London commute - Which single speed bike?



J

jh

Guest
Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
range.

I was considering the following, i've added comments from people i've
spoken to and from reviews off the net:

1) Specialized langster - 400
Good but the alu frame is suppossed ot be sore to use

2) Kona paddy wagon 2008 - 450
Good but are like hens teeth at the moment in my size (56cm)

3) Genesis Flyer 2008 - 500
Good, steel frame but again impossible to get in my size in london

I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
What are the groups opinions?


--

JohnH
 
jh wrote:
> Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
> looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
> short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
> across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
> range.
>
> I was considering the following, i've added comments from people i've
> spoken to and from reviews off the net:
>
> 1) Specialized langster - 400
> Good but the alu frame is suppossed ot be sore to use

That's a bit of a generalisation. Yes, aluminium might give a harsher
ride, but I doubt you'll notice it on a short commute. The tyre width
would probably make much more difference to comfort.

> 2) Kona paddy wagon 2008 - 450
> Good but are like hens teeth at the moment in my size (56cm)
>
> 3) Genesis Flyer 2008 - 500
> Good, steel frame but again impossible to get in my size in london
>
> I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
> knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
> What are the groups opinions?

Do you need clearance for mudguards or rack mounts? I think the Langster
and the Flyer are lacking in these, I don't know about the Kona.
Note that most 2008 bikes have only just been released, so a lot of
shops are probably lacking in stock right now.

A few other options to consider:
On-One il Pompino - its a rather nice bike, with a good steel frame, and
lots of clearance for mudguards or fat tyres. Though only available
direct, and it looks like they are mostly out of stock right now.
Specialized Tricross Single - also an alu frame, but with fatter tyres,
and mudguard clearance.
Genesis Skyline - like the Flyer, but with mudguards etc. I don't know
how widely available it is yet.
 
Craig Wallace wrote:
> jh wrote:
>> 1) Specialized langster - 400
>> Good but the alu frame is suppossed ot be sore to use
>>
>> 2) Kona paddy wagon 2008 - 450
>> Good but are like hens teeth at the moment in my size (56cm)
>>
>> 3) Genesis Flyer 2008 - 500
>> Good, steel frame but again impossible to get in my size in london
>
> A few other options to consider:
> On-One il Pompino - its a rather nice bike, with a good steel frame, and
> lots of clearance for mudguards or fat tyres. Though only available
> direct, and it looks like they are mostly out of stock right now.
> Specialized Tricross Single - also an alu frame, but with fatter tyres,
> and mudguard clearance.
> Genesis Skyline - like the Flyer, but with mudguards etc. I don't know
> how widely available it is yet.

Another one to consider ...

Pearson Touche - Alu frame with carbon forks. Tyres up to 28mm, 25 if
mudguards fitted. Steel inserts in track ends, holes for rack mounting.
Lots of options available. Price from 550. My favourite bike.

http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/index.html?action=97


--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts
 
On Oct 28, 2:04 pm, Craig Wallace <craigw84@fast_NOSPAM_mail.fm>
wrote:
> jh wrote:
> > Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
> > looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
> > short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
> > across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
> > range.
>
> > I was considering the following, i've added comments from people i've
> > spoken to and from reviews off the net:
>
> > 1) Specialized langster - 400
> > Good but the alu frame is suppossed ot be sore to use
>
> That's a bit of a generalisation. Yes, aluminium might give a harsher
> ride, but I doubt you'll notice it on a short commute. The tyre width
> would probably make much more difference to comfort.
>
> > 2) Kona paddy wagon 2008 - 450
> > Good but are like hens teeth at the moment in my size (56cm)
>
> > 3) Genesis Flyer 2008 - 500
> > Good, steel frame but again impossible to get in my size in london
>
> > I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
> > knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
> > What are the groups opinions?
>
> Do you need clearance for mudguards or rack mounts? I think the Langster
> and the Flyer are lacking in these, I don't know about the Kona.
> Note that most 2008 bikes have only just been released, so a lot of
> shops are probably lacking in stock right now.
>
> A few other options to consider:
> On-One il Pompino - its a rather nice bike, with a good steel frame, and
> lots of clearance for mudguards or fat tyres. Though only available
> direct, and it looks like they are mostly out of stock right now.
> Specialized Tricross Single - also an alu frame, but with fatter tyres,
> and mudguard clearance.
> Genesis Skyline - like the Flyer, but with mudguards etc. I don't know
> how widely available it is yet.

There's some Pompino Pros left -
http://www.on-one.co.uk/index.php?m...op=view_page&PAGE_id=187&MMN_position=278:278

Same bike but with a carbon fork..

