Bikes are the coolest invention in the universe

wrath
202

Hey, I’ve been lurking this topic for a while but now I’m getting ready to shop. Great write-up @noahdjango , I’ve been building a list of questions but you already answered half of them right there. With all the opinions from @kimmo and @AnonyMouse and everybody this is super-useful.

My use case is purely recreational. I have a bunch of hikes in the area that I’ve been driving to, but it’s bothering me to drive somewhere to go walk, that just seems wrong. I’ve got one about five miles away that’s my go-to evening/weekend afternoon hike. I could walk from home to it but that’s a long day just getting there. Once upon a time I could have shortcut across open terrain to get there, but the area is building up and the police have become problematic, and I have to take the long way around. (As best I can tell, they consider being a pedestrian inherently suspicious, but that’s a different topic.) So I want to try the bike option. And if I expand my range to ten miles, I have five more hikes to choose from, which would be way cool.

I haven’t owned a bike in a while, and I’ve never ridden a mountain bike other than once around the block. The last one I owned was a classic ten-speed, high seat, drop handle bars, dual lever shifter on the front frame tube, and I know nothing about MTBs, total noob. I had to look up 700c to see what that meant from uptopic.

But MTB is what I’m thinking. Bike the paved part, get to the trailhead, lock the hell out of the bike (and maybe lock the front wheel separately, somewhere out of sight of the frame), do my hike, then ride back home. The rides out will be mostly paved, so speed can matter across that part, which argues for a road bike, but some day I’ll reach a trailhead and decide to just keep going on the bike, so probably MTB for me. I’ve been looking at Craigslist and this seems very doable for not much money, especially since I want something that for theft deterrence looks like a beat-up piece of shi^^^junk but rides great.

I haven’t finished reading to the end of the topic, but what’s with the frame geometry of mountain bikes, as in, why do they have top frame tubes that slant down toward the seat post instead of being purely horizontal?

2 Likes
203

The sloped top tube provides increased standover height. You want to be able to dismount unexpectedly without crushing your nuts.

Nearly all my riding these days is on a Surly Big Dummy rocking a Rohloff (looks like I now have something in common with Shaq). Love the longtail cargo bike. @codinghorror are you going to go longbike? it is way better than trailers IMO, you keep the kids close to you and they don’t get all squirrely and pogo like a trailer.

I want a new trailbike/allrounder but am not riding enough to justify the purchase, so I just cramp down into my late 90s era cross country hardtail.

3 Likes
204

Also, don’t do this to aluminum parts. Any simple green left behind on your aluminum is no bueno.

3 Likes
205

I think your needs would be well served by something like what @noahdjango described as a ‘rocksteady, no-BS mtb’ among his craigslist suggestions:

That is: any decent-quality, decently-maintained late 80s/early 90s rigid mountain bike in a size that fits you well.

  • Should be cheap and easy enough to find.
  • Even a good one should look like a cheap old thing to a casual thief compared to anything new, if not exactly a beat-up piece of shit.
  • Strong steel frame and low-maintenance components so you don’t have to baby it too much or worry if it takes a few knocks.
  • Not-too-racy, not-too-laid-back geometry that should work fine for moderate speeds on pavement and a bit of non-extreme off-road fun.
  • Useful range of gearing so you can go kind of fast and get up some tough hills even if your fitness level isn’t quite avid-cyclist level yet.
  • Broken? Stolen? Lost? Find out you actually hate the thing and want to ditch it for a faster road bike or a high-tech modern MTB? Well, it was cheap to try.
  • Finally, it’s a damn versatile platform for experimentation. Find out you don’t really use it off-road? Just put on the fattest slick tires you can fit, some fenders, lights and maybe racks for a bombproof commuter. Or try some wackier stuff if you’re so inclined, what’s to lose? The generic Taiwanese MTB I got as my first grown-up bike in 1992 is currently a 700c/40mm slicks fixed-gear multistrada mad max frankenbike alternating between drop bars and short risers depending on the mood. I’ve learned a lot about practical bike mechanics and effects of amateur geometry changes in the process, and it’s been a lot of fun. Not a bad beater to lock up around town, either.
6 Likes
206

well, the old ones all had horizontal top tubes, but I don’t think any are made that way now, no. what @rkt88edmo said sounds right. also, the hot thing now for MTB is running a “dropper post” so that you can have the seat high for climbs, then lower it out of your way to better maneuver descents, and back and forth, changing it on-the-fly without dismounting, so maybe that plays into the slant?

nowadays, not only do MTBs have slanted top tubes, but road race bikes do, too. I think this is what they call “compact geometry,” but we’re going to have to let @AnonyMouse or @Kimmo or someone other than me explain that one.

