Considering a Road bike for commuting... good idea?

[Rick Onanian]

On 5 Aug 2003 05:47:24 -0700, mark freedman <[email protected]> wrote:
> touring bike for your recreational rides, but use a clunker for the 10Km ride to and from school.
> Anything valuable will tempt thieves.
>
> Unless you live in an unspoiled Eden.

Or, if you work at OneBeacon Insurance in Foxboro, MA, USA.

I had to go to their office today, and they've got: -- A nice revolving door into the lobby; -- A
couple security guys in the lobby, one of which sits behind a desk looking towards the front; --
Security monitors with cameras everywhere; -- A nice, quiet location in an industrial park, but not
visible from the street or neighboring buildings;

and most importantly -- A bike stand under a roof just outside the front door in full view of the
security guy without even having to turn his head.

Cool! I ought to get a job in a place like that.

> hth
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Mike Beauchamp]

Well, there's no use me spending all my money on a new road bike if I'm going to be so paranoid as
to leave it home all the time when I have to go somewhere...

Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com

"ant" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (mark freedman) wrote in message
>
> > theft is an issue when a bike is locked up for extended lengths of time. By all means, buy a
> > road bike or touring bike for your recreational rides, but use a clunker for the 10Km ride to
> > and from school. Anything valuable will tempt thieves.
>
> a good point, but remember that your 'clunker' only has to *look* like a clunker. if you have a
> friendly LBS, or spend a little time on rbmarket, or have a stock of parts, you can put together a
> beater, or fix up a yardsale special into a completely solid bike. just not so much a looker, and
> probably nothing youd want to run up and down stairs with.
>
> i have a couple really sweet looking bikes. i never lock them up anywhere ever. i also have a
> couple bikes assembled from odds and ends, that look like complete trash. but they're not.
> besides weighing a tad more because the components are not high end, i think id be hard pressed
> to rationally say the well-maintained beaters would get me anywhere any slower than the prissy
> racy bikes.
>
> one beater in particular withstood four years of hard daily bicycling, as well as being locked
> outside day and night in new haven, ct, which has about as high a rate of bicycle theft as any
> city, it would seem. great bike to ride, though.

 

[Boyd Speerschne]

"Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Hey all, I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to replace my nearly 8
> year old Mongoose IBOC Pro mountain bike. I used to use it mainy for offroad but a knee injury
> stopped that, and in the past few years I've used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and
> back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff like that).
>
> I'm just wondering if purchasing a road bike would be more appropriate than a mountain bike. I
> most certainly don't want to be one of those kids riding on the side of the road with a fully
> suspended downhill mountain bike with the seat all the way down bouncing up and down on each
> pedal stroke.
>
> I want something that can use my energy as efficiently as possible, and get me going as fast as
> possible. Like many commuters here I'm sure, it's definately more fun going nearly the speed of
> the cars instead of having them wizz past you. Is a road bike as fast as I think it is?
>
> In the past few years, I've added slicks to my mountain bike, etc. All in the name of a smoother
> and more efficient ride on pavement.
>
> Here's my concern. Obviously a road bike is going to be a more harsh ride, with the small tires
> and the high air pressure, etc. Are small bumps in the road going to be as bad as I think they
> are? Is that why I don't see too many people riding around the streets on nice road bikes?
>
> I'm going to go try a few road bikes out tomorrow, mainly for fun.. but I'm wondering what people
> think in here. Should I stick with a mountain bike? Another reason for wanting to get a road bike
> is that I can convert my mountain bike back to offroad and have two bicycles for whatever type of
> riding I want to do.
>
> Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com
>
>

One thing I can't believe no one has mentioned yet is that road handlebars are considerably safer
than MTB handlebars. Since they are narrower, you are *way* less likely to be clipped by a car while
riding on a road with little to no shoulder.

- Boyd S.