I like On-One kit, it's good and reasonably priced compared to top end
kit. Just a shame their stuff is often out of stock.

Duncan
 
I have a 2007 rust-coloured Langster and it is a fine bike for the
money. I wouldn't go for one of the fancy City (London, Boston, New
York etc) ones that are out now as they would surely attract unwanted
attention but the rust one is under-stated enough. I have RaceBlades
fitted for the bad weather and ordinary Topeak Red and White lights
which are good enough for my commute into Brighton on lit roads. You
can pick up a 2007 Langster for 359 quid from Evans now.
The Kona is not my cup of tea...dunno why I just don't fancy it.
On - One Pompinos look good but are touch expensive for my money.
Shame they never seem to come up second-hand....probably a good sign
though.
But for you I think the previous suggestion of a Tricross Single is
valid. It comes well equipped and has rack and mudguard fixtures. In
my opinion the nicest looking of the lot too, one for the future,
perhaps, for me.
 
in message <[email protected]>, jh
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
> looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
> short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
> across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
> range.
>
> I was considering the following, i've added comments from people i've
> spoken to and from reviews off the net:
>
> 1) Specialized langster - 400
> Good but the alu frame is suppossed ot be sore to use
>
> 2) Kona paddy wagon 2008 - 450
> Good but are like hens teeth at the moment in my size (56cm)
>
> 3) Genesis Flyer 2008 - 500
> Good, steel frame but again impossible to get in my size in london
>
> I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
> knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
> What are the groups opinions?

The Langster seems be well liked by everyone who has one. However, single
speed is for serious cyclists only unless you're in a flat area. Are you
sure it's what you want?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> in message <[email protected]>, jh
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
> > looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
> > short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
> > across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
> > range.
> >
<snip>
> >
> > I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
> > knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
> > What are the groups opinions?
>
> The Langster seems be well liked by everyone who has one. However, single
> speed is for serious cyclists only unless you're in a flat area. Are you
> sure it's what you want?
>
London is quite flat, and where I am is flat as a pancake, I think
single speed is fine. I suppose my main reasons for single speed are
lightness, less maintenance and I want to try out the "fixed thing" see
what its like.

Is there room for clip on mudguards on a langster though? I will size
them up in a shop tomorrow.

--

JohnH
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I have a 2007 rust-coloured Langster and it is a fine bike for the
> money. I wouldn't go for one of the fancy City (London, Boston, New
> York etc) ones that are out now as they would surely attract unwanted
> attention but the rust one is under-stated enough. I have RaceBlades
> fitted for the bad weather and ordinary Topeak Red and White lights
> which are good enough for my commute into Brighton on lit roads. You
> can pick up a 2007 Langster for 359 quid from Evans now.

Thats good to know that there is room for mudguards.

<snip>
> But for you I think the previous suggestion of a Tricross Single is
> valid. It comes well equipped and has rack and mudguard fixtures. In
> my opinion the nicest looking of the lot too, one for the future,
> perhaps, for me.
>

I will check out the Tricross also, it ticks all the boxes it seems.
Thanks for mentioning it. Yeah the only bike I actually liked the colour
scheme on is the flyer, but the tricross looks ok in the pictures...

--

JohnH
 
jh wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> in message <[email protected]>, jh
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>>> Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
>>> looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
>>> short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
>>> across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
>>> range.
>>>
> <snip>
>>> I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
>>> knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
>>> What are the groups opinions?
>> The Langster seems be well liked by everyone who has one. However, single
>> speed is for serious cyclists only unless you're in a flat area. Are you
>> sure it's what you want?
>>
> London is quite flat, and where I am is flat as a pancake, I think
> single speed is fine. I suppose my main reasons for single speed are
> lightness, less maintenance and I want to try out the "fixed thing" see
> what its like.
>

Bikes are very sensitive to any slope and probably even more importantly
there is a lot of stopping and starting in London. Unless you are only
riding a couple of miles I would get gears. If you are only riding a
couple of miles I would get a cheap bike.


