my setup is a 2003 Manitou Skareb (3.4 lbs... too light for
my taste) with Avid Single Digit 5 calipers, Avid Rim Wrangler pad holders,
Koolstop OEM black pads, Avid Speed Dial levers, and Salsa brake boosters.
I'm eager to try the salmon pads.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
 
"ZeeExSixAre" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Just for fun, I smeared some onto the rim surfaces front
> and rear, and rode with SCEEERRRRKKKKKK the whole time, but noticed a
> dramatic increase in braking power. I smeared more and more mud on the
> rims, and the friction increase a little more.

<snip>
> After washing off the mud and scraped-off brake pad material,
> I expected the brakes not to work, but to my surprise, they worked just as
> well as before. The big surprise came when the wheels and pads dried off -
> they're comparable to my disc brakes! They may not be quite as linear and
> therefore more grabby, but they definitely had more power than I needed.


Aye, that was the principle at work in the old WTB abrasive brake pads
that tore the rim sidewalls all to hell, but offered excellent
stopping.

I'll admit that there are a hundred things that can interfere with rim
brake stopping power, some of which can be fixed (pads, sidewall
finish), and some of which must be sorted out from the beginning
(rigid mounting). But if you nail them all, you wind up wondering why
anybody would need such aggressive braking!

I keep waiting for some missing factor that will yield more power from
my discs. Hard to reckon what it might be, though, since the
mounting is rigid as can be, and the braking surfaces seem
self-cleaning by comparison with a rim.

I will say this for discs-- the hotter they get, the better they seem
to work. I'm sure that trait has its limits, but my 8-inch Hayes
mechanical disc does not fade on my 350-foot plummet from home to
work.

Chalo Colina
 
On Mon, 31 May 2004 20:15:03 -0700, George wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I had a gastric bypass last July and have gone from 450lbs to my
> current weight of 382lbs. I am interested in buying a bike so that I
> can enjoy the warm weather and get some exercise. Are there any bikes
> (reasonably priced if possible) that can handle my weight? Specific
> brands/models or personal experience would be great.
>
> Thanks


Since the idea of "reasonably priced" varies greatly, I'll give my
cheapskate recommendation: Used aluminum or steel bike-store (rather
than discount store) mountain bike with 7 (preferred) or 8 speed gearing,
no suspension fork, and make sure the rear hub is spaced for a 135mm wheel
especially if it is an aluminum frame. If the wheels are 36 spoke, and
the rear is a cassette (rather than freewheel) have them re-tensioned by a
good wheelbuilder and ride. If they are 32 spoke, get a good 36 (or more)
spoke cassette rear wheel, preferably handbuilt with butted spokes from a
good wheelbuilder recommended here. Some work mailorder, and they aren't
that expensive. The front is probably fine at 32 spokes, but re-tensioning
is worth the minimal cost.

Keep the tires inflated to maximum pressure.

If you will be road riding, switch the tires to slicks
 
In article <[email protected]>, Chalo
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Try to find a bike that uses an ISIS or other tubular-axle crank, as
> the ordinary square-taper type is apt to break if you get too athletic
> with it. Worry about this when you buy, so you won't have to worry
> about it every time you ride. Better yet would be to use a BMX-type
> cromoly crank with an adapter spider. Here are examples:


<snip>

Chalo would you please elaborate on this point. Is the design of ISIS
(or Octalink) BBs intrinsically stronger than square taper BBs? Are the
square tapers the weak point in the assembly?

I've never had a (square taper steel) spindle fail yet - both cartridge
and cup and cone. But that in of itself is not an indication of a
design's superiority. And I'm 170 lbs. Yet, I've not found a compelling
reason to adopt the ISIS standard. Does your experience inform you
otherwise?

thanks
luke
 
Luke <[email protected]> wrote:
> Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Try to find a bike that uses an ISIS or other tubular-axle crank, as
> > the ordinary square-taper type is apt to break if you get too athletic
> > with it. Worry about this when you buy, so you won't have to worry
> > about it every time you ride. Better yet would be to use a BMX-type
> > cromoly crank with an adapter spider. Here are examples:

>
> <snip>
>
> Chalo would you please elaborate on this point. Is the design of ISIS
> (or Octalink) BBs intrinsically stronger than square taper BBs?