 

[Joe Potter]

Mike Beauchamp wrote:

> Well, there's no use me spending all my money on a new road bike if I'm going to be so paranoid as
> to leave it home all the time when I have to go somewhere...
>

I got a nice Nishiki road bike (say 1980?) for $30 US. The poor old girl could stand a paint job,
but for now it rides very nice. It is a touring bike with 15 gears; a lot of fun.

I got a 1990 Fuji for $41 US on ebay, but had to pay $30 for shipping. It is a real hoot to ride. I
had had trouble with the darn tires, but I have that sorted out. It looks like a couple of years old
--- not 13.

So, I am saying you need not just ride a beater in town. Get an older bike that you really like.
SURE, someday it will be stolen, but they all are if you live in the USA.

--
Regards, Joe

 

[Benjamin Lewis]

Mike Beauchamp wrote:

> Hey all, I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to replace my nearly 8
> year old Mongoose IBOC Pro mountain bike. I used to use it mainy for offroad but a knee injury
> stopped that, and in the past few years I've used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and
> back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff like that).
>
> I'm just wondering if purchasing a road bike would be more appropriate than a mountain bike. I
> most certainly don't want to be one of those kids riding on the side of the road with a fully
> suspended downhill mountain bike with the seat all the way down bouncing up and down on each
> pedal stroke.
>
> I want something that can use my energy as efficiently as possible, and get me going as fast as
> possible. Like many commuters here I'm sure, it's definately more fun going nearly the speed of
> the cars instead of having them wizz past you. Is a road bike as fast as I think it is?

Probably not; I find the difference in speed between my touring bike and my "beater bike", a MTB
with slick tires, to be fairly small, especially in the city. There is a difference though,
especially at higher speeds or in headwinds.

> Here's my concern. Obviously a road bike is going to be a more harsh ride, with the small
> tires and the high air pressure, etc. Are small bumps in the road going to be as bad as I
> think they are?

I've never found it to be an issue on paved roads, except for some "chip and seal" country roads.

> Is that why I don't see too many people riding around the streets on nice road bikes?

That's more to do with marketing and consumer misconceptions, in my opinion.

> I'm going to go try a few road bikes out tomorrow, mainly for fun.. but I'm wondering what people
> think in here. Should I stick with a mountain bike? Another reason for wanting to get a road bike
> is that I can convert my mountain bike back to offroad and have two bicycles for whatever type of
> riding I want to do.

If you're like me, you'll find that road bikes are much more enjoyable on roads than MTBs,
especially if you start going longer distances, where the added hand positions of the drop bars can
make a big difference to comfort.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
-- James Thurber

 

[Tanya Quinn]

[email protected] (mark freedman) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> > I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to replace
>
>
> > used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff like
> > that).
> >
> As I pointed out in Email, theft is an issue when a bike is locked up for extended lengths of
> time. By all means, buy a road bike or touring bike for your recreational rides, but use a
> clunker for the 10Km ride to and from school. Anything valuable will tempt thieves.
>
> Unless you live in an unspoiled Eden.

Lock your bike *really* well regardless of whether it is a clunker or an expensive bike or what it
looks like. Bike thieves are evil and often amateur thieves steal things that aren't valuable. I had
a crappy mountain bike that someone tried to steal by banging it against the porch it was locked to
(denting the frame) - someone scared them off. Later same crappy bike was locked to a different
porch (the frame only) Someone actually bothered to unbolt (it was not quick release) and steal the
front wheel - which after being stored outside in the snow for a while was very rusty.

 

[Benjamin Lewis]

mark freedman wrote:

> "Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
>> I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to replace
>
>
>> used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff
>> like that).
>>
> As I pointed out in Email, theft is an issue when a bike is locked up for extended lengths of
> time. By all means, buy a road bike or touring bike for your recreational rides, but use a clunker
> for the 10Km ride to and from school. Anything valuable will tempt thieves.
>
> Unless you live in an unspoiled Eden.

. . . or unless you have the luxury of being able to take it inside with you.