2 Likes
207

As far as I know, the actual, main advantage of a “compact” sloping-tube geometry is that the manufacturer can save money: a few standard frame sizes can be adapted to fit a larger range of rider sizes by changing the stem and seat tube, and (supposedly) the smaller triangle means you can have the same stiffness with a little less material. So it was very successfully marketed as making race bikes stiffer and lighter. Who doesn’t like that, right?

There’s a lot more info in this article about the Giant TCR, the first compact-geometry road bike to become popular in the late 90s. It looked a bit weird and mountain-bikish in the peloton back then compared to traditional builds, now it just looks like the new normal after the massive adoption of the idea.

2 Likes
208

@tekna2007 pretty much this. since you want to road ride it first, I’d get some semi-slick tires so doing those 5-10 mile rides don’t wear you out as much before you get to your hike, and then they’ll do OK to do slow and easy trails when you decide to, keeping the knobbies in your closet for graduation to any fast/gnarly riding when you feel up to it.

but, if you see a good deal on a casual old touring road bike or something in your size, that might help with the “cheap, theft deterrent” part of the equation. anything not built for racing should have clearance for a fatter 28, 32mm width or > tire that you can get in a semi-slick/hybrid style. that should work for you, too, particularly with the road riding aspect that seems like it’s more important to you, but they’ll handle light walking-style trails no problem.

4 Likes
209

Oh yeah. Forgot to mention the non-MTB options, but I agree that pretty much any not-too-crappy old steel bike + the fattest slick tires you can jam in there = hard to go wrong if you’re not riding uphill on mud or something.

You can even get good new tires for the obsolete 27" wheel size if that’s what it takes. Or change it to 700c for even fatter tire clearance, but that’s the kind of money-and-time rabbit hole I tend to get into but may not interest others.

2 Likes
210

ya, my bike pictured upthread has it’s original 27" wheels. the previous owner had put the cheapest chinese gumwalls available on it to get it sold (which aren’t even all that terrible, tbh.) the rear wore down pretty rapidly and I was pleased to learn there’s still a fair selection of “tried and true” tire models still in 27". Got one Schwalbe Marathon on her now, and when the time comes, I’ll replace the other with one, too.

3 Likes
211

That bike looks fun, and I’d love to do grocery runs on a bike. About children, this author said the same thing. 不動産を有効活用するためにやるべきこと！不動産を購入する時のポイントなどをご紹介｜不動産を購入するときのポイント　2024年2月更新

1 Like
212

As far as I’m concerned, compact frames were several decades overdue. It’s a very simple and straightforward refinement to the bike’s fundamental design, that could have occurred in the 20s or even earlier. It occurred to me in the 80s, looking at my BMX; I thought why the hell don’t folks building race bikes shorten four tubes, making a lighter, stiffer frame, and just lengthen the seatpost, increasing vertical compliance, and thus comfort?

People who get on a modern bike for the first time trip out over the comfort versus stiffness (which you can feel when you stand on the bike and give it some), and attribute the difference to carbon. Of course, a lot of it is due to the ability of designers to use carbon’s properties to really tune a frame’s characteristics, but leaving carbon aside, a lower top tube and longer seatpost is the first thing to do to achieve a great compromise between stiffness and comfort, not mention saving a couple of hundred grams or so.

Years ago, I saw somebody saying that because seatposts were only available in short lengths, and the available lugs only permitted a narrow range of angles, that explained it; a form of lock-in. But I don’t buy that, because a seatpost isn’t a terribly complicated thing for a framebuilder to tackle, and fillet-brazing has totally been a thing for ages, and the compact idea is pretty damn compelling.