> Is there room for clip on mudguards on a langster though? I will size
> them up in a shop tomorrow.
>
 
On Oct 29, 9:42?am, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> jh wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >> in message <[email protected]>, jh
> >> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> >>> Im just getting back into cycling after years of public transport and
> >>> looking for a decent bike that suits my needs. It will be used for my
> >>> short commute from east london to the city (with occasional journeys
> >>> across london). Just wondering what bike to get in the 400-500 pounds
> >>> range.
>
> > <snip>
> >>> I'd prefer a steel framed bike, but due to the lack of them (nobody
> >>> knows when more will be in stock) i'm tempted to go for a langster.
> >>> What are the groups opinions?
> >> The Langster seems be well liked by everyone who has one. However, single
> >> speed is for serious cyclists only unless you're in a flat area. Are you
> >> sure it's what you want?
>
> > London is quite flat, and where I am is flat as a pancake, I think
> > single speed is fine. I suppose my main reasons for single speed are
> > lightness, less maintenance and I want to try out the "fixed thing" see
> > what its like.
>
> Bikes are very sensitive to any slope and probably even more importantly
> there is a lot of stopping and starting in London. Unless you are only
> riding a couple of miles I would get gears. If you are only riding a
> couple of miles I would get a cheap bike.
>
>
>
> > Is there room for clip on mudguards on a langster though? I will size
> > them up in a shop tomorrow.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Nick, in all fairness Bike Couriers favour a singlespeeder. They are
much easier to maintain and pretty fast to boot!
 
[email protected] wrote:

>
> Nick, in all fairness Bike Couriers favour a singlespeeder. They are
> much easier to maintain and pretty fast to boot!
>
I suspect that is fashion rather than utility.

Dérailleurs are not hard to maintain although they can get bashed, even
then it is only ~£14 odd quid to replace a sora rear mech.
 
On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Nick, in all fairness Bike Couriers favour a singlespeeder. They are
> > much easier to maintain and pretty fast to boot!
>
> I suspect that is fashion rather than utility.

Why is that then? Of all cyclists I would have thought couriers would
favour function over fashion!

> Dérailleurs are not hard to maintain although they can get bashed, even
> then it is only ~£14 odd quid to replace a sora rear mech.

Seems to me that derailleurs are good for hills but that hub gears
are better suited to the stop & start of a city commute.

A lightweight bike with a three (or maybe five?) speed would seem
ideal- low maintenance, quick off the mark etc... but most hub geared
bikes seem to be set up for comfort over performance.

I recall the the original Richards Bicycle Book had a photo of a
commuter bike set up like this in the 70s. Drop handlebars,
lightweight frameset, cotterless cranks...

Plus ca change.

Cheers,
W.

PS I commute on a fixie (Edinburgh and rural Perthshire), but I
wouldn't describe myself as a serious cyclist.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Nick, in all fairness Bike Couriers favour a singlespeeder. They are
>>> much easier to maintain and pretty fast to boot!
>> I suspect that is fashion rather than utility.
>
> Why is that then? Of all cyclists I would have thought couriers would
> favour function over fashion!
>

Why do I suspect fashion:

The upsurge of single speeds seems to be rather recent.

A lot of the couriers seem to be young and lifestyle/fashion conscious.

A lot of them don't have brakes either which I find astonishing. I
presume this is due to them being fixies, but even so I can't believe
that a set of brakes would hurt.

>> Dérailleurs are not hard to maintain although they can get bashed, even
>> then it is only ~£14 odd quid to replace a sora rear mech.
>
> Seems to me that derailleurs are good for hills but that hub gears
> are better suited to the stop & start of a city commute.
>

I always remember sturmey archer 3 speeds being a pain to adjust. I
haven't ridden a hub gear bike since the 70's so I don't know how they
have changed.

> A lightweight bike with a three (or maybe five?) speed would seem
> ideal- low maintenance, quick off the mark etc... but most hub geared
> bikes seem to be set up for comfort over performance.
>
> I recall the the original Richards Bicycle Book had a photo of a
> commuter bike set up like this in the 70s. Drop handlebars,
> lightweight frameset, cotterless cranks...
>
> Plus ca change.
>
> Cheers,
> W.
>
> PS I commute on a fixie (Edinburgh and rural Perthshire), but I
> wouldn't describe myself as a serious cyclist.
>

Why do you ride a fixie? I have no problems with dérailleurs and have
only adjusted them once in the last year (after a notable **** over ***
event).

Personally I hate mudguards because they are always bending out of
position and rubbing.
 
On 29 Oct, 13:56, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> [email protected] wrote:
>
> >>> Nick, in all fairness Bike Couriers favour a singlespeeder. They are
> >>> much easier to maintain and pretty fast to boot!
> >> I suspect that is fashion rather than utility.
>
> > Why is that then? Of all cyclists I would have thought couriers would
> > favour function over fashion!
>
> Why do I suspect fashion:
>
> The upsurge of single speeds seems to be rather recent.

Yes, I think that's a backlash against the mainstream's trend to ever
more complicated machines.

> A lot of the couriers seem to be young and lifestyle/fashion conscious.

Indeed- it's not an old mans game, though, is it?

> A lot of them don't have brakes either which I find astonishing. I
> presume this is due to them being fixies, but even so I can't believe
> that a set of brakes would hurt.