You can get used clunker road bikes as well, of course, which may be even less of a target to
thieves than mountain bikes.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
-- James Thurber

 

[Tom Sherman]

Peter Cole wrote:
>
> At typical speeds, the efficiency of a road bike comes from aerodynamics. You can get a similar
> position on any MTB, but the flat bar means you'll have to stay in it. Road bikes are
> significantly lighter, which helps a little in hilly country. The real problem with MTBs is that
> they're geared all wrong for road riding.

Most road bikes are geared too high for their riders. If the professional racers who can have an
average power output of 400 watts use nothing higher than a 53/11 top gear, then riders of lesser
ability will have no practical use for such high gears. Many would benefit from lower climbing
gears, but that would not be macho - they could no longer say, "I climbed such and such with a
39/22 gear".

Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)

 

[Lewdvig]

My suggestion would be to find a nice old steel bike with 130mm rear spacing and get some 8 or 9 spd
STI/Ergo going.

It can be cheaper than you think. Try eBay or your LBS.

"Lewdvig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Its faster and the roads are smoother than they look - at least they are here in Calgary.
>
> "Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Hey all, I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to
replace
> > my nearly 8 year old Mongoose IBOC Pro mountain bike. I used to use it
> mainy
> > for offroad but a knee injury stopped that, and in the past few years
I've
> > used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff like
> > that).
> >
> > I'm just wondering if purchasing a road bike would be more appropriate
> than
> > a mountain bike. I most certainly don't want to be one of those kids
> riding
> > on the side of the road with a fully suspended downhill mountain bike
with
> > the seat all the way down bouncing up and down on each pedal stroke.
> >
> > I want something that can use my energy as efficiently as possible, and
> get
> > me going as fast as possible. Like many commuters here I'm sure, it's definately more fun going
> > nearly the speed of the cars instead of having them wizz past you. Is a road bike as fast as I
> > think it is?
> >
> > In the past few years, I've added slicks to my mountain bike, etc. All
in
> > the name of a smoother and more efficient ride on pavement.
> >
> > Here's my concern. Obviously a road bike is going to be a more harsh
ride,
> > with the small tires and the high air pressure, etc. Are small bumps in
> the
> > road going to be as bad as I think they are? Is that why I don't see too many people riding
> > around the streets on nice road bikes?
> >
> > I'm going to go try a few road bikes out tomorrow, mainly for fun.. but
> I'm
> > wondering what people think in here. Should I stick with a mountain
bike?
> > Another reason for wanting to get a road bike is that I can convert my mountain bike back to
> > offroad and have two bicycles for whatever type of riding I want to do.
> >
> > Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com
> >
>

 

[Ant]

"Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Well, there's no use me spending all my money on a new road bike if I'm going to be so paranoid as
> to leave it home all the time when I have to go somewhere...
>
> Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com

then it sounds like building yourself a good bike that doesn't *look* good should work out. plus,
since youll expect to pay far less, you can feel good about upgrading a few bits and pieces. just
nothing shiny

a beater doesnt have to feel like a beater. in fact, 'beater' is a misleading term. ill call my
beaters 'city bikes' from now on. great bikes. they just dont look too tempting, and you can lock
them to a streetsign without fretting about he paint job.

dont keep cruising on your mtb if you feel the need for speed. buy yourslef an old used bike your
size, replace the tires, put some nice brakepads on, all set! insta-citybike.

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (ant) writes:

> a beater doesnt have to feel like a beater. in fact, 'beater' is a misleading term.

I hear ya.

A neglected bike is a beater at the moment we acquire it, but once it's been fixed up, I don't see
the point in insulting one's own handiwork by continuing to call it a 'beater'.

> ill call my beaters 'city bikes' from now on.

I like that. 'Runabout' might be nice, too. Right now my current main bike is an AFW (anti Fabrizio
weapon). It's armed with a milk crate, horn, handlebar mirror -- the whole fredly gamut.

If I didn't have so much work to do these days, I'd go park it out in front of the local VD clinic
(if it's still around), just to further erode the "image" of cyclists that Fabrizio is so
desparately trying to establish. Ain't I a stinker?