I say the reason it never happened before MTBs is traditionalism. Until the 80s, the industry was dominated by Europeans, who for whatever reason seem to have more trouble thinking outside the box than others when it comes to cycling (even the French, who were more innovative in the automotive sphere). It’s a French organisation (the UCI) currently holding back cycling innovation, with their stupid retrogrouch rules limiting frame design and rider positioning, among other things.

If you ask me, there was at least 20 years of potential development almost completely wasted, mainly from the mid-60s to the mid-80s, where almost nothing happened. Humanity put men on the moon, but couldn’t get around to finishing the basic design of the bike by inventing dual-control levers. Pathetic, when you consider that this machine is one of our finest ideas.

All it would’ve taken is say, someone from the Swiss watch industry to realise what a lame effort settling for having the shift levers on the downtube was, and a few years’ effort backed by enough money. Sure, nice indexed shifting kinda depends on Shimano’s HyperGlide cog-profiling tech (which pretty much requires CAD) and also ‘compressionless’ cable housing (no big deal to come up with IMO), but you could have had friction-shifting brifters - Campy’s Ergolevers are one design that’s amenable to friction-shifting (STI and DoubleTap are limited to an escapement mechanism by nature).

But it took Americans, on the one hand, to start the MTB revolution and kick road bike designers in the arse, and Shimano on the other, to comprehensively define proper road bike componentry with the advent and development of their 7400/6400/5400 series groupsets.

Now that I think about it, it’d make a damn cool statement to build an alternate-reality bike circa 1970, that required no nonexistent tech but only more inspiration. Like the occasional gizmo you see posted here; video from a vinyl record player or some such.

7 Likes
213

In that chart, ATB means All Terrain Bike which means MTB, right?

Under the frame size columns, what is that measurement, seat tube height? I.e. from the center of the crank opening to the top of the frame tube where the seat post is inserted?

I’m 6-2 with a 34 inch inseam measured “bike style”, from the very top of a book pressed up (gently but firmly) into my crotch down to the floor, with shoes on. (My pants inseam is less than that.) I definitely carry a lot of my height in my upper body; I was never going to run track or be a hurdler. Do I need to use a different chart?

Do I need to think about a longer frame, given my measurements?

How did you judge suitability of frame sizes from the Craigslist offerings, knowing @hello_friends’ dimensions … could you just eyeball the pictures? Already know those bikes off the top of your head? Look them up in some reference?

1 Like
214

That’s what I’d say; an experienced eye can roughly tell the size of a bike from the proportions.

1 Like
215

Thanks @telecinese, that all makes good sense to me.

This especially, sounds like peace of mind.

It still won’t get me home from miles out if it gets stolen, but that’s a different problem.

1 Like
216

yeah, same thing, it was a term that fell out of use.

basically yes, but it’s not exactly as standard as one would hope. but the differences are minor. some sizes reflect crank center (or center of the bottom bracket shell, more accurately) to the center of the top tube where it intersects with the seat tube, and I think some go up to the top edge of the seat tube where the seatpost enters. sheldonbrown.com will have good info on this, and you can look up individual manufacturers to read what standard they use. but the differences are not terribly different from one another to where the frame will outright not fit you, in most cases.

eh, if you look at the adjacent rows, you can see there’s a fair amount of overlap to compensate for both topics here, that people’s bodies are not totally standard and some small variations in frame measurement. for traditional geo, the stand-over test is the final boss. for modern geo, I’m not sure but between sheldon and youtube is where I’d look for answers. people seem to like the the GCN videos.

buying a longer-reach stem is how this is usually solved. I would get acclimated to just riding at first since reach is not likely to affect a new rider doing short, casual rides. you’re not going to notice, is what I’m saying; new riders aren’t used to the stretched-out-ness of a proper fit anyhow.

ya, by the headtube mostly. if it had new, slanted geo, I went more by the descriptions or noted that I was guessing in the write up.

the length/steeper angle of the seatstays also tell the story, but headtube is easier to see. MTBs have higher bottom brackets which is the main reason that an MTB frame will measure smaller than a roadie for the same rider; but mostly, as a 6’2" guy, you’re gonna be looking for a noticeably long headtube at a glance just to pare down the list. click all those open into separate tabs, then read the descriptions. see what bikes are actually your target size, close the tab on anything described as too big, and then use the “known good size” pics to judge against the pics where the seller doesn’t provide any info.