I'm with you there, too. I like brakes!
I think this is an affectation. I don't see the benefit, except for
saving a tiny bit of weight.

> I always remember sturmey archer 3 speeds being a pain to adjust. I
> haven't ridden a hub gear bike since the 70's so I don't know how they
> have changed.

I'm told that modern hub gears are very reliable, though I can't
speak from experience. There are certainly some impressively specified
versions around (like the 14-speed Rohloff).
Those in the know claim that most problems with SAs were down to poor
quality control and poor maintenance, which would fit my ancient
recollections. I remember having hassle with derailleurs when I was
young & foolish, too! Though not since I learnt how to use and
maintain them properly.

> > PS I commute on a fixie (Edinburgh and rural Perthshire), but I
> > wouldn't describe myself as a serious cyclist.
>
> Why do you ride a fixie? I have no problems with dérailleurs and have
> only adjusted them once in the last year (after a notable **** over ***
> event).

I enjoy it more. Simpler, less hassle, more fun.

> Personally I hate mudguards because they are always bending out of
> position and rubbing.-

Fair enough. I don't like getting sprayed with muddy water, so I'm
prepared to put up with a little fiddling to avoid it. I've ridden
without mudguards and I would prefer to do so, but not enough to put
up with the discomfort and inconvenience. Same with gears & a
freewheel, I've ridden with both and at the moment I prefer to do
without for my commute.

Cheers,
W.
 
In news:[email protected],
Nick <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Why is that then? Of all cyclists I would have thought couriers
>> would favour function over fashion!
>>
>
> Why do I suspect fashion:
>
> The upsurge of single speeds seems to be rather recent.

To the best of my knowledge the first London courier to ride fixed was one
Brendan Divall, who started so doing circa 1990.
</anorak>

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
They came for Eamonn Holmes; I think I'm right in saying that I
applauded.
 
Nick wrote:

> A lot of them don't have brakes either which I find astonishing.

Are you sure?

If looking from behind then you might see they haven't got a rear brake.
That doesn't mean they haven't got a front.

~PB
 
Pete Biggs wrote:
> Nick wrote:
>
>> A lot of them don't have brakes either which I find astonishing.
>
> Are you sure?
>
> If looking from behind then you might see they haven't got a rear brake.
> That doesn't mean they haven't got a front.
>

Maybe I'm exaggerating when I say a lot but I have seen some. I'm very
much a front brake person so that is the one I notice.


> ~PB
>
>
 
"Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>> On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
> Why do you ride a fixie? I have no problems with dérailleurs and have only
> adjusted them once in the last year (after a notable **** over *** event).
>

Wellm my reason is that it's good for training, however I don't find any
problems at lights etc. I'm quite a powerful bloke and find that I leave
people with gears well behind. I also commute through some small hills and
don't find it a problem. Again, I pass people who I'd normally be slipping
gears with. You'll be amazed at how much determination can win over the
"I'll change down" attitude.

However, I'm on a single speed and not a fixed. I enjoy rolling down hills
at high speed.
 
elyob <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >> On 29 Oct, 12:04, Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>
> > Why do you ride a fixie? I have no problems with dérailleurs and have only
> > adjusted them once in the last year (after a notable **** over *** event).
> >
>
> Wellm my reason is that it's good for training, however I don't find any
> problems at lights etc. I'm quite a powerful bloke and find that I leave
> people with gears well behind. I also commute through some small hills and
> don't find it a problem. Again, I pass people who I'd normally be slipping
> gears with. You'll be amazed at how much determination can win over the
> "I'll change down" attitude.

my knees wouldn't be happy if i did that. Though my getting to work bike
is cheap hybrid who's cheap gear system is always having problems if it
wasn't for the fact it weighs a ton unlaiden let alone once the paniers
are full i would be tempted, to convet it to a fixed but it's enought of
sod to get up the the hill to the star and garter at the best of times.
>
> However, I'm on a single speed and not a fixed. I enjoy rolling down hills
> at high speed.

is one of life's pleasures

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Re: West London commute - any suggestions for a safer route?
Replies
3
Views
514
UK and Europe
[email protected]
T
J
Re: West London commute - any suggestions for a safer route?
Replies
1
Views
304
UK and Europe
[email protected]
P
P
Re: West London commute - any suggestions for a safer route?
Replies
1
Views
295
UK and Europe
POHB
P
P
Re: West London commute - any suggestions for a safer route?
Replies
1
Views
377
UK and Europe
permajeo
permajeo
D
New london commute - route question
Replies
9
Views
312
UK and Europe
Chris Slade
C
Top Bottom Back