Generally, yes. There are ways in which a manufacturer could weaken
the basic ISIS design with stress-concentrating features, inferior
materials, or clumsy machining. An example:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/fsabb.html

All relevant factors equal, though, ISIS and Octalink are much
stronger than traditional square tapers simply by virtue of their
greater cross-sectional diameters. When strength is a critical issue,
the ISIS design leaves room to thicken the spindle's walls, where
there is no such space in the square taper design.

> Are the square tapers the weak point in the assembly?


With most current cranks, yes. Older cranks (e.g. Nuovo Record) or
unusually light cranks of conventional design (e.g. Topline) might be
apt to fail before a square taper spindle.

> I've never had a (square taper steel) spindle fail yet - both cartridge
> and cup and cone. But that in of itself is not an indication of a
> design's superiority. And I'm 170 lbs.


I have snapped off two square taper spindles under pedaling force
alone, without previous damage to the bikes that would help account
for the failures. One I broke when I weighed about 230 lbs, and the
other when I weighed about 270 pounds. Both exhibited a spiral
fracture originating from the root end corner of one of the flats.

Many riders who are much lighter than I was have had similar failures.

> Yet, I've not found a compelling
> reason to adopt the ISIS standard. Does your experience inform you
> otherwise?


If you have ridden lots and lots of miles for many years, and have
never broken a square taper crank spindle, then continuing to do so
should be fine. ISIS is meaningfully stronger and stiffer, though, if
either of those things are issues.

If my only options were to use square tapers or to use ISIS, I would
definitely use ISIS. My personal experiences with the system have
been mixed, however, with some chronic loosening of the crank arm
bolts compelling me to use other kinds of cranks instead. For the
modest amount of structural improvement ISIS offers, I was unwilling
to tolerate other tradeoffs.

I have found that I much prefer a pinch-clamped spline to a tapered
spline. Of major road/MTB component manufacturers, only Shimano offer
such a design, and I can buy far more trustworthy and appealing cranks
from the BMX market for half the price. I use mainly Primo Powerbite
cranks, but I have had excellent results from Bullseye cranks and
Redline Flight Group 2 cranks as well. Profile Racing cranks are
rugged and reliable, but they use a non-tapered interference fit (a
real PITA) instead of pinch bolts, and in my experience they suffer
from quality control issues.

All the BMX cranks I mentioned are available in at least 185mm lengths
(up to 222mm for Bullseye and Profile), which suits me well.

Chalo Colina
 
In article <[email protected]>, Chalo
<[email protected]> wrote:

<snip>

> If you have ridden lots and lots of miles for many years, and have
> never broken a square taper crank spindle, then continuing to do so
> should be fine. ISIS is meaningfully stronger and stiffer, though, if
> either of those things are issues.
>
> If my only options were to use square tapers or to use ISIS, I would
> definitely use ISIS. My personal experiences with the system have
> been mixed, however, with some chronic loosening of the crank arm
> bolts compelling me to use other kinds of cranks instead. For the
> modest amount of structural improvement ISIS offers, I was unwilling
> to tolerate other tradeoffs.
>
> I have found that I much prefer a pinch-clamped spline to a tapered
> spline. Of major road/MTB component manufacturers, only Shimano offer
> such a design, and I can buy far more trustworthy and appealing cranks
> from the BMX market for half the price. I use mainly Primo Powerbite
> cranks, but I have had excellent results from Bullseye cranks and
> Redline Flight Group 2 cranks as well. Profile Racing cranks are
> rugged and reliable, but they use a non-tapered interference fit (a
> real PITA) instead of pinch bolts, and in my experience they suffer
> from quality control issues.
>
> All the BMX cranks I mentioned are available in at least 185mm lengths
> (up to 222mm for Bullseye and Profile), which suits me well.
>
> Chalo Colina


Thanks for the insight Chalo. Once my crankset/BB meets it's end I'll
definitely consider your points and take a closer look at the other
options available.