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca

 

[Werehatrack]

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 12:13:11 GMT, "Peter Cole" <[email protected]> may have said:

>
>"Werehatrack" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:02:12 -0400, "Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> may have said:
>>
>> >I'm just wondering if purchasing a road bike would be more appropriate than a mountain bike.
>>
>> Road bikes, largely due to their narrow tires, tend to inherently be more efficient. If the
>> posture doesn't bother you, and your roads are in reasonably good shape, a road bike is probably
>> a good replacement for the mtb.
>
>At typical speeds, the efficiency of a road bike comes from aerodynamics. You can get a similar
>position on any MTB, but the flat bar means you'll have to stay in it. Road bikes are significantly
>lighter, which helps a little in hilly country. The real problem with MTBs is that they're geared
>all wrong for road riding.

Rider positioning is, however, more a function of the rider, and not solely due to the bike
improving things. It's possible for an mtb rider to get tucked in well, but most don't. Similarly,
some road bike riders only fall into the drops infrequently, in which case the aerodynamic advantage
vanishes and it's just weight and rolling resistance left. If all that's being considered is the
bike, the aerodynamics are less of a consideration than the other two. I will support the idea that
the road bike *encourages* an aerodynamic position, but it can't *guarantee* one.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail. Yes, I have a killfile. If I
don't respond to something, it's also possible that I'm busy.

 

[Fabrizio Mazzol]

Tom Sherman wrote in message <[email protected]>...
>
> they could no longer say, "I climbed such and
such with a 39/22 gear".
>
Tom, you only need 39x21 on a road bike, there are only eight climbs in North America that
require a 23 cog.

Show up for a group ride with a 23 cog and guys like me will notice!

Anyway, no one ever climbs with a even number cog. You must use a 19 or 21.

 

[dane]

In rec.bicycles.misc Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Most road bikes are geared too high for their riders. If the professional racers who can have an
> average power output of 400 watts use nothing higher than a 53/11 top gear, then riders of lesser
> ability will have no practical use for such high gears. Many would benefit from lower climbing
> gears, but that would not be macho - they could no longer say, "I climbed such and such with a
> 39/22 gear".

I can't really agree with this. My top gear is a 52/12 and I use it every day when I ride to and fro
work. Every day. I don't quite hit my bottom gear every day (but close) with a 30/24. If I remember
correctly Tom, you live in a fairly flat section of the country, so I could see you not
needing/wanting as much of a top gear.

However in riding around Bellevue/Seattle I break 40 mph every day on my way to and from work. Sure,
I could coast down those hills a little slower instead of pumping, but why?

--
Dane Jackson - z u v e m b i @ u n i x b i g o t s . o r g When they took the Fourth Amendment, I
was quiet because I didn't deal drugs. When they took the Sixth Amendment, I was quiet because I was
innocent. When they took the Second Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't own a gun. Now they've
taken the First Amendment and I can't say anything.

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 22:34:14 -0500, Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Most road bikes are geared too high for their riders. If the

This can certainly be changed. That's what I did. Also, a road bike with a triple doesn't even need
any changes for most riders on most terrain.

> professional racers who can have an average power output of 400 watts use nothing higher than a
> 53/11 top gear, then riders of lesser ability will have no practical use for such high gears. Many
> would benefit from

Didn't you read the 12-25 vs. 12-27 thread?

> lower climbing gears, but that would not be macho - they could no longer say, "I climbed such and
> such with a 39/22 gear".

Just like a stem with a rise is not macho. I don't care, I've got one. Any elitist 140 pound
cyclist in a tight fitting jersey wants to fight a 210 pound roofer, is welcome to come and see my
stem and cassette.

Their SPD-R cleats won't damage my head as much as my SPD cleats will destroy theirs, too.

> Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
--
Rick Onanian

 

[James Cassatt]

I have used a road bike for comuting the past 10 years. I have gone from a Fuji to a 'dale R500 to
my new TREK 5200. There are limitations. First, I only commute 2 or 3 times a week and not in the
rain if I can avoid it. Second my round trip commite is 38 miles, so I decent bike is prefered.
Third, I carry in my clothes on the days I do not commute and carry work on a memory stick, so I
don't have to haul extra stuff. Fourth, I have a secrue sheltered place to lock my bike. Finally I
would note that although most of my route is on paved trails or city streets, there are places where
the ride is a bit rough. The change from the harsh 'dale to the more comfortable carbon fiber TREK
was welcome in this regard.

"Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Hey all, I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (Maybe $800 CDN total) to replace my nearly 8
> year old Mongoose IBOC Pro mountain bike. I used to use it mainy for offroad but a knee injury
> stopped that, and in the past few years I've used it purely for commuting (10K's to school and
> back, 30-40K rides on weekends, stuff like that).
>
> I'm just wondering if purchasing a road bike would be more appropriate than a mountain bike. I
> most certainly don't want to be one of those kids riding on the side of the road with a fully
> suspended downhill mountain bike with the seat all the way down bouncing up and down on each
> pedal stroke.
>
> I want something that can use my energy as efficiently as possible, and get me going as fast as
> possible. Like many commuters here I'm sure, it's definately more fun going nearly the speed of
> the cars instead of having them wizz past you. Is a road bike as fast as I think it is?
>
> In the past few years, I've added slicks to my mountain bike, etc. All in the name of a smoother
> and more efficient ride on pavement.
>
> Here's my concern. Obviously a road bike is going to be a more harsh ride, with the small tires
> and the high air pressure, etc. Are small bumps in the road going to be as bad as I think they
> are? Is that why I don't see too many people riding around the streets on nice road bikes?
>
> I'm going to go try a few road bikes out tomorrow, mainly for fun.. but I'm wondering what people
> think in here. Should I stick with a mountain bike? Another reason for wanting to get a road bike
> is that I can convert my mountain bike back to offroad and have two bicycles for whatever type of
> riding I want to do.
>
> Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com

 

[Review Boy]

This is a slight drift, due to this bicycle exceeding Mike's budget, but do any of you have opinions
regarding the Specialized Sequoia Sport? I hope this URL works for you: http://tinyurl.com/j607 It
would appear to be a great match for Mike's requirements, except for the price.

"Mike Beauchamp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hey all, I'm considering purchasing a new bicycle (...

 

[Corvus Corvax]

[email protected] (ant) wrote
>
> my commutermobile of choice: surly crosscheck, with 28c tires, and a front cross lever. burly,
> fast, comfortable, etc.

Right on, brother. Count me as another delighted Crosscheck owner. I've got mine set up as a
fixed-gear (74 gear inches) with inverted-tread tires (rated as 38c, actually measure as 34c). Rides
like a freight train, and goes anywhere, including dirt, with no worries. To my mind, it is the
perfect commuter bike: fast, comfortable, nearly indestructible, and extremely low-maintenance.

Way fun to ride, too.

CC

 

[Mike Latondress]

"Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Tom, you only need 39x21 on a road bike, there are only eight climbs in North America that require
> a 23 cog.
>

Name them.

 

[Wayne Pein]

>
> One thing I can't believe no one has mentioned yet is that road handlebars are considerably safer
> than MTB handlebars. Since they are narrower, you are *way* less likely to be clipped by a car
> while riding on a road with little to no shoulder.
>
> - Boyd S.

I ride both and I find this statement to not be true at all. If motor vehicles are close enough that
a few extra inches of handlebar width is the difference between getting hit or not, then you must be
either Superman or a nut case or both. I've certainly been passed very closely and very fast but
never that close. And over the years I've come to realize that how I position myself laterally has a
lot to do with how motorists pass me. If you teeter on the edge using as little lane as possible,
you are inviting motorists to pass, and sometimes they do it unsafely. Counterintuitively, if you
move further out into the lane than at first feels comfortable, overtaking motorists are induced
into being more cautious when passing. They tend to slow down and move over. Your lateral position
is critical in how you expect motorists to overtake.

Wayne