ETA: sellers who aren’t “bike people” will often list the wheel size as the bike’s size. beware any bikes described as 26" or 29", those are wheel sizes. 700 is obviously the wheel.

also, they’ll confuse standover height with frame size but it’s pretty obvious and it’s actually useful to have the standover. the good sellers will list both.

5 Likes
217

What’s the topography of your local area? I ask because mountain bike geometry, and gearing, is oriented around going uphill and downhill a lot. You may find that if you live in a flat area, you don’t get a lot of use out of the lower gears. The geometry is less of an issue for casual riding but you will find that you can sustain high speeds for significantly shorter periods in a more upright position such as a mountain bike tends towards. The average healthy male can sustain 25kph for 1 minute in a fully upright position (the ‘policeman’s bicycle’ or town bike position). In a road bike position, the average healthy male can sustain 25kph until the heat death of the universe.

The other consideration I would put to you is the road surface. It sounds like you’re riding to your track and then switching to on foot. I don’t know what it’s like on your route, but mountain bike tyres are poor on surfaced roads. The ‘knobbles’ make a lot of noise (which is all lost energy), give less grip, and tend be ‘squirmy’ in turns as each knob is subjected to sideways forces as it contacts the road during turns. They perform best on/in loose surfaces like sand or mud, or mixed surfaces like vegetation. Even on gravel, riders are turning towards large, smooth, low pressure tyres. However, it is simple to change the tyres on an old mountain bike to slicks and these are widely available. Of course, road surfaces vary widely in texture (asphalt, tarmac, chipseal etc) and exactly which size/pressure of tyre to use in your area is likely to be the sort of controversy where you could ask 3 cyclists and get 5 answers!

As for locking up your bike - the safest option in my opinion is two good locks of different types (say, one D-lock and one chain) and no quick releases anywhere. Use each lock through one wheel and around a part of the frame (I usually lock rear wheel and seat tube, and front wheel to downtube) and of course, at least one of those should go around a sturdy object. To remove the front wheel would require a quick release to not be onerous, and anything that helps you remove a part from a bike, helps other to do the same.

The sloping downtube on mountain bikes - well it’s partly about not hitting your nuts, partly about permitting the seat tube to sink lower to drop the rider’s centre of gravity (the bottom bracket on a mountain bike will have more ground clearance than a road bike, so the rider’s ‘natural’ position will be raised similarly) and partly to save weight and space (the stripped-down frame has a smaller footprint, so you can get more of them in a container). This last point is particularly relevant to road bikes, in my opinion.

As others have said, getting an old beater mountain bike is probably a good idea. Once you’ve ridden it a few times and started to get a feel for what’s working and not working for you, hopefully we’ve given you a few ideas for changes that you can make cheaply to improve your riding experience.

3 Likes
218

It’s almost impossible to get hold of new 27" rims though!

1 Like
219

5 miles isn’t insurmountable as long as you’re reasonably fit and the path isn’t dangerous.

2 Likes
220

well, the choices are limited, but it’s not like they’re hard to find. this is just the two places I was certain would have them

VeloOrange to the retrogrouch rescue
rim:
http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/vo-pbp-27inch-rims.html
complete wheels:
http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/grand-cru-freewheel-rear-wheel-126mm-27inch.html
http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/grand-cru-high-flange-front-wheel-27inch.html

Velomine not selling rims separately, but these two models still made by Sun and one by Weinmann should be available separately somewhere
http://www.velomine.com/index.php?main_page=advanced_search_result&search_in_description=1&keyword=27"+rim

maybe limited to the american market, though? paying oversized int’l shipping is always fun
/s

2 Likes
221

Yeah, that’s true. I do loops that long out of the house, so it wouldn’t kill me, it would just be a loooong day. Especially since I’d be swearing the whole way home. :slight_smile:

1 Like