I confess part of the attraction of the square taper standard is the
availability of cheap parts - for the moment anyway. Most
retailers/manufactures consider it yesterday's technology. It is of
course, but quite serviceable nonetheless.

The standard I'll avoid is Octalink. Consider my cynical, but it's just
Shimano's ploy to separate cash from the consumer and I'm convinced
that it'll be shortly phased out. The design seems to offer no
significant advantages - if any at all - over ISIS. The latest DuraAce
drivetrain incorporates some type of integrated BB and this cannot bode
well for Octalink.

thanks

luke
 
I broke my dura ace 7410 bb yesterday on a rail trail it was square taper from
1996 figure it had about 16,000 miles on it and i ma 230 pounds. It broke in
the middle of the taper square part.
 
Zeeexsixare wrote:
> > My theory is that the sheen of deposited rubber on the rim

> and the glaze on the pad had been scraped away by the fine- grit mud and
> thus allowed a clean pad-rim interface.
> So I apologize for my previous assertions of disc superiority and
> support your claim that properly-adjusted *quality* rim brakes and pads
> are sometimes comparable to disc brakes. The vast majority of rim brakes
> out there, however, are total junk.




Would anyone agree that well-maintained V-brakes can equal the
performance of a Mech Disc Brake, but not exceed performance of a Hydro
Disc Brake?



--
 
RE/
>Would anyone agree that well-maintained V-brakes can equal the
>performance of a Mech Disc Brake, but not exceed performance of a Hydro
>Disc Brake?


Somebody has to define "performance"...and I think there are different answers
depending...
--
PeteCresswell
 
Luke <[email protected]> wrote;

> The standard I'll avoid is Octalink. Consider my cynical, but it's just
> Shimano's ploy to separate cash from the consumer and I'm convinced
> that it'll be shortly phased out. The design seems to offer no
> significant advantages - if any at all - over ISIS. The latest DuraAce
> drivetrain incorporates some type of integrated BB and this cannot bode
> well for Octalink.


Octalink has had a single fatal flaw for its entire time on the
market. Jobst Brandt has addressed this shortcoming in detail, so I
will simply say that lacking either a taper or a pinch bolt on its
spline, it is subject to spline backlash that increases until either
the bolts loosen and the cranks fall off, or the crank spline becomes
stripped and can rotate on the spindle.

This is a serious shortcoming, and I believe the fact that Octalink is
being replaced by a pinch-bolted spline (an expensive and unimpressive
pinch-bolted spline at that) is because the Octalink design can't be
fixed through refinement.

Octalink spindles do not, to my knowledge, break off at the crank
interface like square tapers do, though. That's the one good thing
that can be said for them.

Chalo Colina
 
angotja <[email protected]> wrote
>
> Would anyone agree that well-maintained V-brakes can equal the
> performance of a Mech Disc Brake, but not exceed performance of a Hydro
> Disc Brake?


When all conditions are right, linear-pull brakes can provide more
braking than any bicycle discs of any kind. But that's a moot point
for most purposes. First, it's difficult to control all the factors
necessary for a linear pull-brake to provide such powerful braking,
and second, most riders can't possibly use so much braking torque--
they just go over the bars.

So when you limit the braking force in question to the amount that
will toss an average sized rider over the bars of an average bike,
then it becomes a matter of how little lever squeeze it takes to
deliver that much braking torque. _That_ is where hydraulic discs
excel-- not in absolute braking power. Hydraulic discs are easily set
up to return lots of braking force for a small force applied at the
lever.

When the issue is either maximum braking force or maximum sustained
braking power, rim brakes prevail. But that's a relatively esoteric
matter of interest mostly to tandemists and super-heavyweight riders.

Chalo Colina
 
Appreciated the info in your post but most of the links were no longer active. Also, any recommendations for pedals?
 

Similar threads